Although mentoring is a popular and effective means of intervention with youth, the positive effects of mentoring can be diminished by premature match closure of relationships. Program, mentor, and mentee characteristics were examined as predictors of premature match closure. Secondary data analyses were conducted on a large national database of mentoring programs consisting of match and youth risk information from 170 mentoring programs and 6468 matches from across the U.S. Premature closure was associated with mentee age at match inception and 19 individual mentee characteristics. The set of mentee characteristics were examined as part of a cumulative risk index encompassing seven conceptually combined categories including family background characteristics, school functioning problems, engagement in risky health behaviors, self-regulation difficulties, engagement in illegal or criminal activities, and internalizing and externalizing behavior problems. Both the age of mentees when matched and the cumulative risk index score significantly predicted premature closure. Results are discussed in terms of directions for future research and suggestions for enhancing mentoring program practices.

Mentoring has been shown to have a small to moderate effect on youth outcomes; however, implementation of research‐based practices improves program efficacy. Benchmark program practices and Standards in the Elements of Effective Practice for Mentoring (MENTOR, 2009) were assessed in the current study as predictors of match longevity. Secondary data analyses were conducted on a national agency information management database from 45 Big Brothers Big Sisters agencies and 29,708 matches from across the U.S. Agency leaders completed a web‐based survey describing their policies, procedures, and practices. Results revealed that the only individual Standard that was predictive of match length was the Training Standard. In addition, the sum total of both Benchmark program practices and Standards were associated with match length and long‐term relationships; however, neither predicted premature match closure. Results are discussed in terms of the importance of implementation of evidence‐based practices, particularly mentor training, for achieving effective mentoring outcomes.

Science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) mentoring programs typically have the goals of generating interest and excitement in STEM topics and careers and supporting STEM career achievement persistence. These outcomes are fostered through positive and trusting relationships with mentors. Mentors in STEM programs often have extensive subject matter expertise in a STEM content area, but they may lack the knowledge, attitudes, and skills that are important for establishing an effective mentoring relationship with a young person. The purpose of this review is to describe (1) a set of topics recommended for inclusion in STEM mentor training, based on a literature review, and (2) the current state of implementation of these recommended training topics among STEM mentoring programs in the United States. We have identified four major topic areas to include in the training of STEM mentors: (1) knowledge and attitudes regarding disparities in STEM career achievement, (2) mentor roles that promote STEM outcomes, (3) behaviors to promote mentees’ positive attitudes about STEM, and (4) program‐specific topics. Training for mentors should prepare them with the knowledge they need to support their mentee being successful in a STEM education or career while fostering the skills they need to establish an effective mentoring relationship.

No abstract

Implementation of research- and safety-based program practices enhance the longevity of mentoring relationships, in general; however, little is known about how mentoring programs might support the relationships of mentees in foster care. Benchmark program practices and Standards in the Elements of Effective Practice for Mentoring, 3rd Edition (MENTOR, 2009) were assessed in the current study as predictors of match longevity. Secondary data analyses were conducted on a national agency information management database from 216 Big Brothers Big Sisters agencies serving 641 youth in foster care and 70,067 youth not in care from across the United States (Mean = 11.59 years old at the beginning of their matches) in one-to-one, community-based (55.06%) and school- or site-based (44.94%) matches. Mentees in foster care had shorter matches and matches that were more likely to close prematurely than mentees who were not in foster care. Agency leaders from 32 programs completed a web-based survey describing their policies and practices. The sum total numbers of Benchmark program practices and Standards were associated with match length for 208 mentees in foster care; however, neither predicted premature match closure. Results are discussed in terms of how mentoring programs and their staff can support the mentoring relationships of high-risk youth in foster care.