Journey of Hope (Primary) is a school-based intervention for children aged 7 to 11 years old who have experienced challenging circumstances, and are at greater risk of social-emotional difficulties. It is delivered by a qualified practitioner (such as social workers, counsellors or psychologists) to groups of eight to 10 schoolchildren for eight weeks.
The information above is as offered/supported by the intervention provider.
7 to 11 years old
Group
Journey of Hope (Primary) is a school-based intervention for children aged 7 to 11 years old, designed to help children normalise emotions related to challenging life circumstances and develop positive coping strategies. Targeted at children who have experienced adversity, it aims to address the increased risk of social-emotional difficulties in this group. Originally developed in the United States for children affected by natural disasters, the intervention has since been adapted to support children facing various forms of adversity.
Delivered over eight sessions of one hour’s duration, it uses role-playing, games, art, and writing activities to help children explore their emotions, manage trauma, and develop problem-solving skills. Each session is organised around a particular theme, and also includes discussions to help give children a greater understanding of negative emotions, managing difficult situations, and learning ways of dealing with problems. Journey of Hope (Primary) is delivered by a mental health practitioner, and a practitioner with experience working with vulnerable children.
7 to 11 years old
Children aged 7 to 11 years old who have experienced challenging circumstances that increase their risk of experiencing socio-emotional difficulties.
Disclaimer: The information in this section is as offered/supported by the intervention provider.
Science-based assumption
Experiences of difficult circumstances and traumatic events increase the risk of social-emotional difficulties, distress and low self-esteem in children. These may impact educational outcomes.
Science-based assumption
Positive coping mechanisms and self-management techniques support children’s resilience, self-esteem, concentration, and behavioural issues.
Science-based assumption
Children who have experienced challenging life circumstances are more at risk of social-emotional and behavioural difficulties.
Intervention
Journey of Hope (Primary) teaches children an understanding of negative emotions, equips them to handle challenging situations, and develops effective problem-solving skills, through discussion, role-playing, games, and art.
Short-term
Children develop an understanding of negative emotions and learn strategies to cope with difficult situations.
Medium-term
Children become more resilient and more aware of their emotions, develop positive coping strategies, and develop positive relationships with peers and trusted adults.
Long-term
Children have increased self-esteem and self-confidence
Children have fewer social-emotional difficulties
Children have improved educational outcomes.
Children aged 7 to 11 years old who have experienced challenging circumstances that increases their risk of experiencing socio-emotional difficulties.
Journey of Hope (Primary) is delivered in eight sessions of one hours’ duration each by a qualified practitioner (such as social workers, counsellors, or psychologists) to groups of eight to 10 schoolchildren.
Each of the eight sessions focuses on a specific theme related to emotions, situations stemming from traumatic experiences, and coping strategies.
Discussions aim to enhance children’s understanding of negative emotions, equip them to handle challenging situations, and develop effective problem-solving skills.
Sessions incorporate role-playing, games, art, and writing activities to help children engage with and explore the themes.
The practitioners who deliver this intervention are one accredited mental health practitioner and one practitioner with substantial experience working with vulnerable children (who does not have to be a mental health professional).
The first practitioner has 16 hours of intervention training. The second practitioner does not require any training if they play a supporting role in the sessions but are required to undergo the same training as the first practitioner if they play a co-facilitating role. Booster training of practitioners is recommended.
It is recommended that practitioners are supervised by one host agency supervisor, with 12 hours of intervention training.
Intervention fidelity is maintained through the following processes:
Contact person: Rebecca Kirkbride
Organisation: Place2B
Email address: Rebecca.kirkbride@place2be.org.uk
Website: www.place2be.org.uk
*Please note that this information may not be up to date. In this case, please visit the listed intervention website for up to date contact details.
Journey of Hope (Primary)’s most rigorous evidence comes from a QED which was conducted in the United States.
This study identified statistically significant improvements in prosocial behaviour.
Journey of Hope (Primary) has preliminary evidence of improving a child outcome, but we cannot be confident that the intervention caused the improvement.
| Identified in search | 6 |
| Studies reviewed | 1 |
| Meeting the L2 threshold | 1 |
| Meeting the L3 threshold | 0 |
| Contributing to the L4 threshold | 0 |
| Ineligible | 5 |
| Study design | QED |
| Country | United States |
| Sample characteristics | 134 children aged 8 to 12 years old who have experienced a traumatic event |
| Race, ethnicities, and nationalities |
|
| Population risk factors | None reported |
| Timing |
|
| Child outcomes | Improved prosocial behaviour (teacher report) |
| Other outcomes | None |
| Study rating | 2 |
| Citations | Powell, T. & Thompson, S. J. (2014) Enhancing coping and supporting protective factors after a disaster: Findings from a quasi-experimental study. Research on Social Work Practice. 26 (5), 539–549. |
The following studies were identified for this intervention but did not count towards the intervention’s overall evidence rating. An intervention receives the same rating as its most robust study or studies.
Blanchet-Cohen, N. & Nelems, R. (2009) Journey of Hope (JoH) curriculum: Building children’s and communities’ resilience.
Powell, T. (2011) The Journey of Hope curricula: Building resilience after a natural disaster (Evaluation of Save the Children’s Journey of Hope programme in Christchurch, NZ). This reference refers to a pre-post study, conducted in New Zealand.
Powell, T. & Blanchet-Cohen, N. (2014) The Journey of Hope: A group work intervention for children who have experienced a collective trauma. Social Work with Groups. 37 (4), 297–313.
Powell, T. & Leytham, S. (2014) Building resilience after a natural disaster: An evaluation of a parental psycho-educational curriculum. Australian Social Work. 67 (2), 285–296. This reference refers to a pre-post study, conducted in New Zealand.
Save the Children. (2015) Journey of Hope: Evaluation 2015.
Note on provider involvement: This provider has agreed to Foundations’ terms of reference (or the Early Intervention Foundation's terms of reference), and the assessment has been conducted and published with the full cooperation of the intervention provider.
Rated 1: Set up and delivery is low cost, equivalent to an estimated unit cost of less than £100.
Rated 2: Set up and delivery is medium-low cost, equivalent to an estimated unit cost of £100–£499.
Rated 3: Set up and delivery is medium cost, equivalent to an estimated unit cost of £500–£999.
Rated 4: Set up and delivery is medium-high cost, equivalent to an estimated unit cost of £1,000–£2,000.
Rating 5: Set up and delivery is high cost. Equivalent to an estimated unit cost of more than £2,000.
Set up and delivery cost is not applicable, not available, or has not been calculated.
Click here for more information.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus.
Supporting children’s mental health and wellbeing: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.
Preventing child maltreatment: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.
Enhancing school achievement & employment: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.
Preventing crime, violence and antisocial behaviour: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.
Preventing substance abuse: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.
Preventing risky sexual behaviour & teen pregnancy: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.
Preventing obesity and promoting healthy physical development: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient.
Rated 2: Has preliminary evidence of improving a child outcome from a quantitative impact study, but there is not yet evidence of causal impact.
Rated 2+: Meets the level 2 rating and the best available evidence is based on a study which is more rigorous than a level 2 standard but does not meet the level 3 standard.
Rated 3: Has evidence of a short-term positive impact from at least one rigorous study.
Rated 3+: Meets the level 3 rating and has evidence from other studies with a comparison group at level 2 or higher.
Rated 4: Has evidence of a long-term positive impact through at least two rigorous studies.
Rated 4+: Meets the level 4 rating and has at least a third study contributing to the Level 4 rating, with at least one of the studies conducted independently of the intervention provider.
Rating has a *: The evidence base includes mixed findings i.e., studies suggesting positive impact alongside studies, which on balance, indicate no effect or negative impact.
Click here for more information.
