Our impact

The findings from three independent evaluations

Monash University

Higher scores across all positive mental health outcomes, including life satisfaction, hope and coping skills.

Significantly lower odds of mental illness (34% lower for anxiety and 47% lower for depression).

The importance of a whole-school, long-term approach to student wellbeing.

This independent evaluation by Monash University examines the effectiveness of our School Wellbeing Program using a sample of over 40,000 secondary school students across Australia. The findings speak to the significant benefits of its long-term implementation for the mental health of school communities.

Watch our interview with Dr Roshini

About the study

Method

A quasi-experimental study with an intervention and a control group was used to evaluate The Resilience Project’s School Wellbeing Program in 40,149 students across 102 schools in 2023. Data collected included sociodemographic information and outcomes derived from validated scales, included life satisfaction, hope, coping skills, anxiety and depression. Intervention schools were arranged by the number of years they had implemented the program, and mixed-effects regression models were used to evaluate the program.

Sample

The study used a sample of students from Year 7 to Year 12 in Australian secondary schools, with a mean age of 14. The intervention group included approximately 20,000 students that have been part of The Resilience Project’s School Wellbeing Program and the control group included approximately 20,000 students who have not been involved in the program. Both groups completed the Resilient Youth (RY) Student Resilience Survey. 

Limitations

As the study did not randomly allocate participating schools into the intervention and control groups, the possibility of selection bias exists which means participants of the two groups may be systematically different from each other in a way that’s not due to chance alone. 

 

The second major limitation is that pre-test results were not available. Ideally, it would be best to measure the mental health outcomes both before and after an intervention takes place as the groups may differ from each other in systematic ways which can influence the outcomes. This could not be done in this study as the data was all anonymous to help students feel comfortable to honestly respond to the questions in the survey. 

 

The study has attempted to counteract these two biases by controlling for plausible confounders, including grade, gender, socioeconomic and rurality status.  

The third limitation is that the responses could only be collected by students that were willing and present on the day of the survey due to the anonymous nature of the survey. 

Furthermore, it is easy to presume that the intervention schools were better resourced than the control schools and that this might explain the results. However, it was found in this study that the intervention schools in the sample were actually from less well-resourced areas, including a higher proportion from low SES, rural and remote settings. 

Credits and publishing

A big thank you to Roshini Balasooriya LekamgeProfessor Dragan Ilic, Dr Nazmul KarimDr Leo Chen, Monash University and Resilient Youth Australia for making this independent evaluation possible and for their ongoing commitment to mental health and wellbeing.

 

The full article has been published in BJPsych Open and can be accessed here

University of Melbourne

This evaluation found students who participated in our program experienced: 

Increased confidence and self esteem

Stronger relationships.

Increased ability to express emotions.

More supportive classroom environments.

Watch Hugh talk about it

About the study

Method

A mixed-methods evaluation was conducted in 2019 to examine the impacts and outcomes of The Resilience Project in the school context, focusing on:

  • How the program is implemented and experienced within the school community
  • Impact of the program on the attitudes, feelings and behaviours of all school community stakeholders (students, teachers and parents/ carers)
  • Whether students with different needs respond differently to the program.


The methods included pre- and post-surveys to measure change over time. The student results were compared to students from non-participating schools, to ensure the changes noted could be attributed to the program and not just from student maturation.

 

There were also several parent/carer interviews, teacher interviews, student focus groups and student case studies, in an effort to gain deeper insights into the nature of the program and its impact. These included: 

 

  • Online survey with guided completion, collected at three time points: 
    1. Prior to the program’s commencement. 
    2. Approximately one month after the initial program presentation. 
    3. End of school year (approx. six months after initial program presentation). 
  • Teacher interviews (One teacher from each program school, n=6). 
  • Student focus groups (One to three focus groups per program school, n=46). 
  • Case study interviews (Total of nine interviews involving three sets of child, parent and teachers). 

 

This research was conducted by researchers from the Melbourne School of Population and Global Health at The University of Melbourne. The research team includes Professor Lisa Gibbs, Dr Lauren Carpenter, Dr Elena Swift, Ms Hannah Morrice and Dr Karen Block. Additional investigators providing expert advice included Professor Nicola Reavley, Dr Rebecca Armstrong, Professor Andrew Mackinnon, Ms Janette Cook, Mr Derek McCormack, Professor Lou Harms and Mr Jason Gaffee.

 

The University of Melbourne recruitment and data collection team included: Dr Anna Barrett, Ms Kathryn Young, Dr Dakhina Mitra, Ms Kate Burke, and Ms Molly Harrington

Sample

The evaluation was conducted with six primary schools implementing the program (544 students) and six schools that were not implementing the program (469 students) used for comparison data.

 

All participating students were aged between 8 and 12 (Grades 4 to 6), with a mean age of 10.6 years. 

 

Program improvements

The evaluation also provided great insights into how the program could be further strengthened. We have already implemented several improvements and will continue to develop our programs in response to the findings and feedback.

 

Developments implemented for teachers delivering the program:
 
  • A new “Teaching TRP Guide”
    • This provided further support for teachers with best practice implementation of the program.
  • Additional professional development
    • Developed and tailored to the wellbeing leaders responsible for driving the program in schools.
 
Developments implemented for students to engage with GEM strategies:
 
  • A GEM Chat guide for teachers
    • Provided examples of small daily reflections, questions and activities to complement the work completed in the lessons.
    • Used to embed the language and practise of GEM in everyday school life.
  • Student journals
    • Added space for daily GEM practise and reflection.
  • Cross-curricular integrated lessons
    • Embedded GEM language and practises in other core curriculum lessons (eg. gratitude in Maths, kindness in English).
  • Integration prompts
    • Provided for teachers to enhance curriculum delivery.
    • Developments implemented for schools to engage parents in the program:
  • The launch of TRP@HOME
    • A new digital resource hub for parents.
  • More parent webinars
    • These provided greater accessibility to strategies which better supported children.
  • “Take it Home” activities
    • Incorporated regularly in student lessons.
  • School newsletters
    • Filled with practical ideas and activities to further support parents with GEM.

 

Areas for further improvement

  • Build further teacher capacity to deliver the emotional literacy and mindfulness components of the program.
  • Work with schools to incorporate GEM principles into the wider school behaviour management policies. 
  • Create communities of practise among The Resilience Project schools. 
  • Work with schools in a holistic approach to student wellbeing, by mapping the TRP program with other school programs to identify how they can best complement one another and align to the curriculum. This intends to build on the recent success of undertaking this process with the DET Resilience Rights and Respectful Relationships program.

University of Adelaide

During COVID-19 students participating in our School Wellbeing Program saw the following impacts (compared to students in non-TRP schools):

Stable emotional wellbeing

TRP participants maintained consistent emotional wellbeing and life satisfaction in contrast to those that did not participate in the program.

Improved social wellbeing

TRP participants experienced an increase in perceived support over the period from their peers and the wider school community. This differed to non-TRP participants, who experienced a steady decline.

Consistent physical wellbeing

TRP students that participated in the program exhibited consistent levels of healthy behaviours in comparison to those students who were not involved in the program.

Watch Hugh talk about it

About the study

Method

Prior to COVID, the Mental Health Productivity Commission had identified that young people are disproportionately impacted by poor mental health and suicide and that a focus on prevention and early intervention was critical.

 

In Jan 2022, The Murdoch Children’s Research Institute (MCRI) released a report on The Indirect Impacts of the COVID 19 pandemic on young people and Adolescence”. It reiterated that not only do we need to support young people in a preventative manner but also “highlighted the importance of schools beyond academic learning, where the social, emotional, and physical health of children and young people can also be supported”.

 

Acknowledging the challenges experienced by young people throughout the pandemic, The Resilience Project wanted to further understand the impact on their mental health and ensure the TRP school program best met the current needs of young Australians.

 

Through the established partnership with Resilient Youth Australia (RY), all schools which participate in The Resilience Project schools program are invited to complete the scientifically validated resilience survey on an annual basis. The University of Adelaide, led by Dr Mark Kohler, was then able to conduct an independent review, analysing and comparing the data collected from the schools that participated in The Resilience Project schools program in 2019, 2020 and 2021 (83,002 students) with those that did not participate (79,699 students). 

Sample

The sample included the data collected from the schools that participated in The Resilience Project schools program in 2019, 2020 and 2021 (83,002 students) with those that did not participate (79,699 students). 

Future contributions

Overall, this evaluation demonstrates the strong outcomes that can be achieved by proactively supporting young Australians in the school environment. Providing the tools and interventions to build resilience can significantly lower the risk of mental illness and buffer the negative effects of stressful life events. It also references the importance of taking a long term approach and that the ongoing provision of the program (across consecutive years) affords greater maintenance of wellbeing.

Check out our wellbeing programs

School Wellbeing Program

Primary and secondary

We’ve partnered with over 1,100 schools in 2025.

Early Years Wellbeing Program

All early years services

We’ve supported over 1,000 early years services since 2015.