In 2020, MARC surveyed hundreds of ACEs, trauma, and resilience (ATR) networks across the country to learn more about their characteristics, goals, and technical assistance needs.
Our findings spotlight the power and potential of ATR networks and opportunities to better support the broader movement for creating healthy, equitable, and resilient communities.
THEY ARE CROSS-SECTOR: 62% report having members from all five of the major sector categories included in the survey (education/youth, health, social services, public policy, and justice/military).
THEY ARE STRATEGIC: 95% provide training and education, 68% coordinate cross-sector system change efforts, and 34% coordinate legislative policy advocacy efforts.
THEY ARE DATA-DRIVEN: 74% report using data for learning and improvement, 58% for strategic planning, and 51% for monitoring population level ACEs and trauma trends.
In the coming months, we will host virtual opportunities to unpack survey findings and identify opportunities for network leaders, technical assistance providers, and funders. In the meantime, please share your comments and questions regarding the survey using this formand help up share the findings by sending this postcard to your networks or retweeting this post.
The Health Federation of Philadelphia (HFP) collaborated with NORC at the University of Chicago to coordinate the MARC ATR Network Survey. We wish to thank all who participated in or contributed to the survey.
Network Evaluation Resources
Looking for more information about the power of ATR networks and the changes they can bring about in their communities? Check out the MARC 1.0 cross-site evaluation findings from Westat.
In an effort to maximize learning from the MARC 1.0 Initiative evaluation reports, HFP and Westat convened a work group of thought partners with network experience to select key findings for deeper exploration. The third and final brief in the resulting series is now available.
BRIEF 3—Context Matters: How ACEs, Trauma, and Resilience Networks Incorporate Local Realities to Promote Resilience
The various settings in which the MARC 1.0 networks were situated provided both challenges and assets. This brief highlights how the networks incorporated local realities to promote resilience by leveraging their strengths and capacities to navigate three types of contextual factors: natural disasters, geography, and cultural identity.
Our colleagues at Prevention Instituteand their partners at the Center for Law and Social Policyhave developed new resources to support suicide prevention during catastrophic events like the COVID-19 pandemic, hurricanes, storms, or other disasters.
Their toolkit includes online-learning modules; suicide-prevention planninginterviewswith agency leaders in Colorado and Santa Clara County, CA; a new social media video aboutBuilding Healing Communities; and anactivity booklet. Also included in their alert is a link to a new social media video on how communities can improve social connection. Please check the resources out and forward them to anyone you think may be interested. If you have any questions, please connect with Prevention Institute's Ruben Cantu(ruben@preventioninstitute.org).
Funding for MARC comes from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Views expressed here are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the Foundation.
