Violence Prevention: How Mentors Foster Safety

/in , , /by

Jones, K., Duckworth, J., Fetters, C., Galoro, B., & Rowhani-Rahbar, A. (2026). Been there, done that, and now I’m giving back: Perspectives from mentors and administrators in community violence intervention programs. Prevention Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-026-01877-4

Key Takeaways

  • Mentors’ shared histories with firearm violence shapes trust, consistency, and engagement, which participants view as central to violence prevention.
  • This study demonstrates that mentoring in community violence intervention programs operates primarily through relational credibility grounded in lived experience rather than through formal curricula.
  • The findings emphasize that mentoring effectiveness depends as much on organizational support and structural resources as on individual mentor skill.

Introduction

Jones and colleagues (2026) situate their study within the persistent crisis of firearm violence affecting Black youth in the United States. While mentoring by credible messengers is widely used in community violence intervention programs, the authors argue that little is known about how mentoring actually functions within these settings. The authors seek to identify the components of mentoring interventions that practitioners believe contribute to preventing interpersonal firearm violence.

Methods

Using a constructivist grounded theory approach, the researchers conducted semi-structured interviews with twenty mentors and program administrators working in community violence intervention programs across Washington State. Interviews, conducted via video conferencing between 2024 and 2025, lasted between forty-five and ninety minutes. Data were transcribed, coded iteratively, and analyzed using constant comparative methods, with attention to researcher positionality and participant validation.

Results

Participants described mentoring as beginning before formal relationship formation, with recruitment centered on individuals with lived experience of violence and strong community ties. Core relational processes included trust-building, nonjudgmental listening, consistency, and cultural attunement. Mentoring extended beyond one-on-one interaction to addressing basic needs, coordinating with families, schools, and justice systems, and teaching decision-making skills. Organizational factors, including training, supervision, and cross-agency collaboration, shaped mentors’ capacity to sustain this work.

Discussion

The authors of this study suggest that mentoring in community violence intervention programs is best understood as a relational and ecological process rather than a discrete service. Lived experience functions as a source of legitimacy that allows mentors to engage youth around trauma, identity, and future orientation. At the same time, participants noted limits imposed by structural inequities, resource scarcity, and inconsistent institutional recognition of mentor expertise.

Implications for Mentoring Programs

For mentoring programs, these findings point to the importance of intentional recruitment, sustained organizational support, and alignment between mentoring relationships and broader systems of care. Programs that ignore structural conditions risk placing unrealistic expectations on mentors alone.

Read the full article here