Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Michigan State University | OTHER |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
In collaboration with the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) and the Office for Violence Against Women (OVW) the Yale University team will evaluate the implementation process and impact of the U.S. Department of Justice's Domestic Violence Homicide Prevention Demonstration Initiative. This evaluation seeks to draw critical findings and potential lessons from the combined experience of the sites including: 1) how the models work in different communities; 2) the barriers and facilitators to implementing the models; and 3) outcomes of the model delivery. The evaluation team will also disseminate the findings with the goal of informing replication.
Process Evaluation: The process evaluation will assess: 1) the training and technical assistance provided to sites; 2) the implementation of the models in the communities; and 3) characteristics of the service delivery systems.
Technical Assistance Providers will document the training and technical assistance (TTA) they provide to the sites.
Sites will be asked to identify key stakeholders to participate in interviews before the implementation begins and then two additional times during the demonstration phase. Key informant interviews will assess: recipient's perception of the training and technical assistance; model fidelity; model implementation (including model penetration, barriers and facilitators to implementation); and, perceptions of model impact. In addition to key informant interviews administrative data will be gathered to assess aspects of model implementation and systematic observations of law enforcement initiated screens will be conducted by a member of the evaluation team who will join patrol officers for "ride-alongs".
Impact Evaluation: The impact evaluation will assess changes in: 1) collaboration among service sectors; 2) supervision and sanctions for offenders; 3) recidivism and re-victimization; 4) victim reported feelings of safety; 5) utilization of resources; and 6) nature of safety planning.
System Collaboration will be assessed through a web-based survey completed at three time points by key stakeholders representing all potential partners in the community. Social network analysis will provide a visual depiction of how the network changes over time.
Victim Interviews will be conducted to determine the impact of involvement in the model program on their safety and wellbeing. Victims will be interviewed at three time points and will be asked about: prior and recent contact with law enforcement, domestic violence service providers or other providers; awareness of resources to address IPV; their safety and fear of their partner; coping strategies utilized; social support; financial resources; willingness to utilize criminal justice system and domestic violence service providers; both their and offenders behavior, beliefs and attitudes; self-reported mental health and substance abuse; their report of offenders substance abuse; and demographic information.
Administrative Data will be utilized to examine the breadth of the model implementation; the impact of the model programs on criminal justice processes; and whether there is a connection between the extent of post-risk assessment sanctions and services and the pattern of newly recorded incidents between the victim and offender. The evaluation will compare processing and outcomes across cases that are in many ways similar except that some cases were determined to be high risk and a risk assessment was completed and others where a risk assessment was not conducted. To facilitate these comparisons, the evaluation team will build a comprehensive database that will depict the "life-history" of each victim and offender dyad.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| California | Lethality Assessment Program |
| |
| North Carolina | Lethality Assessment Program |
| |
| Ohio | Domestic Violence High Risk Team |
| |
| Illinois | Lethality Assessment Program |
| |
| Michigan | Lethality Assessment Program |
| |
| Tennessee | Lethality Assessment Program |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lethality Assessment Program | Other | Law enforcement officers conduct risk screen of domestic violence victims, if high risk victims are referred to domestic violence services. |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Decreased frequency of re-assault | Decrease in harassment, assault, injury, homicide/mortality | up to 3 years |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Increased collaboration between network partners | Increased information sharing, case planning, coordinated response | up to 3 years |
| Increased awareness of and utilization of resources for victims |
Not provided
The demonstration sites are:
California North Carolina Ohio Illinois Michigan Tennessee
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The study will include all domestic violence offenders and victims within the six communities.
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Joy S Kaufman, PhD | Yale University | Principal Investigator |
| Christopher Maxwell, PhD | Michigan State University | Study Director |
| Tami Sullivan, PhD | Yale University | Study Director |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yale University | New Haven | Connecticut | 06511 | United States |
Data will be archived with the National Institute of Justice
before December 31, 2020
To be determined
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| Domestic Violence High Risk Team | Other | Law enforcement officers conduct risk screen of domestic violence victims, if high risk victims are referred to domestic violence services and a team who monitors the clinical and criminal justice progress. |
|
|
Increased awareness of and utilization of community resources
| Up to 3 years |
| Increased safety planning | Increased safety planning at the time of police intervention | Up to 3 years |
| Increased victim reported safety | Victim reported changes in perceptions of safety | Up to 3 years |
| Increased sanctions for offender | Sanctions such as pre-trial containment, cases to trial, adjudications, containment post-adjudication | Up to 3 years |