Perceived effectiveness of community-based support programs in promoting reintegration of youths with traumatic experiences in Ogun State, Nigeria

INTRODUCTION

Youth exposure to traumatic events has become a growing concern across many low- and middle-income countries, including Nigeria, where socio-economic instability, community violence, accidents, displacement, and other adversities place young people at sustained risk of psychological distress and social disruption. Trauma during adolescence or early adulthood has significant implications for long-term functioning, emotional stability, and community belonging. Studies conducted in African contexts consistently show that traumatic exposure is associated with symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, impaired functioning, and difficulties with social adjustment ( Anbesaw et al., 2022). Evidence from Nigerian populations further indicates that access to trauma-informed support remains limited and inconsistent, leaving many young people without structured pathways to recovery or reintegration after traumatic experiences ( Amedu & Dwarika, 2025). The consequences of untreated trauma not only influence individual wellbeing but also shape broader social outcomes, including community cohesion, productivity, peer relationships, and vulnerability to risky behaviours.

Given these challenges, community-based support programs have emerged globally as viable mechanisms for addressing the psychosocial and reintegration needs of vulnerable youths. Community-based approaches emphasize proximity, cultural relevance, accessibility, and collective responsibility for healing and reintegration. Their flexibility allows them to be adapted to diverse contexts, including refugee communities, conflict-affected populations, street-involved youths, and individuals with psychosocial or physical disabilities. Studies have demonstrated that community-rooted initiatives can enhance functioning, promote social acceptance, reduce isolation, and strengthen coping capacities among populations experiencing trauma or displacement. For instance, community-based rehabilitation models have shown positive outcomes for youths and adults with physical and mental disabilities in low-resource settings by leveraging family and community support structures ( Iemmi et al., 2016). Similarly, community-based youth programs have been found to foster self-efficacy, social participation, and advocacy among marginalized adolescents, including those from refugee backgrounds (Huang & Miller Marsh, 2024).

A growing body of research highlights the specific relevance of community-based interventions for trauma-exposed youth populations. Community-based trauma-focused programs have demonstrated measurable reductions in trauma-related symptoms and improvements in functioning, especially when delivered through culturally sensitive and accessible structures (Konanur et al., 2015). Scoping reviews also support the premise that community-based interventions can mitigate the long-term effects of childhood trauma by offering safe relational environments, structured therapeutic activities, and opportunities for emotional expression (Mazzeo & Bendixen, 2023). Furthermore, community-driven reintegration approaches have been applied successfully to youths emerging from high-risk environments, including violent extremist contexts, demonstrating the importance of frameworks that restore identity, rebuild trust, and promote community acceptance (Ellis et al., 2024).

Reintegration itself is a multidimensional construct encompassing psychological recovery, social acceptance, identity reconstruction, access to livelihood opportunities, and participation in community life. Reintegration challenges tend to be more pronounced among youths whose trauma histories intersect with displacement, conflict, or prolonged instability. Research on street-involved children in East Africa, for example, indicates that effective reintegration outcomes depend heavily on structural supports embedded within communities, such as mentorship, socio-emotional support, and community resilience-building activities (Goodman et al., 2023). These findings align with broader social-ecological perspectives on reintegration, which view recovery as influenced by individual, family, community, and structural factors rather than by clinical interventions alone ( Zewude et al., 2023). Thus, understanding how youths perceive the effectiveness of the community-based support programs they encounter is essential for determining whether these interventions meet reintegration needs across these multiple ecological levels.

In Nigeria, however, research examining community-based supports for trauma-exposed youths remains limited, with most existing studies focusing on substance abuse, intimate partner violence, or behavioural perceptions at the community level ( Ajuzie et al., 2023; Awolaran & OlaOlorun , 2025). While these studies illustrate the usefulness of community-based initiatives in shaping youth attitudes and mitigating harmful behaviours, insufficient attention has been given to youths who have experienced trauma and subsequently rely on community structures for reintegration and recovery. Yet, evidence from other African and global contexts demonstrates that community-based programs can play crucial roles in rebuilding psychological stability, strengthening identity, and enhancing social functioning after trauma (Tuaf & Orkibi, 2025; Williams & Thompson, 2011).

Programs that operate at the community level frequently differ in structure, resources, and scope from psychosocial support groups, recreational and empowerment programs, and peer counselling initiatives to multisectoral community rehabilitation strategies. Their effectiveness therefore varies considerably, influenced by program design, cultural alignment, staff capacity, and the degree of community ownership. Studies examining program operations during challenging periods, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, have shown that the functioning of community-based programs can be disrupted by resource constraints, movement restrictions, and weakened community networks (Ahmed et al., 2024). These disruptions reveal the vulnerability of community programs but also demonstrate their adaptability and continued relevance for vulnerable groups.

Given these realities, it becomes necessary to systematically examine the perceived effectiveness of community-based support programs for youths living with traumatic experiences in Nigeria. Youths’ perceptions are critical indicators of program relevance, acceptability, and contextual fit. Their perspectives illuminate whether community programs truly address reintegration needs, foster meaningful participation, improve psychological well-being, and strengthen social belonging. Investigating these perceptions within Nigerian communities can generate context-specific evidence that supports program improvement, guides policy implementation, and contributes to trauma-responsive community development. This study, therefore, focuses on understanding how youths in Nigeria evaluate the effectiveness of community-based support programs in promoting their reintegration following traumatic experiences, situating these insights within the broader discourse on community-driven psychosocial support and youth recovery.

Unfortunately, it is observed that youths in Nigeria continue to experience a wide range of traumatic events, including community violence, domestic abuse, displacement, cult-related activities, kidnapping, and exposure to armed conflicts. These traumatic experiences often result in long-term psychological, social, and behavioural consequences that hinder healthy functioning and reintegration into society. Existing research has highlighted the burden of trauma among young people in Nigeria and the inadequate access to trauma-informed care (Amedu & Dwarika, 2025). Studies conducted in other low- and middle-income settings also demonstrate that post-traumatic stress symptoms remain significant among individuals who have experienced violence or crisis (Anbesaw et al., 2022). Evidence from previous studies indicates that community-focused models can help restore functioning and strengthen support networks when properly implemented (Mazzeo & Bendixen, 2023; Williams & Thompson, 2011). However, findings from other contexts cannot be assumed to translate directly into local Nigerian realities without empirical investigation.

In Nigeria, community-based programs are gradually expanding in areas such as substance abuse prevention, behavioural change, and domestic violence reduction, demonstrating that locally grounded interventions can influence attitudes and psychosocial outcomes ( Ajuzie , Martin & Onwuka, 2023; Awolaran & OlaOlorun , 2025). Yet, despite the growing relevance of these initiatives, there is a notable lack of empirical evidence on the perceived effectiveness of community-based support programs specifically targeting the reintegration of youths with traumatic experiences. Moreover, reintegration after trauma is multidimensional, involving psychological recovery, social acceptance, re-engagement with family systems, participation in education or livelihood activities, and the rebuilding of self-efficacy. While international research on reintegration shows that community-based frameworks can enhance resilience, belonging, and psychosocial well-being (Goodman et al., 2023; Huang & Miller Marsh, 2024), similar evidence is largely missing for Nigerian youth populations who face distinct sociocultural issues.

Therefore, the problem that this study seeks to address is the absence of empirical data on how effective community-based support programs are perceived to be in promoting the reintegration of youths with traumatic experiences in Nigeria. This knowledge gap limits policymakers, mental health practitioners, community organizations, and social workers' ability to design and implement evidence-based, culturally appropriate, and youth-centered reintegration strategies. This study is necessary to generate contextually grounded insights into the perceived effectiveness of these programs, identify strengths and limitations within existing community structures, and provide evidence that can guide program improvement and policy development. The study aims to contribute to a more informed, targeted, and effective reintegration framework for Nigeria.

METHODS

This study employed a mixed-methods design using a convergent parallel strategy in which quantitative and qualitative data were collected simultaneously, analyzed independently, and integrated during interpretation ( Ajuzie et al., 2023; Oh & Davis, 2023). The choice of a mixed approach reflected the nature of the research problem: perceived effectiveness of community-based support programs required quantifiable measurement of reintegration outcomes as well as in-depth exploration of personal experiences, contextual factors, and community-level dynamics that could not be captured through numeric data alone.

The study was conducted in Ogun State, Nigeria. To ensure adequate representation of the different socio-economic and cultural contexts of the State, a multistage cluster approach was applied. Three Local Government Areas, Abeokuta North, Ijebu Ode, and Odeda, were purposively selected because they contained active community-based support programs and reflected urban, peri-urban, and rural settings, respectively. Within each LGA, two communities with functional psychosocial or reintegration-focused programs were identified with assistance from local NGOs, community organizations, and LGA social development units. These communities served as the primary clusters from which participants were drawn.

The study targeted youths aged 15–35 years who had experienced a traumatic event and had taken part in a community-based support program in the selected communities within the past five years. Sampling proceeded through a combination of probability and purposive techniques. Program registers obtained from NGOs and community organizations constituted the primary sampling frame in communities where such records were available. Systematic random sampling was applied to these registers to select youth participants for the survey, thereby reducing selection bias and increasing representativeness. In communities where registers were incomplete or unavailable, eligible participants were identified through program staff and subsequently expanded through controlled snowballing to ensure coverage of youths who had participated but were not formally documented.

A total quantitative sample of 400 youths was targeted across the three LGAs, providing adequate statistical power for subgroup comparisons and multivariable modelling. This sample size accounted for the clustered nature of the design and allowed for potential non-response. Additionally, interviews were conducted with 12 key informants, including program facilitators, community leaders, and caregivers. The quantitative instrument consisted of a structured questionnaire containing six sections. Perceived effectiveness was measured using a Likert-scale instrument developed for this study. A pilot test was conducted in a non-study community in Ogun State, and necessary adjustments were made for clarity and cultural appropriateness. Internal consistency of the perceived effectiveness scale and other multi-item measures was examined and found satisfactory. Qualitative data were generated through semi-structured interviews. All sessions were audio-recorded with consent and complemented by field notes documenting non-verbal cues, contextual observations, and researcher reflections. Interviews typically lasted between 45 and 60 minutes.

Quantitative data were entered into a secure database, cleaned, and analyzed using appropriate statistical software. Descriptive statistics summarized participant characteristics and patterns of perceived effectiveness. Inferential statistics, such as Pearson Correlation and t-Test independent samples were used to analyse the hypotheses at a 0.05 level of significance. Qualitative data were transcribed verbatim and analyzed thematically. Transcripts were coded through an iterative process that combined inductive generation of themes with deductive application of concepts drawn from reintegration theory and trauma recovery literature. Coding was conducted independently by multiple researchers, followed by consensus meetings to refine the codebook and ensure analytic rigor. Integration of quantitative and qualitative strands occurred during interpretation. Informed consent was obtained before respondents could access the questionnaire. Confidentiality of responses was ensured by anonymizing data and storing information securely, with access limited to the research team. No personally identifiable information was disclosed, and results were reported in aggregate form. These steps align with global ethical practices for social science research.

RESULTS

This section presents the analyses of respondents’ demographic characteristics, the research questions, and the study’s hypotheses. Table 1 provides a summary of the demographic information of the respondents, while Tables 2 through 6 present the analyses addressing the research questions. Furthermore, the results of the hypotheses tested are reported in Tables 7 and 8. Of the 400 questionnaires administered, 368 were duly completed and returned, representing a response rate of 92%. In addition, 12 key informants participated in the interview phase of the study.

Table 8 displays the results of the independent samples t-test comparing reintegration levels between youths who participate in community-based support programs and those who do not participate. The table shows that participants recorded a higher mean reintegration score (M = 3.18, SD = 0.81) than non-participants (M = 2.91, SD = 0.89). Both means fall within the moderately high range, but the noticeable difference reflects that those engaged in the programs reported more positive reintegration experiences. The t-test result (t (366) = 3.42, p = .001) further confirms that this difference is statistically significant. The findings, therefore, suggest that youths who have access to counseling, mentorship, psychosocial support, skill-building activities, and community engagement platforms are more likely to achieve smoother reintegration compared to peers who do not engage in such programs.

DISCUSSION

The study demonstrated that youths generally perceived community-based support programs as helpful and relevant to their recovery, describing improvements in emotional stability, coping ability, and daily functioning. These experiences were reinforced by facilitators and community leaders who observed that participants became more open, confident, and socially engaged over time. This aligns with earlier evidence showing that community-rooted interventions foster emotional expression, psychological safety, and relational support (Mazzeo & Bendixen, 2023; Konanur et al., 2015). The safe and supportive environments described in this study also reflect findings that adolescents value trust, openness, and culturally grounded engagement in community programs ( Tuaf & Orkibi , 2025; Iemmi et al., 2016).

Reintegration outcomes were similarly positive, as many youths reported stronger social relationships, a renewed sense of belonging, and greater participation in community life. Caregivers confirmed these improvements through observations of increased communication and responsibility at home. These patterns are consistent with research showing that community engagement strengthens belonging and social adjustment among vulnerable youths (Goodman et al., 2023; Huang & Miller Marsh, 2024) and support arguments that reintegration is shaped by community norms, family involvement, and broader social acceptance ( Zewude et al., 2023; Williams & Thompson, 2011). The study further showed that structured sessions, respectful communication, relevant activities, and safe program spaces shaped youths’ positive perceptions of effectiveness. Facilitators’ efforts to build trust and maintain culturally responsive interactions reflect features already identified as essential for effective community programs (Hill et al., 2024; Huang et al., 2025). This convergence between program design and user experience supports earlier observations that successful interventions depend on environments that meet youths’ emotional and contextual needs (Middleton et al., 2022).

Despite these strengths, youths also identified barriers such as transportation difficulties, financial constraints, stigma, privacy concerns, and emotional distress. These challenges correspond with earlier work showing that community-based initiatives in low-resource settings often face structural and psychological barriers (Ahmed et al., 2024) and that fear of judgment discourages trauma disclosure ( Amedu & Dwarika, 2025). Stigma in particular remains a persistent concern in many African contexts and can undermine program engagement (Sharpe et al., 2024; Ajuzie et al., 2023). However, community-related factors played a significant role, as family encouragement, community leadership, and trust in program settings improved youths’ willingness to participate, while stigma discouraged involvement. These findings align with social-ecological perspectives emphasizing that reintegration success depends on supportive community norms and acceptance ( Zewude et al., 2023; Ellis et al., 2024). Research showing that community acceptance is vital for rebuilding identity among trauma-affected youths further strengthens this interpretation (Awada & Song, 2025).

The study also demonstrated a strong relationship between positive perceptions of program effectiveness and reintegration outcomes, a pattern supported by qualitative reports of improved confidence, functioning, and social connection. This reflects earlier evidence that trauma recovery and reintegration are mutually reinforcing and shaped by effective community support (Wallace et al., 2011; Oh & Davis, 2023). Finally, youths who participated in community-based programs showed better reintegration outcomes than non-participants, reporting greater emotional stability, improved social relationships, and stronger community belonging. This aligns with findings that structured community programs enhance resilience and wellbeing among marginalized youth (Goodman et al., 2023; Oh & Davis, 2023). Overall, the study’s quantitative and qualitative findings converge to reinforce existing literature affirming the value of community-based support programs in promoting recovery and reintegration among trauma-exposed youths.

CONCLUSIONS

This study examined how youths with traumatic experiences in Ogun State perceive the effectiveness of community-based support programs and how these perceptions relate to their reintegration. The findings revealed that most youths considered the programs helpful in improving their emotional wellbeing, coping capacity, confidence, and daily functioning. Reintegration outcomes were similarly positive, as participants described stronger social relationships, increased community participation, and a renewed sense of belonging. Program features such as structured activities, respectful facilitators, relevant content, and safe environments further enhanced the perceived value of community-based support.

The study also highlighted significant challenges affecting participation, including transportation difficulties, financial barriers, emotional hesitations, stigma, and privacy concerns. Community-related factors played a major role: family encouragement, community leadership support, and trust in the program environment fostered active engagement, while negative attitudes and stigma discouraged it. A strong and positive relationship was found between perceived program effectiveness and reintegration, and youths who participated in programs demonstrated better reintegration outcomes than non-participants. Generally, the study concludes that community-based support programs are effective mechanisms for promoting recovery and reintegration among trauma-exposed youths, but their impact is constrained by structural, emotional, and socio-cultural barriers. Based on the findings, the following recommendations were made:

Government agencies such as the Ministry of Health, Ministry of Youths, and Local Government Councils should improve funding for community-based programs, provide transportation support, integrate trauma support into youth development policies, and implement community sensitization campaigns to reduce stigma and enhance youths’ participation.

Community-based organizations and NGOs should strengthen program content with empowerment and life-skills components, ensure confidentiality and flexible schedules, expand outreach to youths facing emotional or logistical barriers, and create safe, youth-friendly environments that encourage openness and trust.

Program facilitators and mental health practitioners should adopt trauma-informed, youth-centered approaches, maintain respectful communication, offer individualized counselling for youths concerned about privacy, and consistently monitor participants’ progress to improve engagement and reintegration outcomes.

Community leaders, traditional rulers, and religious leaders should openly promote program participation, mobilize community resources to support implementation, challenge stigma through public dialogue, and foster an inclusive environment that encourages reintegration and acceptance of trauma-affected youths.

Families and caregivers should encourage regular program attendance, participate in family counselling to strengthen home relationships, reinforce positive behaviours at home, and provide emotional and practical support that enables youths to reintegrate smoothly into their communities.

However, this study has some limitations. First, this study was limited by its reliance on self-reported data, which may have been influenced by social desirability, especially given the sensitive nature of trauma. Some youths were hesitant to disclose personal experiences, which may have reduced the depth of information obtained. The study was also conducted within selected communities in Ogun State, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to other regions with different cultural or socio-economic contexts. In addition, the cross-sectional design does not allow for tracking long-term changes in reintegration or program effectiveness over time. Time constraints during interviews and the availability of participants also posed challenges, affecting the volume and richness of qualitative insights. Despite these limitations, the research provides meaningful evidence about how youths perceive community-based support programs and the factors that shape their reintegration.

However, future studies should consider using longitudinal research designs to explore changes in youths’ recovery and reintegration over longer periods. Researchers could also expand the geographical scope to include multiple states or regions, allowing for comparisons across diverse cultural settings. Further qualitative-focused studies could explore in more depth the personal experiences of youths who are reluctant to participate in community-based programs, particularly those facing stigma or emotional resistance. Additionally, future research may examine the effectiveness of specific program components, such as counselling, skills training, or peer support, to determine which interventions contribute most to reintegration. Finally, studies involving families, program facilitators, and community leaders as separate respondent groups could provide a broader understanding of the social dynamics influencing trauma recovery.

References

1. 1 Ahmed, A. N., Nuri, R. P., Xu, X., Balakrishna, V., Sebeh, A., Maholo, C., & Aldersey, H. M. (2024). Community-based rehabilitation/community-based inclusive development functioning during the COVID-19 pandemic: A secondary analysis of qualitative data. Plos one, 19(1), e0296274.
2. 2 Ajuzie, G. C., Martin, E. O., & Onwuka, O. M. (2023). A Community-Based Study of Behavioural Perception of Psychoactive Drug Abuse in Southern Nigeria. Annals of Health Research, 9(1), 23-29.
3. 3 Amedu, A. N., & Dwarika, V. (2025). Traumatic Experiences and Access to Trauma-informed Care Among Undergraduate Students: Evidence From Nigeria. Journal of Research and Health, 15(6), 583-592.
4. 4 Anbesaw, T., Zenebe, Y., Asmamaw, A., Shegaw, M., & Birru, N. (2022). Post-traumatic stress disorder and associated factors among people who experienced traumatic events in dessie town, Ethiopia, 2022: a community based study. Frontiers in psychiatry, 13, 1026878.
5. 5 Awada, S. R., & Song, S. J. (2025). Children associated with armed forces and armed groups: Understanding and addressing mental health needs. Psychiatry, 88(3), 192-206.
6. 6 Awolaran, O., & OlaOlorun, F. M. (2025). A community-based intervention to challenge attitudes towards intimate partner violence: Results from a randomised community trial in rural South-West Nigeria. Rural and Remote Health, 25(2), 1-11.
7. 7 Ellis, B. H., King, M., Cardeli, E., Christopher, E., Davis, S., Yohannes, S., ... & Weine, S. (2024). Supporting women and children returning from violent extremist contexts: proposing a 5R framework to inform program and policy development. Terrorism and political violence, 36(4), 425-454.
8. 8 Goodman, M. L., Seidel, S. E., Springer, A., Elliott, A., Markham, C., Serag, H., ... & Gitari, S. (2023). Enabling structural resilience of street-involved children and youth in Kenya: reintegration outcomes and the Flourishing Community model. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1175593.
9. 9 Hill, J., Massey, E., & Gullo, H. (2024). Understanding the experience of community-based fitness professionals supporting people with disability to engage in sport and exercise: A national survey. Disability and Rehabilitation, 46(14), 3086-3096.
10. 10 Huang, G. H. C., & Miller Marsh, M. (2024). Fostering newly resettled refugee-background adolescents’ self-efficacy and advocacy in a community-based youth program. Journal for Multicultural Education, 18(4), 554-568.
11. 11 Huang, G. H., Marsh, M. M., & Paul, N. A. (2025, January). In Their Words: Effective Strategies for Supporting Newly Resettled Refugee Background Adolescents in a Community-Based Program. In Child & Youth Care Forum (pp. 1-16). New York: Springer US.
12. 12 Konanur, S., Muller, R. T., Cinamon, J. S., Thornback, K., & Zorzella, K. P. (2015). Effectiveness of trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy in a community-based program. Child abuse & neglect, 50, 159-170.
13. 13 Iemmi, V., Blanchet, K., Gibson, L. J., Kumar, K. S., Rath, S., Hartley, S., ... & Kuper, H. (2016). Community-based rehabilitation for people with physical and mental disabilities in low-and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Development Effectiveness, 8(3), 368-387.
14. 14 Liggins, L. L. (2024). The impact social support and community-based programs have on the reduction of recidivism. Pepperdine University.
15. 15 Maha, C. C., Kolawole, T. O., & Abdul, S. (2024). Innovative community-based strategies to combat adolescent substance use in urban areas of the US and Africa. International Journal of Applied Research in Social Sciences, 6(6), 1048-1067.
16. 16 Mazzeo, G., & Bendixen, R. (2023). Community-based interventions for childhood trauma: A scoping review. OTJR: Occupational Therapy Journal of Research, 43(1), 14-23.
17. 17 Middleton, T. R., Schinke, R. J., Lefebvre, D., Habra, B., Coholic, D., & Giffin, C. (2022). Critically examining a community-based participatory action research project with forced migrant youth. Sport in Society, 25(3), 418-433.
18. 18 Mitchell-Gillespie, B., Hashim, H., Griffin, M., & AlHeresh, R. (2020). Sustainable support solutions for community-based rehabilitation workers in refugee camps: piloting telehealth acceptability and implementation. Globalization and health, 16(1), 82.
19. 19 Oh, J., & Davis, R. (2023). A community-based adapted exercise program to increase quality of life and self-efficacy among adults with physical disabilities: A mixed-method study. Prosthetics and Orthotics International, 47(1), 60-68.
20. 20 Sharpe, D., Rajabi, M., Mesa, L. G., Hanafiah, A., Obuaku-Igwe, C., Davidson, J., & Chileshe, K. (2024). An exploratory cross-cultural study of community-based health literacy interventions to promote the mental well-being of disadvantaged and disabled young Africans: a multi-method approach. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 15, 1424836.
21. 21 Tuaf, H., & Orkibi, H. (2025). Through Their Eyes: Adolescents’ and Stakeholders’ Perceptions of a Community-Based Recovery Program. Child Indicators Research, 1-23.
22. 22 Wallace, B. C., Conner, L. C., & Dass-Brailsford, P. (2011). Integrated trauma treatment in correctional health care and community-based treatment upon reentry. Journal of Correctional Health Care, 17(4), 329-343.
23. 23 Williams, M. E., & Thompson, S. C. (2011). The use of community-based interventions in reducing morbidity from the psychological impact of conflict-related trauma among refugee populations: a systematic review of the literature. Journal of immigrant and minority health, 13(4), 780-794.
24. 24 Zewude, B., Tadele, G., Engdawork, K., & Assefa, S. (2023). A social-ecological view of the factors affecting the effectiveness of reintegration interventions targeting children out of family-based care situations: A scoping review. Cogent Social Sciences, 9(2), 2277343.