An interventional study of Co-Designed Strengths-Based Leadership Program in Homelessness and Youth, sponsored by Unity Health Toronto. Completed at 1 site in Canada. Open to participants aged 16 Years to 24 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-09-15.
Sponsored by Unity Health Toronto · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
The idea for this study came from the research team's current study called Transitioning Youth Out of Homelessness (TYOH) 2.0, which provides coaching and a leadership guide to youth transitioning out of homelessness. Based on feedback from youth and coaches involved in that study, the research team plans to make small changes to the leadership guide and see if it works better as an in-person, four-week leadership program.
All participants in this study will be invited to attend an in-person, four-week leadership program. There will be two programs running at the same time: one in St. Catharines and one in Toronto. The goal is to have 15 participants in each program.
The main purpose of the study is to learn what participants think of the program. The second purpose is to see if there are changes in identity capital (feeling a sense of purpose and confidence in achieving goals) and knowledge about things that are covered in the program, when the research team compares participants' answers at the beginning and at the end of the program.
This project builds on the research team's current community-based randomized clinical trial (Transitioning Youth Out of Homelessness 2.0) utilizing coaching and a co-designed leadership guide to target identity capital (purpose, control, self-efficacy, and self-esteem) for youth transitioning out of homelessness (all participants are also receiving rent subsidies). Based on preliminary feedback from study youth and coaches involved in the intervention arm, the research team will modify the leadership guide and pilot it in the form of an in-person, four-week leadership program (vs. independent learning in the current study).
The overarching objective of this mixed methods pilot project is to co-develop and test a strengths-based leadership program targeting identity capital for youth (16-24 years of age) transitioning out of homelessness. Specifically, the objectives are to:
If this modified delivery of the leadership guide shows promise, the research team plans to incorporate it into a national scale-up alongside rent subsidies and coaching.
Unity Health Toronto is the lead sponsor of 434 studies on the registry; 76 are open to participants now.
Of its 5 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 1 (20%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Eligible young people aged 16-24 years who have transitioned out of homelessness (e.g., no longer living in a shelter or couch surfing), defined as 3 consecutive months within the past 12 months, will be identified by community partners (note: for the purpose of this study, youth living in foster care will be considered homeless).
This age mandate was chosen because this is the age group served by the community partners. The research team has chosen to target the first year of exiting homelessness because collective experience has shown that this can be a particularly precarious time for youth in terms of mental health challenges and risk of (re)experiencing homelessness (even if youth have attempted exits in the past).
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Young people transitioning out of homelessness will attend a four-week, strengths-based leadership program. Two four-week leadership programs (15 youth per program) will be led by coaches from the research team's current TYOH 2.0 study with youth advisors participating as paid leadership interns.
Behavioral: Co-Designed Strengths-Based Leadership Program
Please see arm description.
Intervention Feasibility and Acceptability (Assessed by Recruitment/Enrolment/Completion Metrics)
Quantitative measures consisting of recruitment/enrolment/completion metrics will be utilized. The recruitment rate will be estimated as the proportion of contacted individuals who express interest in participating in the study (T0). The enrolment rate will be calculated as the proportion of recruited individuals who are eligible and consent to participate in the study (T0). Participants were considered to have completed the study if they attended the final program session and completed final data collection (T2).
Time frame: Assessed at T0 (pre-intervention), T1 (first day of intervention) and T2 (last day of intervention).
Intervention Feasibility and Acceptability (Assessed by Program Attendance)
Program attendance was calculated as the percentage of total possible leadership program sessions attended (maximum 8 sessions).
Time frame: Assessed at T2 (last day of intervention).
Intervention Feasibility and Acceptability (Assessed by Program Feedback Questionnaire)
This 4-item anonymous questionnaire was developed for this study to collect information about participants' view of the leadership program, the impact of the program on them, and their view of the individuals running the program.
Time frame: Assessed at T2 (last day of intervention).
Intervention Feasibility and Acceptability (Informed by Focus Groups)
Focus group discussions (at T2) with program participants primarily centered around intervention acceptability but also explored the impact of the intervention on identity capital (e.g., sense of purpose and control) and socioeconomic inclusion (e.g., connection to broader social networks). Qualitative data analysis was conducted using reflexive thematic analysis with a critical social theoretical lens. During analysis, focus group transcripts were coded and codes were organized in a code book, clustered into categories, and eventually synthesized into key themes and sub-themes.
Time frame: Assessed at T2 (last day of intervention).
Pre-post Intervention Change in Identity Capital (Assessed by Multi-Measure Agentic Personality Scale)
The Multi-Measure Agentic Personality Scale (MAPS20) is a 20-item validated self-report measure that explores domains related to identity capital. The MAPS20 contains the following sub-scales: Self-Esteem; Purpose in Life; Internal Locus of Control; Self-Efficacy/Ego Strength. Each subscale has a score range of 5-30, with higher scores indicating greater identity capital.
Time frame: Assessed at T1 (first day of intervention) and T2 (last day of intervention).
Pre-post Intervention Change in Knowledge of Program Material
The composite knowledge assessment scale is 16-item self-report measure that was developed for this study and explores concepts from the program curriculum, such as: mindfulness; core values; purpose; goal setting; growth mindset; identity; and courage. Reported values represent the percentage of participants who answered the question correctly (i.e., agreeing with a correct statement or disagreeing with an incorrect statement).
Time frame: Assessed at T1 (first day of intervention) and T2 (last day of intervention).
| Milestone | Leadership Program |
|---|---|
| Started | 25 |
| Completed | 18 |
| Not completed | 7 |
| Withdrew: Removed by study team | 2 |
| Withdrew: Lost to follow-up | 5 |
Quantitative measures consisting of recruitment/enrolment/completion metrics will be utilized. The recruitment rate will be estimated as the proportion of contacted individuals who express interest in participating in the study (T0). The enrolment rate will be calculated as the proportion of recruited individuals who are eligible and consent to participate in the study (T0). Participants were considered to have completed the study if they attended the final program session and completed final data collection (T2).
| Participants | Leadership Program |
|---|---|
| Screened | 35 |
| Enrolled | 25 |
| Completed Study | 18 |
Program attendance was calculated as the percentage of total possible leadership program sessions attended (maximum 8 sessions).
| Percent of sessions attended | Leadership Program |
|---|---|
| Intervention Feasibility and Acceptability (Assessed by Program Attendance) | 75.5 ± 20.9 |
This 4-item anonymous questionnaire was developed for this study to collect information about participants' view of the leadership program, the impact of the program on them, and their view of the individuals running the program.
| Participants | Leadership Program |
|---|---|
| I would recommend this program to my friends or other youth I know with similar experiences. — Strongly disagree | 0 |
| I would recommend this program to my friends or other youth I know with similar experiences. — Disagree | 0 |
| I would recommend this program to my friends or other youth I know with similar experiences. — Slightly disagree | 0 |
| I would recommend this program to my friends or other youth I know with similar experiences. — Slightly agree | 1 |
| I would recommend this program to my friends or other youth I know with similar experiences. — Agree | 8 |
| I would recommend this program to my friends or other youth I know with similar experiences. — Strongly agree | 9 |
| The coaches and staff were knowledgeable about the program material. — Strongly disagree | 0 |
| The coaches and staff were knowledgeable about the program material. — Disagree | 0 |
| The coaches and staff were knowledgeable about the program material. — Slightly disagree | 0 |
| The coaches and staff were knowledgeable about the program material. — Slightly agree | 0 |
| The coaches and staff were knowledgeable about the program material. — Agree | 8 |
| The coaches and staff were knowledgeable about the program material. — Strongly agree | 10 |
| The coaches and staff were effective facilitators. — Strongly disagree | 0 |
| The coaches and staff were effective facilitators. — Disagree | 0 |
| The coaches and staff were effective facilitators. — Slightly disagree | 1 |
| The coaches and staff were effective facilitators. — Slightly agree | 0 |
| The coaches and staff were effective facilitators. — Agree | 7 |
| The coaches and staff were effective facilitators. — Strongly agree | 10 |
| Participating in this program has made a difference in my day-to-day life. — Strongly disagree | 0 |
| Participating in this program has made a difference in my day-to-day life. — Disagree | 1 |
| Participating in this program has made a difference in my day-to-day life. — Slightly disagree | 0 |
| Participating in this program has made a difference in my day-to-day life. — Slightly agree | 2 |
| Participating in this program has made a difference in my day-to-day life. — Agree | 5 |
| Participating in this program has made a difference in my day-to-day life. — Strongly agree | 10 |
Focus group discussions (at T2) with program participants primarily centered around intervention acceptability but also explored the impact of the intervention on identity capital (e.g., sense of purpose and control) and socioeconomic inclusion (e.g., connection to broader social networks). Qualitative data analysis was conducted using reflexive thematic analysis with a critical social theoretical lens. During analysis, focus group transcripts were coded and codes were organized in a code book, clustered into categories, and eventually synthesized into key themes and sub-themes.
| Themes | Leadership Program |
|---|---|
| Key Themes | 3 |
| Sub-themes | 7 |
The Multi-Measure Agentic Personality Scale (MAPS20) is a 20-item validated self-report measure that explores domains related to identity capital. The MAPS20 contains the following sub-scales: Self-Esteem; Purpose in Life; Internal Locus of Control; Self-Efficacy/Ego Strength. Each subscale has a score range of 5-30, with higher scores indicating greater identity capital.
| Score on a Scale | Leadership Program |
|---|---|
| Self-Esteem (T1) | 20.3 ± 4.0 |
| Purpose in Life (T1) | 18.8 ± 4.8 |
| Locus of Control (T1) | 20.8 ± 2.9 |
| Self-Efficacy (T1) | 20.6 ± 4.0 |
| Self-Esteem (T2) | 21.9 ± 4.4 |
| Purpose in Life (T2) | 20.2 ± 5.4 |
| Locus of Control (T2) | 20.6 ± 3.8 |
| Self-Efficacy (T2) | 19.0 ± 4.2 |
The composite knowledge assessment scale is 16-item self-report measure that was developed for this study and explores concepts from the program curriculum, such as: mindfulness; core values; purpose; goal setting; growth mindset; identity; and courage. Reported values represent the percentage of participants who answered the question correctly (i.e., agreeing with a correct statement or disagreeing with an incorrect statement).
| Percentage of participants | Leadership Program |
|---|---|
| I am confident about my ability to be in the driver's seat in my "car of life." (T1) | 76.0 |
| I can name at least one strategy that I consistently use to help me accomplish my daily tasks. (T1) | 88.0 |
| It is more important to focus on what you want to achieve than who you wish to become. (T1) | 40.0 |
| I have a good understanding of how my brain becomes anxious. (T1) | 87.5 |
| I am confident in my purpose and why it is important in my life. (T1) | 80.0 |
| People who believe they are worthy of love/belonging have an easier time showing vulnerability. (T1) | 100.0 |
| I am not very confident about knowing how to get my "wise mind" in control. (T1) | 52.0 |
| I have a good understanding of how to create an environment that helps me achieve my goals. (T1) | 84.0 |
| I have a hard time naming things around me that have contributed to my habits. (T1) | 56.0 |
| I am confident that I have the knowledge/skills to "speak back" to feelings of shame. (T1) | 76.0 |
| I can easily name my core values. (T1) | 84.0 |
| When creating a new habit (e.g., exercising) it is important to stop while it still feels good. (T1) | 41.7 |
| Your intelligence is something very basic about you that you can't change very much. (T1) | 72.0 |
| It is more important to strive for excellence than perfection. (T1) | 84.0 |
| You need to connect with others before you can connect with yourself. (T1) | 62.5 |
| Interdependence is an important part of self-leadership. (T1) | 87.5 |
| I am confident about my ability to be in the driver's seat in my "car of life." (T2) | 83.3 |
| I can name at least one strategy that I consistently use to help me accomplish my daily tasks. (T2) | 94.4 |
| It is more important to focus on what you want to achieve than who you wish to become. (T2) | 29.4 |
| I have a good understanding of how my brain becomes anxious. (T2) | 100.0 |
| I am confident in my purpose and why it is important in my life. (T2) | 94.4 |
| People who believe they are worthy of love/belonging have an easier time showing vulnerability. (T2) | 83.3 |
| I am not very confident about knowing how to get my "wise mind" in control. (T2) | 55.6 |
| I have a good understanding of how to create an environment that helps me achieve my goals. (T2) | 88.9 |
| I have a hard time naming things around me that have contributed to my habits. (T2) | 83.3 |
| I am confident that I have the knowledge/skills to "speak back" to feelings of shame. (T2) | 82.4 |
| I can easily name my core values. (T2) | 100.0 |
| When creating a new habit (e.g., exercising) it is important to stop while it still feels good. (T2) | 72.2 |
| Your intelligence is something very basic about you that you can't change very much. (T2) | 32.2 |
| It is more important to strive for excellence than perfection. (T2) | 94.4 |
| You need to connect with others before you can connect with yourself. (T2) | 77.8 |
| Interdependence is an important part of self-leadership. (T2) | 88.9 |
Collected over 4 weeks. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.
| Group | Deaths | Serious | Other |
|---|---|---|---|
| Leadership Program | 0/25 (0%) | 0/25 (0%) | 0/25 (0%) |
| Age, Customized(Participants) | Leadership Program |
|---|---|
| Age — 16-18 years | 6 |
| Age — 19-21 years | 10 |
| Age — 22-24 years | 9 |
| Sex/Gender, Customized(Participants) | Leadership Program |
|---|---|
| Gender — Boy/Man | 7 |
| Gender — Girl/Woman | 16 |
| Gender — Non-binary | 2 |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized(Participants) | Leadership Program |
|---|---|
| Race/Ethnicity — White | 7 |
| Race/Ethnicity — Black | 5 |
| Race/Ethnicity — Mixed | 8 |
| Race/Ethnicity — Other | 5 |
| Sexual Orientation(Participants) | Leadership Program |
|---|---|
| Queer/gay/lesbian/bisexual/pansexual/questioning | 9 |
| Straight/heterosexual | 15 |
| Did not specify | 1 |
| Immigration Status(Participants) | Leadership Program |
|---|---|
| Canadian Citizen | 19 |
| Permanent Resident | 5 |
| Refugee | 1 |
| Child Welfare Involvement(Participants) | Leadership Program |
|---|---|
| Yes | 16 |
| No | 9 |
| Age First Homeless(Participants) | Leadership Program |
|---|---|
| Before the age of 10 | 2 |
| 10-12 years of age | 0 |
| 13-15 years of age | 7 |
| 16-18 years of age | 10 |
| 19-21 years of age | 6 |
| 22-25 years of age | 0 |
| Attempts to Live on Own After Being Homeless(Participants) | Leadership Program |
|---|---|
| 1-2 | 12 |
| 3-4 | 11 |
| 5 or more | 2 |
10 further baseline measures are reported on the registry.
Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.
Plan to share: No
This study is completed, as verified in Sep 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Unity Health Toronto