CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 20Mentoring and Academic DevelopmentChild Welfare and AdoptionYouth Development and Social Support

Supporting mentoring relationships of youth in foster care: Do program practices predict match length?

Stelter, Rebecca L., Kupersmidt, Janis B., Stump, Kathryn N.·2018·American Journal of Community Psychology
DOI 10.1002/ajcp.12246
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Implementation of research- and safety-based program practices enhance the longevity of mentoring relationships, in general; however, little is known about how mentoring programs might support the relationships of mentees in foster care. Benchmark program practices and Standards in the Elements of Effective Practice for Mentoring, 3rd Edition (MENTOR, 2009) were assessed in the current study as predictors of match longevity. Secondary data analyses were conducted on a national agency information management database from 216 Big Brothers Big Sisters agencies serving 641 youth in foster care and 70,067 youth not in care from across the United States (Mean = 11.59 years old at the beginning of their matches) in one-to-one, community-based (55.06%) and school- or site-based (44.94%) matches. Mentees in foster care had shorter matches and matches that were more likely to close prematurely than mentees who were not in foster care. Agency leaders from 32 programs completed a web-based survey describing their policies and practices. The sum total numbers of Benchmark program practices and Standards were associated with match length for 208 mentees in foster care; however, neither predicted premature match closure. Results are discussed in terms of how mentoring programs and their staff can support the mentoring relationships of high-risk youth in foster care.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ajcp.12246

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Two quantitative studies found that mentored young people in foster care manifested improved social skills, mental health, quality of life, and greater trust in others than did foster care boys and girls in control groups, but mentees in foster care had shorter matches than mentees not in foster care.

    “Although two quantitative studies have found that mentored young people in foster care manifested improved social skills, mental health, quality of life, social skills, and greater trust in others than did foster care boys and girls in control groups [147,148,149] found that mentees in foster care had shorter matches than mentees not in foster care.”

    From Unpacking Community-Based Youth Mentoring Relationships: An Integrative Review (2021) · cites this paper as [147]

  • Other factors significantly associated with premature terminations included risky health behaviors, internalizing problems, and externalizing problems.

    “Other factors significantly associated with premature terminations included risky health behaviors (e.g., substance use and adolescent pregnancy), as well as internalizing problems (e.g., anxiety, depression, and low self-esteem), and externalizing problems (e.g., behavior regulation difficulties and self-control problems [113,147].”

    From Unpacking Community-Based Youth Mentoring Relationships: An Integrative Review (2021) · cites this paper as [147]

  • The totality of benchmarks and standards implemented according to the Elements of Effective Practice for Mentoring, 3rd Edition, by the BBBS mentoring programs predicted the length of mentoring relationships.

    “The totality of benchmarks and standards implemented according to the Elements of Effective Practice for Mentoring, 3rd Edition, by the BBBS mentoring programs predicted the length of mentoring relationships [113,147].”

    From Unpacking Community-Based Youth Mentoring Relationships: An Integrative Review (2021) · cites this paper as [147]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Stelter, R. L., Kupersmidt, J. B., & Stump, K. N.
Affiliations
Innovation Research and Training (US)
Corresponding author
Kupersmidt, Janis B.
ORCID
Venue
American Journal of Community Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-04-15
Volume
61
Issue
3-4
Pages
398-410
ISSN
  • 0091-0562 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2770
DOI
10.1002/ajcp.12246
OpenAlex
W2801543590
Cited by
20
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3
FWCI
2.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • American Journal of Community Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (#2012‐JU‐FX‐0009)
  • Office of Justice Programs
  • U.S. Department of Justice
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mentoring and Academic Development
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Child Welfare and Adoption
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Youth Development and Social Support
Keywords
mentoring, foster care, foster youth, Big Brothers Big Sisters, program practices, at-risk youth, one-on-one mentoring, school-based mentoring, community mentoring
MeSH terms
Mentoring, Child, Foster, Child, Child Development, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, United States

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review