DOI: 10.3886/icpsr02789
title: Effectiveness of Alternative Victim Assistance Service Delivery Models in the San Diego Region, 1993-1994
title: Archival Version

description: This study had a variety of aims: (1) to assess the needs
 of violent crime victims, (2) to document the services that were
 available to violent crime victims in the San Diego region, (3) to
 assess the level of service utilization by different segments of the
 population, (4) to determine how individuals cope with victimization
 and how coping ability varies as a function of victim and crime
 characteristics, (5) to document the set of factors related to
 satisfaction with the criminal justice system, (6) to recommend
 improvements in the delivery of services to victims, and (7) to
 identify issues for future research. Data were collected using five
 different survey instruments. The first survey was sent to over 3,000
 violent crime victims over the age of 16 and to approximately 60
 homicide witnesses and survivors in the San Diego region (Part 1,
 Initial Victims' Survey Data). Of the 718 victims who returned the
 initial survey, 330 victims were recontacted six months later (Part 2,
 Follow-Up Victims' Survey Data). Respondents in Part 1 were asked what
 type of violent crime occurred, whether they sustained injury, whether
 they received medical treatment, what the nature of their relationship
 to the suspect was, and if the suspect had been arrested. Respondents
 for both Parts 1 and 2 were asked which service providers, if any,
 contacted them at the time of the incident or afterwards. Respondents
 were also asked what type of services they needed and received at the
 time of the incident or afterwards. Respondents in Part 2 rated the
 overall service and helpfulness of the information received at the
 time of the incident and after, and their level of satisfaction
 regarding contact with the police, prosecutor, and judge handling
 their case. Respondents in Part 2 were also asked what sort of
 financial loss resulted from the incident, and whether federal, state,
 local, or private agencies provided financial assistance to
 them. Finally, respondents in Part 1 and Part 2 were asked about the
 physical and psychological effects of their victimization. Demographic
 variables for Part 1 and Part 2 include the marital status, employment
 status, and type of job of each violent crime
 victim/witness/survivor. Part 1 also includes the race, sex, and
 highest level of education of each respondent. Police and court case
 files were reviewed six months after the incident occurred for each
 initial sample case. Data regarding victim and incident
 characteristics were collected from original arrest reports, jail
 booking screens, and court dockets (Part 3, Tracking Data). The
 variables for Part 3 include the total number of victims, survivors,
 and witnesses of violent crimes, place of attack, evidence collected,
 and which service providers were at the scene of the crime. Part 3
 also includes a detailed list of the services provided to the
 victim/witness/survivor at the scene of the crime and after. These
 services included counseling, explanation of medical and police
 procedures, self-defense and crime prevention classes, food, clothing,
 psychological/psychiatric services, and help with court
 processes. Additional Part 3 variables cover circumstances of the
 incident, initial custody status of suspects, involvement of victims
 and witnesses at hearings, and case outcome, including disposition and
 sentencing. The race, sex, and age of each victim/witness/survivor are
 also recorded in Part 3 along with the same demographics for each
 suspect. Data for Part 4, Intervention Programs Survey Data, were
 gathered using a third survey, which was distributed to members of the
 three following intervention programs: (1) the San Diego Crisis
 Intervention Team, (2) the EYE Counseling and Crisis Services, Crisis
 and Advocacy Team, and (3) the District Attorney's Victim-Witness
 Assistance Program. A modified version of the survey with a subset of
 the original questions was administered one year later to members of
 the San Diego Crisis Intervention Team (Part 5, Crisis Intervention
 Team Survey Data) and to the EYE Counseling and Crisis Services,
 Crisis and Advocacy Team (Part 6, EYE Crisis and Advocacy Team Survey
 Data). The survey questions for Parts 4-6 asked each respondent to
 provide their reasons for becoming involved with the program, the
 goals of the program, responsibilities of the staff or volunteers, the
 types of referral services their agency provided, the number of hours
 of training required, and the topics covered in the
 training. Respondents for Parts 4-6 were further asked about the
 specific types of services they provided to
 victims/witnesses/survivors. Part 4 also contains a series of
 variables regarding coordination efforts, problems, and resolutions
 encountered when dealing with other intervention agencies and law
 enforcement agencies. Demographic variables for Parts 4-6 include the
 ethnicity, age, gender, and highest level of education of each
 respondent, and whether the respondent was a staff member of the
 agency or volunteer. The fourth survey was mailed to 53 referral
 agencies used by police and crisis interventionists (Part 7, Service
 Provider Survey Data). Part 7 contains the same series of variables as
 Part 4 on dealing with other intervention and law enforcement
 agencies. Respondents in Part 7 were further asked to describe the
 type of victims/witnesses/survivors to whom they provided service
 (e.g., domestic violence victims, homicide witnesses, or suicide
 survivors) and to rate their level of satisfaction with referral
 procedures provided by law enforcement officers, hospitals,
 paramedics, religious groups, the San Diego Crisis Intervention Team,
 the EYE Crisis Team, and the District Attorney's Victim/Witness
 Program. Part 7 also includes the hours of operation for each service
 provider organization, as well as which California counties they
 serviced. Finally, respondents in Part 7 were given a list of services
 and asked if they provided any of those services to
 victims/witnesses/survivors. Services unique to this list included job
 placement assistance, public awareness campaigns, accompaniment to
 court, support groups, and advocacy with outside agencies (e.g.,
 employers or creditors). Demographic variables for Part 7 include the
 ethnicity, age, and gender of each respondent. The last survey was
 distributed to over 1,000 law enforcement officers from the Escondido,
 San Diego, and Vista sheriff's agencies (Part 8, Law Enforcement
 Survey Data). Respondents in Part 8 were surveyed to determine their
 familiarity with intervention programs, how they learned about the
 program, the extent to which they used or referred others to
 intervention services, appropriate circumstances for calling or not
 calling in interventionists, their opinions regarding various
 intervention programs, their interactions with interventionists at
 crime scenes, and suggestions for improving delivery of services to
 victims. Demographic variables for Part 8 include the rank and agency
of each law enforcement respondent.
description: Victimization often steals one's sense of
 personal control, thereby producing psychological repercussions that
 exacerbate feelings of fear and vulnerability. Victims of violent
 crime, moreover, become dissatisfied and resentful of the criminal
 justice system, plagued by feelings of shame and guilt, and many times
 transfer a sense of disorder, powerlessness, and fear to other areas
 in their life. Previous research has pointed out that not all victims
 cope with victimization equally. While studies have examined how
 victimization changes an individual's life, very little was known
 about how well the needs of these victims were actually being
 met. This study sought to: (1) assess the needs of violent crime
 victims, (2) document the services that were available to violent
 crime victims in the San Diego region, (3) assess the level of service
 utilization by different segments of the population, (4) determine how
 individuals cope with victimization and how coping ability varies as a
 function of victim and crime characteristics, (5) document the set of
 factors related to satisfaction with the criminal justice system, (6)
 recommend improvements in the delivery of services to victims, and (7)
identify issues for future research.
description: Data were collected using five different surveys
 and official records. The first survey was sent to over 3,000 violent
 crime victims over the age of 16 in the San Diego region (Part 1,
 Initial Victims' Survey Data). Over 60 homicide witnesses and
 survivors in the city of San Diego were also contacted. English and
 Spanish versions of the surveys were mailed four weeks after the
 incident and were accompanied by a cover letter from the District
 Attorney that explained the purpose of the survey and assured the
 victim, witness, or survivor that his or her input was voluntary,
 confidential, and anonymous. Follow-up mailings were sent two weeks
 after the initial mailing to increase response rates. A section at the
 end of the initial victims' survey asked respondents for their
 permission to be contacted again in the future for the purpose of
 gaining additional input regarding the effects of victimization. Of
 the 718 victims who returned the initial survey, 330 victims were
 recontacted six months later (Part 2, Follow-Up Victims' Survey
 Data). This second survey was administered via telephone interviews or
 distributed by mail. The interview included both test and original
 questions. Also, some items from the initial survey were repeated to
 measure changes in needs, attitudes, coping behavior, and services
 received. Specific questions were asked regarding case outcome, and
 victim satisfaction with the criminal justice system was explored more
 fully compared to the initial survey. Next, police and court case
 files were reviewed six months after the incident occurred for each
 initial sample case. Data regarding victim and incident
 characteristics were collected from original arrest reports, jail
 booking screens, and court dockets. The information gathered from
 these official records were recorded onto a case tracking form (Part
 3, Tracking Data). Data for Part 4, Intervention Programs Survey Data,
 were gathered using a third survey, which was distributed to members
 of the three following intervention programs: (1) the San Diego Crisis
 Intervention Team, (2) the EYE Counseling and Crisis Services, Crisis
 and Advocacy Team, and (3) the District Attorney's Victim-Witness
 Assistance Program. Due to large staff and volunteer turnover with
 intervention programs, a modified version of this survey with a subset
 of the original questions was administered one year later to members
 of the San Diego Crisis Intervention Team (Part 5, Crisis Intervention
 Team Survey Data) and the EYE Crisis and Advocacy Team (Part 6, EYE
 Crisis and Advocacy Team Survey Data). When identical questions were
 asked, data from the most recent administration of the instrument were
 used. Since no direct comparisons to the San Diego Crisis Intervention
 Team and the Crisis and Advocacy Team were intended, the members of
 the District Attorney's Victim-Witness Assistance Program were only
 surveyed once. To determine the variety of services available to
 victims in the San Diego region, the fourth survey was mailed to 53
 referral agencies used by police and crisis interventionists to
 measure the level of satisfaction with referral procedures,
 coordination among agencies, extent of duplication of services, type
 of services provided to victims, and suggestions for improving service
 delivery models (Part 7, Service Provider Survey Data). The last
 survey was distributed to over 1,000 law enforcement officers from the
 Escondido, San Diego, and Vista sheriff's agencies, who were surveyed
 at line-up (Part 8, Law Enforcement Survey Data). Each of these law
 enforcement agencies was served by either the Crisis Intervention Team
and/or the EYE Crisis programs.
description: Respondents in Part 1 were asked what type of
 violent crime occurred, whether they sustained injury, whether they
 received medical treatment, what the nature of their relationship to
 the suspect was, and if the suspect had been arrested. Respondents for
 both Parts 1 and 2 were asked which service providers, if any,
 contacted them at the time of the incident or afterwards. Respondents
 were also asked what type of services they needed and received at the
 time of the incident or afterwards. Respondents in Part 2 rated the
 overall service and helpfulness of the information received at the
 time of the incident and after, and their level of satisfaction
 regarding contact with the police, prosecutor, and judge handling
 their case. Respondents in Part 2 were also asked what sort of
 financial loss resulted from the incident, and whether federal, state,
 local, or private agencies provided financial assistance to
 them. Finally, respondents in Part 1 and Part 2 were asked about the
 physical and psychological effects of their victimization. Demographic
 variables for Part 1 and Part 2 include the marital status, employment
 status, and type of job of each violent crime
 victim/witness/survivor. Part 1 also includes the race, sex, and
 highest level of education of each respondent. The variables for Part
 3 include the total number of victims, survivors, and witnesses of
 violent crimes, place of attack, evidence collected, and which service
 providers were at the scene of the crime. Part 3 also includes a
 detailed list of the services provided to the victim/witness/survivor
 at the scene of the crime and after. These services included
 counseling, explanation of medical and police procedures, self-defense
 and crime prevention classes, food, clothing,
 psychological/psychiatric services, and help with court
 processes. Additional Part 3 variables cover circumstances of the
 incidents, initial custody status of suspects, involvement of victims
 and witnesses at hearings, and case outcomes, including dispositions
 and sentencing. The race, sex, and age of each victim/witness/survivor
 are also recorded in Part 3, along with the same demographics for each
 suspect. The survey questions for Parts 4-6 asked each respondent to
 provide their reasons for becoming involved with the program, the
 goals of the program, responsibilities of the staff or volunteer, the
 types of referral services their agency provided, the number of hours
 of training required, and the topics covered in the
 training. Respondents for Parts 4-6 were further asked about the
 specific types of services they provided to
 victims/witnesses/survivors. Part 4 also contains a series of
 variables regarding coordination efforts, problems, and resolutions
 encountered when dealing with other intervention agencies and law
 enforcement agencies. Demographic variables for Parts 4-6 include the
 ethnicity, age, gender, and highest level of education of each
 respondent, and whether the respondent was a staff member of the
 agency or volunteer. Respondents in Part 7 were further asked to
 describe the type of victims/witnesses/survivors to whom they provided
 service (e.g., domestic violence victims, homicide witnesses, or
 suicide survivors) and to rate their level of satisfaction with
 referral procedures provided by law enforcement officers, hospitals,
 paramedics, religious groups, the San Diego Crisis Intervention Team,
 the EYE Crisis Team, and the District Attorney's Victim/Witness
 Program. Part 7 also includes the hours of operation for each service
 provider organization, as well as which California counties they
 serviced. Finally, respondents in Part 7 were given a list of services
 and asked if they provided any of those services to
 victims/witnesses/survivors. Services unique to this list included job
 placement assistance, public awareness campaigns, accompaniment to
 court, support groups, and advocacy with outside agencies (e.g.,
 employers or creditors). Demographic variables for Part 7 include the
 ethnicity, age, and gender of each respondent. Respondents in Part 8
 were surveyed to determine their familiarity with intervention
 programs, how they learned about the program, the extent to which they
 used or referred others to intervention services, appropriate
 circumstances for calling or not calling in interventionists, their
 opinions regarding various intervention programs, their interactions
 with interventionists at crime scenes, and suggestions for improving
 delivery of services to victims. Demographic variables for Part 8
include the rank and agency of each law enforcement respondent.
description: Response Rates: The response rate for Part 1 was 22 percent. The
 response rate for Part 2 is unknown. Part 3: Not applicable. The
 response rate is unknown for Parts 4-6. The response rate for Part 7
was 58 percent. The response rate for Part 8 was 49 percent.
description: Presence of Common Scales: Several Likert-type scales were used in Parts 1, 2, and
4-8.
description: Parts 1-3: Not applicable. Parts 4-8: Convenience
sampling.
description: Datasets: 
DS0: Study-Level Files
DS1: Initial Victims' Survey Data
DS2: Follow-Up Victims' Survey Data
DS3: Tracking Data
DS4: Intervention Programs Survey Data
DS5: Crisis Intervention Team Survey Data
DS6: EYE Crisis and Advocacy Team Survey Data
DS7: Service Provider Survey Data
DS8: Law Enforcement Survey Data
description: Parts 1 and 2: Victims, witnesses, and survivors of
 violent crimes in the San Diego region, who were over the age of 16 at
 the time of incident. Part 3: Violent crime incidents. Parts 4-6:
 Staff and volunteers of crisis intervention programs servicing the San
 Diego region. Part 7: Community agencies providing services to violent
 crime victims, witnesses, and survivors in the San Diego area. Part 8:
 Law enforcement officers servicing Escondido and Vista counties, and
the city of San Diego, California.
description: The user guide, codebooks, and data collection
 instruments are provided as Portable Document Format (PDF) files. The
 PDF file format was developed by Adobe Systems Incorporated and can be
 accessed using PDF reader software, such as the Adobe Acrobat
 Reader. Information on how to obtain a copy of the Acrobat Reader is
provided through the ICPSR Website on the Internet.