A RESOLUTION adopting the "2005-2009 Strategic Plan on Seattle's Criminal Justice Response to Domestic Violence", and superseding Resolution 30789.

WHEREAS, the Seattle Police Department responds annually to over 12,000 domestic violence-related 911 calls and an average of 3,000 domestic violence related physical assaults; and

WHEREAS, the City of Seattle commits annually about $13 million of local and other revenue to responding to domestic violence; and

WHEREAS, an average of seventy percent of the City's domestic violence funding is allocated to the City's criminal justice agencies; and

WHEREAS, a 2003 assessment of the City's criminal justice response to domestic violence resulted in recommendations on how to strengthen the City's response; and

WHEREAS, inter-departmental staff representing criminal justice, public health, human services, city council, and finance developed the "2005-2009 Strategic Plan on Seattle's Criminal Justice Response to Domestic Violence," which addresses the assessment's major recommendations; and

WHEREAS, the City's Domestic Violence Council approved the "2005-2009 Strategic Plan on Seattle's Criminal Justice Response to Domestic Violence;"and

WHEREAS, Resolution 30789 inadvertently adopted a draft version of the "2005-2009 Strategic Plan on Seattle's Criminal Justice Response to Domestic Violence.";

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEATTLE, THE MAYOR CONCURRING, THAT:

Section 1. The City of Seattle adopts the "2005-2009 Strategic Plan on Seattle's Criminal Justice Response to Domestic Violence," a copy of which is attached as Attachment 1.

Section 2. The City recognizes that additional resources will be required in order to meet the ambitious goals and objectives included in the Five-Year Plan and that current local government resources are not adequate to implement the Plan fully. Therefore, the City of Seattle will pursue public and private funding opportunities.

Section 3. The Criminal Justice Committee of the City's Domestic Violence Council, which is staffed by the City's Human Services Department and consists of City staff and community representatives, will coordinate the implementation of the Five Year Plan. It will facilitate the development of, and submit to the City Council, by March 31, 2006, an Outcome Framework, which will update or refine the expected outcomes identified in the plan. This framework will include expected meaningful outcomes for each issue area, the performance measurement tool or resource for each outcome, and the appropriate baseline information. In addition, this committee will develop a progress report on the plan's implementation due in the Spring of 2007 and a final report on the plan's implementation and performance due in the Spring of 2010.

Section 4. Resolution 30789 is hereby superseded.

Adopted by the City Council the ____ day of ____________, 2006, and signed by me in open session in authentication of its adoption this ____ day of ____________, 2006. ___________________________________ President ___________ of the City Council

THE MAYOR CONCURRING: _________________________________ Gregory J. Nickels, Mayor

Filed by me this ______ day of ____________, 2006. ___________________________________ City Clerk

(SEAL)

Attachment 1: 2005-2009 Strategic Plan on Seattle's Criminal Justice Response to Domestic Violence

01/17/06 Version #6

Attachment 1 to Res. 30833

2005-2009 STRATEGIC PLAN ON SEATTLE'S CRIMINAL JUSTICE RESPONSE TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

Domestic Violence Prevention Council Chairs Thomas Carr, Seattle City Attorney Gil Kerlikowske, Seattle Police Chief Patricia McInturff, Director, Seattle Human Services Department Domestic and Sexual Violence Prevention Office Marilyn Littlejohn, Director Evelyn Brom, Planner Ward Urion, Planner Assessment Committee Members Edsonya Charles, Mayor's Office Sandy Ciske, Public Health Seattle & King County Kevin Kilpatrick, Seattle City Attorney's Office Debie King, Seattle Police Department Elaine Ko, Council Member Conlin's Office Neil Low, Seattle Police Department Nancy McManigal, Seattle City Attorney's Office Ron Mochizuki, Seattle Police Department Bob Morgan, City Council Central Staff Judith Shoshana, Seattle City Attorney's Office Helen Welborn, Seattle Budget Office Susanne White, Seattle Municipal Court Joni Wilson, Seattle Municipal Court

Assessment Committee Observer Susan Baugh, City Auditor's Office

Assessment Committee Facilitator Marilyn Turkovich, Consultant/Writer

September 2005

Supported by the Office on Violence Against Women, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies & Enforcement of Protection Orders Grants,

Grant Number 98-WE-VX-0028, and Grant Number 03-WE-BX-0049

Table of Contents

Abbreviations

Introduction to the Domestic Violence Strategic Plan

Overview of the Plan

Action Plan

Advocacy Batterer Intervention Firearms Investigations Prosecution Plan Sanctions Special Populations Victim Defendants

Appendices

Table A: Backbone of the Domestic Violence Strategic Plan Table B: Community Conservations: Process and Summary of Results Table C: Recommendations from the 2003 Seattle Domestic Violence Assessment Reports Table D: City Attorney?s Office Prosecution Plan Status Report

Abbreviations

ADS Aging & Disabilities Services APS Adult Protective Services CAO City Attorney's Office CPS Child Protective Services DV Domestic Violence DSVPO Domestic & Sexual Violence Prevention Office HSD Human Services Department KCCADV King County Coalition Against Domestic Violence KCPO King County Prosecutor's Office MOA Memorandum of Agreement OIR Office of Intergovernmental Relations PHSKC Public Health Seattle & King County SCADVU Seattle City Attorney's Domestic Violence Unit SMC Seattle Municipal Court SPD Seattle Police Department SPO Strategic Planning Office VST Victim Support Team

2005-2009 STRATEGIC PLAN ON SEATTLE'S CRIMINAL JUSTICE RESPONSE TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

INTRODUCTION TO THE PLAN

Seattle's Vision

The City of Seattle has a bold vision Seattle will become a community where domestic violence does not exist. It will be a place where people embrace nonviolence and equality in all domestic relationships. The City's Domestic Violence Prevention Council, as

an inter-departmental body of City leaders responsible for City policy and programs, provides the leadership, onongoing oversight, and coordination in the City's efforts to eliminate domestic violence. It accepts the reality that to end domestic violence will require a multi-faceted approach including:

* Primary prevention efforts to change community norms about what constitutes healthy intimate partner relationships;

* Crisis services such as confidential shelters and advocacy to help victims and their children who live in dangerous situations gain safety;

* Interventions by the criminal justice system to protect victims of domestic violence and to hold batterers accountable; and

* Other services and supports such as training and employment, affordable child care, affordable housing, and affordable legal services to help domestic violence victims extricate themselves permanently from abusive relationships and rebuild their lives.

Due to the complexity of domestic violence, the City remains committed to working closely with businesses, schools, health care, media, faith communities, collegiate and professional sports, grassroots organizations and family networks to reject domestic violence in all of its forms.

Over the past decade, Seattle has taken consistent steps to work towards the reduction of domestic violence. This plan builds upon these early efforts. It addresses the City of Seattle's criminal justice response to domestic violence and proposes new approaches and policies, based on best practice evidence, for incorporation in the City's work against domestic violence.

Seattle's First Domestic Violence Strategic Plan

The City's first domestic violence strategic plan was launched in 1998 and provided the first major step toward creating an integrated municipal response to domestic violence in Seattle. The plan identified numerous service gaps. Many of these gaps were subsequently addressed with new programs and strategies. These included:

* A City workplace domestic violence policy (how to recognize it among coworkers and deal with it), an education campaign and the production of "Sweet Resolutions," a presentation emphasizing the theme that domestic violence doesn't stay at home, it also comes to work;

* A Police Department Victim Support Team (which currently includes 75 trained volunteers who are on call to respond to victims onscene);

* An initiative to improve apprehension of fugitive domestic violence offenders;

* Initiation of the Seattle/King County Firearms Forfeiture Project to remove firearms from misdemeanant batterers;

* Initiation of the Victim Defendant Project that explores the growing trend in the arrest of battered victims who are defending themselves against physical violence;

* Media outreach through Op-Ed series and City Council community forums;

* Additional City funds for domestic violence advocacy service system;

* Research on effectiveness of protection orders;

* Research on barriers for ethnic and hard to serve populations;

* Grant funding secured for criminal justice enhancements including firearm forfeiture, surrender and seizure, intensive probation supervision, best practices training for law enforcement, legal advocacy services for felony domestic violence cases, and translations of system brochures; and

* Grant funding secured for social service system enhancements including hotel vouchers for shelter, community advocates, community legal advocates, language advocates, and translations of agency brochures.

Seattle's Second Domestic Violence Strategic Plan

Over a two year period, the Domestic and Sexual Violence Prevention Office conducted a comprehensive assessment of Seattle's domestic violence response, with a focus on the criminal justice system. The information provided in the assessment is used to develop this second strategic plan.

The Seattle Domestic Violence Assessment was released in December 2003. It includes ten separate reports, eight of which refer to specific criminal justice areas. The other two relate to survivor services when there are language and cultural barriers, and community attitudes. Specifically, the reports are:

1. Domestic Violence Cases in the Seattle Police Department.

2. Patrol Response to Domestic Violence in Seattle, Washington: Text Analysis of Seattle Police Department Incident Reports.

3. A Report from the 2003 Domestic Violence Safety and Accountability Audit: Prosecution Response to Misdemeanor Domestic Violence Cases.

4. A Report on Domestic Violence Cases in Seattle Municipal Court.

5. A Report on the Domestic Violence Unit, Seattle Municipal Court Probation.

6. Removing Firearms from Domestic Violence Perpetrators.

7. Victim-Defendants: An Emerging Challenge in Responding to Domestic Violence in Seattle and the King County Region.

8. Summary Reports and Findings of Seattle's Domestic Violence Assessment.

9. Multi-lingual Access Project (MAP): Report Highlights.

10. Healthy Relationships/Healthy Communities: A Community Forum Series on Domestic Violence.

While the Assessments contain over 80 recommendations or opportunities for enhancements, it identified eight for immediate action. They are:

1. Police should improve on-scene investigation, documentation and follow-up of domestic violence incidents by improving training, performance expectations, policies and procedures.

2. Police and the City Attorney should jointly develop policies and procedures for arresting offenders who are gone when police arrive on the scene.

3. Police, the City Attorney and the Seattle Municipal Court should remove firearms from convicted domestic violence misdemeanants.

4. The City Attorney should develop domestic violence policies that guide day-to-day prosecutorial activities and include links with police. Written guidelines should be established for screening cases to help advocates and prosecutors balance safety with evidence.

5. The Municipal Court should strengthen policies and procedures for processing domestic violence cases.

6. The criminal justice system should place new emphasis on helping children in domestic violence incidents. Protocols need to be developed for documenting and helping children at the crime scene, and addressing their safety.

7. The criminal justice system should create comprehensive victim advocacy services, from initial police contact to case adjudication.

8. The Domestic Prevention Violence Council should establish a working committee to oversee implementation of the Assessment's recommendations.

These eight recommendations form the backbone of this second Strategic Plan which focuses on criminal justice areas.

Over the last decade many substantial improvements have been made in Seattle's domestic violence criminal justice response; nonetheless, the City will continue actions to reduce domestic violence. As it does so, it will consider growing and important new research, best practices information, and emerging issues in the domestic violence field.

This Domestic Violence Strategic Plan, which focuses on criminal justice, continues Seattle's initial efforts to foster a focused system and promote changing the attitudes and practices within our system. By accomplishing this goal, Seattle will be able to provide more comprehensive response and assistance to those who need it.

Planning & Development Process

In April 2004, staff from the Seattle Police Department, Seattle Municipal Court, Seattle City Attorney's Office, Public HealthSeattle & King County, Mayor's Office, Finance Department and the Domestic & Sexual Violence Prevention Office of the Human Services Department, along with representatives from Seattle City Council formed the Domestic Violence Prevention Council's Assessment Committee and began intensive planning work. The committee's charge was to create a domestic violence strategic plan based on the recommendations of the 2003 Domestic Violence Assessment. Members brought their collective expertise and efforts to the Domestic Violence Prevention Council (DVPC) for discussion and clarification. The end result of the Assessment Committee's work and the DVPC's deliberations is this strategic plan.

Initially, the Assessment Committee members reviewed the findings and recommendations of the 2003 Domestic Violence Assessment. Based on this review, members identified eight key issues for the strategic plan: 1) Advocacy and Victim Services, 2) Batterers' Intervention, 3) Firearms, 4) Investigations, 5) Prosecution Plan, 6) Sanctions, 7) Special Populations, and 8) Victim Defendants.

The Assessment Committee then formed work teams for each of these issues. These included departmental staff and, in some cases, community partners (See page 2 for list of issue groups). Each team drafted an introduction that provides a brief overview and the action plan for the issue.

Once the Domestic Violence Prevention Council approved the discussion draft of the plan at its December 2004 meeting, conversations with community partners and stakeholders began in earnest in early January of 2005. Staff made the plan available online. In addition, working closely with the King County Coalition Against Domestic Violence (KCCADV), 22 different community groups and programs were contacted to see if they wanted to participate in a briefing and conversation about the plan and/or submit their comments. Six groups chose to respond electronically. The Domestic & Sexual Violence Prevention Office and/or KCCADV staff met with another 15 groups, including:

* Batterer's Intervention Providers;

* Child Protective Services Domestic Violence Collaboration Group (comprised of King County Public Health and Child Protective Services of the Department of Social and Health Services [DSHS]);

* City of Seattle's Criminal Justice Collaboration Group (comprised of City Attorney advocate and prosecution staff, probation and clerical staff, and the Gender and Age Crimes Unit of the Seattle Police Department);

* Court and Community Advocates (under the auspices of the VAWA STOP grant);

* Elder Abuse Council (comprised of professionals from the Attorney General's Office, the Crisis Clinic, DSHS Adult Protective Services and Residential Care Services, DSHS Senior Services, the King County Sheriff's Office, the King County Prosecuting Attorney's Office, the Seattle Human Services Department's Aging and Disability Services, Seattle Police Department, Virginia Mason Clinic and the University of Washington's School of Nursing);

* King County Sheriff's Office Domestic Violence Unit;

* King County Coalition Against Domestic Violence;

* King County Domestic Violence Prevention Council's Coordinating Committee (comprised of King County Prosecuting Attorneys and Advocates, the King County Department of Judicial Administration's DV Coordinator, the King County Sheriff's Office, the King County Women's Program and a representative of the King County Work First Program, King County Department of Public Health);

* Public Defense Attorneys (from 4 different agencies and a representative of the Washington Criminal Defense Lawyers and the Director of the King County Office of Public Defense);

* Strategic Management Team of Seattle's Human Services Department;

* Seattle Women's Commission; and

* Four different groups of survivors of domestic violence.

The community overall was very impressed by the magnitude and aggressive nature of this plan and applauded the City for its efforts to end domestic violence in our community. Each group provided excellent feedback for consideration by the Assessment Committee as it developed the final version of the Strategic Plan. While many of the observations tended to focus on the implementation phase, others have resulted in modifications to the plan.

Next Steps

Over the years, Seattle has made great strides in developing and executing a coordinated community response to domestic violence. The 2003 Domestic Violence Assessment has helped the City identify areas of strengths, as well as opportunities for enhancements with respect to our criminal justice system.

The development and execution of the City's response has involved many stakeholders, from criminal justice personnel to providers of domestic violence services and interested community residents. The City's response has also taken into consideration the rich diversity of our community. For example, the City has supported, through grant funds, a community-driven effort, called the Multi-Lingual Access Project, to improve access to domestic violence services for limited English and non-English speakers. With this strategic plan, which describes the next steps in the City's efforts to improve its response to domestic violence, with respect to the criminal justice system, the City continues to embrace a collaborative approach with respect to implementation. Successful implementation of this plan will require the continued involvement of the many -government and other stakeholders representing various populations -who are committed to responding to domestic violence.

The Domestic Violence Prevention Council's (DVPC) Criminal Justice Committee, which may include providers and other members of the community, will oversee the plan's implementation. Implementation also involves a number of efforts for coordination and community involvement. Examples include: the criminal justice/community-based advocacy roundtable, the involvement of batter intervention (BI) stakeholders in the analysis of current BI practice and the results

of such practice, a workgroup to develop protocol for documenting the presence of children and other special populations at a domestic violence crime scene, and a number of legislative efforts.

Even upon adoption by the DVPC and the City Council, this plan will remain a living document, a work in progress. Therefore, the Criminal Justice Committee will facilitate the development of a plan update for 2007 to address any new or emerging issues and publish information to inform our stakeholders and interested parties of progress.

2005-2009 STRATEGIC PLAN ON SEATTLE'S CRIMINAL JUSTICE RESPONSE TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PLAN OVERVIEW

We know from experience that to end violence in domestic relationships requires a multifaceted, coordinated approach that builds upon the expertise of the various criminal justice agencies and their partners within city government and the community. The City's criminal justice system already has key components of a coordinated system in place:

* Seattle Police Department's Gender and Age Crime Investigations Section, a specialized unit of detectives to investigate domestic violence related felonies and misdemeanors;

* Seattle Police Department's Victim Support Team, a cadre of volunteers and staff who respond to the needs of domestic violence victims;

* Seattle City Attorney's Office's Domestic Violence Unit that coordinates victim advocacy and prosecution services for misdemeanor domestic violence cases;

* Domestic Violence Unit in the Seattle Municipal Court's Probation Services Department, which supervises misdemeanant offenders; and

* Seattle Municipal Court's newly established Domestic Violence Court, in which one judge or a team of judges hear all domestic violence cases of the same defendant from arraignment through probation reviews.

These criminal justice agencies working closely together and with other Cityand community-based agencies have developed some innovative approaches to responding to domestic violence.

This Strategic Plan on Seattle's Criminal Justice Response to Domestic Violence continues the systemic approach to enhancing the City of Seattle's criminal justice response to domestic violence. That is, it targets specific areas that involve or impact more than one agency within the system. The issues include: 1) Advocacy and Victim Services, 2) Batterer Intervention, 3) Firearms, 4) Investigations, 5) Prosecution Plan, 6) Sanctions, 7) Special Populations, and 8) Victim Defendants. The desired result of the plan is systemic change that contributes significantly to making the City even safer, services more accessible, particularly for women and their children, batterers more accountable, and families stronger. During the next five years, Seattle will work towards the following enhancements of its coordinated criminal justice response to domestic violence:

* A comprehensive City victim advocacy service plan that includes community advocacy and service linkages;

* A more effective batterer intervention policy;

* An enhanced police response to children, seniors and vulnerable adults at the scene of a domestic violence related incident;

* Improved collaboration across systems and agencies, locally and regionally, that work with special populations (i.e., children, seniors, vulnerable adults, people of color, and refugees and immigrants);

* Enhanced regional, state and federal funding, services and policies to assist those victimized by domestic violence, including members of special populations;

* Establishment of a confiscation of firearms program to remove such weapons from domestic violence offenders and individuals prohibited from possessing them due to criminal domestic violence conviction;

* Enhanced domestic violence investigations;

* Prosecution that serves the best interest of victims and their children;

* Sanctions with improved compliance, and appropriate alternatives to confinement for domestic violence offenders; and

* Improved response and service to victim defendants.

Work on these enhancements will require a concerted effort to address 40 objectives. These objectives have been divided into "readiness and impact" groups (see tables that follow). All the objectives are deemed important, however, to determine where to target the City 's initial efforts, a number of readiness and impact factors were considered, such as the priorities of the lead Department; availability of funding; number of people, including hard to reach special populations, who may benefit from the effort; and the potential to prevent recurrence of domestic violence and change community norms. Based on factors such as these, the City will strive to initiate the following objectives in 2005:

* Clarifying the role of victim advocates within the criminal justice system;

* Implementing a new victim safety inventory tool that will be used by advocates across the City's criminal justice system;

* Analyzing the current practice of batterer intervention in the City and the results of this practice;

* Implementing a firearm confiscation program targeting domestic violence offenders, including those convicted of criminal domestic violence;

* Implementing a High Risk Offender (HRO) program in the City Attorney's Office;

* Standardizing sanction recommendations for original sentences and reviews;

* Assuring that policies and procedures are in place and adequate training is provided to all officers regarding officer involved domestic violence cases;

* Developing policies that align Seattle Police Department's investigatory practices with nationally-recognized best practices;

* Continuing to provide on-going training to officers and supervisors to produce thorough investigative follow-through; and

* Developing a set of protocols for documenting and tracking the presence of children, seniors and vulnerable adults at the scene of a Domestic Violence-related incident.

As the tables that follow indicate, the goal is to complete several of these objectives in 2005. The target date for completing others is 2006 or later.

Overall, the objectives fall within one of two strategic categories, "New Services and Practices," which are any entirely new efforts within the City of Seattle to strengthen the coordinated response system to domestic violence, and "Service Improvements," which are efforts to refocus or refine existing services within the system (See pages 17 24 for complete list of objectives and their strategic category). Examples of objectives by strategic category for 2005 are as follows:

New Services and Practices

* Write policies to enhance the removal of firearms from batterers as prescribed by law.

* Design and write procedural steps and corresponding forms for SPD, the City Attorney's Office and the Court to enhance the surrender, seizure and forfeiture of firearms.

* Implement High Risk Offender program.

* Standardize sanction recommendations for original sentences and reviews.

Service Improvements

* Clarify the role of victim advocate within the criminal justice system that focuses on victim safety and system accountability.

* Continue to provide on-going training to front-line officers and supervisors to produce thorough investigative follow through.

* Advocate for on-going, and increased, federal, state, and regional financial support for such services as mental health, respite care, emergency housing options, interpretive services and case management services to assist victims of domestic violence, including children, seniors, vulnerable adults, people of color, and refugees and immigrants.

The final section of this document sets forth the action plan, which will guide the City's implementation efforts. It reflects a wellcoordinated process indicating what action needs to occur, how it will occur and which City Department will lead the implementation efforts.. This plan is a work in progress. Adjustments could be made contingent upon available resources. This plan identifies areas where new resources, beyond existing funds, may be required to implement the plan. Regardless of whether the objective or enhancement is new or a refinement of an existing service or practice, the development of new partnerships, policies, protocols and educational/training opportunities is a must for the successful implementation of this plan. With the successful implementation of this plan, the City of Seattle can make significant advances toward reducing the incidence, as well as the severity of domestic violence in our City

Impact and Readiness Tables

TABLE A Objectives by Issue Completion Date Target: 2005

Issue Objectives SI NS&P

Advocacy 1. Clarify the role of victim advocate within the criminal justice system that X focuses on victim safety and system accountability.

Batterer 2. Analyze current practice in Seattle and the results of this practice. X Intervention

Firearms 3. Write policies to enhance the removal of firearms from batterers as prescribed by X law. X 4. Design and write procedural steps and corresponding forms to enhance the surrender, seizure and forfeiture for SPD, the City Attorney's Office and the Court. X 5. Utilize existing database systems for access by SPD, the Court and the City Attorney's Office to promote exchange of firearm information and to coordinate X across systems. 6. Create a communications plan regarding the new City-wide firearms program.

Investigations 7. Continue to provide on-going training to front-line officers and supervisors to X produce thorough investigative follow through.

*SI = System's Improvement *NS&P = New Services & Practice

Table A Objectives by Issue Completion Date Target: 2005

Issue Objectives SI NS&P

Prosecution 8. Increase coordination with police to support investigation and follow-up so that X Plan prosecution serves the best interest of the victim. X 9. Implement High Risk Offender (HRO) program. 10. Standardize sanction recommendations for original sentences and reviews. X

*SI = System's Improvement *NS&P = New Services & Practice

TABLE B Objectives By Issue Completion Date Target: 2007

Issue Objectives SI NS&P

Advocacy 1. Build and sustain a collaborative advocacy service plan for use across the City's X criminal justice system. X 2. Create and implement victim safety inventory tool that can be used by victim advocates across the City's criminal justice system.

Batterer 3. Develop City policy on the use of batterer intervention as a sanction based on X Intervention the results of the analysis of current practice.

Firearms 4. Design and facilitate training tailored to each department of all criminal X justice personnel to introduce new domestic violence goals, policies and procedures and data systems.

Investigations 5. Comply with Washington SSB 6161, Domestic Violence by Law Enforcement Officers, to assure that policies/procedures are in place and adequate training is provided to X all officers regarding officers who are victims and perpetrators in domestic violence cases. X 6. Adopt as a matter of policy relevant law enforcement portions of the Federal Office on Violence Against Women Domestic Violence Tool Kit.

Prosecution 7. Foster relationship between Criminal Justice-based and Community-based advocates X Plan to facilitate responsiveness to victims' needs regardless of prosecution. 8. Design and implement a training program in partnership with others that support X the prosecution goals and philosophy of the City Attorney's Office. 9. In cooperation with City partners, implement prosecution efforts to remove X firearms for batterers.

Victim 10. Enhance probation screening and referral policies for court recommendations and X Defendants for service linkages. 11. Enhance linkages for victim defendants to community domestic violence services. X

*SI = System's Improvement *NS&P = New Services & Practice

Table C Objectives by Issue Completion Date Target: 2009

Issue Objectives SI* NS&P*

Batterer 1. Develop appropriate business practices to foster successful implementation of X Intervention this policy. X 2. Explore advocating at the State legislative level for DV extensive supervision, similar to jurisdictional enhancements for DUI offenders. See Sanctions, Objective 4.

Firearms 3. Develop policies to enhance removal of firearms from those prohibited from possessing firearms due to DV civil protection orders. X 4. Develop and implement a set of protocols for handling firearm removal from those prohibited from possessing firearms due to DV civil protection orders. X 5. Design and write procedural steps and design and facilitate training for appropriate staff regarding new policies and protocols for firearm removal in cases X involving domestic violence civil protection orders. 6. Explore with King County the implementation of a community education campaign X regarding the linkages between firearms and domestic violence, including issues concerning domestic violence offenders and individuals prohibited from possessing firearms due to criminal domestic violence conviction and domestic violence civil X protection orders. 7. Train key community partners on issues such as risks regarding firearm possession X and domestic violence, relevant laws, protocols for surrender, seizure and forfeiture of firearms. 8. Explore legislation at the State level to empower local law enforcement to confiscate weapons from offenders currently prohibited from possessing or purchasing them under Federal law.

Table C Objectives by Issue Completion Date Target: 2009

Issue Objectives SI NS&P

Investigations 9. Evaluate misdemeanor follow-up needs. X 10. Implement an improved report writing and accountability system that fosters X completion of all fields in reports, with supervisor oversight. 11. Evaluate all domestic violence incidents to enhance alignment with best X practices. 12. Conduct quarterly audits of domestic violence reports by Watch Commander to X enhance compliance with best practice. 13. Improve arrest rate in DV cases when the suspect is "gone on arrival." X

Sanctions 14. Formulate a process prior to sentencing to enhance the information judges have for sentencing domestic violence offenders. X 15. Explore alternatives to confinement for domestic violence offenders and propose X a plan for implementation. 16. Improve compliance rates for domestic violence offenders in Seattle's criminal X justice system. X 17. Explore advocating at the State legislative level for DV extensive supervision, similar to jurisdictional enhancements for DUI offenders. See Batterer Intervention, Objective (4)

Table C Objectives by Issue Completion Date Target: 2009

Issue Objectives SI NS&P

Special 18. Develop and implement a set of protocols for documenting and tracking the X Populations presence of children, seniors and vulnerable adults at the scene of a domestic violence related incident regardless of status as victim, witness or perpetrator. 19. Determine and strive to implement the best mechanism (i.e., one stop shop/no X wrong door) for responding to family violence in the City of Seattle. 20. Advocate for the implementation of policy and procedures needed to enhance X responses within and among City, regional and State Departments that create safety, promote the well being, and provide stability for children and their non-offenders parent, seniors, and vulnerable adults. X 21. Implement, in cooperation with other human services campaigns, a community education campaign on domestic violence, including effects on children, seniors, X vulnerable adults, people of color, and refugees. 22. Advocate for on-going, and increased, federal, state, and regional financial support for such services as mental health, respite care, emergency housing options, X interpreter services, and case management services to assist victims of domestic violence, including children, seniors, vulnerable adults, people of color and X refugees and immigrants. 23. Explore the development of legislative action to require Department of Social X and Health Services (DSHS) to implement a Departmental policy to assist victims in domestic violence. 24. Train mandatory reporters and other key community partners on such domestic violence issues as warning signs, liability, and community resources. 25. Continue and evaluate training efforts on immigration and other culturally-and population-specific issues.

Table C Objectives by Issue Completion Date Target: 2009

Issue Objectives SI NS&P

Victim 26. Develop a tool to enhance prosecution case screening of potential victim X Defendants defendants and increase effectiveness of negotiation on cases involving survivors. 27. Enhance advocacy and defender linkages for victim defendants. X 28. Design training to accommodate specific needs of criminal justice system X personnel with emphasis on special populations and sexual minorities. *SI = System's Improvement *NS&P = New Services & Practice

2005-2009 STRATEGIC PLAN ON SEATTLE'S CRIMINAL JUSTICE RESPONSE TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACTION PLAN

Advocacy

Introduction

Victim advocacy is a critical component of any domestic violence program, whether it is within a criminal justice system or a community system. Criminal justice advocates (represented here by the Seattle City Attorney's Office [SCADVU], the Seattle Police Department [SPD Gender and Age Crime Investigations Section] and volunteers from SPD's Victim Support Team [VST]), may differ from community based advocates in the way they work with victims of domestic violence, but their goals are the same: to "advocate" for the victim, to enhance victim safety, and to provide the victim with appropriate resources that will facilitate self determination and empowerment.

One primary area of concern is the difficult job criminal justice advocates have in balancing the needs and desires of the victim with the goals of the criminal justice system in which they work. It is clear that the role of the advocate is extensive, and in most cases, the advocate's work goes far beyond the typical job description. The advocate (SCADVU and SPD Gender and Age Crime Investigations Section) must:

* Listen carefully to the victim, assessing her situation (i.e., safety needs) while taking into account what will occur as a result of police investigation and a prosecutor's decision to file/not file criminal charges against the defendant (i.e., the victim may not want charges filed, may recant or minimize, etc.);

* Assist the victim with safety planning;

* Accompany the victim to court hearings (including assistance with interviews and preparation for trial); keep the victim updated on court dates and information;

* Provide and assist the victim with information about other legal remedies (including protection orders), victims' rights, community resources and referrals, crime victims' compensation,

* Work with police and prosecutors regarding victims' wishes and case action;

* Consult with other personnel who are working with the defendant (Department of Corrections, probation, etc.); and

* Work collaboratively with community-based advocates to address the full range of victim needs.

The Victim Support Team (VST) Program is a unique partnership between community and police to address and prevent domestic violence. VST has a more limited role in providing ongoing victim advocacy services, but play a critical role in providing a crisis response for victims at domestic violence crime scenes. Community volunteers with VST provide crisis intervention and support to domestic violence victims at secured crime scenes, a critical time following domestic violence incidents. The program is designed to address the gap in services to domestic violence victims between the time patrol officers respond to a call to the time advocates, detectives and prosecutors make contact with the victim for follow up. VST response has two parts:

1. Community volunteers provide on-scene crisis intervention to domestic violence victims in the time immediately following the domestic violence incident. Once the scene has been secured, patrol officers can call out the VST to assist on any domestic violence call where the officer is making a police incident report. (Safety precautions are assessed concerning scene safety for VST.) Volunteers work with a partner and are supported by an on-call supervisor. Teams are equipped with an unmarked police car, cell phone, pager, and police radio for communication with patrol officers in the field. The volunteer teams operate in the North and South Precincts during weekend hours.

2. A JustServe AmeriCorps volunteer provides some immediate follow up services, and also transfers the case to a criminal justice system legal advocate for ongoing services. After the weekend hours, the JustServe AmeriCorps member provides follow up calls to domestic violence victims who were assisted by the VST. The AmeriCorps member assists victims with safety planning, help locate emergency resources, make referrals to community resources, and help obtain criminal justice system information such as offender jail release time and protection order information.

VST has access to a number of emergency resources such as:

* The Emergency Feeding Program, which provides VST with bags of nonperishable food, including dietary-specific bags for diabetics and Asian diets;

* Stuffed animals that VST staff can give to children of victims during an intervention;

* Blankets, formula, diapers, and pacifiers for babies and toddlers;

* Gift cards/certificates to victims for Fred Meyer, Safeway, QFC, or McDonalds;

* Free cell phones for victims who need them; and

* Transportation to hospitals, safe housing, and animal shelters for pets if a victim needs to leave her residence and cannot take animals with her.

Recent developments

The Seattle City Attorney's Domestic Violence Unit (SCADVU)

In November 2003 the City Attorney, Tom Carr, issued a Policy Statement regarding domestic violence prosecution and advocacy, partially based on findings of the Domestic Violence Safety and Accountability Audit, a safety study conducted in 2002-03 with a consultant from the Battered Women's Justice Center in Minneapolis, Minnesota. As a result of this work:

* The SCADVU staff has divided into subcommittees to work on protocols and procedures needed to implement the goals of the Policy Statement

* SCADVU staff meet regularly as one large group to discuss and finalize these protocols

* SCADVU advocates have developed a victim safety inventory instrument as recommended by the Safety Audit. The SCADVU tool was developed by taking certain elements from various danger/risk assessment models and incorporating them into one instrument applicable for use by the SCADVU advocates

* SCADVU attorneys have developed a special protocol to prosecute domestic violence "High Risk Offenders."

Seattle Police Department's Gender and Age Crime Investigations Section (SPD)

In 1999, using federal grant funds two domestic violence victim advocate positions were co-located with detectives in the Gender and Age Crime Investigations Section to provide better communications on cases. In 2004 the positions were sustained in SPD. In addition, the roles have been extended to include coordination with the King County Prosecutor's Office, Domestic Violence Unit and availability during the week to respond in the field to domestic violence incidents.

Seattle Police Department's Victim Support Team (SPD VST)

The City Domestic Violence Assessment found underutilization of the VST. In response, a roll call training effort to increase awareness of the VST's role has resulted in significant increased call outs. The hope is that the role of VST will be solidified by educating patrol officers on the value of VST and its services to victims.

VST is also working with SPD administration to make it mandatory for officers to use VST on all DV incidents occurring while VST teams are in service. This should result in 100% victim response during the weekend with immediate on-scene intervention and support by a trained advocate.

Conclusion

The action plan that follows includes clarifying and solidifying the role of the victim advocate across the criminal justice system. This plan identifies tools to help facilitate the advocates' work and introduces a comprehensive City advocacy service plan, which will also include community advocacy work, service linkages and collaboration.

Cross Reference of Other Strategic Issues: Prosecution Plan, Victim Defendants, and Investigations.

Advocacy and Victim Services Strategy

Goal: Design and implement a comprehensive City victim advocacy service plan that includes community advocacy and service linkage.

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures Milestones

1. Clarify the role of victim 1. Review historical Lead: CAO/Victim Notebooks with Planning & advocate within the criminal practices in the field in Advocate research for Development justice system that focuses on order to arrive at clarity participants to interagency Specialist: victim safety and system in defining the role of the include reps from distribution. .25 FTE accountability. victim advocate. SPD and VST Technical A report about Assistance: DSVPO historical Begin May 2005 practices. end December 2005

Summary report of Lead: CAO/Victim new procedures Advocate related to victim participates to advocates role in include reps from the criminal SPD and VST justice system. 2. Clarify and compare Technical current victim advocates Assistance: DSVPO role in victim's safety and Begin June 2005 for system accountability. -end December 2005

Policy statement

on the role of Lead: DSVPO victim advocates Begin June 2005 across agency 3. Establish the role of -end December 2005 lines. victim advocates in Seattle's criminal justice system.

* = New Resource

Advocacy and Victim Services Strategy

Goal: Design and implement a comprehensive City victim advocacy service plan that includes community advocacy and service linkage.

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures Milestones

2. Create and implement a 1. Review, pilot and promote an Leads: SCADVU, Victim Safety victim safety inventory tool acceptable victim safety SMC designated Inventory Tool that can be used by victim inventory tool with potential leads advocates across the City's utilization across agencies. criminal justice system. Begin January Training and Trainer: .1 FTE 2. Promote the use of the 2005 end evaluation victim safety inventory by August 2005 materials and victim advocates, through training rosters. training.

3. Interview advocates to gauge Lead: DSVPO ways in which trainings have Begin June 2005 Report on Trainer: .10 enhanced practice. -end April 2006 safety analysis FTE*

findings.

3. Build and sustain a 1. Obtain leadership support Lead: DSVPO/VST collaborative advocacy service from the DVPC. Advocacy Planning & plan for use across the City's Begin June 2005 service plan that Development criminal justice system. 2. Determine resource needs. on-going includes Specialist:

communications .2 FTE 3. Name Coordinator. strategy and

working 4. Create guidelines for the agreements. advocacy service plan similar to existing KCCADV co-advocacy Annual report agreements/best practices. that provides

updates on plan 5. Build DV advocate implementation. partnerships that commit to working together. (See Prosecution Plan Goal #1, Obj. #1.

Advocacy and Victim Services Strategy

Goal: Design and implement a comprehensive City victim advocacy service plan that includes community advocacy and service linkage.

Expected Outcomes

1. Enhanced victim advocacy services provided by highly skilled victim advocate workers with the City of Seattle's Criminal Justice System.

Batterer Intervention

Introduction

In 2002, nearly 30 percent of the convicted DV offenders received batterer intervention as part of their sentence. The standards for certified batterer treatment programs in Washington State are set forth in the Washington Administrative Code (WAC 388-60-0255, 0265).

Generally, those referred to batterer treatment as a condition of their probation are required to do the following: complete an evaluation/assessment; complete a minimum of 26 weeks of weekly group counseling sessions; and complete an additional four to six months of counseling sessions. Thus, in order to complete the program, it generally takes a minimum of one year. According to Batterers' Intervention expert, Joan Zegree, "for durable change, a one-year program is merely the beginning."

Further, the WAC requires treatment providers to establish specific

criteria for completion of treatment. In addition to attending the minimum number of sessions, the perpetrator must:

* Stop the use of all violent acts or threats of violence;

* Stop using abusive and controlling behavior;

* Adhere to a specific responsibility plan;

* Comply with court orders; and

* Comply with other conditions of the contract for treatment services, such as chemical dependency treatment.

Successful completion of this treatment, however, does not happen in a vacuum. Every part of a municipality's coordinated response system to domestic violence (law enforcement, prosecution, court, and social services), plays vital roles in making intervention with the batterer effective. Specifically, community response elements should include: 1) Support and advocacy for victims and their children, 2) Court review process, 3) Probation, 4) The larger community sending a consistent, clear and strong message, and 5) Intervention Standards (see below). 1 While Seattle has some of these elements in place, significant gaps and barriers exist. Seattle's recently completed assessments on the criminal justice response to domestic violence provide some insight and information about some of these gaps and barriers.

From the report on "Prosecution Response to Misdemeanor DV Cases"

Some of the victims, prosecutors, advocates, police, and probation officers interviewed expressed frustration with the post-sentencing part of the process, saying that most domestic violence offenders do not complete anger management classes or batterer programs. Reasons given for non-completion were finances, offenders committing new crimes, offenders not believing they need treatment, or offender manipulation. These opinions were borne out by observations of the Review Calendar and interviews where advocates and victims expressed frustration with the lack of accountability that sometimes occurred with probation violations for not attending treatment ("They always

give them another chance") and with Stipulated Orders of Continuance ("No one does anything about these orders"). Some probation officers said that this problem is related to agreeing on sentences and conditions without involving corrections and program staff, and winding up with defendants and sentences that are inappropriate for one another. Judges indicated offender accountability could be increased if probation officers were present for review hearings.

From "A Report on DV Unit, Seattle Municipal Court Probation":

Probation counselors and judges interviewed for this report identified the following gaps in batterer intervention as a sanction in Seattle's criminal justice system:

* Low-cost treatment for indigent offenders. Currently, the lowest available fee for treatment in Seattle is $100 for the initial intake and $20 per session per week, although many programs charge higher fees, even for indigent clients;

* Treatment for African-Americans and Native Americans, using culturally-specific curricula;

* Additional treatment for non-English speakers;

* Treatment programs for lesbians and gays;

* More structured, in-depth programs for parents who abuse their children (currently there is only one parenting program that covers issues specific to child abuse);

* Combined mental health and DV treatment (there is currently no single treatment program that addresses both issues);

* Treatment for DV offenders with limited or no literacy skills; and

* Assistance for DV offenders with job training and with employment. Many offenders are court-mandated to chemical dependency and DV treatment, but lack job skills or employment. It is not generally part of the court order or the treatment programs to assist them with obtaining employment, but without employment, they are unable to pay for treatment.

From "A Report on DV Cases in Seattle Municipal Court":

The many batterer intervention providers implement their programs differently. This presents a challenge to the Court, which has the role of attempting to apply fair and equitable sanctions to the offenders under its jurisdiction. For example, one offender who attended eight months of treatment, has been given a certificate of completion by his treatment program, and is now shipping out to Iraq with his Army unit. He requests early termination of his probation, given that all other conditions of his sentence have been completed. Another offender has been in treatment for fourteen months, having started treatment on two separate occasions in two different programs. The first program terminated him for non-compliance due to his lack of attendance. The offender claims he couldn't get to the program because he lost his driver's license due to unpaid traffic tickets. He was paying for treatment and court-ordered child support, so he was unable to pay the traffic tickets. Shortly thereafter, he lost his job. He has since found another job, paid his tickets off and started treatment again, but the second treatment program required that he begin treatment from phase one. He is now in his twenty-second month of probation under his sentence and will not complete the treatment program before his probation supervision has expired under statutory jurisdictional limits. This difference in programming illustrates some of the challenges the Court and probation face, for example:

* What length of treatment will result in significant reduction in battering behavior?

* What constitutes "substantial" compliance vs. strict compliance?

* Without longer jurisdictional authority, what options does the Court have with respect to holding offenders accountable under an equitable standard?

* How can the Court and other partners in the coordinated response system address the economic barriers presented by some offenders?

Program Effectiveness

The question of whether batterer intervention is effective is complex and controversial. In an extensive review of the literature on the effectiveness of batterer intervention programs, Gondolf reports that batterer program evaluations "show 50-80% of program completers to be nonviolent at the end of a 6-month to 1-year period, as verified by their partners." The reduction of other forms of abuse, however, is less clear (threats, stomping, put downs, etc.). Still, batterer intervention programs success rates, for those who do complete, are comparable to those in drug and alcohol programs and

sex offender programs.2 It is important to note that many of those DV offenders who are ordered to attend treatment do not complete.

In a 2001 paper, "Controversies and Recent Studies of Batterer Intervention Program Effectiveness" Bennett and Williams review myriad issues in program evaluation. The authors explore complexities in determining program effectiveness due to factors such as co-occurrence of issues (i.e., unemployment, substance abuse), attrition or high rate of non-completion, and recidivism measures. They say," [t]he most important 'outcome indicator' is not individual behavior or recidivism, but rather community behavior: specifically, the community response to batterer non-compliance."3

Batterer intervention research findings may have current application to practice. Bennett and Williams offer the following "as hypotheses generated from research and practice":

1. Batterer Intervention Programs (BIPs) have a small but significant effect. They are critical elements in an overall violence prevention effort. The most effective reduction in partner violence will occur in those communities with the strongest combination of coordinated, accountable elements.

2. BIPs are more effective for some men than others. One in four men referred to a BIP will account for most of the repeat violence and most of the serious injury within a batterer program.

3. Assessment must occur on an ongoing basis. Most re-offense occurs early, usually within six months of initial program intake. Ongoing assessments are needed and should include both battering and substance abuse.

4. Encourage experimentation and program development. Within the boundary of safety and accountable practice, developing effective programs is more likely under conditions of supervised experimentation. The safe way to engage in experimentation to boost program effectiveness is to work closely with criminal justice authorities, a local victim services agency, and victim advocates.

Evaluate outcomes. Programs which routinely evaluate what they do and its effectiveness are likely safer than programs which do not conduct routine evaluations. A batterers program alone is not enough to prevent violence.

The City of Seattle subsidizes treatment for court-mandated indigent batterers at four non-profit State-certified batterers' intervention programs. Two of the programs serve the general population, one program targets Spanish-speaking batterers, and one program provides native language/culturally appropriate services to batterers from the Korean, Filipino, and Southeast Asian communities. The 2003 data for these programs indicate 381 clients served, 178 (46%) dropped out, 126 were still enrolled in the program, and 77 completed. The two culturally specific programs have the lowest dropout rates and the highest completion rates.

Recent developments

Recent system and community enhancements related to Batterers' Intervention includes:

* Data base updates to improve tracking of offender compliance with sentencing obligations were funded through Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) grant

* Seattle Municipal Court staff has worked to develop their Resource Center to include chemical dependency services, batterer intervention services, mental health services and Department of Social and Health Services connection

Cross Reference of Other Strategic Issues: Sanctions and Victim Defendants.

Batterer Intervention Strategy

Goal: Incorporate an effective batterer intervention policy in Seattle's coordinated community response.

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures Milestones

1. Analyze current practice in 1. Involve batterer Lead: DSVPO Report on analysis, Planning & Seattle and the results of this intervention providers, & SMC evaluation and best Development practice. probation counselors, the Probation practice literature Specialist: King County Public Defense Services search. .25 FTE* Administrator, City Attorney's Office and Researcher advocates in an assessment of Begin April FTE TBD current practice of BI as 2005; end program and sanction. December 2005 2. Review and analyze current agency practices and results, including information about what is working and system barriers, as well as client-specific information, e.g. criminal history

3. Review and monitor research literature and best practice information, and assemble data.

4. Submit report of analysis and assessment o DVPC, along with recommendation for best practice recommendation.

2. Develop city policy on the 1. Conduct briefings to DSVPO Begin Policy statement on Planning & use of batterer intervention as inform the policy statement. January batterers' Development a sanction based on the results 2006; end intervention as a Specialist: of the analysis of current 2. Draft statement for June 2006 service system and .1 FTE practice. discussion, approval and sanction in Seattle's implementation. criminal justice

system. *New Resource

Batterer Intervention Strategy

Goal: Incorporate an effective batterer intervention policy in Seattle's coordinated community response.

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures Milestones

3. Develop appropriate business 1. Review policies and Lead: DSVPO, Policies, practices to foster successful procedures/ protocols. reps from City procedures, and implementation of City's policy 2. Revise business practices Attorney protocols. on the use of batterer and contracts, as needed. Office, Court, Planning & intervention, based on the 3. Train on new protocols and Probation, HSD Training and Development results of the analysis of the practices. evaluation Specialist: current practice. 4. Develop evaluation plan. Begin July documents. .25 FTE* 2006 end June 2009

4. Explore advocating at the 1. Review results of the Lead DSVPO, Notes from state legislative level for DV current practice to determine HSD, SMC, CAO, meetings Planning & extensive supervision, similar the need for extended OIR Reports on Development to jurisdictional enhancements supervision analysis Specialist: for DUI offenders (see 2. Identify and work with Begin April Inter-agency .1 FTE "Sanctions, Objective 4") partners statewide to develop 2006; end July agreements with legislation and strategy. 2009 state association 3. Explore the legislative Legislation changes involved in the DUI Legislative enhancements in 2002 Strategy 4. Draft an impact analysis New Law of the effect of any proposed legislation on local courts and jurisdictions. 5. Finalize proposed legislation & legislative strategy 6. Implement legislative strategy.

Expected Outcomes

1. Improved system for appropriate candidates being sanctioned to batterers intervention 2. Improved completion rates 3. Improved compliance

Firearms

Introduction

The United States has a high rate of domestic violence, including many murders that are committed with guns. About two-thirds of the intimate partner homicides in the U.S. are committed using guns. Seattle and Washington State are no exception. From 1997 to August of 2002, there was a total of 308 domestic violence homicides in Washington, 84 of them in King County. This includes homicides of domestic violence victims, their children, friends and family, police officers, self-defense homicides in which perpetrators were killed, and perpetrator suicides. Domestic violence perpetrators killed 59 percent of these homicide victims with a handgun or rifle. At least 12 of these homicides were committed by perpetrators using firearms they were federally prohibited from possessing because they had a prior domestic violence conviction.

The partners in the Seattle-King County criminal justice community are working together to remove guns from domestic violence perpetrators. Specifically, they are developing a comprehensive approach that would prohibit anyone subject to a restraining order or convicted of domestic violence from acquiring or possessing a firearm. The intent is to have the prohibitions quickly and effectively enforced, and violators prosecuted to the full extent of the law. In addition, police would be required to remove firearms from the scenes of domestic violence calls, as the law allows, protecting the victim and the community. To facilitate this process, the City wants to work with its partners to explore new state legislation that would empower local law enforcement and prosecutors to confiscate weapons. This legislation will complement current federal laws and fill noted loopholes that have prevented effective enforcement at the federal, state and local level.

Local work in firearm confiscation began in 1995 when the Criminal Justice Committee (CJC) of the City of Seattle Domestic Violence Prevention Council elected to examine the role of firearms in domestic violence. A Firearms Subcommittee of the CJC began preliminary research on the issue. They could find no law enforcement agencies actively pursuing this area of law enforcement and subsequently recommended that the Council focus on this critical issue.

In 2002, the City of Seattle's Domestic & Sexual Violence Prevention Office (DSVPO) secured funding to work with the Seattle Municipal Court, Seattle Police Department, and City Attorney's Office to research national best practices on firearm confiscation and make recommendations. In 2003, DSVPO secured additional federal funding to help the King County Sheriff's Office initiate a domestic violence firearms project. Under this project, a database for tracking firearm information, from the incident report supplemental form to the orders for surrender, was developed. Further, under strong judicial leadership from a specialized King County domestic violence court, orders for misdemeanor perpetrators to turn in their firearms within 24 hours of sentencing and return to court within 48 hours with proof of surrender from the King County Sheriff ramped up activity on firearm surrender, getting the attention of law enforcement and policymakers. This work on firearms in King County is one of the first efforts in the nation to address the issue, and is serving as a model for efforts by our Seattle criminal justice partners.

The 2003 assessment report, "Removing Firearms from Domestic Violence Perpetrators," identified areas within the Seattle criminal justice system needing improvement or strengthening:

* Policies within law enforcement, prosecution or judiciary that support the removal of guns from perpetrators

* Removal of firearms by police officers at a domestic violence scene

* Documentation in police reports of the presence of guns

* Removal of firearms from arrested perpetrators prior to conviction

* Enforcing of provisions in protection orders prohibiting the purchasing or possession of firearms

* Procedures for surrendering firearms

Recent developments

Following the release of the 2003 assessment report, the issue of firearms is being addressed through the efforts of an interagency committee consisting of representatives of the Seattle Police Department, City Law Department, the Seattle Municipal Court, the King County Sheriff's Office and the Domestic & Sexual Violence Prevention Office. Accomplishments to date include:

* Issuing of directives to personal recognizance screeners and probation counselors regarding firearms and domestic violence offenders,

* Drafting of court orders assuring removal of firearms from domestic violence offenders.

* Entering of codes in the Municipal Court Information System that allow for tracking the status of firearm surrender, seizer and forfeiture.

* Designing training on firearms surrender, seizure and forfeiture

* Developed new DV supplemental forms for the Seattle Police Department to assure that relevant firearm fields are completed

The strategic plan that follows builds on the work that has been initiated by the firearm confiscation projects in Seattle and King County, as well as the combined efforts of the Seattle Police Department, the City Attorney's Office, the City Municipal Court, and the Domestic & Sexual Violence Prevention Office.

Cross Reference of Other Strategic Issues: Prosecution Plan regarding high risk offenders and Investigations.

Firearms Strategy

Goal 1: Determine policies and implement procedural steps and best practices for handling firearm removal from domestic violence offenders and individuals prohibited from possessing them due to criminal domestic violence conviction.

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures Milestones

1. Write policies to enhance the 1. Develop policy statements in Lead: SPD, Policy statements removal of firearms from SPD, Court and City Attorney's Seattle for the removal of batterers as prescribed by law. Office related to surrender, Municipal firearms. seizure and forfeiture of Court, SCADVU Report on the firearms. designated review of policy 2. Present policies to DVPC for leaders statements by the adoption. DVPC. Begin April 2005; end December 2005

2. Design and write procedural 1. Develop procedures regarding Lead: Seattle Standard operating steps and corresponding forms to firearms at the scene. Police procedures enhance the surrender, seizure 2. Determine procedures for Department and forfeiture of firearms for patrol officers to: a) Domestic SPD. investigate the matter of Violence Unit firearms, b) obtain consent to view firearms, c) seize them Begin January when they are possessed 2005; end illegally or when they are an December 2005 instrumentality of a crime, and Report on the d) accept surrender of analysis of firearms firearms. surrendered, seized, 3. Formulate procedures for the and forfeited and victim support team to address thoroughness of firearms with victim. information 4. Ensure SPD has procedures regarding firearms for an active search component to respond to warrants related to firearm violations 5. Determine all logistics related to storage and return of firearms. 6. Continue to incorporate safety planning and information sharing related to firearms by system's advocates and share information with prosecuting attorney.

3. Design and write procedural 1. Develop procedures for Lead: SCADVU/, Procedures steps and corresponding forms to prosecuting attorney's office Lead Criminal established enhance the surrender, seizure to ascertain the possession of ACA and forfeiture of firearms for firearms and documentation to the City Attorney's Office. present to Court. Begin January Updates on 2. Create procedures for 2005; end information and responding to information December 2005 procedures regarding firearms and firearms regulation. 3. Respond to new information regarding firearms and firearms violations.

4. Design and write procedural 1. Formalize procedures for Lead: Seattle Established steps and corresponding forms to personal recognizance screeners Municipal procedures enhance the surrender, seizure so that information about Court/ and forfeiture of firearms for firearms is being collected and Designated the Court. reported to the Court. Lead 2. Establish within the Court a Updates on process for issuing firearms Begin January information and prohibition orders and 2005; end procedures monitoring offenders for December 2005 compliance. 3. Develop procedures for Court staff to initiate and facilitate the judge's order. 4. Formalize procedures for probation counselors to monitor the offender's compliance regarding firearms and report violations. 5. Establish within the Court a process for responding to firearm violations

5. Utilize existing database 1. Establish initial procedures Lead: SPD, Reporting function systems for access by SPD, the requiring all involved agencies Seattle set up in databases Court and the City Attorney's to check for information Municipal Office to promote exchange of related to firearms and Court, SCADVU Reports on the firearm information and to domestic violence offenders. designated monitoring of coordinate across systems. 2. Design monitoring database leaders databases procedures. 3. Adhere to prescribed Begin January Brief reports on monitoring database procedures. 2005 August achievements or 4. Establish and follow 2005 needed changes procedures for returning firearms as allowed by the Court, including provision that SPD check databases and orders

6. Design and facilitate training 1. Scope out training needs. Lead: SPD, Training Plan tailored to each department for 2. Design training and Seattle all criminal justice personnel to supplemental materials. Municipal Training agendas introduce new domestic violence 3. Create evaluation instrument Court, SCADVU and evaluations goals, policies and procedures to assess effectiveness of designated and data systems. training. leaders 4. Work with agency leads to create a post-training plan to Begin guarantee the continued September development of skills addressed 2005; end June in training. 2006 5. Deliver training and plan for on going needs.

7. Create a Communication plan 1. Continue the Lead: DSVPO Notes from Planning & regarding the new City-wide interdisciplinary team meetings Development firearms program. meetings. Support: SPD, List of community Specialist: 2. Encourage the linkage to Seattle based advocacy .1 FTE community-based advocacy Municipal programs systems and programs for Court, SCADVU Brochures in Funding for limited English speakers. designated targeted languages translations* 3. Provide updates to DVPC, leaders Update reports City Council, City Agencies and other jurisdictions. Begin February 2005; end December 2005

8. Explore legislative change at 1. Include the Washington Lead: DSVPO Notes from Planning & the state level that will empower Association of Prosecuting meetings Development local law enforcement officials Attorney's (WAPA) and Support: SPD, Inter-agency Specialist: to confiscate firearms, Washington Association of SCADVU; DVPC agreement with WAPA, .1 FTE consistent with federal law. (18 Sheriff's and Police Chiefs designated WASPIC U.S.C. & 19 U.S.C. Lautenberg (WASPC) to gain support among leaders Draft legislation Amendment) state prosecutors for the OIR. New Law proposed legislation. 2. Explore search and seizure Begin June and other concerns related to 2005 enforcement of civil protection End December orders. 2009 3. Draft proposed legislation.

Expected Outcomes

1. Increase validation of the number of firearms surrendered, seized and forfeited by 40 percent. 2. Written policies, procedures and forms for SPD, Court and CAO delineating the surrender, seizure and forfeiture of firearms. 3. Increase database systems utilization to ensure firearm information is obtained and to coordinate across systems by 40%. 4. Detailed training plan designed and delivered to introduce new domestic violence goals, policies and procedures and data systems. 5. Fewer domestic violence related homicides due to firearms.

Firearms Strategy

Goal 2: Determine and implement appropriate best practices for handling firearm removal from those prohibited from possessing firearms due to domestic violence civil protection orders.

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures Milestones

1. Develop policies to enhance 1. Develop policy Lead: Policy statement Planning & removal of firearms from those statement(s) SPD/DSVPO Development prohibited from possessing Compare statements to the Specialist: firearms due to DV civil law and make revisions as Assist: KCPO .25 FTE* protection orders. necessary. Present policy(s) to DVPC Begin January for adoption. 2007; end February 2008

2. Develop and implement a set 1. Convene an interagency Lead: Protocols regarding of protocols for handling workgroup including SPD, SPD/DSVPO firearm removal from firearm removal from those SCADVU, DSVPO, King County those prohibited from prohibited from possessing Prosecuting Attorney's Assist: KCPO possessing firearms due firearms due to DV civil office and other appropriate to domestic violence protection orders. agencies. Begin April civil protection orders. 2. Determine protocols for 2008; end implementation. December 2008

3. Design and write procedural 1. Develop procedures Lead: Procedures steps and design and facilitate Design training SPD/DSVPO Training plan, training for appropriate staff. Deliver training and plan materials and evaluations Trainer: for ongoing needs Assist: KCPO .1 FTE*

(less Begin March Planner) 2009; end December 2009

*New Resource

Firearms Strategy

Goal 2: Determine and implement appropriate best practices for handling firearm removal from those prohibited from possessing firearms due to domestic violence civil protection orders.

Expected Outcomes

1. Increase validation of the number of firearms surrendered, seized and forfeited from those prohibited from possessing them due to DV civil protection orders by 20 percent. 2. Written policies and procedures delineating the surrender, seizure and forfeiture of firearms from those prohibited from possessing them due to domestic violence civil protection orders. 3. Detailed training plan designed and delivered to introduce new goals, policies and procedures.

Firearms Strategy

Goal 3: Enhance regional prevention and public education on firearms and domestic violence, including laws about domestic violence offenders and individuals prohibited from possessing them due to criminal DV conviction and DV civil protection orders.

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures Milestones

1. Explore, with King County, 1. Assess current communications Lead: Planning & the implementation of a efforts in the community DSVPO/SPD Community Education Development community education campaign 2. Hire Consultant, if King County plan Specialist: regarding the linkages between appropriate Judicial New clippings, footage .2 FTE* firearms and domestic violence, 3. Develop a communications plan Adminisincluding issues concerning 4. Implement the plan trationon domestic violence offenders and individuals prohibited from Begin April possessing firearms due to 2007; end criminal DV conviction and DV June 2008 civil protection orders.

*New Resource

Firearms Strategy

Goal 3: Enhance regional prevention and public education firearms and domestic violence, including about domestic violence offenders and individuals prohibited from possessing them due to criminal DV conviction and DV civil protection orders.

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures Milestones

2. Train key community partners 1. Assess current efforts Lead: Training plan Trainer: .25 on such issues as risks regarding training regarding DSVPO/SPD/ Training agendas, FTE* regarding firearm possession these issues. KCPO materials, and and domestic violence, relevant 2. Develop training plan and/or evaluations laws, protocols for surrender, curricula seizure and forfeiture of 3. Develop communications Begin April firearms. plan/strategies 2007; end 4. Incorporate communications December strategies for training into the 2009 communications plan (see above) 5. Implement communications strategies. 6. Implement training.

Expected Outcomes

1. Increase the number of presentations about the linkages between firearms and domestic violence by 20 percent.

Investigations

Introduction

Initial and follow-up domestic violence investigations are grounded in a comprehensive response procedure and involve a number of best practices that include:

* risk/danger assessment

* thorough approach at the initial contact including adherence to officer safety procedures,

* prescribed contact procedures including location of potential weapons, identification of potential witnesses, identification of primary aggressor, assessment and documentation of injuries, separation of parties, documentation of victim's and suspect's demeanor and determination for need of a translator,

* use of effective interview techniques determined by best practice,

* provision for safe protection of children who may be involved in the incident,

* assessment and documentation of the crime scene, and

* seizure of weapons as provided by law

* call outs to Victim Support Team

The Seattle Police Department is required to complete an Incident Report on all domestic violence incidents where a crime has been committed. In May 2003, as a part of Seattle's broad assessment of its domestic violence response the office of Domestic and Sexual Violence Prevention asked Praxis International, Inc., to conduct a text analysis of Seattle Police Department (SPD) domestic violence incident reports. While many positive procedures were noted in the report (i.e., officers documenting and photographing injuries, calling for medical attention, noting of victim and suspect appearance, reporting on involvement under the influence of alcohol or drugs, etc.) the text analysis of reports raised several issues about documentation of investigation and risk assessment that included:

* The incident report and Domestic Violence Incident Supplemental Report (DVISR) often omitted the substance of and context of the incident. Many narratives lacked detail, particularly when combined with a missing DVISR;

* Incident reports suggested inconsistent patrol response in investigation and evidence collection. For example, contact information for victims, witnesses, and suspects was often missing or incomplete. In all but one case there was no information about the suspect's access to firearms;

* Risk/danger assessment was often missing or incomplete. Of the 89 reports, 39 lacked information about prior domestic violence and 52 lacked information about prior domestic violence related arrests. This included cases involving assaults in public places and strangulation;

* Children were nearly invisible in the incident reports. There was little information regarding the presence and welfare of children;

* Attempts to locate "At Large" suspects were limited and inconsistent;

* On-site victim support and referrals to other domestic violence resources were missing. Only two reports out of 89 cases requested assistance from the Victim Support Team; and

* Articulation of primary aggressor considerations was evident, but inconsistent.

Other areas raised by the assessment or through the work of the assessment committee for further exploration are:

* Return to Scene by primary investigating officer as investigative best practice;

* Criminal History checks at the scene;

* Caseload of domestic violence and other elder abuse reports in Domestic Violence Unit;

* Quality control on DV Incident Reports is needed at the precinct level; and

* Low capacity of Misdemeanor DV case follow up.

Recent developments

Recent improvements, enhancements, and accomplishments include:

* All front line officers and supervisors completed mandatory eighthour training in Domestic Violence Best Practices, including modules on the following topics, primary aggressor, stalking, elder abuse, strangulation, court orders, custodial interference, report writing, evidence collection and animal abuse;

* The formation of a Domestic Violence Firearm Forfeiture and Seizure Committee to begin developing policies and procedures and best practices for firearm removal;

* Analysis of impact of elder abuse complaints on the DV Unit, including resource needs;

* Redesigned best practices training for other law enforcement agencies and other domestic violence service providers;

* Completed follow-up roll call training to front line personnel regarding incorporating Victim Support Team volunteers as integral to SPD DV response;

* Sustained DV Unit grant funded victim advocate positions working on felony level cases and co-located with investigators;

* Work towards a new online reporting system to provide electronic, and when necessary paper, information on location history and individual history; and

* Work to develop a DV and Firearms roll call training.

The plan that follows below extend the current work of SPD over the next two to five years and suggest procedural steps to put into practice a more thorough domestic violence investigation process.

Cross Reference: Advocacy and Victim Services, Firearms, Prosecution Plan, and Victim Defendants

Investigations Strategy

Goal 1: Identify and implement all best practices in domestic violence investigations.

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources

Parties/ Measures

Milestones

1. Adopt relevant law 1. Review the Tool Kit in order to Lead: SPD Evaluation SPD DV enforcement portions from the determine what practices and processes Domestic report on SPD Unit Staff Tool Kit, as a matter of policy fit. Violence practices and 2. Compare results of the review to Unit processes vs. Trainer: assessment findings. Tool Kit. .25 FTE 3. Create implementation steps for Begin Report on (HSD) each category selected from the Tool January post-training Kit and identified in the Assessment. 2005; end assessment to 4. Decide if a pilot is appropriate or December record how needed. 2006 processes have 5. Determine any training needs to changed, or if implement new bench marks. they have. 6. Design training Analysis of 7. Create an instrument to measure the findings. effectiveness of the action plan Revisions to components. procedures. 8. Make revisions to training as Training plan necessary. and evaluation.

2. Continue to provide on-going 1. Assess completeness of reports Lead: SPD Report on training to front-line officers through a review process to be Domestic monitoring and supervisors to produce determined for training purposes. Violence process and thorough investigative 2. Analyze new training approaches to Unit results. follow-through. correspond to information gleaned from Final report on reports. Begin March findings and SPD DV 3. Determine what areas of training 2005; recommendations. Unit Staff need special attention and make ongoing Revised appropriate changes. training plan and Trainer: 4. Design evaluation process to see content. .1 FTE that new approach) is successful. (HSD)

Investigations Strategy

Goal 1: Identify and implement all best practices in domestic violence investigations.

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures Milestones

3. Comply with Washington 1. Follow the guidelines SPD Lead: SPD Policy. SPD Advanced State Resolution 6161, has established for conducting Training Unit Domestic Violence by Law domestic violence Begin January Enforcement Officers, to investigations as outlined in 2005;end June assure that Procedures and Tactics 2005 policies/procedures are in Publication 030 and comply with place and adequate training all State and City law with Lead: SPD is provided to all officers regard to how investigations regarding officers involved shall be conducted. in domestic violence cases. Begin Training Training and Design June evaluation report, 2. Comply with the training 2005; Training requirements set forth to the begins October Washington Association of 2005; end June Sheriffs and Police Chiefs 2006; ongoing (WASPC) on domestic violence by for new law enforcement officers. employees

4. Implement an improved 1. Design and deliver training Lead: SPD Review on Existing SPD report writing and on report writing. qualitative Resources accountability system that 2. Create a pilot to assess the supervisory fosters completion of all use of the new system. Begin January coaching fields in reports, with 3. Make appropriate changes to 2007; end experiences. supervisor oversight. training. December 2009 4. Work with administrative staff on how to coach officers on use of new system. 5. Create a process for coaching officers who need extra assistance. 6. Provide appropriate coaching training to supervisors on how to provide all necessary feedback.

5. Improve arrest rate in 1. Improve investigative Lead: SPD Statement on Funding for domestic violence cases when techniques in gone-on-arrival Domestic four-hour arrest "Gone on the suspect is "gone on situations. Violence Unit rule. Arrival" model* arrival." Procedures for Begin January gone on arrival. 2007; end Procedures for October 2009 pilot.

Report on pilot Lead SPD findings. 2. Replicate gone on arrival Domestic Report on model. model. Violence Unit

Training plan. Begin October Write training Training Video* 2007; end approaches and ($3,000) 3. Incorporate training into January 2008 materials. on-line bulletins, roll-call Lead: SPD Evaluation training, video CD and through Domestic summation report. the use of other training Violence Unit tools. Begin April 2008; on-going

6. Evaluate misdemeanor 1. Set criteria for misdemeanor Lead: SPD Criteria follow-up needs. detective follow up. Domestic established. 2. Determine number of cases Violence Unit Report on case that fit criteria against numbers served. number of cases resources can Begin June support for follow up. 2007; end June Report on impact 3. Monitor impact of 2008 of reporting efficiencies created once new system. online reporting system is operating.

Investigations Strategy

Goal 1: Identify and implement all best practices in domestic violence investigations.

1. Increased documentation in domestic violence incident reports from patrol. 2. Increased supervision of domestic violence incident reports. 3. Compliance with Washington Resolution 6161. 4. Increased arrest of suspects who are gone at arrival. 5. Improved misdemeanor follow-up.

Investigations Strategy

Goal 2: Develop and enact policies and procedures for complying with best practices by patrol (i.e., management oversight, supervisory review for compliance, etc.).

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures Milestones

1. Evaluate all domestic 1. Establish criteria for Lead: SPD TBD violence incidents to foster thorough in-field investigations Domestic Policy. alignment with best practices. to confirm consistency in review Violence Unit Implementation plan process. for "how to" review 2. Develop policy and communicate Begin August and screen reports to all those affected by the 2007; end for consistency. adoption of the policy. August 2008 Checklist on 3. Review and screen every report providing positive for thoroughness. and negative 4. Provide immediate feedback, feedback. positive or negative, and facilitate for appropriate follow-through.

2. Conduct quarterly audits of 1. Select reports at random. Lead: SPD Form for review. domestic violence reports by 2. Review for thoroughness. Domestic Checklist on Watch Commander to enhance 3. Provide feedback to the Violence Unit providing positive compliance with best practices. supervisor, and if necessary, and negative provide training and coaching in Begin feedback. domestic violence reports. September Reports on 2007; findings. on-going

Expected Outcomes

1. Improvement in completion of domestic violence incident reports.

Investigations Strategy

Goal 3: Hold domestic violence offenders accountable by locating and arresting warrant subjects who are at large.

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures Milestones

Lead SPD, Provide an annual report, in Planning & To enhance tracking and 1. Evaluate and prioritize DSVPO, SMC, July each year, that documents Development reporting on efforts to outstanding domestic violence CAO efforts to serve warrants on Specialist: serve warrants on warrants based upon the domestic violence suspects. .1 FTE domestic violence seriousness of the offense Outcome Report to include the following: subjects. and likelihood of service. Framework: March 2005 1. Categorization of 2. Improve the outstanding domestic violence effectiveness of methods for Annual Report: warrants by seriousness of the tracking and locating each July offense and likelihood of domestic violence warrant service, and the number in each subjects. category, distinguishing

misdemeanor from felony 3. Coordinate the efforts warrants. of patrol officers in locating domestic violence 2. Description of any new subjects and serving methods or initiatives warrants. undertaken to increase service of domestic violence warrants. 4. Assess the adequacy of organizational structures, 3. Summary of the results of information systems, and SPD warrant service efforts, resources for identifying and including subjects arrested, in tracking domestic violence custody, at a verified location, warrant subjects. other.

4. Assessment of

organizational structures,

resources and information

systems needed to support

domestic violence warrant

service.

Expected Outcomes

To increase apprehensions of domestic violence warrant subjects through Warrant and Protection Order round-ups and patrol service

Consider in the Outcomes Report on the Domestic Violence Strategic Plan, the following measures for domestic violence warrant service activities: 1. For the most recent calendar year, the number of domestic violence warrants issued and the number that were outstanding (i.e., were not quashed or served) at the end of the year. Source: Seattle Municipal Court 2. Number and percentage of Tier I and number of Tier II and Tier III warrants served by SPD, distinguishing those served by the Warrant and Protection Order Unit and those served by other SPD units. Source: SPD 3. The results of SPD warrant service efforts, including the number of subjects arrested, in custody, at a verified location, other. Source: SPD. 4. Jail bookings for of domestic violence subjects, distinguishing arrests for assault, on warrants, for violation of protection orders, other. Source: Jail

Prosecution Plan

Introduction

Since the late 1970s and early 1980s, mandatory arrest and proprosecution policies have been part of the criminal justice system response to Domestic Violence all over the country. In Seattle, the City Attorney's Office created the Battered Women's Project in 1978, followed by the Family Violence Project, culminating in 1995 with the Seattle City Attorney's Domestic Violence Unit (SCADVU), which combined advocates and prosecutors into one organization to work together on prosecution of batterers and support and advocacy for victims. The Unit's mission is to provide support, assistance and protection for victims of domestic violence, while holding batterers accountable. Our goal is to act in the best interest of the victim, and the community to prevent further acts of violence. Prosecutors will continue to make the decision as to when to prosecute a case and will promote public awareness that domestic violence is not acceptable in our society. We will do everything we can to empower the victim, while realizing that domestic violence is a complex matter not amenable to simple solutions. The unifying theme of our approach to domestic violence is the recognition that every victim is unique. There is no "one-size-fits-all" approach to domestic violence prosecution that will work in every case. To implement this policy and approach, the Seattle City Attorney's Domestic Violence Unit staff initiated a process to address most of the topics set forth in the Fall 2003 policy statement involving domestic violence prosecution. The Unit divided into small groups to work on recommendations and implementation.

Changes

Victim Safety Inventory

We have developed a victim safety inventory to assess risk to the victim, to assist with safety planning, and allow us to consider risk in our decision about whether to file. Advocates and prosecutors will discuss the information gained from the risk assessment to decide whether to file the case. Risk assessment will also guide our decision to designate a defendant as a High Risk Offender (HRO) and apply HRO special protocols.

High Risk Offenders

Over the years we have seen a particular group of batterers that we are calling High Risk Offenders (HRO) who require additional attention from the criminal justice system. We will evaluate every case or defendant referred for domestic violence charges to decide whether these individuals deserve the application of additional resources and different procedures. Some of the factors we will consider include such lethality indicators as use of weapon, escalating amount and type of violence, use of violence in public, enhanced vulnerability of the victim, use of drugs/alcohol during the incident or access to firearms should be considered high-risk offenders. A criminal history of prior convictions for felony domestic violence assaults, sexual assault, use of weapons, felony gang activity within the last five years, or four or more prior events regardless of outcome, would also be considered for High Risk Offender designation. In HRO cases we will implement procedures and strategies, including working with SPD and Court Probation Services to maximize our ability to prosecute HRO cases and seek substantial jail sentences in most cases.

We have designed a short checklist to document the designation. Our challenge is to balance the need to include defendants who really need this designation, and their victims who need the additional attention, against the resource constraints that face our office. Prosecutor and advocate discussion will be critical in HRO designation. As with all domestic violence prosecutions, we hope to enhance victim safety, hold batterers accountable, punish crimes, and deter serious crimes involving domestic violence in our community. With this program, we hope to target resources to hold accountable the domestic violence offenders who are the most likely to re-offend, to offend seriously, and to risk the lives of their victims and children. We want to provide the greatest possible resources to victims whose perpetrators fall into this category, and reduce the level of violence with which they live. We also hope to reduce recidivism and persuade serious and habitual batterers that there are serious and sure consequences for their conduct; we want them to end the violence, take advantage of resources or treatment, or be unable to continue to perpetrate the violence because they are in jail. We also want to determine through our efforts, whether this level of targeted resources can make a difference and give the victims of these perpetrators the opportunity to experience safety and support in a way that perhaps they have not been able to in the past.

Firearms:

We have adopted a protocol for training prosecutors to seek removal of firearms from defendants.

Reviews and sentencing

We have adopted and will be implementing new standardized probation revocation guidelines. Our goal is to have a standardized office policy for recommendations in cases of probation violations. We also are working on new disposition standards office-wide. Domestic violence recommendations will be part of this new protocol.

Bail Schedule

We drafted a bail schedule guideline document to standardize the recommendations we make when filing cases. HRO defendants will always have a bail recommendation of $15,000 or above.

No Contact Orders

We will apply our policy of looking to the best interest of the victim in deciding whether to seek a no contact or to oppose lifting a no contact order. Risk assessment will play a major role in this case by case analysis.

Recent Developments

Future working groups will flesh out policies involving trial policy, plea policy, and dismissal policy. The CAO will continue and finalize the work begun on drafting written decline policies and procedures as well as publishing filing and dispositional guidelines in domestic violence cases. In addition, it is important to work on our role with respect to community advocates and how our working together promotes victim support, safety and change. Also we want to work with SPD regarding follow-up and investigation issues, and with the King County Prosecutors Office about enhancing movement of cases between our offices. Additionally, the Seattle Municipal Court (and our office) has created a Domestic Violence Court, which will impact our policies and protocols as well. In developing and strengthening ties with community advocates, care will be given to honor and protect the confidentiality of the community advocacy role in working with victims of domestic violence.

Cross Reference of Other Strategic Issues: Advocacy and Victim Services, Firearms, Investigation, Sanctions, and Special Populations.

Prosecution Plan

Goal 1: Assure that prosecution serves to balance the best interest of victims and their children with the community's interest in consistently treating domestic violence as a serious crime

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures Milestones

1. Foster relationship between 1. Convene a Criminal Lead: KCCADV/ Roundtable proceedings Funding for Criminal Justice based and Justice/Community based advocacy SCADVU KCCADV* Community based advocates to roundtable discussion to Inter-local or facilitate responsiveness to determine how the two systems Begin June interagency agreements victim's needs regardless of work to support victims 2005ongoing. prosecution. regardless of whether prosecution Protocol occurs 2. Develop and adopt an agreement on roles. 3. Determine protocol for assuring that victims' needs are met. 4. Link with Advocacy and Victim Services plan component

2. Increase coordination with 1. Convene a SCADVU/SPD forum to Lead: SCADVU Forum police to support investigation determine the best strategy to and SPD Implementation plan and follow-up when prosecution increase coordination, Evaluation report, serves the best interest of investigation and follow up 2005 including continued victims. procedure reporting of data on 2. Pilot strategy referrals, filings, 3. Evaluate strategy and outcomes 4. Evaluate "collaboration distinguishing meetings" to determine if they in-custody, from are meeting determined needs out-of-custody cases.

Expected Outcomes

1. Needs of victims are addressed whether or not prosecution occurs 2. Victim needs are taken into consideration in prosecution decisions 3. Roles of advocates in Criminal Justice system and community are clarified 4. Outcomes in Advocacy and Services plan segment are incorporated here by reference 5. Improved coordination between prosecution and police with respect to investigations occurs

*New Resource

Prosecution Plan

Goal 2: Seek prosecution outcomes that promote victim and community safety and that hold batterers accountable

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures Milestones

1. Implement High Risk Offender 1. Determine the scope of HRO Lead: ? Set of ? Funding for (HRO) program pilot SCADVU protocols HRO* 2. Implement HRO pilot project 3. Evaluate HRO pilot 2005 ? Evaluation ? Training 4. Explore expansion of the Report including Budget pilot impact on case

outcomes and

impact on victim

and community

safety

2. Standardize sanction 1. Increase coordination with Lead: PCS recommendations for original Probation Department on Division ? New or updated sentences and reviews sanctions identified guidelines 2. Review current sentencing staff recommendation guidelines 3. Identify appropriate End December guidelines 2005 4. Sentencing recommendation workgroup formalize guidelines Lead: for approval by the City SCADVU staff Attorney 5. Review current End December review-sanction guidelines 2005 6. Identify appropriate review-sanction guidelines 7. SCADVU members formalize guidelines for approval by the City Attorney

Prosecution Plan

Goal 2: Seek prosecution outcomes that promote victim and community safety and that hold batterers accountable

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures Milestones

3. In cooperation with City 1. Link with Firearms plan Lead: ? See measures partners, implement prosecution component SPD,SCADVU, under Firearms efforts to remove firearms from SMC batterers. June 2005 April 2006

4. Design and implement a 1. Assess how current training Lead: ? Evaluation of training program in partnership practices support prosecution SCADVU and current training with others that supports the goals and philosophy other practices prosecution goals and 2. Develop a training plan identified philosophy of the City 3. Implement the training plan PCS ? Training plan, Attorney's Office. staff/other which include community identification of partners training resources

identified May 2005 May 2006

Expected Outcomes

1. Increased successful prosecution of high risk batterers 2. Improved victim safety 3. Improved community safety 4. Sanctions more commensurate with crime and conduct 5. More firearms lawfully removed from the hands of batterers 6. Firearm related violence reduced 7. Trained City Attorney staff targeted to supporting prosecution goals and philosophy.

Sanctions Issues Strategy

Goal : Develop a plan regarding information available to judges, effectiveness of sanctions, improved compliance and alternatives to confinement for domestic violence offenders.

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures

Milestones

1. Formulate a process prior to 1. Determine best practice Lead: ? Report on best Planning & sentencing to enhance the regarding information important to DSVPO/ practices with Development information judges have for the court at time of sentencing. designated recommendation Specialist: sentencing domestic violence lead for .2 FTE* offenders. 2. Explore options regarding implementation. implementation. Lead: SMC/

designated ? Implementation 3. Determine resource needs. lead plan Funds for

consultant 4. Write or update policies and Begin ? Written and procedures regarding the provision January policy. training* of information provided to the 2007; end Court at sentencing. July 2009 ? Training plan

5. Design and facilitate training ? Training and for appropriate justice personnel evaluation on the new/updated policies and procedures regarding the provision of information provided to the Court at sentencing.

*New Resource

Sanctions Issues Strategy

Goal: Develop a plan regarding information available to judges, effectiveness of sanctions, improved compliance and alternatives to confinement for domestic violence offenders.

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures Milestones

2. Consider increasing the 1. Review current law and Lead DSVPO, ? A report of Planning & severity of sanctions for practice regarding sanctions and HSD, SMC, CAO the review and Development domestic violence through compare with other jurisdictions findings. Specialist: Municipal Court misdemeanor Begin April .1 FTE sentencing guidelines that give 2006; end July FTE*/Municip a clear message to offenders 2009 al Court that DV is a dangerous and Strategic serious crime, and consider Advisor .1 limiting the number of chances FTE an offender has to comply with conditions of sentence,

3. Improve compliance rates for 1. Examine databases (MCIS, Lead SMC/ ? Database Planning & domestic violence offenders in Tracker) for ways to improve designated improvements. Development Seattle's criminal justice compliance information. lead Specialist: system. .1 FTE* 2. Study obstacles which may Begin January impede offender's compliance. 2007; end January 2008

? Report on 3. Determine ways the system can Lead: DSVPO/ obstacles. assist in eliminating obstacles. SMC, designated lead ? 4. Prioritize resources to address Recommenda-tion obstacles. Begin January plan. 2007; end ? Benefit cost December 2009 analysis.

4. Explore alternatives to 1. Identify best practices Lead: DSVPO/ ? Gap analysis Planning & confinement for domestic regarding alternatives to SMC, report with Development violence offenders and propose a confinement. designated recommenda-tions Specialist: plan for implementation. lead .1 FTE* 2. Develop recommendations. Begin January ? Budget impact 3. Determine next steps. 2007; end July analysis 2008 4. Identify resource needs for ? Action plan this process.

5a. Explore advocating at the 1. Review state law and the Lead DSVPO, ? Notes from Planning & state legislative level for results of the current practice to HSD, SMC, CAO, meetings Development extended supervision of DV determine the need for extended OIR ? Reports on Specialist: cases, similar to current supervision or revised sanctions analysis jurisdictional enhancements for 2. Identify and work with partners Begin April ? Inter-agency .1 FTE DUI offenders. (See "Batterer statewide to develop legislation 2006; end July agreements with Intervention Strategy, Objective and strategy. 2009 state 4). 3. Explore the legislative changes association involved in the DUI enhancements ? Legislation 5b. Consider pursuing state in 2002 ? Legislative legislation to increase 4. Draft an impact analysis of the Strategy potential sentences. effect of any proposed legislation ? New Law on local courts and jurisdictions. 5. Finalize proposed legislation & legislative strategy 6. Implement legislative strategy

Expected Outcomes

1. Increase compliance by 5%. 2. Increase compliance information by 10%.

Special Populations

Introduction

Domestic violence respects no boundaries. People of any race, religion, occupation, education level, culture, socio-economic status, and sexual orientation can suffer, directly or indirectly, from violence within the home. Seniors, vulnerable adults and children often are the invisible victims of domestic violence. Discrete policies and procedures may be needed to appropriately respond to domestic violence in relationships of special populations.

Seniors and Vulnerable Adults

In 2000 there were 84,971 seniors (persons 60 years and older), representing 15 percent of the total population in the City of Seattle. By 2025, as the baby boomers age, forecasters predict that people 60 and over will comprise about 27 percent of the City's population.4

Seniors face many challenges in living their lives, not the least of which is domestic violence. Research in this area is still in its infancy, but one definitive study, the National Elder Abuse Incidence Study of 1998, revealed that almost half a million people 60 years and older in this country were victims of domestic abuse in one year.5 The vast majority of perpetrators of this violence (about two-thirds) were family members, specifically the victim's adult child or spouse.6 The types of abuse perpetrated on the elderly include physical, sexual, emotional, financial exploitation and neglect. Self-neglect is also a serious problem that commonly affects the elderly, but is beyond the scope of this plan. People with disabilities are similarly, if not more, vulnerable. Studies show that they are five to ten times more likely than the general public to be the victims of violent crime.7

In most states in this country, abuse perpetrated against vulnerable adults (frail elders and adults with disabilities) is the subject of mandatory reporting requirements. Washington State law requires that mandatory reporters report suspected physical and sexual assault to the Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) and to law enforcement. It further requires that mandatory reporters report probable neglect, abandonment, financial exploitation, and abuse to DSHS. For a variety of reasons, many mandatory reporters of vulnerable adult abuse do not comply with their mandatory reporting obligations. According to the National Elder Abuse Incidence Study cited above, only 16 percent of cases of abuse against the elderly in the U.S. are reported to the authorities.

These statistics make clear the need for raising public awareness and conducting specialized training of agencies and professionals who work with the elderly and disabled about the likelihood that this population will become victims of domestic violence, and about mandatory reporting requirements.

In recent years, the Seattle Police Department (SPD) has received an increasing number of referrals from Adult Protective Services (APS). In 2000, SPD had 177 APS referrals. In 2003, the referrals to SPD increased to 659. SPD detectives working these cases estimate that two thirds to three quarters of the vulnerable adult referrals they receive are domestic violence-related. During the last four years, the Seattle Police Department's workload for vulnerable adult abuse cases has almost tripled. Staff, however, has remained the same despite the rising numbers. Vulnerable adult abuse cases are among the most complex cases the police department investigates. The complexity of these cases is due to many factors, the most significant of which is the extreme reluctance on the part of many of these victims to participate in the investigation and prosecution of the case. This reluctance stems from a number of causes: alienation from and unfamiliarity with the criminal justice system, fear of retaliation by the abuser, threats by the abuser, and fear that admitting to the abuse or conviction of the abuser may result in their being placed in a long-term care facility. In addition, many of these victims suffer from physical and mental disabilities, including dementia, which can impair their ability to testify.

Children

Domestic violence also adversely affects children. Studies indicate that more than half of the female victims of domestic violence live in households with children less than 12 years.8 Children who witness domestic violence lose a sense of safety, security and stability in their home life. Over time, the abuse and violence in the home can disrupt school performance. Youth who have grown up in violent homes are at risk of creating the types of abusive relationships they have witnessed. At the very least, children who witness violence in the home are at greater risk for behavioral and physical health problems, including depression, anxiety, suicide ideation or attempts, abuse of drugs and alcohol, and aggressiveness toward their peers.

The adverse impact of domestic violence on children who witness it can be mitigated by a number of protective factors, such as positive parental support by the non-offending parent. However, the harmful effects of witnessing domestic violence can be exacerbated by the violence they experience themselves. Some studies show that up to half of men who abuse their intimate partners also abuse their children.9 Conversely, in about half of all child maltreatment cases, the mother is also abused. In Washington State, for example, there were 79,000 calls to Child Protective Services in 2002. Of these calls, 37,200 were accepted for investigation and about 40 percent had indications of domestic violence. Child Protective Services investigated 28,198 cases and 53 percent had domestic violence indications.10

Child abuse and domestic violence are inextricably linked within the family. But the various systems that respond to one or the other of these forms of violence do not always understand the dynamics of the other forms of violence or have the tools or capacity to work with each other to assure the well-being of victims. For example, many battered women who have not abused their children do not admit that they are victims of domestic violence because they are afraid that Child Protective Services may take their children away from them for exposing their children to violence or failing to protect their children. Child Protective Services needs to work closely with the criminal justice system and human services providers to assure that non-offending parents and their children have the resources they need to create safety and stability for themselves and to hold the offenders accountable.

During an on-scene investigation for a domestic violence case, children can be easily overlooked if they are not injured or directly involved in the incident. In Seattle, the patrol officers, the first responders on the scene, will assess the situation, provide information and referrals, and make an arrest, as appropriate. As a part of the Police Incident Report, officers are prompted to get the names of children and their dates of birth, as well as the names of those in whose custody the children are left. They also can indicate whether they have taken statements from children. If a child is injured, and is therefore considered a victim, more information is gathered, e.g. emotional state, excited utterances and nature of injuries. Other police agencies throughout the country, including the King County Sheriff's Office, are using or piloting other protocols to help officers gather more information on children at the scene, regardless of their status as witnesses or victims. Such protocols present an opportunity for officers to assure that children at a domestic violence scene are safe and can access the services they need.

People of Color/Immigrant and Refugees

According to the 2000 Census, one-third of Seattleites are people of color. People of Asian descent are the largest group at about 13.0 percent of the total population. Next are Blacks, or African Americans, who made up 8.3 percent. Latinos comprise 5.3 percent of the total population.

Most women, who want help to stop the violence, face a set of common barriers in their quest for support and assistance with ending the violence. These barriers include: misconstrued religious norms that contribute to self-blame, social isolation and on-going abuse and violence; lack of economic resources for independent living; fear of losing children; and lack of information or knowledge about what service and systems supports are available. The problems created by these common barriers are further complicated for people from different cultures.

Immigration status and limited English proficiency create additional challenges for refugees and immigrants who are domestic violence victims:

* Undocumented immigrants may be unwilling to report the abuse or violence they experience because they fear they will be deported. They believe, because of misinformation provided by their abusing spouse, that they can gain permanent residency only through the cooperation of the spouse. They do not know that they have the right to petition for lawful permanent residency independently.

* Another reason immigrant victims may not report is fear that the spouse will be deported or jailed. If the victim is economically dependent upon the spouse, deportation or imprisonment will leave them without sufficient resources to care for themselves or their children.

* Lastly, limited English proficiency further isolates abused women and significantly impairs their ability to discover community resources and supports. Without access to interpreters and translated materials, the victims remain totally dependent upon their abuser, who, as indicated previously, may give misinformation or withhold information.

A responsive coordinated systems' approach to domestic violence must adequately address these barriers if it is to succeed in helping victims of domestic violence among refugees and immigrants with limited or non-existent English skills. RCW 2.43.010 states, "It is hereby declared to be the policy of this state to secure the rights, constitutional or otherwise, of persons who, because of a nonEnglish-speaking cultural background, are unable to readily understand or communicate in the English language, and who consequently cannot be fully protected in legal proceedings unless qualified interpreters are available to assist them." This law goes on to describe the appointment, qualifications and payment of interpreters in order to secure these rights. Seattle is committed to carrying out this policy to insure that these barriers to safety are broken down and that victims have access to information, and resources within the community to assist them in their quest for safety.

Domestic violence is a form of oppression, based on behaviors designed to keep victims in their place, intimidate victims, dismiss victims and/or control victims. People of color also experience other forms of oppression racism and xenophobia designed to control and disempower them. For example, relations between the police and African Americans and Native Americans, historically, have involved significant violence and oppression. Some immigrants have experienced or witnessed similar levels of violence with respect to the police in their homeland. The consequence is distrust and reticence to engage the criminal justice system to help end the violence in their family. Indeed, in many communities of color, the goal is simply to end the violence. It is not to imprison the abuser. We need to develop culturally competent alternatives that help women who want to both end the violence and keep their families together.

Recent developments

* A regional Safe and Bright Futures two-year planning grant was recently awarded to develop services for children affected by domestic violence.

* A multilingual access institute to train language advocates on domestic violence took place in September 2004. At the writing of this plan the City awaits news of funding sought to continue this work.

* Federal funding will have also been sought to help support the annual Elder Abuse Conference for criminal justice professionals and others from around the region and the state receive specialized training.

Cross Reference: Investigations

Special Populations

Goal 1: Implement the appropriate best practice responses by the police to incidents involving children, seniors, vulnerable adults and LGBT persons at the scene of a domestic violence related incident, taking into account their possible status as witnesses, victims and defendants

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures Milestones

Develop and implement a set of 1. Establish an interagency SPD/DSVPO Workgroup Planning & protocols for responding to workgroup to include SPD, CAO, Begin April established. Development incidents involving seniors, human services, and public 2005 Specialist: vulnerable adults, LGBT persons health, CPS, APS, SFD and KCPO. Set of protocols .25 FTE* and documenting and tracking the end March presence of children, seniors 2. Determine protocols for 2009 Evaluation report: and vulnerable adults at the responding, documentation and Officer use scene of a DV related incident tracking. Improved regardless of status as victim, documentation of witness or perpetrator. 3. Conduct pilot of new protocols presence of children (train officers, and evaluate). and vulnerable adults

and referrals 4. Submit recommendation to DVPC Improved for adoption. communications of

risk to children and 5. Implement any approved vulnerable adults to protocols citywide prosecution

Effectiveness of 6. Codify as policy, train tracking mechanism officers and fire and aid crews, include as component of annual New policy performance evaluation, evaluate Trainings/Materials use and impact. Officer use

Improved

documentation/

communication of

risks to children &

vulnerable adults to

prosecution

Special Populations

Goal 1: Implement the appropriate best practice responses by the police to incidents involving children, seniors, vulnerable adults and LGBT persons at the scene of a domestic violence related incident, taking into account their possible status as witnesses, victims and defendants

Expected Outcomes

1. Improve response and documentation re: incidents involving seniors, vulnerable adults, LGBT persons and the presence of children, seniors and vulnerable adults at the scene of a domestic violence incident by law enforcement by 20% by December 2010.

Special Populations

Goal 2: Improve collaboration across systems and agencies that work with children, seniors, LGBT persons, and vulnerable adults in order to create safety, promote well-being, and provide stability for children and their non-offending parent, seniors, and vulnerable adults.

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures Milestones

1. Advocate for the Participate in the King County PHSKC/DSVPO Community meetings implementation of policy and regional inter-agency team to & reports procedures needed to enhance develop protocols for working with Begin 2005; responses within and among City, children affected by domestic end 2009 Annual report on regional and State Departments violence. regional protocol that create safety, promote the HSD development Planning & well-being, and provide Sponsor discussion with government (DSVPO/ADS) Development stability for children and their agencies and other organizations Begin June Specialist: non-offender parent, seniors, that work with seniors and 2007; end .25 FTE* LGBT persons, and vulnerable vulnerable adults about 2009 adults . inter-agency collaboration. (Elder Abuse)

Sponsor discussion with the LGBT community to identify best practices and training needs.

2. Determine and strive to 1. Research and evaluate models. DSVPO Report summarizing Planning & implement the best mechanism 2. Sponsor a series of community (with best practice, Development (one-stop shop/no wrong door) conversations. SPD/SCADVU/ community feedback, Specialist: for responding to family 3. Submit recommended model to KCCADV) and .25 FTE violence in the City of Seattle. DVPC for approval. recommendations. Begin June 4. Establish an implementation 2007 team. End 2009 Research funding options, Proposals for including federal and foundation funding resources Interagency Write and submit proposals for agreements funding New policies Implement interagency Operational agreements, as appropriate coordinated model Address operational issues Customer surveys Develop and implement a communications plan

3. Explore the development of Identify partners who will assess DSVPO/OIR Report on statewide Planning & legislative action to require the need and planning policies Development DSHS to implement a departmental Begin August Specialist: policy to assist victims of 2005 New policies .1 FTE domestic violence. ongoing (state-wide)

Expected Outcomes

1. Improved coordination among local, regional and state agencies.

Special Populations

Goal 3: Enhance City, regional, state and federal funding, services and policies that benefit members of special populations who are victimized by domestic violence.

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures

Milestones

1. Implement, in cooperation with 1. Assess current communications DSVPO Communications Communications other human services campaigns, a efforts in the community. plan. Consultant* community education campaign on 2. Work with communications News clippings, domestic violence, including specialist. Begin January footage. Planning & effects on children, seniors, 3. Develop a communications plan. 2006; end Survey of Development LGBT persons, vulnerable adults, 4. Implement the plan. December 2009 community Specialist people of color, and refugees. awareness and .25 FTE

change in public Funding for

opinion. implementation*

2. Train mandatory reporters and 1. Assess current efforts re: DSVPO Communications Trainer: .4 FTE* other key community partners on training, including for mandatory plan. such issues as warning signs, reporters. Begin January Training plan. reporting requirements, 2. Develop training plan and/or 2006; end Trainings. liability, and community curricula. December 2009 Preand Postresources. 3. Develop communications tests assessing plan/strategies. change in the 3. Consider advocating for 4. Incorporate communications knowledge of state legislation to expand who strategies for training into the individuals. is a mandatory reporter and to communications plan (see above). Surveys on extend required background checks 5. Implement communications practice and to records beyond Washington strategies. knowledge within State. 6. Implement trainings. systems. 7. Review mandatory reporting State requirements with City agencies, Legislation stakeholders and regional governmental partners. 8. Develop legislative proposals as appropriate.

1. Assess training conducted DSVPO Training plan Trainer .1 FTE 4. Continue training efforts on previously in SPD, SFD, CAO and SPD, SMC, SFD Pre and Post immigration and other culturally SMC on special populations CAO test assessing and population-specific issues 2. Conduct additional training Begin January change in 3. Develop tools 2007 on going knowledge and

attitudes

*New Resource

Special Populations

Goal 3: Enhance City, regional, state and federal funding, services and policies that benefit members of special populations who are victimized by domestic violence.

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures

Milestones

4. Advocate for on-going, and 1. Document the need for services HSD/DSVPO/OI Needs assessment Planning & increased, federal, state and 2. Set priorities R/DOF/ Legislative Development regional financial support for 3. Develop a legislative action Mayor's action agenda Specialist: such services as mental health, agenda Office/ Change in public .1 FTE respite care, emergency housing 4. Submit agenda to DVPC for City policy options, interpreter services, approval. Council Community and case management services to 5. If approved, add to city's resources assist victims of domestic legislative agenda Begin maintained or violence, including children, 6. Develop & implement legislative August increased seniors, LGBT persons, vulnerable strategy 2005ongoing Appropriate adults, people of color, and 7. Review City budgets for allocation of city refugees and immigrants appropriate allocation of resources for 5. Seek increased dedication of resources for vulnerable adult and responding to City resources for responding to elder abuse cases. vulnerable adult domestic violence involving and elder abuse. vulnerable adult and elder abuse, including financial exploitation

Expected Outcomes

1. Establish a baseline measure for community awareness about domestic violence, including effects on children, seniors, and vulnerable adults.

Victim Defendants

Introduction1

Over the past two decades, numerous efforts have been made at the federal, state and local levels to increase safety and justice for domestic violence survivors and criminalize domestic violence. These efforts include domestic violence-related legislation, policies, protocols and training programs, and development of specialized domestic violence units within city and county governments. The King County region is nationally recognized for its many domestic violence-related programs and training projects. In Seattle and King County, Washington, community and criminal justice system-based advocates throughout the region have expressed concerns that an increasing number of domestic violence survivors are being arrested and charged with domestic violence-related crimes. Survivors in this situation are often referred to as "victim-defendants."

The King County Coalition Against Domestic Violence's publication, "Victim Defendants: An Emerging Issue in Responding to Domestic Violence in Seattle and the King County Region" (2003), which is also a part of Seattle's DV Assessment, has contributed to national discussion on the topic of survivors who are also defendants and to growing research on survivors use violence against their battering partners. Some survivors use violence in self-defense, but are inappropriately arrested when the context of self-defense is either not recognized or documented by law enforcement, or who are incorrectly identified as primary aggressors. There are survivors who are arrested because of false accusations by their batterers. Other survivors initiate illegal acts of violence against their battering partners and are appropriately arrested. Those who are convicted are often sentenced to complete batterer intervention programs, which compromise safety and are not appropriate for survivors. There are many negative impacts of arrest and conviction

that compromise the safety of survivors.

Recommendations made in the "Victim-Defendants: An Emerging Challenge in Responding to Domestic Violence in Seattle and King County" report take into consideration a review of promising practices compiled from national literature, conversations with researchers and practitioners from other cities and states around the country, as well as discussions with local criminal justice representatives and domestic violence advocates.

Key goals are to ensure that:

* Domestic violence survivors who act in self-defense or who are not primary aggressors are not arrested,

* Charges are not filed or charges are dropped for those who are arrested while acting in self-defense or who were not the primary aggressors in the incident,

* The batterers of those survivors who are defending themselves are held accountable for their threats and/or assaults that resulted in the need for self-defense.

* All victims have access to vigorous and appropriate defense counsel, and supportive community-based advocacy,

* Those who are convicted receive sentences that do not compromise their safety.

* Sanctions acknowledge survivor status and court recommendations consider survivor safety issues.

1This material was adapted from the King County Coalition Against Domestic Violence's publication entitled "Victim-Defendants: An Emerging Issue in Responding to Domestic Violence in Seattle and the King County Region," prepared by Meg Crager, Merril Cousin and Tara Hardy

Recommendations are highlighted below, with a focus on training for all disciplines involved.

1. Leadership should view victim defendants as a significant concern.

Leaders and policy-makers need to lend their support to a collaborative effort to develop a coordinated response for victim defendant cases. This response would include comprehensive and ongoing training, consideration of arrest, charging and sentencing policies, and changes to existing data systems to improve information flow.

2. Law Enforcement-Law enforcement agencies should be able to give officers the time, training, resources, and support they need to correctly identify the primary aggressor in more complex cases. Practices should include carefully evaluating domestic violence incidents for self-defense, prioritizing accurate identification of the primary aggressor, refraining from making mutual arrests, and using interpreters whenever one or both of the parties do not speak English or have limited English skills.

3. Defense Attorneys-The defense bar should train staff, including investigators and social workers, where applicable, in the dynamics of domestic violence, and support them in acquiring tools for defending domestic violence survivors charged with domestic violencerelated and other crimes.

4. ProsecutorsProsecutors should make domestic violence training mandatory for all staff, including training on evaluating cases for self-defense, screening for victim defendants, evaluating the context of the violence and the history of the parties, and recommending appropriate sentences for survivors with consideration to safety.

5. System-Based Advocates-System based advocates, those advocates who work within the criminal justice system are not permitted to work with defendants in the current case, even if the defendant has been identified as the victim in a previous case. Their role is to advocate for the identified victim in the current criminal case. However, they assist domestic survivors charged with domestic violence-related crimes by flagging possible victim-defendant cases for the prosecutor and consulting with the prosecutor about potential safety concern.

6. Court, Probation and Corrections-Ideally, all judicial officers, court, probation and corrections staff should receive training in the dynamics of domestic violence, the tactics of batterers, and assessing the possibility of domestic violence exists in other types of cases. When the case of a domestic survivor is going to be prosecuted, judges should craft sentences that integrate the safety needs of the individual survivor. In some cases, judges may consider alternatives such as deferred sentences, in which the survivor agrees to complete the conditions of sentence, after which charges are dropped

7. Batterer Intervention Programs-As most court-mandated batterers claim to be "the victim" when they begin a batterer intervention program, staff may reasonably become desensitized to that claim and may have difficulty identifying court-referred domestic violence survivors. Therefore, batterer intervention programs should provide training for their staff in victim defendant issues. For those courtmandated clients who are domestic violence survivors and not batterers, staff should clearly document to the court, with the survivor's permission, that the individual is not a candidate for batterer intervention, as she or he is a domestic violence survivor.

8. Community-Based Advocacy Programs-Community-based agencies should develop and integrate comprehensive responses to domestic violence survivors who are charged with domestic violence-related crimes. Some areas to address include:

* Acknowledging in support group and individual work that many domestic violence survivors use violence. Engage in an open conversation about survivors' use of violence, its impacts, and alternatives.

* Providing information to survivors about the criminal justice system and the potential consequences of arrest.

* Increasing opportunities for early contact with victim-defendants through relationships with local law enforcement and the jail.

* Collaborating with defense attorneys on the defense of domestic violence survivors.

In addition, the domestic violence advocacy community should develop some consensus on what mandatory conditions of sentence are appropriate for domestic violence survivors who have committed domestic violence related crimes. Once this consensus is reached, community leaders should work with prosecutors, defenders, and the court to ensure that domestic violence survivors are being sentenced appropriately.

The following reflects recent accomplishments in the work on this issue; many of these activities were guided by the victim defendant assessment report:

* Training for criminal justice practitioners by Gael Strack on identifying primary aggressor (Dec. 2002).

* A four part training series for advocates on working with women who use violence (July and August 2004).

* Training for defenders by a defense law professor from Tulane Law School on victim defendants (September, '04).

* Brochure for jail personnel to disseminate to women arrested for domestic violence.

* Recommendations to judges regarding consequences and recommendations in sentencing survivors contained in a paper, "Some Issues to Consider when Domestic Violence Survivors are Charged with Domestic Violence Related Crimes."

* Presentations about the report findings and recommendations to numerous criminal justice and advocate networking agencies.

* SPD mandatory DV best practice training with primary aggressor (victim defendant) module.

* Participation by the Seattle City Attorney's Office in the National Prosecution focus group sponsored by the National Clearinghouse for Battered Women.

* Seattle Municipal Court and City Attorney's Office established a working relationship with Giving Real Options to Women (GROW), an organization educating women incarcerated at King County jail; women most likely are jailed for charges other than domestic violence, but their history points to domestic violence related situations.

Cross Reference of Other Strategic Issues: Batterer's Intervention, Sanctions, Investigations, and Advocacy and Victim Services

Victim Defendants Strategy

Goal: Develop victim defendant protocols and training across systems that address screening prosecution cases, community referrals, and effective dispositions.

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures Milestones

1. Develop a tool to enhance 1. Convene a work group Lead: SCADVU Screening tool. Planning and prosecution case screening involving prosecution Development of potential victim advocates and probation staff Specialist: defendants and increase to develop tool. .25 FTE effectiveness of 2. Draft language and Lead: DSVPO Report evaluation negotiations on cases procedures for use. data on cases of women Training involving survivors. 3. Adopt and train on use of Begin January who use violence. budget for tool. 2006; end City agencies. 4. Evaluate a sample of cases December 2008 alleging/involving women's use of violence.

2. Enhance linkages for 1. Determine, create, and Lead: SCADVU Community and victim defendants to provide access to needed SPD insystem advocate community domestic violence services for survivors /Staffing to meeting agendas and services. 2. Link to Advocacy Service be determined minutes. Plan (see Advocacy and Victim Services Strategy 2005 Protocol 2009) for areas pertaining to Begin June community service linkages 2006 end June 3. Develop protocol for 2007 referral for systemsand community-based advocacy on victim/defendant issues. (See prosecution Plan Goal 1, Obj.1)

*New Resource

Victim Defendants Strategy

Goal: Develop victim defendant protocols and training across systems that address screening prosecution cases, community referrals, and effective dispositions.

Objectives Procedural Steps Responsible Intermediate Resources Parties/ Measures Milestones

3. Enhance advocacy and 1. Determine necessary Lead: DSVPO Referral list defender linkages for victim training for defense bar to community advocates Planning & defendants. understand victim defendant specially trained on Development issues. women's use of Specialist: 2. Establish ways for defense Begin January violence. .25 FTE* and prosecution staff to 2006; end communicate about case December 2008 Defense disposition. communications 3. Formulate mechanism for protocol. establishing working relationships between defense and community based advocates.

4. Enhance probation 1. Fashion responsible court Leads: SMC & Screening tool. screening and referral recommendations and protocol SCADVU policies for court for screening and referrals Victim defendant recommendations and for with survivor/defendant protocol on court service linkages. safety need prioritized. recommendations. 2. Develop tool Begin March 3. Screen for victim 2005; end Report on court defendant status. March 2006 sentences for victims 4. Establish referral who use violence. policies and procedures with community advocacy agencies Referral list to 5. Implement Policies and victim defendant Procedures. trained community

advocates.

Referral policies and procedures

5. Design training to 1. Establish training needs DSVPO Training plan. Trainer: .25 accommodate specific needs on victim defendants with Training agendas and FTE* of each criminal justice emphasis on issues of Begin 2008; evaluations. system service provider. relevance applicable to end 2009 special populations including sexual minorities. 2. Repeat training as needed.

1. Increased recognition of victim defendants. 2. Decrease in survivors being prosecuted. 3. Increased dialogue between defenders and advocacy community and between community and in-system advocates. 4. More appropriate court recommendations that consider safety issues for survivors. 5. Improved criminal justice practitioners' skills in responding to victim defendants.

2005-2009 STRATEGIC PLAN ON SEATTLE'S CRIMINAL JUSTICE RESPONSE TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

APPENDICES

TABLE A: Backbone of the DV Strategic Plan April 2005

Begin End Objective

'05 '06 '07 '08 '09

I. VICTIM ADVOCACY: 2005 1. Clarify the role of the victim 2005 advocate 2. Create & implement a victim safety 2005 On inventory tool going 3. Build & sustain a collaborative advocacy service plan across CJS

II. BATTERER INTERVENTION 2005 1. Analyze current practice and the results of this practice 2006 2. Develop city policy on batterer intervention as a court sanction 2006 3. Develop appropriate business practices to foster successful implementation of the policy 4. Explore advocating at the State 2006 legislative level for DV extensive supervision, similar to jurisdictional enhancements for DUI offenders

III. FIREARMS A. Focus on Criminal DV Conviction 2005 1. Write policies to enhance the removal of firearms as prescribed by 2005 law 2. Design and write procedures and forms to enhance firearm removal. 2005 3. Use existing database systems to promote exchange of firearm information and to coordinate across 2005 systems 4. Design and facilitate training 2005 across the system 2005 5. Create a communications plan 6. Explore legislative change at the State level that will empower local law enforcement officials to confiscate firearms, consistent with federal law. (18 U.S.C. & 19 U.S.C. Lautenberg Amendment)

2007 B. Focus on DV Civil Protection Orders 1. Develop policies to enhance the removal of firearms from those prohibited from possessing them due 2008 to DV civil protection orders 2. Develop and implement a set of 2009 protocols for handling firearm removal. 3. Develop procedures and conduct trainings for the appropriate staff 2007 C. Focus on Regional Efforts 1. Explore with King County the implementation of a community education campaign regarding the linkages between firearms and 2007 domestic violence. 2. Train key community partners on such issues as risks regarding firearm possession and domestic violence, relevant laws, protocols for surrender, etc.

INVESTIGATIONS A. Domestic Violence Unit 2005 1. Adopt as policy relevant law enforcement portions from the national best practices tool kit 2005 On 2. Continue to provide on-going going training to front-line officers and supervisors to produce thorough investigative follow-through 2005 3. Comply with Washington State SSB 6161 regarding the establishment of policies, procedures and training to address officer-involved DV cases

2007 4. Implement an improved report writing and accountability system 2007 5. Improve arrest rate in DV cases when the suspect is "gone on arrival" 2007 6. Evaluate misdemeanor follow-up needs B. Management Oversight of Patrol 2007 1. Evaluate all domestic violence incidents to enhance alignment with 2007 best practices 2. Conduct quarterly audits of On domestic violence reports going

PROSECUTION PLAN A. Serving the Best Interest of 2005 On Victims going 1. Foster relationship between Criminal Justice-based and 2005 Community-based advocates 2. Increase coordination with police to support investigation and follow-up

B. Seeking Outcomes that Promote Victim and Community Safety and Hold 2005 Batterers Accountable 1. Implement High Risk Offender 2005 program 2. Standardize sanction recommendations for original 2005 sentences and reviews 3. Implement prosecution efforts to 2005 remove firearms from batterers 4. Design and implement a training program that supports the prosecution goals and philosophy of the City Attorney's Office

SANCTIONS 2007 1. Formulate a process prior to sentencing to enhance the information judges have for sentencing DV offenders 2007 2. Improve compliance rates for DV offenders 2007 3. Explore alternatives to confinement for DV offenders and propose a plan for implementation 2006 4. Explore advocating at the State legislative level for DV extensive supervision, similar to jurisdictional enhancements for DUI offenders

SPECIAL POPULATIONS A. Police Response at the Scene of a DV-Related Incident 2005 1. Develop and implement protocols for documenting and tracking the presence of children and others at the scene

B. Improving Collaboration across 2005 systems and Agencies 1. Advocate for the implementation of policies and procedures needed to enhance responses within and among City, regional and State departments 2007 that create safety 2. Determine and strive to implement the best mechanism (one-stop/no-wrong door) for responding to family 2005 violence. 3. Explore the development of legislative action to require DSHS to implement a departmental policy to assist victims of domestic violence.

C. Enhanced Regional, State and 2006 Federal Funding, Services and Policies 1. Implement, in cooperation with 2006 other human services campaigns, a community education campaign on 2007 domestic violence 2. Train mandatory reporters and key community partners on key issues 2005 3. Continue training efforts on immigration and other culturallyand population-specific issues 4. Advocate for on-going, and increased, federal, state and regional support for critical services.

VICTIM DEFENDANTS: 2006 1. Develop a tool to enhance prosecution case screening of potential victim defendants and increase effectiveness of negotiations on cases involving 2006 survivors 2. Enhance linkages for victim 2006 defendants to community domestic violence services 2005 3. Enhance advocacy and defender linkages for victim defendants 4. Enhance probation screening and referral policies for court 2008 recommendations and service linkages 5. Design training to accommodate specific needs of each criminal justice system service provider with emphasis on special populations and sexual minorities

TABLE B:

CITY OF SEATTLE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE STRATEGIC PLAN

COMMUNITY CONVERSATIONS: PROCESS & SUMMARY OF RESULTS

After the Domestic Violence Prevention Council approved the discussion draft of the plan at its December 2004 meeting, conversations with community partners and stakeholders began in earnest in early January of 2005. Staff made the plan available online. In addition, working closely with the King County Coalition Against Domestic Violence (KCCADV), 22 different community groups and programs were contacted to see if they wanted to participate in a briefing and conversation about the plan and/or submit comments. Six groups chose to respond electronically. Domestic & Sexual Violence Prevention Office and/or KCCADV staff met with another 15 groups, including:

* Batterer's Intervention Providers

* Child Protective Services Domestic Violence Collaboration Group (comprised of King County Public Health and Child Protective Services of the Department of Social and Health Services [DSHS])

* City of Seattle's Criminal Justice Collaboration Group (comprised of City Attorney advocate and prosecution staff, probation and clerical staff, and the Gender Crimes Unit of the Seattle Police Department)

* Court and Community Advocates (under the auspices of the VAWA STOP grant)

* Elder Abuse Council (comprised of professionals from the Attorney General's Office, the Crisis Clinic, DSHS Adult Protective Services and Residential Care Services, DSHS Senior Services, the King County Sheriff's Office, the King County Prosecuting Attorney's Office, the Seattle Human Services Department's Aging and Disability Services, Seattle Police Department, Virginia Mason Clinic and the University of Washington's School of Nursing)

* King County Sheriff's Office Domestic Violence Unit

* King County Coalition Against Domestic Violence

* King County Domestic Violence Prevention Council's Coordinating Committee (comprised of King County Prosecuting Attorneys and Advocates, the King County Department of Judicial Administration's DV Coordinator, the King County Sheriff's Office, the King County Women's Program and a representative of the King County Work First Program, King County Department of Public Health)

TABLE B: CITY OF SEATTLE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE STRATEGIC PLAN COMMUNITY CONVERSATIONS: PROCESS & SUMMARY OF RESULTS

MAJOR ISSUES IDENTIFIED IMPLICATIONS FOR PLAN

1. Advocacy: Several professionals' related Change: The CAO will refer to the tool used by their liability and credibility concerns over the advocates as a "victim safety inventory". use of the term "Risk Assessment Tool" which is a clinical term used to describe a scientific, empirically studied mechanism for garnering lethality data for domestic violence situations within the context of a clinical environment.

2. Batterer Intervention: Challenges exist for Change: Staff rewrote the section referenced to make probation officers about determining the issues clearer. 'completion.'(as noted on page 28 of the text portion of the plan) This can be addressed by being sure probation has access to WAC 388-60. Sections WAC 388-60-0255 and 388-60-0265 clearly delineate the completion requirements. WAC compliance by all certified programs is mandatory.

3. Firearms Strategy: Federal law already prohibits Change: An objective is added to explorelegislative a respondent in a DV protection order or anyone change at the state level that will empower SPD and convicted of a misdemeanor or felony DV offense other local law enforcement officials to enforce from legally acquiring or possessing a firearm. state law that reflects federal law in this regard. State law should be drafted to replicate or enhance federal law which would empower local law enforcement to enforce this provision and not depend on the will of federal prosecutors and law enforcement to act.

4. Prosecution Plan: The CAO should develop and Change: The CAO is currently in the process of publish filing and dispositional "guidelines" on developing and will publish filing anddispositional DV cases. "guidelines" or "standards". This will be noted in the "Recent Developments" section of the prosecution plan.

5. Prosecution Plan: The CAO should develop a Change: The CAO is currently in the process of "written decline policy" and implement it on all developing and will publish its written decline DV cases. This documentation is especially policy and it will be implemented in all DV cases. helpful for future prosecutions including This will be noted in the "Recent Developments" homicides and other felony DV cases. section of the Prosecution Plan.

6. Special Populations: Given that Seattle Fire and Change: Seattle Fire Department and Aid will be aid (EMT) are vital components to any response, added to the "procedural steps" of the groups they need to be included in any training on identified in the "Impact and Readiness Tables" of CPS/APS cases. the plan.

7. Special Populations: SPD officers should be Change: Added a new objective under goal #3 trained on issues regarding their role in Continue training efforts on immigration and other dealing with immigration issues. All officers culturallyor population-specific issues. should receive training on the SPD policy to NOT inquire about immigration status or enforce immigration law. Officers can also be trained in what resources are available for immigrant and refugee victims (including assistance with immigration status), and on what kind of documentation they can provide that will be helpful to victims petitioning for legal status under VAWA.

8. Victim Defendants: Special Populations has a Change: Specialized training is ongoing within SPD significant intersection with Victim Defendant and and CAO regarding victim defendants and issues within the specific populations of gay, understanding the gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and lesbian, bisexual and trans-gendered trans-gendered population's special concerns and individuals. Specialized training issues. New language is added to is needed for Objective 5, procedural step #1 "with emphasis on police officers, prosecutors and judges in issues of relevance applicable to special identifying primary aggressors within these populations, including sexual minorities." populations.

9. Victim Defendants: Why wait until the end of the Change: Specialized training is ongoing within SPD and case to deal with the wrong person being CAO regarding victim defendants, and will continue. New arrested. This should not be a dispositional language is added to Objective 5, procedural step #1 issue. It is an issue of investigation by the "with emphasis on issues of relevance applicable to police and awareness especially in special populations". non-traditional populations that don't fit gender stereotypes of the man vs. woman assault.

10. Miscellaneous: What about prevention, civil Change: While most of these issues are beyond the scope court system, family court processes, children. of this plan, which is primarily about the criminal justice system, the introduction to the plan has been modified to reference these and other strategic areas the city must address to end domestic violence. The DVPC will take this up in the "Call to Action" work item.

11. Operations: The role of the DVPC with respect to Change: The following sentence has been added to the plan implementation is not defined. plan in the Introduction section: "The City's Domestic Violence Prevention Council, as an inter-departmental body of city leaders responsible for city policy and programs, provides the leadership, on-going oversight, and coordination in the City's efforts to eliminate domestic violence."

12. Operations: Need a mechanism for reporting the Change: The following as been added to the plan in the status of Plan's effectiveness and making "Next Steps" section: adjustments in plan; who is responsible for plan "Even upon adoption by DVPC and the City Council, this implementation. plan will remain a living document. The DVPC's Criminal Justice Committee will oversee its implementation and facilitate the development of an update for 2007 to address any new or emerging issues and inform our stakeholders and interested parties of progress."

13. Special Populations: The courts need to develop Referral: This suggestion will be forwarded to the policies that would defer No Contact Orders and Seattle Municipal Court for their consideration and the protection orders to Juvenile Court engaged in development of a policy from the bench. The Assessment Dependency Actions when children are either the Committee is in concurrence with this recommendation. victim or defendant in these criminal cases. Leave the issues of contact with kids to the court more capable of addressing these concerns.

14. Advocacy: Collaborative Advocacy: While Implementation Issue: Efforts are currently underway advocates want to strengthen collaboration to implement a plan to increase opportunities for between systems-based advocates (City) and strengthened collaboration between these two diverse community-based advocates, they want to ensure and distinct groups of advocates. The goal is to that any collaboration that occurs take into increase effective service to victims. Protective account the need for a "firewall" around measures will continue to guard the confidential nature community based advocates in order to protect of the work of community-based advocates in these the confidential nature of these advocates' efforts. roles.

15. Batterer Intervention: Enforcement of the WAC Implementation Issue: The evaluation may reveal these (388-60) governing BI programs is currently not efforts as consistent with a "best practices model" and funded (1.5 FTE for the entire State to certify may result in a new business practice within Seattle's programs and follow up on complaints) in this system. State. The City of Seattle should form its own "enforcement" body that would enforce the State codes and refuse to use programs that fail to meet them. In addition, the city should develop a "quality assurance panel" comprised of representatives from all the spheres of the coordinated response to monitor compliance of batterer intervention programs.

16. Batterer Intervention : How the City defines Implementation Issue: All care and consideration will "success" of BI programs needs to be carefully be taken by the City in developing the definition of considered. Qualitative measurements must be "success" within the context of the BI programs the standard of measuring program effectiveness, themselves as well as the standards of success within not quantitative. Cessation of violent and the criminal justice system. controlling behavior is an outcome to be measured. In measuring success the City should look at what the victims or current partners (those primary partners still involved in some capacity in a batterer's life) are saying a year after treatment about the perpetrator's behavior in regard to the efficacy of treatment.

17. Batterer Intervention: When considering the use Implementation Issue: The evaluation identified in the of BI as a sanction the City should consider the plan may lead to consideration of comparative models, models of other "problem solving courts" such as which may result in a change in business practice King County's Drug Court which incorporates a within Seattle's system. "wrap-around services" model to identify and address each of the defendant/client's specific and unique needs/challenges or potential impediments to success. These concerns range from financial challenges (ability to pay for treatment) to multiple diagnosis (chemical dependency, mental health disorders, etc.) to cultural and linguistic barriers to successful entry and completion of the various programs. The "one size fits all" approach to BI is ineffective and a set-up for failure for many individuals.

18. Prosecution Plan: Standardized and published Implementation Issue: The CAO takes very seriously the sentencing guidelines could have a negative negative impact to the extra vulnerable victims in its impact on victims of DV in such cases as caseload and would therefore keep these sentencing immigrants, elder and vulnerable adult cases, standards only as guidelines, not inflexible protocols etc. since some of these cases require a that must be enforced. specialized approach to minimize harm to the victims.

19. Special Populations: Is the Community Education Implementation Issue: The plan identifies seniors and Campaign inclusive of elders and vulnerable vulnerable adults among the populations affected by DV adults? There needs to be specialized focus on and subjects of the campaign. The unique concerns of this group when doing community education. each of the populations noted will be taken into account when crafting the campaign.

20. Vision Statement: No Change. After much discussion with many other "Seattle will one day be a community where groups, including the HSD Strategic Management Team and domestic violence does not exist. It will be a the Assessment Committee of the Domestic Violence place?" A group noted that it would be more Prevention Council, the current statement meets the realistic, attainable, more credible and definition of a more measurable and definable, albeit potentially more attractive to potential funding aggressive, vision statement. sources if the statement were modified to read, "Seattle will one day be a community where domestic violence is no longer tolerated?"

21. Advocacy: Roles of the Advocate: No Change. The Plan underscores the commitment within Reiterated, over several meetings, was the SPD and CAO to keep the focus of the advocates on concern that advocates primary role remain victim safety and system accountability. Within CAO, focused on victim safety and system they will not be determining whether prosecution is accountability. Concerns ranged from advocates appropriate. They gather information from victims, and getting caught up in investigatory and advise attorneys about the level of risk faced by the prosecutorial duties to advocates needing victim and express their opinion about what steps would professional training in their subject matter. be in the best interest of the victim. The advocates with their extensive experience are uniquely qualified for this role. Attorneys continue to make filing decisions.

22. Batterer Intervention: Concerns exist over the No Change: The strategic plan specifically states in evaluation that will be conducted by the City to its goal that this evaluation will focus on the unique determine the efficacy and use of BI treatment application of Batterer's Intervention within Seattle's as a sanction within Seattle's Coordinated Coordinated Community Response and the use of Community response system. Concerns focused on batterer's treatment by those systems for a specific the efficacy and validity of this evaluation determination of how it is working as a sanction within given the existence of other research available Seattle's system. Current national research does not as well as concern over the narrow and specifically address the Seattle system. Care will be ineffective evaluation of the treatment modality taken to look at the interactions of the various and providers outside the context of the agencies' (courts, probation and prosecution) use and Coordinated Community Response system. referral to BI programs as a sanction within Seattle's Criminal Justice System.

23. Batterer Intervention: Batterer intervention No Change: "Responsible Parties" are city departments professionals should be listed under with authority and responsibility to implement City "Responsible Parties/Milestones" in the policy and programs. Community stakeholders will have Objectives of the "Impact and Readiness Tables". opportunity to participate with implementation as members of DVPC committees.

24. Investigations: Primary suggestions related to No Change: These measures are already in existence the incorporation of patrol and patrol command within SPD. staff in policy and planning decisions on DV protocols. Mechanisms for positive and (limited) negative feedback to patrol on performance and investigation quality need to be instituted.

25. Investigations: Command staff needs to No Change: Patrol staff is given the time necessary to distinguish the time allotment for investigation report effectively on DV crimes. of DV offenses from other less intensive cases. Current practices accommodate this with DUI investigations and should be allowed for effective DV investigations.

26. Investigations: SPD should join regional efforts No Change: Recent changes to the DV Supplemental form to standardize their DV Supplemental form with have already been adopted and sent to the printer. In other jurisdictions. the future, the SPD's IT system will become a "paperless" system eliminating the use of the DV Supplemental form at that time. This system, however, will provide more capacity for reporting on critical issues.

27. Investigations: The DV Fugitive Apprehension No Change: The Assessment acknowledges the fact that Team is not mentioned in the plan and concerns SPD disbanded the team in 2002 and assigned DV warrant about staffing. service coordination to a detective in the DV Unit. It recommends the results of the DV warrant service be reported to the DVPC. Regarding staffing, the staffer responsible for SPD's fugitive warrant efforts is not the lead staff on firearms. Collaboration occurs to assure effective development and implementation of firearm policies and procedures with respect to warrants.

28. Prosecution Plan: Confusion and concern exist No Change: The CAO's policy doesn't at all mean going over the definition of the terminology back in time to the days before a Coordinated Community "prosecution that is in the best interest of the Response model, but simply wants to acknowledge that victim". Does this mean going back to pre-1984 more care and attention will be given to the victim's days when an uncooperative victim spelled the best interest in the decision to proceed with end of a case? Will the CAO still operate from prosecution. the paradigm of a Coordinated Community Response model?

29. Prosecution Plan: The CAO should develop No Change: The CAO already has standards for its HRO standards for its High Risk Offender Program. program.

30. Prosecution Plan: There appears to be little way No Change: The City Attorney has developed a victim of identifying high-risk and repeat offenders safety inventory to identify risks faced by a victim. and of defining different strategies for dealing The office combines this tool with objective criteria with them. Recommend the development of a system to identify defendants for the high-risk offender for tracking them. The City should also examine program. These criteria allow attorneys the existing legislation and work with SPD to better flexibility to include truly dangerous defendants in utilize the "three strikes law" in cases of the program. In addition to its case files, the office repeat offenders. maintains advocate files on all defendants. This practice was identified and praised in the assessment. The advocates have information that is much more extensive than a mere criminal history. This information is used to more effectively prosecute repeat offenders.

The City Attorney's office obtains a complete criminal history for every defendant. This includes all recorded information on any prior offense anywhere in the nation. The decision whether to charge a repeat offender with a felony is made by the King County Prosecutor. The City of Seattle has no control over those decisions.

31. Prosecution Plan: The prosecution policy No Change: The City Attorney's Office has not abandoned appears to have changed significantly by no-drop prosecution. For cases that the office files, eliminating the 'No-drop' policy the City has this remains the office policy with particular emphasis followed for over 10 years. This was not a in high-risk offender cases. The office has adopted a finding supported by the Assessment. In more sophisticated screening mechanism that recognizes "No-drop,' the City prosecutes perpetrators that the criminal justice system is not the solution regardless of the wishes of the victim. If this for every victim. The net result of these changes policy is abandoned, victims will be pressured has actually been an increase in the filing rate of by the perpetrators to drop charges?. By domestic violence cases for the first two months of changing this policy, there will be an implicit 2005. The Seattle City Attorney's office is endorsement of the idea that DV is a personal absolutely committed to the prosecution of domestic matter, not a crime which affects larger society violence. The City Attorney's office does not now and and must be prosecuted as such. has never endorsed the proposition that domestic violence is a personal matter.

32. Sanctions: The goal of a coordinated community No Change: Since the implementation of a specialized DV response would be to ensure that every Probation unit, the probation department forwards probationer who failed to comply with treatment notice of violation of conditions of sentence (or SOC) requirements received appropriate justice system to the court within 7 days. Much more consistent and consequences. Probationers who fail to meet graduated sanctions for offenders who fail to complete their batterer intervention program requirements BI or any other condition of their sanction from the must receive justice system consequences. court is beginning to occur with the inception of the DV Court in 2004.

33. Sanctions: Judges need ongoing and continuing No Change: The particular judges assigned to DV Court education on Domestic Violence. within SMC are some of the best trained judges on the subject on the bench. Many of the judges do participate in ongoing legal education for judges on domestic violence issues.

34. Sanctions: Offenders who commit serious domestic No Change: While frustrations exist and will likely violence crimes should do serious jail time. continue, various issues prevent courts of limited (e.g. several survivors referenced personal jurisdiction from implementing standardized, experiences where crimes that were of felony determinate sentences which would prescribe specific level injuries received less than 60 days in sentences for certain crimes. This would not work well jail as a punishment). at this court level and should not be considered given the unique challenges that exist to prosecutors, judges and defense attorneys at this jurisdictional level.

35. Sanctions: Longer periods of jurisdiction need No change: One of the objectives in the BI Plan is to be available for the court to ensure that "Explore advocating at the state legislative level for defendants get the kind of treatment and the DV extensive supervision, similar to jurisdictional time necessary to successfully complete such enhancements for DUI offenders". treatment. DUI offenders who receive 5 years of probation are an example to replicate for this legislation.

36. Special Populations: This component is such a No Change: While each of these areas has their own large and complicated conglomerate of issues unique area of concern, the providers and professionals that the City should consider breaking this within the various agencies of the criminal justice portion up into the various populations system believe that becoming proficient in each of represented in this portion. For example, these areas make them more effective practitioners and elders and vulnerable adults, children, more able to truly execute their duties holding immigrants and ESL populations, etc. should each batterers/perpetrators accountable and meeting the have their own separate place in the plan. unique safety needs of each diverse victim population.

37. Special Populations: Permanent position within No Change: The CAO & SPD currently have staff the CAO and SPD for elder abuse investigation attorney/detective positions designated to crimes and prosecution should be a part of the long against elderly and vulnerable adults. While in the term planning of the City. CAO, this position does go through the regular rotation cycle of the office, keeping this position in the regular rotation cycle increases the overall awareness of the practitioners within the CAO.

38. Victim Defendants: Defense and community based No Change: Efforts are currently underway to build victims advocates can work more closely to working relationships between defense and community ameliorate and address these concerns. Need based advocates to ameliorate the impact of criminal mechanisms for establishing this relationship. charges on the victims. Also see objective #3.

39. Special Populations: Language interpretation Change/No Change: New language in the Introduction is and other considerations affecting immigrant and added affirming Seattle's commitment to carrying out refugee women are not part of the plan. state law about the availability of qualified interpreters The plan already included an objective to advocate for on-going, and increased, federal, state and regional support for several types of services, including interpreter services. Lastly, the City has supported the MultiLingual Access Project, using federal Violence Against Women funds. The City has submitted a request to the federal Violence Against Women Office for continued support.

40. Special Populations: The Plan includes other No Change: The plan addresses this issue. One of the populations in its focus such as elder abuse and goals of the plan is "to improve collaboration across child abuse, but it is not clear in which systems and agencies that work with children, seniors instances these problems will be addressed. Not and vulnerable adults in order to create safety?.." all elder abuse and child abuse situations are For example, as part of the implementation of the plan, domestic violence and the service providers are the City will participate in the King County regional different for each group. inter-agency team to develop protocols for working with children affected by domestic violence. One of the leads in this interagency collaborative is Child Protective Services. A similar effort will occur with respect to elder abuse. The city will participate in the King County Elder Abuse Council.

41. Miscellaneous: Involvement of community service No Change: The safety audit and the DV plan focus providers / Perpetrator Treatment primarily on city, not community-based, services, processes and practices. Still, staff conversed with 15 stakeholders, including community-based providers. With respect to Batterer Intervention, the objective is to analyze current practice in the city and the results of the practice. This analysis will engage providers, probation counselors, defense attorneys, prosecutors and advocates. It will try to determine what is working, what is not working and why. It will also look at client/offender-specific data, and take into consideration best practice. A report with recommendation will be submitted to the DVPC.

42. Operations: The City used an independent, No Action: Many of the Assessment reports were based on out-of-state agency to conduct the DV the results of a safety audit. A safety audit is a Assessment. The City should use an independent specialized file review process. The City hired expert or agency to review the strategic plan consultants with expertise in this process. These consultants advised the City on the audit and conducted many of the file reviews themselves. The City has expertise sufficient to develop and implement a plan based on the recommendations of the audit.

43. Operations: The structure for collaboration and No Change: The DVPC use committees, including city coordination between various City Departments is staff and members of the community, to implement items not well defined. on its work plan. With respect to the DV Plan, the department leads for each action item are identified in the plan.

Table C Recommendations from the 2003 Seattle Domestic Violence Assessment Reports

Recommendations Status

Probation: A Report on the Domestic Violence Unit, Municipal Court Probation

COURT

1. Consider the possibility of developing a DV court, or at 1. Implemented DV Court September minimum, having a single judge preside over all the related 2004. matters for one offender. A specialized DV team, consisting of a judge, a prosecutor, a defender, and a probation counselor, could result in improved tracking of, and accountability for DV offenders

2. Develop a clear definition of compliance in DV cases, and 2. Addressed in DV Strategic Plan respond quickly and consistently to those offenders who fail (Sanctions, Batterer's Intervention to comply. The court should not give high risk offenders Sections). multiple chances to comply, with no penalty for failure to do so.

3. Consider a mandatory review for all DV offenders 30, 60, 3. Under consideration in further 90 and 180 days after sentence, to improve compliance rates. developing DV Court practices.

4. Conduct a detailed review of its sentencing practices in 4. Addressed in DV Strategic Plan DV cases, in light of the high-risk nature of these cases. (Sanctions Section)

5. Convene a short-term work-group to develop clear 5. Addressed in DV Strategic Plan sanctions and approaches to non-compliant and other (Sanctions Section) high-risk DV offenders. Some alternatives to consider include weekend incarceration, day reporting, home confinement with electronic home monitoring, only for those offenders who do not reside with the victim.

6. Consider responding to the impact of the offender's 6. Area for Future Exploration violence on children. This would require development of a policy on responding to DV offenders who are parents, or who have assaulted their spouse or partner in the presence of children.

PROBATION

7. Review the philosophy and purpose of the unit, and 7. Completed and available integrate decisions into revisions to its structure and resources. (as recommended in the 1997 Probation study).

8. Considering conducting PSIs on all DV offenders. This 8. Addressed in DV Strategic Plan should include screening for "victim/defendants," those (Sanctions Section); Internal offenders who are DV victims who have committed DV-related training has occurred regarding crimes. victim defendants and Probation began developing a specialized case load of DV female offenders.

9. Develop specific policies and procedures for monitoring 9. DV offenders. Policies and procedures from a DV Probation Unit in another jurisdiction could be adopted and revised (with permission). Policies and procedures should include: a) Standardized letters to victim a) a requirement to contact the victim at minimum to provide regarding information about information about probation and the probationer's conditions probation and improvements are of sentence, and to warn the victim when the offender fails implemented and ongoing; to comply, b) Implemented a new intake form. b) a DV-specific intake form to give the probation counselors and the court more consistent information about the offender, c) Implemented procedures for identifying DV related risk factors; c) procedures for identifying and responding to key shared with SCADVU for work they are DV-related risk factors, doing in this same area.

d) standards for recommended sanctions for failures to d) Implemented administrative comply, such as use of Workcrew, Community Service, and sanctions. weekend jail time, with some guidelines for the length of sanction, depending on the type and reason for failure to comply, e) Implemented procedures regarding bench warrants. e) procedures for consistent request rapid warrant service from SPD's Fugitive Apprehension Team, f) Implemented procedures for the no weapons condition. f) procedures for enforcing the "No Weapons" condition of sentence.

10. Explore with the City's Office of Domestic and Sexual 10. Implemented: Violence Prevention Office (where indigent batterers' Seattle Mental Health is on-site in treatment contracts are currently administered) the SMC and provides DV treatment on possibility of SMC offering certified DV treatment to sliding fee scale and free with indigent offenders in-house. medical coupons; Addressed in DV Strategic Plan (Batterers' Intervention Section).

11. Find ways to use existing resources creatively in order 11. SMC had requested GF for to provide more intensive supervision to high risk position that is currently grant offenders. For example, offenders who have been compliant funded through 8/05. for 3-4 months could be seen in a group check-in, thereby freeing up counselors time for intensive monitoring of those who need it.

12. Work with police and City Attorney's office to improve 12. Work in progress; Addressed in information flow, victim safety, and strengthen response to DV Strategic Plan (Sanctions, offenders who are non-compliant. Batterers' Intervention, Firearms Sections)

13. Work with the City Attorney's Office to develop an 13. Completed process and effective response to Probationers with both DV and Mental improvements ongoing. health issues

14. Establish and maintain regular DV-related training for 14. Completed process and DV staff on such topics as treatment approaches with improvements ongoing. batterers, working with victims, motivational interviewing, substance abuse and mental health issues, working and responding to immigrant offenders who are undocumented, and other related topics.

15. Develop DV-specific orientation and training materials 15. Completed process and for new staff. improvements ongoing.

16. Develop a systematic way of flagging those probationers 16. Completed process and who are DV victims, and ensuring that they have access to improvements ongoing supportive community resources.

17. Implement a method for flagging key risk factors and 17. Completed process and responding effectively to high-risk cases through more improvements ongoing; Intensive frequent contact in person, or by phone, contact with the Supervision position funded. victimized partner, and rapid response for any violation of the court order.

18. Distinguish between intimate partner violence and other 18. Established a specialized case forms of family violence. Assign the non-intimate partner load for child abuse cases and other violence to staff who can develop expertise in monitoring forms of specialization are under these cases. consideration.

19. Develop and implement a system for accurately tracking 19. Work on identifying system the overall compliance of the Unit's caseload. requirements for new computer system. Code training for counselors ongoing for accuracy in data keeping.

20. Notify the victim advocate in the City Attorney's Office 20. Completed process and when a review or revocation hearing is scheduled. improvements ongoing.

21. Consider increasing the use of qualified volunteers to 21. Completed process and assist with case management. improvements ongoing.

22. Explore a potential partnership with the Seattle Police 22. Procedures for warrants in place Department for monitoring offenders who have a poor record and further improvements ongoing. of compliance, and for immediate service of warrants.

Court: A Report on Domestic Violence Cases in Seattle Municipal Court, Recommendations for Strengthening Seattle Municipal Court Practices in DV Cases

23. Work with the City Attorney's Office and the public 23. DV Court and DV Case Flow Work defender agencies to establish an integrated case processing Group model, in which a specialized team of DV judges, DV prosecutors and defenders specializing in DV issues hears and tracks all stages of an individual defendant's case.

24. The court should consider creating a system for ranking 24. Area for future exploration. the danger/severity of charges and danger to the community presented by each defendant, and should expedite those cases that are the most dangerous. This ranking could occur at arraignment or at pretrial.

25. The court should establish sentencing guidelines that 25. DV Court established, Addressed give a clear message to offenders and victims that DV is in DV Strategic Plan (Sanctions viewed as a dangerous and serious crime. The court should Section). consider whether reduced or dismissed charges are consistent with the goals of offender accountability. In addition, the court may want to consider a more consistent approach to sentencing that accounts for different levels of dangerousness of DV offenders.

26. The court should consider limiting the number of chances 26. Addressed in DV Strategic Plan an offender has to comply with the conditions of sentence, (Sanctions Section) and consider imposing alternative sanctions such as Workcrew, Community Service, or Day Reporting for those who fail to comply. Jail time served should be a sanction for those who consistently fail to comply.

27. All Court units involved in processing DV cases should 27. Firearm policies are in draft have clearly written DV policies and procedures. These and in the law department for should be developed in consultation with SPD and the City review. As part of the DV Court, Attorney's Office, to ensure that any DV-related policies other required policies are under from these agencies are acknowledged, and that key linkages consideration to these agencies are incorporated into policies and procedures.

28. The court should consider implementing a system to track 28. The Court is currently processing and outcomes of DV cases. This should be done in developing performance outcomes for collaboration with the Seattle Police Department, the City the DV Court. Collaboration with Attorney's Office and King County Department of Adult and SPD, City Attorney's office, etc Juvenile Detention, to ensure some consistency in data will be included in the next phase between agencies. of outcome development

29. The Court, in partnership with the City Attorney's 29. Area for Future Exploration Office, should consider developing formal linkages with local community-based DV advocacy programs in order to provide consistent and comprehensive post-sentencing advocacy to victims of DV defendants who have cases with SMC.

In response to concerns identified by participants in the City-wide Safety Audit, there are some additional recommendations around business practices of the court:

30. DV Unit Probation Counselors could conduct a brief 30. Addressed in DV Strategic Plan screening prior to sentencing, to fully explain treatment to (Sanctions Section) offenders, and to determine their eligibility for treatment.

31. The Court's DV Case Flow Group should continue to work 31. Area for Future Exploration with defender agencies to ensure the defense agency that represented the offender remains accessible throughout the jurisdiction of the case. Probation counselors should have the name and contact information for the defense attorney.

32. The Court should work with the City Attorney's Office to 32. Review of process in progress. find a way to prosecute new criminal law violations.

33. Jail screeners should check the protection order 33. Implemented history of all defendants.

34. The court should provide resources, training, and 34. Access to database is being policies that require court staff to check these databases obtained for court staff and for all defendants. training plan has been developed.

Report: Domestic Violence Safety and Accountability Audit: Prosecution Response to Misdemeanor Domestic Violence Cases

Practice Area: Helping Victim with Safety Planning

We recommend: 35. See Prosecution Plan Status 35. multi-disciplinary training involving community-based Report Attached advocates on danger and risk assessment, and safety planning 36. development of written guidance on danger and risk 36. See Prosecution Plan Status assessment, and safety planning Report Attached 37. development of up-to-date referral information on 37. See Prosecution Plan Status community-based programs Report Attached

38. development of a networking or collaboration plan among SCADVU and community-based advocates. 39. review of the current practice of several prosecutors 38. See Prosecution Plan Status being involved in the prosecution of a case and how this Report Attached practice could, within the current climate of resource difficulties, be streamlined to facilitate a more consistent 39. DV Court implemented victim-advocate-prosecutor link.

Practice Area: Screening Cases

We recommend: 40. See Prosecution Plan Status 40. development of written guidance for screening cases that Report Attached will aid both advocates and prosecutors in balancing safety and evidentiary concerns. 41. multi-disciplinary training, on the written guidance See Prosecution Plan Status Report developed as well as applications of Washington state law to Attached the evaluation of evidence. 42. institutionalizing an on-going educative role with law Addressed in DV Strategic Plan enforcement officers on evidence collection, report writing, (Investigations Section) and other prosecutorial needs that incorporates training and some sort of regular feedback on or evaluation of reports.

Practice Area: Pretrial Release

We recommend: 43. DV Court has bi-weekly calendar 43. the exploration, with courts and community-based for modification of no-contact advocates, of the legal availability of the modification of orders and will make improvements as no-contact orders. needed.

Practice Area: Filing or Charging Offenses

44. We recommend written guidance and training on the 44. See Prosecution Plan Status potential usages of the valuable historical information Report Attached contained in advocate files for risk assessment safety planning case prioritization basis for stalking charges heightened bail or stringent release conditions other acts evidence heightened sentence or stringent probation conditions

Practice Area: Pre-Trial Procedures and Discovery

We recommend: 45. See Prosecution Plan Status 1. exploring ways to build in prosecutorial contact with Report Attached victims.

Practice Area: Using Trial Strategies

We recommend: 2. See Prosecution Plan Status 46. a consistent linkage or liaison function be formed Report Attached between city and county attorney domestic violence units on strangulation and stalking cases regarding roles with the police and screening and charging cases. 47. once this linkage or function is created, that multi-disciplinary training on the linkage occur, as well as on:

a. the reasons for recanting 47. See Prosecution Plan Status b. strategies for dealing with recanting in the courtroom Report Attached c. recognizing strangulation and stalking, and strategies for charging and prosecuting d. updates on advocacy information, responses and skills in strangulation and stalking cases

Practice Area: Sentencing Strategies

We recommend: 48. Addressed in DV Strategic Plan 48. the utilization of work group as deemed appropriate (Prosecution Plan); SMC internal (there are so many potential ones in Seattle, including this work group on sentencing audit team) that brings prosecutors, probation, and the recommendations is proposed judiciary to a common philosophy of battering and a way of (Sanctions Section) looking at sentencing that accounts for different levels of dangerousness

Practice Area: Post-Sentencing Strategies

We recommend: 49.Addressed in part in the DV 49. building on the current good relationship between SCADVU Strategic Plan (See Batterer advocates, probation officers, and batter program providers, Intervention Section). and on the recommendations made in the sentencing section, to bring prosecutors, probation, and the judiciary to a common philosophy of battering not only as a way of looking at sentencing that accounts for different levels of dangerousness but also as a consistent way of holding offenders accountable for probation violations and SOC failures

OVERALL RECOMMENDATIONS Re: Supervision, Management, and Advocacy

50. Develop and adopt a prosecution plan 50. Implemented

51. Evaluate the current role of the advocate 51. See Prosecution Plan Status Report Attached

Reports: Patrol Response to Domestic Violence in Seattle, Washington: Text Analysis of Seattle Police Department Incident Reports and Domestic Violence Cases in the Seattle Police Department

PATROL

52. Establish a system to monitor police reports at each 52. Addressed in DV Strategic Plan precinct to improve quality of on-scene response, (Investigations Section) investigation, and report writing. Highlight the following areas:

History and context of the violence Risk assessment in domestic violence Evidence collection when suspect is "at large' Presence and welfare of children Determination of prohibition to possess firearms Determination if suspect has access to firearms Use of primary aggressor criteria

53. Increase focus on "gone at arrival" suspects. 53. Addressed in DV Strategic Plan (Investigations Section)

54. Place new emphasis on responding to children at the 54. Addressed in DV Strategic Plan scene. (Special Populations Section

55. The green pocket card that SPD officers distribute 55. This pocket guide is no longer should be eliminated. Currently it instructs officers to in use. Issue resolved through DV tell victims that a two-week No Contact Order is best practices training for all automatically issued by the court, so victims believe that patrol. this is true, and it is not. Although this card is no longer reprinted for active use, officers with old copies still distribute it, thus imparting misinformation that can be dangerous for victims

56. Officers should not copy victim information on the Super 56. .Issue resolved through DV Best Form sheet that is put into the court file. This Practices training. information, with the victim's name and address, becomes part of the court record. The defendant and the defendant's attorney can easily access this. This happens as a result of sloppy copying of the Super Form sheet, and when copied this way, the Police Objection to Release is obscured.

POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

57. Develop interdepartmental policies and procedures for 57. Implemented handling domestic violence cases.

58. Develop follow up investigation criteria for domestic 58. Addressed in DV Strategic Plan violence cases. (Investigations Section)

59. Develop policies and procedures for firearms surrender, 59. These are drafted and have been seizure and forfeiture. submitted internally for approval.

60. Develop training component on firearms surrender, 60. The planning for this training seizure and forfeiture. component has begun.

61. Provide domestic violence training for Field training 61. Implemented officers.

62. Include domestic violence advocate in SPD DV training. 62. Implemented

VICTIM SUPPORT

63. Provide direct support for victims of domestic violence 63. Addressed in DV Strategic Plan by police officers. (Investigations Section)

64. Increase utilization of the Volunteer Support Team. 64. Implemented. Also addressed in DV Strategic Plan (Advocacy Section)

DATA AND TECHNOLOGY

65. Establish DV data collection needs in partnership with 65. Addressed in DV Strategic Plan DVPC. (in part, Firearms, Special Populations Sections)

66. Report progress on Computer Aided Dispatch project to 66. To be scheduled DVPC in 2003.

67. Warrants should be "pushed" directly into the Mobile 67. Area for Future Exploration Data Computers (MDCs) of patrol cars by appropriate beat.

68. Provide access to PROMIS via personal desktop computers 68. Implemented for both domestic violence advocates and detectives. Provide caller ID on advocate phones, to assist with hang-up calls which may be victims trying to call them for assistance or in a crisis.

INVESTIGATIONS

69. Bolster misdemeanor follow-un investigations. 69. Addressed in DV Strategic Plan (Investigations Section)

WARRANTS

70. Provide 2003 results of DV warrant service assessment to 70. To be scheduled the DVPC

Report: Removing Firearms from Domestic Violence Perpetrators, and Recommendations from SMC three-months case review follow up

Recommendation Status

71. Police reports accurately reflect the presence of 71. Addressed in DV Strategic Plan firearms at the scene of the initial investigation. (Firearms Section)

72. Police reports record the defendant's Concealed Pistol 72. Addressed in DV Strategic Plan License status. (Firearms Section)

73. Police officers seize or encourage the surrender of 73. Addressed in DV Strategic Plan firearms at the time of the initial investigation (Firearms Section)

74. PR screeners record the defendants' access to firearms 74. Implemented in their reports

75. City Attorney advocates provide a comprehensive summary 75. Area for Future Exploration of the defendant's DV history to the bench

76. Probation officers and police officers work jointly to 76. Addressed in DV Strategic Plan ensure the "possess no weapons" clause of the various (Firearms Section) adjudication agreements are complied with.

77. Judges ask the defendant about access to firearms at all 77. Reviewing places and points proceedings where inquiries need to be made.

78. When appropriate, the bench could order the surrender of 78. Addressed in DV Strategic Plan firearms to the police dept within a specified amount of (Firearms Section) time and schedule subsequent review hearings to ensure compliance

79. The bench could request assurances from defense counsel 79. Area for Future Exploration that a person holding a firearm for the defendant be eligible to possess a firearm.

Report: Victim Defendants: An Emerging Challenge in Responding to Domestic Violence in Seattle and the King County Region

80. Leadership should view victim defendants as a 80. Many community leaders, significant concern. Leaders and policy-makers need to lend including SPD Chief, SMC judge, their support to a collaborative effort to develop a DVPC, have attended presentations on coordinated response for victim defendant cases. This issue response would include comprehensive and ongoing training, consideration of arrest, charging and sentencing policies, and changes to existing data systems to improve information flow

81. Law Enforcement-Law enforcement agencies should be able to give officers the time, training, resources, and support they need to correctly identify the primary aggressor in 81. Training provided regarding more complex cases. Practices should include carefully strangulation, identifying primary evaluating domestic violence incidents for self-defense, aggressor, and self-defense. prioritizing accurate identification of the primary aggressor, refraining from making mutual arrests, and using interpreters whenever one or both of the parties do not speak English or have limited English skills. Resources would include: access to all relevant criminal history databases; the related history of the parties before making the arrest decision; consideration of arrest history of the parties in the larger context of the violence in the relationship; time and resources to use interpreters when necessary; supervisory review of domestic violence cases with feedback and consultation; assignment of follow-up detective in cases where there are questions or concerns about which party is the primary aggressor.

82. Defense Attorneys-The defense bar should train staff, 82. Defense attorneys training held including investigators and social workers, where 9/10/04 (45 attendees); Director of applicable, in the dynamics of domestic violence, and the Office of Public Defense support them in acquiring tools for defending domestic committed to ongoing work on the violence survivors charged with domestic violence-related issue and scheduled to speak at and other crimes. KCCADV membership meeting 11/19/04; Annotated list of local agencies distributed to 45 defense attorneys

83. ProsecutorsProsecutors should make domestic violence 83. Gael Straeck training in training mandatory for all staff, when feasible. At minimum December '02; "Some Issues to staff would be required to screen for domestic violence Consider in Sentencing" paper survivors among domestic violence defendants. written and distributed to KCPO and SCADVU

84. Batterer Intervention Programs should: 84. Two batterer intervention Provide training for their staff in victim-defendant programs sent staff to 4-day issues. training series on survivors using Carefully evaluate court-referred clients for indications violence; Regional focus group cited that they are survivors of domestic violence. more batterer intervention programs If there are indications that an individual is a survivor that do assessments and refer to of domestic violence, programs should incorporate into the victim services if batterers' assessment in-depth questions that help determine which intervention not appropriate party in the relationship is engaging in a pattern of power and control, and which party is a victim of that pattern.

For those court-mandated clients who are domestic violence survivors and not batterers, staff should clearly document to the court (with the survivor's permission) that individual is not a candidate for batterer intervention, as she or he is a domestic violence survivor.

85. Community-Based Advocacy Programs should: 85. Advocate trainings held; Acknowledge that many domestic violence survivors use Advocate group committed to monthly violence. Advocates can provide information that could help meetings; Advocate group working on prevent arrest of survivors by engaging in an open revised outreach materials to conversation about survivors' use of violence, its impacts, include survivors use of violence; and alternatives. "Working with Survivors Charged with Ensure that advocates have a clear understanding of the DV-Related Crimes" paper written and scope and limitations of state confidentiality statutes, so distributed to advocates; Staff at that information disclosed by survivors about their own use New Beginnings and EDVP describe of violence cannot be used against them in a criminal or better connections with defense civil case. attorneys; Office of Public Defense Provide information to survivors about the criminal to speak at 11/19 KCCADV membership justice system. Inform survivors about the domestic violence meeting to discuss how to work with laws, the potential consequences of arrest, and what they defense attorneys; Director of can do if they are arrested. Office of Public Defense and KCCADV Increase opportunities for early access to Director scheduled to meet in victim-defendants through relationships with local law December '04 to discuss next steps enforcement and the jail. in relationship building Collaborate with defense attorneys on the defense of domestic violence survivors. When working with victim-defendants, investigate whether meeting bail is a constraint, particularly for those who are charged with felonies. If so, consider a revolving bail fund for victim-defendants. Understand that there may be potential negative consequences to survivor's case before sharing specific information about a victim-defendant with staff in the prosecutor's office. If the survivor has an open criminal case, consult with a defense attorney about any other legal actions, such as obtaining a civil protection order.

City Attorney's Office Table D: Prosecution Plan Status Report

Plan Item Action Steps Status

1. Explicitly recognize the need to a. Include in Role of Advocate Done empower victims Document

b. Include in Filing and Work Begun Disposition Standards

c. Include in DV Unit Manual The Manual will be completed when all steps are complete

2. Clarify the roles and a. Include in Role of Advocate Done responsibilities of advocates and Document attorneys regarding when cases are to be filed or not filed

b. Include in Prosecution Plan Done

c. Include in High Risk Offenders Done Plan

d. Training Begun

3. Use a risk assessment tool to a. Research existing tools Done help guide decisions regarding victim safety

b. Draft risk assessment tool Done

c. Implement Done

d. Evaluate After six months of use

4. Create a process for vertical a. Define standards Done prosecution of high risk offenders

b. Create a screening process Done

c. Identify appropriate defendants Begun

d. Devise procedures Done

e. Train Done

f. Coordinate with SPD and Done Probation

g. Evaluate After six months

5. Implement Multi-disciplinary a. Train staff experts Two staff members attended training training on risk assessment and in Boston and then conducted training safety planning for the entire team.

b. Coordinate training with SPD Begun

c. Coordinate training with Done Probation

6. Update referral information for a. Review referral resources Done community-based programs

b. Assess current connections with Document drafted community-based programs

c. Expand community network Begun

d. Provide booklet "Where to Turn" Begun to prosecutors and train

e. Convene a criminal Planning begun justice/community based advocacy roundtable

f. Develop a protocol for assuring Planning begun that needs are met

7. Identify and resolve conflicts a. Convene a series of all team Done between attorneys and advocates on sessions to implement action plan filing decisions

b. Conduct one on one training Done with attorneys

c. Clarify role of advocates and Done attorneys

d. Clarify paradigm with Done leadership by meeting with the Division Director and City Attorney

8. Cases without sufficient evidence a. Reminders to all staff Done should be referred back to SPD for further investigation

b. Seek increased follow up in Begun cases with defendant identification problems

c. Review by SCADVU director in Done cases with defendant identification problems

9. Limit declines to 1) proceeding a. Training Done is not in the victim's best interest; 2) alleged victim should really be the defendant; 3) there is no possibility of developing a sufficient basis to file the case

b. Prosecutor/Advocate filing Done meetings

c. Review by SCADVU director of a Open sample of advocate files for unfiled cases

10. Increase Staff Proficiency a. Design standardized practice Begun materials HRO done Bail schedule done No Contact Order protocol done Review standards -done

Firearms begun

Sentencing recommendations -

scheduled

11. Organize and implement a a. When budget or grant funds Ongoing training program for all new allow send all new attorneys to attorneys domestic violence training conducted by National Association of District Attorneys

b. Assess all training to Begun determine compatibility with prosecution goals and philosophy

c. Develop and implement a Begun training plan

12. Train for victim independent a. See above prosecution

13. Decrease number of cases a. Change paradigm to empower Done dismissed on day of trial because victims the victim chooses not to participate

b. Implement Risk Assessment tool Done to give advocates background information on victim's needs

c. Give advocates greater role in Done deciding whether or not to proceed with a case

d. Train on effects on victims of Done prosecutions

e. Improve prosecutors training on Begun prosecution effects on victims

f. Improve communication with Begun non-English speaking victims

14. Make explicit that our office a. Train on new paradigm Done operates under a flexible "no drop" policy.

b. Implement strict no drop policy Done for high risk offenders

c. Implement weekly meetings among Done mini teams of victims and advocates

d. Train staff on victim safety Begun issues

1 Zegree, J., "Batterers Intervention: All You Need To Know", Article Published by the National College of District Attorneys, 1999.

2 Gondolf, E., "Batterer Intervention Systems: Issues, Outcomes, and Recommendations," Sage Publications, 2002

3 Bennett, L. & Williams, O., "Controversies and Recent Studies of Batterer Intervention Program Effectiveness,' VAWnet, National Electronic Network on Violence Against Women, 2001.

4 U.S. Census 2000, Demographic Profiles and Washington State Office of Finance and Management, Allocation of Seattle Population by Age, 2010, 2020, 2025, and 2030.

5 National Center on Elder Abuse, "Executive Summary," National Elder Abuse Incidence Study, Final Report, 1998, p. 4.

6 Ibid, p. 7.

7 Dick Sobsey, 1996.

8 U.S. Department of Justice, Violence by Intimates: Analysis of Data on Crimes by Current or Former Spouses, Boyfriends and Girlfriends, March 1998, reported in

9 Strauss, Murray A., Gelles Richard J., and Smith, Christine, Physical Violence in American Families: Risk Factors and Adaptations to Violence in 8,145 Families, New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1990.

10 English, Diana, Domestic Violence and Child Protective Services, Domestic Violence Forum, May 2003 presentation. Report available through Washington State Office of Children's Administration.

September 05 30833At1 t