Skip Navigation

Strengthen the Evidence for Maternal and Child Health Programs

Sign up for MCHalert eNewsletter

Evidence Tools
MCHbest. Adult Mentor.

MCHbest Logo

Strategy. Mentoring Programs

Approach. Create mentorship programs to meet the needs of adolescents.

Return to main MCHbest page >>

Overview. There are many steps in implementing a mentor program. To support outreach, work towards the development of formal and ongoing relationships with nonprofit and faith-based organizations.[1] During recruitment, know the motivations of volunteers, and select mentors who possess 1) a passion for civic engagement, 2) a strong sense of empathy, and 3) the ability to build relationships with students.[2, 3, 4] Use a prosocial orientation in recruitment strategies.[2]. Include mentor training with content on mentor’s viewpoint about mentoring.[5, 6] While selecting the matches, consider the holistic needs, wellbeing, and the desired outcomes of mentees, and stress the importance of the mentors being flexible in activities with their mentee.[6, 7, 8, 9] Finally, prepare to evaluate the mentorship program using logic models, close relationship theories and methodologies to enhance the effectiveness of the program.[8,9]

Evidence. Emerging Evidence. Strategies with this rating typically trend positive and have good potential to work...

Access the peer-reviewed evidence through the MCH Digital Library or related evidence source.

Outcome Components. This strategy has shown to have impact on the following outcomes (Read more about these categories):

  • Quality of Care. This strategy promotes the degree to which healthcare services meet established standards aimed at achieving optimal health outcomes.
  • Utilization. This strategy improves the extent to which individuals and communities use available healthcare services.

Detailed Outcomes. For specific outcomes related to each study supporting this strategy, access the peer-reviewed evidence and read the Intervention Results for each study.

Intervention Type. Community Organizing (Read more about intervention types and levels as defined by the Public Health Intervention Wheel).

Intervention Level. Community-Focused

Examples from the Field. There are currently no ESMs that use this strategy. Search similar intervention components in the ESM database.

Sample ESMs. Here are sample ESMs to use as models for your own measures using the RBA framework (see The Role of Title V in Adapting Strategies).

Quadrant 1:
Measuring Quantity of Effort (“What/how much did we do?”)

  • Number of mentorship programs established to serve adolescents in a given community or population. (Measures availability and reach of mentoring opportunities) Number of adolescents enrolled and actively participating in mentorship programs. (Assesses program engagement and utilization)

Quadrant 2:
Measuring Quality of Effort (“How well did we do it?”)

  • Percent of mentorship programs that adhere to evidence-based practices and quality standards for effective youth mentoring. (Measures program quality and fidelity to best practices) Percent of mentors who complete required training, receive ongoing support, and demonstrate core competencies for building positive relationships with adolescents. (Assesses mentor development and skill-building)

Quadrant 3:
Measuring Quantity of Effect (“Is anyone better off?”)

  • Number of adolescents who report high levels of satisfaction, trust, and personal connection with their mentors. (Measures quality and effectiveness of mentoring relationships from youth perspective) Number of adolescents who show increased resilience, coping skills, and positive behavior changes through mentoring program participation. (Assesses impact on youth protective factors and risk reduction) Number of successful mentorship program innovations, adaptations, and scaling strategies that are replicated and adapted across multiple contexts to expand access and impact for adolescents. (Assesses knowledge transfer and field advancement) Number of cross-sector partnerships and collective impact initiatives led by Title V catalyzed by mentorship programs. (Shows systems-level and transformative impact)

Quadrant 4:
Measuring Quality of Effect (“How are they better off?”)

  • Percent of adolescents who report high levels of satisfaction, trust, and personal connection with their mentors. (Measures quality and effectiveness of mentoring relationships from youth perspective) Percent of adolescents who show increased resilience, coping skills, and positive behavior changes through mentoring program participation. (Assesses impact on youth protective factors and risk reduction) Percent of successful mentorship program innovations, adaptations, and scaling strategies that are replicated and adapted across multiple contexts to expand access and impact for adolescents. (Assesses knowledge transfer and field advancement) Percent of cross-sector partnerships and collective impact initiatives led by Title V catalyzed by mentorship programs. (Shows systems-level and transformative impact)

Note. When looking at your ESMs, SPMs, or other strategies:

  1. Move from measuring quantity to quality.
  2. Move from measuring effort to effect.
  3. Quadrant 1 strategies should be used sparingly, when no other data exists.
  4. The most effective measurement combines strategies in all levels, with most in Quadrants 2 and 4.

Learn More. Read how to create stronger ESMs and how to measure ESM impact more meaningfully through Results-Based Accountability.

References

[1] Azuine RE, Singh GK. Mentoring, Bullying, and Educational Outcomes Among US School-Aged Children 6-17 Years. J Sch Health. 2019 Apr;89(4):267-278. doi: 10.1111/josh.12735. Epub 2019 Feb 7. PMID: 30734289.

[2] Micheal L. Shier, Jesssica Larsen-Halikowski, Stephanie Gouthro, Characteristics of volunteer motivation to mentor youth, Children and Youth Services Review, Volume 111, 2020, 104885, ISSN 0190-7409, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.104885. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0190740919311776)

[3] Bufali MV, Connelly G, Morton A. Examining holistically the experiences of mentors in school-based programs: A logic analysis. J Community Psychol. 2023 Nov;51(8):3171-3193. doi: 10.1002/jcop.22991. Epub 2023 Jan 9. PMID: 36623254.

[4] Maker Castro E, Cohen AK. Fostering youth civic engagement through effective mentorship: Understanding the college student volunteer mentors who succeed. J Community Psychol. 2021 Mar;49(2):605-619. doi: 10.1002/jcop.22482. Epub 2020 Dec 3. PMID: 33270915.

[5] Matheson, David & Rempe, Gary & Watson Saltis, M. & Nowag, Amanda. (2020). Community engagement: mentor beliefs across training and experience. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning. 28. 1-18. 10.1080/13611267.2020.1736774.

[6] Ahmed, Yasmin Mahmoud, "Mentors’ Perspectives on the Mentor–Mentee Relationship in High School Mentoring Programs" (2022). Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies. 12908. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/12908

[7] Dutton, H., Bullen, P., & Deane, K. (2018). Getting to the heart of it: Understanding mentoring relationship quality from the perspective of program supervisors. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 26(4), 400–419. https://doi.org/10.1080/13611267.2018.1530132

[8] Dutton H, Deane KL, Overall NC. Using Observational Dyadic Methods in Youth Mentoring Research: Preliminary Evidence of the Role of Actors' and Partners' Self-disclosure in Predicting Relationship Quality. J Youth Adolesc. 2023 Jun;52(6):1157-1169. doi: 10.1007/s10964-023-01757-y. Epub 2023 Mar 4. PMID: 36871089; PMCID: PMC10121698.

[9] Weiler LM, Chesmore A, Pryce J, Krafchick J, Haddock SA, Zimmerman TS, Rhodes T. Mentor response to youth academic support-seeking behavior: Does attunement matter? Youth Soc. 2019 May;51(4):548-569. doi: 10.1177/0044118x17697235. Epub 2017 Mar 26. PMID: 32042210; PMCID: PMC7009788.

This project is supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under grant number U02MC31613, MCH Advanced Education Policy, $3.5 M. This information or content and conclusions are those of the author and should not be construed as the official position or policy of, nor should any endorsements be inferred by HRSA, HHS or the U.S. Government.