Evidence-based intergenerational practices are sought by practitioners interested in the potential value of intergenerational programs. These are often difficult to identify as intergenerational program research frequently consists of small samples and pre-post analyses of attitudinal data with little attention to implementation characteristics. We systematically identified evidence-based intergenerational practices linked to program outcomes from peer-reviewed journal articles ( n = 21) published between 2000 and 2019. Scoping reviews facilitate synthesis of available evidence-based practices and identification of gaps in the literature. Fifteen evidence-based intergenerational practices were identified; each was coded in at least five articles. The practices informed program content (e.g., using technology), program considerations (e.g., environmental modifications), facilitator and participant preparation (e.g., training), and quality interactions among participants (e.g., incorporating mechanisms of friendship). While these identified practices reflect extant theory and research, rigorous implementation research is needed to advance evidence-based intergenerational practice as policymakers and practitioners advocate for intergenerational program growth.

Intergenerational programs have long been employed to reduce ageism and optimize youth and older adult development. Most involve in‐person meetings, which COVID‐19 arrested. ​​Needs for safety and social contact were amplified during COVID‐19, leading to modified programming that engaged generations remotely rather than eliminating it. Our collective case study incorporates four intergenerational programs in five US states prior to and during COVID‐19. Each aims to reduce ageism, incorporating nutrition education, technology skills, or photography programming. Authors present case goals, participants, implementation methods, including responses to COVID‐19, outcomes, and lessons learned. Technology afforded opportunities for intergenerational connections; non‐technological methods also were employed. Across cases, programmatic foci were maintained through adaptive programming. Community partners’ awareness of immediate needs facilitated responsive programming with universities, who leveraged unique resources. While new methods and partnerships will continue post‐pandemic, authors concurred that virtual contact cannot fully substitute for in‐person relationship‐building. Remote programming maintained ties between groups ready to resume shared in‐person programming as soon as possible; they now have tested means for responding to routine or novel cancellations of in‐person programming. Able to implement in‐person and remote intergenerational programming, communities can fight ageism and pursue diverse goals regardless of health, transportation, weather, or other restrictions.

No abstract

Intergenerational practitioners responding to a 2018 national survey identified a need for evidence-informed evaluation tools to measure program impact. The Best Practices (BP) Checklist, a 14-item (yes/no) measure assessing the extent to which an intergenerational program session maintained effective intergenerational strategies, may help meet this need. Yet, researchers have not validated the measure. In this study, we begin the empirical validation process by completing an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) of the BP Checklist to offer insight into possible item reduction and an underlying latent factor structure. Using BP Checklist data from 132 intergenerational activities, we found a 13-item, 3-factor structure, reflecting dimensions of: (a) pairing intergenerational participants, (b) person-centered strategies (e.g., selecting activities reflecting participants’ interests), and (c) staff knowledge of participants. Our study represents a foundational step toward optimizing intergenerational program evaluation, thereby enhancing programming quality.

No abstract