DOI: 10.3886/icpsr38265.v1
title: What Constitutes Success? Evaluating Legal Services for Victims of Crime, Arizona, Maryland, and Oregon, 2019-2021
title: Version 1

description: Victim legal services generally, and victims rights enforcement legal services specifically, are still relatively new victim assistance fields compared with other forms of crime victim services. Therefore, the field of victim legal services has so far lacked a conceptual framework that articulates the ultimate goals of these services, and how the provision of these services is intended to promote those goals. This formative evaluation, which is a collaboration between the Justice Research and Statistics Association (JRSA) and the National Crime Victim Law Institute (NCVLI) and funded by the National Institute of Justice, seeks to address this gap by first creating a conceptual model and theory of change, and then testing it in practice.
description: The purposes of the study were to: test the model, including each program's alignment with the model pilot test data collection to help the programs build and measure a better foundation for monitoring/determining program fidelity and effectiveness assess overall readiness for formal process and outcome evaluations later in time
description: The data in this release relate to Stage 2 of the study. Stage 1 of the project culminated in the development of a conceptual model and included qualitative data which are not currently available. The qualitative data will be made available at a later date. In Stage 2, researchers used the model from Stage 1 to guide continued formative evaluation work with three victims' rights enforcement legal clinics: the Arizona Voice for Crime Victims (AVCV); the Maryland Crime Victims' Resource Center, Inc. (MCVRC), and the Oregon Crime Victims Law Center (OCVLC). Activities consisted of site visits that included staff interviews, document review, and research design collaboration; operationalizing implementation and outcome measures; pilot testing data collections for feasibility, appropriateness, and reliability; and evaluability assessments. All of these activities, the clinics, and the criminal justice system were affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, which was built into the research design. Quantitative data collected during Stage 2 included activities/implementation activities data reported for each site and client satisfaction survey data. The client satisfaction survey data is archived separately for each site since their surveys were not identical. Qualitative data collected during Stage 2 included staff interview transcripts, transcripts of staff interviews about the early impacts of COVID-19 on their offices and the criminal justice system, and transcripts from a post-pilot test focus group with each project site. These data, too, are not currently available but will be at a later date.
description: Not applicable
description: Response Rates: Subject Matter Experts (SME) Interviews: 100 percent National Survey: 74 percent Pilot Site Staff Interviews: 100 percent Pilot Site COVID-19 Impact Interviews: 100 percent Pilot Site Administrative Data: 100 percent Pilot Site Post-pilot focus groups: 100 percent for two sites, 24 percent for the third.
description: Presence of Common Scales: Several Likert-type scales were used.
description: Three pilot sites were chosen for this research based on the following qualifications: Organization delivers rights legal advocacy in the arena of rights assertion and enforcement in criminal proceedings to crime victims Site has a concept underlying their model of delivery and procedures/processes/protocols/ or programs in place for how they do so Site's desire to measure how well their practices achieve their goals for clients and cases Site's desire to understand areas that are successful as well as those that may be improved Site's desire to contribute to the evidence base for what constitutes successful legal service delivery for crime victims Willingness and ability to participate in activities for both stages of the project After interviewing representatives at several legal services providers with a focus on victims' rights enforcement, the following three sites were selected: the Arizona Voice for Crime Victims; Maryland Crime Victims' Resource Center, Inc.; and the Oregon Crime Victims Law Center.
description: Datasets: DS0: Study-Level Files DS1: Arizona Voice for Crime Victims (AVCV) Data File DS2: Maryland Crime Victims' Resource Center, Inc. (MCVRC) Data File DS3: Oregon Crime Victims Law Center (OCVLC) Data File DS4: Pilot Sites Combined Activities Data File
description: Clients of crime victim legal services. Smallest Geographic Unit: State
description: face-to-face interview; telephone interview; web-based surveyResearchers collected qualitative data for this study which are not currently available. The qualitative data will be made available at a later date.