Abstract

Co-located models to address intimate partner violence and sexual violence, such as Family Justice Centers (FJC) and Multi-Agency Model Centers (MAMC), have emerged as promising practices to meet the needs of survivors. Although implementation of FJCs and MAMCs is widespread and supported by a recent increase in funding, little is known about the effectiveness of these models. This systematic review synthesizes and critically analyzes the peer-reviewed and grey literature focused on evaluating FJCs and MAMCs in the United States. A systematic search of terms pertaining to intimate partner violence, sexual violence, and co-located models was conducted using 11 computerized article databases and 15 center and organization websites. Thirteen studies were included in the final sample, most of which were government or agency-initiated reports. Over half of the studies were process evaluations and four were outcome evaluations. Of the outcome evaluations, none included a comparison group and two used a longitudinal design. Overall, the studies largely focused on organizational outcomes as opposed to survivor outcomes. Despite the lack of information pertaining to survivor outcomes, study findings indicated a high degree of provider and survivor satisfaction with co-located models. Although the research on co-located models – such as FJCs and MAMCs – is growing, evidence about the models’ impact on survivor outcomes related to safety and well-being is inconclusive. Using methodologically rigorous approaches to evaluation design and data analysis, future research should focus on exploring the relationship between coordination, collaboration, and survivor outcomes.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call