Part of monthly Quality In Action webinar series hosted by the Mentoring Partnership of Minnesota. Why Youth Mentoring Relationships End with Dr. Renee Spencer, September 2011.

1. Why Youth Mentoring Relationships End September 7, 2011 Quality in Action

2. Webinar Logistics Asking Questions & Sharing Comments During the Webinar “Raise your hand” & MPM Organizers will unmute you Or, type questions (and comments) in the question/answer section and submit; we will respond directly to you or possibly share your question with all attendees When unmuted, please monitor your background noise Polly Roach Vice President of Strategic Services Recordings of past webinars are available on our YouTube Channel.

3. Elements of Effective Practice Standard: Facilitation bringing the match to closure in a way that affirms the contributions of both the mentor and the mentee and offers both individuals the opportunity to assess the experience. Benchmarks B.6.1/2 Program has procedure to manage (un)anticipated closures, including a system for a mentor or mentee rematch. B.6.3. Program conducts and documents an exit interview with mentor and mentee. Enhancements E.6.1 Program explores opportunity to continue the mentor/mentee match for a second (or subsequent) year E.6.2 Program has a written statement outlining terms of match closure and policies for mentor/mentee contact after a match ends. E.6.3 Program hosts a final celebration meeting or event with the mentor and mentee to mark progress and transition.

4. QMAP Data: Closure R1. Develop and implement procedures to manage both anticipated and unanticipated match closures, including procedures for re-matching mentors and mentees. R2. Conduct exit interviews with mentors. R3. Conduct exit interviews with mentees. R4. Ensure mentors, mentees (and families when appropriate) understand program policy regarding communication and contact between mentors and mentees after documented match closure.

5. QMAP Data: Closure R1. Develop and implement procedures to manage both anticipated and unanticipated match closures, including procedures for re-matching mentors and mentees. R2. Conduct exit interviews with mentors. R3. Conduct exit interviews with mentees. R4. Ensure mentors, mentees (and families when appropriate) understand program policy regarding communication and contact between mentors and mentees after documented match closure.

6. Why Youth Mentoring Relationships End Renée Spencer, Ed.D., LICSW Boston University 6

7. 7 RIA Issue #5 - Overview Introduction Youth and Mentor Characteristics Relationship Processes Program Factors Early Ending Matches Discussion

8. Why should we care about endings? The lack of attention to endings in youth mentoring may inadvertently be contributing to false expectations that most relationships will be long-term if not life-long, when current evidence suggests otherwise.

9. 9 Introduction What happens when mentoring relationships do not go well? Paying closer attention to what happens when things do not go well can help us better identify and meet the special challenges posed by creating and sustaining formal mentoring relationships between youth and adults.

10. Relationship Failure Estimates are that about half of formal mentoring end earlier than was planned at the start When relationships experience an earlier than expected ending within the first three months, they have potential to do harm New evidence suggests that short, but highly consistent formal relationships with frequent contact and planned endings may not run these same risks 10

12. Phases of Relationship Decline is a passive drifting apart over time that accompanies the reductions in importance and level of closeness. Dissolution is more intentional or active termination of the relationship.

13. Thought provoking? A well-timed structural ending can encourage more of a psychological separation, enabling the protégé to try out functioning with less guidance and support. Premature structural endings may provoke feelings of abandonment and anxiety as a protégé is forced to function more independently before feeling ready to do so. A structural ending that occurs later than a psychological one may lead to feelings of resentment on the part of both protégé and mentor as the relationship no longer suits the needs of one or both parties. In all of these cases, endings may be functional or dysfunctional.

14. Case Study - Workplace (A) Mismatches in mentor and protégé personality, values and work styles (B) Lack of mentor expertise (C) Distancing and manipulative behavior on the part of the mentor (D) Poor attitude and/or (E) Personal problems on the part of the mentor.

15. Formal vs. Informal Protégés in a workplace mentoring program indicated that negative experiences in formal relationships had a greater effect on thoughts about quitting and workplace stress than did such experiences in informal mentoring relationships

16. Case Study - Psychotherapy One qualitative study of therapy relationships with interns found that all of the clients informed about the intern’s planned departure at the outset of treatment completed the full course of treatment whereas some of the clients who were not informed until near the end of the year did not return for subsequent sessions (Gould, 1978). Client reports indicate a desire for clear endings (e.g., Marx & Gelso, 1987) and it is commonly accepted practice wisdom that abrupt endings have the potential to be harmful in both the near and long term (Gelso & Woodhouse, 2002)

17. 17 Relationship Processes Goal = Longer, Stronger Matches Relationship duration and strength are associated with youth outcomes

18. Role of Parents In our in-depth qualitative interviews we find parents often have significant insight into what contributed to the dissolution of the relationship and the consequences of poorly handled endings for their child (Spencer & Basualdo-Delmonico, 2010). This leads us to concur that involving parents and guardians at the early signs of relationship struggles may be helpful in determining the best course of action.

19. 19 Other Process Factors Matching based on shared interests Consistency of contact Mentor’s approach Dosage - or amount of contact… what is more critical?

20. Program Factors Pre-match training and orientation Ongoing training Staff contact during relationship Resources/space Summer contact More satisfying and effective relationships (longer, stronger) 20

21. 21 Themes - Early Ending Matches Mentor or protégé abandonment; Perceived lack of protégé motivation; Unfulfilled expectations; Deficiencies in mentor relational skills including the ability to bridge cultural divides; Family interference; Inadequate agency support.

22. 22 Preventing Relationship Failures Higher levels of program support Screen mentors for consistency and continuity Clear expectations for relationships* Discuss closure from the start Cultural training for participants** Monitoring of matches and ongoing training

23. 23 Youth and Mentor Characteristics Youth Age at time of match Risk status Gender Mentors Income Marital status Age

24. 24 Conclusion Once the match between a mentor and a young person is made, the work has only just begun. By identifying and addressing common pitfalls in formal mentoring relationships, programs can better support mentors and youth in their efforts to build close, enduring, and growth-promoting relationships.

25. 25 Share RESOURCES MPM Training www.mentoringworks.org/traininginstitute Web sites & PDFs www.delicious.com/traininginstitute This presentation & others www.slideshare.net/traininginstitute

26. MENTOR/National Mentoring Partnership The leader in expanding the power of mentoring to millions of young Americans who want and need adult mentors. Ongoing Support, Supervision and Monitoring Reaching Closure 26

27. National organization that provides training and technical assistance to youth mentoring programs. Going the Distance—A Guide to Building Lasting Relationships in Mentoring Programs Overcoming Relationship Pitfalls, fact sheet 27

28. 28 The mission of the Mentoring Partnership of Minnesota is to lead our state in building and sustaining quality mentoring for every child. Tools for Mentoring Adolescents: Building Trust and Attachment

29. Next Quality In Action Webinar October 5 – Navigating the Criminal Background Screening Process The criminal background screening process can be difficult and time- consuming for mentoring programs to navigate. In a recent survey of Minnesota mentoring programs that use a commercial background screening service, 46% said they use a commercial service because they don’t have the capacity to run their own checks. But what are you getting with a commercial screening service? What can you do to conduct more effective criminal background screenings? Combining feedback from mentoring programs and our own research, MPM put together two new informational overviews to help you choose internal or external screening processes that meet your program’s needs. Join this webinar to assess screening challenges and learn more about useful resources.

30. And don’t forget… October 24 – 12th Annual Minnesota Mentoring Conference Featuring keynote speakers, Dr. Renée Spencer (in person), and Dr. Jean Rhodes (via interactive video conference). The 2011 conference, Best in Class, features well-known experts and trainers from around the country who are highly regarded for their innovations in mentoring, and who will bring cutting edge insights on the field to mentoring staff, supporters and stakeholders. Save $25 on each conference registration - register now to receive the Early Bird rate of $110 valid through September 14th. Participants of all experience levels can expect to walk away from the conference with great ideas and practices to implement in their programs. For more information, visit www.mpmn.org/Events/AnnualConference.aspx