By Malore Dusenbery, Jeanette Hussemann, Teresa Crowe

More than 11 million people in the United States are Deaf, deaf, hard of hearing, late-deafened, or Deaf-Blind. Research indicates deaf people report experiencing victimization at higher rates, but a lack of accessible resources and trauma-informed services for American Sign Language (ASL) speakers makes it difficult for deaf people to report crimes and access support. In response to these issues, the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office in 2017 began funding Barrier Free Living (BFL), a provider of services for survivors of domestic violence and their families, to increase access to direct services for deaf survivors and increase local stakeholders’ awareness of deaf survivors’ needs through its Deaf Services (DS) program.

In 2019, Urban, in collaboration with Gallaudet University and NORC at the University of Chicago, began a multimethod process evaluation of BFL’s DS program to document its implementation and assess to what extent it achieved its intended goals. Drawing on information gathered from BFL staff, deaf consumers of BFL’s services, and community partners, we identified the following key findings:

The DS program provided a range of services to meet the diverse needs of deaf survivors, including counseling and support groups, legal services, case management, housing support, employment support, occupational therapy, and child care. Consumers reported overall positive experiences with the services they received and communication accessibility at BFL.

The DS program helped increase BFL’s ability to communicate with deaf survivors by increasing routine use of interpreters, training hearing staff in ASL, and improving communications technology.

The DS program led to increased awareness and collaboration around services provided to deaf clients, but communication and staffing challenges remain.

The DS program partners with a range of external agencies to support referrals or coordinate service provision, provide education and training, and conduct outreach and advocacy.

Funding and staffing are the primary factors that impede the provision of enhanced services for deaf survivors, but a community-wide lack of accessible and available services and housing also hinders providers from meeting their clients’ needs.

Based on these findings, we provide recommendations for

how BFL and similar direct service programs can improve and adapt staffing, services, and outreach to strengthen their response to deaf survivors;

how policymakers, funders, and system-level stakeholders can address societal and policy-level barriers to meeting the needs of deaf survivors; and

how researchers and funders of research can fill critical gaps in research on deaf survivors and deaf-focused services by increasing and improving the research done with the deaf community.

Washington, DC: The Urban Institute, 2022. 83p.

Edited by Thiago Pierobom de Ávila, Aline Yamamoto, Cristina Elsner de Faria, Jude McCulloch, Kerry Carrington

This collection of articles is the fruit of a joint project implemented between Brazilian and Australian researchers and professionals committed to the work of gender and family violence prevention and response. With the support of the Australian Embassy in Brazil and the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women Brazil Country Office, an innovative project was designed to support research exchange and strenghten academic collaboration, as well as foster a collaborative network of experts and professsionals, with the aim to enhance debate on gender and family violence prevention and extract lessons from both countries’ policy experiences. The Brazil-Australia Partnership on Preventing Domestic and Gender-based Violence project included several institutions. Amongst those institutions, it is important to highlight the role played by the Gender Equality Cabinet of the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Federal District (MPDFT), along with the Monash Gender and Family Violence Prevention Centre and the School of Justice of Queensland University of Technology in Australia, in the organization of international conferences and the coordination of this collection. This initiative also had the active participation of the São Paulo Public Prosecutor’s Office (MPSP), the Pontifical Catholic University of São Paulo (PUC-SP), the Research Group on Criminal Policies of the Law Faculty at the University Center of Brasilia (UniCEUB), the Superior School of the Public Prosecutor of the Union (ESMPU), the Institute for Applied Economic Research (IPEA), the Center for Studies and Research on Women at the University of Brasilia (UnB) and the Gender Observatory of the Brazilian Senate. From the Australian side, the project was financially supported by the Council on Australia Latin America Relations (COALAR), and additionally to the institutions previously mentioned, it also had the participation of Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety (ANROWS) and RMIT University. In June 2019, as part of the Project’s planning, a delegation of Australian professionals from governmental institutions, non-governmental organizations, academic and justice sectors came to Brazil (Brasilia and São Paulo) to explore the Brazilian policy framework and analyse program cases. Following it, in December 2019, a delegation of Brazilian experts went to Australia (Brisbane and Melbourne) to participate in expert workshops and conferences, as well as visit Australian successful programs for violence prevention. As a result, the project allowed an in-depth policy dialogue and advanced debates related to measuring the costs of domestic violence, as well as its impact on the economic growth. It also created opportunties to share good practices in gender equality policies, particularly primary prevention approaches, and to promote an integrated approach across the justice, public security and public health systems. The aim is to establish collaborative arrangements between both countries, contributing to policy development on gender and family violence prevention in Brazil and Australia.

Brasilia 2021 Ministério Público do Distrito Federal e Territórios, Brazil. 2021. 203p.

By Min Xie, Preeti Chauhan, Michael Rempel, and Jeremy Travis

This study relies on data from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) and presents trends from 1996 to 2022 in crime victimization, rates at which victims report crimes to the police, confidence in the police, and victims’ use of services in New York City. This is one of two studies falling under the umbrella of the Crossroads Project. Its goal is to trace New York City’s trends in crime victimization, enforcement, incarceration, and racial disparities from the 1990s to the early 2020s in the hopes that empirical data over a long timeframe might provide a much-needed perspective capable of informing future policy. Both of the two resulting reports and a joint executive summary may be found at the project landing page. How was the NCVS used in the present study? Although the NCVS is typically used to assess victimization patterns for the nation as a whole, the data can be used to study New York City victimization trends. This is because the New York City’s population base is greater than 5 million and there are fewer concerns regarding identification of victims within the data and unstable estimates (too small of a population may provide volatile estimates). A small body of research has used the NCVS data for local crime analysis including for Chicago, Los Angeles, Dallas, and Houston (Rezey & Lauritsen, 2023; Xie, Ortiz Solis, & Chauhan, 2024). Other research has examined New York City data (Langan & Durose, 2009; Xie, Ortiz Solis, & Chauhan, 2024) but the analyses was more limited in the scope and did not extend to 2022. Our study examines the NCVS data in New York City from 1996 to 2022 by nonfatal violence and property crimes. We also assess whether these crimes were reported to the police and, if not, what proportion were not reported because the victims believed the police would not help (a proxy for public confidence in the police). Next, we examine what proportion of victims of violence used victim services, regardless of whether the crime was reported to the police or not. Lastly, we compare New York City to the nation as a whole and to other cities with a population over one million. The analyses are also conducted by race/ethnicity with the caution that the sample size may be too small for reliable estimates. This is the first study to unpack New York City victimization data in this way. Table 1 presents the average number of interviews conducted in New York City annually from 1996 to 2022, compared to the number of interviews for the United States and other cities with populations exceeding one million. The sample size decreases when the data is disaggregated by race/ethnicity, which is a limitation of the NCVS as smaller sample sizes result in larger standard errors of estimates, reducing the results’ precision. To further assist with this issue, a data point in this report for a specific year is a three-year moving average. Three-year moving averages produce more reliable estimates because the annual count of violent incidents in a single city tends to be small. The three-year average violence rate in 1997 is the average violence rate from 1996 to 1998, and so on.

New York: Data Collaborative for Justice, at John Jay College, 2025. 18p.

By Stephen Koppel, Min Xie, Michael Rempel, Olive Lu, Jeremy Travis, & Preeti Chauhan

New York City’s response to crime and violence stands at a pivotal moment. After decades of declining crime and a shrinking criminal legal system, recent years have brought major criminal legal reforms, a global pandemic, and renewed debate about safety, fairness, and enforcement.

To help move the conversation forward, the goal of the Crossroads Project was to ground essential policy discussions in objective data concerning the pendulum swings that describe New York City’s trajectory from the 1990s to the present.

Introduction to the Crossroads Project The premise of this project is simple: In determining its response to crime and violence, New York City stands at a crossroads. After years of declining rates of crime, enforcement activities, and incarceration, New York City has experienced volatility in many of these same criminal justice measures. New realities have prompted calls for a more punitive response to crime which, in turn, are countered by advocates urging continued support for a reform agenda. Today’s choices on the path forward will have long-term consequences for the well-being of the City’s residents and communities, and for New Yorkers’ aspirations for safety, justice, and equity. To inform current policies, this report, along with another focusing on victimization, seeks to widen our perspective by drawing attention to the pendulum swings that describe the City’s longer history. These swings feature a multi-decade pattern of declining crime, enforcement activities, and incarceration from the 1990s until 2020, followed by upticks and reversals in the vacillating 2020s. The juxtaposition of this more extended view of history against present-day debates about the best path forward underscores the power of the metaphor: We are at a crossroads. The driving premise of the Crossroads project is that we have an opportunity to learn from past responses to crime—including disproportionate harm experienced by communities of color—to craft more effective policies in the future. To help move the conversation forward, our immediate purpose is to ground discussions in objective data concerning New York City’s history up to the present. We expand on two earlier analyses, 1 adding more metrics and extending the tracking period through at least 2023. In addition, an accompanying report draws on the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) to document victimization trends in the City, the proportion of victimization reported to the police, and changes in victims’ confidence in police and use of services.2 Notably, that report finds that during the study period (1996 to 2022), more than half of all crimes were never reported to the police, with reporting rates declining over time—particularly for household property crime— and finds an increasing perception that police would not help if called. By contrast, the present report focuses solely on criminal complaints that are reported to the police and processed by the criminal legal system and thus may offer a more limited view of overall victimization. An executive summary available at the project landing page integrates key findings from both reports. The full report on crime victimization trends is available at this same landing page. Tied to this research, the Crossroads Convening, a two-day public event held at John Jay College in May of 2025, provides New Yorkers with an opportunity to look both backward and forward, reflecting on past trends and advancing a much-needed dialogue about the future steps New York City’s criminal legal system might take We seek to answer seven questions about the changing criminal legal landscape since 1990. 1. Crime: How have crime rates changed, encompassing the most serious violent crimes and shooting incidents, and misdemeanor crime complaints (Chapter 2)? 2. Law Enforcement: How have police enforcement activities changed, encompassing pedestrian street stops, minor summonses, felony and misdemeanor arrests, and drug arrests (Chapter 3)? 3. Decision-Making in the Courts: How have key decisions and case outcomes changed, encompassing prosecutors’ decision of whether to file arrests with the court in the first place, judges’ bail decisions, case dispositions (e.g., conviction rates), and the use of alternatives to incarceration (Chapter 4)? 4. Incarceration and Community Corrections: How have local jail, state prison, probation, and parole admissions and daily population numbers changed (Chapter 5)? 5. Recidivism After Disposition: How have recidivism rates changed for people immediately released into the community following a non-carceral case disposition (Chapter 6)? 6. Racial Disparities: Amid the overall trends, to what extent (if at all) have racial and ethnic disparities in people’s criminal legal system involvement declined (Chapter 7)? 7. The Early 2020s: Zooming in from this report’s longer-term analysis, what trends or fluctuations have taken place specifically in the early 2020s (covered in all chapters)? Answers to this last question will set the stage for a discussion of the criminal legal system we want, moving forward. Finally, Chapter 8 summarizes major themes and takeaways

New York: Data Collaborative for Justice, at John Jay College, 2025. 40p.

By Ben Mathews, Kelsey Hegarty, Harriet MacMillan, et al.

Objectives: To estimate the prevalence in Australia of intimate partner violence, each intimate partner violence type, and multitype intimate partner violence, overall and by gender, age group, and sexual orientation. Study design: National survey; Composite Abuse Scale (Revised)— Short Form administered in mobile telephone interviews, as a component of the Australian Child Maltreatment Study. Setting: Australia, 9 April – 11 October 2021. Participants: 8503 people aged 16 years or older: 3500 aged 16–24 years and about 1000 each aged 25–34, 35–44, 45–54, 55–64, or 65 years or older. Main outcome measures: Proportions of participants who had ever been in an intimate partner relationship since the age of 16 years (overall, and by gender, age group, and sexual orientation) who reported ever experiencing intimate partner physical, sexual, or psychological violence. Results: Survey data were available for 8503 eligible participants (14% of eligible persons contacted), of whom 7022 had been in intimate relationships. The prevalence of experiencing any intimate partner violence was 44.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 43.3–46.2%); physical violence was reported by 29.1% (95% CI, 27.7–30.4%) of participants, sexual violence by 11.7% (95% CI, 10.8–12.7%), and psychological violence by 41.2% (95% CI, 39.8–42.6%). The prevalence of experiencing intimate partner violence was significantly higher among women (48.4%; 95% CI, 46.3–50.4%) than men (40.4%; 95% CI, 38.3–42.5%); the prevalence of physical, sexual, and psychological violence were also higher for women. The proportion of participants of diverse genders who reported experiencing intimate partner violence was high (62 of 88 participants; 69%; 95% CI, 55–83%). The proportion of nonheterosexual participants who reported experiencing intimate partner violence (70.2%; 95% CI, 65.7–74.7%) was larger than for those of heterosexual orientation (43.1%; 95% CI, 41.6–44.6%). More women (33.7%; 95% CI, 31.7–35.6%) than men (22.7%; 95% CI, 20.9–24.5%) reported multitype intimate partner violence. Larger proportions of participants aged 25–44 years (51.4%; 95% CI, 48.9–53.9%) or 16–24 years (48.4%, 95% CI, 46.1–50.6%) reported experiencing intimate partner violence than of participants aged 45 years or older (39.9%; 95% CI, 37.9–41.9%). Conclusions: Intimate partner violence is widespread in Australia. Women are significantly more likely than men to experience any intimate partner violence, each type of violence, and multitype intimate partner violence. A comprehensive national prevention policy is needed, and clinicians should be helped with recognising and responding to intimate partner violence.

Medical Journal of Australia (MJA), 2025, 9p.

By Ilias Chatzis, under the substantive guidance of Morgane Nicot, Martin Hemmi and Pascale Reinke-Schreiber

Migrant smuggling is a type of organized crime with links to other serious criminal offences, including illicit financial flows, corruption and trafficking in persons. Smuggling is an illegal service that is offered to countless people and requires a financial or material remuneration. Many migrants who do not have other viable options to move across borders, regularly depend on the services provided by smugglers to migrate. In principle, once the smuggling transaction is completed and the person arrives at the desired destination, the relationship between the smuggler and the migrant ceases without any harm being done. Too often, however, smuggled migrants and refugees suffer from various dangerous circumstances and abusive and violent treatment while under the control of smugglers. This Study considers the underlying risk factors that lead to abuse and violence during the smuggling operation and analyses whether gender influences the type of violence that is inflicted upon smuggled migrants. It also analyses the criminal justice responses to these abuses and the practical obstacles that may hamper the reporting, investigating or prosecuting of these “aggravations”. Finally, the Study provides recommendations for reducing the impunity of the people involved in such offences along the smuggling routes. UNODC, through the analysis of case law within its Knowledge Portal on Smuggling of Migrants, noted that there was little evidence of migrant smuggling being prosecuted in the countries where the smuggling venture occurred, let alone for cases where smuggling became abusive or exploitative. Yet, civil society, researchers and academia have increasingly raised their concerns over the extreme violence faced by people on the move along certain routes. To have a better understanding of the dynamics at play and the challenges to obtain justice in this context, this Study looks into two major transit regions, North Africa and Central America. It uses recently collected data from the UNODC Observatory on Migrant Smuggling that contains testimonies from frontline responders, smuggled migrants and migrant smugglers from West and North Africa. Aggravations occurring along the Central Mediterranean route also feature in the Study, as they are characteristic of the various types of abuse that migrants face before embarking on their dangerous sea crossings. It is often over those cases that courts in destination countries assess jurisdiction to prosecute smugglers and provide access to justice to the affected smuggled migrants. Practitioners were also interviewed for the Study to gain knowledge about smuggling characteristics in Central America. The present Study therefore focuses on these two regions, typically coined as transit regions for migrant smuggling operations.

Vienna: UNODC, 2021. 102p.

By Marina Duane, Storm Ervin, Susan Nembhard, Roderick Taylor

Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, is one of the most populous counties in the United States, 1 and the sheer number of people who appear in courtrooms and need services there presents several challenges for responding to intimate partner violence (IPV). For example, in the Pittsburgh Municipal Court alone, 10,200 cases were filed in 2018, of which IPV cases constituted 16 percent (or 1,687 cases).2 The same is true for the child welfare system and family court, where IPV is one of the many issues clients face. To tackle this challenge, Allegheny County partners have made several notable strides in responding to IPV, including the following innovations: ◼ creating resource specialist positions in magisterial district judge (MDJ) courtrooms who now help divert aggressors into interventions and otherwise offer expedient connections to social services, which creates more options other than punishment ◼ becoming more trauma informed and family friendly at the family division of the Court of Common Pleas for survivors and families filing for Protection from Abuse (PFA) orders (figure 1 provides an example of a child-friendly playroom available to parents who come to the court to file a PFA order) ◼ initiating early screening for IPV at the Office of Children, Youth and Families and creating IPV specialist positions with the goal of helping families address IPV and reducing its negative impact on children without separating family members from one another From June 2018 to December 2020, researchers from the Urban Institute conducted a systemwide assessment of Allegheny County’s response to IPV. Based on a variety of data collection activities described in this report and in consultation with local partners, we developed the following three priority areas to improve interagency coordination and respond to IPV more effectively and efficiently: 1. Get the county’s top leaders to prioritize IPV over a defined period. Attention to the issue from the top can help mobilize individual agencies, enable IPV experts to turn recommendations into policies and practice, and direct resources where they can make the most impact. 2. Shift the focus from case outcomes to people’s experiences, especially during early encounters with formal services. Focusing on experiences can help overcome hesitancy and increase buy-in among aggressors and survivors. In turn, improved experiences can alleviate many survivors’ reluctance to turn to authorities or aggressors’ hesitancy to get help, through Battering Intervention Programs (BIPs). 3. Reinstitute and sustain IPV-focused fatality reviews and ensure they embrace a nonblaming culture. Moreover, identify the most critical system gaps and get assistance from leaders to implement the changes that the review team recommends. In addition to these interagency priorities, we also recommend that Allegheny County partners consider taking the following agency-specific steps: ◼ Establish a specialized IPV unit in the Allegheny County Public Defender office. ◼ Differentiate IPV from DV in the 911 system, in the PFA office, throughout the family division, and in all IPV-related cases coming through the child welfare system ◼ Record survivors’ information (including full names, date of birth, and other identifiers) consistently, and when possible ensure law enforcement and/or assistant district attorneys can safely and securely share survivors’ information with criminal and family division actors, the probation office, the Department of Human Services, and BIP providers. ◼ Prioritize and improve referrals to BIPs and play an active role in encouraging participants to view them as help (not as admissions of guilt) and in monitoring and encouraging attendance. ◼ Create a mechanism to consistently track aggressors’ and survivors’ experiences at system entry points.

Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2021. 47p.

Elizabeth L. Beck,

Natasha N. Johnson,

Sommer Delgado,

Victoria Helmly,

Susan A. McLaren,

Alice Prendergast,

Leigh Alderman,

Lorenzo Almada,

Brian Bride,

Eric Napierala,

William J. Sabol

Using data from an evaluation of three Second Chance Act grantees, we explore formerly incarcerated people’s (FIP) access to housing. This study is unique in that it includes the perspectives of individuals with lived experiences and the insights of the reentry program providers working to meet their overall needs, including in the area of housing. The data come from reentry programs in three regions of the United States. Although the needs of the people with lived experiences have similarities, regional differences exist, particularly related to housing costs and supply, including the availability of transitional housing. Also, variations exist between FIP who are able to live with family compared with those who do not have this option. The three programs this study examined worked to address housing needs in distinctive ways and explores the housing needs of FIP and the strategies the three programs use to address these needs. Incorporating a two-pronged approach, this article includes analyses of (1) interview data with 31 FIP from 3 months to 3 years post-incarceration and (2) interviews and program materials to support formulative case analyses of the housing-related work that program enacted. Through this work, highlighting program efforts to remove barriers to housing for this population, the study seeks to promote the advancement of relevant policy, practice, and research in this arena.

Cityscape, 25(2): 2023.

By Timantha Goff, et al.

Black migrants are subject to abuse and a disturbing pattern of racism, violence and harm at disproportionately higher incidence than non-Black migrants while in the custody of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), according to a groundbreaking report released today by Black-led and immigrants rights organizations.

Authored by the Black LGBTQIA+ Migrant Project (BLMP), Black Alliance for Just Immigration (BAJI), UndocuBlack Network, and Freedom for Immigrants (FFI), the first-of-its-kind study draws on nearly 17,000 call records from FFI’s National Immigration Detention Hotline spanning a six year period.

The data reveal a disturbing pattern of abuse perpetrated against Black migrants by ICE, private detention contractors and officials at contracting jails. Key findings include:

28 percent of all abuse-related reports made to the FFI hotline come from Black migrants, despite accounting for only only six percent of the total ICE detention population;

In some detention facilities in Alabama, Georgia and Louisiana, Black migrants are almost twice as likely to experience abuse inside detention compared to non-Black migrants;

Black non-binary migrants are 3.5 times more likely to experience abuse in immigration detention;

A new FOIA request corroborated a previous study that found that 24 percent of all people in solitary confinement are Black;

Over 53 percent of the most high-intensity and life-threatening cases that FFI intervened on in the six year period were on behalf of Black migrants.

“No one should live in fear or face punishment like this, especially not for the color of their skin or where they were born,” said Moussa Haba, an author of the report and monitoring fellow with Freedom for Immigrants who was previously detained by ICE. “The United States calls itself the land of the free, but for this to be true, Black migrants like me deserve to live in freedom, not from behind bars. What I experienced in detention was the opposite of freedom. Significant trauma was inflicted upon me during this time. I was subject to an unending racism in detention, and our new report demonstrates that I am not alone. It’s clear that detention must end to stop this cycle of abuse—and our fight to abolish detention is really a fight for freedom.”

“Being detained as an immigrant and having to fight for my freedom, I have faced discrimination based on my race,” said Marlissa, a 22-year-old Bahamian woman from South Florida currently detained at the Baker County Detention Center in Florida. “I have faced a lot of racism, a lot of disrespect, and a lot of unfairness in this system. I was threatened with solitary confinement after officers used racial slurs against me. Being detained, it’s like you have no say and you have no rights. It’s as if they look at you like you're beneath them, and the door is just being slammed in your face like you're an animal. Once released and given a second chance, the first thing I want to do is see my family because it's been almost three years. Then I want to continue my enrollment in college to follow my dream, and I want to continue to try to be successful in life and be a role model to my siblings and society.”

“It is not shocking that Black migrants in detention describe their conditions as torture, because detention is torture,” said Ronald Claude, director of policy & advocacy with Black Alliance for Just Immigration (BAJI). “Our report ‘Uncovering the Truth’ makes it clear that the U.S. immigration system is anti-Black. Detention is one of the enduring legacies of this country’s history of slavery and Jim Crow laws. Collecting race and ethnicity data is critical as it makes visible the Black people detained by the U.S. government.”

“The profit-driven mass incarceration system of the U.S. is built on the backs of formerly enslaved Black people and Black migrants,” said Haddy Gassama, policy and advocacy director of UndocuBlack Network. “White supremacist sentiments and anti-Blackness are not only endemic in the current systems of policing and immigration enforcement, they were the driving factors for the existence of these inhumane institutions. The U.S. has the world's largest carceral system, and Black folks bear the heaviest brunt of its cruelty. Immigration is a Black issue, and as long as the practice of detention exists, Black migrants will always face anti-Blackness within the system that was built to uniquely harm them. The findings of this report affirm the call for the complete abolition of all forms of detention.

Black Alliance for Just Immigration (BAJI) , 2022. 31p.

By Lisa Cameron, Jennifer Seager, Manisha Shah

We examine the impact of criminalizing sex work, exploiting an event in which local officials unexpectedly criminalized sex work in one district in East Java, Indonesia, but not in neighboring districts. We collect data from female sex workers and their clients before and after the change. We find that criminalization increases sexually transmitted infections among female sex workers by 58 percent, measured by biological tests. This is driven by decreased condom access and use. We also find evidence that criminalization decreases earnings among women who left sex work due to criminalization, and decreases their ability to meet their children's school expenses while increasing the likelihood that children begin working to supplement household income. While criminalization has the potential to improve population STI outcomes if the market shrinks permanently, we show that five years post-criminalization the market has rebounded and the probability of STI transmission within the general population is likely to have increased.

Working Paper 27846

Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2020. 52p.

By Sierra Smucker, Jirka Taylor, Ivy Todd, Emily Hoch, Monique Martineau, Deven Clark, Meagan E. Cahill, Esther M. Friedman

s the number of older adults in the United States increases, there will be a corresponding increase in the need for services to prevent elder abuse and intervene in cases where it has already occurred. However, there are a limited number of evidence-based interventions to support victims of elder abuse. To encourage the rigorous evaluation of one intervention—Elder Abuse Shelters (EASs)—RAND researchers developed three research designs and assessed the preparedness of the well-established Weinberg Center's EAS in New York to undertake them. Researchers found that the Weinberg Center's EAS is well established, and the program model was organizationally and programmatically ready to be evaluated, though data collection practices should be strengthened before implementing the suggested evaluation designs. These evaluation designs could be generalized and implemented at EASs across the country as the number of shelters continues to grow.

Key Findings

The Weinberg Center's client numbers have fluctuated over time but are typically between 16 and 34 per year. Clients mostly identify as women, are ethnically and racially diverse, and are from the New York City area. Many clients have cognitive impairment and limited financial resources.

The COVID-19 pandemic corresponded with a decrease in the number of clients by decreasing potential clients' desire to stay in long-term care facilities and increasing turnover in referring agencies.

The Weinberg Center has a clear program logic model that connects inputs and outputs with measurable short- and long-term outcomes.

Organizationally and programmatically, the Center is ready to embark on an evaluation, with scores of 77 and 84 percent, respectively, in those areas of the evaluability assessment.

However, a low score for evaluation readiness of 43 percent, driven largely by currently insufficient data collection processes, indicates that the Center would need to strengthen its data collection capacity to complete a rigorous evaluation.

Three evaluation designs could help the Weinberg Center's EAS and other EAS models rigorously evaluate its impact: (1) a quasi-experimental design using non-random self-selection into the program, (2) a propensity score matching design that pairs clients with Adult Protective Services, and (3) a robust pre- and post-evaluation design.

When conducting an evaluation of an EAS, researchers must consider equity, data safety, and consent. The experience of elder abuse and the tools needed to help someone heal will differ across individuals depending on their background and cultural expectations.

Recommendation

Because the Weinberg Center is largely ready to embark on an evaluation, its leadership should review the proposed designs and consult with partners and potential evaluation teams as needed to decide how to proceed. Federal and state partners interested in protecting victims of elder abuse should consider funding one of these evaluation designs to determine whether EASs should be supported and encouraged to proliferate as the population ages.

Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2023, 77p.

By Emily Grant, Lena Dechert

Wyoming is home to a little over 16,000 Indigenous residents, who make up nearly 3% of the state's population. However, Indigenous people in Wyoming continue to experience disproportionately high rates of homicide and disappearances compared to White residents. This means they go missing and are killed more often than their population size alone would predict. The Wyoming Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons (MMIP) Task Force is dedicated to tracking and sharing data on these cases. This fifth-annual publication includes the latest available information on Indigenous homicide victims and missing persons in Wyoming, along with updates on efforts to improve law enforcement protocols for missing person cases.

Laramie: Wyoming Survey & Analysis Center, University of Wyomingm 2025. 7p.

By Emily Grant, Lena Dechert, Laurel Wimbish, Andria Blackwood

HOMICIDE 105 Indigenous people (34 females, 71 males) were victims of homicide between 2000 and 2020. Indigenous homicide victims were 21% of the total homicide victims in Wyoming between 2000 and 2020. Between 2010 and 2019, the homicide rate per 100,000 for Indigenous people was 26.8, eight times higher than the homicide rate for White people. The homicide rate for Indigenous females was 15.3 per 100,000, 6.4 times higher than the homicide rate for White females. MISSING Between 2011 and September 2020, 710 Indigenous persons were reported missing. Some Indigenous people were reported missing more than once during the time period, resulting in a total of 1,254 missing person records for Indigenous people. Eighty-five percent were juvenile, and 57% were female. They were reported missing from 22 counties in Wyoming. Ten percent of missing Indigenous people are found within the same day they are reported missing, 50% are found within one week. One-fifth of the Indigenous people reported missing were missing for 30 or more days, which is a higher percentage than White people missing for 30 or more days (11%). Currently, 10 Indigenous people are listed as missing (3 females and 7 males). MEDIA COVERAGE Only 30% of Indigenous homicide victims had newspaper media coverage, as compared to 51% of White homicide victims. Indigenous female homicide victims had the least amount of newspaper media coverage (18%). MEDIA PORTRAYAL The newspaper articles for Indigenous homicide victims were more likely to contain violent language, portray the victim in a negative light, a nd provide less information as compared to articles about White homicide victim COMMUNITY BARRIERS Lack of trust in law enforcement and the judicial system, no single point of contact during an investigation, and lack of information during the investigation and after the final outcome were seen as barriers in the community related to the reporting and response to MMIP. RECOMMENDATIONS Develop consistent protocols and data systems for MMIPs to inform both law enforcement and families. Pay particular attention to documenting tribal affiliation in official records, coroner reports, and vital records. Create an Indigenous advocacy position/response team to help families navigate the reporting and investigation process. The advocate can serve as a communication point person, helping to reduce the emotional burden for families of repeating incident details to multiple agencies. Raise community awareness about the prevalence of MMIP, contributing risk and protective factors, and available resources. Distribute a list of community resources and efforts

Laramie: Wyoming Survey & Analysis Center University of Wyoming , 2021. 51p.

By The European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE)

Introduction The European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) has developed 13 indicators on intimate partner violence and domestic violence to guide the data collection efforts of the police and the justice sector. EIGE’s indicators support EU Member States to measure intimate partner violence and domestic violence and to assess the progress made to combat and monitor these forms of violence. Ultimately, the indicators enhance the comparability of national administrative data on intimate partner and domestic violence in alignment with the minimum requirements of Directive (EU) 2024/1385 on combating violence against women and domestic violence; Directive 2012/29/EU on establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime; and the Council of Europe convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (the Istanbul Convention). Between 2018 and 2020, EIGE used the 13 indicators to measure intimate partner violence across the EU. Between 2021 and 2022, EIGE revised and simplified the 13 indicators, the data collection tool used to populate the indicators and the data collection methodology. Between 2023 and 2024, EIGE conducted a new EU-wide data collection exercise to measure intimate partner violence and domestic violence using the updated indicators, data collection tool and methodology. This document describes the methodological approach for the 2023–2024 data collection exercise. The structure of this report is as follows. • The following section provides an overview of EIGE’s data collection exercise, indicators and data collection tool and provides general methodological details. • The remaining sections provide indicator-specific details on the methodological approach used to collect data on EIGE’s 13 indicators on intimate partner violence and domestic violence. • The annexes present mapping tables with further information on the availability and comparability of the data collected, and the sources of the data.

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2025, 152p.

By The European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights

This report presents the findings of research conducted by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) on existing child protection systems across all EU Member States. The 27 national reports, commissioned from Franet, the agency’s multidisciplinary research network, are available online on the agency’s website. These reports offer a wealth of additional data beyond what is included here. In April 2024, the European Commission adopted a Recommendation on developing and strengthening integrated child protection systems in the best interests of the child. It calls on authorities at all levels of government, civil society and other stakeholders to cooperate to protect children from violence by means of better-integrated systems. Its aim is to enforce a ‘culture of zero-tolerance for violence against children’ (recital 7) while also emphasising ‘Child protection as a global priority of the Union’ (p. 21). In developing the Recommendation, the Commission consulted children by means of the EU Children’s Participation Platform, and more than 1 000 children provided their views. Based on these data and the Commission Recommendation, this report suggests practical me

Vienna: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights ,2025. 118p.

By Thorn in partnership with Burson Insights, Data & Intelligence

Since 2019, Thorn has focused on amplifying youth voices to better understand their digital lives, with particular attention to how they encounter and navigate technology-facilitated forms of sexual abuse and exploitation. Previous youth-centered research has explored topics such as child sexual abuse material (CSAM) — including that which is self-generated (“SG-CSAM”) — nonconsensual resharing, online grooming, and the barriers young people face in disclosing or reporting negative experiences. In recent years, young people have been encountering sexual interactions involving money and other items of value in their digital lives at an alarming rate, and may, at times, be advertising personal imagery. Technology has previously been recognized as a key enabler in the commercial sexual exploitation of children (CSEC) — facilitating unprecedented access to minors, enabling novel “advertising” models, introducing new forms of abuse (e.g., live-streamed child sexual exploitation), and strengthening illicit market networks for CSAM. However, the apparent commodification of sexual interactions involving minors, without clear third-party facilitator, points to an evolution within technology-facilitated forms of sexual exploitation.

Thorn explored this new development as part of its recent Emerging Threats to Young People survey, which examines emergent online risk areas to better understand how current technologies create and/ or exacerbate child safety vulnerabilities and to identify areas where solutions are needed. This report sheds light on some of the ways in which the intersection of technology and romantic or sexual relationships impacts young people and increases their risk for exploitative interactions. These risks include commodified and/or commercial exchanges for nude imagery and/or involvement in sexual acts. Other reports from the series address additional issues, including the emergence of deepfake nudes6 and the evolving nature of sextortion.7 Drawing on responses from a survey of 1,200 young people aged 13-20, this report examines their lived experiences with technology-facilitated sexual solicitations and involvement in commodified exchanges. Three key findings emerged from this research:. It’s common for young people to receive sexual solicitations8 online, often after only a brief period of connection between users. One in 3 (36%) young people reported they had received a solicitation to send sexual imagery of themselves from an online-only contact while they were under the age of 18. Most (79%) of these solicitations were received within a week or less of connecting with the other user.

For some young people, technology-facilitated sexual experiences have been commodified, with young people receiving both monetary and non-monetary (e.g., social opportunities) forms of compensation. One in 7 (15%) young people reported engaging in at least one form of transactional sexual experience while under the age of 18. And 33% of those who had indicated they received social opportunities, like invites to parties or more online followers, as part of their compensation. . Markets for the commercial sexual exploitation of children appear to be expanding, driven, in part, by emerging buyer dynamics that capitalize on vulnerabilities linked to technology-facilitated sexual exploration among young people. Among young people who had a commodified sexual experience as a minor, 25% indicated they never received a solicitation to sell their content, 59% indicated they exclusively knew their buyers online, and 42% indicated they had a buyer who was another minor.

El Segundo, CA: Thorn, 2025. 33p.

By Michele Burman | Ruth Friskney | Jane Mair | Richard Whitecross 

This Report presents the findings of the Domestic Abuse and Child Contact: The Interface Between Criminal and Civil Proceedings research project, funded by the Scottish Government. The study set out to examine the relationship between civil and criminal law in the context of child contact proceedings which raise issues of domestic abuse. The impetus behind the study is to better understand how, if at all, developments in domestic abuse proceedings and changing definitions in the context of criminal law in Scotland, inform the handling of child contact cases which are conducted within the scope of civil justice. Scotland has seen several major policy and legislative developments aimed at reforming responses to domestic abuse, most recently the introduction of the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018. These developments have been primarily situated within the context of criminal law and the criminal justice process. There has been relatively less attention paid to civil law. The negative impact of domestic abuse on children is well-recognised in Scotland (see, e.g., Callaghan et al 2018). Growing awareness of the nature and impact of domestic abuse is reflected to some extent in the explicit statutory obligations, introduced by the Family Law (Scotland) Act 2006, on the civil courts to consider domestic abuse in the context of actions for child contact. In further recent debate and reform of child law and family justice, domestic abuse has been highlighted and children placed at the heart of the decision-making process. Decisions in respect of child contact generally, and in particular where there are allegations of domestic abuse, continue to present significant challenges. Relatively little is known of how these provisions of Scots family law work in practice; of the extent to which the treatment of domestic abuse in the civil courts reflects criminal practice, or of the ways in which individual child contact cases may (or may not) interact with criminal justice proceedings. How child contact, more generally, works in practice in Scotland, is an under-researched area with Wilson and Laing’s (2010) study a rare exception. The significance of the interaction of the criminal and the civil, in the context of domestic abuse and child contact, was clearly identified by the Scottish Government in the commissioning of a significant scoping project: Contact Applications Involving Allegations of Domestic Abuse: Feasibility Study (McGuckin & McGuckin 2004) but the planned Phase 2 did not follow. Much of the research evidence we have on this specific issue in Scots family law derives from two doctoral theses (Mackay 2012; Morrison 2014). Overall, there is limited research evidence on the operation of family law in child contact cases, and whether and how the interpretation and application of the civil law statutory provisions are informed by contemporary understandings of domestic abuse and changing definitions or practices in the criminal law. The research which has been published has consistently stressed the need for further, large scale (e.g., McGuckin & McGuckin 2004; Wilson & Laing 2010) and longitudinal study (e.g., Mays & Christie 2001). Through a focus on the interrelationship between the investigation and prosecution of domestic abuse in criminal justice and parallel child contact proceedings advancing through civil justice processes, this research study contributes to addressing the current knowledge gap. The key stated aims of the study are: a. to understand the ways in which domestic abuse proceedings may inform the handling of and decision-making in child contact cases; b. to explore family law practitioner understandings of the impact and relevance of a course of conduct of domestic abuse and its implication in contact cases under s.11 7A – C of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995; c. to identify and explain perceived impediments or obstacles to communication and information exchange in such cases; and d. to examine the links or lack thereof between domestic abuse criminal proceedings and Child Welfare Hearings (contact). 

Edinburgh: Scottish Civil Justice Hub, Scottish Centre for Crime & Justice Research, 2022. 78p.

By Thi Hoang and Livia Wagner

This report examines the prevalence of online child sexual exploitation and abuse (OCSEA) in West Africa, specifically in Ghana, Côte d’Ivoire and Cape Verde, highlighting key risk factors. Data on OCSEA is scarce due to under-reporting and weak reporting mechanisms, but preliminary data indicates an acceleration in uploads since 2019. Case studies in Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana and Cape Verde reveal gaps and shortcomings in victim identification, protection and prosecution. Urgent action is required to prevent devastating consequences for individuals in West Africa. Key points l Risk factors for OCSEA are prevalent and increasing across the ECOWAS region. l Limited evidence exists regarding the regional prevalence and trends of OCSEA, but preliminary findings suggest that it is more widespread than official data indicates. l Global trends indicate that regions with weak OCSEA identification processes and under-reporting tend to have higher prevalence of OCSEA. l Addressing the challenges of detection, investigation, prosecution and victim support requires sustained political will and greater prioritisation of OCSEA in the policy agenda. l This is an opportune moment for ECOWAS states to take action and implement practical measures to prevent the expansion of OCSEA and strengthen identification and follow-up processes 

OCWAR-T Research Report 7 | August 2023, ENACT Africa, 2023. 48p.

By Kylie Butler and Jasmine B. MacDonald

This policy and practice paper describes what we know about the relationship between intimate partner violence (IPV) and violence against family animals. It covers: (a) the forms of violence against family animals in an IPV context; (b) why perpetrators of IPV use violence against family animals; (c) how violence against family animals affects victim-survivors; and (d) implications for practice including tips for supporting clients who may be experiencing violence against family animals in an IPV context. Key messages ƒ Some evidence suggests that violence against family animals may be an indicator of frequent and severe IPV patterns. ƒ Perpetrators may threaten, harm or kill family animals with an intention to control victimsurvivors, cause emotional distress and/or control animals. ƒ Violence against family animals has negative effects on the physical and psychological wellbeing of victim-survivors, including children and family animals. ƒ Many victim-survivors report staying with, delaying leaving or returning to perpetrators due to fears for the safety of family animals left with the perpetrator. ƒ Actions at the practitioner, service and systemic levels to strengthen support for victimsurvivors of IPV who have experienced violence against family animals include: − screening for violence against family animals and providing support with animal-inclusive safety planning − increasing access to animal-inclusive crisis accommodation ƒ strengthening relationships between IPV support services, animal welfare services and law enforcement

Southbank VIC 3006 Australia Australian Institute of Family Studies, 2024. 16p

By Kristin Lees Haggerty; Olanike Ojelabi; Randi Campetti; Kathy Greelee

The authors of this paper report on a research project aimed at addressing unreported cases of elder abuse, and specifically exploring what guidance policy and decision-makers need in order to address barriers to reporting. Specifically, the authors’ research sought to improve understanding of elder abuse reporting pathways, facilitators, barriers, and outcomes. Over the course of their research, the authors report achieving three main objectives: conducting an environmental scan of policies and practices across states; conducting an in-depth case study of policy changes made in the state of Massachusetts; and developing recommendations for improving communication between Adult Protective Services (APS) and reporters based on findings from the first two objectives. The project was guided by two main research questions: what the legal, ethical, and practical barriers and facilitators are to establishing feedback loops about reported cases of potential elder abuse; and how regulations are interpreted and put into practice at the state and local levels in Massachusetts. The authors discuss their research design, methods, and analytical data analysis techniques, expected applicability of the research, limitations, outcomes, and recommendations.

Waltham, MA: Education Development Center, 2023. 67p.