National Evaluation Findings to Date
The national evaluation team receives quarterly data from JUMP grantees. The following information is based on data submitted by nearly 90 percent of cohort I and II grantees (projects funded in 1995 and 1997). A more thorough analysis of preliminary data is available in the 1998 Report to Congress: Juvenile Mentoring Program (JUMP). Cohort III grantees began submitting data in fall 1999. These data and continuing data from cohorts I and II will enable the national evaluation team to draw more conclusions about JUMP.JUMP Youth
JUMP projects have reported 7,422 youth
enrolled. More than 60 percent of these youth are enrolled in projects that were
funded in 1997 (cohort II). As a whole,
the projects serve a balanced mix of boys
(48.4 percent) and girls (51.3 percent)
(0.3 percent of the records do not include
gender). Three projects serve only girls
and five projects serve only boys. Of the
youth who are enrolled, 5,425 have been
matched with a mentor at least once.
At the time of enrollment, youth are just under 12 years old on average. However, a wide distribution of ages is represented among the participants (see figure 2). Because it takes time to match a youth to a mentor, the ages at first match are slightly higher than age at enrollment, averaging just over 12 years. The age at second match averages 13.5 years, and the age at third match averages 14.3 years.
JUMP projects serve children of many racial and ethnic backgrounds; a substantial
proportion of the enrolled youth are African American (see figure 3). More than half
(55.4 percent of the agencies that reported
on enrollment) either serve minority children exclusively or have an enrollment of
10 percent or less of white children. However, two projects serve white children
almost exclusively.
Most of the youth enrolled in JUMP projects live in single-parent households. Less than 20 percent are from intact two-parent households (see figure 4). JUMP youth are usually exposed to some risk factors (for example, parental drug or alcohol use, friends who engage in delinquent behavior, or poor grades) and are lacking in protective factors (for example, clear standards and consistent discipline, a sense of social belonging, or realistically high parental expectations for achievement). Of those youth for whom data are available, school and social/family domains are the most frequent areas of increased risk (see table).
JUMP Mentors
The volunteer mentors involved in JUMP projects constitute a diverse group. Although many projects try to recruit mentors from the same racial and ethnic groups as the youth enrolled, mentors are most likely to be white females. More than half of the mentors are white (see figure 5), and 62.8 percent are women.
In general, mentors are well educated. Of those mentors for whom education information was available, 83 percent had completed at least some college.
Because there are disproportionate numbers of white and female mentors, some African American and Hispanic youth, and some boys, are assigned mentors who are of a different race and/or gender. Genders are matched in 85.1 percent of first matches and ethnicity is matched in 58.3 percent of first matches. When first matches are not of the same race, a white mentor is matched to a nonwhite youth 77.8 percent of the time. Only 4.1 percent of all matches consist of a female youth with a male mentor.
Satisfaction and Perceived Benefits
Although mentoring has been used as an intervention with youth (both formally and informally) for many years, proof of its effectiveness is just beginning to be evidenced by the data. It is logical that if mentoring can support positive youth development, it can also affect progress toward the JUMP goals, namely, reduction in delinquency and gang involvement, improvement in academic performance, and reduction in school dropout rates.
The JUMP national evaluation will play an important role in expanding the body of information about mentoring. However, some assessments can be made now, such as whether—and to what degree—youth and mentors are satisfied with the mentoring relationship and whether each perceives any benefit to the youth as a result of participation in the JUMP project.
JUMP grantees obtained feedback from youth and mentors using a standardized instrument to ensure consistency in reporting across sites. The results of this data collection are summarized in this Bulletin. A complete discussion of preliminary material is available in the 1998 Report to Congress: Juvenile Mentoring Program (JUMP).
Both youth and mentors viewed the experience as positive. Youth and mentors were asked to indicate whether they believed the mentoring relationship helped the youth a little, a lot, or not at all in regard to the following behaviors:
- Getting better grades.
- Attending all classes.
- Staying away from alcohol.
- Staying away from drugs.
- Avoiding fights.
- Staying away from gangs.
- Not using knives or guns.
- Avoiding friends who start trouble.
- Getting along with family.
Match characteristics affected perceived benefits. In 463 cases (265 female mentees and 198 male mentees), the data available allowed researchers to combine, using assigned identification numbers, information received from mentors and youth regarding perceived benefits with corresponding demographic and match characteristics. From these cases, an indication of the perceived satisfaction and benefits could be analyzed with respect to some youth and mentor descriptive characteristics.
The data suggest that boys matched with female mentors and boys matched with male mentors differed somewhat in their perception of the benefits of the mentoring relationship.2 Boys paired with female mentors reported that they liked their mentors and felt understood by them to the same degree as boys paired with male mentors. However, boys who were matched with male mentors reported greater benefits with respect to avoiding drugs and gangs than did boys matched with female mentors. There were marginally significant differences in reports that mentoring helped youth avoid the use of alcohol and weapons. It is important to remember that these results must be confirmed with more objective data because the reports of perceived benefits by the youth cannot be taken as an indisputable measure of project effectiveness.
Mentor reports differed somewhat from those of mentees. Female mentors paired with boys reported that they observed significantly less improvement than did their male counterparts in the following areas:
- Staying away from drugs and alcohol.
- Avoiding fights.
- Staying away from gangs.
- Not using knives or guns.
- Avoiding friends who start trouble.
The benefit of cross-race and cross-gender matches to youth is an important area for further study. However, it is important to bear in mind that self-report data are subject to various influences that can affect the data’s validity; therefore, research using more objective measures is needed. In addition, more sophisticated research designs and analyses are needed to control for potentially confounding variables.
