National Evaluation of the Rural Domestic Violence and Child Victimization Enforcement Grant Program Final Report: Volume I Executive Summary Evaluation Report

• NCJ Number: 198127
• Author(s): Mary Ann Dutton; Aileen Worrell; Darci Terrell; Sharon Denaro; Robin Thompson
• Date Published: July 2002
• Length: 108 pages
• Grant Number(s): 98-WR-VX-K002
• Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
• Corporate Author: Cosmos Corporation
• Sale Source: Cosmos Corporation
• Publication Format: Document
• Publication Type: Program/Project Description
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: See NCJ-198128 for Volume II, Site-Specific Reports.

Annotation

This document provides an evaluation of the Rural Domestic Violence and Child Victimization Enforcement Grant Program.

Abstract

The grant program provides funding to States, local and tribal governments, and private or public entities in rural States to create or enhance collaborations among criminal justice agencies, service providers, and community organizations to enhance services and the response to victims of domestic violence. The evaluation consisted of two phases: a process evaluation and an outcome evaluation. The process evaluation was conducted before the outcome evaluation to describe the 89 grantees funded in 1996 to 1998 and the context and nature of grant activity. The outcome evaluation conducted an in-depth quantitative and qualitative analysis of the Rural program by identifying and assessing outcomes for nine grantees. The evaluation team sought to find the desirable outcomes associated with the program, the obstacles grantees encountered, alternative explanations for the outcomes, and the lessons learned. The outcomes associated with the Rural program included increased community ownership for violence prevention and intervention; enhanced investigation and prosecution of domestic violence cases; and increased knowledge of domestic violence following training. The obstacles encountered included lack of previously established working relationship; lack of an established mechanism or willingness to share data; staff turnover; and ethnic and racial discrimination. Alternative explanations for the outcomes achieved included other interventions instead of program activities; other interventions in interaction with program activities; and the desired outcomes were a result of a bigger process. Lessons learned included evaluation of long-term outcomes requires greater capacity for systematic data collection; community buy-in and enlisting the participation of key stakeholders is essential for successful outcomes; and the Rural program is filling a gap that would not be filled without such Federal assistance. 3 endnotes, 14 exhibits, appendix