Effectiveness of Mentoring Programs for Youth:

Current Status and Future Prospects

Invited Presentation for the Big Brothers Big Sisters -- Large Agency Alliance 2012 Conference, San

Diego, CA

February 2012

What Did We Learn From an Earlier Meta-Analysis of

Programs Evaluated Through 1998

Mentoring programs can promote gains in emotional, behavioral, social, and academic outcomes of participating youth

Average youth experienced only “modest” or small benefits”

Effects were “enhanced significantly” when more recommended “best practices” were utilized

American Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 30, No. 2, April 2002

What Did We Learn from a Meta-Analysis of Last ~Decade

of Studies: 1999-2010?

Psychological Science in the Public Interest,12, 57-91

Good NewsMentoring programs have continued to benefit youth in many areas

Programs often have positive impacts in two or more outcome domains

Effects of mentoring generally in line with other youth interventions

Mentoring works at both preventing declines in youth outcomes and promoting improvements

Mentoring effects across program locations, models, populations, etc. broad and flexible strategy

No evidence of improved effectiveness over prior generation of programs

Too few studies to evaluate impacts on several key outcomes (e.g., school drop-out, juvenile offending)

Same largely true for longer-term, “follow-up” effects

Stronger effects when programs:

Target “at risk” youth (exception: populations high on both individual and environmental risk)

Match youth and mentors based on similarity of interests

Utilize mentors with educational/occupational backgrounds that are a good fit with program goals

Support mentors in adopting teaching and/or advocacy roles

Bad NewsNew News

Promotion

Prevention

?

?

7

Where Does the Field Go From Here?

8

• High-fidelity implementation of evidence-based practices (EBP)– For BBBS =

• Support for “Fidelity to Model” (i.e., SDM / Standards)

• Broadening of core model to more fully encompass EBP (e.g., pre-match training, more frequent support contacts post one year, more systematic monitoring of mentoring relationship quality)

• Use SOR/YOS for local benchmarking and tracking of progress in mentoring quality/youth impacts at national level

9

• Bold innovation directed toward long-term, transformative impacts on young people– For BBBS =

• Nationally-directed pursuit of enhancements that “stretch” program models

• Align with research and organization’s strategic direction

• Pilot, refine, rigorously evaluate, and, if found to be effective, go to scale

10

• Examples in Progress– School-Based: ESBM– Community-Based: Youth-Centered Match

Support Study (Step-It-Up-2-Thrive Model)

11

Youth-Centered Match Support Study

12

• Collaborative partnership—BBBSA

• National office• 11 BBBSA affiliates

– Thrive Foundation for Youth—Universities

• University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) (DuBois)

• Portland State University (PSU) (Keller)

13

• Funding—OJJDP Mentoring Research Best Practices

Grant —Supplemental funding to BBBSA from Thrive

Foundation to support program implementation

14

• Overarching strategy

– Introduce practices based on Step-It-Up-2-Thrive model (Thrive) as more intentional approach for achieving positive youth outcomes

– Anchored in latest findings from mentoring and positive youth development literatures

– Experimentally test whether matches randomly assigned to receive “Thrive” supports have better outcomes than those receiving standard CBM

• Mentoring relationship (e.g., 1-year retention)• Youth (e.g., reduced involvement in problem behavior)

15

Opportunities Moving Forward

16

• Researchers: Long-term follow-up studies of mentored/non-mentored youth into adulthood (e.g., PPV CBM study sample)

• Programs: Use internally-generated data (e.g., SOR/YOS) to identify “hot spots” of effectiveness where innovative practices may be occurring

• Research-Practice Partnerships: Collaborations that encompass all stages of the innovation/research process (e.g., new approaches for mentor recruitment)

Questions, Comments, Reflections?

17

Evidence-based Practice

Effect Size Guidelines

19