Method. Using a model of collaboration that looks more like a woven mat of intersecting threads (with the potential for diffuse dissemination of results) than spokes on a wheel with its implied flow of information to the center, the IRP brought together researchers and practitioners in 2003 to develop a methodology for this multi-site study. The team agreed that youth at the transition point between childhood and adulthood in each cultural setting would be administered the CYRM in their own language. Items on the CYRM were jointly negotiated between researchers with 47% of questions relating specifically to cultural and community factors and processes. Qualitative interviews with youth judged by community elders to be “resilient” were also conducted in each site. Through face-to-face meetings, publications, and a major conference, results have been discussed widely and the meaning of the data negotiated between participants.

Results. Each of the papers in this symposium will discuss different aspects of the research findings. First, the methodological challenges and necessary innovations in study design will be discussed. Next, quantitatively, results show that while an ecologically nested model of resilience may be a reliable model, factor analysis of the data reveals differences across sites and gender in patterns of youth resilience that cannot be accounted for by this model. Finally, qualitatively, 9 specific “tensions” were revealed which help us to understand how children globally struggle to nurture and sustain well-being under adversity.

Implications. In the increasingly heterogeneous contexts of Western democracies and globalization of research methods, this research breaks new ground in regard to how to study resilience in localized contexts and the applicability of findings to community policy and practice.