What Changed For The Young People in Our Care
Horizon Recovery Treatment Outcomes
Horizon's own outcomes data shows measurable change for the young people in our residential and outpatient care — with the number behind each figure, and the follow-up that shows what stayed.
Download a summary (PDF)
Talk with our team
Clinically reviewed by Koren Hudson, MA, LPC, NCC on July 24, 2026. These are real results from our own clinical records — not a research study, and no outcome is guaranteed.

Symptoms Eased, Measurably.

We track your child with the BASC-3, a standardized assessment where 50 is average for a young person their age, 60 or higher
is elevated, and 70 or higher is clinically significant. Below is what changed for the first 20 young people we tested at both ends of care.

Symptom scores fell from the elevated range back toward typical

First 20 young people tested at both intake and discharge

Typical for age
Elevated
Clinically significant
At intake
At discharge
BASC-3 T-SCORE
70 60 50 40 30
INTAKE DISCHARGE
64 55
INTAKE DISCHARGE
63 55
INTAKE DISCHARGE
30 · clinically low 39 43

About 1 in 3 young people who arrived in the elevated range returned all the way to typical.

Our own clinical records — not a research study, and no outcome is guaranteed. Small groups shift as more data comes in; we update and label them honestly.

BASC-3 T-SCORES, INTAKE TO DISCHARGE — FIRST 20 YOUNG PEOPLE TESTED AT BOTH ENDS OF CARE
MEASURE AT INTAKE AT DISCHARGE CHANGE DIRECTION
Emotional symptoms 64.0 55.4 −8.6 Lower is better
Anxiety & depression 62.7 54.9 −7.8 Lower is better
Coping & adaptive skills 38.9 43.2 +4.3 Higher is better
Aftercare

Most young people Stayed Well

Getting better in the building matters less than staying better at home. About 5.8% of
young people returned to care within 90 days of discharge.
N = 798 discharges. We count a return more than a week after discharge as a new episode, and a return inside a week
as a continuation of the same one. Measured a second way — any return, to any level of care, at any time — the figure is about 9% (N = 574 young people).
Figures cover all levels of care and are current through July 2026.
Returned within 90 days
Did not return

Each dot is 1 in 100 discharges.

How Long A Young Person Stays Makes A Difference

Read the two right-hand pairs separately — they rest on different groups.

READMISSION AND IMPROVEMENT BY LENGTH OF STAY
LENGTH OF STAY RETURNED WITHIN 90 DAYS REACHED MEANINGFUL IMPROVEMENT
Under 30 days 5.9% 9.7%
30–59 days 3.2% 44.7%
60–89 days 3.8% 35.0%
90+ days 0.0% 25.0%

Young people who stayed longer aren't a random group. Families who can sustain a longer stay differ from families who can't, and young people who struggle badly sometimes leave early. So this is what happened for the young people who stayed — not proof that the extra time alone caused it. The 60+ day groups are small; read those rows with that in mind.

Improvement is lowest among young people who left in the first month, and rises sharply after four weeks. Whether that is the time itself, or the difference between families who could stay and families who couldn't, these numbers can't separate — so we show both and let you weigh it.

Wondering what length of stay would make sense for your child? Ask our team
THE NEURO PROGRAM

Young People In The Neuro Program Improved More

Among our residential clients, those who took part in the Neuro Program reached meaningful improvement at a higher rate than those who didn't — even though they arrived with higher symptom scores.

By meaningful improvement we mean a clinically significant change: at least a 5-point drop on the PHQ-9, or a 4-point drop on the GAD-7, for a young person who arrived in the elevated range.

Took part in the Neuro Program N = 214
40.0%
Average symptom score at Intake:
Did not take part N = 117
14.3%
Average symptom score at Intake:
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%

Families chose the Neuro Program — we didn't assign young people to it — and that group also stayed in care longer. Longer stays track with better improvement on their own, as the section above shows, so some of this gap is likely time in care rather than the program. This is what happened for the young people who took part, not proof that the program alone caused it.

A brain map is a painless recording of brain activity, taken with sensors that rest on the scalp — no needles, no radiation. White and green mark the healthy range; warm colors mark too much activity, cool colors too little.

This is one young person's data. It shows what the measurement looks like — not a typical result, and not the 331 young people in the figures above. All identifying information has been removed.

Before Brain Map

Before

At the start of the program. Large warm areas across the front and centre mark activity above the healthy range.

After 40 sessions Brain Map

After 40 sessions

The warm areas have shrunk toward green — the measure has moved closer to the healthy range for this young person.

Before you weigh these

How to read these numbers

This Isn't A Research Study

These are our own clinical records, rebuilt from the source each time we report them. No control group, no peer review, and no outcome is guaranteed. Where we can test a change, we say so: the symptom changes above clear statistical significance at p = 0.003, with a medium-to-large effect, and 40% met the reliable-change threshold.

We Don't Claim Cause

We report what happened for the young people we served. We don't claim we're the only reason it happened. Where another explanation is just as likely — a longer stay, a family who chose a program — we name it next to the figure.

Every Figure Carries Its Count

The number of young people behind a figure is on the figure. Ask us for the count behind any number here, or on any program's website. If we can't give you the N, we won't put the number in front of you.

Some Groups Are Small

The intake-to-discharge figures rest on 20 complete before-and-after tests. That's enough to show a real change, and small enough that the averages will move as more come in.

Nobody Is Left Out

Young people who didn't improve are inside every average on this page. We don't remove them, and we don't show a strong figure without the ones that run the other way.

Questions parents ask

Ask us anything here — and ask every
program you’re considering

Is 20 young people enough to trust?

What about the young people who didn’t improve?

What is the BASC-3, and why do you lead with it?

Do you guarantee my child will improve?

Those are averages — what about my child?

What happens to the diagnoses my child arrives with?

How do I know these numbers are current?

Ask us the hard question

Every figure here comes with someone who can walk you through how it was built. If you’re weighing a decision about your child, start there.