When mentors do not meet our expectations, Match Intervention is required.  Depending on the seriousness of the actions (or inaction), frequency and time of year, Program Managers (PMs) can give mentors official warnings, place mentors on probationary status and/or un-match the mentor and prevent the mentor from mentoring with our program again (refer to the Match Intervention Protocol: Decision Tree to understand the order of protocol in this scenario). 

All Match Intervention decisions must first be discussed between PMs and mangers during their weekly check-in meetings – often as a part of the Focus List portion of that discussion.  Manager approval is required for all Match Intervention strategies.

This area of concern is particularly important in the beginning of the match and each subsequent school year.  If a mentor has not written for 3 consecutive weeks at the beginning of the year, PMs must add this pair to their focus list and discuss the potential for un-matching at their next check-in.

Timeline for Match Intervention Protocol in Circumstances Where Mentors are Not Meeting Expectations

Generally speaking, the timeline PMs follow in scenarios where mentors are not meeting the expectations set forth for mentor engagement is as follows:

Circumstances/Timing	Action
Mentor exhibits "negative behavior"	PM brings situation to their manager's attention during the weekly check-in to discuss next steps.
Following meeting with manager	PM reaches out to mentor via email to schedule a call, and may elect to issue a formal warning.
+ 2 Weeks	If mentor has not connected with the PM or has not corrected the "negative behavior," PM reaches out to mentor to inform them that they are being placed on formal probation and are at risk of being un-matched.
+2 - 4 Weeks	If mentor has not corrected "negative behavior" and/or adhered to the goals set forth via the formal warning, PM discusses un-matching with manager and next steps are decided upon.

Issuing Warnings

PMs can issue formal warnings for the following (referred to as "negative behavior" in the timeline above):

• Mentor stood up mentee at an event without calling or emailing;
• Pair has not met in person for two months for mentor driven reasons;
• Mentor missed three consecutive lessons AND is not returning the calls and emails sent by the PM;
• Mentor missed two consecutive events AND not returning the calls and emails sent by the PM.

If one or more of the above concerns is observed, PMs engage in the protocol outlined below

1. PM creates note on mentor’s platform profile detailing the observed concerning behavior;
2. PM informs manager of concern and updates information on their Focus List (typically executed during the PM-manager weekly check-in;
3. Decision on next step regarding match and communication is agreed upon by PM and manager;
4. PM updates mentor platform profile to reflect decision made in collaboration with their manager, as well as next steps the PM will take;
5. PM emails mentor to communicate warning and schedule a follow-up call
   • Click HERE to view a template for this email communication (see template for "On-Track to Miss 4 Lessons").  Please note that you may need to slightly augment the language of this template.  At a bare minimum, you will need to address the email and edit the text in brackets;
6. PM calls mentor;
   • Click HERE to view objectives and best practices for this call as well as talking points to support high quality execution of the discussion.
7. PM sends mentor a follow up email that reviews the phone conversation [link email template];
   • Click HERE to view a template for this email communication.  Please note that you may need to slightly augment the language of this template.  At a bare minimum, you will need to address the email and edit the text in brackets;
8. PM documents details of conversation with mentor via a note on the platform profile (for both mentee and mentor);
9. As necessary, PM informs mentee of status of communication with mentor and addresses any concerns mentee may have.

PMs give mentors an official warning once.  Mentors that are still not meeting expectations more than two weeks after the warning is issued must be brought up at PM’s next weekly check-in with their manager, at which time the decision may be collaboratively made to place the mentor on probationary status or un-match the pair.  If consensus is not achieved, the decision of the manager will represent the final decision.

Placing Mentors on Probationary Status

PMs place a mentor on Probationary Status when mentors have not achieved the agreed upon goals stated in their formal warning or have not responded to the PMs formal warning at all.  Mentors cannot not be placed on probation more than once.

If mentors have not achieved the agreed upon goals stated in the formal warning, PMs engage in the protocol outlined below

1. PM creates note on mentor’s platform profile detailing the decision to place the mentor on probationary status;
2. PM calls mentor to escalate their concern regarding their inability to meet the goals agreed upon during the formal warning discussion;
   • Click HERE to view objectives and best practices for this call as well as talking points to support high quality execution of the discussion.
3. While on the call, PM sets up a time, 2 weeks and 4 weeks from call, to check in with mentor to review progress;
4. PM sends mentor a follow up email that reviews the phone conversation;
   • Click HERE to open a template for this email communication.  Please note that you may need to slightly augment the language of this template.  At a bare minimum, you will need to address the email and edit the text in brackets;
5. PM documents details of conversation with mentor via a note on the platform profile (for both mentee and mentor);
6. As necessary, PM informs mentee of status of communication with mentor and addresses any concerns mentee may have.

If mentor fails to meet the conditions of the probation by deadline, PMs must bring this to the attention of their manager during their next weekly check-in.   At this point, the decision is made to give the mentor a final chance (depending on the context of their mentoring relationship) or lead the pair through the match closure process.  If consensus is not achieved, the decision of the manager will represent the final decision.

Un-Matching

Mentors not meeting expectations should be un-matched for the following reasons:

• Mentor has not completed a lesson and/or met mentee in person since warning was issued and/or has not reconnected with the PM;
• Mentor has been on probation and has not demonstrated improvement. 

For all other circumstances, PM will present individual cases to their manager during weekly check-ins.  A final decision regarding next steps will be made by the PM and their manager in that space.  If there is not consensus, the decision of the manager presides.

The protocol for un-matching procedure during the school year is as follows:

1. PM brings up un-matching possibility with manager in weekly check-in;
2. PM calls mentor to discuss un-matching;
   • Click HERE to view objectives and best practices for this call as well as talking points to support high quality execution of the discussion.
3. PM sends mentor a follow up email that reviews the phone conversation;
   • Click HERE to open a template for this email communication.  Please note that you may need to slightly augment the language of this template.  At a bare minimum, you will need to address the email and edit the text in brackets;
4. PM talks with mentee in class about un-matching;
   • Click HERE to read about iMentor's approach to healthy match closure.  The article includes tips for managing the mentee closure experience, including talking points.
5. PM leads pair through healthy match closure process, to the best of her ability;
6. PM updates mentor profile with detailed notes, email conversations, or anything that would help future platform users understand the un-matching situation;
7. PM formally un-matches pair on platform (click HERE to learn about un-matching a pair on the platform.