Profile Updated:
Summary: This is an intergenerational mentoring initiative designed to delay or reduce substance use by increasing the resiliency and protective factors of at-risk middle school youth. The program is rated Ineffective for improving outcomes related to alcohol use, marijuana use, self-control, problem behaviors, school absences, grades, and bonding. (Review the full program description).
| Title | Rating | Details | Outcome Category | Study(ies) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alcohol use |
Ineffective | One Study |
There were no statistically significant differences on alcohol use between students who participated in the program and students in the control group. |
Drugs and substance abuse; Use of legal substances; Alcohol use | Aseltine, Robert H., Matthew Dupre, and Pamela Lamlein. "Mentoring as a Drug Prevention Strategy: An Evaluation of Across Ages." Adolescent & Family Health 1(1):11–20. See evaluation methods. |
| Marijuana use |
Ineffective | One Study |
There were no statistically significant differences on marijuana use between students who participated in the program and students in the control group. |
Drugs and substance abuse; Use of legal substances; Marijuana/cannabis use | Aseltine, Robert H., Matthew Dupre, and Pamela Lamlein. "Mentoring as a Drug Prevention Strategy: An Evaluation of Across Ages." Adolescent & Family Health 1(1):11–20. See evaluation methods. |
| Self-control |
Ineffective | One Study |
There were no statistically significant differences on self-control between students who participated in the program and students in the control group. |
Mental health/behavioral health; Externalizing behavior; Low self-control | Aseltine, Robert H., Matthew Dupre, and Pamela Lamlein. "Mentoring as a Drug Prevention Strategy: An Evaluation of Across Ages." Adolescent & Family Health 1(1):11–20. See evaluation methods. |
| Problem behaviors |
Ineffective | One Study |
There were no statistically significant differences on problem behaviors between students who participated in the program and students in the control group. |
Juvenile problem and protective behaviors; Multiple measures of juvenile problem behavior | Aseltine, Robert H., Matthew Dupre, and Pamela Lamlein. "Mentoring as a Drug Prevention Strategy: An Evaluation of Across Ages." Adolescent & Family Health 1(1):11–20. See evaluation methods. |
| Absences |
Ineffective | One Study |
There were no statistically significant differences on number of school absences between students who participated in the program and students in the control group. |
Education; Attendance | Aseltine, Robert H., Matthew Dupre, and Pamela Lamlein. "Mentoring as a Drug Prevention Strategy: An Evaluation of Across Ages." Adolescent & Family Health 1(1):11–20. See evaluation methods. |
| Grades |
Ineffective | One Study |
There were no statistically significant differences on school grades between students who participated in the program and students in the control group. |
Education; Academic achievement/school performance; Grades in school | Aseltine, Robert H., Matthew Dupre, and Pamela Lamlein. "Mentoring as a Drug Prevention Strategy: An Evaluation of Across Ages." Adolescent & Family Health 1(1):11–20. See evaluation methods. |
| School bonding |
Ineffective | One Study |
There were no statistically significant differences on school bonding between students who participated in the program and students in the control group. |
Education; School attachment/connectedness | Aseltine, Robert H., Matthew Dupre, and Pamela Lamlein. "Mentoring as a Drug Prevention Strategy: An Evaluation of Across Ages." Adolescent & Family Health 1(1):11–20. See evaluation methods. |
Program Goal/Target Population
Across Ages is a mentoring initiative designed to increase the resiliency and protective factors of at-risk middle school youths through a comprehensive intergenerational approach. The overall goal is substance use prevention. At-risk youth generally come from neighborhoods characterized by poverty and high rates of substance use, drug-related crime, and unemployment.
Program Components
The basic concept of the program is to pair older adult volunteers (55 and older) with students (10 to 13 years old) to create a special bonding relationship. The project also uses community service activities, provides a classroom-based life skills curriculum, and offers parent-training workshops.
Mentors: Older mentors—by acting as advocates, challengers, nurturers, role models, and friends—help youth develop the awareness, self-confidence, and skills they need to abstain from drug use and overcome other obstacles. The mentor is expected to spend at least 4 hours each week with their assigned youth. Activities include working on homework or school projects, going to sports events or cultural activities, or selecting a community service activity to work on together. Mentors and mentees meet year round.
Community Service: The community service component focuses on interactions with frail elders. For instance, students are expected to make biweekly visits to nursing homes where they visit with residents for an hour. Students record their experiences in journals and share this information in class.
Classroom Curriculum: The classroom component is built on a Positive Youth Development curriculum, which promotes social competence. The curriculum teaches life and resistance skills through didactic instruction, videotapes, journals, role-playing, and homework assignments.
Parent Workshops: Events for parents, youth, and mentors are scheduled on weekends. To encourage participation, a meal and entertainment are usually provided. When possible, free transportation is provided. Mentors are also encouraged to maintain contact with parents through mail and phone calls.
Study Title: Mentoring as a Drug Prevention Strategy: An Evaluation of Across Ages. (which is associated with outcomes Alcohol use, Marijuana use, Self-control, Problem behaviors, Absences, Grades, and School bonding)
Research Design
Aseltine, Dupre, and Lamlein (2000) conducted a 3-year evaluation of the Across Ages program in Springfield, Massachusetts. Ten sixth-grade classrooms across three public middle schools participated in the evaluation during the 1997 and 1998 school years. Classrooms were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: 1) the full mentoring condition (n = 85), 2) the curriculum-only condition (n = 135), and 3) a control group (n = 138). Students in the mentoring condition received all three components of the program: the Positive Youth Development Curriculum (PYDC), participation in community service with elderly residents, and weekly one-on-one mentoring with older adult volunteers. Students in the curriculum-only condition received the PYDC and participated in community service but received no mentoring. The control condition received no intervention. Parental consent was required for students to participate in the program. The CrimeSolutions review of this study focused on the differences between students in the full mentoring condition and students in the control condition.
Sample
The total analytic sample included 358 students. Youths completed questionnaires at three points: 1) baseline (before the intervention), 2) immediately after the school year, and 3) six months post-intervention (the CrimeSolutions review focused on the findings from this time period). The study took place in Springfield, Massachusetts, a diverse city of 150,000 with high poverty levels, especially among children and minority groups. As of 1990, 20 percent of residents lived below the poverty line, including one in three children. The population is 18 percent Black and 17 percent Hispanic/Latino, with 58 percent of Latino children younger than 18 and 74 percent younger than 5 living in poverty. In public schools, 72 percent of the 26,000 students are members of minority groups and 77 percent have low income. The study authors did not provide specific information on the demographic characteristics of the students in the sample.
Outcome Measures/Data Collection
Measures were primarily drawn from the National Youth Survey and were supplemented with items assessing attitudes toward the elderly. The primary outcomes included measures of mental and behavioral health (e.g., self-control, cooperation), academic performance (e.g., grades), problem behaviors (e.g., alcohol use), and attitudes toward drugs and older adults. Trained interviewers administered the questionnaires during class time. Summary scales were created by averaging item scores, and minimal missing data were imputed using item means. Additional controls, such as family drug use, neighborhood risk, and family supervision, were included for analyses involving substance use and problem behaviors to strengthen the accuracy and power of statistical tests.
Statistical Analysis
Statistical analyses were conducted using general linear models that controlled for: 1) baseline values of outcome variables; 2) covariates including race, ethnicity, sex, family structure, and language spoken at home; and, for some models, additional risk factors such as family drug use and neighborhood risk. The study did not conduct subgroup analysis.
Citation:
Aseltine, Robert H., Matthew Dupre, and Pamela Lamlein. "Mentoring as a Drug Prevention Strategy: An Evaluation of Across Ages." Adolescent & Family Health 1(1):11–20.
This study is a high-quality randomized controlled trial.
To implement the Across Ages program, a 2-day training plus follow-up technical assistance is recommended. The training can be conducted on-site for up to 25 people. The cost of the 2-day training is $1,000 per day, plus travel and per diem. Technical assistance costs $500 per day plus travel and per diem.
These sources were used in the development of the program profile:
LoSciuto, Leonardo L., Amy K. Rajala, Tara N. Townsend, and Andrea S. Taylor. 1996. “An Outcome Evaluation of Across Ages: An Intergenerational Mentoring Approach to Drug Prevention.” Journal of Adolescent Research 11(1):116–129. (This study was reviewed but did not meet CrimeSolutions criteria for inclusion in the program’s evidence base.)
Rogers, Anita M., and Andrea S. Taylor. 1997. “Intergenerational Mentoring: A Viable Strategy for Meeting the Needs of Vulnerable Youth.” Journal of Gerontological Social Work 28(1-2):125–40.
Taylor, Andrea S., and Joy G. Dryfoos. 1999. “Creating a Safe Passage: Elder Mentors and Vulnerable Youth.” Generations 22(4):43–48.
Taylor, Andrea S., Leonard LoSciuto, Margaretta Fox, Susan M. Hilbert, and Michael Sonkowsky. 1999. “The Mentoring Factor: Evaluation of the Across Ages’ Intergenerational Approach to Drug Abuse Prevention.” Child & Youth Services 20(1-2):77–99.
Mano, Momoko. 2007. “Role of Intergenerational Mentoring for Supporting Youth Development: An Examination of the ‘Across Ages’ Program in the US.” Educational Studies in Japan 2:83–94.
Jekielek, Susan, Kristin A. Moore, and Elizabeth C. Hair. 2002. “Mentoring Programs and Youth Development: A Synthesis.” Washington, DC: Child Trends.
Following are CrimeSolutions-rated programs that are related to this practice:
This practice provides youth with a positive and consistent adult or older youth relationship to promote healthy youth development and social functioning and to reduce risk factors. The practice is rated Effective in reducing delinquency and improving educational outcomes; Promising in improving psychological outcomes and cognitive functioning; and Ineffective in reducing substance use.
Evidence Ratings for Outcomes
|
Crime & Delinquency - Multiple crime/offense types |
|
Education - Multiple education outcomes |
|
Mental Health & Behavioral Health - Psychological functioning |
|
|
Mental Health & Behavioral Health - Cognitive functioning |
|
|
Mental Health & Behavioral Health - Social functioning |
|
|
Drugs & Substance Abuse - Multiple substances |
Designed to foster the development of five interrelated sets of cognitive, affective, and behavioral competencies, in order to provide a foundation for better adjustment and academic performance in students, which can result in more positive social behaviors, fewer conduct problems, and less emotional distress. The practice was rated Effective in reducing students’ conduct problems and emotional stress.
Evidence Ratings for Outcomes
|
|
Juvenile Problem & At-Risk Behaviors - Multiple juvenile problem/at-risk behaviors |
|
|
Mental Health & Behavioral Health - Internalizing behavior |
This practice consists of skill-building and interaction-based activities integrated into school-based programs for grades 6–8 that are aimed at preventing marijuana use among adolescents ages 12–14. This practice is rated Effective for preventing marijuana use.
Evidence Ratings for Outcomes
|
|
Drugs & Substance Abuse - Marijuana |
This practice encompasses programs that provide youths with formal supportive relationships and various positive, community-based activities and experiences to reduce their need to use alcohol and/or drugs. The practice is rated Effective for reducing the likelihood of alcohol initiation and reducing the likelihood of drug use initiation.
Evidence Ratings for Outcomes
|
|
Drugs & Substance Abuse - Alcohol |
|
|
Drugs & Substance Abuse - Multiple substances |
Following are CrimeSolutions-rated programs that are related to this program:
This is a one-on-one mentoring program in which youth referred from a community mental health agency receive support from adult volunteers with whom they spend 2 to 3 hours weekly on positive community activities. The program is rated Effective. The intervention was shown to be associated with a statistically significant increase in global functioning and a lower likelihood of an unplanned and client-initiated ending of treatment.
This is an intervention designed to prevent future criminal activity among system-involved youth through using short-term, high-intensity relationships with paid mentors, referred to as Advocates. The program is rated Promising. Program participants showed statistically significant improvement in educational engagement and reductions in serious dispositions, compared with a comparison group.
This is a school-based, mentoring program designed to improve academic performance and life satisfaction and reduce absences and behavioral infractions. The program is rated Promising. Participants had a statistically significant decrease in unexcused absences and higher math and English grades, compared with the control group. However, it did not effect school-reported behavioral infractions, science or history grades, positive affect, negative affect, coping, or overall mental health.
This is a group mentoring program that seeks to reduce recidivism of youth on probation in New York City, using an interactive journaling curriculum based on cognitive-behavioral principles. The program is rated Ineffective Program participants showed a statistically significant reduction in felony reconvictions, compared with comparison group youth at 24 months; however, there were no statistically significant differences on arrests, felony arrests, or reconvictions.
This is a school-based intervention designed to help students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) develop, practice, and generalize academic and social skills by using volunteer mentors to deliver skills training to students. This program is rated as Ineffective. Academic functioning and parent/teacher ratings of student behavior reflecting ADHD symptoms did not differ statistically significantly for youths in the intervention group, compared with the control group.
This program was designed to help high school students with mild learning disabilities improve their ability to identify postsecondary career goals. This program is rated Promising. The program group showed statistically significant improvement in social connectedness, transition competency, and self-determination, compared with the control group. However, there were no statistically significant differences in career/educational goals, academic connectedness, and familial connectedness.
This is an intervention for urban minority freshmen at risk of dropping out of high school. The goal was to enhance school-related cognitions and behaviors. The program is rated Promising. The program did not statistically significantly impact students’ absences, grade point averages, or decision-making efficacy, but had statistically significant effects on discipline referrals, negative school behavior, performance in mathematics and language arts, and other self-reported outcomes.
This is a school-based program designed for at-risk middle school students that aims to improve academic performance, promote school connectedness, and decrease disciplinary actions. The program is rated Ineffective. There was no statistically significant impact on students’ English, reading, or science grades; measures of school connectedness; or school absences. However, treatment group students had statistically significantly fewer discipline referrals compared with control group students.
This program was originally rated Promising. It has been re-reviewed based on the change in the program rating instrument. Under the new instrument, CrimeSolutions ow now rates individual program outcomes and no longer assigns an overall rating.
Rating Process
Program Status
This program is Active.