Mentor Manual (PDF) - Cambridge Community Services
Your health and well-being have remained our priorities throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, and we will take all necessary precautions to ensure our team and clients are safe. South Bay Community Services is open for business to serve our clients, accept referrals and serve those in our community through our virtual and telehealth services. While we are working on prioritizing in-person visits for specific clients and families, we will continue to keep everyone apprised of pertinent reopening information. Please click here to contact us for services.
Mentor Manual (PDF) - Cambridge Community Services
Graphs represent the number of identified programs according to a type of program, b geographic coverage of the program, c target participants, and d target career stage. Most programs we reviewed focus on mentorship, are offered regionally, are not limited to specific target groups, and emphasize faculty and postdoc career stages. Notably, no programs specifically target staff (non-faculty, university employees), despite evidence that staff and contingent faculty roles (e.g., adjuncts, non-tenure-track) do extensive service in mentoring and provision of DEI services in academia. Also, most programs include multiple target categories, so totals are >n in figure sections c and d.
Building a diverse and inclusive network helps promote a sense of identity and community that counteracts feelings of isolation often experienced by scientists throughout their careers39. Mentoring networks, including peer mentors, should also be encouraged because they are more balanced in power and transparency, and less hierarchical40,41. Peer mentor networks can be particularly effective for tackling same-career-stage challenges and opportunities28,33,42. All these efforts should be accompanied by human resources training and implementing codes of conduct detailing best practices to make the whole experience for mentors and mentees more enjoyable and successful36,43,44. By diversifying the academic community with which mentors and mentees actively engage, scientific advancement can be achieved in a nurturing environment that can have a strong, positive impact on productivity25,32,33. Therefore, fostering mentorship networks should be a high priority for any academic institution undertaking DEI efforts.
A diverse environment improves working and learning experiences for the people involved, brings new perspectives to research, encourages more people to work in STEM fields and academia, and improves opportunities for everyone involved. To achieve this goal, we urge all agencies, foundations, institutions, and societies to use the many existing examples to inform their development of programs to generate effective mentoring relationships within their sphere of influence. We also present a step-by-step framework to diversify and build mentorship networks that includes all the aspects discussed in this commentary (Fig. 2). Building effective, diverse, multi-mentor networks can only work when programs are informed and accompanied by institution-wide DEI policy implementation, reflect diversity of the community in which institutions are embedded, and synchronize support for all organizational and career levels. Healthier work environments, more inclusive science training, and better outcomes for professionals from all backgrounds would ideally ensue as successful program implementation broadens, creating a virtuous cycle of enriched mentoring for future generations.
Mentoring is one approach that may improve the health and well-being of YMHC, through both prevention efforts, before serious mental health concerns emerge, and intervention efforts, when symptoms have already appeared. In the past decade, programs have been emerging that are designed to target youth (mentees), and sometimes even mentors, specifically because they have been identified as having mental health challenges, and/or as meeting criteria for an emerging mental health problem, such as heightened aggression, inattention, or suicide ideation. The field is in its infancy in understanding the promise, potential impact, and potential challenges of mentoring relationships for YMHC, and the evidence-based program elements needed to implement and sustain programs designed to serve YMHC in the community and mental health system contexts.
Additional innovative mentoring program strategies under investigation include those that use mentoring to address the lack of continued engagement in mental health care among YMHC. More specifically, a program that includes those who have lived experience with mental health challenges (i.e., peers) as mentors and recovery role models is being tested to examine whether it can improve the overall engagement of youth and their families in mental health services.11, 12 The impact of mentoring that is provided specifically to address issues such as stigma and acceptance, and increase efficacy, among participants are also being examined.11 Programs can also focus on improving known determinants of mental health service engagement and using and/or providing mentors that assist and support youth in accessing clinics, advocating for needed services, and continuing follow-up with care and services. Although these programs have a focused approach on mentoring to address barriers to mental health service use, it is not assumed that all YMHC need continuous mental health care. Rather, these approaches focus on matching youth with mentors who also live with mental health conditions and can be trusted guides in navigating the mental health system and life with a mental health condition. In addition to the importance of the relationship, this approach utilizes mentors to provide psychoeducation and advocacy, among other services.
Finally, the previously noted Meyerson19 meta-analytic review of mentoring for youth with mental health challenges found greater estimated favorable effects on outcomes for formal mentors (compared to natural mentors), and for school/hospital-based settings (compared to community-based settings). Surprisingly, programs that provided ongoing support/supervision to mentors fared worse in estimated effects on outcomes than those that did not; notably, however, programs that provided a support opportunity to parents and those that directly involved parents had greater estimated favorable effects on outcomes.19 A difference in estimated program effects in association with the duration of the program among the studies reviewed was not found.
One study of this type was an evaluation of a group mentoring program for youth receiving outpatient mental health services.17 Observed relative improvements in externalizing symptoms for mentored youth occurred, at least in part, through the process of decreasing parental stress. It should be noted, however, that both externalizing symptoms and parental stress were measured at the same points in time, which leaves open the possibility that improvements in parental stress might instead have flowed from decreased levels of externalizing symptoms.
Finally, mediational analyses carried out by Jent and Niec17 in their evaluation of their cognitive-behavioral mentoring program described earlier suggest that mentoring program participation may have reduced externalizing problems of the participants by decreasing the stress of parents and/or guardians. This may work by providing respite for caregivers, as caring for a youth with mental health challenges can be particularly exhausting and isolating for parents for a number of reasons, such as stigma and increased numbers of appointments with social services and school personnel needed to assist these youth. Comparable analyses failed to provide support for changes in perceived parent-social support or parent-child relationship quality as intervening processes; although each did show more favorable levels for the mentored group, neither was related, in turn, to the level of externalizing problems as an outcome in mediational analyses.
Legislative mandates may also play a role in the reach of mentoring programs for YMHC. For example, agencies in California that have historically provided mentoring programs and support to mentoring programs are now being asked, under the new legislation, to involve mentors in providing linkage and referral to mental health services for children and families suffering with mental health challenges. This type of legislation, known in this instance as the California Mental Health Services Act (aka Proposition 63), could potentially transform the use of mentorship as an intervention for YMHC.
In an analysis of responses of 251 youth and their caregivers to open-ended questions about positive and negative aspects of the mental health services for youth received at community agencies,41 it was noted that the one type of service that both youth and caregivers appeared to value highly was mentorship for the youth. Youth often cited having someone, like their counselor or mentor, to do activities with and to keep them out of trouble as the most helpful aspect of the program. Likewise, it was important to caregivers for the youth to be assigned a mentor who could act as a role model and who could get the youth involved in positive activities (p. 463). As such, the authors concluded that mentoring could be a way to increase engagement of youth in mental health services.
Illustrating an approach to combining mentoring with outpatient mental health services for youth, the Great Life Mentoring program (formerly called 4Results Mentoring) in the state of Washington provides an infrastructure to support YMHC and particularly to help them achieve life goals, including academic, social, and behavioral goals, which are important to these youth. This one-to-one mentoring program, which utilizes community volunteers who receive extensive initial training and ongoing individualized support from staff, stresses the importance of match longevity and is based on the importance of helping youth to develop secure attachments. When considering data over a seven-year period, the program was remarkably reported to have successfully retained 98% of mentors for at least 1 year with an average match (i.e., mentoring relationship) length of 3.7 years.42 041b061a72