U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

21–222 PDF 2017

S. HRG. 113–846 

ACCESSING SUPPORT: HOW THE 

VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT 

SERVES HAWAII MILITARY FAMILIES 

EXPERIENCING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

OCTOBER 16, 2014 

HONOLULU, HAWAII 

Serial No. J–113–74 

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary 

( 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont, Chairman 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 

CHUCK SCHUMER, New York 

DICK DURBIN, Illinois 

SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware 

RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut 

MAZIE HIRONO, Hawaii 

CHUCK GRASSLEY, Iowa, Ranking Member 

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina 

JOHN CORNYN, Texas 

MICHAEL S. LEE, Utah 

TED CRUZ, Texas 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

KRISTINE LUCIUS, Chief Counsel and Staff Director 

KOLAN DAVIS, Republican Chief Counsel and Staff Director 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

OCTOBER 16, 2014, 10:02 A.M. 

STATEMENT OF COMMITTEE MEMBER 

Page 

Hirono, Hon. Mazie, a U.S. Senator from the State of Hawaii ............................ 1 

STATEMENTS OF CONGRESSIONAL MEMBERS 

Hanabusa, Hon. Colleen, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Hawaii ................................................................................................................... 4 

Schatz, Hon. Brian, a U.S. Senator from the State of Hawaii ............................. 3 

WITNESSES 

Witness List ............................................................................................................. 33 

Arincorayan, Colonel Derrick, Deputy Director, Department of Behavioral 

Health, Schofield Barracks Health Clinic, United States Army Hawaii, 

Schofield Barracks, Hawaii, 

prepared joint statement .................................................................................. 34 

Kreidman, Nanci, Chief Executive Officer, Domestic Violence Action Center, 

Honolulu, Hawaii ................................................................................................. 20 

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 110 

Lopes, Marci, Executive Director, Hawaii State Coalition Against Domestic 

Violence, Honolulu, Hawaii ................................................................................. 21 

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 112 

Louie, Hon. David, Attorney General, State of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii ........ 9 

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 47 

attachment I to prepared statement ............................................................... 50 

attachment II to prepared statement ............................................................. 107 

Morita, Cindy, Family Advocacy Program Manager, United States Army Hawaii, Schofield Barracks, Hawaii ........................................................................ 7 

prepared joint statement .................................................................................. 34 

Ogden, Dawn, Counseling and Advocacy Program Supervisor, Joint Base 

Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii .................................................... 8 

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 42 

SUBMISSION FOR THE RECORD 

Baker, Hon. Rosalyn H., Senator, Hawaii State Senate, statement ................... 116 

(1) 

ACCESSING SUPPORT: HOW THE 

VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT 

SERVES HAWAII MILITARY FAMILIES 

EXPERIENCING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 16, 2014 

UNITED STATES SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m. in 

Room 325, at the Hawaii State Capitol, 415 South Beretania 

Street, Honolulu, Hawaii, Hon. Mazie Hirono, presiding. 

Present: Senator Hirono. 

Also Present: Senator Schatz and Representative Colleen 

Hanabusa. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MAZIE HIRONO, 

A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF HAWAII 

Senator HIRONO. Good morning. This hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee will come to order. Before we begin, I would like 

to go over the Committee’s rules regarding our hearings. Today’s 

hearing deals with a serious issue. And I know that members of 

the public will act accordingly. 

And I want to note at the outset that the rules of the Senate prohibit outbursts, clapping, or demonstrations of any kind. This includes blocking the view of people around you. So, please be mindful of these rules. And I know this is not going to be necessary, but 

if such events occur, then the person will be asked to leave. 

I am glad to be joined by my colleagues, Senator Brian Schatz 

and Congresswoman Colleen Hanabusa, at this hearing. 

I would like to start with an opening statement. And I will ask 

my colleagues if they would also like to present opening statements 

before we take our first panel. Thank you. 

Twenty years ago on September 13, 1994, a Violence Against 

Women Act, better known as VAWA, was signed into law. And 

VAWA represented a major shift in the way Congress approached 

the issue of domestic violence. With this enactment, Congress acknowledged a Federal rule in recognizing that domestic violence is 

not a private matter to be kept among family and suffered in silence. It is a crime and should be treated as such. 

VAWA recognized that domestic violence is a complicated, multifaceted crime that defies easy solutions. The root causes of domestic violence are varied. It could include a stressor such as age, a 

history of family violence, and a large number of social economic 
2 

factors. To address this fact, VAWA looked to prevent domestic violence and related crimes by encouraging collaboration among law 

enforcement, the judiciary, and both public and private sector service providers. As part of our ongoing commitment to ending domestic violence, Congress has reauthorized VAWA three times since 

1994. 

I have supported domestic violence legislation since first taking 

elected office more than 30 years ago and am proud that one of the 

first major bills that I co-sponsored and worked on as a Senator 

was the 2013 VAWA reauthorization. I co-sponsored that bill which 

focused on expanding VAWA protection and services to better serve 

Indian country, the LGB community, and protecting women regardless of immigration status. 

After 20 years, therefore, more people are able to seek VAWA 

protection and more services are available to meet the needs of distinct community and populations than when first enacted. But, 

work remains. Every year on the anniversary of VAWA’s passage, 

the national network to end domestic violence conducts account of 

adults and children served by domestic service providers all across 

the country. 

As a snapshot, on September 17, 2013, nearly 70,000 people, including 575 from Hawaii, sought such services. Still, while service 

providers helped nearly 70,000 people that day, there were still 

nearly 10,000 men and women who sought services whose needs 

were not met. There are also populations that VAWA does not 

cover. 

One community that has been largely removed from the VAWA 

conversation is the military, our active duty personnel and their 

families. That does not mean the military men and women go 

unserved. In fact, for many years, the Department of Defense’s 

Family Advocacy Program or FAP and other support services have 

provided military victims with assistance. These programs work 

with perpetrators and their military command to prevent domestic 

violence and enforce appropriate consequences. 

We know that the military population faces different challenges 

than the population at large. Females who are between 20 and 24 

years of age are at the greatest risk of non-fatal, intimate partner 

violence. 

In 2012, nearly one-half of active duty personnel, military personnel, were under the age of 25. And while this should not be 

taken to indicate higher instances of domestic violence in the military, the age factor is worth noting. 

There are also emotional and psychological stressors that military and their families experience that are not shared by the rest 

of us. Deployments, for example, present a specific type of longterm absence from home. 

The transition back to civilian life after deployment is also challenging, particularly for those who have been in combat. These are 

just two possibilities—two possible contributing factors to potential 

domestic violence in the military. And what we do know is that 

military-connected men and women do seek non-military provider 

services. 

During a two-week period in September of 2014, the Domestic 

Violence Action Center, DVAC, worked with 40 active duty per-
3 

sonnel or intimate partners of active duty personnel who sought 

help. That is four people a day over a 10-day period. Active duty 

military and their families are a part of our community and they 

should be able to seek services when and where they feel most comfortable. 

Attorney General Louie has noted in his written testimony that 

VAWA’s stakeholders have identified three priority areas for collaboration of services. The first two appropriately are providing enhanced training for first responders and improving outreach to underserved populations. The third issue identified is addressing the 

need for services sought by military-connected men and women. 

To this end, I anticipate expanding upon the Attorney General’s 

VAWA military working group efforts. The main question we want 

to answer today is not why military men and women are seeking 

services off base; rather, we are focusing on how best to address 

the needs of these men and women. 

Given the current Federal budget constraint, we must examine 

how our existing Department of Defense and VAWA resources can 

be used to ensure quality services for our servicemembers and their 

families, and how can we assure that there is a continuum of care, 

a safety net for men and women involved in abusive relationships, 

regardless of where abusive incident occurs, when it happens, or 

who employs those affected; as we gain a better understanding of 

the unique stressors that impact military personnel, how can we fit 

their specific needs into the program directive of VAWA. 

I believe the answer is through collaboration, which VAWA envisioned since it was first enacted, collaboration among State and 

local governments, service providers, and the Department of Defense. It will take a community-wide effort for us to eliminate this 

community-wide problem. 

Today’s hearing is an opportunity to hear from the very stakeholders and strengthening the collaboration between civilian and 

military service providers to see where there is overlap and learn 

where collaboration can be fostered and improved upon. 

As a Member of both the Senate Armed Services and Judiciary 

Committees, I look forward to working with appropriate stakeholders to ensure that we do the best we can in both the military 

and civilian sectors to meet the needs, particularly today, of military-connected victims of domestic violence. We have two panels 

this morning, and I look forward to hearing from you. 

Now, Senator Schatz and Congresswoman Hanabusa, if you 

would like to provide opening statements, you may do so. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BRIAN SCHATZ, 

A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF HAWAII 

Senator SCHATZ. Thank you, Senator Hirono. And I want to 

thank you for organizing a field hearing on such an important 

issue. Domestic violence is tragic and the damage it causes does 

not end with the victim. Violence hurts our families, our children, 

and communities. 

We have made progress in preventing domestic violence and supporting victims. Since the passage of VAWA in 1994, there has 

been a drop in domestic violence incidents by over 50 percent. Last 

year, President Obama made history when he signed into law a 
4 

stronger VAWA bill. And I am proud to say that all Members of 

Hawaii’s Congressional delegation were co-sponsors of this legislation. 

The new law will help bring survivors of domestic violence out 

of the shadows to receive life-saving services. But, there is more to 

do. The national network to end domestic violence puts out an annual snapshot of how many victims are seeking help in each State 

in a 24-hour period. 

Hawaii’s most recent snapshot was sobering. In one day, over 

500 domestic violence victims were served in Hawaii. And domestic 

violence hotlines received over 100 calls from victims. That is more 

than five calls an hour. The focus of this hearing is on the support 

available to military-connected families that experience domestic 

violence. 

Domestic violence in military families is such a critical issue because it is a problem that seems to be getting worse. Even as incidents of domestic violence are going down across the country, domestic violence in military and veteran communities appears to be 

going up. 

The military provides many resources for victims of domestic violence, but there are challenges to addressing domestic violence in 

military families. Military families often live far from their friends 

and families, which makes them particularly socially isolated. They 

live with enormous stress from deployment, both while the 

servicemember is away and when they return. 

Victims also face a terrible choice in reporting domestic violence 

to the military. A report could mean risking the servicemember’s 

career and the whole family’s financial stability. For this reason, 

many victims feel more comfortable seeking support from community-based organizations. 

There is clearly a role for both military support services and community-based support. But, we need to ask whether military support services are adequately addressing the needs of victims. And 

we also need to look at whether VAWA’s funding takes into account 

the reality that community-based organizations are part of the 

front line for military families experiencing domestic violence. 

I hope that this is the beginning of a dialogue between the Department of Defense and community-based domestic violence organizations about creating a collaborative and coordinated approach 

to preventing domestic violence in military families and supporting 

victims. Thank you. 

Senator HIRONO. Thank you. 

Congresswoman Hanabusa. 

STATEMENT OF HON. COLLEEN HANABUSA, A 

REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF HAWAII 

Representative HANABUSA. Good morning. I want to begin first 

by thanking Senator Hirono for convening this field hearing and 

also to Senator Schatz and all the panelists, distinguished guests, 

and everyone who made time to join us today. 

Domestic violence touches every corner of our community. It does 

not depend on race or income. It affects men, women, gay, straight. 

And while it has recently been the subject of talk about sports figures and police officers, we cannot let that distract us from the fact 
5 

that it reaches across the spectrum of social and professional relations. 

We are here today to address how VAWA serves Hawaii’s military families and basically how we are going to address the domestic violence. Now, before we begin that, we do have to kind of understand how VAWA came about. And Senator Hirono gave us the 

rundown, which is that it was in 1994. Actually, Vice President 

Biden is the one credited for the passage of the original VAWA. 

And it expired in the year 2011. It did not get reauthorized until 

just recently in 2013. 

It was a very interesting vote. Though Senator Hirono left us in 

the House and went to the Senate, she clearly understands the difficulty of a piece of legislation like this getting through the House 

of Representatives. It passed the Senate, 78 to 22, and it passed 

the House, 286 to 136. 

Now, what you need—138. What you need to understand is of 

that, 87 Republicans joined the solid Democrats in passing VAWA 

in the House. What it meant was the importance of that issue. Because 87 Republicans in the House, for that to come to the floor, 

violated what they call their Hastert Rule, which meant the majority of the majority have to be in favor of a piece of legislation before 

it could be actually voted on. But, the concept and those issues that 

were contained in VAWA mobilized a portion of the Republican coalition that said this was too important, we have to do it. And that 

is how VAWA became law. 

And it did have major components. And one that helped build 

those coalitions, for example, the tribal aspects of it, gay and lesbian and immigration, all as mentioned by Senator Hirono. But, 

what it did was it managed to force the building of that coalition. 

And that is how we have VAWA today. 

We also must understand what it means in terms of what the 

purpose of it is. It is legal assistance, transitional housing, counseling support, advocacy. And what it is credited with with some 

statistics that have been used is that since its inception and about 

15 years later, it reduced violence about 58 percent in 15 years. 

And I think they were measuring it primarily by weight, but there 

was some transition that was done in that. 

But, sadly, domestic violence affects your military families, which 

is the subject of today’s hearing. And whether the victim of abuse 

is a member of the Armed Services or a family member, we owe 

it to her or him—and let there be no question that VAWA applies 

to both men and women, though we do call it Violence Against 

Women Act—because domestic violence knows no boundaries applied. And we need to help to provide a safe home. And we owe it 

to the abuser to also discover how do we break this cycle of violence. 

The most important first step is for us to bring the question out 

of the shadows by signing—by shining the light on the problem and 

acknowledging that it affects Hawaii’s military families. And we 

need to speak open and have productive discussion about what we 

can do and must do. 

And that is why, as I look across from me and I see Nanci 

Kreidman, I know of no one who probably knows this issue as well 

as she does as to the Hawaii community. And she can probably 
6 

give us what I consider to be the hidden facts about Hawaii’s military, because Hawaii’s military has always represented a special 

culture of their own. And I think that is probably been the reason 

why we have had such a difficulty in understanding, getting our 

hands on this particular issue. 

We are hoping that what these hearings will do is to bring this 

matter out and make it so that people can seek the help and the 

assistance that we need. So, we must make it a priority, with the 

health and safety of Hawaii’s military’s families as paramount. And 

I do look forward to participating in this conversation. Again, I 

thank you, Senator Hirono. 

Senator HIRONO. Thank you very much, Senator Schatz and Congresswoman Hanabusa. I would like to now ask our first panel of 

witnesses to step forward and be seated. 

I would like to briefly introduce our first panel of witnesses. 

Colonel Derrick Arincorayan—did I pronounce that correctly? 

Colonel ARINCORAYAN. Yes, ma’am. 

Senator HIRONO [continuing]. And Miss Cindy Morita are here on 

behalf of U.S. Army Hawaii to share with us information about the 

services available to men and women connected with the military 

who are experiencing domestic violence. 

Colonel Arincorayan is a published researcher who serves as a 

Deputy Director of the Army’s Behavioral Health unit in Hawaii. 

He has served with the Army for 28 years. He has a doctorate in 

clinical social work. 

His colleague Miss Morita serves as U.S. Army Hawaii’s Family 

Advocacy program manager. She has a master’s degree in social 

work and has worked on domestic violence issues in various States 

for a number of years. I look forward to hearing from both of you. 

Miss Dawn Ogden, the Counseling And Advocacy Program Supervisor at joint base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, which provides services for Navy and Air Force personnel and their families, has a 

master’s degree in social work and has worked to provide clinical 

services in both the civilian and military sectors for a number of 

years. Miss Ogden has been with Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam 

programs since 2001, and has been a supervisor since 2010. 

And I would like to take this time to acknowledge our military 

partners in the audience today, including CAPT. Neferet. Raise 

your—there you are. Thank you so much for joining us, representing Pacific Fleet. Theresa Phillips, who is representing Navy 

Region Hawaii, and the staff representing Joint Base Pearl HarborHickam. There are a number of staff people here. Thank you. 

Additionally, the Commander of the Schofield Health Clinic, 

Colonel Everhart, is here and staff representing Army Garrison 

Hawaii. Thank you all for being here. 

The Honorable David Louie has served as Hawaii’s Attorney 

General since 2011. In that capacity, he oversees 175 deputy attorneys—I used to be one myself way back when—and provides legal 

counsel for the governor, legislature, and various State agencies. 

Among other things, the Attorney General’s office receives the 

vast majority of Federal funding through the VAWA act and will 

share with us how VAWA funds have been allocated. And before 

we hear from this panel, though, I do need to swear you in. So, 

please rise and raise your hands. 
7 

Do you affirm that the testimony you are about to give before the 

committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 

truth so help you God? 

Colonel ARINCORAYAN. I do. 

Ms. MORITA. I do. 

Ms. OGDEN. I do. 

Attorney General LOUIE. I do. 

Senator HIRONO. Please be seated. So, we are going to start with 

Colonel Arincorayan. 

Colonel ARINCORAYAN. I will—— 

Senator HIRONO. Go ahead, Miss Morita. 

STATEMENT OF CINDY MORITA, FAMILY ADVOCACY PROGRAM 

MANAGER, UNITED STATES ARMY HAWAII, SCHOFIELD 

BARRACKS, HAWAII 

Ms. MORITA. I would like to start off by giving a warm Aloha and 

thank you to Senator Hirono, Senator Schatz, and Congresswoman 

Hanabusa for this opportunity to speak at the Senate Judiciary 

hearing regarding Army Family Advocacy Program, which I will 

refer to as FAP. 

FAP is the Department of Defense social service program whose 

mission is to help address child abuse, child neglect, and domestic 

abuse affecting our military families. We provide primary, secondary, and tertiary provision services and clinical intervention. 

The Army’s Hawaii footprint consists of approximately 15,000 

married active duty soldiers, with an average of 46 percent living 

on post and 54 percent living off post. 

The United States Army FAP here in Hawaii is comprised of the 

following programs. FAP behavioral health provides assessment, 

treatment, clinical interventions at Tripler Army Medical Center 

and the Schofield Barracks health clinic. And Army community 

service FAP prevention provides education, support services, including parent support program and victim advocacy program. 

One of our goals is to ensure for every incident of domestic violence and child abuse, the families receive timely and appropriate 

care. Army Hawaii FAP has a surveillance initiative for families reporting verbal disputes to the military police. This initiative allows 

victim advocates and social workers to reach out early to potential 

victims of domestic violence. 

The reporting process also involves multiple processes which are 

triggered after a domestic violence incident is reported. FAP, child 

welfare service, law enforcement, and commanders may all be engaged and provide coordinated services. Commanders are mandated to report all child abuse and domestic abuse to the military 

police, who are then required to notify FAP for coordination and 

case management. 

FAP ensures victims have access to military and civilian resources that provide support and safety. Throughout the process, a 

victim advocate is available to assist victims with making a report, 

crucial safety planning, providing information on legal rights, and 

reporting options, and leading victim support groups. VA can also 

attend court hearings and law enforcement interviews. Our dedicated victim advocates provide 24 hours, seven days a week responses and safety planning services. 
8 

FAP Behavioral Health provides individuals counseling, couples 

and family counseling, domestic violence intervention, parent support, and healthy relationship groups. FAP also offers ongoing 

mandatory critical training for commanders, troops, professional 

and community members that addresses safety, education, spouse 

and intimate partner abuse, prevention, and family life education. 

We also offer numerous prevention activities and support, including 

new parent support program, home visits, and classes. We maintain relationships with external communities to help coordinate reporting and synchronized efforts. 

The United States Army Hawaii FAP also, along with our sister 

service leadership, has prioritized collaboration with each other 

and with our civilian partners through the military Family Advocacy Coordinating Council, comprised of military and civilian agencies, designed to facilitate the opportunity to network and create 

communications, share processes, identify challenges, and provide 

information and updates. 

One of the successful outcomes through this partnership included 

an agreement to provide notification between family courts and 

military services. The notification agreement increased our visibility on restraining orders and allowed us to reach out to victims 

in a timely manner. We know the sooner we can intervene, the better we can provide safety options for victims of domestic violence. 

We hope we were able to provide you an overview of the United 

States Army Hawaii FAP program. We would like to again thank 

you for the opportunity to share with you our process and also to 

extend our appreciation to Congress for its continued support of the 

family advocacy program that allows us to work with our military 

families and meet their needs. Thank you. 

[The prepared joint statement of Colonel Derrick Arincorayan 

and Cindy Morita appears as a submission for the record.] 

Senator HIRONO. I apologize for my coughing, but I have a cold. 

I do not think I am giving anybody my germs for now. I think I 

am not contagious at the moment. 

Please go ahead, Miss Ogden. Thank you. 

STATEMENT OF DAWN OGDEN, COUNSELING AND ADVOCACY 

PROGRAM SUPERVISOR, JOINT BASE PEARL HARBOR– 

HICKAM, PEARL HARBOR, HAWAII 

Ms. OGDEN. Good morning, Senator Hirono, Senator Schatz, and 

Congresswoman Hanabusa. Thank you for the opportunity to address you today. 

My name is Dawn Ogden. I have been a clinical social worker 

with the Department of Navy for almost 18 years. I am honored 

to share information about the domestic violence services and programs provided at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam. 

I have worked with the Family Advocacy Program since starting 

with the Navy in government service in 1996. I have seen the commitment the Navy has to ending domestic violence as a clinician 

working directly with victims, offenders, and their children for my 

first 14 years, and now as a supervisor for 22 staff members employed by Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam as part of their family 

violence prevention and intervention programs, the services we provide to active duty Navy and Air Force members and their families. 
9 

In addition, we serve commands, first responders such as military 

medical and law enforcement, and other military partners like 

child and youth programs, and military mental health. 

We also collaborate and coordinate services with community organizations and institutions such as Child Welfare Services, Domestic Violence Action Center, Honolulu Police Department, 

Women, Infant, Children, and many of our local schools, with a 

high number of the military dependents, to name just a few. 

We believe a coordinated community response is vital to effectively responding to domestic violence, and we are committed to enhancing opportunities for collaboration and building relationships. 

Again, thank you for this opportunity, and I look forward to being 

of service in today’s hearing. 

[The prepared statement of Dawn Ogden appears as a submission for the record.] 

Senator HIRONO. Thank you. 

Attorney General. 

STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID LOUIE, ATTORNEY GENERAL, 

STATE OF HAWAII, HONOLULU, HAWAII 

Attorney General LOUIE. Thank you, Senator Hirono. And let me 

thank the Committee for convening this hearing. My thanks to you 

personally, Senator Hirono, and also to Senator Schatz and also to 

Congresswoman Hanabusa for your leadership on this issue. It is 

of vital importance to both our State and our community here, as 

well as to the Nation. 

I have submitted written testimony. And I am not going to read 

it all to you. I know you are pleased at that. Let me just hit a couple of the highlights that I would like to note for this hearing. 

First off, I mean obviously, there is a domestic violence issue and 

problem here in Hawaii. My office tracks statistics on these matters through our Hawaii Criminal Justice Division. 

In 2013, there were 4,959 domestic violence-related arrests. 

Those are just arrests. This is a 13 percent increase over the last 

five years. In 2013, there were 8,750 victims that received assistance. This was a 16 percent decrease, which I think, you know, you 

never really know, but I think it reflects decreases in funding. It 

may reflect decreases in reporting and just changes in the way 

things happen. 

It is a problem. We all know it is a problem. And I am very 

pleased that you are spotlighting and convening this so that we can 

address the problem that the military shares with our community. 

This is not a military problem, it is not a Hawaii problem. It is a 

problem for all of us, and it crosses all lines, as Congresswoman 

Hanabusa noted. 

We have been so very fortunate. And I think I thank you folks 

for your roles in getting VAWA passed again. And I thank you so 

much. We have been in the forefront, helping to administer those 

grants here in Hawaii by a million dollars a year. And so every 

year, we have convened a group of 14 representatives, including 

law enforcement, domestic violence, sexual assault, community providers, prosecuting attorney, police chiefs, Family Court judges, et 

cetera, to come together and figure out how are we going to dis-
10 

tribute this money in the best way possible, given it is limited 

funds. And so we do that every year. 

And in general, we give 5 percent to the judiciary, 25 percent to 

the police, 25 percent to prosecutor, and 30 percent to victims’ services. There is also a 15 percent discretionary amount that we have 

always allocated that to victim services. So, we give 45 percent of 

the grant to victim services, believing that that is a very important 

area to go through. 

Now, what does my office do in this area? Obviously, I am the 

chief law enforcement officer of the State of Hawaii, but primarily, 

criminal matters and matters of domestic violence, sexual assault, 

things like that, we rely upon the Honolulu prosecutor and the 

prosecutors of all the counties, because basically all of that authority to prosecute those matters is delegated out to the various counties. 

But, in addition to helping to distribute the VAWA grants, about 

two years ago, Senator Schatz called me into his office and we had 

a meeting with I think Nanci Kreidman and others. There were 

other community providers. And what was raised was the lack, essentially, of a coordinated community response that there was not 

always good communication between the first responders, who 

many times would roll over. As they got promoted—you would help 

to train them, but as they got promoted, then there was not also 

the training for the next person coming into the position. People 

change positions, so relationships did not always get built. 

And so we looked at that and we thought, well, let us convene 

a group, since we already have the VAWA State planning committee. I put it to the planning committee, since we were already 

addressing our domestic violence issues, would they like to participate in a working group to address this coordinated community response, and the central question, which was posed by both Abraham Lincoln and Bill Bradley in his most recent book, how can we 

all do better. Okay. 

And so I was very pleased that the response was overwhelmingly 

positive by this group. We got together. It has been my great privilege and pleasure to serve in a capacity as convening this group. 

Over the last year, we have met six times. Law enforcement has 

come, the judiciary has come. There have been service providers 

that come, prosecutors, police, and it has really been a great conversation. 

Because one of the things is that by getting together and talking 

about these things and trying to identify issues and where do we 

have opportunities to collaborate, communicate, and cooperate, we 

were able to form relationships. And people were able to pick up 

the phone and talk to their counterparts. And that is such a huge 

thing, that I look forward to you folks and to our community and 

to the military to try and work in a collaborative fashion. Just the 

mere fact of getting together in this room alone and in meetings 

that we had, really helped to focus what people’s—not only their 

issues but their challenges. Because it is one thing for, you know, 

someone to say, oh, you are not doing your job or you need to do 

a better job, but when you appreciate the fact that everybody is 

working under limited resources and that everybody wants to do a 
11 

better job, you can figure out how to collaborate and not duplicate 

services. 

I really appreciate the opportunity to work with all of the people 

on our planning group. We focused, as you mentioned in your opening remarks, Senator, that we picked three areas. And the first one 

was a training for first responders, outreach to underserved community, and then addressing the growing need for services for the 

military. 

And I—that last piece is one that we have just started to promote and to work on. We have convened a subgroup to address 

that. And we were in the process of starting to figure out how we 

were going to reach out to the military. So, this is very convenient 

for us that you can foster—— 

Senator HIRONO. Great minds think alike. 

Attorney General LOUIE. There we go. I look forward to that conversation. And I think it is very important to have that conversation at multiple levels. That is, if only the staff are talking and 

only the line workers are talking, it is not enough. If only the top 

leaders are talking, that is not enough. We have to have engagement and discussion and continued discussion at all levels so that 

we can have this coordinated response and move forward together. 

I look forward to working with you folks on this, and thank you for 

the opportunity. 

[The prepared statement of Hon. David Louie appears as a submission for the record.] 

Senator HIRONO. Thank you very much, Attorney General. And 

before we proceed to probably five-minute rounds of questions so 

that we will be able to possibly have multiple opportunities to ask 

questions, I would like to acknowledge the presence of Flo 

Nakakuni, our U.S. Attorney. Thank you so much for being here. 

Okay, I will start the first round of questions. 

Attorney General, you mentioned that in the three areas that 

you identified as need areas on this issue, that the one that we are 

focusing on today, of course, is collaborating with the military. And 

by the way, the password, the byword, really is coordinated community response. I think you will hear that a lot. That was, I believe, in the first VAWA, and it is all about bringing the stakeholders together. 

So, in your efforts, though, you said that you would like to have 

outreach to the military, so that means that you do not have a military representative or representatives on your working group at 

present? 

Attorney General LOUIE. That is correct. 

Senator HIRONO. Now, Miss Morita, I think it would be very 

helpful for us to really understand the context in which domestic 

violence occurs. And so you have got experience in, quote, the private sector and the military side, working with these families, and 

can you share with us some of the common factors surrounding domestic violence. 

Ms. MORITA. For civilian or military? 

Senator HIRONO. Well, for both, because there are the common 

factors that overlay, and then we will get to some of the stressors— 

particular stressors that military families face. 

Ms. MORITA. For specifically military? 
12 

Senator HIRONO. Well, for both, because of the common factors 

that overlay, and then we will get to some of the stressors, particular stressors that military families face. 

Ms. MORITA. When you think about domestic violence, as the 

opening statement indicated, there are lots of different issues that 

impact military and civilian domestic violence victims. 

Senator HIRONO. Miss Morita, could you speak into the microphone. 

Ms. MORITA. As the opening statements indicated, we talked 

about how domestic violence crosses all barriers. And so when we 

look at domestic violence, some of the issues that we see are 

around finances, complex issues on mental health, all sorts of different issues. What we do see in the military is that our clients 

look very similar to domestic violence in all situations. 

Senator HIRONO. Are there not some very specific stressors that 

military personnel face that may—that would not be faced by the 

civilian population? 

Ms. MORITA. Absolutely. 

Senator HIRONO. Which could inform how we provide services to 

them, especially as they seek services outside of the military context. 

Ms. MORITA. Absolutely. 

Senator HIRONO. Would you like to respond, Colonel? 

Colonel ARINCORAYAN. Yes, ma’am. So—— 

Senator HIRONO. This is being recorded, by the way. Olelo is 

here, so we appreciate you speaking into the mic. 

Colonel ARINCORAYAN. Yes, ma’am. I would like—in addition to 

what Miss Morita was stating is that, you know, we are unique in 

that, as you mentioned that in the opening statement, in terms of 

deployment, our operational tempo is high. As we move out of the 

deployment cycle into the training cycle, I still think it remains the 

same. The stressors are there, long hours, isolation, and lack of 

support, much like what you had mentioned early on. So, I think 

those are the key differences between the civilian and the military 

population. 

Senator HIRONO. As long as you are responding, Colonel, the 

Army’s testimony indicated various kinds of collaboration and 

MOUs. And my understanding is that these are with State agencies that you have these collaborative models, and MOUs. 

Ms. MORITA. That is correct. We have two formal MOUs, one 

with the Child Welfare Service, as well as the Children’s Justice 

Center. 

Senator HIRONO. Are those State agencies? 

Ms. MORITA. Yes. 

Senator HIRONO. Since we have non-profit providers here, do you 

have any kind of collaboration with them? 

Ms. MORITA. We do not have formal agreements, but we do a lot 

of informal partnerships. One of the things that actually all of our 

services do is that we are on different committees and meetings 

that we sit in to support and provide information, as well as we 

do referrals, and we do programs and activities together. 

Senator HIRONO. So, is this in any kind of a formal way? Is there 

some kind of a group committee that you do this through? 
13 

Ms. MORITA. We do not have a formal group or committee, but 

what we do have is the military Family Advocacy Coordinating 

Council. And what that is is a program that is actually been 

around for numerous years, and I would like to say about 20 years, 

approximately 20 years. And what we did is we got together. And 

it is something that we continue to meet all the different branches 

of services on it as well as the Coast Guard. 

We have civilian agencies that come and share information and 

resources. Some of them attend regularly, some we invite as we see 

trends in the community or friction points or things that we can 

get together to talk about, and different programs or our different 

needs that we are seeing. 

Senator HIRONO. Do you think that perhaps a more formal kind 

of a group would be helpful to enhance and strengthen the collaboration between the civilian and the military provider community? 

Ms. MORITA. We are also—you know, we certainly can look at 

anything that could enhance collaboration and us working together. 

Senator HIRONO. Because the resources are getting actually less 

for a problem that defies easy solutions. 

Ms. MORITA. We definitely want work together to ensure that we 

are providing the best services for our families. 

Senator HIRONO. I definitely share your concerns. We definitely 

want to work together to make sure we are providing the best services for our families. 

Miss Ogden, you hosted me on a visit to your Pearl Harbor’s 

Family Advocacy facility, and I thank you for that. 

Expanding on Miss Morita’s response regarding some of the common factors that apply to domestic violence, whether it is happening in the military context or in the civilian context, could you 

elaborate on it a little more. I know that the Colonel provided some 

of that, but, you know, as a person who is dealing on a day-to-day 

basis with the military families, what are some really specific and 

unique factors exhibited by military families experiencing domestic 

violence? 

Ms. OGDEN. Well, certainly those stressors around deployment 

and the anticipation of separation and then reintegration are challenges. I do think that all the military branches put a lot of services in place because they know those are stressors. So, to put 

things in place to do education for not only servicemembers but 

also to the family members around what are common things that 

come up as we approach this anticipated separation, often more 

conflicts arise, people will start emotionally kind of pushing away 

from one another. 

We want to help educate them that that is a normal part of the 

process. And so the more they—we can help them see that that is 

normal, and here are ways to cope with that, keep communication 

lines clear; you know, have a plan of action, that that can help 

them not see that as something—some personal failure or something that they are doing wrong. 

And also for reintegration, we have lots of programs to try to 

help them look at what are some of the things that have happened 

since people were away and the one family member or spouse that 

was left behind has had to run the show. So, now we have to find 

a way to fit the deployed member back into the family unit and 
14 

what are some of the challenges with that and how can we give 

them some skills and understanding so they can reintegrate better. 

I think for some of those very specific challenges that they have 

as military members, there really are—because of that recognition 

by the military, there has been a lot of support services put in 

place to specifically address that. 

Senator HIRONO. And of course recognizing that the military 

families do go outside of the military provider community to access 

services in the private sector, so to the extent that you have this 

kind of awareness about the specific stressors and how to deal with 

them, there is a question as to whether those—that kind of intelligence and information and approaches are shared with the private providers, and whether that could definitely be enhanced. 

Ms. OGDEN. Sure. I think there is also room for enhancements. 

I think some of our partnerships, like say the local schools, to help 

them understand what children—how children are being impacted 

by this kind of separation. So, we have gone specifically to the 

schools and helped educate the administrators, the school administrators, and the teachers so that they can also understand some of 

those, you know, very military-specific stressors, and what they can 

do to help support the military children and families, and also so 

that they are aware of our military resources that are available. 

I think Military One Source or Tricare, as they expand their network of civilian providers, have also done—made efforts to try to 

educate those providers about military-specific stressors so that 

they can help those civilian providers understand those challenges 

that are unique and help to maybe learn some of the language that 

I think would help make military families be able to feel comfortable going, you know, outside and working with civilian providers. I think there are efforts, yes. 

Senator HIRONO. I will get to my second round probably, but my 

time is up, so I would like to turn to Senator Schatz for his questions, and then followed by Congresswoman Hanabusa. 

Senator SCHATZ. Thank you, Senator Hirono. My question is for 

Miss Morita and Miss Ogden. Can you describe your staffing structure and whether you have sufficient resources to meet the need? 

Ms. MORITA. We actually have fairly similar staffing structure. 

What we have on our impact home centers, so those are social 

workers and nurses who do home visits to parents. We have educators, staff educators, who do our trainings and classes. We have 

victim advocates who provide victim advocacy services, as I mentioned earlier. And as well as on the clinical side, I might turn to 

Colonel Arincorayan to indicate his clinical staffing. 

Colonel ARINCORAYAN. So, within our clinical staff, the Family 

Advocacy Behavioral Health is part of the behavior health service 

line. And within the behavioral service line, we provide an array 

of behavioral health services. 

An example is child and family behavioral service, patients that 

are medical home, with the behavioral health. And so there is—I 

would say we have a robust behavioral health service at least to 

provide support for family advocacy families. 

Senator SCHATZ. You have enough in the way of staffing? 

Ms. MORITA. To answer your question, so based on the current 

case load, we are adequately resourced, but we are always contin-
15 

ually assessing our situation to see as we look at the complexities 

of our cases. 

Senator SCHATZ. And what is the reporting structure from your 

FAP program. How does it work through the different branches in 

the service? 

Ms. MORITA. In terms of reporting an incident? 

Senator SCHATZ. No, I mean the chain of command. I mean who 

is getting these data, who is being made aware of what is going on 

in terms of the aggregate data? Obviously, for individual cases, 

there is the question of restricted or unrestricted, but who is keeping an eyeball on these programs from the standpoint of providing 

services to servicemembers’ families? 

Colonel ARINCORAYAN. In our program, the Army program, it is 

not as similar as the Navy. We have prevention and the treatment 

services that are under different commands. 

The Family Advocacy, which falls under the Army Community 

Services Prevention, belongs to the installation management command. My service, the Behavioral Health Services, belongs to the 

medical command, falls under the Surgeon General, the Army surgeon general. 

Senator SCHATZ. Does that make sense? 

Colonel ARINCORAYAN. At this point, it does. We would need to, 

you know, look at their review, do a review of maybe a bottom-up 

review analysis to see if it does make sense to keep it the way it 

is or—— 

Senator SCHATZ. Okay, thank you. And then one additional question for Miss Morita and Miss Ogden. 

How do you develop best practices and how standardized are 

these FAP programs. Do you have flexibility to implement it as you 

see fit at each base and each installation or does this come from 

big DOD? 

My basic concern is that you want enough flexibility to implement according to the individual needs. On the other hand, there 

are best practices, and so you do not want each administrator to 

develop a program on full cloth. So, I am interested in where you 

get your best practices and your standards, and how that gets developed. 

Ms. OGDEN. Absolutely, I think there is a framework that the 

DOD, OSD has said now all branches of service, you will use the 

same set of definitions, that is DOD maltreatment definitions. We 

want you to all use the same process of the committee that determines whether this meets those definitions for abuse or neglect. 

So, that is some that just—you know, just happened in the last 

several years to try to get that consistency across all branches of 

services so that DOD and OSD can really look that we are comparing oranges to oranges. With the Navy has this many members, 

the Army has this many, are we talking about the same thing? 

I think that is there, and that that has been a really useful thing 

to try to get us using all those things—frameworks. 

But, speaking for the Navy, I can say that those best practices, 

certainly our headquarters is also looking for best practices, whether that is something that one, you know, installation started up or 

some new evidence-based program, so what they know they will 

certainly share and offer that with all of the installations. 
16 

We are given the latitude to try things here, you know, and to 

find things that work for our specific community. Any commandspecific, because each command can have a little different flavor, 

so absolutely, we are given that. 

Senator SCHATZ. Senator Hirono, if you will indulge me one last 

question, it will save me a second round. My question is about who 

is aggregating all of these data. And I think that is for the Attorney General. 

My concern is just as a general proposition. As we saw the reporting of sexual assault in the military go up, we were I think correctly informed that that was actually a good thing, not a bad 

thing, because of people reporting it and more public awareness 

around it. And I am not entirely sure whether the increase in 

incidences of domestic violence is as a result of an actual increase 

or an increase in services and reporting. And I do not think we 

have time to address that particular question, I am not sure it is 

knowable at this point, but the question of who is aggregating data 

and analyzing it, I think is not—there is no clear answer yet. Attorney General? 

Attorney General LOUIE. The best answer I can give you is the 

data that we are analyzing and aggregating does not generally include military data. We get our data from the police departments, 

prosecutors, from the judiciary. And where military service people 

come into contact with those institutions, then we may have some 

of that data. 

But, I think to the extent—I mean I do not have any links with 

the military directly. We do not get this data. I mean we certainly 

could if those channels were opened up, but right now, we do not 

aggregate any of that data on a regular systemized basis. 

Senator SCHATZ. That seems like something we ought to work on 

as a community. I mean—I will stop there. Thank you. 

Senator HIRONO. Thank you, Senator. 

Congresswoman Hanabusa. 

Representative HANABUSA. Thank you, Senator Hirono. In your 

testimony, is it Colonel Arincorayan? 

Colonel ARINCORAYAN. Yes, ma’am. 

Representative HANABUSA. Or Miss Morita, your testimony, you 

have pointed out something that I would like clarification on. You 

said there are about 15,000 married active duty soldiers with an 

average of 46 percent living on post and 54 percent living off post. 

So, where they are living, does that affect who they may report 

more to. In other words, if you are living off post, is there a higher 

probability, for example, that if something were to happen, that it 

would be H.P.D. on Oahu, for example, that would be called, versus 

somebody within the military itself; versus where you are living on 

post, it would be something that would be of course covered by 

whatever your structure is in place on post? 

Ms. MORITA. Well, certainly, where a servicemembers lives can 

impact where they intersect with services. 

A couple of things that might be important to note is our reporting process. We—there is some mandated reporting process. So, if 

a commander is aware that there has been an incident, they are 

required to report back to us on post. As well as we have agreements that if a member is arrested for domestic violence, that re-
17 

port gets sent to the military police, and then we are informed of 

the incident. It definitely has an impact in terms of maybe who is 

the initial responder in that situation. 

Representative HANABUSA. Miss Ogden, do you have any statistics like that as to your military and Air Force? Because you are 

representing the Joint Base. 

Ms. OGDEN. Yes. We have just under 20,000 active duty Navy 

and Air Force members, and approximately 24,000 family members. Of those, most Air Force families, that is 83 percent approximately, currently live on installations. So, their first responders 

would be military law enforcement. 

Our Navy families is pretty much the opposite, where only 14 

percent of our Navy families live on installation. The rest would be 

living out on the economy or in the public, private venture housing, 

which is also the primary—while it is Federal, is the primary jurisdiction of H.P.D. but I know that they will also contact our military 

law enforcement folks and sometimes decide who will take that 

case further. 

Representative HANABUSA. One of the issues that we have always struggled with in this area has been, for example, the confidentiality of it. And I think it was attested to earlier that there 

was a concern about how it may then affect the job or the promotion structure of one spouse, whoever that spouse may be, in 

terms of military. 

So, in light of all of that, do you have any assessment as to 

whether the way it is reported, in other words, what then gets reported to the military police or whoever, then it goes up the chain 

to the commander, that somehow that is affecting the number of 

people who are actually seeking help. Because they do not want 

that future for their family and their spouse to be affected. Is that 

a criteria in their mind, do you see being played out? 

Ms. MORITA. I know that one of the things that was developed 

was the restricted report for that very reason. And the intent behind it is that we wanted family members and soldiers to be able 

to come forward to get services without triggering that response, to 

give them time to find out what services are available, as well as 

to seek treatment. So, that is one of the things that the Department of Defense started was the restricted report to address those 

issues. 

Representative HANABUSA. But, is there at some point where 

that restricted report becomes unrestricted when, for example, 

there is a pattern of behavior or something like that, that it just 

automatically then, you know, you do not have the benefit of that 

protect—and the only reason I am asking this is because the culture of the military is very different than our private sector. 

What is it about that culture—and we are just finding more and 

more, as we have hearings in Washington, of what goes on within 

our unformed personnel. It must even be different and a greater 

concern among family members who do not even have that. 

So, what then would happen. Is there something that says, okay, 

at this point, you are no longer—because we know military personnel do not have the same kind of rights that you might have. 

Anyone know? 
18 

Colonel ARINCORAYAN. I am going to just answer that, ma’am. 

We—in speaking with the restricted reporting, we try as much as 

possible to remain—keep confidentiality in all the cases that occur. 

And if restricted reporting is granted to the victim, there may be 

a threshold that we will meet that we no longer can keep restricted 

reporting. It is usually when there is imminent harm, imminent 

harm to the individual as well as children that may be involved, 

then we must get commanders or the appropriate authorities involved to mitigate risk. And that is usually the time when we will 

break confidentiality. 

Representative HANABUSA. So, it is something that is—that can 

be broken given the set of circumstances. It is not something that 

somebody just is entitled to, they will and that can be broken depending on the criteria that—— 

Colonel ARINCORAYAN. Defense policy, yes. 

Representative HANABUSA. Thank you. 

Senator HIRONO. Thank you. I think that we recognize, and particularly as both Congresswoman Hanabusa and I serve on the 

Armed Services Committee for our respective bodies, that we are 

dealing with a very unique environment with regard to the military. And for Attorney General Louie also, regardless of some numbers that we have seen that domestic violence is decreasing, which 

I find kind of astounding, that 75 percent decrease, you indicated 

that it is a problem. 

We do not necessarily know the full extent of this problem in either the military side or the civilian side, because just as sexual 

assault is underreported, probably this is also underreported. And 

so there is a whole other aspect of information and education that 

is part of the components of how we address this issue. 

So, I think for the military, thank both of you for raising that 

question of how do military victims, how safe do they feel in coming forward. And it is probably an issue that we could—that I am 

sure the military is wrestling with. And there is restricted reporting for the Army. Is there restricted reporting in the Navy? 

Ms. OGDEN. Yes. 

Senator HIRONO. But, we do not know what the cause and effects 

are of putting these kinds of options available, whether that results 

in more people feeling that they can come forward and talk to you 

folks, access your services or not. 

And in fact, you know, when it comes to the issue of sexual assault in the military, we did get information from the Pentagon as 

to how many instances were occurring and what was being reported, what was being prosecuted. Is there that kind of data gathering with regard to domestic violence in the military? 

Ms. OGDEN. Well, I know relatively new is going to be the form 

the data gathering will start here in October with the severity 

codes. And that is where—that is going to be first presented to 

Congress, I believe, in 2016. And that is where all the branches of 

the military are going to be able to partner, looking at domestic violence specifically and sexual assault within an intimate partner 

relationship. And if it meets criteria for abuse of moderate to severe level of abuse, then those cases will be—that will be in our 

central registry database that each of the branches of service have. 
19 

And then concurrently, we will then be notifying the commands. 

The commands will know that this has been identified as a case 

where they will be looking at the servicemember’s personnel record 

to then see what the command has done to take some action. And 

that can be, you know—you know, it just means to show that the 

command considered that. It does not mean they have to have 

taken a specific action. 

Senator HIRONO. Excuse me, Miss Ogden. Is this requirement for 

data gathering across all services? 

Ms. OGDEN. Yes. 

Senator HIRONO. So, this is a directive from the Pentagon—— 

Ms. OGDEN. Yes. 

Senator HIRONO [continuing]. Or from Congress? 

Ms. OGDEN. And OSD is the one putting out all of the information on this. We are starting to gather this data, starting with all 

cases that are opened as 1 October. 

Senator HIRONO. That would be helpful to your efforts. I am assuming this study will be made public, because the Attorney General has mentioned that you have no data as to what is happening 

in the military context on the incidence of domestic violence. 

Attorney General LOUIE. Yes, it stays only in the military. We 

have no data at all. 

Senator HIRONO. So, I would like to ask all of you, we have been 

talking about coordinated community response, and there are 

MOU’s with regard to State agencies, and there are different efforts being made to provide a coordinated community response, 

would you all agree that we can do better with bringing all the parties together, and that efforts should be made toward that goal? 

Colonel ARINCORAYAN. Certainly. 

Attorney General LOUIE. I would certainly agree with that. 

Ms. MORITA. No. 

Senator HIRONO. That is called a trick question. 

No, we need to be on the same page, because this is a really 

tough community-wide problem. 

Thank you very much. If my colleagues do not have further questions, we will move on to Panel 2. Thank you very much. 

Senator HIRONO. So, on the second panel, I will do a brief introduction as you are coming forward. 

While that is being set up, I would like to start by introducing 

our next panel, consisting of Nanci Kreidman. And she is the Chief 

Executive Officer of Domestic Violence Action Center, DVAC, and 

Marci Lopes. 

Nanci has been working on addressing family violence in Hawaii 

for 30 years and is widely recognized for her advocacy. She has 

been honored for her work by a number of organizations, including 

the YWCA and the National Association of Social Workers. 

Marci Lopes is an Executive Director of the Hawaii State Coalition Against Domestic Violence. Marci has a master’s degree in 

counseling, psychology. And prior to serving as an executive director of the coalition, Marci worked with Parents And Children Together, a large and leading domestic violence service provider in 

Hawaii. 

Before we begin to hear testimony, I would like to swear you in. 

If you can stand and raise your hand. 
20 

Do you affirm that the testimony you are about to give before 

committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 

truth? 

Ms. KREIDMAN. I do. 

Ms. LOPES. I do. 

Senator HIRONO. All right. We will start with you, Nanci. 

STATEMENT OF NANCI KREIDMAN, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACTION CENTER, HONOLULU, 

HAWAII 

Ms. KREIDMAN. Okay. Thank you very much for bringing us together. As I think was apparent in the first panel, there is a kind 

of a climb we can all do together. So, the opportunity to have 

our—— 

Senator HIRONO. I think you need to speak into the—— 

Ms. KREIDMAN. I need to speak into the mic too, okay. 

Thank you for inviting us here today. I think, as is apparent to 

all of us during the first panel, there is some work we can do together. So, having our Congressional delegation involved in a conversation is key to moving forward. 

The Domestic Violence Action Center, you probably already 

know, provides direct services and community mobilization in addressing domestic violence. We have a staff of 52 who are dedicated 

to delivering direct services, professional training, outreach, and 

participating in system reform work. 

It is a complex problem, it is a costly problem, and it is an enormous problem that touches all of our families, as you have all said 

and our military colleagues have said. The Domestic Violence Action Center has been involved in almost every effort to examine the 

problem of domestic violence over the last nearly 25 years. And it 

is our intention to stay in the conversation. We work with thousands of families every year. And it has not recently occurred to us 

but has occurred to us some time ago that at least 10 percent and 

sometimes as many as 20 percent of the families we are serving at 

any one time are military families or military family members. 

And we have wanted to help conversation with the Department 

of Defense, with the Department of Justice, or military colleagues 

and our own Congressional delegation about the impact of serving 

the military community and the potential ways it may be tracked 

to serve the civilian community. This does not mean we are not 

willing to serve and work with the military, but it does cost us 

money. 

As a civilian non-profit agency, we are always yearning to increase our revenues. And if we can receive the support and the cooperation of the military, we think that would be the best interest 

of the community as a whole. 

You alluded earlier, Senator Hirono, to the data that we collected. After beginning a conversation which was really inspired by 

Adriana Ramelli from Sex Abuse Treatment Center at the VAWA 

planning committee, the Domestic Action Center and some of our 

other domestic violence programs designated a two-week period of 

time when we were going to lift out the number of people that our 

staff serves. 
21 

We did that. We instructed all of our staff to make an inquiry 

about who it is that they were providing safety planning with, who 

it is that they were making contacts. Our staff provides long-term 

advocacy and legal representation to victims of domestic violence or 

survivors of domestic violence. In that two-week period, which was 

September 15 through September 30th, safety planning was conducted 40 times. 

Safety planning is not an event; it is—rather, it is a process. 

When circumstances change, we revisit the threats to a person and 

examine what kinds of things that they may need to make that 

their safety plan. That is a very exhaustive process. Again, it is an 

important one for all the people we have contact with. 

Our staff made 104 contacts with the military clients that they 

were working with just during that two-week period, and 52 additional contacts with other people out in the community. As people 

are navigating their way to safety, there are lots of encounters with 

other agencies. 

So, our work is to make sure that the rest of the people they are 

interacting with, understand the challenges, understand the pathway, understand the risks. That is a big commitment by our staff 

in support of the military. Again, we are happy to be there to be 

able to help our military families, but it comes at a cost to our civilian community, quite honestly. 

The other thing that is maybe a little bit delicate, but something 

that I would really like to place on the table, and that is depending 

on the branch of the military and the individual command, we have 

different degrees of cooperation and responsiveness. 

Some of the survivors we work with face a lot of challenges and 

many obstacles to getting safe, to getting services that they need, 

to getting their abusers held accountable. The opportunity to engage in greater conversation and maybe more collaboration in a coordinated fashion, we think would be in the best interest of the 

survivors who might be having difficulty with the branch or the 

commander. 

So, we are on board. These are just a few thoughts and conversation, and I hope we can continue to have. Again, my thanks for 

each of you coming and convening our community. 

[The prepared statement of Nanci Kreidman appears as a submission for the record.] 

Senator HIRONO. Thank you. 

Miss Lopes. 

STATEMENT OF MARCI LOPES, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, HAWAII 

STATE COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, 

HONOLULU, HAWAII 

Ms. LOPES. Thank you for this opportunity. I would briefly like 

to take a few minutes to share with you all that my father went 

to Viet Nam when I was three days old. He went on to have a 21- 

year career with the United States Army. Upon retiring from the 

Army, he has enjoyed a 25-plus-year career working for the VA. 

My husband also has 21 years of service to the military. For the 

past 11 and a half years, he has and continues to proudly serve our 

Air National Guard. So, I have an intimate understanding of the 

challenges many of our military families face. 
22 

I am the Executive Director for the Hawaii State Coalition 

Against Domestic Violence. I started this position in March of this 

year. Our coalition is a membership of 22 organizations statewide. 

They all provide domestic violence services. Our mission is to engage communities and organization to end domestic violence 

through education, advocacy, and action for social change. 

I am speaking today about some of the life saving services provided to the residents of Hawaii because of the existence of VAWA 

and FVPSA. 

The island of Oahu reported to me the greatest demands on services being accessed by the military members and dependents. The 

island of Oahu provides aid for families from the Air Force, Army, 

Navy, Marines, Coast Guard, as well as the National Guard and 

Army Reserves. Services are not only accessed by legal dependents, 

they are also accessed by intimate partners who may not be married to the servicemember. We also have adult children and other 

family members who are accessing our services. 

Since this passage in 1984, FVPSA has remained the only direct 

Federal funding source for our shelters. FVPSA currently funds 

non-domestic violence emergency shelters statewide. I have to take 

this unique opportunity to share that our shelters in Hawaii are 

still recovering from funding cuts that they experienced in 2008. 

Our Molokai shelter, the most isolated of our shelters, reported 

to me this morning that they are functioning with a 45 percent 

budget cut that they experienced in 2008. 

I attached in my information to you the most recent shelter utilization data. So, we have nine shelters, four operating on Oahu, two 

are operated by Child and Family Service, one in Honolulu and one 

in Leeward. We have one operated by Parenting Children Together 

that services families in Kaneohe. And we have one operated by 

the Women’s Spouse Abuse Shelter in Waialua. 

The Hawaii island operates two shelters by Child and Family 

Service, one in Hilo and one in Kona. We have one shelter operated 

by the YWCA in Kauai, and one operated in Maui by Women Helping Women. We also have our Molokai shelter operated by the 

Molokai Community Council Hale Ho’omalu. 

There is a military shelter available on Oahu, but it is not 

staffed. Active duty and spouses can access that shelter after contacting the military crisis line and getting a referral. Victims are 

only allowed to stay two weeks. If they need additional time, that 

has to be approved by the chain of command. 

Oahu service providers have shared that many military victims 

prefer to access local shelters because they have staff available 24/ 

seven, they can stay 90 days, and they do not trust the military 

restricted and unrestricted reporting levels. 

Victims have also reported that they are fearful that the 

perpetrators’s chain of command will not be able to keep them safe 

and to hold their abuser accountable. When events occur off base, 

there are jurisdiction challenges. If the police department makes a 

report because the event took place off base, victims and perpetrators can choose to access services off base. 

If the Hawaii judicial system is involved, they can mandate military personnel to better intervention programs. We have two service providers on Oahu that provide better intervention services. 
23 

They are Parents And Children Together and Child and Family 

Service. 

If a victim in Hawaii applies for a restraining order, a child welfare case is started. And so many of military families are also involved in child welfare services. So, we have three agencies who 

provide services for those families. Child and Family Service for 

Leeward Oahu, the Domestic Violence Action Center for Central 

Oahu, and Parents And Children Together for windward Oahu. 

If a military dependent child is in need of counseling services, 

they can access the Parents And Children Together, Family Peace 

Center program. The military does not have therapeutic groups for 

children at this time, but I was told they do have individual and 

counseling services for the families available on some facilities. 

Because of a lack of affordable housing and the inventory of 

housing in the open market, many of our victims are returning to 

their abuser or becoming homeless as a result of their domestic violence. The Violence Against Women Act provides much needed 

transitional housing programs on our island, but it is still not 

enough. Only three of our islands are benefiting from this transitional housing program. 

On Oahu, we have Child and Family Service, who is able to provide services for victims and their children. Parents And Children 

Together operates a transitional home for single women only. That 

is eight beds. Maui has Women Helping Women, has a transitional 

housing program that does service women and children. And then 

Hawaii island, Child and Family Service has a transitional housing 

program for victims and children. 

Oahu also receives Safe Haven and State judicial funding for supervised visitation centers. Visitation centers operate to keep children and victims safe while families are going through the TRO 

process, a custody dispute, or a highly conflicted divorce. If visitation is not handled properly, if it is children at risk for being 

abused, kidnapped, or further harm to the custodial parent, many 

military families are accessing the visitation center. They are able 

to provide Skype visits for families that are deployed or have been 

stationed off-island. So, that services is being accessed. 

And there is one center on Oahu for all of our families. They 

service over 250 families a year, over 3,000 visits. There is a waiting list. And families get an hour and a half visit per week if they 

are lucky. 

Senator HIRONO. Can you wrap up, Miss Lopes. We have your 

full testimony. 

Ms. LOPES. I will end there. We have many dedicated service providers. We have a great need for legal services. And I want to 

thank you for your continued support. 

[The prepared statement of Marci Lopes appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Senator HIRONO. Thank you. 

I understand that Senator Schatz has to leave, so thank you very 

much for joining us. We can look forward together. 

This is for Miss Lopes, because you are the—you oversee a lot, 

you collect data from a number of programs, and there are quite 

a few of them, although the need is still greater than the resources. 
24 

The Attorney General said that of the VAWA funding, a portion 

of it goes to you folks. And how do you decide which shelters or 

which island, how they get VAWA money or do they get VAWA 

money? 

Ms. LOPES. The coalition does not make that decision. The AG’s 

office determines that. We are able to give input during the planning meetings. 

Senator HIRONO. So, for clarification then, the Attorney General 

actually designates within the Molokai shelter who will get what 

amount? 

Ms. LOPES. FVPSA is the only one that funds shelters, and that 

is not the Attorney General’s funding. 

Senator HIRONO. Whatever the Attorney General funding decisions are, they do the decisions. 

Ms. KREIDMAN. It is a competitive process. Everybody makes a 

proposal, submits it to the Attorney General’s office, and they have 

a process. 

Senator HIRONO. I see. Thank you. So, I asked our Panel 1 people that as we focus on the coordinated community response, I 

think you indicated that depending on which service, depending on 

which commander, because a commander of a facility or installations have a lot of leeway as to how things proceed under their 

command, that we could do—we could do more to facilitate the 

ability of you folks in particular to be able to provide the kind of 

services to the military people who are coming to you get. 

So, in your experience, we talked about in the first panel—well, 

first of all, let me ask whether you agree that we could do better—— 

Ms. LOPES. Absolutely. 

Ms. KREIDMAN. Yes. 

Senator HIRONO. [continuing]. However way we structure this. 

Do you think a more formal way of communicating with the military would help in Hawaii than what exists right now? 

Ms. KREIDMAN. Yes. 

Senator HIRONO. With regard to the very specific experiences 

that may be stressors for domestic violence, Miss Kreidman, as you 

provide direct services, are there some very specific ways that you 

work with military victims that you may not do with other victims 

as you do your safety planning? 

For example, I was informed that you are concerned about the 

access to firearms more with the military people that you work 

with. Can you just talk a little bit about what kind of unique circumstances that they need to provide a different kind of services 

in the military. 

Ms. KREIDMAN. I think that is a trick question, too. 

Senator HIRONO. It is not meant to be. 

Ms. KREIDMAN. There are factors that are true for all survivors. 

There are root causes that are—that exist in all battering relationships. The uniqueness of a military family member being victimized by her perpetrator has something to do with her isolation, her 

lack of familiarity with the community that she is in, the lack of 

confidence she may have in her husband’s command, the ability to 

know when it is appropriate to ask for what, the level of lethality 

in the relationship that needs to be assessed, the kind of respon-
25 

sibilities and maybe work schedules of their partner or perpetrator 

needs to be understood. 

We do not start our assessment or our support as if they are very 

different populations. We start with the assumption that there is 

some very strong similarities between what is happening for the 

victim in the civilian community and victim in the military community. And then we distill out the parts of the relationship or the 

danger or the perpetrator’s role in the military to figure out is 

there something special or different or more intensive that we must 

do in order to assure her access to the right kind of services and 

in the right order, and taking things into consideration the 

lethality that she is facing. 

Senator HIRONO. So, as you are doing the safety planning, it 

sounds as though it is a very individualized process. If you know 

that you are dealing with someone from the military, though, does 

that trigger certain kinds of questions that you would ask regarding their particular situation and what concerns they may have 

about accessing you folks as opposed to the military services? 

Ms. KREIDMAN. Yes. It is also evident to us, because it has been 

disclosed over and over again, that they come to us because they 

do not find the military resources either safe or have the confidence 

in them because of the—earlier, we said that all reports are made 

to military police. That may or may not be a good thing for a particular—and the level of fear and terror and torment that a victim 

is experiencing is exacerbated by the lack of familiarity with the 

community they are in, the installation they are on. And—— 

Senator HIRONO. So, the military is concerned about how to deal 

with it, and one of the responses has been to allow for restrictive 

reporting. This could be an area, though, from a civilian provider, 

community standpoint that maybe better, strong communication as 

to what is causing the military families to not go to the military, 

maybe there are other approaches that could be implemented by 

the military to address the situation. 

A lot of my questions have to do with trying to understand what 

is out there and what does the military person who, as you say, is 

away from familiar surroundings, and how do they—how do you 

think they get the information as to what is available for them if 

they are the victim of domestic violence? And I am talking about 

the majority of the cases probably do not have police involvement 

or not. 

I do not know what percentage of the cases H.P.D., for example, 

on Oahu are involved or what percentage of the domestic violence 

situations are people who do not want to involve the police but who 

seek help. 

Ms. KREIDMAN. Well, just to give you an example, we have a program on site at court. Every person who is petitioning Family 

Court for a restraining order has the opportunity to have a conversation with a staff member from the Domestic Violence Action 

Center. The military families use our Family Court system in the 

same way that the civilian community does. That is one place 

where we would meet people who work with Domestic Violence Action Center so they could be referred at that point to additional 

services in the civilian community. 
26 

If there are 54 percent of military families living off post, any encounter with law enforcement would be our civilian police. And 

they are certainly familiar with our domestic violence programs 

and would make referrals to our domestic violence programs. 

I am not as well acquainted with how the—how the communication goes or the collaboration occurs between the Honolulu Police 

Department and the military base, although I know that there is 

improved communication among them. 

Senator HIRONO. I am told that if H.P.D. is involved and if there 

is an arrest, then that information goes to the command. My time 

is up. 

Now, Congresswoman Hanabusa. 

Representative HANABUSA. Thank you, Senator. Nanci, let us— 

first of all, I just want to say it is typical of you to just cut to the 

chase; that if we do more military, it is going to take away from 

civilian. And that really is—that really is a concern. I mean, I can 

see that. 

But, can you give me an idea of how much—as you are gathering 

data, how much of the numbers that you would service or potentially could be servicing could have the military relationship. Do 

you have any idea of what that might be as you are now being 

more sensitive in gathering this particular piece of data? 

Ms. KREIDMAN. I am not sure I understand your question. I am 

thinking that if we are serving 15 percent of our people at any 

given time, our military family members—— 

Representative HANABUSA. Right. 

Ms. KREIDMAN [continuing]. If we had funds, we could increase 

our resources so that we could also be serving 15 percent of the civilian community whose cases we cannot open or accept. 

Representative HANABUSA. That is exactly what I was thinking 

about. Because what you were saying was you know, if you handle 

the military, which is not something I am objecting to, but it also 

means you cannot handle this civilian population. There is no compensation is what I heard. So, it is about 15 percent or something 

like that. 

I guess I am trying to figure out, the resources are limited all 

the way around, but it seems like if it is a service that is being provided, that it is a service that should be compensated somehow, because you get it back. I mean—— 

Ms. KREIDMAN. I am not sure even if the military branches have 

specialized legal services for those victims of domestic violence in 

the same way that we do. 

Representative HANABUSA. Right. 

Now, the other thing that I was reading in your testimony that 

caught my eye was when you said from 2009 to 2014, 37.2 of all 

divorce cases sampled in the State Judiciary, at least one member 

was military. And I just want to be clear, when you define military, 

was the definition of the military used active duty versus Guard 

and Reserve. Do you see the difference that I am trying to draw? 

Ms. KREIDMAN. I think it is both. 

Representative HANABUSA. It is both. 

Ms. KREIDMAN. I think it is both. That came out of a report 

issued by—— 

Representative HANABUSA. Right, I saw it here. 
27 

Ms. KREIDMAN [continuing]. Family Court. Yes. 

Representative HANABUSA. So, do you know or are you familiar 

enough with the report to know, though it may be, you know, nofault divorce, whether how many of them may have been related 

to issues of domestic violence. Do you have any idea. If you do—— 

Ms. KREIDMAN. I do not know. 

Representative HANABUSA. I am going to move now to Marci. 

And, Marci, I want to thank you for your testimony because you 

are very detailed in the military impact. 

The one thing that I was wondering about, because it seemed 

like given the nature of the military families, especially those active duty in a new place, you know, because they serve two to three 

years max and are moving on, that you did mention that there is 

just one shelter available, but there is no one that staff that is 

shelter. Right? 

And yet, we do know, and then you also said that the FVPSA 

program is the only one that funds shelters. Yet, we all know that 

VAWA funds transitional housing. So, is transitional housing once 

the person decides to move completely out versus a sheltered situation? 

Ms. LOPES. It could be either one. They could go from an emergency shelter to transitional; or if they are working with an advocate that is unable to refer them directly to the transitional housing program, that can happen. And sometimes DVAC or Hawaii 

Immigrant Justice Center, they have advocates working on legal 

issues with them and they are able to get them into transition. 

Representative HANABUSA. Because it would seem that for a military person who is being abused and needs shelter, that they need 

to be out of that situation. But, as was testified, they find themselves returning because there is no alternative, there is no family 

structure here. For most cases, they are isolated. And, where do 

they turn to? So, it is almost like forcing them back into the situation. Would that be a correct assessment? 

Ms. LOPES. Yes, ma’am. 

Representative HANABUSA. Another thing you said is that they 

do not trust the chain of command; that the chain of command— 

it is almost like an assumption that the chain of command will protect whoever is in the service, and they do not feel that they will 

be in any way protected from that. Is that the sense that you are 

getting from the military? 

Ms. LOPES. The majority of the victims, yes. 

Representative HANABUSA. So, this is not a trick question. In a 

situation like this where we do, and you went to great detail to 

show your understanding of being a member of a military family, 

plus a spouse of somebody who has very strong military ties, now 

what do you do then? I mean, how do you address something as 

fundamental as where do they turn? 

Ms. LOPES. I think we have a unique situation here in Hawaii 

because we are so isolated. The coalition operates a program called 

Flight To Freedom. And if we do have victims that need to leave 

the island because they are in imminent danger, we use our funds 

to help them, fly them to their family and their support system. 

Representative HANABUSA. So, it is putting them back into their 

’ohana, in other words? 
28 

Ms. LOPES. Yes. 

Representative HANABUSA. And is that the most effective way 

that you have found, in the experiences that you have for those, 

that clearly this would probably be a category that does not qualify, 

restricted report would probably be unrestricted. But, is this the 

best solution for them? 

Ms. LOPES. It depends on their safety; if they are really terrified 

and they feel that their life’s in danger, they want out of here as 

quickly as possible. 

But, I also have to note that the past two to three years, we have 

seen many women meet servicemembers online. And they are flying over here to Hawaii, depleting all of their savings, and finding 

out that this person is an abuser. And now they are stranded here 

in Hawaii and they are accessing our shelters, and we are trying 

to get them back. That is also a challenge that we are having right 

now. 

Representative HANABUSA. Can you give us an idea of how many 

of these Flights To Freedom in a particular year, or however you 

keep your data, and where do you find the money? 

Ms. LOPES. We solicit foundations, private grants. And after 

speaking with Cody, we learned the value that we should be tracking how many military servicemembers we are providing this to. 

But, it is a very special fund that we use. 

And after we purchase the tickets, we try and destroy any evidence that we ever made this purchase. And so we have the total 

numbers of tickets that we purchased, but we do not keep any 

identifying information. I do not have the numbers in my mind 

right now, but we can get that to you. 

Representative HANABUSA. Okay. So that is the ultimate that 

they can look to? 

Ms. LOPES. Immediately. 

Ms. KREIDMAN. That is also negotiation that occurs around early 

return of dependents that is sometimes employed when a person 

needs to leave. 

Representative HANABUSA. Thank you. 

Thank you, Senator. 

Senator HIRONO. Okay, back to the Flights To Freedom. So, did 

you say that you do not have the information as to how much your 

organizations have spent to return spouses? 

Ms. LOPES. We have the total, but we have not been keeping 

track of which are military dependents. We have not been keeping 

that data. We recently started tracking that. 

Senator HIRONO. And you use your own resources to return 

abused persons to a much more supportive environment? 

Ms. LOPES. Yes. 

Senator HIRONO. And, Nanci, you are right that the military does 

have an early release of dependents which is similar to return the 

dependents to a much safer situation. So, that has been another 

one of the military’s responses in how to best provide that. 

Ms. LOPES. And I believe that is only if they are married dependents. 

Senator HIRONO. There may be restrictions, and this could be yet 

another identifying of how best the civilian and the military community can work together. 
29 

I am having difficulty figuring out whether there are overlaps to 

the services provided by the civilian side and the military side. Do 

the people come to you. Basically, they just come to you, they are 

not accessing the military services? 

Ms. LOPES. If a victim calls the shelter and is taken into a shelter, if she discloses that she would like the shelter advocates, the 

local advocates, to work with the family advocacy programs, they 

will. But, that is completely up to the victim. It is her decision. 

Senator HIRONO. So, if the victim chooses to use the FAP program, then you do not provide the services that FAP is providing 

to that person. 

Ms. LOPES. Right. 

Ms. KREIDMAN. That is entirely the same for us. Sometimes we 

work very closely with the Family Advocacy Program. And some of 

the services that we provide are a little bit different, so we try. It 

is entirely up to the survivor, where she wants to get help and in 

what ways. Sometimes there is a good collaboration between the 

Domestic Violence Action Center and the Family Advocacy Program, sometimes not so for a variety of different reasons. There is 

not really duplication. Sometimes there is cooperation, and sometimes they come to DVAC and that is all that they—the entirety 

of their support. 

Senator HIRONO. It has been mentioned by all of us many times 

that the resources are scarce. And while you are great at raising 

money and advocating for that, let us assume there will be no additional funds. And in fact, I believe that Attorney General in his testimony said the VAWA funding has not increased in five years, 

even as we have expanded, by the way, the groups and people that 

VAWA will not protect. So, we have to be very creative here. 

What would you say would be the biggest challenge that you 

would like to have a coordinated community response team address 

with regard to your ability, your group’s ability, to help 

servicemembers of families? 

Ms. KREIDMAN. I think I need to understand what we mean 

when we use the phrase coordinated community response. Who 

comes to the table, what is the work we are doing together. What 

are the expectations that everybody brings when they come to the 

table. What can we agree on. What is the work that needs to be 

forged so that we are not duplicating services and we are cooperating? 

I do not really know exactly what we mean by a coordinated community response between civilian and the military communities. 

Maybe that is a first step. 

Senator HIRONO. Yes. 

Ms. KREIDMAN. Again, since we have got five different branches 

of the military and each one of them is their own little domain, 

that in and of itself is a kind of a challenge. The Army may want 

to approach it one way, the Marines may want to approach it in 

a different way, the Air Force may want to approach it in a different way. 

So, is the coordination among the branches and the civilian community or is the coordination between a branch and a civilian community. I am not entirely certain. 
30 

Senator HIRONO. I would say that this is why going forward, it 

does behoove us to at least use the same terminology and come to 

a common understanding. Would you want to add anything to what 

Miss Kreidman has said? 

Ms. LOPES. I believe that the military has lots of training resources that we could better utilize. 

Senator HIRONO. Training resources? 

Ms. LOPES. They bring excellent trainers over. But, we have not 

been able to coordinate. I think it is a goal. And Cindy recently 

joined our fatality review team, and she has been able to share now 

some of the training resources that we have. I think that is an easy 

way that we can start coordinating. 

Senator HIRONO. So, as you sit there, Nanci, this is—or we are 

going to be ending this hearing earlier, and which is good, yes, 

and—good. 

As you are thinking about there are some ways that we can move 

things along, feel free. I will turn to Congresswoman Hanabusa for 

additional questions. 

Representative HANABUSA. Thank you. I just—I am kind of 

stuck. The reason I am stuck is because I am trying to understand 

this from the perspective of the victim or the person who is seeking 

help. And that person who seeks help, Nanci, you said DVAC may 

be the only—— 

Ms. KREIDMAN. Right. 

Representative HANABUSA [continuing]. Agency that they choose 

to go with. And it seems like at some point that if you are coordinating, that it would—and if we are, quote, getting compensated 

for expenses, which is a logical thing to happen, but then the question becomes what about the person who is seeking the help? If 

that person does not want anything—any knowledge of this to go 

back to the military, for whatever that reasons may be, and wants 

to just seek help from DVAC or from one of your groups, how do 

we do that? Because it seems like in the process, we are losing 

sight of the person who is seeking the help. 

Ms. LOPES. We would never disclose any military connections or 

information if she did not want us to. It would only be if she preferred that we contact them. She can completely come and access 

all of our member programs with complete confidentiality. 

Representative HANABUSA. No, I agree. But, the reality of how do 

you then do the funding, right. How do you get compensated for 

that. As Nanci put it so aptly, as she does, in the beginning, taking 

money away as a community, not that the community does not 

want to, but you are limited; everybody is limited in the amount 

of resources. And it would seem that this is something that you are 

doing a service to the military as well. 

But, you know, that is the difficulty that I am having. And I am 

not sure that the military would be willing to just pick a number. 

We have three this month, take our word for it, we will sign an 

affidavit that we have three this month. 

Do you understand what I am getting at. I am just trying figure 

out how does the person fit into what we are talking about? 

Ms. KREIDMAN. A person might have sought assistance from the 

military several times and did not get the outcome that was supportive to her, at which point she may seek help someplace else. 
31 

Sometimes that is how we get our military family member survivor 

clients. 

I do not know. I think we have to figure that out. Through the 

coordination, and through the cooperation, and through the increased and improved communication, we might figure out how to 

report. We report to other funding sources lots of details without 

disclosing who the clients are that we are serving. 

Representative HANABUSA. Because I think for a lot, if a client 

is seeking help from you and wants that level of confidentiality, it 

probably has to do with the spouse, and not wanting that spouse 

to be affected in any way, you know, that which may or may not 

be—it is probably not good for the military not to know. You know, 

they should know if they have somebody who is abusing or something. And as a result of that, they should know. But, yet, it is this 

tension. 

I do not know what the answer is. I threw it out. Thank you. 

Thank you very much, Senator. 

Senator HIRONO. So, as with sexual assault, we want to encourage reporting in the civilian community as well as in the military 

community. And I think it is also important to keep in mind that 

the military, they are very much a part of our community, and they 

should be able to access services wherever they feel comfortable. 

When we get down to some of the nitty-gritty of how the resources 

can come together to do as best as we can, then that is another 

matter for a coordinated response. 

It is very clear that this is a very complicated situation. It is very 

complicated, with no easy solutions. And so as we go forward, I do 

ask our military colleagues who are here and our civilian community for cooperation as we go forward, because, you know, as I mentioned in my opening statement, I do anticipate moving forward 

with a collaboration model that is more than you all should be talking together more. 

All right. I would like to see a model that can be implemented. 

And we are certainly—I certainly will be interested to know if 

other jurisdictions have models that we can follow. And there must 

be, because when VAWA was first enacted, it did have the military 

collaboration component as part of a community response. 

It takes willing hearts to go there. And as I close this hearing, 

I do want to thank all of you for being here. It is a communitywide issue. And we will go forward together with as much frankness as we can so that we can, first of all, understand what we are 

dealing with, and how we can do a more effective job with the limited resources that we all have. 

The minutes or the record of the hearing will remain open for another week so any community persons, any legislators, anyone who 

wants to submit further testimony or statements to the committee, 

can do so in one week. 

And with that, I thank all of you, and adjourn this hearing. 

[Whereupon, at 11:51 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

[Additional material submitted for the record follows.] 

(33) 

A P P E N D I X 

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
34 

PREPARED JOINT STATEMENT OF COLONEL DERRICK ARINCORAYAN

AND CINDY MORITA
35 
36 
37 
38 
39 
40 
41 
42 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DAWN OGDEN
43 
44 
45 
46 
47 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID LOUIE
48 
49 
50 

ATTACHMENT I TO PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID LOUIE
51 
52 
53 
54 
55 
56 
57 
58 
59 
60 
61 
62 
63 
64 
65 
66 
67 
68 
69 
70 
71 
72 
73 
74 
75 
76 
77 
78 
79 
80 
81 
82 
83 
84 
85 
86 
87 
88 
89 
90 
91 
92 
93 
94 
95 
96 
97 
98 
99 
100 
101 
102 
103 
104 
105 
106 
107 

ATTACHMENT II TO PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID LOUIE
108 
109 
110 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF NANCI KREIDMAN
111 
112 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MARCI LOPES
113 
114 
115 
116 

SUBMISSION FOR THE RECORD
117 
118 

Æ