Wyman’s Teen Connection Project
A school- and community-based program to enhance adolescent peer relationships and improve social-emotional and well-being outcomes.
Program Outcomes
- Close Relationships with Peers
- Depression
Program Type
- After School
- Community - Other Approaches
- School - Environmental Strategies
- Social Emotional Learning
Program Setting
- School
- Community
Continuum of Intervention
- Universal Prevention
Age
- Late Adolescence (15-18) - High School
Gender
- Both
Race/Ethnicity
- All
Endorsements
Blueprints: Promising
Program Information Contact
Tori Gale
Director, Partner Development
Wyman Center
600 Kiwanis Drive
Eureka, MO 63025
Email: Tori.Gale@wymancenter.org
Website 1: www.wymancenter.org
Website 2: https://wymancenter.org/national-network/tcp/
Program Developer/Owner
Original Developer: Joseph Allen, Ph.D.
Current Owner/Purveyor: Wyman Center
Brief Description of the Program
The 12-week program, delivered in school- and community-based settings, is an experience-based group intervention designed to positively change social connections among high school age youth. Wyman's Teen Connection Project uses a social-emotional learning approach and is designed to gradually change youths' ongoing peer relationships as sources of social support. As a result of improving peer relationships, adolescents benefit from broader changes in academic engagement and enhanced psychosocial functioning.
The 12-week program, delivered in school- and community-based settings, is an experience-based group intervention designed to positively change social connections among high school age youth. Wyman's Teen Connection Project uses a social-emotional learning approach and is designed to gradually change youths' ongoing peer relationships as sources of social support. As a result of improving peer relationships, adolescents benefit from broader changes in academic engagement and enhanced psychosocial functioning.
Wyman's Teen Connection Project consists of 12 TCP Curriculum lessons facilitated in 45- to 60-min group sessions held once per week. Youth meet in groups of 5 to 15 participants led by two trained adult facilitators. Facilitators both guide discussions and provide a safe source of support while also themselves modeling appropriate levels of self-disclosure for youth in discussions. The sessions are organized into three phases: establishing buy-in and a safe peer context, developing/enhancing a sense of social belonging, and consolidating relationships. Each phase uses elements of approaches independently shown to enhance outcomes for youth. The approach starts the process of building a sense of group trust and commonality as students see other students stating that they value connection. Next, activities are designed to gradually enhance youths' sense of social belonging. The final sessions aim to consolidate developing relationships by employing principles from narrative theory to gradually develop a coherent understanding of life experiences to enhance functioning. The intervention concludes with a strengths approach, which is aimed to further solidify the relationships formed and leave students with the secure base of a positive self-narrative to establish and maintain connections with their peers.
Outcomes
Primary Evidence Base for Certification
Study 1
Allen et al. (2020) found that, relative to control students, the intervention students reported significantly:
- Higher comfort with peers (at posttest and 4-month follow-up)
- Higher peer-rated approachability (at 4-month follow-up)
- Fewer depressive symptoms (at 4-month follow-up)
- Higher academic engagement (at 4-month follow-up), and
- Higher use of social supports (at 4-month follow-up).
Brief Evaluation Methodology
Primary Evidence Base for Certification
The one study Blueprints has reviewed (Study 1) meets Blueprints evidentiary standards (specificity, evaluation quality, impact, dissemination readiness). The study was done by the developer.
Study 1
Allen et al. (2020) used a randomized controlled trial to assess the impact of the 12-session program on a sample of 610 high school students from four high schools. Students were randomized to an intervention group (n = 322) or to a health class as usual control group (n = 288). Students were assessed on peer relationships, depressive symptoms, academic engagement, and use of social supports at pretest, posttest, and 4-month follow-up.
Study 1
Allen, J. P., Narr, R. K., Nagel, A. G., Costello, M. A., & Guskin, K. (2020). The Connection Project: Changing the peer environment to improve outcomes for marginalized adolescents. Development and Psychopathology, 1-11. doi:10.1017/S0954579419001731
Protective Factors
Individual: Coping Skills, Problem solving skills, Skills for social interaction
Peer: Interaction with prosocial peers
*
Risk/Protective Factor was significantly impacted by the program
Subgroup Analysis Details
Subgroup differences in program effects by race, ethnicity, or gender (coded in binary terms as male/female) or program effects for a sample of a specific racial, ethnic, or gender group:
Study 1 (Allen et al., 2020) tested for subgroup effects by race and ethnicity and found equal benefits across groups In addition, the study tested for subgroup effects with subsample analyses by gender and found no significant benefits for either males and females.
Sample demographics including race, ethnicity, and gender for Blueprints-certified studies:
The Study 1 sample of high school students (Allen et al., 2020) was 51% female, 59% African American, 17% White, 9% Hispanic/Latino, less than 1% Asian American, 10% multiethnic, and 3% other.
The Training of Facilitators (TOF), described below, is conducted by an agency's own staff who have participated in a Training of Trainers (TOT) and received a Trainer's Certificate.
Training Certification Process
Organizations that are trained and implementing Wyman's Teen Connection Project (TCP) become part of Wyman's National Network, which includes partners across the country implementing Wyman programs.
Training is offered through a 5-day Training of Trainers model, in which staff from partner organizations are trained to implement the program and to lead the Training of Facilitators with their own agency staff. For large partners, onsite training may be available. Training is experiential and grounded in tenets of adult learning theory.
During the first 2.5 days of the TOT, participants complete the Training of Facilitators portion during which trainers model TCP lessons and teach participants to implement the program with fidelity and high quality. The TOF is guided by the written TCP Training and Facilitation Guide provided to all participants. The overall aims of the TOF include ensuring participants gain:
- An understanding of how to implement TCP with high quality facilitation
- Familiarity with the TCP logic model
- An understanding of TCP fidelity criteria and how they are measured
- Practiced delivery of the TOF with peers and feedback on training techniques and areas where further skill development may need to be supported
The final 2.5 days of the full 5-day training focuses on how to lead a TOF and how to coordinate/oversee program implementation. This portion of the training is supported by written materials including a Coordinator Planning Tool, Fidelity Criteria, TOT lesson plans and information about leading a TOF. In addition to the aims of the TOF, the second half of training is geared toward supporting participants to understand how to use Wyman Connect, Wyman's proprietary online data system, to monitor fidelity and support continuous quality improvement and to understand the role and responsibilities of a TCP Coordinator.
Throughout the training, trainers build relationships among participants in a way that mirrors the work they will do with youth. In addition, trainers continually model diversity and inclusion strategies.
To receive a TCP Trainer's Certificate, participants must successfully complete all components of the TOT. TCP Trainers must receive certification from Wyman, the national replicators and owners of TCP. No other entities are authorized to provide the TCP TOT. The decision to certify a participant as a TCP Trainer is at the sole discretion of the Wyman Training of Trainers Instructors.
Source: Washington State Institute for Public Policy
All benefit-cost ratios are the most recent estimates published by The Washington State Institute for Public Policy for Blueprint programs implemented in Washington State. These ratios are based on a) meta-analysis estimates of effect size and b) monetized benefits and calculated costs for programs as delivered in the State of Washington. Caution is recommended in applying these estimates of the benefit-cost ratio to any other state or local area. They are provided as an illustration of the benefit-cost ratio found in one specific state. When feasible, local costs and monetized benefits should be used to calculate expected local benefit-cost ratios. The formula for this calculation can be found on the WSIPP website.
Start-Up Costs
Initial Training and Technical Assistance
Year 1 costs: Inclusive of 1st year license, 5 curriculum sets, 1 Training of Trainers (TOT), 2 Training of Facilitators (TOF), program implementation guidance and monitoring, access to online data collection and reporting system = $17,500 for up to 500 teens. Costs increase by $1,000 for every 250 teens served beyond 500.
Curriculum and Materials
Five curricula are included in Year 1 costs. Additional curricula are available only to Certified Replication Partners and their provider organizations. Individual sets are $500 plus shipping costs (10% of total if under $1,000; 5% of total if over $1,000).
Licensing
Licensing is included in Year 1 costs.
Other Start-Up Costs
It is recommended that organizations give at least 4-6 weeks of program planning/start-up time to account for training to be completed and program recruitment (if applicable).
Space is usually donated by schools or other interested organizations. If not donated, costs for space will vary.
Intervention Implementation Costs
Ongoing Curriculum and Materials
Year 2 and beyond: Additional curricula beyond 5 sets included in Year 1 costs are $500 plus shipping (10% of total if under $1,000; 5% of total if over $1,000).
Program materials and art supplies are estimated at $500 per TCP group. Potential costs for snacks/drinks and teambuilding supplies should also be considered.
Staffing
In addition to salary costs of facilitators and program managers, we recommend organizations plan for 20% of salary for benefits and at minimum a 3% salary increase for staff from year-to-year. An evaluation or data specialist is not required; however, some organizations include this role when staffing their program.
Other Implementation Costs
Transportation may need to be provided depending on program setting. Costs will vary.
Implementation Support and Fidelity Monitoring Costs
Ongoing Training and Technical Assistance
Ongoing training after initial training is not required; however, it is recommended that organizations plan for professional development of staff to ensure quality of programming is continually increasing. Costs for additional training provided by Wyman include:
- Facilitators Institute: $600 per participant + travel
- Coordinator's Learning Exchange: $0 + travel
- Replacement trainer: $6,500 per participant + travel
- Training of Facilitators (by Wyman): $1,200 + travel
- Other Supplemental Training (by Wyman): $150 per person for half day or $300 per person full day.
Access to webinars, check-in calls, and email inquiries are included in the annual license fee for program monitoring.
Specialized technical assistance is available and generally starts at $175/hr but varies based on project needs.
Fidelity Monitoring and Evaluation
The cost for fidelity monitoring and evaluation is included in Year 1 and annual renewal fees.
Ongoing License Fees
Year 2 and beyond: Licensing, fidelity monitoring and evaluation is $5,500 per year for up to 500 teens. Costs increase $1,000 for every 250 teens served beyond 500.
Other Implementation Support and Fidelity Monitoring Costs
No information is available
Other Cost Considerations
N/A
Year One Cost Example
In this example, a school or other youth-serving agency delivers Wyman's Teen Connection Project to 500 teens (50 groups of 10 youth each) during Year 1. Costs below include those paid to the purveyor and materials costs for each group. Salaries for program managers and facilitators are not included; these will vary by location and may potentially be included as part of their regular responsibilities.
| Package: Training, Curriculum, and Implementation Guidance | $17,500.00 |
| Program materials and art supplies - $500 X 50 groups | $25,000.00 |
| Total One Year Cost | $42,500.00 |
With 500 youth participants, the Year 1 per youth cost is $85.
Funding Overview
Wyman's Teen Connection Project is a youth development program with evidence that it promotes youth mental health and positive peer connections through social-emotional learning. Funding streams that support youth development, adolescent mental health, social-emotional competencies, and in-school and after-school programs may be used to support the program.
Allocating State or Local General Funds
Youth Mental Health Grants have been highly successful for financing adoption of the Teen Connection Project (TCP). This includes school-based grants, grants made through the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act and grants made through American Rescue Plan.
Maximizing Federal Funds
SAMSHA and HHS grants focused on mental health and/or adolescent mental health may be ideal funding mechanisms to explore.
The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) contains specific language that allows school districts to utilize Student Support and Academic Enrichment Grants (Title IV, Part A) for programs and activities that support student access to a well-rounded education. The purpose of a well-rounded education is to provide an enriched curriculum and education experiences to all students. Programs and activities carried out under Title IV, Part A must be coordinated with other school- and community-based services and may be conducted in partnership with institutions of higher education and other entities. Research shows social-emotional learning on a large scale supports better performing and more positive school communities.
Foundation Grants and Public-Private Partnerships
Foundations and Public-Private Partnerships that put high priority on supporting young people in developing social emotional competencies and learning to build connections with others and preparing young people for strong futures would be ideal financers of TCP.
Generating New Revenue
Wyman welcomes collaboration and cost-sharing amongst schools and other youth serving organizations to maximize use of program license and minimize the financial impact of program adoption in a community.
Data Sources
All information comes from the responses to a questionnaire submitted by the purveyor, The Wyman Center, to Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development.
Program Developer/Owner
Original Developer: Joseph Allen, Ph.D.Current Owner/Purveyor: Wyman CenterUniversity of VirginiaBox 400400Chalottesville, VA 22904-4400434-982-4727allen@virginia.eduallen.uva@gmail.com
Program Outcomes
- Close Relationships with Peers
- Depression
Program Specifics
Program Type
- After School
- Community - Other Approaches
- School - Environmental Strategies
- Social Emotional Learning
Program Setting
- School
- Community
Continuum of Intervention
- Universal Prevention
Program Goals
A school- and community-based program to enhance adolescent peer relationships and improve social-emotional and well-being outcomes.
Target Population
Age
- Late Adolescence (15-18) - High School
Gender
- Both
Race/Ethnicity
- All
Subgroup Analysis Details
Subgroup differences in program effects by race, ethnicity, or gender (coded in binary terms as male/female) or program effects for a sample of a specific racial, ethnic, or gender group:
Study 1 (Allen et al., 2020) tested for subgroup effects by race and ethnicity and found equal benefits across groups In addition, the study tested for subgroup effects with subsample analyses by gender and found no significant benefits for either males and females.
Sample demographics including race, ethnicity, and gender for Blueprints-certified studies:
The Study 1 sample of high school students (Allen et al., 2020) was 51% female, 59% African American, 17% White, 9% Hispanic/Latino, less than 1% Asian American, 10% multiethnic, and 3% other.
Risk/Protective Factor Domain
- Individual
- Peer
Risk/Protective Factors
Risk Factors
Protective Factors
Individual: Coping Skills, Problem solving skills, Skills for social interaction
Peer: Interaction with prosocial peers
*Risk/Protective Factor was significantly impacted by the program
See also: Wyman's Teen Connection Project Logic Model (PDF)
Brief Description of the Program
The 12-week program, delivered in school- and community-based settings, is an experience-based group intervention designed to positively change social connections among high school age youth. Wyman's Teen Connection Project uses a social-emotional learning approach and is designed to gradually change youths' ongoing peer relationships as sources of social support. As a result of improving peer relationships, adolescents benefit from broader changes in academic engagement and enhanced psychosocial functioning.
Description of the Program
The 12-week program, delivered in school- and community-based settings, is an experience-based group intervention designed to positively change social connections among high school age youth. Wyman's Teen Connection Project uses a social-emotional learning approach and is designed to gradually change youths' ongoing peer relationships as sources of social support. As a result of improving peer relationships, adolescents benefit from broader changes in academic engagement and enhanced psychosocial functioning.
Wyman's Teen Connection Project consists of 12 TCP Curriculum lessons facilitated in 45- to 60-min group sessions held once per week. Youth meet in groups of 5 to 15 participants led by two trained adult facilitators. Facilitators both guide discussions and provide a safe source of support while also themselves modeling appropriate levels of self-disclosure for youth in discussions. The sessions are organized into three phases: establishing buy-in and a safe peer context, developing/enhancing a sense of social belonging, and consolidating relationships. Each phase uses elements of approaches independently shown to enhance outcomes for youth. The approach starts the process of building a sense of group trust and commonality as students see other students stating that they value connection. Next, activities are designed to gradually enhance youths' sense of social belonging. The final sessions aim to consolidate developing relationships by employing principles from narrative theory to gradually develop a coherent understanding of life experiences to enhance functioning. The intervention concludes with a strengths approach, which is aimed to further solidify the relationships formed and leave students with the secure base of a positive self-narrative to establish and maintain connections with their peers.
Theoretical Rationale
The program uses a social-emotional learning approach to change adolescents' peer relationships in schools, which, in turn is hypothesized to improve academic and psychosocial functioning.
Theoretical Orientation
- Social Learning
Brief Evaluation Methodology
Primary Evidence Base for Certification
The one study Blueprints has reviewed (Study 1) meets Blueprints evidentiary standards (specificity, evaluation quality, impact, dissemination readiness). The study was done by the developer.
Study 1
Allen et al. (2020) used a randomized controlled trial to assess the impact of the 12-session program on a sample of 610 high school students from four high schools. Students were randomized to an intervention group (n = 322) or to a health class as usual control group (n = 288). Students were assessed on peer relationships, depressive symptoms, academic engagement, and use of social supports at pretest, posttest, and 4-month follow-up.
Outcomes (Brief, over all studies)
Primary Evidence Base for Certification
Study 1
Allen et al. (2020) found that adolescents in the treatment group, compared to the control group, had higher comfort with their peers at posttest and the 4-month follow-up, and had higher peer-rated approachability and academic engagement, fewer depressive symptoms, and were more likely to use social supports to cope with stress at the 4-month follow-up.
Outcomes
Primary Evidence Base for Certification
Study 1
Allen et al. (2020) found that, relative to control students, the intervention students reported significantly:
- Higher comfort with peers (at posttest and 4-month follow-up)
- Higher peer-rated approachability (at 4-month follow-up)
- Fewer depressive symptoms (at 4-month follow-up)
- Higher academic engagement (at 4-month follow-up), and
- Higher use of social supports (at 4-month follow-up).
Mediating Effects
Study 1 (Allen et al., 2020) tested whether adolescents' use of social supports to cope with stress mediated the relationship between program participation and academic engagement and depressive symptoms at the 4-month follow-up. Results revealed no significant mediation via use of social supports at posttest, but the use of social supports at the 4-month follow-up significantly mediated the intervention effect on both academic engagement and depressive symptoms.
Effect Size
Study 1 (Allen et al., 2020) found that effect sizes were in the small-medium range for peer-rated approachability, depressive symptoms, and academic engagement (B range = .07-.09), and a medium-large effect for comfort with peers, averaged across intervention and control groups (B = .27).
Generalizability
One study meets Blueprints standards for high-quality methods with strong evidence of program impact (i.e., "certified" by Blueprints): Study 1 (Allen et al., 2020). The sample for the study included high school students. The study took place in a midwestern state and compared the treatment group to a business-as-usual control group.
Endorsements
Blueprints: Promising
Program Information Contact
Tori Gale
Director, Partner Development
Wyman Center
600 Kiwanis Drive
Eureka, MO 63025
Email: Tori.Gale@wymancenter.org
Website 1: www.wymancenter.org
Website 2: https://wymancenter.org/national-network/tcp/
References
Study 1
Certified
Allen, J. P., Narr, R. K., Nagel, A. G., Costello, M. A., & Guskin, K. (2020). The Connection Project: Changing the peer environment to improve outcomes for marginalized adolescents. Development and Psychopathology, 1-11. doi:10.1017/S0954579419001731
Study 1
Summary
Allen et al. (2020) used a randomized controlled trial to assess the impact of the 12-session program on a sample of 610 high school students from four high schools. Students were randomized to an intervention group (n = 322) or to a health class as usual control group (n = 288). Students were assessed on peer relationships, depressive symptoms, academic engagement, and use of social supports at pretest, posttest, and 4-month follow-up.
Allen et al. (2020) found that, relative to control students, the intervention students reported significantly:
- Higher comfort with peers (at posttest and 4-month follow-up)
- Higher peer-rated approachability (at 4-month follow-up)
- Fewer depressive symptoms (at 4-month follow-up)
- Higher academic engagement (at 4-month follow-up), and
- Higher use of social supports (at 4-month follow-up).
Study 1
Evaluation Methodology
Design:
Recruitment: Schools in four districts in the greater metropolitan area of a midwestern state were recruited for this study. Within schools, students were recruited through in-class presentations with written descriptions of the program and its evaluation sent home to parents.
Assignment: The study randomized 610 high school students to an intervention group (n = 322) or to a health class as usual control group (n = 288). Randomization took place using a random number generator, with randomization blocked by student gender and grade level. In a few cases where only small numbers of students from a given health class signed up for the study, more students were randomly assigned to the intervention group than the control group (to keep minimum group size of five students). Intervention students met once a week during the Fall or Spring semester as a pullout from their regular health class, and control students attended their health class as usual during these sessions.
Assessments/Attrition: Assessments occurred at baseline, after the 12-week intervention (immediate posttest), and at a 4-month follow-up. Total student attrition was 15.1% at posttest and 23.8% at follow-up.
Sample:
The total sample of high school students was 51% female, 59% African American, 17% White, 9% Hispanic/Latino, less than 1% Asian American, 10% multiethnic, and 3% other. The average grade of the students was about 10.5 (SD=.80).
Measures:
The study examined three student self-reported behavioral outcome measures and two risk and protective factors.
Comfort with classmates was rated separately for treatment group and control group students, on a scale ranging from 1 "I always keep my guard up" to 5 "I'm always open" for students they said they knew. Using the same 1-5 rating scale, the mean of all ratings of a student given by the student's peers was created to produce a sociometric score for that student's peer-rated approachability.
Depressive symptoms were measured with the 27-item Child Depression Inventory (alphas ranged from .82 to .84).
Classroom academic engagement was assessed with a 10-item scale measuring student effort, attention, and persistence while initiating and participating in learning activities (alphas ranged from .69 to .77).
Lastly, students reported on their coping via social supports in their environment using the 8-item social support scale from the Self-Report Coping Scale (alphas ranged from .86 to .89).
Analysis:
The analyses used hierarchical linear models to examine intervention effects at posttest and 4-month follow-up time points, with students at level 1 and study condition and classroom group at level 2. Baseline outcomes and sociodemographic factors were included as covariates in level 1 models. With the variables standardized, model coefficients showed effect sizes.
Intent-to-Treat: On page 5, the authors stated, "analyses were run using all available data using an intent-to-treat approach." However, analysis Ns were not presented, and there was no mention of the sources of missing data or how missing data were handled.
Outcomes
Implementation Fidelity:
The median and modal number of sessions attended by participants was 11 out of 12 sessions (Mean sessions=9.8, SD sessions=2.7). No other fidelity data were provided.
Baseline Equivalence:
Of 11 tests for baseline equivalence between treatment and control groups, there were no significant differences for either sociodemographics or baseline outcomes.
Differential Attrition:
Attrition rates were similar across conditions at both the posttest and 4-month follow-up. However, comparison of baseline measures for completers and dropouts found that males and those knowing few students in their classroom were more likely to drop out. Otherwise, the authors stated that there were no differences for any baseline measures. No other tests were reported. In response to a Blueprints request, the lead author provided additional models testing the interaction of each baseline measure with condition predicting attrition. In 11 tests, only one interaction reached significance (p =.043); thus, likely, there was no attrition bias by condition.
Posttest:
At the posttest assessment, students in the intervention group compared to the control group showed positive effects on one of three behavioral outcomes: intervention students displayed higher levels of comfort with classmates. However, at the 4-month follow-up assessment, there were significant positive intervention effects on all three behavioral outcomes. Specifically, compared to control group students, intervention students 1) displayed higher levels of comfort with their classmates in both conditions, 2) were rated as significantly more approachable by students in control group, and 3) had lower levels of depressive symptoms.
Effects sizes were in the small-medium range for peer rated approachability and depressive symptoms, (B range = .07-.09), and the authors reported a medium-large effect for comfort with students, averaged across intervention and control groups (B = .27).
Risk and protective factors. The study found no intervention effects at posttest for coping approaches or academic engagement. However, at the 4-month follow-up, intervention students' use of social coping strategies and academic engagement was significantly greater than control group students.
Mediation and moderation analyses. For mediation, the authors found that the use of social supports at 4 months (but not at posttest) significantly mediated the intervention effects on both academic engagement and depressive symptoms at the 4-month follow-up. For moderation, the authors found one significant interaction between gender × intervention condition on depressive symptoms at posttest, but separate analysis revealed no significant effects for males or females.
Long-Term: Not examined.