What are positive childhood experiences?
Positive childhood experiences are everyday interpersonal connections that support healthy developmental outcomes1, 2, 3. They are a type of social and relational protective factor2, 4, 5 that can occur in the different settings where families, schools and communities interact and engage with children5.
PCEs are the opposite of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and other events that cause major stress and trauma in a child’s life. Along with building protection, PCEs can help offset the negative consequences of adversity6, 7, 8, 9.
Examples of PCEs
Children can receive and engage with PCEs in many ways, including but not limited to these:
- a positive and caring relationship with at least one caregiver
- a positive connection with at least one teacher
- a mentor or coach who provides support
- a healthy connection with an encouraging neighbour
- volunteer involvement and other fun, safe and supportive activities outside the home
Why PCEs matter: the evidence
PCEs can influence positive outcomes for all children, even those affected by adversity2, 7 or involved with the juvenile justice system10, 11. When children have enough positive experiences, or encounter them across several settings, PCEs offer an important counterbalance to the negative effects of ACEs and other adversity4.
One finding is particularly relevant: the accumulation of PCEs can offset exposure to risk, and it may help explain why some people exposed to adversity do not develop the negative outcomes one would expect5. That is the resilience-building effect of PCEs.
For practice, the essential point is that PCEs are realistic and feasible to implement. Positive, supportive and nurturing experiences can be intentionally built into programmatic work with children, young people and young adults across developmental and cultural contexts4.
Lifelong benefits: PCEs across every stage of life
The benefits of PCEs ripple through every stage of life. Outcomes have been documented from infancy through adulthood and across generations. The table summarises them.
| Stage of development | Outcomes associated with PCEs |
|---|---|
| Infancy and early childhood |
|
| Middle childhood, late childhood and adolescence |
|
| Adulthood |
|
| Across generations |
|
How can practitioners and policymakers foster PCEs?
Practitioners and policymakers can increase the prevalence and frequency of PCEs by implementing and funding evidence-based strategies that focus on social and relational health in community, school and other settings serving children and families. They can also support screening for PCEs, which helps service providers identify and build on existing strengths.
The Social Development Strategy as a proven approach
The is a proven approach to building protection12, 13, 15, and it can be used to enhance PCEs. The strategy strengthens positive bonds and connections between children and positive adults – parents, teachers, peers, coaches, faith leaders – through three core elements:
- opportunities for positive involvement – children are given ways to take an active part
- the skills to be successful – the competences they need are taught
- recognition of effort and outcomes – children’s contributions are acknowledged
The bonds forged in this way help motivate children to abide by clear standards for behaviour set by those who have provided the opportunities, skills and recognition, which results in healthy behaviour at home, in school and in the community. Intentionally building these components into the social and relational experiences offered to young people is a practical and effective way to enhance PCEs. It is the same strategy that Swedish CTC areas teach to thousands of adults in Malmö.
Tiered approaches
Tiered intervention approaches are another way to increase children’s experience of PCEs. Communities might, for example:
- offer a family-based curriculum to families and caregivers
- implement school-based strategies that promote positive relationships
- use community-based mentoring to reach children and families who need more intensive support
Policy options
Policymakers can support greater access to PCEs in several ways:
- investment in effective strategies with demonstrated impact on bonding and social connection
- prevention policies that address families’ social needs19, for example by reducing poverty and increasing access to quality services and relational support
- integration of PCEs into the broader prevention infrastructure
Monitoring PCEs: the view from Washington State
Practitioners, policymakers and others can use student self-report data from the biennial Washington State Healthy Youth Survey to understand students’ experiences of PCEs and monitor trends over time. Statewide data from 2018 to 2023 consistently show a positive community norm:
The data indicate the potential to increase positive community norms further, and to improve youth outcomes, by giving children more exposure to PCEs. European readers will recognise the instrument: the Healthy Youth Survey shares its origins with the CTC youth survey, and the three opportunity measures are the same protective-factor scales that a CTC community reads in its own profile.
Future directions for building PCEs
The research on PCEs is still developing. Future research, practice and policy efforts are needed to better understand the preventive and protective role of PCEs for individuals and across entire communities and systems.
Understanding how PCEs amplify strengths
Further work is needed to understand how PCEs amplify the strengths and capacities of both individuals and communities5, including the interplay between individual and collective protective factors.
Implementation and effectiveness
Ongoing implementation of PCEs is needed to better understand:
- whether developing and sustaining PCEs across multiple domains and developmental stages can meaningfully offset the negative impact of adversity5
- how PCEs can complement and operate in tandem with other prevention and intervention efforts
Integration into the prevention infrastructure
PCEs can also be integrated into a broader prevention infrastructure to strengthen the foundation for healthy and successful children, families, organisations and communities. Policymakers have several options for ensuring that PCEs are included in:
- economic and social programmes
- workforce development priorities
- assessment and governing practices
- funding strategies
Key messages
- PCEs are everyday interpersonal experiences in family, school, peer and community settings that support children’s healthy physical, emotional, behavioural and cognitive development.
- PCEs are associated with positive long-term outcomes for children and adults.
- PCEs can help counterbalance the impact of risk and offer an important buffer against adversity.
- PCEs have intergenerational impact: PCEs in one generation are associated with healthier outcomes in the next.
- PCEs can be enhanced by policy and practice, through targeted social, economic and practical strategies.
What this means for European communities
The brief comes from one US state, but little in it is specific to that state. The it describes – bonds to caring adults, opportunities to contribute, recognition for doing so – are the same ones a CTC youth survey measures anywhere in Europe, and the Social Development Strategy it recommends is already part of the CTC process on this continent. The documented effects across the life course and across generations underline the value of early, positive intervention. Four courses of action follow for communities and prevention agencies:
- foster PCEs systematically in every relevant setting: family, school and community
- implement the Social Development Strategy as a proven approach, and train the adults who work with children in it
- monitor PCEs through a regular youth survey, so that protection is measured, not assumed
- integrate PCEs into existing prevention programmes and structures
Investing in positive childhood experiences is an investment in the future, with demonstrable effects for individuals, for families and for whole communities.
References
Original source:
Houghten, M., Kuklinski, M., Meiser, A., Egbon, O., & Ranjit, J. (2025). Building Positive Childhood Experiences as a Foundation for Lifelong Health and Wellbeing. Washington State Health Care Authority, Olympia, WA. https://depts.washington.edu/sdrg/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/PCEs-SDS-Research-Brief.pdf
Studies cited in the brief:
1. Sousa, M., Machado, A. B., Pinheiro, M., Pereira, B., Caridade, S., Almeida, T. C., Cruz, A. R., & Cunha, O. (2025). The impact of positive childhood experiences: A systematic review focused on children and adolescents. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380251320978
2. Han, D., Dieujuste, N., Doom, J. R., & Narayan, A. J. (2023). A systematic review of positive childhood experiences and adult outcomes: Promotive and protective processes for resilience in the context of childhood adversity. Child Abuse & Neglect, 144, 106346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2023.106346
3. So, M. R., Woodward, K. P., Shlafer, R. J., Testa, A., Davis, L., & Jackson, D. B. (2023). Positive early childhood experiences and school readiness among U.S. preschoolers. Journal of Pediatrics, 262, Article 113637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2023.113637
4. Narayan, A. J., Rivera, L. M., Bernstein, R. E., Harris, W. W., & Lieberman, A. F. (2018). Positive childhood experiences predict less psychopathology and stress in pregnant women with childhood adversity: A pilot study of the benevolent childhood experiences (BCEs) scale. Child Abuse & Neglect, 78, 19–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2017.09.022
5. Bethell, C., Jones, J., Gombojav, N., Linkenbach, J., & Sege, R. (2019). Positive childhood experiences and adult mental and relational health in a statewide sample. JAMA Pediatrics, 173(11), e193007. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2019.3007
6. Reese, E. M., Barlow, M. J., Dillon, M., Villalon, S., Barnes, M. D., & Crandall, A. (2022). Intergenerational transmission of trauma: The mediating effects of family health. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(10), 5944. https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/10/5944
7. Wang, D., Jiang, Q., Yang, Z., & Choi, J.-K. (2021). The longitudinal influences of adverse childhood experiences and positive childhood experiences at family, school, and neighborhood on adolescent depression and anxiety. Journal of Affective Disorders, 292, 542–551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2021.05.108
8. Narayan, A. J., Lieberman, A. F., & Masten, A. S. (2021). Intergenerational transmission and prevention of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs). Clinical Psychology Review, 85, Article 101997. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2021.101997
9. Morris, A. S., Hays-Grudo, J., Zapata, M. I., Treat, A., & Kerr, K. L. (2021). Adverse and protective childhood experiences and parenting attitudes: The role of cumulative protection in understanding resilience. Adversity and Resilience Science, 2(3), 181–192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42844-021-00036-8
10. Winn, A., Hannan, K., Sege, R., & Burstein, D. (2025). Reimagining the juvenile justice system through the healthy outcomes from positive experiences framework. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 22(5), 782. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph22050782
11. Lynne, S. D., Fagan, A. A., Counts, T. M., Bryan, J. L., Kidd, J., & Fogarty, K. (2025). Buffering effects of positive childhood experiences on the association between adolescents’ adverse childhood experiences and delinquency: A statewide study. Child Abuse & Neglect, 163, 107325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2025.107325
12. Hill, K. G., Bailey, J. A., Steeger, C. M., Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R. F., Kosterman, R., Epstein, M., & Abbott, R. D. (2020). Outcomes of childhood preventive intervention across 2 generations: A nonrandomized controlled trial. JAMA Pediatrics, 174(8), 764–771.
13. Catalano, R. F., Hawkins, D. J., Kosterman, R., Bailey, J. A., Oesterle, S., Cambron, C., & Farrington, D. P. (2021). Applying the Social Development Model in middle childhood to promote healthy development: Effects from primary school through the 30s and across generations. Journal of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology, 7(1), 66–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40865-020-00152-6
14. Kim, B. E., Gloppen, K. M., Rhew, I. C., Oesterle, S., & Hawkins, J. D. (2015a). Effects of the Communities That Care prevention system on youth reports of protective factors. Prevention Science, 16, 652–662.
15. Kim, B. E., Oesterle, S., Hawkins, J. D., & Shapiro, V. B. (2015b). Assessing sustained effects of Communities That Care on youth protective factors. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, 6(4), 565–589.
16. Crouch, E., Radcliff, E., Merrell, M. A., Hung, P., & Bennett, K. J. (2021). Positive childhood experiences promote school success. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 25(10), 1646–1654. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-021-03206-3
17. Crouch, E., et al. (2023). Examining bullying victimization, bullying perpetration, and positive childhood experiences. Journal of School Health, 93, 669–678. https://doi.org/10.1111/josh.13323
18. Cunha, O., Sousa, M., Pereira, B., Pinheiro, M., Machado, A. B., Caridade, S., & Almeida, T. C. (2024). Positive childhood experiences and adult outcomes: A systematic review. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380241299434
19. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2025). Blueprint for a national prevention infrastructure for mental, emotional, and behavioral disorders. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/28577
20. Washington State Healthy Youth Survey (n.d.). Data Dashboard. https://www.askhys.net/