Introductory comments include a statement from President Bush's 2003 State of the Union address, in which he advocates and promises Federal support for Mentoring programs. The panel notes that Federal funding for mentoring programs for fiscal 2003 is $450 million. The operations of two school-based mentoring programs are portrayed: one in Tulsa, OK, and one in Norwalk, CT. The latter program is one of the oldest and most effective of the school-based mentoring programs. Mentoring programs in general provide for the matching of an adult with a child or youth for the purpose of improving the youth's quality of life and opportunities for future success. The children and youth enlisted into mentoring programs are usually considered disadvantaged in some way that puts them at risk for delinquency and low achievement. School-based mentoring programs are primarily intended to help problem students perform better in school; however, the adult mentor is much more than just a tutor, as he/she helps the youth deal with personal problems of any type. The community-based mentoring program profiled is in Miami-Dade County and is under the sponsorship of a local chapter of Big Brothers/Big Sisters. This program focuses on disadvantaged minority children and youth, as the mentors provide positive role modeling and guidance to help their mentorees avoid alcohol and drug abuse, gang involvement, negative peer associations, and low academic achievement. The faith-based mentoring program described is in Irvine, CA. Members of a church act as mentors in four separate programs that focus on children and youth with different types of needs. The workplace mentoring program portrayed is sponsored by Johns Hopkins Hospital. Disadvantaged children and youth are invited to enter a mentoring relationship with persons who work in the hospital. Although the focus of the mentoring relationship is on involvement in the work of the hospital and possible future commitment to a health-care occupation, the relationship also becomes a resource for addressing various types of problems the mentorees may experience. Some of the issues addressed in questions to the panel of experts include recruitment and background checks for mentors, sources for mentor recruitment, the matching of parties in a mentoring relationship, and the evaluation of mentoring programs. Regarding the latter issue, the panel advises that the quality and length of a mentoring relationship have a direct relationship to outcomes for mentorees.