Evaluation of the Juvenile Mentoring Program (JUMP)

• NCJ Number: 189127
• Date Published: November 2000
• Length: 89 pages
• Grant Number(s): 98-JG-FX-0002
• Sponsoring Agency: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP)
• Corporate Author: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP)
• Sale Source: NCJRS Photocopy Services; Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse/NCJRS
• Publication Format: Document
• Publication Type: Program/Project Evaluation
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This evaluation report on the Juvenile Mentoring Program (JUMP) assessed the nature, status, and successes of the Program established under the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (JJDP) Act of 1974.

Abstract

Under the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (JJDP) Act of 1974, a delinquency prevention program was established, the Juvenile Mentoring Program (JUMP). JUMP is designed to provide one-to-one mentoring of youth at risk of delinquency, gang involvement, educational failure, or dropping out of school. The Office for Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention was mandated to conduct an ongoing evaluation of JUMP to assess the nature, status, and successes of the Program. Information for the evaluation was obtained from documents (grantee applications, contract amendments, quarterly narrative reports, information from a standardized questionnaire given to participating youth, and exit forms), the JUMP Management Information System (JUMP MIS), telephone interviews, and site visits conducted by evaluation staff. This evaluation report begins with an overview of pertinent factors that were instrumental in determining the initial need for JUMP and a brief summary of major JUMP program characteristics. Chapter Two provided information about the diverse nature and key features of the current 175 JUMP projects. Chapters Three, Four, and Five presented specific information on youth, mentors, and mentoring relationships. The remaining chapters, Six, Seven, Eight, and Nine, documented benefits perceived to date, characteristics of effective mentoring programs, and considerations of future program operations and oversight. The national evaluation team formed collaborative relationships with other individuals and organizations in the field. Through these relationships, the team hoped to strengthen mentoring projects across the country. The report concluded with a discussion of expanded evaluation activities. Graphs, charts, tables and references