The evaluation of the domestic violence court program: final report

2006·25.8 MB·English

by  Ontario. Ministry of the Attorney General.

Information
Into Strategy
www.pra.ca
[email protected]
EVALUATION OF THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
COURT PROGRAM
Final Report
July 5, 2006
MINISTRY OF THE
ATTORNE' GENERAL
LAW LIBRARY
Prepared for:
Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General
500-363 Broadway Winnipeg, MB R3C 3N9 Ph: 204.987.2030 Fx: 204.989.2454
208-350 Sparks Street Ottawa, ON KIR 7S8 Ph: 613.233.5474 Fx: 613.233.5673
34-1919 Rose Street Regina, SK S4P 3P1 Ph: 306.347.2543 Fx: 306.791.4848

KF
PRA Inc.
505.5
The evaluation of the domestic
P73
violence court program.
2006
c.]
2/
KF PRA Inc.
505.5
The evaluation of the domestic
P73
violence court program.
2006
c.l
MINISTRY of THE
attorney general
law library
/
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2017 with funding from
Ontario Council of University Libraries
https://archive.org/details/mag_00059030
ministry of the
DEC 2 0 2006
attorney general
LAW LIBRARY
Information
Into Strategy
www.pra.ca
[email protected]
EVALUATION OF THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
COURT PROGRAM
Final Report - Volume I
July 5, 2006
Prepared for:
Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General
500-363 Broadway Winnipeg, MB R3C 3N9 Ph: 204.987.2030 Fx: 204.989.2454
208-350 Sparks Street Ottawa, ON KIR 7S8 Ph: 613.233.5474 Fx: 613.233.5673
34-1919 Rose Street Regina, SK S4P 3P1 . Ph: 306.347.2543 Fx: 306.791.4848
Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General
Evaluation of the Domestic Violence Court Program Final Report Volume I—-July 5, 2006
-
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Ontario'Ministry of the Attorney General and PRA Inc. would like to acknowledge and
thank those who assisted in this research: the DVC co-leads who organized the site visits; the co¬
leads and community groups who made substantial efforts to contact domestic violence victims
about this evaluation; and the stakeholders and victims of domestic violence who participated in
the research. Their willingness to volunteer their time and their candour in sharing their views
and experiences were critical to the success of this evaluation.
Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General
Evaluation of the Domestic Violence Court Program - Final Report Volume I—-July 5, 2006
Table of acronyms
ASRS Automated Statistical Reporting System
CAS Children’s Aid Society
CCJS Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics
CISTP Cultural Interpreter Service and Training Program
CLD Criminal Law Division
CP Coordinated Prosecution
Canadian Police Information Centre (database of Criminal Convictions, Conditional and
CPIC
Absolute Discharges and Related Information)
CRIS Crown Resource Information Services
CSD Court Services Division
CSMD Corporate Services Management Division
DAP Domestic Assault Program
DOJ Department of Justice
DOVES Domestic Violence Evaluation System
DVAA Domestic Violence Administrative Assistant
DV Domestic Violence
DVC Domestic Violence Court
DVCAC Domestic Violence Court Advisory Committee
DVCE Domestic Violence Court Program Evaluation
DVSR Domestic Violence Supplementary Report
DVSRF Domestic Violence Supplementary Report Form
EIP Early Intervention Program
FLSA French Language Services Act
GSS General Social Survey
GBDVCC Grey Bruce Domestic Violence Coordinating Committee
ICON Integrated Court Offence Network
LSI-OR Level of Supervision Inventory
MAG Ministry of the Attorney General
MCSCS Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services
MPRDV Model Police Response to Domestic Violence
OCAA Ontario Crown Attorneys’ Association
ODARA Ontario Domestic Violence Assault Risk Assessment
OVSS Ontario Victim Services Secretariat
PAR Partner Assault Response
SA/DV Sexual Assault/Domestic Violence
VAW Violence Against Women
VicT rack Victim Tracking
VIF Victim information Form
VSI Volunteer Screening Initiative
V/WAP VictimA/Vitness Assistance Program
WRC Written Revocable Consent
Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General
Evaluation of the Domestic Violence Court Program - Final Report Volume I—-July 5, 2006
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.i
1.0 Introduction.1
1.1 Purpose of this evaluation.1
1.2 Structure of this report.2
2.0 Background.3
2.1 Domestic violence in Canada.3
2.2 Specialized domestic violence courts. 4
2.3 Profile of the Domestic Violence Court Program.7
2.4 Key findings from literature on specialized domestic violence court
programs.19
3.0 Methodology.22
3.1 Development of evaluation framework.22
3.2 Provincial focus groups.23
3.3 Literature review.23
3.4 Site visits.23
3.5 Stakeholder interviews.24
3.6 File review..26
3.7 Victim interviews.28
3.8 Database analysis.31
3.9 Incorporation of other research.37
4.0 Findings.40
4.1 Improving services for victims.40
4.2 Increasing victim safety and helping prevent re-victimization.70
4.3 Holding offenders accountable.84
4.4 Intervening early in domestic violence cases.129
4.5 Improving coordination of services.140
4.6 Administration and management.143
4.7 Level of satisfaction and suggestions for improvements.146
5.0 Conclusions and recommendations.154
VOLUME II APPENDICES
APPENDIX A LOGIC MODEL
APPENDIX B EVALUATION FRAMEWORK
APPENDIX C STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEW GUIDES
APPENDIX D FILE REVIEW TEMPLATE
APPENDIX E VICTIM INTERVIEW GUIDE
APPENDIX F DOVES FORM
APPENDIX G DOVES INTERPRETATION GUIDE
VOLUME II LITERATURE REVIEW
Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General
Evaluation of the Domestic Violence Court Program - Final Report Volume /—-July 5, 2006
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Roles of justice stakeholders. 9
Table 2: Focus sites for the DVC Program evaluation.24
Table 3: Stakeholders interviewed. 25
Table 4: Stakeholders interviewed by site.25
Table 5: File review.26
Table 6: Accused age on day of offence.27
Table 7: Victim age on day of offence...27
Table 8: Accused gender. 28
Table 9: Victim gender.28
Table 10: Sites with DOVES records by region.34
Table 11: Number of records by region (N=12,160).34
Table 12: Number of DOVES records by fiscal year (N=12,160).35
Table 13: Accused age (N=12,160).35
Table 14: Accused gender by region (N=12,160). 35
Table 15: Victims contacted by V/WAP at any point in criminal case by region.41
Table 16: Victims contacted by V/WAP at any point in criminal case by fiscal year.41
Table 17: Victims contacted by V/WAP at any point in criminal case by gender...41
Table 18: Victims contacted by V/WAP. 42
Table 19: Type and frequency of contact by V/WAP.42
Table 20: Victim contact information available prior to first court appearance of the accused
(excluding bail hearing) (N=12,160).43
Table 21: Victim contact information available prior to accused first court appearance (excluding
bail hearing) by fiscal period (N=12,160).44
Table 22: Victims who responded to first V/WAP contact by region.44
Table 23: Victims who responded to first V/WAP contact by fiscal year.44
Table 24: Victims who responded to first contact by V/WAP by accused gender
(N=10,697). 45
Table 25: Services provided by V/WAP. 46
Table 26: Interviews with victims across the province.50
Table 27: Victim interviewed in person by Crown by region.50
Table 28: Victim interviewed in person by Crown by fiscal period.50
Table 29: Victim interviewed by interviewer type.51
Table 30: Victim interviewed by interviewer type by fiscal period.52
Table 31: Trial conducted by same Crown* who did victim interview (N=873).53
Table 32: Trial conducted by same Crown* who did victim interview by fiscal period
(N=873).53
Table 33: Number of victim input memoranda in files. 54
Table 34: Substance of victim input memoranda.55
Table 35: Victim input for guilty pleas (N=7,349).56
Table 36: Victim input for guilty pleas by fiscal period (N=7,349).56
Table 37: Source of victim input on guilty pleas (N=4,833).57
Table 38: Victims who provide input for guilty plea by source of input by fiscal period
(N=4,833).57
Table 39: French-language services.61
Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General
Evaluation of the Domestic Violence Court Program - Final Report Volume I—-July 5, 2006
Table 40: Use of Domestic Violence Supplementary Report or other risk assessment tool.74
Table 41: Accused release information (N=12,160).75
Table 42: Accused release information by fiscal period (N=12,160).76
Table 43: Accused release information by gender (N=12,160).76
Table 44: Police detention decision.77
Table 45: Outcome of bail hearing.77
Table 46: Non-mandatory conditions of judicial interim release.78
Table 47: Partners of PAR-DVC referrals contacted by PAR (ASRS).80
Table 48: Police collected additional evidence, besides victim testimony (N=12,160).84
Table 49: Police collected additional evidence, besides victim testimony by fiscal year
(N=12,160).85
Table 50: Police collection of evidence in addition to victim statement.85
Table 51: Evidence collected in addition to victim statement.86
Table 52: Videotaped victim statement.86
Table 53: Dual charges ..91
Table 54: Designation of DV Crowns.92
Table 55: Crown who took guilty plea (N=7,349).94
Table 56: Prosecutor who took guilty plea by fiscal period (N=7,349).95
Table 57: Type of Crown handling trial (N=l,536)*.95
Table 58: Type of Crown handling trial by fiscal period (N=l,536) *.96
Table 59: Scheduling DVC cases. 97
Table 60: PAR program. 101
Table 61: Offenders ordered into PAR as part of bail (N=12,160)* ..102
Table 62: Offenders ordered into PAR as part of bail by fiscal period (N=12,160).103
Table 63:PAR ordered as part of probation (N=6,750). 103
Table 64: PAR ordered as part of probation by fiscal period (N=6,750). 104
Table 65: Referrals to PAR by fiscal period.104
Table 66: Referrals to PAR through CP and EIP by gender and fiscal period.105
Table 67: Participants in PAR program.105
Table 68: PAR program outcome by fiscal period.106
Table 69: PAR program outcome for CP and EIP clients by fiscal period.106
Table 70: PAR program outcome for males and females by fiscal period (ASRS).107
Table 71: Dispositions (N=12,154).Ill
Table 72: Dispositions by fiscal period (N=12,154).Ill
Table 73: Dispositions by gender (N=12,154).Ill
Table 74: Withdrawn cases by peace bonds (N=2,775). 112
Table 75: Withdrawn cases by fiscal period (N=2,775). 112
Table 76: Withdrawn cases by gender (N=2,775). 112
Table 77: Dispositions in cases that went to trial (N=l,931).113
Table 78: Dispositions in cases that went to trial by fiscal period (N= 1,931).113
Table 79: Police collected additional evidence by disposition (N=12,154).114
Table 80: Charges by number of cases with each charge.115
Table 81: Disposition for each case.116
Table 82: Disposition for cases that went to trial.116
Table 83: Disposition by charges.117
Table 84: Conviction rate of most common/most serious charges.117