Intimate Partner Abuse Solution Programs

by Lynn Langton, Madison Fann, Duren Banks, Michael G. Planty, Dulani Woods, Michael J. D. Vermeer, Brian A. Jackson: For Complete Post, Click Here…

Identifying High-Priority Needs Within the Criminal Justice System for Programs Focused on Intimate Partner Violence Prevention.

Key Findings

  • Programs are typically designed around or required to follow a prescribed approach.
  • Systems are not always based on an evidence-informed, theoretical model of change that incorporates an assessment of the risk factors and needs to address interpersonal violence.
  • There is not enough emphasis on the community when it comes to preventing recurrence or escalation of IPV.
  • IPAS programs suffer from a lack of funding for both program implementation and rigorous research.
  • Most programs do not conduct any aftercare or follow-up with participants after program completion.
  • State regulations around IPAS programs are often very prescriptive, which prevents states from altering or shifting their approaches.
  • There is considerable variation in the logistics of how IPAS programs are run and limited research on how logistical factors affect participation.
  • Programs are limited by a lack of information from survivors about ongoing interactions with the participant.
  • There is a lack of understanding of and consistency in the process of referring perpetrators to IPAS programs and potential biases associated with this process.
  • Because of the many conceptual and logistical variations in IPAS programs, research findings may not be generalizable.

Leave a Reply