A rapid evidence assessment of the impact of mentoring on re-offending
There has been a significant amount of recent interest in the influence of mentors in increasing the life success of individuals who are at risk of re-offending. The mentor can provide both direct assistance (e.g. helping to fill in job applications or locate appropriate housing) and indirect support (e.g. encouragement or acting as a positive role model). This would otherwise be unavailable to most offenders or ‘at-risk’ youth because of their family and social background. Mentoring is usually viewed as a method of both reducing re-offending and increasing positive life outcomes such as increasing education, training and employment. This report looks at the effect of mentoring on re-offending.
Title: A rapid evidence assessment of the impact of mentoring on re-offending
Authors: Darrick Jolliffe, David P. Farrington
Series: Home Office Online Report 11/07
Number of pages: 13
Date published: April 2007
Availability: Download full report 
100Kb
Key findings
- Of the 18 studies assessed, 7 showed that mentoring had a statistically significant positive impact on re-offending.
- Overall, the results suggested that mentoring significantly reduced subsequent offending by 4% to 11%, but this result was primarily driven by studies of lower methodological quality.
- The best studies, designed to provide the most accurate assessment of the impact of mentoring, did not suggest that mentoring caused a statistically significant reduction in re-offending.
- Some mentoring programmes were more effective than others. Those more successful in reducing re-offending were where the mentor and mentee spent more time together at each meeting and met at least once a week.
- Mentoring was only successful in reducing re-offending when it was one of a number of interventions given, suggesting that mentoring on its own may not reduce re-offending. Where behaviour modification, supplementary education and employment programmes were also involved, significant reductions in re-offending occurred.
- Longer mentoring programmes were not more effective, possibly because of the difficulty in recruiting high-quality mentors throughout the period that the individual was mentored.
- Mentoring was found to be most effective when it was applied to those apprehended by the police but this may have been because these studies tended to have more comprehensive mentoring.
- Only studies in which mentoring was still being given during the follow-up period led to a statistically significant reduction in re-offending. This suggests that the benefits of mentoring did not persist after the mentoring ended.
- Mentoring seems to be a promising intervention but only 2 studies of lower quality have evaluated the impact of mentoring on re-offending in the UK. It is, therefore, recommended that large-scale trials should be mounted to evaluate the effects of mentoring programmes on subsequent offending in the UK.
Getting a copy
Download A rapid evidence assessment of the impact of mentoring on re-offending PDF 100Kb
Last update: Tuesday, April 17, 2007