[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 156 (Saturday, November 8, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12123-S12128]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself and Mr. Coats):
  S. 1461. A bill to establish a youth mentoring program; to the 
Committee on the Judiciary.


                       the jump ahead act of 1997

  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, millions of young people cry out for 
help. It would be irresponsible to turn our backs and do nothing when a 
solution is not only at hand--but has already proven a helping hand. 
The problem is ``at-risk'' youth. The solution is mentoring.
  Mr. President, let me give you some idea of the scope of the problem. 
Last month the census released a report that said half of America's 16 
and 17 year olds are at-risk children. Half. That's 3.7 million 
children at just those two ages. Other estimates run as high as 15 
million for children of all ages.
  Among the factors putting these children at risk are poverty and 
being raised in a single-parent family. Twenty-one percent of our 
children live in poverty--a six point increase since 1970. Twenty-eight 
percent live in one-parent households--a 16-percent increase since 
1970. These ``at-risk'' children are more likely to drop out of school 
and be unable to find work. And that, Mr. President, is the path to 
drugs and crime. Mentoring is a proven way to reach out to these kids 
and provide them with caring role models who can help turn their lives 
around.
  Earlier this month, Attorney General Janet Reno reported that violent 
crime by teenagers had dropped for the second straight year. Among the 
reasons for the drop, General Reno cited the community mentoring 
programs that we created with the original Juvenile Mentoring Program, 
or JUMP, in 1992.
  Since its enactment, JUMP has funded 93 separate mentoring programs 
in more than half the states. The competition for JUMP awards is great: 
Over 479 communities submitted applications for the recent round of 
grants.
  JUMP grantees use a variety of program designs. Mentors include law 
enforcement and fire department personnel, college students, senior 
citizens, Federal employees, business people, professionals, and other 
diverse volunteers.
  The children are of all races. They come from urban, suburban, and 
rural communities, ranging in age from 5 to 20. In its first year, JUMP 
helped to keep thousands of at-risk young people in 25 States in school 
and off the streets through one-to-one mentoring.
  Mr. President, this program has proved popular and effective and that 
is why today Senator Coats and I are introducing the JUMP Ahead Act of 
1997. I want to thank Senator Coats for his commitment and I am pleased 
that he is an original cosponsor of this bill.
  General Reno was not speaking idly when she touted the benefits of 
mentoring. A 1995 scientific study of the Big Brothers/Big Sisters 
Programs bears this out.
  The study tracked 959 children in eight cities. Of the children 
studied, 40 percent came from broken homes, 27 percent had been abused, 
28 percent came from homes where the spouse was abused, and 15 percent 
had suffered the death of a parent. This was a classic pool of at-risk 
children.
  The results after just 1 year were startling. Compared to children 
who were on a waiting list to enter the program, the children in the 
study abused alcohol 27 percent less, were 32 percent less likely to 
engage in violent behavior, and missed 52 percent fewer school days.
  These dramatic results were achieved at a cost of just $1,000 a 
match. Compare that to the $24,000 a year we're willing to spend to put 
someone in jail once they've dropped out of school and turned to crime 
or drugs. You are going to hear a lot of statistics today. But too 
often we lose sight of the human aspect of these numbers. So let me 
tell you the story of a single child.
  Recently, I hosted a conference on mentoring in my home State of New 
Jersey. There I met 11-year-old Kenneth Jackson. Once Kenneth had been 
a troubled student who was considered likely to drop out. Now, thanks 
to his mentor, Kenneth reads and does arithmetic at two grades above 
his actual sixth grade level. And the best news--Kenneth told me that 
now he thinks school is cool and that he never thinks about dropping 
out. It's hard to argue with success like that.
  Sadly, Kenneth's mentor--Dwight Giles--is no longer with us. He 
recently

[[Page S12124]]

died of a heart attack. Dwight was a good friend and I mourn his 
passing. And I would like to dedicate this bill to his memory.
  Mr. President, we need to take this successful program to the next 
level. The JUMP Ahead Act reforms the basic successful structure of 
JUMP and increases funding to $50 million per year for four years and 
increases awards to up to $200,000.
  This initiative will not only vastly increase the number of mentoring 
programs able to receive grants, but will also create a new category of 
grants to enable experienced national organizations to provide 
technical assistance to emerging mentoring programs nationwide. The 
legislation also requires the Justice Department to rigorously evaluate 
the programs and document what is effective, and what is not.
  Finally, Mr. President, we like to talk a lot about pulling yourself 
up by your boot straps. But that doesn't mean much for a child unless 
you also provide a solid path to walk on. I grew up poor in Paterson, 
NJ. But I had rich role models in both my hard-working parents. Too 
many children today don't have that same blessing.
  Mentoring tells our at-risk kids that we as a nation care about 
them--that their lives are precious to us. Mentoring tells them that if 
they are willing to pull on those boots and try to walk away from a 
dead end life, they will not have to walk alone.
  Mr. President, I have told you the scope of the problem. And in 
America, when we have a problem we don't just wring our hands and say 
nothing can be done. We roll up our sleeves and get to work.
  Mr. President, with this bill we get to work for our children. I hope 
my colleagues will support the bill, and ask unanimous consent that a 
copy of the legislation be printed in the Record and a summary of the 
study by the Big Brothers/Big Sisters be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 1461

         Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives 
     of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``JUMP Ahead Act of 1997''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) millions of young people in America live in areas in 
     which drug use and violent and property crimes are pervasive;
       (2) unfortunately, many of these same young people come 
     from single parent homes, or from environments in which there 
     is no responsible, caring adult supervision;
       (3) all children and adolescents need caring adults in 
     their lives, and mentoring is an effective way to fill this 
     special need for at-risk children. The special bond of 
     commitment fostered by the mutual respect inherent in 
     effective mentoring can be the tie that binds a young person 
     to a better future;
       (4) through a mentoring relationship, adult volunteers and 
     participating youth make a significant commitment of time and 
     energy to develop relationships devoted to personal, 
     academic, or career development and social, artistic, or 
     athletic growth;
       (5) rigorous independent studies have confirmed that 
     effective mentoring programs can significantly reduce and 
     prevent the use of alcohol and drugs by young people, improve 
     school attendance and performance, improve peer and family 
     and peer relationships, and reduce violent behavior;
       (6) since the inception of the Federal JUMP program, dozens 
     of innovative, effective mentoring programs have received 
     funding grants;
       (7) unfortunately, despite the recent growth in public and 
     private mentoring initiatives, it is reported that between 
     5,000,000 and 15,000,000 additional children in the United 
     States could benefit from being matched with a mentor; and
       (8) although great strides have been made in reaching at-
     risk youth since the inception of the JUMP program, millions 
     of vulnerable American children are not being reached, and 
     without an increased commitment to connect these young people 
     to responsible adult role models, our country risks losing an 
     entire generation to drugs, crime, and unproductive lives.

     SEC. 3. JUVENILE MENTORING GRANTS.

       (a) In General.--Section 288B of the Juvenile Justice and 
     Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5667e-2) is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(a) In General.--'' before ``The 
     Administrator shall'';
       (2) by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following:
       ``(2) are intended to achieve 1 or more of the following 
     goals:
       ``(A) Discourage at-risk youth from--
       ``(i) using illegal drugs and alcohol;
       ``(ii) engaging in violence;
       ``(iii) using guns and other dangerous weapons;
       ``(iv) engaging in other criminal and antisocial behavior; 
     and
       ``(v) becoming involved in gangs.
       ``(B) Promote personal and social responsibility among at-
     risk youth.
       ``(C) Increase at-risk youth's participation in, and 
     enhance the ability of those youth to benefit from, 
     elementary and secondary education.
       ``(D) Encourage at-risk youth participation in community 
     service and community activities.
       ``(E) Provide general guidance to at-risk youth.''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(b) Amount and Duration.--Each grant under this part 
     shall be awarded in an amount not to exceed a total of 
     $200,000 over a period of not more than 3 years.
       ``(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1999, 
     2000, 2001, and 2002 to carry out this part.''.

     SEC. 4. IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION GRANTS.

       (a) In General.--The Administrator of the Office of 
     Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention of the Department 
     of Justice may make grants to national organizations or 
     agencies serving youth, in order to enable those 
     organizations or agencies--
       (1) to conduct a multisite demonstration project, involving 
     between 5 and 10 project sites, that--
       (A) provides an opportunity to compare various mentoring 
     models for the purpose of evaluating the effectiveness and 
     efficiency of those models;
       (B) allows for innovative programs designed under the 
     oversight of a national organization or agency serving youth, 
     which programs may include--
       (i) technical assistance;
       (ii) training; and
       (iii) research and evaluation; and
       (C) disseminates the results of such demonstration project 
     to allow for the determination of the best practices for 
     various mentoring programs;
       (2) to develop and evaluate screening standards for 
     mentoring programs; and
       (3) to develop and evaluate volunteer recruitment 
     techniques and activities for mentoring programs.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated $5,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 
     1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002 to carry out this section.

     SEC. 5. EVALUATIONS; REPORTS.

       (a) Evaluations.--
       (1) In general.--The Attorney General shall enter into a 
     contract with an evaluating organization that has 
     demonstrated experience in conducting evaluations, for the 
     conduct of an ongoing rigorous evaluation of the programs and 
     activities assisted under this Act or under section 228B of 
     the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 
     (42 U.S.C. 5667e-2) (as amended by this Act).
       (2) Criteria.--The Attorney General shall establish a 
     minimum criteria for evaluating the programs and activities 
     assisted under this Act or under section 228B of the Juvenile 
     Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 
     5667e-2) (as amended by this Act), which shall provide for a 
     description of the implementation of the program or activity, 
     and the effect of the program or activity on participants, 
     schools, communities, and youth served by the program or 
     activity.
       (3) Mentoring program of the year.--The Attorney General 
     shall, on an annual basis, based on the most recent 
     evaluation under this subsection and such other criteria as 
     the Attorney General shall establish by regulation--
       (A) designate 1 program or activity assisted under this Act 
     as the ``Juvenile Mentoring Program of the Year''; and
       (B) publish notice of such designation in the Federal 
     Register.
       (b) Reports.--
       (1) Grant recipients.--Each entity receiving a grant under 
     this Act or under section 228B of the Juvenile Justice and 
     Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5667e-2) (as 
     amended by this Act) shall submit to the evaluating 
     organization entering into the contract under subsection 
     (a)(1), an annual report regarding any program or activity 
     assisted under this Act or under section 228B of the Juvenile 
     Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 
     5667e-2) (as amended by this Act). Each report under this 
     paragraph shall be submitted at such time, in such a manner, 
     and shall be accompanied by such information, as the 
     evaluating organization may reasonably require.
       (2) Comptroller general.--Not later than 4 years after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall 
     submit to Congress a report evaluating the effectiveness of 
     grants awarded under this Act and under section 228B of the 
     Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 (42 
     U.S.C. 5667e-2) (as amended by this Act), in--
       (A) reducing juvenile delinquency and gang participation;
       (B) reducing the school dropout rate; and
       (C) improving academic performance of juveniles.

[[Page S12125]]

     
                                  ____
 [From the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. 
                   Department of Justice, April 1997]

          Mentoring--a Proven Delinquency Prevention Strategy

             (By Jean Baldwin Grossman and Eileen M. Garry)

       In the past decade, mentoring programs for disadvantaged 
     children and adolescents have received serious attention as a 
     promising approach to enriching children's lives, addressing 
     their need for positive adult contact, and providing one-on-
     one support and advocacy for those who need it. Mentoring is 
     also recognized as an excellent way to use volunteers to 
     address the problems created by poverty (Freedman, 1992).
       Through a mentoring relationship, adult volunteers and 
     participating youth make a significant commitment of time and 
     energy to develop relationships devoted to personal, 
     academic, or career development and social, athletic, or 
     artistic growth (Becker, 1994). Programs historically have 
     been based in churches, colleges, communities, courts, or 
     schools and have focused on careers or hobbies.
       The child mentoring movement had its roots in the late 19th 
     century with ``friendly visitors'' who would serve as role 
     models for children of the poor. In 1904 Ernest K. Coulter 
     founded a new movement that used ``big brothers'' to reach 
     out to children who were in need of socialization, firm 
     guidance, and connection with positive adult role models. The 
     resulting program, Big Brothers/Big Sisters (BB/BS) of 
     America, continues to operate today as the largest mentoring 
     organization of its kind.
       BB/BS programs across the Nation provide screening and 
     training to volunteer mentors and carefully match the mentors 
     with ``little brothers'' and ``little sisters'' in need of 
     guidance. Public/Private Ventures (P/PV) performed an 18-
     month experimental evaluation of eight BB/BS mentoring 
     programs that considered social activities, academic 
     performance, attitudes and behaviors, relationships with 
     family and friends, self-concept, and social and cultural 
     enrichment. The study found that mentored youth were less 
     likely to engage in drug or alcohol use, resort to violence, 
     or skip school. In addition, mentored youth were more likely 
     to improve their grades and their relationships with family 
     and friends.


                         from the administrator

       All children need caring adults in their lives, and 
     mentoring is one way to fill this need for at-risk children. 
     The special bond of commitment fostered by the mutual respect 
     inherent in effective mentoring can be the tie that binds a 
     young person to a better future.
       OJJDP's Juvenile Mentoring Program (JUMP) is designed to 
     reduce delinquency and improve school attendance for at-risk 
     youth. Mentoring is also one component of our SafeFutures 
     initiative, which assists communities to combat delinquency 
     by developing a full range of coordinated services. In 
     addition to JUMP and SafeFutures, OJJDP supports mentoring 
     efforts in individual States through our Formula Grants 
     Program funding.
       With nearly a century of experience, Big Brothers/Big 
     Sisters of America is probably the best known mentoring 
     program in the United States. The extensive evaluation of 
     this pioneer program by Public/Private Ventures (P/PV), 
     described in this Bulletin, provides new insights that merit 
     our attention.
       The P/PV evaluation and OJJDP's 2-year experience with JUMP 
     suggest that strengthening the role of mentoring as a 
     component of youth programming may pay handsome dividends in 
     improved school performance and reduced antisocial behavior, 
     including alcohol and other drug abuse.
                                                     Shay Bilchik,
                                                    Administrator.


                            the federal role

       The Juvenile Mentoring Program (JUMP) is a Federal program 
     administered by the Office of Juvenile Justice and 
     Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP). As supported by JUMP, 
     mentoring is a one-on-one relationship between a pair of 
     unrelated individuals, one adult and one juvenile, which 
     takes place on a regular basis over an extended period of 
     time. It is almost always characterized by a ``special bond 
     of mutual commitment'' and ``an emotional character of 
     respect, loyalty, and identification'' (Hamilton, 1990). 
     Although mentoring also is a popular concept for success in 
     the corporate world, this Bulletin focuses on the mentoring 
     of children by adults.
       JUMP is designed to reduce juvenile delinquency and gang 
     participation, improve academic performance, and reduce 
     school dropout rates. To achieve these purposes, JUMP brings 
     together caring, responsible adults and at-risk young people 
     in need of positive role models.
       In the 1992 Reauthorization of the Juvenile Justice and 
     Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, Congress added Part G--
     Mentoring. This was done in recognition of mentoring's 
     potential as a tool for addressing two critical concerns in 
     regard to America's children--poor school performance and 
     delinquent activity. Senator Frank Lautenberg and Congressman 
     William Goodling were the primary sponsors of this new 
     provision. In Part G, Congress also recognized the importance 
     of school collaboration in mentoring programs, whether as a 
     primary source or as a partner with other public or private 
     nonprofit entities.
       To date Congress has made $19 million available to fund 
     JUMP: $4 million each year in fiscal years (FY's) 1994, 1995, 
     and 1996 and $7 million in FY 1997. OJJDP funded 41 separate 
     mentoring programs under the JUMP unbrella with FY 1994 and 
     1995 funding. JUMP awards for FY 1996 and FY 1997 will be 
     announced in spring 1997.
       While adhering to the basic requirements of JUMP, the 
     grantees are using a variety of program designs. Mentors are 
     law enforcement and fire department personnel, college 
     students, senior citizens, Federal employees, businessmen, 
     and other private citizens. The young people are of all races 
     and range in age from 5 to 20. Some are incracerated or on 
     probation, some are in school, and some are dropouts. Some 
     programs emphasize tutoring and academic assistance, while 
     others stress vocational counseling and training. In its 
     first year (July 1995 to July 1996). JUMP was involved in 
     attempting to keep more than 2,000 at-risk young people in 25 
     States in school and off the streets through one-to-one 
     mentoring.
       Additional FY 1995 funding for mentoring was provided 
     through OJJDP's SafeFutures initiative, which operates in six 
     sites (Boston, Massachusetts; Contra Costa County, 
     California; Fort Belknap Indian Reservation, Harlem, Montana; 
     Imperial County, California; Seattle, Washington; and St. 
     Louis, Missouri). The SafeFutures program assists these 
     communities in developing a coordinated continuum of care to 
     reduce youth violence and delinquency. Mentoring is a 
     component of this coordinated effort in each of the 
     SafeFutures sites.
       In addition to the funding for JUMP and SafeFutures 
     grantees, OJJDP supports mentoring programs through its 
     Formula Grants program to the States. In FY 1995, for 
     example, Formula Grants funds in 28 States supported 91 
     programs that included mentoring as part or all of the 
     program.


              Big Brothers/Big Sisters (BB/BS) of America

       BB/BS is a federation of more than 500 agencies that serve 
     children and adolescents. Its mission is to make a difference 
     in the lives of young people, primarily through a 
     professionally supported one-to-one relationship with a 
     caring adult, and to assist them in reaching their highest 
     potential as they grow into responsible men and women by 
     providing committed volunteers, national leadership, and 
     standards of excellence. The organization's current goals 
     include increasing the number of children served; improving 
     the effectiveness, efficiency, and impact of services to 
     children; and achieving a greater racial and ethnic diversity 
     among volunteers and staff. BB/BS volunteer mentors come from 
     all walks of life, but they share the goal of being a caring 
     adult who can make a difference in the life of a child.
       For more than 90 years, the BB/BS program has paired 
     unrelated adult volunteers with youth from single-parent 
     households. BB/BS does not seek to ameliorate specific 
     problems but to provide support to all aspects of young 
     people's lives. The volunteer mentor and the youth make a 
     substantial time commitment, meeting for about 4 hours, two 
     to four times a month, for at least 1 year.
       Developmentally appropriate activities shared by the mentor 
     and the young person may include taking walks; attending a 
     play, movie, school activity, or sporting event; playing 
     catch; visiting the library; washing the car; grocery 
     shopping; watching television; or just sharing thoughts and 
     ideas about life. Such activities enhance communication 
     skills, develop relationship skills, and support positive 
     decisionmaking.
       The BB/BS mentor relationships between mentors and youth 
     are achieved through professional staff and national 
     operating standards that provide a level of uniformity in 
     recruitment, screening, matching, and supervision of 
     volunteers and youth. BB/BS agencies provide orientation for 
     volunteers, parents, and youth to assist the individuals in 
     determining if involvement in the program is appropriate for 
     them. Opportunities to participate in volunteer education and 
     development programs such as relationship building, 
     communication skills, values clarification, child 
     development, and problem solving are available to local 
     affiliates.
       Supervision includes contact with all parties within the 
     first 2 weeks following a match. BB/BS maintains monthly 
     contact with the volunteer and parent or child for the first 
     year. In addition, inperson or telephone contact is 
     maintained quarterly between case managers and both the 
     volunteer and the parent, guardian, and/or child for the 
     duration of the match. Although its standards are reinforced 
     through national training, national and regional conferences, 
     and periodic agency evaluations, BB/BS is not monolithic. 
     Individual agencies adhere to national guidelines, but they 
     customize their programs to fit the circumstances in their 
     area.


  How youth benefit from big brothers/big sisters relative to similar 
               nonprogram youth 18 months after applying

                              (In percent)

        Outcome                                                  Change
Antisocial activities:
    Initiating Drug Use...........................................-45.8
    Initiating Alcohol Use........................................-27.4
    Number of Times Hit Someone...................................-31.7
Academic outcomes:
    Grades..........................................................3.0
    Scholastic Competence...........................................4.3
    Skipped Class.................................................-36.7

[[Page S12126]]

    Skipped Day of School........................................ -52.2
Family relationships:
    Summary Measure of Quality of the Relationship..................2.1
    Trust...........................................................2.7
    Lying to Parent...............................................-36.6
Peer Relationships: Emotional Support...............................2.3

\1\ For ease of presentation, we will refer to the group that was 
immediately eligible for a mentor as ``mentored youth'' or ``Little 
Brothers and Little Sisters,'' even though this group includes some 
youth (22 percent) who were never matched. The wait-list youth are 
called the ``control'' youth.

Note.--All impacts in this table are statistically significant at least 
at a 90 percent level of confidence.

 public/private ventures (p/pv) evaluation of big brothers/big sisters

       At the same time that Congress was considering Federal 
     support for juvenile mentoring programs, P/PV was beginning a 
     carefully designed evaluation of BB/BS mentoring programs 
     (Tierney and Grossman, 1995), OJJDP followed the progress of 
     this 18-month experimental evaluation closely, believing that 
     the results would confirm the generally accepted proposition 
     that mentoring benefits at-risk youth and would support 
     further national expansion of this activity.
       P/PV chose eight local BB/BS agencies for the study, using 
     two criteria: large caseload (to ensure an adequate number of 
     youth for the research sample) and geographic diversity. The 
     sites selected were in Columbus, Ohio; Houston, Texas; 
     Minneapolis, Minnesota; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Phoenix, 
     Arizona; Rochester, New York; San Antonio, Texas; and 
     Wichita, Kansas.
       The young people in the study were between 10 and 16 years 
     old (with 93 percent between 10 and 14). Slightly more than 
     60 percent were boys, and more than 50 percent were minority 
     group members (of those, about 70 percent were African 
     American). Almost all lived with one parent (usually the 
     mother), the rest with a guardian or relatives. Many were 
     from low-income households, and a significant number came 
     from households with a history of either family violence or 
     substance abuse. For the study, youth were randomly assigned 
     to be immediately eligible for a mentor or put on a waiting 
     list.\1\
       The goal of the research was to determine whether a one-to-
     one mentoring experience made a tangible difference in the 
     lives of these young people. The researchers considered six 
     broad areas that mentoring might affect: antisocial 
     activities, academic performance, attitudes and behaviors, 
     relationships with family, relationships with friends, self-
     concept, and social and cultural enrichment. The findings 
     presented below were based on self reported data obtained 
     from baseline and following up interviews or from forms 
     completed by agency staff.
       The overall findings, summarized in the table, are 
     positive. The most noteworthy results are these:
       Mentored youth were 46 percent less likely than controls to 
     initiate drug use during the study period. An even stronger 
     effect was found for minority Little Brothers and Little 
     Sisters, who were 70 percent less likely to initiate drug use 
     than similar minority youth.
       Mentored youth were 27 percent less likely than were 
     controls to initiate alcohol use during the study period, and 
     minority Little Sisters were only about one-half as likely to 
     initiate alcohol use.
       Mentored youth were almost one-third less likely than were 
     controls to hit someone.
       Mentored youth skipped half as many days of school as 
     control youth, felt more competent about doing schoolwork, 
     skipped fewer classes, and showed modest gains in their grade 
     point averages. These gains were strongest among Little 
     Sisters, particularly minority Little Sisters.
       The quality of their relationship with their parents was 
     better for mentored youth than for controls at the end of the 
     study period, primarily due to a higher level of trust 
     between parent and child. This effect was strongest for white 
     Little Brothers.
       Mentored youth, especially minority Little Brothers, had 
     improved relationships with their peers.
       P/PV did not find statistically significant improvements in 
     self-concept or the number of social and cultural activities 
     in which Little Brothers and Little Sisters participated.
       P/PV concluded that the research presented clear and 
     encouraging evidence that mentoring programs can create and 
     support caring relationships between adults and youth, 
     resulting in a wide range of tangible benefits. It was the 
     researchers' judgment that the successes they observed are 
     unlikely without both the relationship with the mentor and 
     the support from the BB/BS program.
       The study did not find evidence that any mentoring 
     programming will work but that programs that facilitate the 
     specific types of relationships observed in BB/BS work well. 
     The researchers noted that following about the relationships 
     between Little Brothers and Little Sisters and their Big 
     Brothers and Big Sisters:
       They had a high level of contact, typically meeting three 
     times per month for 4 hours per meeting. Many had additional 
     contact by telephone.
       The relationship were built using an approach that defines 
     the mentor as a friend, not a teacher or preacher. The 
     mentor's role is to support the young person in his or her 
     various endeavors, not explicitly to change the youth's 
     behavior or character.
       The study lists the following elements as prerequisites for 
     an effective mentoring program:
       Thorough volunteer screening that weeds out adults who are 
     unlikely to keep their time commitment or who might pose a 
     safety risk to youth.
       Mentor training that includes communication and limit-
     setting skills, tips on relationship-building, and 
     recommendations on the best way to interact with a young 
     person.
       Procedures that take into account the preferences of the 
     youth, their families, and volunteers and that use a 
     professional case manager to determine which volunteer would 
     work best with each youth.
       Intensive supervision and support of each match by a case 
     manager who has frequent contact with the parent or guardian, 
     volunteer, and youth and who provides assistance as 
     difficulties arise.
       One of the strongest conclusions of the P/PV study is the 
     importance of providing mentors with support in building 
     trust and developing positive relationships with youth. Many 
     of the relationships between the volunteers and youth would 
     have faltered and dissolved if they had not been nurtured by 
     BB/BS's caseworkers. Thus to be effective, mentoring programs 
     should provide an infrastructure that fosters and supports 
     the development of effective relationships.
       Over 8 years, P/PV studied numerous mentoring programs 
     other than BB/BS. The extent to which these mentoring 
     programs included standardized procedures in the areas of 
     screening, orientation, training, match supervision and 
     support, matching practices, and regular meeting times varied 
     tremendously. Some programs included virtually none of these 
     elements, while others were highly structured. The 
     researchers identified three of these areas as vitally 
     important to the success of any mentoring program: screening, 
     orientation and training, and support and supervision.
       The screening process provides programs with an opportunity 
     to select adults who are most likely to be successful as 
     mentors by looking for individuals who already understand 
     that a mentor's primary role is to develop a friendship with 
     the youth. Orientation and prematch training provide 
     important opportunities to ensure that youth and their 
     mentors share a common understanding of the adult's role in 
     these programmatically created relationships and to help 
     mentors develop realistic expectations of what they can 
     accomplish. Ongoing staff supervision and support of matches 
     is critical to ensuring that mentors and youth meet regularly 
     over a substantial period of time and develop positive 
     relationships.
       It is interesting to note that matching did not turn out to 
     be one of the most critical elements. None of the objective 
     factors (e.g., age, race, and gender) that staff take into 
     account when making a match correlate very strongly with the 
     frequency of meetings, length of the match, or its 
     effectiveness. Programs may prefer to make same-race matches, 
     and parents and youth sometimes prefer a mentor of the same 
     race. Programs should continue to honor these preferences and 
     make same-race matches whenever possible. At the same time, 
     it is clear that youth who wait a long time for a same-race 
     mentor are in most cases only delaying the benefits that a 
     mentor of any race can provide.
       There are two obstacles to replication of effective 
     mentoring programs: the limited number of adults available to 
     serve as mentors and the scarcity of organizational resources 
     necessary to carry out a successful program. The researchers 
     report that between 5 million and 15 million children could 
     benefit from being matched with a mentor; the organization 
     matches only about 75,000 youth in a year. Even with the 
     multitude of smaller mentoring programs around the country, 
     it seems reasonable to conclude that at best just a small 
     percentage of young people are benefiting from mentoring.
       In regard to organizational resources, the study notes that 
     effective programs require agencies that take substantial 
     care in recruiting, screening, matching, and supporting 
     volunteers. Paid caseworkers carry out these critical 
     functions for BB/BS at a program cost of approximately 
     $1,000 per year per match.


                       ojjdp and the p/pv results

       The P/PV evaluation, plus its 2 years of experience with 
     JUMP, led OJJDP to modify the project design guidelines in 
     its 1996 JUMP solicitation to reflect the latest knowledge 
     about what works--and does not work--in mentoring. Based on 
     the P/PV study, OJJDP expanded the guideline on mentor 
     support and training, emphasizing that the program 
     coordinator should have frequent contact with parents of 
     guardians, volunteers, and youth and should provide 
     assistance when requested or as problems arise. This 
     guideline also specifies the type of training mentors should 
     receive. From its JUMP experience, OJJDP inserted a guideline 
     on the role of the mentor, added a caution about time 
     limitations that may interfere with the effectiveness of 
     college undergraduate or graduate students as mentors, 
     suggested that parents should have a say in the selection of 
     mentors, called for screening mechanisms to weed out 
     volunteers who will not keep their commitments, and 
     established minimum expectations for the time mentors should 
     spend with youth (1 hour per week for at least 1 year).

[[Page S12127]]

                           evaluation of jump

       OJJDP is required by Congress to submit a report regarding 
     the success and effectiveness of JUMP initiatives 120 days 
     after their termination. Evaluations are critical to ensuring 
     that mentoring programs operate as designed and meet their 
     goals in terms of both the process and the impact on youth.
       To prepare for the timely initiation of evaluation 
     activities once the grantee is chosen for the national 
     evaluation, OJJDP directed its management evaluation 
     contractor, Caliber Associated, to design an evaluation and 
     prepare for initial data collection. The JUMP evaluation will 
     be accomplished through a partnership among the grantees, 
     OJJDP, and the JUMP evaluation grantee. Caliber produced a 
     workbook containing an overview of the JUMP initiative and 
     the national evaluation that defined the roles of OJJDP, the 
     evaluator, and JUMP grantees. Caliber also pilot tested 
     grantee administration of data collection instruments and 
     conducted followup interviews of participating grantees. Once 
     the grantee for the evaluation is selected, Caliber also will 
     help coordinate the transition to the evaluation grantee. 
     Selection of the evaluation grantee is expected to take place 
     in spring 1997.
       Although formal evaluations have not yet been implemented, 
     the mentoring programs funded under JUMP appear to be making 
     a difference in the lives of many young people. The 
     preliminary accomplishments of a few of the OJJDP-funded 
     mentoring programs are highlighted below.
       The Big Brothers/Big Sisters of southwest Idaho have made 
     41 matches of at-risk youth and mentors in this JUMP project. 
     According to parents and teachers familiar with the program, 
     30 percent of the youth who participated in the program 
     showed improvement in their school attendance, 30 percent 
     showed academic improvement, 35 percent showed improvement in 
     their general behavior, and 48 percent increased the 
     frequency of appropriate interactions with peers. For 
     example, a female being raised by her father was matched to a 
     female volunteer and, after the match, scored higher in 
     measures of grades, self-satisfaction, self-esteem, positive 
     attitude toward others, and pride in appearance.
       Project Caring Connections in New York City provides 30 
     youth with caring relationships with adult mentors from 
     corporations and the community. As an integral part of the 
     Liberty Partnerships Program, it offers a comprehensive range 
     of services from academic enrichment to cultural experiences 
     to a safe environment in which young people can learn social 
     skills. During afterschool hours, Project Caring Connections 
     mentors work with students one-to-one or in a group to 
     provide academic support, job shadowing (going to the 
     mentor's workplace), and social and cultural enrichment. 
     Through the program, at-risk students may gain exposure to 
     publishing, theater, law, art, government, and business and 
     also do community service. This past year, some youth were 
     able to serve as panelists on a cable news show and discuss 
     crime in their communities, curfews, and the importance of 
     staying in school.
       Big Sisters of Colorado, in Denver, matched 59 girls, 
     mostly Hispanic, with mentors. Program activities funded by 
     OJJPD included a Life Choices program to develop 
     decisionmaking and academic skills; recreation, community 
     service, and challenge course activities; a pregnancy-
     prevention program; and mentor visits to the girls' schools. 
     None of these girls have become pregnant or had problems with 
     alcohol or drugs since their involvement in the program.
       Big Brothers/Big Sisters of Pensacola, Florida, is a JUMP 
     initiative in which 26 youth from single-parent families who 
     are at risk for juvenile delinquency, teen pregnancy, 
     truancy, and dropping out of school are being mentored by 
     legal professionals, members of the military, corporate 
     employees, and others. The youth are actively encouraged to 
     stay in school and meet the goals their individualized case 
     plans. All have had increased exposure to athletic, 
     recreational, and cultural activities, and many have 
     demonstrated improved social and academic skills. The program 
     has also engaged youth in a 3-day Kids N Kops police mini-
     academy. This innovative program provides mentoring and 
     training by police officers and educates youth about the 
     dangers of drugs, guns, and gangs while strengthening the 
     relationship between police and at-risk youth.
       The Cincinnati Youth Collaborative in Ohio matched 136 
     youth and volunteers in its first year in JUMP. Mentors 
     include doctors, dentists, lawyers, judges, teachers, 
     chemists, police officers, nurses, waiters, postal clerks, 
     travel agents, and college students. Some special activities 
     were a trip to New York City, visits to college campuses, a 
     community bowl-a-thon, job shadowing, and participation in a 
     school beautification project. The project reports that 99 of 
     the 136 young people have improved academically and 102 have 
     improved socially.
       The RESCUE Youth mentoring program in Los Angeles, 
     California, was developed and implemented by the Los Angeles 
     County District Attorney's Office, in conjunction with the 
     Los Angeles County Fire Department, to rescue youth ages 12 
     to 14 at the earliest signs of at-risk behavior. The district 
     attorney's staff match the students with volunteer 
     firefighter mentors in an effort to address truancy, juvenile 
     delinquency, and potentially serious criminal behavior. 
     Through this JUMP initiative, mentors worked with 140 youth 
     on their communication and conflict resolution skills and 
     provided training in fire prevention and first aid.
       The JUMP projects offer many success stories, including the 
     following examples. One student, who began the 1995-96 school 
     year as a repeat first grader, ended the year with straight 
     A's with the help of her mentor. In another instance, a male 
     student being raised by his father alone showed a twofold 
     increase in his grades and in measures of self-esteem after 
     being matched with a female mentor. It is expected that the 
     JUMP evaluation will document a significant number of similar 
     positive outcomes.


                                summary

       The research conducted by P/PV--and the preliminary reports 
     from JUMP--provide powerful evidence that youth can be 
     positively influenced by adults who care. More important, 
     these positive relationships do not have to be left to chance 
     but can be created through structured mentoring programs.
       The P/PV research, however, has even broader implications 
     for social policy than just encouraging the spread of 
     mentoring--namely, that practitioners and policy makers 
     should take a new approach to serving youth. For the past 30 
     years, society's attention and resources were directed 
     predominantly at teenagers' problems, as evidenced by 
     programs focusing on issues such as dropping out of school, 
     truancy, substance abuse, and teen pregnancy. With only small 
     gains to show, the public and politicians alike have 
     concluded, probably prematurely, that youth, even those as 
     young as 14, are too old to be helped.
       The BB/BS results suggest that, where its youth policy is 
     concerned, society's focus has been too narrow. What is 
     desperately needed is a more positive approach that meets the 
     basic needs of youth, especially those living in high-risk 
     neighborhoods, for nurturing and supportive adults, positive 
     things to do after school and on weekends, and volunteer and 
     work opportunities that develop skills, foster learning, and 
     instill a sense of civic responsibility. If society focuses 
     on these basic developmental needs, youth will mature 
     responsibly, avoid many negative behaviors, and become more 
     resilient in the face of inevitable setbacks.
       P/PV's evaluation of BB/BS suggests that strengthening this 
     aspect of youth programming is likely to be more effective in 
     producing responsible young adults than the traditional 
     approach to youth policy, which has attempted to prevent 
     specific problems or to correct problems that have already 
     arisen. These traditional elements will still be needed, but 
     they should complement and support the basic developmental 
     needs addressed by mentoring programs.
       The BB/BS mentoring program did not provide tutoring and 
     antidrug counseling--it simply provided adult friendship on a 
     regular and intensive basis. Yet it achieved improvements in 
     school performance and reductions in antisocial behavior. The 
     findings thus provide a direction for building and 
     strengthening one approach to delinquency prevention.
       Dealing with the problems of juvenile delinquency, creating 
     more positive opportunities for our youth, and helping them 
     find strong and positive adult role models in their lives are 
     among the societal goals that can be achieved in part through 
     the implementation of sound mentoring programs. While many 
     children are being served by these efforts already, hundreds 
     of thousands more could also benefit from the special bond of 
     mentoring before serious problems develop.

  Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I am so pleased to join my colleague 
Senator Lautenberg in introducing the JUMP Ahead Act of 1997. As a 
national board member of Big Brothers Big Sisters of America, I know 
personally how important this legislation is, and the type of 
opportunity it will give to thousands of at-risk youth around the 
country.
  While intuitively we know that mentoring relationships can make a 
huge difference in the lives of young people, we now have 
scientifically reliable evidence about the positive impact that 
mentoring programs can have. In 1995, Public/Private Ventures, a policy 
research organization in Philadelphia, conducted an impact study of the 
Big Brothers Big Sisters program. The results were startling. The 
addition of a Big Brothers or Big Sister to a young person's life 
drastically reduced first time drug use, significantly lowered 
absenteeism, and reduced violent behavior. Furthermore, the young 
people studied were less likely to start using alcohol and more likely 
to do well in school.
  JUMP Ahead will link community based mentoring programs with public 
schools to give more children the chance to reap the benefits of a one-
to-one mentoring relationship. JUMP Ahead is based on a small, 
innovative, federal program known as the Juvenile Mentoring Program 
[JUMP].
  Building on the success of JUMP, the JUMP Ahead Act will create a 
competitive grant program which allows local, nonprofit social service 
and education agencies to apply cooperatively

[[Page S12128]]

and directly for grants from the Department of Justice's Office of 
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. These grants are used to 
establish mentoring services utilizing responsible individuals as 
mentors.
  During the last session of Congress, I introduced the Character 
Development Act as part of my Project for American Renewal. The 
Character Development Act, like the JUMP Ahead Act, Stressed the 
importance of mentoring relationships in the process of cultural 
renewal.
  The need for additional adult support and guidance for our Nation's 
youth has never been greater than at this time. Currently 38 percent of 
all American children live without their fathers. It is increasingly 
important to support the work of organizations that are attempting to 
stand in the gap left by absent fathers.
  Since mentoring programs work through the efforts of volunteers, only 
modest funds are necessary to have a far-reaching impact. I am 
convinced that the investment that the JUMP Ahead Act calls for over 
the next 5 years, will produce tremendous positive results in the lives 
of many at-risk youth.
  I encourage my colleagues to take a close look at this bill and 
consider supporting it. One-to-one mentoring has proven its 
effectiveness in positively impacting the lives of at risk youth. I ask 
my colleagues to join me and Senator Lautenberg in this effort to 
encourage and expand opportunities for one-to-one mentoring 
relationships for at-risk youth. The JUMP Ahead Act of 1997 takes an 
important step forward in meeting the needs of so many of this 
country's hurting youth.
                                 ______