Recovery community centers, also known as peer recovery support centers, are peer-operated spaces offering community and services for people in or seeking recovery. Over the past decade, they have increased in popularity, yet little is known about how such centers impact different outcomes. This study examined this in relation to daily meaning and recovery identity.
l
Recovery community centers are peer-operated spaces offering community services for people in or seeking recovery from a substance use disorder. The centers serve as a hub to build recovery capital, or the resources needed to establish and maintain recovery, through resources such as peer coaching, mutual-help groups, advocacy, and life skills training. Their numbers are increasing nationally, with a recent study demonstrating that more than half of surveyed recovery community centers have opened in the last 5 years. Given their relatively recent proliferation, little is known about how recovery community center participation actually impacts recovery outcomes. This study examined the extent to which perceived helpfulness of recovery community centers was associated with daily meaning and recovery identity.
The current study was a naturalistic daily diary design among 88 recovery community center attendees. Attendees of recovery community centers were recruited from 6 different recovery community centers in Pennsylvania. After completing a baseline survey, participants completed a 10-minute survey each day for 10 days. The surveys asked participants whether they had spent any time at a recovery community center, and, if so, participants answered 7 questions about the helpfulness of their time at the recovery community center (see graphic below).
Participants also answered questions each day about how meaningful their day had been (e.g., “My day has been meaningful”; “My day has been gratifying”) and their recovery identity (e.g., “I kept recovery central to my day”; “I was grateful to be in recovery”). The researchers wanted to better understand the degree to which attendee’s perception of the helpfulness of recovery community centers each day was associated with the amount of meaning they reported and the strength of their recovery identity. The authors used two types of statistical models: one examining these questions at the level of the day (e.g., does higher recovery community center helpfulness on a given day predict higher daily meaningfulness and recovery identity) and one at the level of the person (e.g., do those who have overall higher perceptions of recovery community center helpfulness also have higher overall meaningfulness and recovery identity). Additional models tested whether helpfulness was associated with recovery experiences, even when accounting for that recovery experience the prior day. This type of approach can help make the case that recovery community center helpfulness is actually leading to enhanced meaning and recovery identity rather than the other way around.
There were no treatments applied. Although the researchers initially recruited 94 participants, 6 did not attend a recovery community center for the duration of the 10-day study and their data were omitted. The sample was, on average, 43 years of age, and 56% were female. Participants were primarily White (78%); 16% were Black, and 67% identified as another race. The sample was diverse in terms of time spent in recovery: 36% had been in recovery for less than a year, 33% between 1 and 5 years, and 31% for greater than 5 years. About half (47%) of the sample were employed full time, whereas 30.7% were unemployed. Seven in 10 (68%) had an annual household income of less than $50,000.
Greater perceived recovery community center helpfulness was associated with higher meaning and recovery identity
Participants visited recovery community centers on almost 1/3 of days during the study (30.9%). The researchers found that helpfulness significantly varied day to day. Those who reported higher perceived recovery community center helpfulness overall also reported greater overall meaning and greater overall recovery identity. Further, reporting higher perceived recovery community center helpfulness on a given day was associated with greater overall meaning and greater overall recovery identity on that day. These results were identical when controlling for the previous days outcome, helping make the case that helpfulness is causing greater recovery meaning and identity, rather than the other way around.
Among individuals who engage with recovery community centers, those who find their engagement helpful are also likely to experience higher meaning in life and stronger recovery identity. These two factors, in turn may help protect against future relapses and disorder recurrence as they might be considered recovery resilience factors. The study also showed that perceived helpfulness was not consistent across days, suggesting that helpfulness may fluctuate depending on what resources are available on any given day, and how and with what the attendees engage. This might suggest that the effectiveness of recovery community centers may depend upon individual component parts, such as the mutual-help groups on a given day, or other resources the participants access, rather than the recovery community center as a whole. As a result, the impact of recovery community centers on recovery outcomes may be amplified when the needs and wants of recovery community center attendees are considered.
It is worth nothing that this sample may have been higher functioning than other recovery community center samples. For example, 31% of this sample was in recovery for 5+ years, compared to 20% of a separate sample of recovery community center members from 31 programs in New England. Similarly, about half were employed full-time compared to 20% of the New England sample. Having more recovery capital – as was the case for the current sample – may be naturally associated with higher levels of recovery meaning and identity. It is possible that in samples with lower recovery capital, perceived recovery community center helpfulness would have even higher associations with meaning and recovery identity.
This study suggests that perceiving recovery community centers as more helpful is associated with greater perceived daily meaning and recovery identity. These two factors, in turn, may help protect against future relapse and disorder recurrence as they might be considered as resilience factors. Future research is needed to determine whether, how, and to what degree, recovery community center participation is helpful, especially to individuals in early recovery.
Apsley, H. B., Lancaster, J., Ren, W., Brick, T., & Cleveland, H. H. (2025). Experiences at recovery community centers predict holistic recovery outcomes: A daily diary assessment of RCC helpfulness, meaningfulness, and recovery identity. Frontiers in Public Health, 12. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1476441.
l
Recovery community centers are peer-operated spaces offering community services for people in or seeking recovery from a substance use disorder. The centers serve as a hub to build recovery capital, or the resources needed to establish and maintain recovery, through resources such as peer coaching, mutual-help groups, advocacy, and life skills training. Their numbers are increasing nationally, with a recent study demonstrating that more than half of surveyed recovery community centers have opened in the last 5 years. Given their relatively recent proliferation, little is known about how recovery community center participation actually impacts recovery outcomes. This study examined the extent to which perceived helpfulness of recovery community centers was associated with daily meaning and recovery identity.
The current study was a naturalistic daily diary design among 88 recovery community center attendees. Attendees of recovery community centers were recruited from 6 different recovery community centers in Pennsylvania. After completing a baseline survey, participants completed a 10-minute survey each day for 10 days. The surveys asked participants whether they had spent any time at a recovery community center, and, if so, participants answered 7 questions about the helpfulness of their time at the recovery community center (see graphic below).
Participants also answered questions each day about how meaningful their day had been (e.g., “My day has been meaningful”; “My day has been gratifying”) and their recovery identity (e.g., “I kept recovery central to my day”; “I was grateful to be in recovery”). The researchers wanted to better understand the degree to which attendee’s perception of the helpfulness of recovery community centers each day was associated with the amount of meaning they reported and the strength of their recovery identity. The authors used two types of statistical models: one examining these questions at the level of the day (e.g., does higher recovery community center helpfulness on a given day predict higher daily meaningfulness and recovery identity) and one at the level of the person (e.g., do those who have overall higher perceptions of recovery community center helpfulness also have higher overall meaningfulness and recovery identity). Additional models tested whether helpfulness was associated with recovery experiences, even when accounting for that recovery experience the prior day. This type of approach can help make the case that recovery community center helpfulness is actually leading to enhanced meaning and recovery identity rather than the other way around.
There were no treatments applied. Although the researchers initially recruited 94 participants, 6 did not attend a recovery community center for the duration of the 10-day study and their data were omitted. The sample was, on average, 43 years of age, and 56% were female. Participants were primarily White (78%); 16% were Black, and 67% identified as another race. The sample was diverse in terms of time spent in recovery: 36% had been in recovery for less than a year, 33% between 1 and 5 years, and 31% for greater than 5 years. About half (47%) of the sample were employed full time, whereas 30.7% were unemployed. Seven in 10 (68%) had an annual household income of less than $50,000.
Greater perceived recovery community center helpfulness was associated with higher meaning and recovery identity
Participants visited recovery community centers on almost 1/3 of days during the study (30.9%). The researchers found that helpfulness significantly varied day to day. Those who reported higher perceived recovery community center helpfulness overall also reported greater overall meaning and greater overall recovery identity. Further, reporting higher perceived recovery community center helpfulness on a given day was associated with greater overall meaning and greater overall recovery identity on that day. These results were identical when controlling for the previous days outcome, helping make the case that helpfulness is causing greater recovery meaning and identity, rather than the other way around.
Among individuals who engage with recovery community centers, those who find their engagement helpful are also likely to experience higher meaning in life and stronger recovery identity. These two factors, in turn may help protect against future relapses and disorder recurrence as they might be considered recovery resilience factors. The study also showed that perceived helpfulness was not consistent across days, suggesting that helpfulness may fluctuate depending on what resources are available on any given day, and how and with what the attendees engage. This might suggest that the effectiveness of recovery community centers may depend upon individual component parts, such as the mutual-help groups on a given day, or other resources the participants access, rather than the recovery community center as a whole. As a result, the impact of recovery community centers on recovery outcomes may be amplified when the needs and wants of recovery community center attendees are considered.
It is worth nothing that this sample may have been higher functioning than other recovery community center samples. For example, 31% of this sample was in recovery for 5+ years, compared to 20% of a separate sample of recovery community center members from 31 programs in New England. Similarly, about half were employed full-time compared to 20% of the New England sample. Having more recovery capital – as was the case for the current sample – may be naturally associated with higher levels of recovery meaning and identity. It is possible that in samples with lower recovery capital, perceived recovery community center helpfulness would have even higher associations with meaning and recovery identity.
This study suggests that perceiving recovery community centers as more helpful is associated with greater perceived daily meaning and recovery identity. These two factors, in turn, may help protect against future relapse and disorder recurrence as they might be considered as resilience factors. Future research is needed to determine whether, how, and to what degree, recovery community center participation is helpful, especially to individuals in early recovery.
Apsley, H. B., Lancaster, J., Ren, W., Brick, T., & Cleveland, H. H. (2025). Experiences at recovery community centers predict holistic recovery outcomes: A daily diary assessment of RCC helpfulness, meaningfulness, and recovery identity. Frontiers in Public Health, 12. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1476441.
l
Recovery community centers are peer-operated spaces offering community services for people in or seeking recovery from a substance use disorder. The centers serve as a hub to build recovery capital, or the resources needed to establish and maintain recovery, through resources such as peer coaching, mutual-help groups, advocacy, and life skills training. Their numbers are increasing nationally, with a recent study demonstrating that more than half of surveyed recovery community centers have opened in the last 5 years. Given their relatively recent proliferation, little is known about how recovery community center participation actually impacts recovery outcomes. This study examined the extent to which perceived helpfulness of recovery community centers was associated with daily meaning and recovery identity.
The current study was a naturalistic daily diary design among 88 recovery community center attendees. Attendees of recovery community centers were recruited from 6 different recovery community centers in Pennsylvania. After completing a baseline survey, participants completed a 10-minute survey each day for 10 days. The surveys asked participants whether they had spent any time at a recovery community center, and, if so, participants answered 7 questions about the helpfulness of their time at the recovery community center (see graphic below).
Participants also answered questions each day about how meaningful their day had been (e.g., “My day has been meaningful”; “My day has been gratifying”) and their recovery identity (e.g., “I kept recovery central to my day”; “I was grateful to be in recovery”). The researchers wanted to better understand the degree to which attendee’s perception of the helpfulness of recovery community centers each day was associated with the amount of meaning they reported and the strength of their recovery identity. The authors used two types of statistical models: one examining these questions at the level of the day (e.g., does higher recovery community center helpfulness on a given day predict higher daily meaningfulness and recovery identity) and one at the level of the person (e.g., do those who have overall higher perceptions of recovery community center helpfulness also have higher overall meaningfulness and recovery identity). Additional models tested whether helpfulness was associated with recovery experiences, even when accounting for that recovery experience the prior day. This type of approach can help make the case that recovery community center helpfulness is actually leading to enhanced meaning and recovery identity rather than the other way around.
There were no treatments applied. Although the researchers initially recruited 94 participants, 6 did not attend a recovery community center for the duration of the 10-day study and their data were omitted. The sample was, on average, 43 years of age, and 56% were female. Participants were primarily White (78%); 16% were Black, and 67% identified as another race. The sample was diverse in terms of time spent in recovery: 36% had been in recovery for less than a year, 33% between 1 and 5 years, and 31% for greater than 5 years. About half (47%) of the sample were employed full time, whereas 30.7% were unemployed. Seven in 10 (68%) had an annual household income of less than $50,000.
Greater perceived recovery community center helpfulness was associated with higher meaning and recovery identity
Participants visited recovery community centers on almost 1/3 of days during the study (30.9%). The researchers found that helpfulness significantly varied day to day. Those who reported higher perceived recovery community center helpfulness overall also reported greater overall meaning and greater overall recovery identity. Further, reporting higher perceived recovery community center helpfulness on a given day was associated with greater overall meaning and greater overall recovery identity on that day. These results were identical when controlling for the previous days outcome, helping make the case that helpfulness is causing greater recovery meaning and identity, rather than the other way around.
Among individuals who engage with recovery community centers, those who find their engagement helpful are also likely to experience higher meaning in life and stronger recovery identity. These two factors, in turn may help protect against future relapses and disorder recurrence as they might be considered recovery resilience factors. The study also showed that perceived helpfulness was not consistent across days, suggesting that helpfulness may fluctuate depending on what resources are available on any given day, and how and with what the attendees engage. This might suggest that the effectiveness of recovery community centers may depend upon individual component parts, such as the mutual-help groups on a given day, or other resources the participants access, rather than the recovery community center as a whole. As a result, the impact of recovery community centers on recovery outcomes may be amplified when the needs and wants of recovery community center attendees are considered.
It is worth nothing that this sample may have been higher functioning than other recovery community center samples. For example, 31% of this sample was in recovery for 5+ years, compared to 20% of a separate sample of recovery community center members from 31 programs in New England. Similarly, about half were employed full-time compared to 20% of the New England sample. Having more recovery capital – as was the case for the current sample – may be naturally associated with higher levels of recovery meaning and identity. It is possible that in samples with lower recovery capital, perceived recovery community center helpfulness would have even higher associations with meaning and recovery identity.
This study suggests that perceiving recovery community centers as more helpful is associated with greater perceived daily meaning and recovery identity. These two factors, in turn, may help protect against future relapse and disorder recurrence as they might be considered as resilience factors. Future research is needed to determine whether, how, and to what degree, recovery community center participation is helpful, especially to individuals in early recovery.
Apsley, H. B., Lancaster, J., Ren, W., Brick, T., & Cleveland, H. H. (2025). Experiences at recovery community centers predict holistic recovery outcomes: A daily diary assessment of RCC helpfulness, meaningfulness, and recovery identity. Frontiers in Public Health, 12. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1476441.
SIGN UP FOR THE BULLETIN
151 Merrimac St., 4th Floor. Boston, MA 02114
