1. Urszula Tyl, Public Health
University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL
Investigation of Effects of Youth Mentoring on Residential Opportunity Context During Adulthood
Mentoring programs, such as Big Brothers Big Sisters
(BBBS), have gained popularity as a way to help address
needs and problems of youth. A randomized controlled trial of
the BBBS community-based mentoring program in the early
1990s included 1,138 10 to 16-year old youth, most coming
from socioeconomically-disadvantaged backgrounds (Tierney
et. al., 1995). At an 18-month follow-up, relative to non-
mentored peers, mentored youth reported better outcomes in
several areas (e.g., substance use, academic attitudes and
performance). This was especially the case for youth whose
mentoring relationships that were longer-lasting and
experienced positively by them (Rhodes et al., 2005). The
improved outcomes resulting from this type of mentoring
could facilitate developmental trajectories toward positive
longer-term outcomes (e.g. post-secondary education) that, in
turn, increase the likelihood of living in higher opportunity
areas as an adult. Such effects could be important both in
mediating effects of mentoring experienced during formative
years of development on adult outcomes (e.g., employment)
and in setting the stage for intergenerational effects in the
form of improved outcomes for children of mentored
individuals.
• Although preliminary, findings suggest that movement to
high opportunity living areas may require additional
supports beyond mentoring. These may include increasing
youth and young adults’ access to key resources, such as
free or low cost education and job training programs
• More research studies are needed to see how youth
mentoring programs help in the long run. One possibility is
that programs are most likely to promote movement to
high opportunity living areas when they facilitate greater
educational attainment (e.g., college attendance).
Limitations:
• County level data may not be ideal; participants may have
made moves to areas of higher opportunities within
counties
• Opportunity Index has missing data for certain counties;
likewise, some participants from the original study are
deceased, incarcerated or have no updated living
information
ConclusionResults
Sample: 382 participants (221 male, 161 female) from sample of the original
study had received BBBS mentoring at 18-month follow-up and whose adult
residential address could be determined
Measures:
• Opportunity level of adult residential area: Current residential locations of
participants were identified using LexisNexis and then mapped to a county-
level measure of opportunity: Measure of America’s Human Opportunity
Index (HOI)
• Mentoring relationship quality (MRQ): Frequency of meetings, length
(months, as of 18 month follow-up), and 5-item measure of perceived support
(e.g., My Big Brother/Sister has lots of good ideas about how to solve
problems)
Analyses:
• Bivariate and partial correlations between indices of MRQ and HOI score;
partial correlations controlled for participant age at study enrollment, gender,
ethnic minority status, household income, parent education, and study baseline
reports of problem behavior (stealing), school attendance, and grades.
Method
Introduction
• Measure of America Human Opportunity Index: http://opportunityindex.org
• United States 2000 Census: http://www.census.gov/en
• Rhodes, J., Reddy, R., Roffman, J., & Grossman, J. (2005). Promoting successful youth
mentoring relationships: A preliminary screening questionnaire. Journal of Primary
Prevention, 26, 147–168.
• Tierney, J. P., Grossman, J. B., & Resch, N. L. (1995). Making a Difference: An Impact Study
of Big Brothers Big Sisters.
References
A special thank you to Principal Investigator Dr. David Dubois
from the UIC Institute for Health Research and Policy for his
guidance, oversight and expertise with youth mentoring in the
formation of this project.
Acknowledgements
Houston Texas
Population, 2000 1,953,631 20,851,820
High school graduates, 2000 70.4% 75.7%
Bachelor's degree or higher, persons age 25+, 2000 27.0% 23.2%
Median household income, 1999 $36,616 $39,927
Persons below poverty, percent, 1999 19.2% 15.4%
Columbus Ohio
Population, 2000 711,470 11,353,140
High school graduates, 2000 83.8% 83.0%
Bachelor's degree or higher, persons age 25+, 2000 29.0% 21.1%
Median household income, 1999 $37,897 $40,956
Persons below poverty, percent, 1999 14.8% 10.6%
San Antonio Texas
Population, 2000 1,144,646 20,851,820
High school graduates, 2000 75.1% 75.7%
Bachelor's degree or higher, persons age 25+, 2000 21.6% 23.2%
Median household income, 1999 $36,214 $39,927
Persons below poverty, percent, 1999 17.3% 15.4%
Minneapolis Minnesota
Population, 2000 382,618 4,919,479
High school graduates, 2000 85.0% 87.9%
Bachelor's degree or higher, persons age 25+, 2000 37.4% 27.4%
Median household income, 1999 $37,974 $47,111
Persons below poverty, percent, 1999 16.9% 7.9%
Philadelphia Pennsylvania
Population, 2000 1,517,550 12,281,054
High school graduates, 2000 71.2% 81.9%
Bachelor's degree or higher, persons age 25+, 2000 17.9% 22.4%
Median household income, 1999 $30,746 $40,106
Persons below poverty, 1999 22.9% 11.0%
Phoenix Arizona
Population, 2000 1,321,045 5,130,632
High school graduates, 2000 76.6% 81.0%
Bachelor's degree or higher, persons age 25+, 2000 22.7% 23.5%
Median household income, 1999 $41,207 $40,558
Persons below poverty, 1999 15.8% 13.9%
2000 Census for Living Areas at Time of BBBS Study
Rochester New York
Population, 2000 219,773 18,976,457
High school graduates, 2000 73.0% 79.1%
Bachelor's degree or higher, persons age 25+, 2000 20.1% 27.4%
Median household income, 1999 $27,123 $43,393
Persons below poverty, percent, 1999 25.9% 14.6%
Wichita Kansas
Population, 2000 344,284 2,688,418
High school graduates, 2000 83.8% 86.0%
Bachelor's degree or higher, persons age 25+, 2000 25.3% 25.8%
Median household income, 1999 $39,939 $40,624
Persons below poverty, percent, 1999 11.2% 9.9%
Current Participant Residence Opportunity Grade 2015
Analysis of Baseline Survey to 2015 Opportunity
Index
Neither bivariate nor partial correlations indicated an
association between any of the measures of
mentoring relationship quality and the opportunity
index score associated with the participant’s adult
residential area.
Residential Opportunity Grades in 2015 for Total United
States Population
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
missing A+ A A- B+ B B- C+ C C- D+ D D- F
NumberofCounties
Opportunity Grade
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
missing A A- B+ B B- C+ C C- D+ D D-
NumberofCounties
Opportunity Grade