The Mentoring to Succeed Act of 2025 inserts a new Section 172 into Subtitle D of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act to fund competitive grants for community-based organizations and partnerships to establish, expand, or enhance youth mentoring programs. Grants—awarded for up to three years—must link trained, screened mentors with in‑school and out‑of‑school youth to provide social-emotional learning, employability skills, career exploration, paid and unpaid work experiences, and pathways to recognized postsecondary credentials.
This bill matters because it formalizes mentoring as an explicit WIOA activity, sets federal reporting and evaluation requirements, and prioritizes applicants serving high-poverty, rural, or high‑risk communities. Compliance officers, school systems, workforce boards, and community organizations should note the screening/training specifications, the required data collection metrics, subgrant authority, and the Department of Labor’s mandate to study program effectiveness within three years.
At a Glance
What It Does
Amends WIOA to create a competitive grant program (Section 172) that funds mentoring programs focused on social-emotional learning and career readiness; grants run no more than three years and may be regranted by recipients. It authorizes training, background checks, mentor compensation, paid work experiences, and program evaluation, and it directs the Secretary to coordinate technical assistance with federal partners.
Who It Affects
Community-based nonprofit organizations (including faith-based affiliates), covered partnerships between such organizations and employers or local educational agencies, high-need schools, and institutions offering postsecondary credentials. State and local workforce boards, employers that host internships/apprenticeships, and DOL program managers will also be affected by implementation and reporting duties.
Why It Matters
The bill layers mentoring into federally supported workforce development, potentially redirecting WIOA-aligned resources toward upstream prevention and career pipelines. It also creates standardized training, screening, and reporting expectations that will change how small community providers document outcomes and partner with employers and schools.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The core of the bill adds a new, standalone grant program under WIOA dedicated to youth mentoring. Eligible applicants are community-based organizations or ‘covered partnerships’ that combine such organizations with industry partnerships, local educational agencies, employers, or other public entities.
The statute defines eligible youth expansively: in-school and out-of-school youth, plus young people who meet alternative risk-based criteria (for example, those with adverse childhood experiences, parental incarceration, gang involvement, chronic absenteeism, or other indicators of elevated need).
Grants fund mentoring programs that must be structured (one-on-one, group, or peer), last at least a year, and intentionally address social-emotional development and workforce readiness. Programs must recruit, screen (including criminal background checks with a described exclusion standard), train (trauma-informed practices, cultural competency, disability inclusion, social-emotional learning), and where appropriate compensate mentors.
Funded activities extend beyond mentoring to work-based learning, internships, pre-apprenticeships, occupational training tied to recognized postsecondary credentials, career exposure, and supports like financial literacy and resume preparation.Applicant requirements include a needs assessment with baseline metrics, a plan specifying mentor types and meeting frequency, demographic information on mentees and mentors, a recruitment and screening plan, and a budget. The Secretary must prioritize proposals that serve youth in high-poverty, rural, or violence‑impacted communities and those that demonstrate private-sector partnerships for internships or credential pathways.
Recipients must report annually on participant counts and demographics, academic and labor-market outcomes, and social-emotional development measured by a validated tool; reports must comply with student privacy rules. Separately, the Department of Labor must complete an evaluation study submitted to Congress within three years analyzing program models and the grant program’s effects on academic and career outcomes.
The Five Things You Need to Know
Grants are competitive and limited to a maximum duration of 3 years; recipients may award subgrants with Secretary approval.
The bill’s eligible youth definition explicitly covers students with risk indicators—chronic absenteeism, repeated school changes, gang involvement, parental incarceration, substance use risk in the home, or one or more adverse childhood experiences.
Mentor safeguards: applicants must present a written screening plan, conduct criminal background checks, and exclude mentors with convictions “directly related to child safety” occurring during participation or within the prior 7 years.
Reporting requires annual data on participant counts and demographics, academic achievement, dropout/attendance, arrests for violent crime, employment outcomes, postsecondary enrollment, and social‑emotional development measured by a validated assessment tool.
The Secretary must give grant priority to programs serving high‑poverty, rural, or high‑risk communities and projects that connect youth to postsecondary preparation and private‑sector work experiences; authorizations run for fiscal years 2026–2030 with “such sums as may be necessary.”.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Designates the bill as the “Mentoring to Succeed Act of 2025.” This is purely stylistic but sets the legislative reference used throughout the rest of the text.
Creates Section 172 — Youth Mentoring Programs
Inserts a new section into WIOA that authorizes competitive grants to community-based organizations and covered partnerships to establish, expand, or support mentoring programs. This provision establishes the statutory home for mentoring within federal workforce law, so future WIOA program rules and local planning may need to integrate mentoring grants and reporting into existing workforce activities.
Definitions and eligibility
Defines key terms (community-based organization, covered partnership, eligible entity, eligible youth, mentoring, youth workforce readiness programming, covered recognized postsecondary credential). The eligible youth definition is broad and risk-based rather than strictly income-based, meaning programs must be prepared to serve youth with behavioral, trauma, familial incarceration, or substance-use related risks, not just those meeting standard WIOA income thresholds.
Grant mechanics and authorized activities
Authorizes competitive awards (maximum three-year duration) and specifies permitted uses: mentor training and screening, case management staff, paid/unpaid work experiences, pre-apprenticeships, occupational training prioritizing credentials aligned with local in-demand jobs, and program evaluation. Recipients may subgrant with Secretary approval, which enables larger intermediaries to fund smaller local providers but also raises oversight and subrecipient monitoring responsibilities for primary grantees.
Application, prioritization, and reporting
Applications must include a needs assessment with baseline measures, a mentor recruitment and screening plan, demographic and service plans to reach underserved communities, projected match numbers, and budgets. The Secretary must prioritize applicants serving high‑poverty, rural, or violence‑affected communities and those offering postsecondary preparation and employer partnerships. Annual reports to the Secretary must include specific outcome metrics and use validated social-emotional assessment tools while safeguarding student privacy under FERPA.
Technical assistance and funding authorization
Directs the Secretary to coordinate with the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention and the Department of Education to funnel grantees to the National Mentoring Resource Center for best practices and no-cost technical assistance, and to provide transition supports for youth returning from correctional facilities and for students with disabilities. Authorizes 'such sums as may be necessary' for fiscal years 2026–2030, which creates program authority but not a fixed appropriation.
Department of Labor study and evaluation
Requires the DOL Chief Evaluation Officer to study mentoring program models, mentor roles in social-emotional learning and workforce readiness, and to evaluate the grant program’s effect on academic and career outcomes, with results due to Congress within three years of enactment. The mandated evaluation creates an evidence loop but will depend on the quality and consistency of the reporting data grantees provide.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Education across all five countries.
Explore Education in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- At‑risk and underserved youth: the statute targets students facing chronic absenteeism, trauma, parental incarceration, gang exposure, or substance‑use risks and funds sustained mentoring plus pathways to credentials and work experiences tailored to their needs.
- Community‑based organizations and intermediaries: eligible nonprofits can access federal grant funds to scale mentoring programs, hire staff, provide mentor training, and form partnerships with schools and employers.
- Employers and local industry partnerships: the bill incentivizes private‑sector collaboration by prioritizing proposals that include internships, apprenticeships, and credential pathways, potentially expanding employer access to local talent pipelines.
Who Bears the Cost
- Small community organizations: the application, mandated screening, training, validated social‑emotional measurement, and reporting obligations add administrative and operational costs that grantees must absorb or budget for—especially challenging for grantees without prior federal grant experience.
- Local educational agencies and schools: schools partnering with grantees will need to coordinate student participation, share data under FERPA constraints, and support logistical arrangements for work‑based learning and credential pathways.
- Department of Labor and federal partners: DOL must administer competitive awards, oversee subgranting approvals, coordinate technical assistance, and execute a congressionally required evaluation—work that will require staffing and data capacity at the agency level.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill balances two legitimate priorities—scaling high‑quality mentoring for the youth who need it most, and imposing rigorous safeguards and measurement to protect youth and produce evidence—yet those safeguards increase costs and administrative complexity in ways that may exclude small, community‑rooted providers that are often most effective at reaching high‑need youth.
The bill creates clear programmatic expectations (training, screening, validated assessments) that improve program quality but also raise implementation challenges. Small community providers that know high‑need youth best may lack the administrative capacity to satisfy federal grant rules, background‑check regimes, and annual validated measurement protocols—pushing them toward partnering with larger intermediaries or foregoing application.
That dynamic can centralize decision-making and funding with organizations that are stronger on compliance than on community relationships.
The reporting requirements specify a mix of academic, safety, and employment metrics and demand use of validated social-emotional instruments. Those instruments vary in cost, training needs, and developmental appropriateness; inconsistent tool choice across grantees can complicate the DOL evaluation and obscure cross-site comparisons.
Privacy protections reference FERPA, but practical data-sharing agreements between schools, employers, and community providers will require time and legal review. Finally, the authorization language—'such sums as may be necessary' for FY2026–2030—gives program authority without a fixed appropriation, meaning program scale will hinge on future appropriations decisions.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.