Youth Mentoring: Programs and Practices that Work

A Forum — September 15, 2006

According to a recent report, Understanding and Facilitating the Youth Mentoring Movement, “three million young people are in formal one-to-one mentoring relationships in the U.S., a six-fold increase from just a decade ago.” Report authors Jean Rhodes and David DuBois contend that mentoring programs are highly popular, both in the policy and programmatic spheres, and have been shown, when implemented effectively, to promote positive developmental outcomes in youth within the domains of work and school, mental and physical health, and behavior. Two ongoing challenges to effective implementation have intensified, however, in recent years: the pressure felt by youth mentoring organizations to focus on quantity at the expense of quality as waitlists grow, and the current public policy track, which seems to favor new, not-yet proven programmatic approaches over more tried-and-true models. At AYPF’s forum, researchers Rhodes and DuBois described their findings on best practices in the realm of youth mentoring implementation, administration, and policy to ensure that programs are designed optimally and run effectively. Dr. Andrea Taylor of Across Ages also discussed her experiences regarding implementation and dissemination of a model mentoring program.

David L. DuBois, PhD, Professor in the Division of Community Health Sciences within the School of Public Health, University of Illinois at Chicago, explained that the field of research on youth mentoring is still relatively new compared to work in other aspects of youth services, such as counseling or child-parent relationships. DuBois cited a growing literature showing that while mentoring can be effective, its degree of effectiveness depends largely upon the quality of the relationship between mentor and mentee. His co-authored report (Understanding and Facilitating the Youth Mentoring Movement) notes that the effects of mentoring programs have, on average, been small, although these effects increase as programs implement practices that are likely to promote quality mentoring relationships and thus help them to become better aligned with the insights gleaned by research. Research points to seven features of effective relationships – referred to as the “7 C’s” in DuBois’ presentation. The first two are preconditions of effective relationships:

• Compatibility of youth and mentor: Similarities in interests are important, but closeness in age or ethnicity are not. Some youth are also better able than others to benefit from mentoring relationships.
• Capability of mentor: Prior experience in helping roles or professions in areas such as education or direct-service work with youth is helpful, as is sensitivity to the mentee’s cultural and socioeconomic background.

The other C’s describe the way the relationship functions:

• Consistency: Regular meetings are necessary for mutual trust and ease of contact to take root.
• Continuity: The greatest benefits come from relationships lasting at least a year, but the key is meeting predetermined expectations for the relationship length.
• Closeness: Therapeutic qualities such as empathy, authenticity, trust, and collaboration are important, and so is having fun. Negative or disappointing exchanges can easily overshadow the positive aspects.
• Centeredness on youth’s developmental needs: Balance attention to youth’s needs for ownership, autonomy, and input with structure, scaffolding, and guidance.
• Connectedness: Benefits of mentoring accrue, in part, through improvements in the mentee’s other relationships as well – with peers and parents. Mentoring involving several mentors and mentees also shows promise.

These insights are especially important as older community-based, one-on-one mentoring relationships give way to other kinds of mentoring, such as group mentoring, peer mentoring, e-mentoring, and site-based models at schools and after-school programs, including sports-based programs, service-learning, and workplace training programs. While mentoring has been shown to be particularly effective with vulnerable youth, these effects are best achieved when the mentoring relationship is based on the youth’s qualities and interests rather than existing deficiencies.

Jean E. Rhodes, PhD, Professor of Psychology at the University of Massachusetts, Boston, stated that enthusiasm for new approaches to social services like mentoring often outpaces the scientific knowledge base. She attributed much of the recent enthusiasm among policymakers and the public to a 1995 study by Public/Private Ventures (P/PV), Making a Difference: An Impact Study of Big Brothers Big Sisters, which generated impressive enthusiasm for mentoring programs’ potential to turn youth’s lives around.

P/PV’s study looked at outcomes of the Big Brothers Big Sisters of America (BBBSA) program and was cited on the U.S. Senate floor and in newspapers, opinion pieces, and other research. Recent internet searches yielded about 70,000 hits for the study. P/PV’s study gave hope to a public disillusioned with a bureaucratic social welfare system and persistent poverty and capitalized on the American ideal of individual action. BBBSA rode the tide of public enthusiasm over mentoring and has since tripled in size.

The powerful constituencies that fund these programs and create policy championed the business model for expanding the program’s reach, valuing quantity over quality of implementation. In contrast, Rhodes advocated a research-based approach to replication and dissemination of successful programs, emphasizing program evaluation, accreditation (when possible), and sustainability. Rhodes highlighted the way that effective mentoring practices can be made more sustainable by exporting them to other settings, i.e., summer camps, which can ‘give it [mentoring] away’ for free, in much the same way that mentoring can sometimes ‘give away’ a bit of something even more expensive – psychotherapy.

Andrea Taylor, PhD, Director of Training at Temple University’s Center for Intergenerational Learning and a senior research associate with Temple University’s Institute for Survey Research, described Across Ages. Taylor is the developer and principal investigator of Across Ages, which was originally funded by the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention as a drug prevention model program targeting youth ages 10-13. It has now been replicated in 75 sites across the U.S. Its core components are: mentoring by an adult at least 50 years old, community service projects and family activities, and the Social Competence Promotion Program for Young Adolescents (developed by Weissberg et al, 1992).

In outcome evaluations, groups of youth receiving the full intervention (i.e., all three components) were compared with those receiving limited intervention and those with no intervention. Baseline and exit surveys revealed a decrease in substance abuse and an increase in knowledge about drug use, positive school-related behaviors, positive attitudes toward school and the future, and improvement in attitudes toward adults in general and older adults in particular. While all groups of youth showed improvement, results were greatest with the group receiving full intervention—and especially the mentoring component—and were directly correlated with level of connection between the children, parents, and mentors.

Outcomes for families were increased participation in school activities, more positive communication with children, engaging in more positive activities as a family, improved access to community resources, and expanded support networks. Benefits for mentors included increased feelings of self-worth, expanded support networks, collaborative problem-solving, increased social and volunteer activity, improvement in relationships with other family members, and unanticipated enjoyment in activities with youth.

Effective program practices gleaned from this program model are:

• Screening and ongoing training: Rigorous screening of mentors and ten-hour mentor pre-service training (in which program staff learn more about the mentors); pre-match training for youth; mentor-youth activities prior to matchmaking allow for skill-building and staff monitoring of the matches; and monthly meetings for mentors for supervision, training, and support.
• Time commitment and vigilant monitoring of matches: Require a one-year commitment from mentors and youth, including weekly face-to-face contact for a minimum of two hours. Program staff confirms with both mentors and youth that meetings have actually happened.
• Structured activities and goal setting: Mentors, youth, and family all participate. This includes school- and community-based activities.

Lessons learned from the 75 replications of this model are:

• Programs must be adequately funded and realistic with regard to the number of youth served.
• Programs must adhere to fidelity guidelines.
• Practitioners need to understand the theoretical and empirical framework.
• Programs that seek out technical assistance are more effective: New challenges that could not have been foreseen arise during implementation.

Ongoing challenges are:

• Sustainability
• Mentor recruitment
• Consistency and longevity of matches
• Realistic expectations, i.e., mentoring is not a panacea
• Mentoring is hard work, requiring both patience and tenacity

Question and Answer

Betsy Brand, AYPF Director, asked what an accreditation framework would look like, especially with regard to policymakers. Rhodes re-emphasized the importance of good training and explained that when no training is required, volunteers have little guidance on issues such as concluding the mentoring relationship, ethical issues in confidentiality, and, more generally, how to build trust and form a good relationship. Taylor emphasized the importance of having a mental health professional on call. Rhodes also suggested that incentives be tied to evaluation, i.e., accreditation as a gateway to funding. DuBois warned policymakers to be careful that standards do not preclude personalization. He recommended that MENTOR’s evaluation tools be considered (www.mentoring.org). All three participants recommended this website as a resource for mentoring curricula and program models.

Role of stipends: Taylor said that stipends can be useful to fund mentor transportation and activities. DuBois added that the mentors often find social recognition and expression of appreciation from mentees and family members to be the most rewarding aspect. Rhodes noted that in the last decade, mentors have gotten younger, i.e., high school and college students trying to fulfill service learning credits, and that research has shown that the length of mentoring relationships decline as these instrumental incentives become more frequent. While many kids initially ask for college students, these same kids discover, when given the chance, that they really enjoy working with older (age 50+) mentors.

Faith-based organizations: DuBois noted the great increase in faith-based mentoring and mentioned some programs that serve children of incarcerated parents. He also cautioned that many faith-based organizations have good intentions but lack professional expertise about children’s development and mental health.

Growth of programs: Rhodes said that the length of the mentor/mentee relationships is a good determinant of whether or not a program is trying to grow too fast. DuBois recommended that a program not grow before it is already performing systematic outcome evaluations. He cited the Society for Prevention Research, which requires two systematic, replicable outcome evaluations before the program can claim that it has an impact.

Presenter Bios

Jean E. Rhodes, Ph.D. is a Professor of Psychology at the University of Massachusetts in Boston. She completed her Ph.D. in clinical-community psychology at DePaul University and her clinical internship at the University of Chicago School of Medicine. She has researched both natural and assigned mentoring relationships within different social contexts and has published widely in developmental and community psychology journals. Rhodes is a Fellow of the American Psychological Association and the Society for Community Research and Action, a Distinguished Fellow of the William T. Grant Foundation, and a member of the MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Transitions to Adulthood. She sits on the Board of Directors of the National Mentoring Partnership, the Advisory Boards of many mentoring and policy organizations, and the editorial boards of several journals in community and adolescent psychology. Her book Stand By Me: The Risks and Rewards of Mentoring Today’s Youth (Harvard University Press) was recently issued in paperback; she is currently working on a co-authored book about ethical considerations in volunteer youth work (Harvard University Press).

David L. DuBois, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor in the Division of Community Health Sciences within the School of Public Health at the University of Illinois at Chicago. He received his doctorate in clinical-community psychology from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. In 2003, he co-chaired the National Research Summit on Mentoring. Along with Jean Rhodes, he then co-authored the National Research Agenda for Youth Mentoring that emerged from the summit. He also is lead co-editor of the Handbook of Youth Mentoring (Sage Publications), which recently received the Social Policy Award for Best Edited Book from the Society for Research on Adolescence. In the past few years, he has conducted research on youth mentoring with funding from the William T. Grant Foundation and from the National Institute of Mental Health. He is a member of the Research and Policy Council of MENTOR and serves as a consultant to numerous local, state, and national mentoring organizations.

Andrea Taylor, Ph.D. is the Director of Training at Temple University’s Center for Intergenerational Learning, an organization focused on implementing innovative cross-age programs and civic engagement across the lifespan.  She is the Developer and Principal Investigator of Across Ages, an evidenced-based model project funded by the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, and a senior research associate with Temple University’s Institute for Survey Research. Dr. Taylor provides consultation, training and technical assistance to a variety of private, non-profit organizations, universities, school districts, and federal and state agencies, including the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, the Child Welfare League of America, and the Pennsylvania Department of Drug and Alcohol Programs. She has published numerous articles specific to the efficacy of intergenerational mentoring and risk reduction for vulnerable adolescents and is the author of Mentoring Across Generations: Partnerships for Positive Youth Development (2000, Kluwer/Plenum Press).

American Youth Policy Forum   1836 Jefferson Place NW,  Washington DC 20036
Telephone 202-775-9731      |      Fax 202-775-9733      |     Email aypf@aypf.org