Iterative Intervention Development: Refining the Virtual Sync Curriculum through Interviews with Young People Transitioning from Foster Care

Background and Purpose: Young people transitioning from the foster care system have elevated risk for a range of mental health diagnoses that can be exacerbated by coping difficulties, negative help-seeking attitudes, and mental health service disengagement (Brown et al., 2015; Sakai et al., 2014; Sieta et al., 2016). Strengthening Youth Networks and Coping (SYNC) is a group-based psychosocial intervention developed for young people with foster care experience to improve coping self-efficacy and help-seeking attitudes. This study explores implementation of the 8-session synchronous remote SYNC curriculum, which is primarily facilitated by a young adult with lived experience in foster care, along with additional adult supporters.

Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with SYNC participants aged 16-24 (N=22) following the first four intervention cohorts. Interviews focused on implementation factors, including feedback about curriculum content and delivery, as well as perceived intervention benefits. Participants received a $20 incentive to provide immediate post-session feedback and $30 to complete the post-intervention interview. Thematic analysis was used to identify participant perceptions of factors associated with intervention fidelity, adherence, and acceptance.

Results: All participants indicated the curriculum was helpful, with one participant calling the curriculum an “eye opener”; another said it encouraged them to “be more social and more open” and “know [they’re] not alone”. Many participants noted that having a facilitator with lived experience was crucial to their attendance (as one person said, “I don’t know if I would have stayed”). All participants indicated the peer leader was an important part of their experience, reporting it was helpful “because they’ve been through the same kind of stuff we have,” that “it wasn’t like they were trying to act like they [know] what happens,” and that “it did, like, comfort me to know . . .there’s someone that can also, like, relate to me”. Participants appreciated intervention aspects including an environment that was perceived to be non-judgemental, reflective discussions and journaling, flexible engagement (e.g., speaking up or commenting in the chat), and exploring relatable vignettes. Participants from all cohorts indicated the importance of community-building and relationships. Barriers to participation included the scheduled time, number of sessions, and some participants’ preference for in-person meetings. Participants noted engagement was negatively impacted during sessions with lower attendance. Participants were asked about the importance of incentives, with half saying they would have attended regardless. Overall, participants recognized their SYNC experience as beneficial and meaningful.

Conclusions and Implications: Participant interviews provided critical feedback during the final refinement of the SYNC intervention. A clear finding across cohorts was the importance of group cohesion, consistent participation, peer connection, and near-peer role modeling. Expected barriers to attendance were confirmed, as was potential disengagement of some participants due to the virtual delivery of the intervention. Overall participants consistently described SYNC as a beneficial intervention that improved their ability to cope effectively and to manage mental health challenges. Next steps for the intervention will focus on continued development of engagement strategies during and between sessions in hopes to further refine the curriculum and prepare it for wider distribution.