Mentoring Ex-Offenders

Mentoring Ex-Offenders

What is Mentoring?

A mentor or life coach is a civilian support person that is paired with ex-offenders to provide more informal forms of support such as advice, guidance and encouragement while modeling pro-social behavior. Mentors can be volunteers or employees.

Mentoring is not the same as or a replacement for case management.

Why is mentoring important for Ex-Offenders?

Mentors may be more effective at providing informal and emotional support to returning prisoners than case managers who may be perceived as authority figures.[1]

Ex-offenders may not have many people in their lives that are possible role models for success in their desired areas

Mentors may promote greater adherence to formal interventions[2]

Promising Practices of Mentoring Programs

Have a coordinator

Have a staff person who is responsible for recruiting, training and supervising mentors within the programs[3]

Mentoring is not an end to itself itself[4]

Mentoring may be an effective tool for increasing retention in a service program like employment training or substance abuse treatment[5]

Mentors who are perceived peers may be more effective[6]

Should always same gender[7]

Same race/ethnicity preferred[8]

Should come from similar socio-economic backgrounds or have a history of justice-involvement[9]

Training

Mentors should have training in building relationships and other relevant skills and knowledge, to help prepare mentors for their roles

Supported by case management

Ensure that the case manager has a role in supporting the mentor-mentee relationship

Case managers should speak with mentors often and directly[10]

Tie mentorship goals to the ex-offender’s case plan[11]

The mentor should not be conducting assessment but rather should communicate with the mentee and the case manager to establish goals for mentorship

Mentoring for adults may be referred to as coaching or life coaching[12]

The term mentor is sometimes perceived as condescending and may be a barrier for the program

Time commitment

Time spent per meeting should be significant. Longer meeting times are tied to greater outcomes[13]

Frequency of meetings is also important. Meeting once a week or more during the initial transition is more effective[14]

Mentoring Models

One-on-one

Mentor and mentee are paired and decide when, where and how often to meet

· Most flexible model

· Can be done in combination with group model

Group

A number of individuals together facilitated by a mentor

· Most common with ex-offender population[15]

· Meets less often, every 1-2 weeks

Combination

Mentees may have a one-on-one mentor and meet with a group as well

Possible Outcomes of Mentoring Programs

Short-Term

Promote adherence and buy-in for formal intervention programs[16]

Increase level of support and encouragement perceived by the mentee[17]

Promote knowledge and skills in demonstrating pro-social behaviors

Long-Term

There is little evidence supporting long term effects of mentoring itself, but rather outcomes should be tied to promoting adherence and success of the a program’s primary objective such as increasing ex-offender employment or educational goals[18]

Barriers to Mentoring Programs

Lack of ex-offender buy-in[19]

· Ex-offender may have a variety of priorities and time constraints

· Mentor may seem like another person to report to

· Can feel like they are being treated like a child

· No perceived common ground with mentors/mentors not trusted

· Confidentiality concerns

· Mentees quickly have difficulty scheduling once they have a job

Mentors and mentees are not relatable to one another

· Mentors and mentees backgrounds have little in common

· Mentors are perceived as authority figures or resemble authority figures

Mentors attempt to push their own values and ideas of success onto mentees

Time Coordination

Resources

National Institute of Corrections: http://nicic.gov/

National Reentry Resource Center: http://nationalreentryresourcecenter.org/

1

Prepared by Megan Foster, Graduate Intern April 2013

[1] Devilly, G. J., Sorbello, L., Eccleston, L., & Ward, T. (2005). Peer-based education schemes. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 10(2), 219-240.

[2] Jucovy, L. (2006). Just Out: Early Lessons from the Ready4Work Prisoner Reentry Initiative. Baltimore: Annie E. Casey Foundation.

[3] Jucovy, 2006

[4] Fletcher, R., Sherk, J., & Jucovy, L. (2009). Mentoring Former Prisoners: A Guide for Reentry Programs. New York: Public/Private Ventures.

[5] Bauldry, S., & Hartmann, T. A. (2004). The Promise and Challenge of Mentoring High-Risk Youth: Findings from the National Faith-Based Initiative. Baltimore: Annie E. Casey Foundation.;

Jolliffe, D., & Farrington, D. P. (2007). A Rapid Evidence Assessment of the Impact of Mentoring on Re-Offending: A Summary. London: Home Office. Retrieved from http://www.policypointers.org/Page/View/5357

[6] Devilly, Sorbello, Eccleston, & Ward, 2005; Jolliffe & Farrington, 2007

Geither, G. J. (2012, April/May). Mentoring4Success: Adult Mentoring in Kansas. Corrections Today, pp. 28-32.

[7] Fletcher, Sherk, & Jucovy, 2009; Jucovy, 2006

[8] Fletcher, Sherk, & Jucovy, 2009; Jucovy, 2006

[9] Jolliffe & Farrington, 2007

[10] Geither, 2012

[11] Geither, 2012

[12] Jucovy, 2006

[13] Jolliffe & Farrington, 2007

[14] Jolliffe & Farrington, 2007

[15] Fletcher, Sherk, & Jucovy, 2009

[16] Jucovy, 2006

[17] Jolliffe & Farrington, 2007

[18] Jucovy, 2006; Jolliffe & Farrington, 2007

[19] Fletcher, Sherk, & Jucovy, 2009