The work of mentoring matters. Whether one is looking at the broad-scale enactment of induction programming or the individualized attention focused on new teachers' learning and development, mentors play a pivotal role in new teacher retention and development. As a result, mentors are in a good position to interpret and enact induction policy at the local level. In light of their unique role, what conditions are needed to ensure that mentors have time to mentor as well as opportunities to develop a mentoring practice that promotes effective teaching? Given the importance of mentoring and the vagaries of local control, how can induction policy play a constructive role in promoting educative mentoring? Serious mentoring both supports and stretches new teachers, helping them with immediate problems and moving their practice forward. It challenges the prevailing culture of teaching (Little, 1990) and depends on skills of observation, analysis, and communication that go beyond those mastered by most classroom teachers (Feiman-Nemser, 1998). Unfortunately, many mentoring programs seem to rest on the assumption that those who know how to teach automatically know how to assist a novice in learning to teach. In this chapter, the authors offer lessons learned from studying mentor policy and practice in three well-regarded induction programs. In the tradition of research on the intersection of education policy and classroom practice (e.g., Coburn, 2001; Cohen & Ball, 1990; Cohen & Hill, 2001; Spillane & Thompson, 1997), the authors examine how state and district policies surrounding new teacher induction shape the practice of mentors and the learning of beginning teachers. As their analysis demonstrates, weak systems of mentor support contribute to uneven mentoring practices, which ultimately result in missed learning opportunities for novice teachers and their students. The authors conclude with a discussion of implications for induction policy as it relates to mentors' work and development. (Contains 4 notes.)