The roles in traditional mentoring dyads are well known across both academic and professional contexts (Dawson, 2014). Despite the universality of these relationships, the way mentorship is evaluated in these relationships is fractured. Evaluation is limited to singular voices, singular points in time and simplified metrics to capture the journey and the unique experience of mentorship. These gaps push mentorship evaluation to try to encapsulate mentorship as a generalizable experience to satisfy metrics rather than acknowledging the dynamic complexity of these relationships. An exploration of current mentorship evaluation within the literature will highlight current limitations. These limitations allowed the authors to propose a new Co-Analysis model for evaluation that centers on shifting mentorship towards the values of partnership, flexibility, and holistic assessment. The model not only provides a universal pathway to improve any individual mentoring relationship, but also the opportunity for new voices to shape our understanding in future literature. [Articles in this journal were presented at the University of Calgary Conference on Postsecondary Learning and Teaching.]