Support for Mentor Advocacy

Evidence Rating for this Practice

Promising
In each of the two studies reviewed, the practice of support for mentor advocacy was associated with better outcomes. Additionally, the methodology used for assessing effects of the practice met criteria for rigor in both studies. Based on these considerations, the practice received a designation of Promising.

Description of Practice

Support for mentor advocacy is a practice that focuses on enhancing the actions that mentors may take on behalf of their mentees outside of the mentor-mentee relationship itself (i.e., the time they spend together). Examples of mentor advocacy include (but are not necessarily limited to) efforts on the part of mentors to:

• facilitate or be present to show support for the mentee’s participation in developmentally-enhancing organized activities (e.g., after-school programs);
• help ensure that the mentee has access to appropriate services (e.g., counseling, health care), resources (e.g., school supplies), or opportunities (e.g., post-secondary education, employment);
• contribute to decision-making that affects the mentee within different settings and institutions (e.g., school, court system);
• establish and maintain ties with other significant persons in the mentee’s life (e.g., parents, teachers, peers); and
• expand the mentee’s social network through introductions to new persons (e.g., mentor’s family or friends).

Although mentors may be guided or encouraged by programs to undertake such efforts primarily in partnership with the mentee’s parent(s)/caregiver(s), in some instances they also may be supported in taking action more independently as circumstances warrant. The timing, intensity, and duration of the mentor advocacy activities that are targeted for support by programs can vary widely based on considerations such as the characteristics, backgrounds, and assessed needs of mentees, mentor backgrounds, skills, and interests, and program goals. Program support also may be geared toward helping mentors tailor their advocacy activities to the assessed needs and preferences of their mentees. Mentors may be supported by programs in taking on an advocacy role through training that is provided before or during the match relationship as well as through more individualized match support. Program support for mentor advocacy is distinguished from the practice of helping mentors to cultivate self-advocacy skills in their mentees as well as from separate components of programs or organizations that may involve having persons or groups other than mentors (e.g., professional staff) advocate on behalf of mentees or their families. It is also distinct from more indirect efforts of programs to facilitate mentor advocacy, such as through recruitment of prospective mentors whose characteristics or backgrounds are expected to be well-suited to assuming this type of role.

Goals

The primary goal of the practice is to support mentors to take actions on behalf of their mentees in order to enhance mentee development.

Target Population/Eligibility of Target Sites

This practice is potentially applicable to all forms of mentoring and the full range of youth who may be served by mentoring programs.

Theory and Evidence-Informed Principles

Program support for mentor advocacy is not guided by a particular theoretical perspective. However, the focus of this practice on supporting mentors to intervene on behalf of a young person in order to provide instrumental or tangible assistance is consistent with the theories of social support, social networks and social capital. Along with its potential to positively influence the youth’s adaptation in different settings (e.g., school, peer group), such support may broaden the youth’s network of social ties in ways that lead to new connections and opportunities, thus increasing social capital (Heaney & Israel, 2002; Portes, 2000). Viewed from a broader ecological perspective (Bronfenbrenner, 1994), mentor advocacy also may help to strengthen bridges across multiple settings or domains of activity in a young person’s life (e.g., school and family) or to foster entre into new ones (e.g., work). Furthermore, in line with prominent theories of youth delinquency, such as Differential Opportunity Theory, advocacy efforts by a mentor on behalf of a young person may connect a young person to ‘legitimate’ opportunities for achieving goals, thus making delinquent behavior such as violence and substance use less attractive (Hagan, 2012).

Corresponding Elements of Effective Practice

This practice is most relevant to the area of Monitoring and Support within the Elements of Effective Practice.

Key Personnel

The successful implementation of this practice is likely to require staff to have experience with engaging in advocacy on behalf of youth and with training or supporting others to do so effectively.

Additional Information

None.

External Validity Evidence

Variations in the Practice
The studies reviewed, both of which are meta-analyses, provide no information about the practice other than its presence or absence in the mentoring program being evaluated. Therefore, no information is available about the particular activities associated with supporting mentors in adopting an advocacy role.

Youth
One study focused on youth considered at risk for delinquency (by virtue of their prior delinquency or their environmental or individual risk characteristics) and thus provided evidence of practice effects for that population of youth. The other study had broader inclusion criteria for youth participants and thus included studies of samples of youth that varied along dimensions such as age, gender, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. Neither study, however, tested for possible differences in the association of support for mentor advocacy with program effects across subgroups of youth. Therefore, applicability of findings to different subgroups of youth is largely unknown.

Mentors
Studies investigating the possible effects of support for mentor advocacy were inclusive of mentors of varying characteristics, including both adult and peer mentors, paid and volunteer mentors, and mentors with varying motivations for participation in programs. However, studies did not test for evidence of possible differences in effects of mentor advocacy across subgroups of mentors along these or other dimensions. Therefore, the applicability of findings to different subgroups of mentors remains unknown.

Program Settings/Structures
Studies included in the meta-analyses evaluated mentoring programs with varying structures and that were delivered in a range of different types of settings, including those taking place within the community and those occurring at school, those using a one-on-one format and those employing a group format, and those that provide match support for mentoring pairs and those that do not. Neither meta-analysis, however, tested for evidence of possible differences in effects of support for mentor advocacy on the basis of such program characteristics. Therefore, applicability of findings to different program structures or settings is unknown.

Outcomes
Both meta-analyses investigated the potential effects of mentor advocacy on a range of youth outcomes, including delinquency, aggression, substance use, academic achievement, social skills, self-esteem, and obesity. Effect-sizes were collapsed across all outcomes when testing for potential effects of mentor advocacy. However, one of the studies did summarize results suggestive of program support for mentor advocacy being associated with similarly stronger effects for each of four types of outcomes (delinquency, aggression, drug use, academic achievement/failure).

Resources Available to Support Implementation

Resources are currently not available.

The use of mentors as intentional advocates is one of the more exciting developments in the mentoring field over the last decade. There is so much emphasis placed, and rightly so, on the interpersonal bonding aspects of the mentor-mentee relationship. We have much reason to believe that the trust, mutuality, and deep personal connection between mentors and youth are often the drivers of personal growth (for both participants) and program outcomes. But sometimes lost in the desire to emphasize this special connection is the notion that mentors must be active, that they must provide something tangible that no other adult in the child’s life is positioned to do. Good mentoring may frequently be as much about instrumental support and providing access to opportunities as it is about giving advice or offering emotional support, and programs that use their mentors in a formal advocate role are well positioned to bring a balanced approach to the mentor’s role.

As so beautifully illustrated in Robert Putnam’s recent book Our Kids: The American Dream in Crisis, one of the deepest needs that many American youth have is for more social capital, for the connections, networks, and concrete forms of assistance that come from having a group of successful, caring adults in a young person’s life. Research and experience tell us that these types of connections and relation-based opportunities are often essential in helping youth overcome challenges and successfully transition in to young adulthood. This social capital, often in the form of direct advocacy, may be instrumental in helping youth interact effectively with institutions and may provide solutions to problems. But Putnam also clearly demonstrates that the youth in America who need it the most are the least likely to have this rich social capital and advocacy in their lives. If mentoring programs are going to be connecting caring adults with youth who need more social capital to draw from, preparing those mentors to advocate on behalf of their mentees seems like a logical extension of that role.

Obviously, asking mentors to play this role will have an impact on many aspects of program implementation. These include:

Mentor Recruitment and Screening

• The need to emphasize certain personal traits in mentors, such as the ability to problem-solve, communication skills to engage other adults about their mentee, and a willingness to provide the mentee access to other adults and institutions in the mentor’s personal network.
• Messages that realistically portray what these advocacy activities look like in action.
• A potential emphasis on finding mentors with a history of helping youth overcome challenges.
• Screening protocols that assess whether mentors have the time and capacity to take on this deeper level of support.

Mentor Training

• Developing curricula that explain the advocacy role to new mentors and illustrate the boundaries of when and how they can most appropriately advocate on behalf of their mentee.
• Information about how to interact with institutions and other providers or caring adults in the child’s life.
• Chances to practice what may be an unfamiliar role and think through appropriate responses to situations where some direct advocacy may be in order.

Match Support and Closure

• Opportunities to receive extra guidance from program staff or referrals to other youth services.
• Processes for information sharing with the program, parents, or other adults so that the best outcomes can be achieved for the youth.
• Guidance for the mentees themselves so that they have a voice in when and how their mentor advocates on their behalf.
• Teaching mentees to find other caring adults who can advocate for them in the future once their current mentoring relationship ends.

The big question for mentoring practitioners is to figure out how much, and what type, of advocacy makes senses for their program. There are several obvious examples of the types of programs where direct advocacy would seem to be clearly in order:

• Programs in which the youth are “system-involved,” such as the child welfare or juvenile justice systems. Mentors may play a huge role in advocating for youth as they interact with these institutions, helping ensure that youth are treated fairly and that the outcomes for mentees are optimized.
• Programs in which the youth is making a major transition, such as moving into higher education or early career paths. A mentor may be instrumental in helping a youth navigate an unfamiliar environment or build a network of other caring adults that can offer ongoing or additional support.
• Programs in which the youth are trying to overcome a barrier to their success, such as trying to improve academically in a dysfunctional school or living in a family trying to overcome poverty or homelessness.

One important consideration for mentors who are taking a more formal advocate role is to avoid lapsing in to “fix it” mode on every problem the mentee encounters. The potential exists not only for mentors to overstep their bounds in relation to the parent’s child or program rules, but also to wind up inadvertently negating the voice and wishes of the mentee for whom they are advocating. These considerations suggest that mentors must remember to “share power” when it comes to advocating for the mentee and make sure that the youth is driving the action and learning to advocate for themselves too. These considerations remind us that, optimally, advocacy means that mentors help find solutions and expand possibilities, not inappropriately take control of situations or narrow options.

By encouraging mentors to advocate for youth, practitioners may help to better ensure that youth are represented in areas of life where they can’t effectively walk alone and that they have someone who is looking out for their best interests in ways that are empowering and youth-centered. It’s no surprise that the review of the evidence found this to be a promising practice. When done well, it’s the living embodiment of Urie Bronfenbrenner’s famous observation that, for a youth to find success, “someone’s got to be crazy about that kid.”

For more information on research-informed program practices and tools for implementation, be sure to consult the Elements of Effective Practice for Mentoring™ and the “Resources for Mentoring Programs” section of the National Mentoring Resource Center site.