Effectiveness of resilience-promotion interventions

KEYWORDS:

• Adversity
• college students
• curricula
• professionals
• resilience
• trauma

  In 2023, more than 70% of U.S. college students surveyed reported psychological distress (American College Health Association [ACHA], Citation2023). Less than half felt that their college prioritized well-being (ACHA, Citation2023) despite the fact that a majority of students will have experienced at least one adverse or traumatic event (e.g., psychological/physical/sexual abuse; community/school violence, etc.) before college (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], Citation2023; Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration [SAMHSA], Citation2023a). Similarly to students, more than 70% of American workers surveyed between 2020–2023, reported feeling work-related stress and at least one symptom of a mental health condition (e.g., anxiety, depression; American Psychological Association [APA], Citation2023; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Citation2022). Increasingly, an overwhelming majority of American workers reported that it is important to them that their organization values psychological well-being and provides support for employee mental health (APA, Citation2023). As a result, the U.S. Surgeon General has emphasized workplace wellbeing as a pressing public health issue and current priority (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Citation2022).

  Despite the fact that students and adult workers are capable of developing appropriate coping mechanisms if given resources and support (Greer, Citation2023; Schroeder et al., Citation2023; Straup et al., Citation2022; von Keyserlingk et al., Citation2022), there are limited organizations implementing data-driven opportunities to increase resilience, which is a “dynamic process encompassing positive adaptation within the context of significant adversity” (Luthar et al., Citation2000, p. 543). Although not all adversity causes long-term psychological distress, the experience of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and/or experiencing additional traumatic events in adulthood (Fereidooni et al., Citation2024), increases health and learning problems, and can negatively affect decision-making (CDC, Citation2023; SAMHSA, Citation2023a). Other negative events – such as witnessing community violence and experiencing multiple types of victimization in adulthood – can also result in psychological distress. Thus, a team of researchers at Florida State University aimed to meet the needs and demands for mental wellness programs, by developing a trauma-informed, easy to use and cost-efficient curriculum aimed at developing resilience.

  Researchers began with a new curriculum aimed to help college students. Then, these efforts were expanded with training for higher education professionals, and, later, for adult workers in organizations that sought to bring new non-clinical knowledge and skills about fostering resilient responses to adversity to their employees.

  Effectiveness of resilience-promotion interventions

  To develop the curricula for each group, it was imperative to have a strong conceptualization of resilience, as it is often described inconsistently across contexts (Bryan et al., Citation2019) and left without a universal definition (Aburn et al., Citation2016). However, all three versions of the curriculum focused on adaptive outcomes following adversity, based on Luthar et al. (Citation2000) notion that resilience can stem from factors beyond personal qualities. Thus, researchers ascribed to the notion that individuals can adapt to adversity by developing multiple adaptive skills that they can employ when facing stressful or traumatic events. These are described in the resilience literature, as follows: optimism (e.g., being hopeful for the future) active coping skills (e.g., seeking out resources), supportive social network (e.g., engaging in positive communities), physical wellbeing (e.g. exercising), mindfulness/spirituality (e.g., having meaning and purpose in life, and cognitive flexibility (e.g., reframing negative experiences; Wu et al., Citation2013). As these adaptive skills can be taught, all versions of the curricula include a wide range of lessons and activities to help individuals learn how to develop them. Researchers have also noted that many individual and microsystem factors can influence individuals’ ability to respond to adversity, including positive family functioning, the developmental environment, personality traits, and active coping mechanisms (Bonanno et al., Citation2015; Wu et al., Citation2013). For this reason, all curricula also include a discussion of those factors; for example, participants are reminded that having healthy relationships with other people increases their ability to respond adaptively to adverse experiences.

  Development and implementation of individual curricula for college students

  The team from FSU crafted its first resilience curriculum for college students in 2018. They worked with students, faculty and staff to develop a free interactive program called the Student Resilience Project (SRP). A positive, strength-based approach (Hamby et al., Citation2018) was intentionally chosen. Similarly, an asynchronous, self-guided, online format was selected, because teens and young adults frequently turn to the internet for mental health resources and information (Rideout & Fox, Citation2018).

  Researchers found that students needed to build stronger coping mechanisms, develop a greater awareness of wellness resources freely available on campus, and better understand their peers’ experiences with health issues; all of which could be easily accessed online. The team also used a university-wide student health survey of student behavior and attitudes toward health topics (Florida State University Healthy Campus, Citation2017). That survey identified three top impediments to academic success: namely, stress, anxiety, and sleep. That survey was augmented by student interviews across campus to identify what students believed they needed help with in order to respond adaptively to stressful events. Once student needs were researched and identified, the project tools were finalized, and the program was developed and tested. The project was then launched and made mandatory for first-year students to complete.

  Description of the student-based curricula

  The student curriculum includes trauma-informed activities. These activities acknowledge that many people may have experienced adverse events that have led to psychological distress, including symptoms of posttraumatic stress. They complement campus mental health services, as well as multimedia content on resilience, overcoming adversity and skill-building (Oehme et al., Citation2019). More than 28,000 students have accessed the curriculum, which has since been implemented by four other postsecondary U.S. institutions. The aspirational goals of the curriculum’s learning environment and content reflect the “Six Guiding Principles to a Trauma-Informed Approach” (CDC, Citation2018). These principles include psychological and physical safety, trustworthiness and transparency, peer support, collaboration, empowerment, and cultural, historic and gender issues (CDC, Citation2018).

  To access the curriculum, which remains available, students log into the website, using student credentials. They begin with a brief introductory video, and they identify their values and university values that can help them overcome challenges. They also review two brief videos describing how adverse events can lead to psychological distress and how some individuals are able to respond adaptively to such events, that is respond in a resilient manner. Because the curriculum is strength based, students are prompted to identify their own strengths from a list. Then, in the first major section of the curriculum, they can select from various peer videos that describe how these students overcame common challenges and built resilience skills to assist them in managing these challenges. Some sample topics include everyday stressors, culture shock, burnout, and breakups. The students featured in the videos are varied in terms of race, gender, sexuality and year in school. Research indicates that this type of first-person peer perspective is particularly effective in drawing similarities for individuals (i.e., identification), particularly in a health context (Chen & Bell, Citation2022). Moreover, restorative narratives (Tenore, Citation2015), which focus on strengths, allow negative information to be shared without overwhelming the listener that, in turn, increases prosocial behaviors (Fitzgerald et al., Citation2020).

  The next two sections focus on expert advice and skill building. Students must listen to short audio files of at least two (out of thirteen) experts in their field. Each expert discusses a “big issue” such as: building frustration tolerance, quieting intrusive thoughts, and finding support for students of color. Expert photos are presented as colorful pop-art style caricatures, which students shared a preference for during interviews about program graphics. Then, students are asked to select at least one new skill to develop from a list of five: spectacular failure (paths to success), relaxation skills, writing to relax, mindfulness, and yoga. Depending on the skill selected, students can review videos, text and audio to cultivate that skill.

  In the final few sections, students are encouraged to explore potential stressful events and develop the building blocks for healthy psychological wellbeing. Multimedia material guide them to reflect on the impact of potentially stressful large-scale disruption caused by pandemic, natural disasters, and more. They are also invited to learn about healthy relationships because of the potential adverse effects of unhealthy personal relationships (Hostinar, Citation2015). This section explores values (e.g., communication, respect), deal-breakers (e.g., degrading comments) and resources (e.g., counseling), all described in text and imagery. Finally, they are encouraged to reach out if they still need help with various feelings (e.g., overwhelmed, depressed, etc.). In this section, they are given more resources and frequently asked questions are addressed. Students are also offered a free toolkit to download and fill out on their own, with pages for affirmations, self-reflection, and art-related creativity. For a more comprehensive description of each section, see Oehme et al. (Citation2019).

  Student-based curricula outcomes

  Throughout the development and expansion of the program, quasi-experimental research was conducted, with multiple FSU Institutional Review Board (IRB) approvals, all procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation. Procedurally, every study required participants to complete the curricula and answer online, self-report questionnaires (to review the published studies, please see Oehme et al., Citation2019; Ray et al., Citation2019a, Citation2019b, Citation2021; Hendrickse et al., Citation2023). The research on the student curricula demonstrated that after completing the program, students self-reported greater self-efficacy to seek help for stresses and challenges experienced on campus, a higher likelihood to engage in self-help activities and greater intentions to use campus resources (Hendrickse et al., Citation2023). Restorative narratives included in program videos increased students’ intentions to seek resources and share content (Ray et al., Citation2019b). More than 85% of students surveyed felt that if they followed program advice it would probably help them effectively deal with challenges (Ray et al., Citation2019a). Moreover, research during the COVID-19 pandemic revealed that students with minoritized identities, who faced greater health inequities, reported accessing the university’s curriculum for help (Ray et al., Citation2021). Throughout each study, it is important to note that students self-reported behavioral intent, which indicated their motivation and commitment to perform a behavior (Conner & Norman, Citation2022; Sheeran, Citation2002; Sheeran & Webb, Citation2016) but the intention-behavior gap should continue to be explored (Conner & Norman, Citation2022).

  Overall, college students reported that the program made it easier to get help with struggles and challenges (Oehme et al., Citation2019; Ray et al., Citation2021). Research also revealed that students in the campus community who reported the highest numbers of ACEs (i.e., women, people of color, LGBTQ+ students) felt the least resilient (Perko et al., Citation2020) and that using sections that specifically addressed their concerns (e.g., Real Talk: Support for LGBTQ+ students) could help those who were in greatest need. Beyond the skills and knowledge gained during the program, it was also clear that students who may need clinical help or counseling better understood what resources were available, where those resources were located, and were willing to share that information with others in need (Oehme et al., Citation2019; Ray et al., Citation2019a, Citation2021).

  Development and implementation of individual curricula for academic professionals

  University administrators, faculty, and staff are increasingly called to provide more resources to meet the mental and behavioral health needs of their students and to help them thrive (Chessman & Taylor, Citation2019; J. J. W. Liu et al., Citation2022; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Citation2021). Spurred by the need for higher education professionals to have access to resilience material, researchers launched a separate resilience-based curriculum for faculty and staff (T. Trolian et al., Citation2022; T. L. Trolian et al., Citation2016). The faculty/staff-focused program picks up where the student project ends. It emphasizes that professionals can offer a variety of support to help students learn, grow, and cope with stress, but that professionals also need to focus on staying emotionally and physically healthy themselves to best fulfill their roles (Cordaro, Citation2020).

  The online course, which is currently available, uses traditional adult curriculum design/instructional principles (Morrison et al., Citation2019; Wager et al., Citation2005) and offers a professional certification to users. Course content describes commonly identified stressors that affect college students (Cohen, Citationn.d.; C. H. Liu et al., Citation2019), along with research on the importance of student wellbeing in affecting student retention and degree completion (Eisenberg et al., Citation2009, Citation2013), and national trends in supporting college students’ behavioral and mental health (Chessman & Taylor, Citation2019, National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Citation2021). An entire module is dedicated to the research on the impact of COVID-19 on students, faculty, and staff (Eisenberg et al., Citation2020; Perz et al., Citation2020; Son et al., Citation2020) that emphasizes the heightened effects of the pandemic reported for specific demographic groups (Browning et al., Citation2021; Conron et al., Citation2021; Fruehwirth et al., Citation2021; Hoyt et al., Citation2021; Zimmermann et al., Citation2020), the negative impacts of social isolation (C. H. Liu et al., Citation2020; Salimi et al., Citation2021), the need for intentional outreach (C. H. Liu et al., Citation2020) and increased academic support for students (Salimi et al., Citation2021). The toll of the disruptive and deadly pandemic on faculty and staff is also discussed (Lai et al., Citation2021, Naughton, Citation2021), with acknowledgment of its contributing role in burnout, compassion fatigue, and vicarious trauma (Maller & McGill, Citation2021; Queen & Harding, Citation2020).

  Course participants are reminded that individual resilience is no longer seen as a fixed personality trait (Bonanno et al., Citation2015) and that as a process of adaptation, individuals are more likely to be able to respond adaptively who possess a number of skills, strengths, and characteristics (APA, Citation2019; Masten et al., Citation2021). In multiple sections of the training, participants are reminded that people can improve their ability to respond adaptively across their lifespan (APA, Citation2019; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Citation2019).

  The course makes clear that neither faculty/staff nor students bear the entire responsibility for building resilience and the larger role of the institution is explored. First, the institution must reduce the risk of harm, mitigate stressors, and lessen exposure to risky or adverse conditions (Masten et al., Citation2021). Second, the institution must also connect students to meaningful support (Smyth et al., Citation2010). When they have the resources they need, and the barriers are removed, students can function better (Smyth et al., Citation2010). In higher education, this means examining mental health care available on campus (Center for Collegiate Mental Health, Citation2024), making care available to students in a timely manner when they need it (Mowreader, Citation2023), reducing financial barriers to academic leave (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Citation2021), and working to destigmatize help-seeking (Smyth et al., Citation2010). Finally, campuses must create conditions in which students can learn practical resilience promoting skills and thrive (Masten & Barnes, Citation2018).

  Specific strategies to avoid retraumatizing students who have recently experienced adverse or traumatic events such as a violent incident near campus, a serious illness or injury, a sexual assault, or a mental health crisis. Resources are offered for campus units that may assist students in these situations such as financial aid, athletics, admissions, campus police, campus health, student support services, counseling centers, housing, veteran’s services, and advising. Resilience-building strategies are also offered for faculty/staff to share with students in a variety of ways and printable handouts and free resources are provided. The ultimate goal is to emphasize ways to increase students’ ability to respond to adversity with resilience, offer the skill-building needed for adaptation, and provide the tools necessary for improving the institution’s response to the reality of psychological distress following adverse and traumatic events.

  After participants learn about ways to help students build wellbeing, the concepts of individual professional and institutional resilience are explored. For professionals, a wide range of personal and professional strategies for building resilience and preventing burnout, compassion fatigue, and vicarious trauma are offered. Burnout is defined as a state of exhaustion caused by being involved in emotionally demanding situations over a long period of time; compassion fatigue is an emotional and physical depletion as a result of caring for others who are in significant emotional pain and distress; and vicarious trauma is a change in worldview and belief in one’s self, also a result of exposure to the trauma of others (OVC, Citationn.d.).

  Some strategies offered to professionals for buffering stress include the importance of building physical exercise into a busy schedule (Mental Health Foundation, Citationn.d.; Paluska & Schwenk, Citation2000; Tyson et al., Citation2010), the importance of sleep (American Academy of Sleep Medicine [AASM], Citation2017; CDC, Citation2016; Hershner & Shaikh, Citation2020; Milojevich et al., Citation2016), and how engaging in hobbies (Pressman et al., Citation2009) and finding social support can help support resilient responses to adversity (Hostinar, Citation2015; Hostinar & Gunnar, Citation2015; Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, Citation2014). Professional strategies are also enumerated, with an emphasis on developing or joining existing peer support groups and attending workshops on self-care and managing stress (Cordaro, Citation2020). Finally, the institution’s role in building a resilient workforce and campus is outlined. Institutional steps that can support employee resilience (Baumgartner, Citation2020; Bell et al., Citation2003; Cordaro, Citation2020) include:

  • providing employees with the opportunity to receive training on professional development, leadership, skills training, and burnout prevention;

  • helping professionals find meaning and purpose in their work, offering frequent sessions for opportunities to network, recognizing good work and positive outcomes, and building healthy coping skills;

  • giving employees tools to address signs of burnout and vicarious trauma, including quality, effective supervision in which trained supervisors can debrief and help employees process difficult work experiences;

  • encouraging employee wellness practices, providing yoga space, meditation rooms, exercise benefits, and ample communal space for the exchange of ideas

  • promoting practicing self-care in the professional realm by utilizing an institution’s social support network and resources;

  • connecting with colleagues to explore and discuss shared experiences to help prevent or minimize the impact of compassion fatigue and vicarious trauma;

  • mentoring/coaching, talking through experiences with more seasoned employees;

  • connecting to benefits, employees can be encouraged to utilize employee assistance programs (EAPs), time off, and counseling programs; and,

  • connecting to resources available to faculty and staff such as the faculty development center, counseling center; or employee wellness/assistance programs

   

  Academic professional outcomes

  More than 2,000 faculty and staff members from over 400 institutions of higher learning have already taken the Professional Certification in College Student Wellbeing, Trauma, and Resilience. An initial pre/posttest quasi-experimental study, approved by FSU’s IRB (all procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards), of the faculty/staff curriculum revealed that 70% of participants were likely to implement the knowledge and tools they learned. Shortly after the curriculum launched, participants in the initial study (which was a sufficiently powered within-subjects experimental design; n = 52) reported significantly more positive attitudes toward trauma-informed approaches, stronger beliefs about the prevalence of psychological trauma on campus, greater self-efficacy to implement trauma-informed approaches, and greater knowledge of resilience than they did before they started the program (Ray et al., Citation2024). Regarding knowledge, participants indicated that they could better define, identify and understand the key components of a trauma-informed approach after completing the program as compared to before. Of relevance, the posttest revealed that they were better able to define resilience as a dynamic process (Ray et al., Citation2024).

  The growth of confidence (i.e., self-efficacy to implement a trauma-informed approach) among participants was particularly noteworthy. They described specific ways in which they now felt they could use their knowledge and skills. To illustrate, one participant indicated that they “took massive notes” and that now, “change is imminent” on campus. Many noted through open-ended responses that they planned to share information learned (e.g., “talk to the entire faculty”) and more than 80% indicated that they would also be willing to serve on campus-wide committees about trauma-informed approaches to supporting students (Ray et al., Citation2024). In a feedback form, outside of the study itself, participants were asked to share their reactions to the course content; the practical resources (i.e., handouts) were received the most favorably by participants. Conversely, the reviews on the videos in the course were more mixed, leading researchers to plan revisions to reduce video content and augment the sections that offer new tools. There were also a significant number of responses that were critical of including pandemic-related research in the course; some participants felt that the impact of the COVID-19 no longer affected college students and should not be included.

  Strengthening workplace resilience: curriculum for organizations

  Beyond the university, researchers have begun to expand their focus toward broader organizational systems in acknowledging the collective responsibility for resilience, particularly amid global disruptions, which have increased levels of social anxiety in the workforce (S. L. Bloom, Citation2011; Gan et al., Citation2023; Hales et al., Citation2019; Kindred & Bates, Citation2023). Organizations worldwide have been compelled to confront unforeseen challenges and devise strategies to support employees through repeated adversities. Reacting to these dynamics, employers approached FSU researchers for expertise in developing a program centered on organizational resilience, the capacity of an organization to adapt to collective adversities (Barasa et al., Citation2018).

  Responding to requests to cultivate approaches to organizational resilience expanded FSU’s application of resilience development. Organizational resilience necessitates an understanding of how an organization that serves clients who have experienced adversity inadvertently subjects its employees to trauma and stress. It also requires a deep comprehension of how the impact of individual and community adversity and loss across the lifespan affects everyone: the workforce, organizational processes and culture, and methods of service provision (Treisman, Citation2021). Professional development training often neglects or underestimates the significance of systemic, secondary, and organizational trauma awareness, focusing predominantly on individual development rather than addressing the complex dynamics within organizational structures and policies (Treisman, Citation2021).

  Typically, an organization’s emphasis is placed on addressing the trauma of others (such as clients) rather than acknowledging the larger entity’s role, and on understanding the impact at an individual level rather than viewing resilience through an organizational lens (S. Bloom & Farragher, Citation2013). Research suggests that developing resilience-focused organizations can lead to significant transformation, enhancing client satisfaction, employee well-being, and organizational performance, while preventing burnout (S. L. Bloom, Citation2011, Citation2013a, Citation2013b, Citation2013c; Treisman, Citation2021). Strengthening resilience is crucial for enhancing coping mechanisms and overall employee and client well-being (Treisman, Citation2021).

  Descriptions and preliminary outcomes of the organization curriculum

  To support businesses and organizations in deepening their understanding of trauma’s impact and the potential for resilience, a new initiative was started called, FSU’s Trauma and Resilience Collaborative (TRC). The TRC consolidates the university’s efforts on trauma and resilience across different life stages and communities, with a particular focus on agencies, organizations, and companies. The new TRC launched a pilot curriculum to offer the workforce multiple online, self-paced courses with high interactivity, grounded in the latest research on trauma and resilience.

  A pilot program was implemented in collaboration with two statewide healthcare organizations. About 4,700 professionals from these companies completed the training provided by the TRC. This marked the initial step toward fostering trauma-informed and responsive workplaces dedicated to addressing trauma’s effects and promoting resilience both internally and externally. In the pilot, demographic data was self-reported. In the first organization ( = 1,368) the majority self-identified as White (62%), Black (22%) or multiracial (15%) with more than half (58%) noting that they were Latine. In the second organization (n = 3,400) the majority also identified as White (52%), Black (34%) or multiracial (11%) and about 28% were Latine. Smaller proportions identified other races/ethnicities. In both organizations, the majority (more than 80%) were women. More than 76% of all participants had at least an associate degree.

  Each organization had to achieve a completion rate of at least 90% among its workforce for a basic online training. The training raised individual and organizational awareness of the prevalence of trauma, along with the risks of long-term negative impacts and information about how to build more workplace resilience. Content also emphasized trauma-aware environmental and interior design elements for physical building space, along with communication skills for employees that can help them avoid re-traumatizing clients who have experienced significant adversity, leading to more successful interactions. The course lists and strengthens individual resilience skills, incorporating many of the same concepts found in the aforementioned projects.

  Upon completion of the three-hour course, researchers met biweekly with organizational leadership to assess the project and were anecdotally told that leadership recognized improvements in staff’s ability to recognize trauma, enhance client services, bolster employee job satisfaction and well-being, and foster a culture of support and empathy. However, it is important to note that these were anecdotal comments gathered through online informal feedback surveys after the training was completed. Researchers plan to expand the employee survey process and include rigorous testing of the project. As the program expands, experimental pre/posttests will be conducted to determine employee attitudes about the training and their use of skills and knowledge gained through the training. Expansion will include incorporating collective organizational resilience skills, such as adaptability to change, maintaining morale during challenging circumstances, fostering open communication and collaboration, and implementing strategic processes to cultivate a supportive/inclusive organizational culture that encourages innovation and learning from setbacks.

  One notable lesson gleaned during the pilot was the significance of incorporating a much more in-depth, 20-hour training on trauma and resilience for a smaller group of employees who expressed interest in a deeper exploration of the impact of trauma. These employees were included in an exploratory, more thorough discussion of trauma. Administrative staff offered the 20-hour training to employee volunteers willing to commit to extra training time. These employees, designated as “organizational champions,” can help internalize trauma-aware communication in policy and practice and find other ways to spearhead organizational change. Essentially, serving as opinion leaders, who can create behavioral change (Valente & Pumpuang, Citation2007). So far, most of the organizational champions have been part of the company’s administration, but the research team is exploring ways organizations can incentivize the advanced 20-hour training for employees throughout each company.

  Anecdotally, a physician and statewide medical director involved in the pilot program, shared, “This partnership has deepened our understanding and awareness of these critical issues, enhancing our effectiveness in addressing physical and mental health challenges.” Raising awareness of trauma among individuals is beneficial, as evidenced by employees expressing appreciation for the pilot certification project. However, for this awareness to genuinely reshape a workplace, it must translate into actionable strategies and solutions addressing systemic issues and fostering genuine individual and collective resilience skills. This transformation requires policy changes at all levels to reflect trauma-informed and responsive practices and systemic shifts. Further development and scientific testing of organizational training, along with the implementation of new policies aimed at enhancing employee well-being, are imperative.

  Practical and theoretical implications

  Federal health agency resources (e.g., CDC, SAMHSA, etc.) highlight and inform the need for constant work, sensitivity, and culture change for institutions that seek to responsibly respond to trauma and adversity. Organizational assessment and ongoing quality improvement are essential to determine if the resulting programs meet their resilience goals (SAMHSA, Citation2023b). The core concepts of psychological resilience are applied in all three programs outlined and evaluation work has begun to improve the projects and gauge participant learning. As noted by Luthar et al. (Citation2000), experimental studies of resilience-based interventions, such as those outlined in this paper, are imperative to fostering opportunities to promote positive adaptation (i.e., psychological resilience). As recommended by extant research (Aburn et al., Citation2016; Luthar et al., Citation2000), the curricula and related research also explores specific social and organizational contexts, which helps expand the lens of psychological resilience as a construct.

  Findings of the studies of the curricula presented here should be considered in light of a few limitations. Participants voluntarily opted into the studies and were limited to the southeastern region of the United States. Additionally, participant responses were self-reported through online questionnaires. Future studies should consider expanding the population and cross-examining the results of the self-reported dependent variables (e.g., intended behavior) with non-self-report measures (e.g., behavior; tracking participant visits to the mental health center), along with additional qualitative data.

  The university-wide approach to a curriculum shows new insights into effective coping skills that can be developed to increase resilient responding to adverse experiences. Universities must keep pace and provide this information to students in safe, effective, and accessible ways. As technology changes, the options available for health information delivery increase, and universities will have more opportunities to improve student services.

  The newer workplace curriculum is in its early stages, necessitating additional experimental research to ascertain the benefits of fostering resilience within the workforce through organizational-wide training and capacity strengthening. Like individuals, organizations experience development, growth, change, and adaptation. Organizational systems and individuals interact dynamically, influencing, and shaping each other (Treisman, Citation2021). By utilizing a framework for organizational resilience that envisions a systemic approach, we can expand the larger communities’ knowledge of trauma and wider promotion of resilience skills.

  Myriad efforts to educate the public about the impact of trauma and adversity have been undertaken worldwide (Bellis et al., Citation2023; CDC, Citation2019; NHS Education for Scotland, Citation2023; Srivastav et al., Citation2020). Yet far beyond individual, professional, and organizational efforts to build resilience lies a larger public health obligation that includes safe neighborhoods, access to health care, access to quality child care, effective community responses to disasters, affordable higher education and housing and a range of other important resources that serve as protective factors for individuals and families (Bellis et al., Citation2023, National Scientific Council on the Developing Child, Citation2023). Resources are crucial to create conditions that are conducive for children to grow, learn, and thrive (National Scientific Council on the Developing Child, Citation2023). These policy issues must be addressed by investment and commitment by governmental agencies and will serve both resilience-building and essential trauma prevention efforts (Collins et al., Citation2024, National Scientific Council on the Developing Child, Citation2023). In the meantime, trauma and resilience work with individuals, college administration, and the private sector workforce serves an important purpose – but will take larger societal efforts to make widespread resilience a reality. Until that time, organizations can play an important role in increasing knowledge about the impact of trauma across the lifespan and disseminating information about ways to build resilience.

  Disclosure statement

  No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).