# Brief: Youth mentoring Prepared from Grant Precedent, 2026-10-23; data as of precedent 2026-10-21, measures 2026-10-22. ## Measures funders require ### Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (DOJ OJP), Mentoring Programs 15 of 41 measures shown. #### How many unique youth were matched with one or more mentors during this reporting period? - Code: Q1 - Requirement: required - Definition: Unique means unduplicated. Youth should only be counted once during a reporting period, regardless of the number of matches involved. Match refers to the pairing of one youth with one or more adult or peer mentor(s). Reporting period is the specific timeframe covered by this report. - Target rule: No target rule stated - Source: DOJ Office of Justice Programs, solicitation performance measures, https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/funding/performance-measures/pmqd/performance-measures-mentoring-programs.pdf #### How many unique youth have been matched with one or more mentors since the beginning of this award? - Code: Q2 - Requirement: required - Definition: Beginning of the award refers to the Project Period Start Date for your award. You can find this in your award documentation or in JustGrants. - Target rule: No target rule stated - Source: DOJ Office of Justice Programs, solicitation performance measures, https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/funding/performance-measures/pmqd/performance-measures-mentoring-programs.pdf #### How many unique mentors were matched with one or more youth during this reporting period? - Code: Q3 - Requirement: required - Target rule: No target rule stated - Source: DOJ Office of Justice Programs, solicitation performance measures, https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/funding/performance-measures/pmqd/performance-measures-mentoring-programs.pdf #### How many unique mentors have been matched with one or more youth since the beginning of this award? - Code: Q4 - Requirement: required - Target rule: No target rule stated - Source: DOJ Office of Justice Programs, solicitation performance measures, https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/funding/performance-measures/pmqd/performance-measures-mentoring-programs.pdf #### How many matches closed during this reporting period? - Code: Q5 - Requirement: required - Definition: Closed means the match came to a formal ending, representing the concluding process of a specific pairing between one youth and one or more mentors. - Target rule: No target rule stated - Source: DOJ Office of Justice Programs, solicitation performance measures, https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/funding/performance-measures/pmqd/performance-measures-mentoring-programs.pdf #### How many unique youth were involved in matches that closed during this reporting period? - Code: Q6 - Requirement: required - Target rule: No target rule stated - Source: DOJ Office of Justice Programs, solicitation performance measures, https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/funding/performance-measures/pmqd/performance-measures-mentoring-programs.pdf #### Did you adjust the program plan as described in your application’s proposal narrative? If yes, what adjustments did you make, and why? - Code: Q7 - Requirement: required - Definition: The program plan outlines how grant activities will be managed to achieve award goals and benefits for program participants. It is part of the proposal narrative. - Target rule: No target rule stated - Source: DOJ Office of Justice Programs, solicitation performance measures, https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/funding/performance-measures/pmqd/performance-measures-mentoring-programs.pdf #### Did you experience any challenges during the reporting period that impacted service delivery to program participants? If yes, how did you address the challenges, and do the challenges remain unresolved? - Code: Q8 - Requirement: required - Target rule: No target rule stated - Source: DOJ Office of Justice Programs, solicitation performance measures, https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/funding/performance-measures/pmqd/performance-measures-mentoring-programs.pdf #### Did you engage with OJJDP training and technical assistance providers during this reporting period? If yes, did the providers adequately address your issue? - Code: Q9 - Requirement: required - Target rule: No target rule stated - Source: DOJ Office of Justice Programs, solicitation performance measures, https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/funding/performance-measures/pmqd/performance-measures-mentoring-programs.pdf #### Of the matches that closed during this reporting period, how many met the expected minimum duration of participation? - Code: Q10 - Requirement: required - Definition: Expected minimum duration refers to the minimum number of months that participation in a match is expected to last, according to your program model. - Target rule: No target rule stated - Source: DOJ Office of Justice Programs, solicitation performance measures, https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/funding/performance-measures/pmqd/performance-measures-mentoring-programs.pdf #### Of the matches that closed during this reporting period, how many met the expected minimum frequency of participation? - Code: Q11 - Requirement: required - Definition: Expected minimum frequency refers to the number of times per month that the youth and mentor are expected to participate in the match. - Target rule: No target rule stated - Source: DOJ Office of Justice Programs, solicitation performance measures, https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/funding/performance-measures/pmqd/performance-measures-mentoring-programs.pdf #### Of the matches that closed during this reporting period, how many met the expected total number of hours of participation? - Code: Q12 - Requirement: required - Definition: Hours of participation refers to the number of hours per month that the youth and mentor are expected to meet for the duration of the match. - Target rule: No target rule stated - Source: DOJ Office of Justice Programs, solicitation performance measures, https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/funding/performance-measures/pmqd/performance-measures-mentoring-programs.pdf #### Of the unique youth involved in matches that closed during this reporting period, how many experienced improved mental and emotional health? - Code: Q13 - Requirement: required - Definition: Mental and emotional health refers to life satisfaction, depressive symptoms, adaptive coping with stress, hopeful future expectations, self-esteem, or sense of meaning and purpose. - Target rule: No target rule stated - Source: DOJ Office of Justice Programs, solicitation performance measures, https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/funding/performance-measures/pmqd/performance-measures-mentoring-programs.pdf #### Of the unique youth involved in matches that closed during this reporting period, how many experienced improved social-emotional skills? - Code: Q14 - Requirement: required - Definition: Social and emotional skills refer to self-control, social competence, problem-solving ability, skills for setting and pursuing goals, perseverance, self-advocacy, or career exploration. - Target rule: No target rule stated - Source: DOJ Office of Justice Programs, solicitation performance measures, https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/funding/performance-measures/pmqd/performance-measures-mentoring-programs.pdf #### Of the unique youth involved in matches that closed during this reporting period, how many experienced improved health and prosocial behaviors? - Code: Q15 - Requirement: required - Definition: Health and prosocial behaviors refer to healthy eating, physical activity, treatment adherence, prosocial behavior, and civic engagement. - Target rule: No target rule stated - Source: DOJ Office of Justice Programs, solicitation performance measures, https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/funding/performance-measures/pmqd/performance-measures-mentoring-programs.pdf ## What you can collect, and how Tier 1 is collected today from your own records. Tier 2 needs one free instrument. Tier 3 needs a partner under a data agreement. A measure that matches no rule has no tier. ### Tier 1: Collect today from your own records #### How many unique youth were matched with one or more mentors during this reporting period? - Collect today from your own records. A count of services or people, held in the organization’s own records. #### How many unique youth have been matched with one or more mentors since the beginning of this award? - Collect today from your own records. A count of services or people, held in the organization’s own records. #### How many unique mentors were matched with one or more youth during this reporting period? - Collect today from your own records. A count of services or people, held in the organization’s own records. #### How many unique mentors have been matched with one or more youth since the beginning of this award? - Collect today from your own records. A count of services or people, held in the organization’s own records. #### How many matches closed during this reporting period? - Collect today from your own records. A count of services or people, held in the organization’s own records. #### How many unique youth were involved in matches that closed during this reporting period? - Collect today from your own records. A count of services or people, held in the organization’s own records. #### Of the matches that closed during this reporting period, how many met the expected minimum duration of participation? - Collect today from your own records. A count of services or people, held in the organization’s own records. #### Of the matches that closed during this reporting period, how many met the expected minimum frequency of participation? - Collect today from your own records. A count of services or people, held in the organization’s own records. #### Of the matches that closed during this reporting period, how many met the expected total number of hours of participation? - Collect today from your own records. A count of services or people, held in the organization’s own records. ### Tier 2: Add one free instrument #### Of the unique youth involved in matches that closed during this reporting period, how many experienced improved mental and emotional health? - Instrument: Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Public domain; 10 items, about 2-3 minutes). License: “freely available; permission not required for use.” Form: https://www.phenxtoolkit.org/toolkit_content/PDF/PX180901.pdf Also cleared in this domain: PHQ-9, GAD-7, PCL-5 (Past Month). #### Of the unique youth involved in matches that closed during this reporting period, how many experienced improved social-emotional skills? - Instrument: Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Public domain; 10 items, about 2-3 minutes). License: “freely available; permission not required for use.” Form: https://www.phenxtoolkit.org/toolkit_content/PDF/PX180901.pdf Also cleared in this domain: PHQ-9, GAD-7, PCL-5 (Past Month). #### Of the unique youth involved in matches that closed during this reporting period, how many experienced improved health and prosocial behaviors? - Instrument: Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Public domain; 10 items, about 2-3 minutes). License: “freely available; permission not required for use.” Form: https://www.phenxtoolkit.org/toolkit_content/PDF/PX180901.pdf Also cleared in this domain: General Self-Efficacy Scale, Schwarzer/Jerusalem, Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS). ### Implementation question, answered from program records #### Did you adjust the program plan as described in your application’s proposal narrative? If yes, what adjustments did you make, and why? #### Did you experience any challenges during the reporting period that impacted service delivery to program participants? If yes, how did you address the challenges, and do the challenges remain unresolved? #### Did you engage with OJJDP training and technical assistance providers during this reporting period? If yes, did the providers adequately address your issue? ## What grantees achieved 1 grantee of Comprehensive Mentoring reported 5 results against targets over 4 periods; the median result was 103% of target (middle half 53% to 125%), and 60% met or exceeded the target. Source: Juvenile Welfare Board of Pinellas County, program monitoring reports, https://www.jwbpinellas.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/VII-C-Program-and-Financial-Monitoring-Information.pdf. - Big Brothers Big Sisters of Tampa Bay, Inc. (FY2019): Percent of Pinellas County children who are matched for at least seven (7) months will have no new in- school or out-of-school suspensions during the school year of program participation as measured by independent verification with Pinellas County School data.; promised 75%, actual 77% (103% of target); unit: %. Source: https://www.jwbpinellas.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/VII-D-Program-and-Financial-Monitoring-Information.pdf Program-level figures, not individual grantees: Mentoring Children of Prisoners reported 11 results against targets over 3 periods; the median result was 95% of target (middle half 75% to 112%), and 45% met or exceeded the target. Source: OMB PART assessments (ExpectMore.gov archive), https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/omb/expectmore/detail/10002335.2004.html. - Mentoring Children of Prisoners (2007): By FY 2014, increase by two percent over the previous year's result the percent of children of prisoners receiving mentoring through Mentoring Children of Prisoners (MCP) who will be or will have been in relationships lasting at least one year.; promised 60.0%, actual 34.0% (57% of target); unit: %. Source: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/omb/expectmore/detail/10003505.2005.html Program-level figures, not individual grantees: Mentoring Program reported 5 results against targets over 2 periods; the median result was 82% of target (middle half 73% to 135%), and 40% met or exceeded the target. Source: OMB PART assessments (ExpectMore.gov archive), https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/omb/expectmore/detail/10002335.2004.html. - Mentoring Program (2007): The percentage of mentored students who demonstrate improvement in core academic subjects as measured by grade point average after twelve months. (2005 cohort); promised 49.6, actual 22.0 (44% of target); unit: %. Source: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/omb/expectmore/detail/10003328.2006.html ## Target-setting language with precedent Each item comes from one funder, one program or one department; none is a government-wide rule. No target-setting clause from Justice in the library yet; the items below are the nearest precedent. - CDC DP-23-0002 applicant FAQ (2023): Quote: “you may enter a '0' and then TBD for targets in the work plan” — https://archive.cdc.gov/www_cdc_gov/healthyschools/nofo/nofo.htm - EDGAR, 34 CFR 75.110(c) (2024): Paraphrase: An applicant that lacks a baseline explains how and when it will establish one. — https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2024-08-29/html/2024-17239.htm - SAMHSA CMHS Infrastructure, Prevention and Promotion Overview Guide, v2.0, p. 9 (2022): Quote: “grantees can revise annual goals in consultation with their GPO during the first quarter of each fiscal year” — https://spars.samhsa.gov/sites/default/files/2023-01/OE%20SPARS%20CMHS%20IPP%20Overview%20Guide.pdf - Promise Neighborhoods guidance document, third edition (2025): Quote: “target setting will be an iterative process throughout implementation as more performance data is available” — https://promiseneighborhoods.ed.gov/pdf/Promise_Neighborhoods_Guidance_Document_508c.pdf - HRSA-26-057 ECCS SEED applicant FAQs, p. 6 (2026): Paraphrase: Baseline estimates are confirmed or updated within six months of award. — https://files.simpler.grants.gov/opportunities/45e009d7-46ed-482f-8aa7-02812f207f71/attachments/54ad1b19-2651-43c7-8ade-76203c7770d7/HRSA-26-057_ECCS_SEED_Applicant_FAQs.pdf - NIH PAR-25-383, Section VI (2025): Paraphrase: Future-year milestones may be renegotiated based on prior-year data. — https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PAR-25-383.html - Arizona Rural Health Transformation, approved program narrative, pp. 20-22 (2026): Paraphrase: A baseline assessment is done after award, and targets are set from it. — https://www.azahcccs.gov/AHCCCS/Downloads/Initiatives/RHTP/Arizona%27sApprovedProgramNarrative.pdf - HRSA Health Center Program (H80) patient targets, Primary Health Care Digest (2022): Quote: “confirm or request adjustment to their patient target by the deadline in their email” — https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/USHHSHRSA/bulletins/3120df3 ## What reviewers penalize These ten weaknesses recur in 17 published reviewer critiques, mostly U.S. Department of Education and NIH. The count is the number of critiques that name it, not a rate, and a reviewer comment is a judgment. - [ ] Attrition or missing-data handling left unresolved (named in 7 of 17 critiques). Reviewers wrote: “the applicant did not address how missing data will be handled” U.S. Department of Education, Education Innovation and Research (EIR) Mid-Phase, WestEd, S411B220027, 2022, Technical Review Form, pp. 25, 29. https://www.ed.gov/sites/ed/files/2022/12/S411B220027_WestEd_TRF.pdf#page=29 - [ ] Comparisons vulnerable to selection, contamination, baseline differences or incompatible data (named in 7 of 17 critiques). Reviewers wrote: “may require additional interpretation” National Institutes of Health, NIAID, K01 AI131895 (Rebeiro, Vanderbilt), applicant-authorized summary statement; a research application, pp. 5-6. https://beta.nih.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_media/2026-09/k01-rebeiro-summary-statement.pdf#page=6 - [ ] Feasibility assumptions or fallback arrangements unsupported (named in 6 of 17 critiques). Reviewers wrote: “no alternative analysis plan is provided” National Institutes of Health, NIDCD, R01 DC017174 (Heinemann and Cherney), applicant-authorized summary statement; a research application, pp. 3, 5-6. https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/2022-03/sanitized-heinemann-cherney-summary-statement-redacted.pdf#page=5 - [ ] Implementation fidelity, thresholds or mediators inadequately specified (named in 5 of 17 critiques). Reviewers wrote: “Mediators are not described.” U.S. Department of Education, EIR Early-Phase, Education Development Center, U411C190275, 2019, Technical Review Form, p. 4. https://www.ed.gov/sites/ed/files/2019/11/U411C190275-Education-Development-Center-Inc.-TRF-Tier-2.pdf#page=4 - [ ] Measurement tools insufficiently identified, supported or protected against reporting bias (named in 4 of 17 critiques). Reviewers wrote: “no detail is provided” U.S. Department of Education, EIR Mid-Phase, Niswonger Foundation, U411B170038, 2017, Technical Review Form, pp. 4-5. https://www.ed.gov/sites/ed/files/2016/12/U411B170038_TRF.pdf#page=4 - [ ] Targets or success criteria missing, inconsistent or disconnected from the project (named in 4 of 17 critiques). Reviewers wrote: “lacks a specific number” U.S. Department of Education, EIR Mid-Phase, ASSISTments Foundation, S411B220024, 2022, Technical Review Form, p. 14. https://www.ed.gov/sites/ed/files/2022/12/S411B220024_ASSISTments-Foundation-Inc_TRF.pdf#page=14 - [ ] Analysis procedures insufficiently specified for the stated questions or model (named in 4 of 17 critiques). Reviewers wrote: “methods of data analysis are not adequately described” National Institutes of Health, NIAID, R01 AI098472 renewal (Gandhi, UCSF), applicant-authorized summary statement; a research application, pp. 4-5. https://beta.nih.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_media/2026-09/2-R01-AI098472-06_Ganhdi_Summary.pdf#page=4 - [ ] Data protection, management or cross-site coordination incomplete (named in 3 of 17 critiques). Reviewers wrote: “The data management plan stops midsentence on page 125” National Institutes of Health, NIDCD, R01 DC017683 (Gifford and Camarata, Vanderbilt), applicant-authorized summary statement; a research application, pp. 9-10. https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/2022-05/sanitized-giffordcamarataapplicationsummary-dc017683-01a1.pdf#page=10 - [ ] Feedback collection lacks a specified route into program decisions (named in 2 of 17 critiques). Reviewers wrote: “The applicant does not discuss how often the team will review data or implement changes.” U.S. Department of Education, EIR Early-Phase, Orange County Superintendent of Schools, S411C200130, 2020, Technical Review Form, pp. 16, 19. https://www.ed.gov/sites/ed/files/2020/12/S411C200130-Orange-County-Superintendent-of-Schools-TRF.pdf#page=19 - [ ] Evaluator independence insufficiently explained (named in 1 of 17 critiques). Reviewers wrote: “The level of independence is not made clear” U.S. Department of Education, EIR Early-Phase, Research Triangle Institute, S411C220065, 2022, Technical Review Form, pp. 24-25. https://www.ed.gov/sites/ed/files/2022/12/S411C220065_Research-Triangle-Institute-_TRF.pdf#page=24 ## Protocol skeleton ### Draft text, edit before use Measures: How many unique youth were matched with one or more mentors during this reporting period?; How many unique youth have been matched with one or more mentors since the beginning of this award?; How many unique mentors were matched with one or more youth during this reporting period?; How many unique mentors have been matched with one or more youth since the beginning of this award?; How many matches closed during this reporting period?; How many unique youth were involved in matches that closed during this reporting period?; Did you adjust the program plan as described in your application’s proposal narrative? If yes, what adjustments did you make, and why?; Did you experience any challenges during the reporting period that impacted service delivery to program participants? If yes, how did you address the challenges, and do the challenges remain unresolved?; Did you engage with OJJDP training and technical assistance providers during this reporting period? If yes, did the providers adequately address your issue?; Of the matches that closed during this reporting period, how many met the expected minimum duration of participation?; Of the matches that closed during this reporting period, how many met the expected minimum frequency of participation?; Of the matches that closed during this reporting period, how many met the expected total number of hours of participation?; and 3 more listed above. Baseline: \_\_\_\_ months from award, using \_\_\_\_. Targets: set from the observed baseline at month \_\_\_\_, or committed now as a change of \_\_\_\_ percentage points from baseline. Missing-data plan (how dropout and missing observations will be handled): \_\_\_\_ Comparison group or baseline (what you compare against and how the groups started): \_\_\_\_ Fallback if recruitment, data access or the first analysis falls short: \_\_\_\_ Fidelity threshold (what counts as full implementation, and how it is measured): \_\_\_\_ Instrument named, with its validity evidence and its rights (license) status: \_\_\_\_ Numeric target for each measure (a number, not a direction): \_\_\_\_ Analysis for each outcome (method, comparison, adjustment): \_\_\_\_ Data protection and data management (who holds identifiable data, where, for how long): \_\_\_\_ Feedback schedule (who reviews the data, how often, and what changes as a result): \_\_\_\_ Evaluator role and independence (who evaluates and how they are separate from delivery): \_\_\_\_ The text is copied or summarized from public documents. It is not legal advice.