Safe Families for Children
Safe Families for Children (SFFC) is a volunteer-driven program designed to temporarily host children and provide a network of support for them and their parents. SFFC is designed to serve parents and children ages 0–18 in families experiencing a crisis that affects children’s safety. For example, a crisis might include homelessness, substance use, mental health issues, intimate partner violence, medical problems, incarceration, or parental stress. SFFC aims to maintain children’s safety and keep families intact. A team of volunteers administers SFFC with the goal of surrounding families with a “circle of support” that includes direct support such as childcare, mentoring, tangible goods, or housing and indirect support such as referrals to resources.
Some volunteers provide direct support to families by serving as a Host Family, Family Coach, or Family Friend. Host Families provide children or families with a safe place to stay when needed, which can be during the day or can include brief or extended overnight support. Family Coaches work to support relationships between parents and the Host Family, help children adapt to the Host Family’s home, and work to ensure the Host Family’s home is a safe environment. They also help to arrange visits between parents and children, connect parents with needed resources, and help parents develop a family goal plan designed to improve their protective factors (e.g., parental resilience, social connections, knowledge of parenting and child development). Family Friends strive to mentor, empower, and support parents and help parents meet their educational, emotional, behavioral, and medical needs. Family Friends are encouraged to share skills with parents that promote healthy caregiver-child relationships, such as special play time, communication, behavior management, self-regulation, and coping skills. Family Friends may support Host Families by dropping off meals, providing childcare, or supplying transportation.
Other volunteers and staff provide indirect supports to meet the needs of Host Families or parents. For example, the Chapter Director manages SFFC services and leads the team of volunteers. The team may also include a Ministry Lead who coordinates volunteer recruitment efforts, typically through a local church or faith community. Family Coach Supervisors provide supervision to Family Coaches, oversee the process of enrolling families in the program, and provide training to parents and volunteers on effective parenting skills. Resource Friends and Leadership Council members provide information and connections to other community services, such as housing or food assistance.
SFFC is rated as a supported practice because at least one study carried out in a usual care or practice setting achieved a rating of moderate or high on design and execution and demonstrated a sustained favorable effect of at least 6 months beyond the end of treatment on at least one target outcome.
Date Last Reviewed (Handbook Version 2.0): Jul 2025
Date Program or Service Description Last Updated: Jul 2025
Date Originally Reviewed (Handbook Version 2.0): Jul 2025
Sources
The following sources informed the program or service description, target population, and program or service delivery and implementation information: the program or service manual, the program or service developer’s website, the California Evidence-Based Clearinghouse for Child Welfare, and the studies reviewed.
This information does not necessarily represent the views of the program or service developers. For more information on how this program or service was reviewed, download the Handbook of Standards and Procedures, Version 2.0
Target Population
SFFC is designed to serve parents and children ages 0–18 in families experiencing a crisis that affects children’s safety.
Dosage
On average, children spend 6 weeks living with the Host Family, with a range of 2 days to 2 years. The program aims to continue communication with the family for 6–12 months after the children return home. The Family Coach typically holds weekly phone calls with parents. The Host Family also calls parents as needed.
Location/Delivery Setting
Recommended Locations/Delivery Settings
SFFC volunteers deliver SFFC in the home and in the community.
Location/Delivery Settings Observed in the Research
- Home
- Community Center (e.g., religious or recreational facility)
- Host family's homes
Education, Certifications and Training
SFFC recommends the Chapter Director have a degree in social work or counseling. The Family Coach Supervisor must meet state qualifications for child welfare supervisors. There are no educational requirements for other volunteers.
All volunteers participate in either live or online training through the Safe Families Community Hub. Initial training includes a 3-hour core training for Family Friends, Host Families, and Family Coaches; a 2-hour Host Family training for Host Families and Family Coaches; a 2-hour Family Coach training for Family Coaches only; and a Family Friend mentoring training for Family Friends only. States may require volunteers working with children to complete state-specific Mandated Reporter Training. Family Coaches, Host Families, and Family Friends may receive optional training to improve skills in caring for children or working with parents.
Volunteers must meet program eligibility criteria specific to their role. Across roles, this includes requirements related to their age, criminal background, history of involvement with the child welfare system, and willingness to abide by program values and conduct standards. Host Families must complete items on the program’s home safety checklist, be physically able to provide care, and be willing to follow the program’s behavior management requirements. Program staff conduct volunteer screening based on volunteer application materials, references, and criminal and child abuse background checks.
Program or Service Documentation
Book/Manual/Available documentation used for review
Safe Families for Children. (2024). Practice policies and procedures manual.
Available languages
SFFC materials are available in English and Spanish.
Other supporting materials
Safe Families for Children FAQs
How Safe Families for Children Works
For More Information
Website: https://safe-families.org/
Phone: (773) 355-5577
Email: info@safefamilies.net
Note: The details on Dosage; Location; Education, Certifications, and Training; Other Supporting Materials; and For More Information sections above are provided to website users for informational purposes only. This information is not exhaustive and may be subject to change.
| Results of Search and Review | Number of Studies Identified and Reviewed for Safe Families for Children |
|---|---|
| Identified in Search | 2 |
| Eligible for Review | 2 |
| Rated High | 0 |
| Rated Moderate | 1 |
| Rated Low | 1 |
| Reviewed Only for Risk of Harm | 0 |
| Outcome | Effect Size
|
95% Confidence Interval
|
Implied Percentile Effect
|
N of Studies (Findings) | N of Participants | Summary of Findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Child safety: Child welfare administrative reports | 0.07 | [-0.11, 0.26] | 2 | 1 (2) | 451 |
Favorable:
0 No Effect: 2 Unfavorable: 0 |
| Child permanency: Out-of-home placement | 0.71 | [0.52, 0.90] | 26 | 1 (4) | 451 |
Favorable:
4 No Effect: 0 Unfavorable: 0 |
| Child permanency: Planned permanent exits | 0.61 | [0.42, 0.80] | 22 | 1 (1) | 451 |
Favorable:
1 No Effect: 0 Unfavorable: 0 |
Note: For the effect sizes and implied percentile effects reported in the table, a positive number favors the intervention condition and a negative number favors the comparison condition. A range of comparison conditions, including no intervention, minimal intervention, placebo or attention, treatment as usual, and head-to-head comparison conditions are eligible for review (see Section 4.1.7 of the Handbook Version 2.0). Different types of comparison conditions may affect the magnitude of the effect sizes across studies. For example, an intervention compared to a no treatment comparison condition may produce a larger effect size than the same intervention compared to another intervention because the other intervention may itself be effective. The effect sizes shown may be derived from samples that overlap across studies. See the Individual Study Findings table for information about the specific comparison conditions used in each study and the Studies Reviewed section for information about any overlapping samples. The effect sizes presented here are provided for informational purposes only and are not used in determining a program or service rating. Effect sizes for some outcomes were not able to be calculated by the Prevention Services Clearinghouse.
| Outcome | Effect Size
|
Implied Percentile Effect
|
Months after treatment when outcome measured
|
Number of Participants | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Child safety: Child welfare administrative reports | |||||
| Study 15334 - SFFC vs. Service As Usual -- Pooled Child Level Outcomes (Schneider, 2024) | |||||
| No Recurrence of Maltreatment (Odds Ratio) | 0.07 | 2 | 6 | 451 | |
| Recurrence of Maltreatment (Transition Ratio) | Null | not calculated | 6 | 451 | |
| Child permanency: Out-of-home placement | |||||
| Study 15334 - SFFC vs. Service As Usual -- Pooled Child Level Outcomes (Schneider, 2024) | |||||
| Deflection from Foster Care (Odds Ratio) | 0.64 * | 23 | 6 | 451 | |
| No Protective Custody (Odds Ratio) | 0.78 * | 28 | 6 | 451 | |
| Foster Care Removal (Transition Ratio) | Favorable * | not calculated | 6 | 451 | |
| Protective Custody (Transition Ratio) | Favorable * | not calculated | 6 | 451 | |
| Child permanency: Planned permanent exits | |||||
| Study 15334 - SFFC vs. Service As Usual -- Pooled Child Level Outcomes (Schneider, 2024) | |||||
| Permanence of Care (Odds Ratio) | 0.61 * | 22 | 6 | 451 | |
*p <.05
Note: For the effect sizes and implied percentile effects reported in the table, a positive number favors the intervention condition and a negative number favors the comparison condition. Effect sizes and implied percentile effects were calculated by the Prevention Services Clearinghouse as described in the Handbook of Standards and Procedures, Version 2.0, Sections 6.4 and 6.5 and may not align with effect sizes reported in individual publications. The Prevention Services Clearinghouse uses information reported in study documents and, when necessary, information provided by study authors in response to author queries to assign study ratings and calculate effect sizes (see Section 8.4.2 in the Handbook of Standards and Procedures, Version 2.0). The Prevention Services Clearinghouse typically relies on study-reported p-values to form the basis of the assessment of statistical significance for a finding, but will perform its own statistical test of a finding using any available information in study documents or author queries, as needed (see Section 6.3 in the Handbook of Standards and Procedures, Version 2.0). As a result, the effect sizes and statistical significance reported in the table may not align with the estimates as they are reported in study documents. Effect sizes for some outcomes were not able to be calculated by the Prevention Services Clearinghouse.
Only publications with eligible contrasts that met design and execution standards are included in the individual study findings table.
Full citations for the studies shown in the table are available in the "Studies Reviewed" section.
The participant characteristics display is an initial version. We encourage those interested in providing feedback to send suggestions to preventionservices@abtglobal.com.
The table below displays locations, the year, and participant demographics for studies that received moderate or high ratings on design and execution and that reported the information. Participant characteristics for studies with more than one intervention versus comparison group pair that received moderate or high ratings are shown separately in the table. Please note, the information presented here uses terminology directly from the study documents, when available. Studies that received moderate or high ratings on design and execution that did not include relevant participant demographic information would not be represented in this table.
For more information on how Clearinghouse reviewers record the information in the table, please see our Resource Guide on Study Participant Characteristics and Settings.
| Characteristics of the Participants in the Studies with Moderate or High Ratings | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Study Location
|
Study Year
|
Demographic Characteristics
|
Populations of Interest*
|
Household Socioeconomic Status
|
||
| Study 15334 - SFFC vs. Service As Usual -- Pooled Child Level Outcomes | ||||||
| Characteristics of the Children and Youth | ||||||
| Illinois, USA | 2015 |
Mean age at referral: 6 years
44% Black
38% White 12% Latinx 6% Multiethnic |
100% Children from families under investigation for child maltreatment by Child Protective Services | -- | ||
“--” indicates information not reported in the study.
* The information about disabilities is based on initial coding. For more information on how the Clearinghouse recorded disability information for the initial release, please see our Resource Guide on Study Participant Characteristics and Settings.
Note: Citations for the documents associated with each 5-digit study number shown in the table can be found in the “Studies Reviewed” section below. Study settings and participant demographics are recorded for all studies that received moderate or high ratings on design and execution and that reported the information. Studies that did not report any information about setting or participant demographics are not displayed. For more information on how participant characteristics are recorded, please see our Resource Guide on Study Participant Characteristics and Settings.
Studies Rated Moderate
Study 15334Testa, M. F. & Budde, S. (2021). Low-cost randomized controlled trial of Safe Families for Children: Final report. Children’s Home Society of America. https://safe-families.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/AppendixA-SFFCFinalReport_Apr_15_2021_updated.pdf
Schneider, W., Testa, M. F., & Budde, S. (2024). Effects of a voluntary hosting program for child welfare involved families. International Journal on Child Maltreatment, 7, 175-204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42448-023-00187-4
Chen, D-G., Testa, M. F., Ansong, D., & Brevard, K.C. (2020). Evidence building and information accumulation: Using the bayesian paradigm to advance child welfare intervention research. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, 11(3), 483-498. https://doi.org/10.1086/711376
This study was conducted in a usual care or practice setting (Handbook Version 2.0, Section 7.2.2)Studies Rated Low
Study 15335Little, M., Warner, G., & Baker, V. (2017). Safe Families for Children: Evaluation report [Children’s Social Care Innovation Programme evaluation report 56]. Department of Education. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a759ae340f0b67b3d5c7cc8/Safe_Families_IP_evaluation_report.pdf
This study received a low rating because baseline equivalence of the intervention and comparison groups was necessary and not demonstrated.