A Feasibility Study of the My Strengths Training for Life™ (MST4Life™) Program for Young People Experiencing Homelessness

Jennifer Cumming, Fiona J. Clarke, Mark J. G. Holland, Benjamin J. Parry, Mary L. Quinton and Sam J. Cooley
Additional contact information
Jennifer Cumming: School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK
Fiona J. Clarke: School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK
Mark J. G. Holland: Department of Health and Sport, Newman University, Birmingham B32 3NT, UK
Benjamin J. Parry: School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK
Mary L. Quinton: School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK
Sam J. Cooley: School of Psychology, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK

IJERPH, 2022, vol. 19, issue 6, 1-17

Abstract: My Strengths Training for Life™ (MST4Life™) is a positive youth development program for improving wellbeing and social inclusion in young people experiencing homelessness. MST4Life™ addresses a gap in strengths-based programs aimed at promoting healthy and optimal development in vulnerable older adolescents/emerging adults. The program was co-developed with a UK housing service as part of a long-term (>8 years) community–academic partnership. This mixed-methods study describes a key step in developing and evaluating the program: exploring its feasibility and acceptability with 15 homeless young people (Mean age = 19.99 years, SD = 2.42; 60% male, 40% female). Participants experienced 8 weekly sessions within their local community, followed by a 4-day/3-night residential outdoor adventure trip. In addition to their attendance records, the viewpoints of the participants and their support workers were obtained using diary rooms and focus groups. Feasibility was indicated via the themes of attendance, engagement, and reaction. The findings suggested that young people enjoyed and perceived a need for the program, that they considered the program and its evaluation methods to be acceptable, and that both the community-based and outdoor adventure residential phases could be implemented as planned. Minor modifications are needed to recruitment strategies before it is more widely rolled out and evaluated.

Keywords: co-design; community engagement; intervention development; positive youth development; social inequalities; strengths-based (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/6/3320/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/6/3320/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:6:p:3320-:d:769149

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().