Practice Profile: Youth-Initiated Mentoring for Youth Development

Youth-initiated mentoring involves a hybrid approach in which youths are empowered to identify, develop, and strengthen natural mentoring relationships from their existing social networks, rather than being assigned a new mentor through a more formal mentoring relationship. The practice is rated Promising for improving psychological, health, school/academic, and social outcomes, and rated Ineffective for cognitive functioning outcomes.

Practice Goals/Practice Components

Youth mentoring is defined as a “consistent, prosocial relationship between an adult or older peer and one or more youth[s]” (OJJDP N.d.). The goal of mentoring is to reduce risk factors for later problem behaviors (such as delinquency) and to enhance protective factors of at-risk youth.

Formal mentoring generally involves matching a volunteer or paid mentor with an at-risk youth mentee, whereas informal mentoring (also known as natural mentoring) happens when an at-risk youth has an ongoing relationship with an adult or older peer that may come from a youth’s extended family or from nonrelated individuals, such as neighbors, teachers, or coaches (Schwartz et al. 2013). Natural mentoring relationships tend to occur through organic social connections, rather than through formal mentoring programs that match mentors with mentees (van Dam et al. 2021).

Youth-initiated mentoring involves a hybrid approach in which youths are empowered to identify and recruit natural mentors from their existing social networks. Youth-initiated mentoring can include a variety of program models, but they all involve supporting a youth to identify, develop, and strengthen natural mentoring relationships, rather than assigning them a new mentor through a more formal mentoring relationship. Youth-initiated mentoring also attempts to overcome some limitations of formal mentoring, such as long waitlists for mentees (due to a lack of volunteer mentors) and high attrition rates of mentors (Kupersmidt et al. 2017).

Practice Theory

Numerous theoretical frameworks underly youth mentoring, including attachment theory, social support theory, and resiliency theory. Attachment theory focuses on bonds or attachments that youths make and how those attachments can affect factors such as future relationships and level of trust or closeness that youths may experience later on (Bowlby 1969). Social support theory focuses on the importance of secure attachments for youth, which can begin as early as infancy and early childhood and affect later perceived social support by adults (Heaney and Israel 2002). Finally, resilience theory suggests that protective factors in a youth’s life can buffer against the consequences of risks factors (Hawkins et al. 2000). A supportive adult mentor can serve as a protective resource for a youth and provide important guidance and reinforcement that can help them overcome risk factors (DSG 2019). All these theories support the importance of developing a meaningful, healthy relationship between a caring and supportive adult mentor and an at-risk youth.

Van Dam and colleagues (2021) conducted moderator analyses to see whether any factors strengthened the likelihood that youth-initiated mentoring programs improved outcomes. Certain study characteristics showed statistically significant improvements in outcomes. For example, the effect size was larger (g = 0.40) when parents, schools, teachers, peers, staff, or government records were used to measure outcomes, compared with youth reports (g = 0.27). In addition, quasi-experimental studies showed a larger effect size (g = 0.95), compared with randomized controlled trials (g = 0.15). With regard to sample characteristics, there was a statistically significant effect for studies with predominately female youth (g = 0.60), whereas studies with predominantly male youth or equal gender distribution had no statistically significant effect on outcomes. With regard to program characteristics, there was no statistically significant difference in effect sizes between programs in which youth-initiated mentoring occurred as a standalone program, compared with youth-initiated mentoring that was embedded in another program.

These sources were used in the development of the practice profile:

These sources were used in the development of the practice profile:

Bowlby, John. 1969. Attachment and Loss, Vol. 1: Attachment. New York, N.Y.: Basic Books.

(DSG) Development Services Group, Inc. 2019. “Youth Mentoring and Delinquency Prevention.” Literature review. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Hawkins, J. David, Todd I. Herrenkohl, David P. Farrington, Devon D. Brewer, Richard F. Catalano, Tracy W. Harachi, and Lynn Cothern. 2000. Predictors of Youth Violence. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Heaney, Catherine A., and Barbara A. Israel. 2002. “Social Networks and Social Support.” In Health Behavior and Health Education, edited by Karen Glanz, Barbara K. Rimer, and Frances Marcus Lewis. San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey–Bass, 185–209.

Kupersmidt, Janis B., Rebecca L. Stelter, Jean E. Rhodes, and Kathryn N. Stump. 2017. “Enhancing Mentor Efficacy and Preparedness Through Web-Based Prematching Training.” Journal of Nonprofit Education and Leadership 7(3):197–216.

(OJJDP) Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. N.d. Mentoring. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Retrieved Nov. 8, 2022, from

Schwartz, Sarah E.O., Jean E. Rhodes, Renee Spencer, and Jean B. Grossman. 2013. “Youth-Initiated Mentoring: Investigating a New Approach to Working with Vulnerable Adolescents.” American Journal of Community Psychology, published online.

Following are CrimeSolutions-rated programs that are related to this practice:

National Guard ChalleNGe Program

Youth-Nominated Support Team-Version II (YST-II)

Sources of Strength

Why might a practice's outcome ratings differ from the ratings of specific programs encompassed by that practice?