View in EDS

Resilience in Reentry: An Implementation and Impact Evaluation of the Social Resilience Model in the PREPARE Program in New York City

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Title:	Resilience in Reentry: An Implementation and Impact Evaluation of the Social Resilience Model in the PREPARE Program in New York City
Language:	English
Authors:	Fadumo M. Abdi, Opiaah Jeffers, Hannah Rackers, Tyler E. Chandler, Emma Pliskin, Victor St. John, Child Trends
Source:	Child Trends. 2025.
Availability:	Child Trends. 7315 Wisconsin Avenue Suite 1200W, Bethesda, MD 20814. Tel: 240-223-9200; Fax: 240-200-1238; Web site: http://www.childtrends.org
Peer Reviewed:	N
Page Count:	62
Publication Date:	2025
Sponsoring Agency:	Administration for Children and Families (ACF) (DHHS), Office of Family Assistance (OFA)
Contract Number:	90ZJ00220100
Document Type:	Reports - Research
Education Level:	Adult Education
Descriptors:	Resilience (Psychology), Fathers, Institutionalized Persons, Child Rearing, Parent Education, Interpersonal Relationship, Career Readiness, Financial Education, Recidivism, Adult Programs, Program Effectiveness
Geographic Terms:	New York (New York)
DOI:	10.56417/5107u8400b
Abstract:	Objective: The primary objectives of this evaluation were to understand the implementation and assess the effects of the Pathways to Reentry, Employment, and Parenting (PREPARE) program and the addition of the Social Resilience Model (SRM; PREPARE Plus) on the lives of formerly incarcerated fathers in four areas: 1) parenting; 2) healthy relationships; 3) employment readiness and financial education; and 4) reduced recidivism. Study design: This evaluation used a randomized control trial (RCT) to assess the impact of integrating the SRM in the PREPARE program. Participants were randomly enrolled in either the intervention group, which integrated SRM into the program (PREPARE Plus), or the comparison group (PREPARE). Participants who opted into the study completed three surveys: at the beginning of the program, at the end of the program, and at a three-month follow-up after program end. Study participants also participated in focus groups at the end of the program and an interview three months after the end of the program. The full analytic sample is 203. Results: Results from the impact evaluation analysis showed that, at post-test, PREPARE Plus participants had modest but statistically significantly higher scores than PREPARE participants on parenting self-efficacy, with no other statistically significant differences observed between groups. However, difference-in-differences analyses found no statistically significant differences in change between PREPARE Plus and PREPARE participants. SRM implementation in PREPARE Plus improved after a mid-study refresher by the developer, shifting from limited, inconsistent delivery to confident, consistent use. Participants more often recalled and applied grounding, resourcing, and sensation tracking, with improvements linked to stronger emotional regulation and parenting outcomes. Intent-to-treat and dosage analyses support expanding SRM content. Conclusion: Our study found that participation in the PREPARE program had statistically significant positive outcomes and, further, that the addition of SRM was linked to significantly higher parenting self-efficacy--even relative to participation in PREPARE. Regarding implementation, we found that increased training for staff promoted content retention and practice for participants.
Abstractor:	As Provided
Entry Date:	2026
Accession Number:	ED678777
Database:	ERIC

Description
Abstract:	Objective: The primary objectives of this evaluation were to understand the implementation and assess the effects of the Pathways to Reentry, Employment, and Parenting (PREPARE) program and the addition of the Social Resilience Model (SRM; PREPARE Plus) on the lives of formerly incarcerated fathers in four areas: 1) parenting; 2) healthy relationships; 3) employment readiness and financial education; and 4) reduced recidivism. Study design: This evaluation used a randomized control trial (RCT) to assess the impact of integrating the SRM in the PREPARE program. Participants were randomly enrolled in either the intervention group, which integrated SRM into the program (PREPARE Plus), or the comparison group (PREPARE). Participants who opted into the study completed three surveys: at the beginning of the program, at the end of the program, and at a three-month follow-up after program end. Study participants also participated in focus groups at the end of the program and an interview three months after the end of the program. The full analytic sample is 203. Results: Results from the impact evaluation analysis showed that, at post-test, PREPARE Plus participants had modest but statistically significantly higher scores than PREPARE participants on parenting self-efficacy, with no other statistically significant differences observed between groups. However, difference-in-differences analyses found no statistically significant differences in change between PREPARE Plus and PREPARE participants. SRM implementation in PREPARE Plus improved after a mid-study refresher by the developer, shifting from limited, inconsistent delivery to confident, consistent use. Participants more often recalled and applied grounding, resourcing, and sensation tracking, with improvements linked to stronger emotional regulation and parenting outcomes. Intent-to-treat and dosage analyses support expanding SRM content. Conclusion: Our study found that participation in the PREPARE program had statistically significant positive outcomes and, further, that the addition of SRM was linked to significantly higher parenting self-efficacy--even relative to participation in PREPARE. Regarding implementation, we found that increased training for staff promoted content retention and practice for participants.
DOI:	10.56417/5107u8400b