U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Office for Victims of Crime

Making Collaboration Work:

The Experiences of Denver

Victim Services 2000

DECEMBER 2002

Message From

the Director

The Office for Victims of Crime

(OVC) funded the Victim Services 2000

(VS2000) project to establish demonstration sites for the development of effective systems of services delivery to

crime victims.The project goal was to

develop a model that would improve

the range and quality of services for

crime victims as well as the victims’ access to them.

In 1997, Denver, Colorado, was awarded a VS2000 grant and selected as the

VS2000 urban demonstration site.This

bulletin describes the factors most critical to the success of Denver’s efforts.

Project participants agreed to be guided

by core values, a shared vision and goal,

and a commitment to the creative use

of collaboration. Other critical factors

were diverse, balanced leadership;

skilled facilitators; careful maintenance

of the collaborative climate; dedication

to victim-centered sevices; and the inclusion of all stakeholders in planning

and decisionmaking.

OVC and the VS2000 staff hope that

sharing the Denver experiences will

help victim service professionals across

the country form productive collaborations for better services and assistance

to victims of crime.

John W. Gillis

Director

Over the past 20 years, the field of

victim services has grown from a

small grassroots effort to an emerging profession. The advancement of the

rights of victims, once achieved through

adversarial struggles and lawsuits, is now

accomplished through multidisciplinary

efforts and collaborations among former

adversaries throughout the country. Today

there is greater understanding of victims’

issues due to legislation enacted to support victims’ rights, increased funding for

victim services, and hard work by many

victim advocates. Out of these efforts, understanding has grown and collaboration

on behalf of victims is unprecedented.

The public’s awareness of crime victimization has developed largely due to accounts given by victims and survivors

and the hard work and advocacy of the

service providers working with them.

As the victim services movement has

grown, alliances and collaborations

among service providers have increased.

Out of the interrelationships among

certain victimizations—such as sexual

assault, domestic violence, and partner,

child, and elder abuse—have grown new

agendas for collaboration in advocacy,

programming, legislation, and education.

Alliances have developed among criminal

justice advocates, community-based agencies, educators, institutions, and other allied professionals. Within the criminal

justice system, collaboration has taken

hold as well. The public expects the agencies of the criminal justice system to uphold the law and provide protection from

crime. When research documented that

the public had lost confidence in “the

system,” parts of the criminal justice system were prompted to find new ways to

address problems. Asking whether our reactive, adversarial approach to justice and

law enforcement continues to make sense

as our only, or even our primary, response

to crime, criminal justice offices and professionals reached out to the criminal 

justice system and beyond to work 

collaboratively with various agencies to

address the safety and well-being of our

communities.
decisionmaking in the criminal justice

system. In the 1970s, the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, a grantmaking agency, worked with state and

local coordinating and planning councils

to establish common goals and funding

priorities to meet them. Other projects,

such as the National Jail and Prison

Overcrowding Project (NJPOP), made

similar programming efforts. Jointly 

funded by the National Institute of Corrections (NIC), a federal agency, and the

Edna McConnell Clark Foundation, a

private organization, NJPOP recognized

that unless all parts of the system that

contribute to the growth of jail and

prison populations participate in decisionmaking about the best use of existing

resources, jails and prisons will continue

to fill. Such collaboration required

tremendous effort by all parts of the system. Each part had to be willing to try to

understand the roles and responsibilities

of the others, to compromise on issues,

and to acknowledge and respect others’

political realities.

In recent years, numerous federal initiatives have continued to work for empowerment of communities by encouraging

the use of collaboration by criminal justice policymaking entities, including

Comprehensive Communities, Weed and

Seed, Community Oriented Policing Services, Violence Against Women Office

(VAWO), Safe Kids/Safe Streets, the Office of Justice Program’s Drug Courts Program Office, NIC, and the Office of

Justice Programs. Many of these programs

represent federal interagency or interbureau collaboration. To ensure that the

goals of collaborations are successfully

met, philosophical hurdles and entrenched organizational structures must

be overcome through training and commitment of resources.

Advantage (1996), provides definitions

of these terms:

■ Networking is exchanging information for mutual benefit.

■ Coordination is exchanging information and altering activities for mutual benefit and to achieve a common

purpose.

■ Cooperation is exchanging information, altering activities, and sharing

resources for mutual benefit and to

achieve a common purpose.

Huxham distinguishes these terms from

collaboration:

Collaboration is the exchange of

information, the altering of activities, the sharing of resources,

and the enhancement of the capacity of another for the mutual

benefit of all and to achieve a

common purpose.

Three tables that appear later in this bulletin briefly illustrate how Denver victim

service agencies moved from networking

to collaboration in three areas that became VS2000 project initiatives: an 

online Resource Directory, an online

Case Management System, and the

Community Advocacy Program. The 

tables note the stage in the collaboration

continuum at which the agencies became

involved in the VS2000 project.

Application of the

Collaborative Model

to the Criminal Justice

System

T

he Federal Government has long 

encouraged and supported a collaborative approach to planning and 

Victim Services 2000 (VS2000) represents all of these forms of collaboration.

Funded by a discretionary grant from the

Office for Victims of Crime (OVC),

VS2000 is a demonstration project designed to create a comprehensive, coordinated, seamless system for delivery of

services to victims of crime. OVC selected two VS2000 sites for the development

and implementation of two comprehensive collaboration models: Denver, Colorado, in 1997, as the urban site and

Vermont, in 1998, as the rural site. Both

sites were charged with developing a distinct model for seamless delivery of victim services, tailored to their particular

geographic, political, and demographic 

complexities and using the concepts of

collaboration and innovation. Once this

was accomplished, both VS2000 sites

were charged with developing and providing information and technical assistance

about their particular VS2000 model of

victim services.

One of a series, this bulletin documents

VS2000 initiatives in Denver and addresses planning and collaboration, the

factors most critical to the success of any

interdisciplinary effort. While each

VS2000 model is unique, some common

themes run through them, including a

strong emphasis on creative collaboration

and planning.

Defining 

Collaboration

Defining collaboration is difficult

because of ambiguities in practical

usage. For example, the word “collaboration” is commonly interchanged

with terms such as “networking,” “cooperation,” and “coordination.” To distinguish

collaboration from other terms, Chris

Huxham, in Creating Collaborative 

OVC Bulletin

2
existing gaps in Denver’s services to victims, collaborative planning in 1987 led

to the establishment of a centralized victim services center. Victim services in

Denver continue to be provided to the

entire continuum of crime victims, including services specifically designed for

traditionally underserved victims. Many

of the agencies work to increase the public’s education and awareness about victims’ issues. By regularly conducting client

satisfaction surveys, agencies determine

the best strategies to adopt for refinement

and expansion of their services.

Once Denver was selected as a VS2000

site, funding began, and the project was

under way. The planning committee became the steering committee, and all of

the agencies and programs participated as

partners in Denver’s VS2000 project. Participants included community and criminal justice-based victim service programs

as well as victims, survivors, and allied

professionals. Though many of these programs had a history of collaboration on

distinct projects and smaller scale initiatives, VS2000 provided the first opportunity for collaboration with participation

from the full spectrum of Denver’s victim

service agencies. With OVC funding for

staffing and program innovations, these

service providers and allied professionals

came together to work toward the following goals:

■ The creation of a seamless, comprehensive, coordinated, interdisciplinary system of delivery of services for

victims of crime, with special emphasis on services for victims previously underserved or unserved.

■ The establishment of a training institute that integrates technology,

cross training among victim service

providers, and training for allied professionals who work with victims of

crime.

■ The application of relevant technology to the delivery of services for

victims of crime.

The following statement reflects the mission of VS2000 as it has evolved with the

project goals in mind.

To work with the community to

create a model network of services that offers outreach as well

as innovative, specialized, seamless, and integrated services to

all victims of crime, strengthening and restoring the fabric of

our community.

Leadership and Facilitation

Leadership was the first critical

factor in the success of Denver

VS2000. Research has demonstrated

overwhelmingly that successful collaborations depend on skilled leaders. Historically, few in the criminal justice

system have had the training or experience necessary to convene, lead, and facilitate collaborations effectively. Until

recently, it was difficult to find skilled collaboration conveners, leaders, and facilitators within the victim services field.

Critical to the success of Denver VS2000

was the fact that the VALE board already

had in place the leadership necessary to

facilitate this complex collaboration. The

VALE board was established in 1984 to

fund local crime victim services, using

surcharges on criminal cases in Denver’s

county and district courts. This fivemember board awards more than $1

million each year to approximately 26

community-based victim service programs

that serve victims in the city and county

of Denver. A similar municipal structure

funds the criminal justice-based victim

service programs in Denver. With separate funding sources, criminal justicebased victim service programs and

community-based victim service programs

3

MAKING COLLABORATION WORK

Application of the

Collaborative Model

to VS2000

V

S2000 has been a 5-year experiment

in collaboration within the victim

services field. It is hoped that the

experiences and lessons learned from the

VS2000 project will help professionals

around the country form new collaborations as they work in the fields of victim

assistance and criminal justice.

Building on Existing 

Collaborations

In 1996, when OVC announced its intention to fund development of model

victim service networks in both rural and

urban communities, the Denver Victim

Assistance and Law Enforcement (VALE)

board convened its planning committee,

which comprised more than 50 community and criminal justice-based victim service providers and allied professionals.

Since Denver’s victim service community

had a strong history of collaborative projects and partnerships, the creation of a

seamless, integrated victim service delivery system such as VS2000 seemed like

the logical next step. The goal of Denver’s VALE committee was to design the

components and structure of a VS2000

model for the city of Denver and strategize their implementation. Historically,

Denver’s victim service community has

had several interdisciplinary task forces

and councils to focus on sexual assault,

domestic violence, and child abuse. In addition, three statewide coalitions representing domestic violence, sexual assault,

and criminal justice programs have been

active in Denver. Further, interdisciplinary, victim-centered protocols have been

in place in Denver for sexual assault, domestic violence, elder abuse, older and

disabled crime victims, and child sexual

assault and abuse. In an effort to fill 
VS2000 Case Management 

System

In 1997, VS2000 conducted a needs

assessment that asked underserved victims

how services might be tailored to better

meet their needs. Respondents said they

wanted service providers to ask them

what they needed rather than only tell

them what is available. Also, they expressed a desire for services that recognized and addressed the multiple layers of

obstacles they often encounter in getting

their needs met.

In response to this feedback, VS2000 is

developing a Case Management System

for victim services providers. This shared

system will operate over a secure private

network that makes it possible for service

providers to assist and track their clients

through the network of services to ensure

clients are getting the help they need. It

also allows service providers to communicate with colleagues about shared clients.

In particular, this system allows service

providers to assist, follow up on, and support those victims who must navigate

multiple agencies. For victims, using this

system means they will not have to retell

their stories and complete duplicative

forms each time they access services at a

different agency.

Community Advocacy

The 1997 needs assessment of underserved victims showed that these victims

do not trust that the services being provided will meet their needs, even if the

services were designed for their particular demographic group. Further, the 

assessment showed that underserved victims normally will not access services outside their community even when they

have knowledge of the services. They

want services to be located in their community and they want the services to be

provided by individuals who are members

of their communities or neighborhoods.

defining the transition points between

planning, implementing, providing technical assistance, and overseeing the longterm, operational phase; and planning

major meetings and retreats. The collaboration curriculum developed by the Center for Effective Public Policy for the

State Justice Institute (see A Note to

Readers) was also very helpful in framing

the issues of collaboration for VS2000

participants. This curriculum would be especially beneficial to beginning collaborative projects.

VS2000 Online Resource 

Directory

Early in the project, VS2000 participants identified a critical service gap.

Appropriate referrals were not being 

provided to victims since there was no 

resource database to generate accurate,

up-to-date referral information. Providing

information to victims about resources

is the backbone of victim assistance. Locating, compiling, screening, organizing,

and distributing information about resources to victims in a timely manner are

some of the most time-consuming tasks

for a victim services agency. Too often,

by the time an agency has gathered,

processed, printed, and distributed information about resources to its clients, it is

out of date. In addition, great duplication

of effort resulted as each agency individually went through the process of providing

information about resources to victims.

To replace this approach, Denver victim

service providers developed and implemented a collaborative, Internet-based directory of resources available for use by all

service providers. All 38 Denver victim

services agencies share this Web-based

resources directory of more than 800

records, contributing data and accessing

information. The administration, maintenance, and updating of directory records

for all agencies is performed by an information specialist employed by a VS2000

member agency.

do not compete for funding, which eases

tension surrounding selection of programs

for funding.

The Denver VALE board convened the

VS2000 Planning Committee and other

necessary stakeholders, supported the development of the project financially, and

arranged for the housing and administration of the project by the Denver District

Attorney’s Office. Perhaps the board’s

most important contribution was a commitment to facilitate and fund the final

programmatic and fiscal recommendations of the VS2000 Steering Committee.

Staff Selection

Staff selection was the second critical

factor in the success of Denver VS2000.

The planning body of Denver VS2000 

realized that successful collaboration 

requires the time, energy, and talent of

a supportive staff. Convening meetings,

documenting progress, and acting on

agenda items all take dedicated staff time.

Recruitment for the VS2000 staff targeted

individuals with particular experience and

knowledge. They needed experience

working with both criminal justice and

community-based victim service organizations, and they needed knowledge about

planning and collaboration, training, curriculum development, community organizing, technical writing, and program

management. A concerted effort was

made to hire a culturally diverse team

that reflected Denver’s demographics,

demonstrated VS2000’s commitment to

cultural competency, and met the needs

of all victims of crime.

Using Skilled Facilitators

The use of skilled facilitators at strategic points was the third critical factor in

the success of Denver VS2000 collaboration and planning. These strategic points

included setting initial goals; developing

values and a mission; identifying and

OVC Bulletin

4
Networking Coordination Cooperation Collaboration

Victim service agencies referred Several agencies began to share Three agencies pooled their Thirty-eight agencies collabvictims to each other’s services. their paper resource directories resource data to create a joint orated to design and develop

Each agency created, used, and and to use more than one as a resource directory. One agency a shared online resource

updated its own paper resource reference. developed the database and directory of their combined 

directory. updated information using an resource data. Each agency 

automated version. The other inputs current data electrontwo agencies used paper ically. An information speversions of the directory. cialist administers, maintains, 

and updates records for all

member agencies.

▲ VS2000 enters the process

5

The assessment also showed that the underserved victim wants services provided

in his or her language, in a culturally

competent manner, and with recognition

of the unique barriers experienced by

many ethnic and cultural communities

in accessing services.

Community advocates and community

advocacy programs were conceived in direct response to the information gathered

in this needs assessment. Community advocates are members and residents of the

community or neighborhood they serve.

They are known, respected, and involved

in their communities and are responsible

for linking victims with available services.

MAKING COLLABORATION WORK

Table 1. VS2000 Online Resource Directory

Networking Coordination Cooperation Collaboration

Victim service agencies made Agencies developed, and cur- Case managers currently meet Twenty-two agencies will use

referrals to each other’s services. rently participate in, an Inter- monthly for case reviews. Vic- the online Case Management

agency Cross-Training Plan to tim service agencies created a System to eliminate duplicaincrease knowledge and trust standard intake and assess- tive intake procedures, better

among agencies. ment process and form (an follow up on referrals, 

element of the online Case and share case records as

Management System). appropriate.

▲ VS2000 enters the process

Table 2. VS2000 Case Management System

Three underserved communities were selected as sites for the VS2000 Community Advocacy Program. Community

advocates inform the VS2000 Steering

Committee and VS2000 working teams

about both the need for services and the

barriers to services experienced by the

victims in their communities.

Collaboration changes the way we work

and requires a profound shift in our thinking about how change is created. The examples provided in the three tables

illustrate how collaboration shifted organizational focus from competing to consensus building, from working alone to

including others, from thinking about

activities to thinking about results and

strategies, and from focusing on shortterm accomplishments to demanding

long-term results.

Establishing a Collaborative

Structure

We know that many victims of crime

have experienced multiple and varied victimizations. We also know that the

impact of a crime ripples out to affect

many people beyond the primary victim.

Many specialized programs have been developed to meet these multidimensional

needs resulting from crime victimization.

These programs create a continuum of

services, and within that continuum, each

service provider has expertise, access, or

purview within a particular service area.
OVC Bulletin

6

Developing a Guiding Vision

and Core Values

The guiding vision of all VS2000 

agencies can be expressed like this: 

When crime victims in Denver

look for services, there will be

no wrong door for them to open.

Wherever they turn, a quick, reliable connection will be made

to get them to the most appropriate services. 

During their first month of working together, the VS2000 partners developed

this vision and the following values in

support of it:

■ Victim-centered services. The victims are our clients, and they come

first. We provide services to our victim clients based on an evaluation

of their needs and we deliver them

with respect. The advocacy and 

services we provide to our victim

clients are intended to empower

them. We agree to keep in mind

the big picture of victim services, 

including prevention and important

community issues.

■ Embodiment of the spirit of diversity. We acknowledge our limits, our

assumptions, and our privileges, and

those historical cultural concepts of

victim services that do not work for

all victims. We are willing to listen

and learn from each other. We

honor each other’s identity.

■ Creative collaboration. We recognize that the whole is greater than

the sum of its parts. We value risk

taking. We work with flexibility. We

communicate openly and honestly

with each other. We share information, knowledge, and values.

■ Self-care so you can care for others. We commit our agencies in vision and in practice to the exercise

of self-care. Only by being aware of

and accountable for our own needs

and by keeping ourselves and our

agencies healthy can we adequately

provide for our clients. We realize

that agencies as well as individuals

need renewal and restoration.

Networking Coordination Cooperation Collaboration

Agencies informally exchanged Agencies hired certain employ- Three community advocates Underserved communities obinformation about meeting ees to perform targeted out- were hired to address commu- tain services from agencies and

community needs in flexible reach to community members. nity needs. Agencies and com- agencies receive more referrals

and specific ways. munity advocates host and from underserved communities.

participate in cross-training

events to learn from each

other and to build trusting 

relationships. VS2000 funds

this project. 

▲ VS2000 enters the process

Table 3. VS2000 Community Advocacy Program

Further, instead of delivering one unduplicated type of service to a victim, service providers often unknowingly deliver

several very similar services to the same

victim at the same time. Using training,

technology, and community advocacy initiatives, the VS2000 demonstration project coordinates these specialized service

providers and programs so that the services victims receive are networked and interconnected. This is what victims said

would increase the value of the services.

The structure of the coordination in

VS2000 was critical to its success. Each

agency involved in the collaboration

had a seat on the VS2000 Steering 

Committee, its governing body. VS2000

agencies also participated on several

working teams that addressed the core issues of collaboration: technology, model

network development, and training. 

Subcommittees were convened under

each of these teams to address specific 

issues, make recommendations to their

team, and submit them to the Steering

Committee for approval.
7

MAKING COLLABORATION WORK

network. Visual exercises were used.

In one exercise, participants were

asked to draw pictures of what the

world or their communities would

look like if seamless services were

provided for all victims of crime.

■ Be aware of and address changes in

participants’ attitudes, perceptions,

and level of support and participation. As time passes, participants

sometimes become uncomfortable

comparing their original ideas with

the actual developments. As the

Denver VS2000 project matured,

conversations and actions naturally

shifted from philosophy and visions

to the implementation of new initiatives and new ways of delivering

services. This made some participants feel their turf was threatened.

Others felt that the time and work

involved had begun to outweigh

any evidence of tangible change.

Commitment began to wane and

participation on working teams and

committees decreased. Two things

became clear. VS2000’s core values

and mission needed to be revisited,

and it was more important than ever

for all decisions to be made with

input from all participants.

2. Develop a Results-Driven 

Process

■ Maintain balance between the

process and the product. Denver

VS2000 continues to be a large, collaborative effort, which involves

many agencies that compete for

funding and territory. Issues of trust

were present from the beginning.

Mindful of this, VS2000 staff and

meeting facilitators knew it was critical for the participants to have time

to express and process these and

other issues. This made participants

feel that they had a voice and it

was heard. Opportunities were provided to participants to engage in

trust-building discussions with their 

colleagues. In the first year, especially, meetings often consisted of

processing issues and clarifying positions. This created an atmosphere of

mutual trust and collective ownership of the project and its outcomes

that was crucial to sustaining a collaborative network of this magnitude.

■ Provide the participants with immediate feedback about the results

of the time and effort they spent on

the project. Design, and insert into

the work, some short-term goals that

the participants can achieve. This

will keep participants motivated to

continue working on the long-term

goals. Aware that busy people would

continue to attend meetings only if

they see tangible results, project staff

interspersed challenging, short-term

goals that could successfully be completed while working on the longterm goal of creating a model victim

service network. Another long-term

goal, that of developing a technology

system, began with smaller goals of 

providing participants with e-mail

accounts and training them in basic

software applications for word processing, spreadsheets, and databases.

The larger goal of raising the awareness of service providers to create a

truly seamless network of victim

services began with the smaller goal

of implementing a cross-training

plan throughout VS2000. Selecting

interns from a minority intern recruitment program was a short-term

commitment to the goal of embracing the spirit of diversity.

The Denver 

Experience:

Lessons Learned

I

n their 1989 book, Teamwork: What

Must Go Right/What Can Go Wrong,

Carl E. Larson and Frank M.J. Lafasto

described eight characteristics found in

high performing teams: a clear, elevating

goal; a results-driven structure; competent

team members; a unified commitment; a

collaborative climate; standards of excellence; external support and recognition;

and principled leadership. The discussion

below uses these characteristics as a framework to analyze the planning and collaboration of VS2000. What worked? What

did not? What lessons were learned?

1. Establish a Clear, Elevating 

Goal

■ Base the project goal on project

values. At the inception of the project, Denver VS2000 convened a facilitated, all-day, team-building

session attended by members of the

planning committee who represented more than 50 VS2000 participant

agencies. The purpose of the meeting was to define the project’s core

values and create a common vision.

Four core values were identified: 

victim-centered services, an atmosphere that welcomes diversity, creative collaboration, and passionate

well-being (self-care so you can care

for others).

■ Use words and pictures of clear,

elevating goals so people fully understand them. A few months into

the project, VS2000 convened a Visioning Session to define the vision

further and begin developing the

structure of the model victim service
OVC Bulletin

8

of disagreement, it was helpful to

revisit the core vision and values

to maintain focus and inspire 

participants.

■ Recruit diverse and balanced leadership. Ongoing recruitment for

leadership of the VS2000 project

sought diverse individuals of all levels of skill, knowledge, and experience to reflect the diversity of the

field and to provide balance and

broad perspective to the project. Believing a diverse and balanced work

force would be best for the development of the project, VS2000 required each team on the project to

have the same diversity as existed in

the field, including age and work experience. Included in the leadership

search were direct service providers,

such as victim service providers,

community members, and allied professionals, as well as policymakers

and administrators, such as agency

directors and administrative and

program staff.

4. Recruit Unified and 

Committed Stakeholders

■ Commitment needed from all levels

of the VS2000 project and agencies. The VS2000 staff believed

that multilevel participation by all

stakeholders regardless of position

would give the project greater and

necessary depth and breadth of perspective. For example, the executive

directors of Denver’s victim service

agencies serve as members of the

VS2000 Steering Committee. In addition, many also participate on the

project’s working teams and committees and allow or require their staff

to participate also.

5. Create a Collaborative 

Climate

■ Understand the obstacles to using

collaboration in victim services.

Collaboration is not often seen in

victim services because the conditions for successful collaboration

rarely exist. Normally, victim services funding is scarce and the competition for it is intense. Victim

services work often operates from a

model of scarcity, forcing the service

provider to function with the anxiety and fear of losing or not finding

resources. None of this is conducive

to collaboration. VS2000 was possible because the basic needs and

resources were met by a grant, allowing the individuals enough relaxation, security, and peace of mind so

that ideas could emerge, take root,

and grow.

■ Recognize the value of building 

relationships between criminal 

justice-based and community-based

programs. A tension often exists between community-based and criminal justice-based programs. Rather

than acknowledging that the work

done by both programs is necessary

and complements the other in serving victims, program members argue

about each program’s relative value

and contribution. The experience 

of VS2000 indicated that collaboration would not be realized without a

solid understanding of roles by both

the criminal justice-based and 

community-based programs and

without the establishment of respect

and trust between them. VS2000

found that cross training was critical

for increasing understanding. Guided 

discussions were very valuable in

helping the participants work

through issues of tension and

■ Maintain good communications

among all stakeholders involved in

the process. A network of good

communications is necessary for

the success of any collaboration, 

particularly one as diversified as the

Denver VS2000 project. A staff of 5

provided communications support

for the approximately 150 individuals who worked in 5 teams on 15

committees and subcommittees. The

staff coordinated meetings; maintained a participant database; wrote

and disseminated a newsletter; announced meetings, trainings, and

other pertinent information; established e-mail accounts for project

participants; maintained a meeting

calendar; recorded minutes; and uploaded products created by the project onto the VS2000 Web site.

Communications were further enhanced by frequently including updates about the progress of other

teams, team committees, and committee agendas. In addition, time

was allotted for agency updates and

networking.

3. Develop the Capabilities of 

Project Participants

■ Encourage and inspire all team

members to participate. All Denver

VS2000 participants, both management and staff, were encouraged to

join in and share the responsibility

for the project. They were encouraged to make decisions about the

structure and components of the

VS2000 model service network.

When it became clear that each person’s opinion was important and actively sought, individuals who may

normally remain reserved and quiet

in group situations began to take a

more active role and display

leadership qualities. During times
9

MAKING COLLABORATION WORK

difference unless the consumers of

their services evaluate them and provide feedback. Since VS2000 projects are guided by the concept

of creating and providing victimcentered services, evaluation and

feedback from those served is very

important for assessing the effectiveness of a VS2000 project.

7. Recruit External Support and 

Recognition

■ Recognize the importance of diversified support. VS2000 worked hard

to cultivate relationships and garner

the support of external entities that

were interested or willing to help

provide services or support for victims of crime. These included allied

professionals in local seminaries, law

schools, and corporations such as

AT&T Wireless. By building the

broadest, most integrated victim

service network possible, the greatest

number of victims can be assisted.

■ Acknowledge the critical roles of

funding entities. Ranging from

housing staff members to helping 

ensure the ongoing viability of project initiatives, the support of the

Denver VALE board in administering the VS2000 project has been

critical. The Denver District Attorney’s Office, which housed the Denver VALE board, was key in making

VS2000 a reality. Denver District

Attorney Bill Ritter devoted the resources of his office to administrative, housing, and oversight

functions for the VS2000 effort, as

well as providing his leadership and

commitment to the issues of victim

rights and services.

■ Understand that internal support 

is also critical. One’s own organization must provide support and

recognition. VS2000 discovered that

those who were involved in successful collaborations enjoyed the internal

support of their agencies. VS2000 also

discovered that collaboration takes

time and energy, and receiving only

superficial commitment from partner

agencies impeded success.

8. VS2000 Leadership Principles

■ Embrace diversity, critique, and

conflict as opportunities for growth

and understanding. One goal of the

VS2000 model is for the collaboration participants to develop trust in

the leadership and believe it to be

fair, open, and supportive of creative

decisionmaking. The VS2000 model

believes this will ensure many voices

are heard and participants will be

encouraged to work hard. In the

VS2000 model, the leadership invites criticism as an important step

in resolving conflict and moving forward collaboratively. Further, it is

important for leadership to embrace

criticism and conflict as positive opportunities to achieve mutual understanding. The VS2000 Community

Advocates and the Victim Advisory

Council are two groups that invited

criticism and embraced conflict as

an impetus for growth.

■ Consensus building and collaboration. While the consensus model of

decisionmaking has been important to the grassroots and feminist

philosophies underlying victim services, applying it to collaboration is

more challenging. On the plus side,

consensus building empowers more

people to participate. On the minus

side, having increased numbers of

participants makes decisionmaking

difficult. An organization must take

care to implement and manage the

consensus-building process wisely.

develop the trust necessary for a

collaborative environment.

■ Understand that collaboration is

a process that requires constant

evaluation and adjustment. A 

collaborative effort is not a destination but a journey. During the

project, all VS2000 team members

had to constantly assess whether the

collaborative effort represented the

populations being targeted for better

service. As new collaborators joined

the effort, it was important and necessary to reassert the agreements and

understandings of the collaboration

to maintain the original collaborative climate established by the core

VS2000 group. As team members

reached out to other victim services

providers, allied professionals, victims, and underserved communities,

it was very important that the original collaborative climate was strong

and that all involved had a good 

understanding of its meaning.

6. Set a Standard of Excellence

■ Set a standard of excellence that

provides results that meet the needs

of the targeted community. The

needs assessment that VS2000 conducted was a necessary first step in

defining the project’s standard of excellence. In this assessment, focus

groups were most helpful in clearly

identifying areas where victim 

services did not reflect the “no

wrong door” vision. Focus groups

noted where victims seeking services

might run into obstacles.

■ Stress the importance of evaluation. As a profession, victim services

often does not evaluate the impact

of its services adequately. Those who

work in victim services will never

know if their work is truly making a
OVC Bulletin

10

From Teamwork: What Must Go

Right/What Can Go Wrong by Carl E.

Larson and Frank M.J. Lafasto, 1989.

Responsibilities of Team 

Leaders

■ Avoid compromising the team’s

objective with political issues.

■ Exhibit personal commitment to

the team’s goal.

■ Do not dilute the team’s efforts

with too many priorities.

■ Be fair and impartial toward all

team members.

■ Be willing to confront and resolve

issues associated with inadequate

performance by team members.

■ Be open to new ideas and information from team members.

Create a Supportive 

Decisionmaking Climate 

■ Trust team members with meaningful levels of responsibility.

■ Provide team members with the

necessary autonomy to achieve 

results.

■ Present challenging opportunities

that stretch the individual abilities

of team members.

■ Recognize and reward superior 

performance.

Excessive emphasis on the consensusbuilding process can ultimately be

unproductive. Skilled management

and implementation of the process

and capable facilitation of the group

are needed to ensure that the group

actually reaches decisions and honors them rather than reprocessing

them.

Conclusion

T

his bulletin outlines the most critical

factors that contributed to the success of the interdisciplinary, collaborative Denver VS2000 project. These

success factors are not unique to Denver.

They exist in the Vermont model and

other successful collaborations both within and outside the criminal justice system.

Although it is impossible to isolate which

critical element may be the most important predictor of success, it is very important to highlight three elements that

contributed to success in the Denver 

experience:

■ Acceptance by the stakeholders that

a collaborative climate is not a destination, but a journey.

■ Adoption of a shared vision and core

values by all that set the tone for the

entire process.

■ Agreement that collaboration is part

and parcel of how the planning

process is conducted.

A Note to Readers

T

he Center for Effective Public Policy

for the State Justice Institute, in

concert with the National Center

for State Courts, is administering a national training and technical assistance

project on this topic, called the National

Principled Leadership

■ Stand behind the team and support it.

Responsibilities of Team 

Members

■ Demonstrate a realistic understanding of my role.

■ Demonstrate objective and factbased judgments.

■ Collaborate effectively with other

team members.

■ Make the team goal a higher priority than any personal objective.

■ Demonstrate a willingness to devote whatever effort is necessary

to achieve team success.

■ Be willing to share information,

perceptions, and feedback openly.

■ Help other team members as needed and appropriate.

■ Demonstrate high standards of 

excellence.

■ Stand behind and support team 

decisions.

■ Demonstrate courage of conviction

by directly confronting important

issues.

■ Demonstrate leadership in ways

that contribute to the team’s 

success.

■ Respond constructively to feedback

from others.
Resource Center on Collaboration in

Criminal and Juvenile Justice. This project, sponsored by the State Justice Institute and its federal partners—the Bureau

of Justice Assistance, NIC, OVC, the

Drug Courts Program Office, VAWO, and

the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention—is assisting selected

jurisdictions, including the Denver

VS2000 Project, with building stronger

initiatives and enhancing justice in their

communities. Denver VS2000 is proud to

publish the first bulletin on collaboration

resulting from this training and technical

assistance project.

11

MAKING COLLABORATION WORK

AMEND

Anti Violence Program

Asian Pacific Development Center

AT&T Wireless Services

City Attorney’s Office, Domestic 

Violence Unit

Colorado Attorney General’s Office

Colorado Coalition Against

Domestic Violence

Colorado Coalition Against Sexual 

Assault

Colorado District Attorney’s Council

Colorado Division of Criminal Justice

Colorado Federal Bureau 

of Investigation

Colorado Organization for 

Victim Assistance

Colorado State Judicial, Office of 

Probation Services

Denver VS2000 Steering Committee

References

Borden, Lynne M., and Daniel F. Perkins

(1999). Assessing Your Collaboration: A

Self Evaluation Tool. Available at

www.joe.org/joe/1999April/tt1.html.

Collaboration and Knowledge Management Resource Center Web site, www.

collaboration-tools.com.

Denver Juvenile Justice Integrated Treatment Network (2000). Collaboration and

Coordination—Denver’s story of integrating

services for substance abusing juvenile offenders. Denver, CO: Denver Juvenile Justice

Integrated Treatment Network.

Hargrove, Robert A. (1998). Mastering the

Art of Creative Collaboration. New York,

NY: McGraw-Hill.

Huxham, Chris, ed. (1996). Creating

Collaborative Advantage. Newbury, CA:

Sage Publications.

Larson, Carl E., and Frank M.J. Lafasto

(1989). Teamwork: What Must Go

Right/What Can Go Wrong. Newbury,

CA: Sage Publications.

U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (1994). Innovative Community

Partnerships: Working Together for Change.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of

Justice. NCJ 146483.

Curtis Park Community Center

Denver Child Advocacy Center

Denver Community Corrections

Denver County Court Probation

Denver Crime Victim 

Compensation Program

Denver Department of Human Services

Denver District Attorney’s Office

Denver Health Medical Center

Denver Indian Health and 

Family Services

Denver Police Department

Denver Sheriff’s Department

Denver VALE Board

Denver Victims Service Center

Domestic Violence Initiative for 

Women with Disabilities

Dove: Advocacy Services for Abused 

Deaf Women and Children

Justice Information Center

Mary’s Hope

Muslim Women’s Society

The Poder Project

Project Safeguard

PAVE: Promoting Alternative to 

Violence through Education

Rape Assistance and 

Awareness Program

SafeHouse Denver

Servicios de la Raza

Sexual Assault Interagency Council

U.S. Attorney’s Office

Victim Offender 

Reconciliation Program

WINGS Foundation
Resources

F

or more information about the Denver VS2000 project and related

products, please contact Denver

VS2000 or OVC at the following:

U.S. Department of Justice

Office for Victims of Crime

810 Seventh Street NW.

Washington, DC 20531

202–616–3575

Fax: 202–514–6383 

E-mail: dolisek@ojp.usdoj.gov

Web site: www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc

Denver VS2000

303 West Colfax, No. 1300

Denver, CO 80204

720–913–9256

Fax: 720–913–9090 

Web site: www.vs2000.org

NCJ 194177

Acknowledgments

Victim Services 2000 would like to

acknowledge the help and support of

the Denver District Attorney’s Office

in making VS2000 a reality. District

Attorney Ritter devoted the resources

of his office to the administration,

housing, and oversight of this effort.

More importantly, Bill Ritter’s leadership and commitment to victims’

rights and services helped us create a

model network of services that passionately adheres to those ideals.

OVC Bulletin

This document was prepared by the Denver VS2000 project, under grant number

1997–VF–GX–K001, awarded by the Office for Victims of Crime, Office of Justice

Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.The

opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in this document

are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position or

policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

The Office for Victims of Crime is a component of the Office of Justice Programs,

which also includes the Bureau of Justice

Assistance, the Bureau of Justice Statistics,

the National Institute of Justice, and the

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency

Prevention.

Authors

Marti Kovener and Erin Stark, 

Denver VS2000.

Bill Woodward, Manager, National

Resource Center on Collaboration

in Criminal and Juvenile Justice,

Center for Effective Public Policy.

For information on training and technical assistance available from OVC, 

contact:

OVC Training and Technical Assistance 

Center

10530 Rosehaven Street, Suite 400

Fairfax, VA 22030

1–866–OVC–TTAC (1–866–682–8822)

Fax: 703–279–4673

E-mail: TTAC@ovcttac.org

Web site: www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/assist/ 

welcome.html