Dream, Believe, Achieve.

Youth Initiated Mentoring Promising Practices

Sarah Schwartz, PhD, MEdJean Rhodes, PhD

Renée Spencer, EdDKaren Baetzel

Placeholder slide 6 minute intro video on NGYCP

NGYCP Mission

The mission of the National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program (NGYCP) is to intervene in

and reclaim the lives of 16-18 year old high school dropouts and produce program

graduates with the values, skills, education, and self-discipline necessary to succeed as

productive citizens.

NGYCP Vision

The National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program will be recognized as America’s premier voluntary program for 16-18 year-old high school dropouts, serving all 54 states and territories.

Program Elements

Quasi-Military 8 Core Components

– Academic Excellence– Physical Fitness– Leadership/Followership– Responsible Citizenship– Job Skills– Service to Community– Health and Hygine– Life Coping Skills

Federal/State Cost Share

NGYCP Locations6

Alaska

Alabama

Arizona

Arkansas

California

ColoradoDelaware

Florida

Georgia

Idaho

Illinois Indiana

Iowa

Kansas

Kentucky

Louisiana

Montana

Maine

Massachusetts

Maryland

Michigan

Minnesota

Missouri

Mississippi

Nebraska

Nevada New Jersey

New Mexico

New York

North Carolina

North Dakota

Ohio

Oklahoma

Oregon

PennsylvaniaRhode Island

South Carolina

South Dakota

Tennessee

Texas

Utah

Vermont

Virginia

Wisconsin

Wyoming

Washington

West Virginia

Connecticut

District of Columbia

New Hampshire

Hawaii

Puerto Rico

Alaska

NGYCP

No NGYCP

2014

NGYCP Program Model

Placeholder for mentor video

The Value of Youth-Initiated Mentoring

Cadet buy-in Program efficiency Retention Stronger, durable

mentor relationships Youth outcomes

Mentoring Standards

1. Post-Residential Action Plan (P-RAP)

2. Recruiting3. Screening4. Mentor Qualifications5. Training6. Matching7. Mentor-Mentee

Contact8. Case Management

But does it work?

Youth Initiated Mentoring:

INVESTIGATING A NEW APPROACH TO WORKING WITH VULNERABLE ADOLESCENTS

Sarah Schwartz, PhD, MEdJean Rhodes, PhD

Renée Spencer, EdD

Theoretical Rationale

Youth-Initiated Mentoring

Builds on strengths of natural mentoring

AND provides structure for relationships to develop

Autonomy in selecting mentors may increase motivation and investment, esp. for adolescents

Redresses shortage of volunteer mentors

Methods

Study Participants Quantitative (N = 1,173)

10 ChalleNGe sites across the country Ages 16-18 at baseline 88% male 41% White; 40% Black; 14% Latino, 4% Other

Qualitative (N = 30) 3 ChalleNGe sites (California, Michigan, Mississippi) Ages 20-22 at the time of the interview 90% male 63% White; 20% Latino; 7% Black; 7% Mixed Race

Methods

Measures Baseline Youth and Mentor Characteristics

Demographic characteristics youth (youth self-report) Demographic characteristics of mentors (mentor self-report

from program records) Relationship Characteristics (youth self-report)

Contact with mentors Mentor selection method

Outcome Measures at 38 Month Follow Up (self-report)

Results

Who are the mentors? Average age: 46.7 years old 83% same race or ethnicity as their mentee 26% living in same zip code as mentee 93% working full time; 4% retired; 3% unemployed;

1% working part time Qualitative data indicated mentors were drawn from

family friends and extended family, school and afterschool staff, and religious leaders

Results

How were the mentors chosen? 55% youth chose “mostly on their own” 37% parents helped choose 5% ChalleNGe staff helped choose 4% were chosen “some other way” (e.g., mentor asked

youth)

Results

Frequency and duration of contact At 9 month follow-up: 76% participants reported contact with

mentors 34% weekly in-person contact 47% weekly contact of any type (e.g. in-person, phone,

written) At 21 month follow up: 74% participants reported contact

with mentors 27% weekly contact of any type

At 38 month follow up: 56% participants reported contact with mentors

Outcomes among Youth in Early Terminating Relationships (Relative to Control) with Propensity Score Matching

Results

Outcomes among Youth in Mid-Length Relationships (Relative to Control) with Propensity Score Matching

Results

Outcomes among Youth in Enduring Relationships (Relative to Control) with Propensity Score Matching

Results

Results

Descriptive Summary of 38-Month Outcomes by Match Length

Results

What were the processes through which enduring YIM relationships influenced outcomes?

Results

I wanted to quit really, really badly. I even, like I told my mom that I wanted to go home, and that I was gonna get into a fight there, so I could get kicked out, an’ then, uh, I got a phone call from my mentor, and then we had like a, a really long talk about, about why I needed to stay there, and how like, what I needed to do in order to, to stay there, and…that was like the turning point that made me decide that I was gonna like keep trying when I was at the camp.

Supporting Successful Completion of the Residential Phase

Results

Supporting Post-Residential Phase Transition

Results

Social-Emotional Support

“Because out of the respect I had for him, [it] helped me to respect other people…And that was a big step for me, because I went through a lot, and everybody, it felt like everybody was stabbin’ me in my back, and then he came along and he was, he was more than a mentor, he was a friend.”

“Mentoring just, like, that part taught me how to get closer to other people, like how I got closer to [my mentor], and I started also with my family back home. And that would have me acting better…”

Results

Advice and Guidance

“When I would start to slip, my mom would call him, and he’d call me, an’ then it’d be like, ‘oh, well, I’m messing up again’ and then get back on track…so he was there, kinda, to kinda like push me in the right directions sometimes.”

“I went to a community college at first, and she wanted to make sure that I didn’t stop there, she wanted to make sure that I pursue my career, she wanted to make sure that I wasn’t gonna be pregnant or you know, on drugs, and um, I haven’t, I haven’t let her down on any of that.”

Results

Instrumental Support “He didn’t have to do all that, an’ he did, an’ he’s

still givin’ me these leads, in, you know, in the right direction, when it comes to the jobs, an’ all that. He didn’t have to do all that, that took extra work for him, you know ”

“He was there looking out for me and making sure that I was not going to jail and stuff like that.”

Results

What factors predict enduring relationships? Mentor selection Same racial or ethnic background

Results

Most youth reported having similar backgrounds to their mentors

Most youth believed similarity to be beneficial to relationship quality and duration “We were both raised in the church, both military

raised…Everything that we believed in was just about the same, so there are a lotta similarities, and I think that’s why we got along so well whenever I first moved here, and it was one of the main reasons I highly considered him to be my mentor, and that’s why he’s still my mentor till this day.”

Results

Some youth described the benefit of having the same ethnic or racial background as their mentors “She understood where I was comin’ from…the

way we do things…It got us closer and uh, it helped us understand each other better.”

“Just to see a, a, a Black man just, in our community, that just basically came up, ‘cause ‘round here mostly don’t see too many like that...makin' money the right way.”

Discussion

In the context of ChalleNGE:YIM relationships tend to be enduring (relative to traditional formal mentoring)Mentors chosen by youth and of the same race or ethnicity as mentees were most enduring Enduring relationships are associated with improved academic, vocational, and behavioral outcomes

But not improvements in substance useMentors provided social-emotional support, guidance, and instrumental support

Supported completion of Residential Phase Supported transition during Post-Residential Phase

Discussion

Potential Benefits of YIM: Effective with vulnerable adolescents Fosters skills to recruit adult support Builds social capital within communities

Potential Limitations of YIM: Challenges to identifying mentors May be difficult to achieve consistent weekly

contact Potential negative influence of early terminations

Future Directions for Research

Experimental study of impacts of YIMInvestigate YIM in contexts outside of

ChalleNGELongitudinal qualitative dataPerspectives of mentors

Future Directions for Practice

“Full” YIM: Train youth in how to recruit mentors; program provides screening and training; monitors relationship

Adult and youth training (group): Relationships-building workshops for youth and recruited adult to attend together

Youth training (group): Workshops training youth in how to identify, solicit, and draw on support from adults within their social networks

Formal mentoring to YIM: Formal mentor teaches youth how to identify, solicit, and draw on support from adults within their social networks as part of termination process

Choice in mentor selection: Within formal mentoring, allow youth greater autonomy in choosing mentors

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge Megan Millenky, Dan Bloom and other members of the ChalleNGe evaluation team and the support of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, Edna McConnell Clark Foundation, John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, MCJ Foundation, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the

U.S. Department of Defense.