Clinical trial NCT02021838: Evaluation of the Office on Violence Against Women's Domestic Violence Homicide Prevention Demonstrative Initiative
Official title: Evaluation of the Domestic Violence Homicide Prevention Initiative
Study type: OBSERVATIONAL
Overall status: COMPLETED
Conditions: Domestic Violence
Keywords: domestic violence homicide prevention
Lead sponsor: Yale University
Sponsor class: OTHER
Collaborators: name: Michigan State University
First posted: 2013-12-27
Enrollment: 666
Sex: ALL
Minimum age (years): 18
Standard ages: ADULT
OLDER_ADULT
Accepts healthy volunteers: no
Observational model: COHORT
Time perspective: PROSPECTIVE
Sampling method: NON_PROBABILITY_SAMPLE
Study population: The study will include all domestic violence offenders and victims within the six communities.

Brief summary: In collaboration with the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) and the Office for Violence Against Women (OVW) the Yale University team will evaluate the implementation process and impact of the U.S. Department of Justice's Domestic Violence Homicide Prevention Demonstration Initiative. This evaluation seeks to draw critical findings and potential lessons from the combined experience of the sites including: 1) how the models work in different communities; 2) the barriers and facilitators to implementing the models; and 3) outcomes of the model delivery. The evaluation team will also disseminate the findings with the goal of informing replication.

Detailed description: Process Evaluation: The process evaluation will assess: 1) the training and technical assistance provided to sites; 2) the implementation of the models in the communities; and 3) characteristics of the service delivery systems.

Technical Assistance Providers will document the training and technical assistance (TTA) they provide to the sites.

Sites will be asked to identify key stakeholders to participate in interviews before the implementation begins and then two additional times during the demonstration phase. Key informant interviews will assess: recipient's perception of the training and technical assistance; model fidelity; model implementation (including model penetration, barriers and facilitators to implementation); and, perceptions of model impact. In addition to key informant interviews administrative data will be gathered to assess aspects of model implementation and systematic observations of law enforcement initiated screens will be conducted by a member of the evaluation team who will join patrol officers for "ride-alongs".

Impact Evaluation: The impact evaluation will assess changes in: 1) collaboration among service sectors; 2) supervision and sanctions for offenders; 3) recidivism and re-victimization; 4) victim reported feelings of safety; 5) utilization of resources; and 6) nature of safety planning.

System Collaboration will be assessed through a web-based survey completed at three time points by key stakeholders representing all potential partners in the community. Social network analysis will provide a visual depiction of how the network changes over time.

Victim Interviews will be conducted to determine the impact of involvement in the model program on their safety and wellbeing. Victims will be interviewed at three time points and will be asked about: prior and recent contact with law enforcement, domestic violence service providers or other providers; awareness of resources to address IPV; their safety and fear of their partner; coping strategies utilized; social support; financial resources; willingness to utilize criminal justice system and domestic violence service providers; both their and offenders behavior, beliefs and attitudes; self-reported mental health and substance abuse; their report of offenders substance abuse; and demographic information.

Administrative Data will be utilized to examine the breadth of the model implementation; the impact of the model programs on criminal justice processes; and whether there is a connection between the extent of post-risk assessment sanctions and services and the pattern of newly recorded incidents between the victim and offender. The evaluation will compare processing and outcomes across cases that are in many ways similar except that some cases were determined to be high risk and a risk assessment was completed and others where a risk assessment was not conducted. To facilitate these comparisons, the evaluation team will build a comprehensive database that will depict the "life-history" of each victim and offender dyad.

Eligibility criteria: The demonstration sites are:

California North Carolina Ohio Illinois Michigan Tennessee

Primary outcomes:
measure: Decreased frequency of re-assault
timeFrame: up to 3 years
Secondary outcomes:
measure: Increased collaboration between network partners
timeFrame: up to 3 years
measure: Increased awareness of and utilization of resources for victims
timeFrame: Up to 3 years
measure: Increased safety planning
timeFrame: Up to 3 years
measure: Increased victim reported safety
timeFrame: Up to 3 years
measure: Increased sanctions for offender
timeFrame: Up to 3 years
Other outcomes:
Locations:
city: New Haven
country: United States
facility: Yale University
state: Connecticut
Study officials:
affiliation: Yale University
name: Joy S Kaufman, PhD
role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
affiliation: Michigan State University
name: Christopher Maxwell, PhD
role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
affiliation: Yale University
name: Tami Sullivan, PhD
role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
References: