Presented September 20, 2012 - Part of 2012 Collaborative Mentoring Webinar Series Education Northwest/National Mentoring Center, Friends For Youth, Indiana Mentoring Partnership, Kansas Mentors, Mass Mentoring Partnership, Mentoring Partnership of Minnesota, Mentoring Partnership of Southwest Pennsylvania, Mentor Michigan, Mobius Mentors, Oregon Mentors and other partners are working together in 2012 to deliver this free monthly webinar series for mentoring professionals. For updates about upcoming webinars, join and follow the Mentoring Forums at http://mentoringforums.educationnorthwest.org.

1. 2012 Collaborative Mentoring Webinar Series
The Importance
of Closure
Sept. 18, 2012

2. 2012 Collaborative Mentoring Webinar Series
Sarah Kremer, Michael Garringer, April Riordan, MP of Celeste Janssen, Meghan Ferns, Dana Gold, MP of
Friends for Youth Education Northwest Minnesota Oregon Mentors Oregon Mentors SWPA
Webinars are held monthly on the 3rd Thursday.
• 10-11:15am Pacific
• 11am-12:15pm Mountain
• 12-1:15 pm Central
• 1-2:15pm Eastern
Marissa Strayer Benton, December Warren,
Mobius Mentors Indiana MP
1

3. Good to Know…
After the webinar, all attendees receive:
Please help us
 Instructions for how to access PDF of
presentation slides and webinar out by
recording answering
survey
 Link to the for questions at the
resources, contact information &
end of the
opportunities to continue the dialogue
webinar.
2

4. Participate in Today’s Webinar
• All attendees muted for best
sound
• Type questions and comments in
the question box
• Respond to polls
• Who is with us today?
3

5. Today’s Webinar
1. Importance of closure for mentoring matches
2. Different types of closure/endings
– When is it time for the match to end?
3. Program responsibility for managing risks and
benefits of closure
4. Tips & ideas for program coordinators
Q & A throughout the presentation
4

6. This Webinar Will End…
1. Programs should do all they
can to prevent closure
2. But sometimes it is
necessary – and even
beneficial
3. Closure should be a
process, not just an event
4. Try to handle it positively for
both mentor and mentee
5

7. Renée Spencer, MSSW, Ed.D.
Renée Spencer’s research interests include youth
mentoring, adolescent development and gender. She is a
recipient of a William T. Grant Foundation Scholar Award
to study youth mentoring relationships. She has
published a number of articles and book chapters on
youth mentoring, including ‘It’s Not What I Expected’: A
Qualitative Study of Youth Mentoring Relationship
Failures, and ‘First, Do No Harm’: A Call for Ethical
Guidelines in Youth Mentoring (with Jean Rhodes and
Belle Liang. Spencer is a member of MENTOR’s Research
and Policy Council and the Big Brothers Big Sisters of
America’s Research Advisory Council.
6

8. Ethical Principles of Youth Mentoring
1. Promote the Welfare and Safety
of the Young Person
2. Be Trustworthy and Responsible
3. Act with Integrity
4. Promote Justice for Young People
5. Respect the Young Person’s
Rights and Dignity
7

9. Endings in Youth Mentoring
• Not enough attention to closure Most formal
- research or practice relationships do end
• Think about it in theory • 1/3 to ½ end
prematurely
– Keller’s stage model (HYM, 2005) • Early endings
• Focus largely on making and associated with
sustaining matches decrements in youth
functioning (e.g., Grossman
• Little known about how and why & Rhodes, 2002; Herrera et al., 2007;
Karcher, 2005)
relationships end

10. Different Types of Closure
• Planned
• Unplanned
• Relationship-based
• Non-relationship reasons
• Psychological vs. physical
9

11. Types of Endings
(n= 48 matches)
• Ending planned and completed (20)
• Ending planned but not completed (8)
• Ending not planned – formally ended by
agency (20)

12. When is it Time to End the Match?
• Psychological distance/disengaged
• Meeting but not having an impact
• Annual cycle
• When initiated by mentor or mentee
• Danger of closing too fast? Or too
slow?
• Who decides? Mentor, mentee,
parent, program?
11

13. Reasons for Ending
(n= 48 matches)
• Changes in life circumstances (19)
• Youth dissatisfaction or disinterest (7)
• Mentor dissatisfaction (9)
• Mentor abandonment (5)
• Gradual dissolution (8)

14. Relationship Strength
(n=48 matches)
• Strong (15)
• Adequate (4)
• Tenuous (3)
• Out of sync (8)
• Weak (18)

15. Planned and Completed
(n=20)
• Clear reason for ending
• Plan for ending established
• Mentor and youth have opportunity to say
goodbye
• Impact: Generally satisfied with procedural
ending but disappointed (to varying degrees)
about the loss

16. Strong Match, Planned Ending
• Strong emotional connection
– “I love the little guy” 14-year-old Cape
• Mentor moved out of state Verdean male
• Planned, clear goodbye youth, 24-year-old
– Mentor tells parent about end; bi-racial mentor,
asked for advice about telling
youth
matched 15
– Multiple planned meetings leading months
up to move

17. Strong Match, Planned Ending
Different Outcome : “Two Strikes”
• Strong match
– Close connection, good good-bye 12-year-old boy
• Mentee shows signs of loss matched with
– Does not want another mentor, depressed 2nd mentor
mood, poor school performance
• Mother’s assessment: - 1st abandoned him
– “Smiling” until mentor left, then “just broke down” - 2nd took a new job in
– “Heartbroken” when abandoned by first mentor
another part of the
country
– Now, “don’t want to do the program no more.”

18. Weak Match, Planned Ending:
“Sort of Said Goodbye”
Mentor decided to end it
– “getting to be way more of … an inconvenience than,
12-year-old than something good for me”
– Wanted a closer connection, not sure youth was
white female benefitting
– Parent does not think a connection ever made
youth, 27-year- – Youth thought the relationship was “fun”
old white Ending
– Mentor ended relationship on what became their last
mentor, outing, said they would still plan to talk but at time of
matched 12 last interview had not
– Parent said mentor “sort of said goodbye” but the youth
months wasn’t really clear it was all over
– Youth unclear whether it was just official relationship
that was ending

19. Planned not Completed
(n=8)
• Ending planned “I don’t think he likes me no
more… Because he left
– All parties not always aware of without saying, he just left
plan to end without calling. ”
• Plan made for saying good-bye
“discouraged me from
• Plan never enacted wanting to put him in a
• Impact: disappointment, situation again not saying
that another person would
sadness, hurt, anger, self- do the same thing.”
blame

20. Strong Match, Planned Ending not
Completed: “It was a Great Match”
• Strong connection but frequency of meetings
13-yr old White becoming less consistent due to youth’s
schedule/interests
male youth,
• Mentor assumed youth no longer interested
37-yr-old White
• No direct communication between mentor and
mentor, youth about ending
matched 23 • Parent surprised by ending; thought they
months could have made it work
– Relationship unique in youth’s life
– “Communication is always difficult in an
awkward time”

21. Ending not Planned:
Agency Closed Match (n=20)
• No plan for direct communication between mentor and youth
• Agency played central role
– Served as go-between - communicated one party’s decision
to end match to another
– Closed match
• Unable to reach either mentor or youth
• Loss of contact between mentor and youth
• Impact: Similar to planned, not completed - confusion,
disappointment, sadness, hurt, anger, resentment, self-blame

22. Weak Relationship, Ending Not Planned:
“We just never heard from her again”
• 3rd match for youth
• Pair out of sync 14-year-old
– Youth satisfied with relationship female Black
– Mentor feels emotional connection Caribbean
is weak youth matched
• Mentor stopped calling; left it up with 21-year-old
to youth to call bi-racial mentor
• Agency closed match for 21 months
• Parent and youth upset about
ending

23. Conclusions and Implications
1. Stronger relationships tended to have more complete
closure
2. Weaker relationships ended in an unclear and
frequently negative way
3. Lack of attention to closure may be inadvertently
contributing to negative mentoring experiences –
especially for more relationally vulnerable youth
4. Need for clear, direct endings
5. Importance of closely monitoring matches

24. Benefits & Risks of Closure
+ Manage expectations - Renee’s research showed
+ Safety impact on youth
+ Risk management - Word of mouth from
+ Outcomes and evaluation mentors could be
results reflect effective negative
matches - Retention rates decrease
+ Re-matching • For youth - Quantity vs. quality
+ Benefits of - Funding at stake
activities/events that are
• For - Risk management
part of closure process mentors - Re-matching
+ Reflection
+ Celebrate
• For the
accomplishments program
23

25. Program Responsibility
• Legal – risk management
• Ethical – youth & relationship
• Address closure process in recruitment,
screening and pre-match training
• Monitor & support mentors and mentees
throughout the match, with special
attention to the beginning
• Clear policies for post-match contact
communicated to all participants
24

26. Program Responsibility
25

27. What does closure look like?
1. Who is involved?
– Mentor, mentee,
parent/guardian, program
staff
2. What is discussed?
3. How are things left?
Next steps?
26

28. Ideas for Closure
27

29. Future Webinars
October 18 - Growing the Evidence Base for Mentoring: The Future Topics:
Research, Lessons Learned, and Long-Lasting Impact of
Public/Private Ventures November 15 –
Disconnected/
Opportunity Youth
December 20 –
National Mentoring
Month
P/PV closed its doors in July of this year, but we have asked three of their
prominent mentoring researchers and experts—Drs. Wilson Goode, Jean
Grossman, and Carla Herrera—to join us to discuss the legacy of their work, the art
of evaluating mentoring programs, and future trends and directions for our entire
field.
28

30. Good to Know…
After the webinar, all attendees receive:
Please help us
 Instructions for how to access PDF of
presentation slides and webinar out by
recording answering
survey
 Link to the for questions at the
resources, contact information &
end of the
opportunities to continue the dialogue
webinar.
29

31. 2012 Collaborative Mentoring Webinar Series
Sarah Kremer, Michael Garringer, April Riordan, MP of Celeste Janssen, Meghan Ferns, Dana Gold, MP of
Friends for Youth Education Northwest Minnesota Oregon Mentors Oregon Mentors SWPA
Thank you for
participating today!
Marissa Strayer Benton, December Warren,
Mobius Mentors Indiana MP
30