全球智库信息集成服务系统

Key Findings:

• Positive and statistically significant changes occurred in the areas of (1) building awareness of ACEs, (2) family support, (3) risk behavior reduction and healthy youth development, (4) school climate and student success, and (5) community development.
• Development of community capacity varied. It was highest in the areas of (1) cross-sector partnerships, (2) evidence-based problem solving, (3) shared goals, (4) effective communication with partners, and (5) focusing on equity. The networks had moderate capacity in (1) developing sustainable infrastructure; (2) engaging and mobilizing residents; (3) implementing trauma-informed programs, policies, and practices; and (4) increasing capacity to use data. All networks struggled to achieve communitywide change.  
• Communities had multiple models of success. There may not exist one “best” community capacity building model. The networks that were more successful in addressing ACEs and building resilience aligned three factors: (1) collective community capacity, (2) community network structure, and (3) effective community change strategies.  
• All networks face sustainability challenges. All networks had to independently find resources and support coalition infrastructure needed to sustain their work. Their staffs and budgets are small, and their grant-based funding is time-limited. The sustainability of these efforts depends on their ability to secure resources and implement a successful coalition leadership succession plan.