Introduction and Background

 

The Minnesota Child Response Initiative (MCRI) is a partnership of the following of domestic violence programs, mental health agencies, and child-serving systems: African-American Family Services, CornerHouse, Domestic Abuse Project, Family and Children’s Services, Eastside Neighborhood Services, Washburn Child Guidance Center, Hennepin County Department of Child, Families and Adult Services, Minneapolis Public Schools and the Minneapolis Police Department. The project is administered by the Tubman Family Alliance.  The primary goal of the MCRI is to identify and intervene with children exposed to violence.  The MCRI project has been organized into three primary components in order to facilitate this mission: intervention, systems change, and research.  The research component started in the fall of 2003. 

 

Intervention

The intervention component of the project involves the pairing of mental health professionals and family violence advocates with law enforcement officers to offer a voluntary, acute advocacy and crisis response to families who have called 911 for help with domestic violence incidents, or other incidents involving children’s exposure to violence.  These visits are meant to provide additional resources to children and families dealing with the difficult physical and emotional issues associated with domestic violence.  Follow-up visits are made when necessary, and the clinicians and advocates make referrals to meet the court advocacy, mental health, and social service needs of the families.

 

Systesm Change

Central to identifying and intervening with children exposed to violence is a better understanding of the system and community barriers that exist to working with these children.  This is the motivation for the systems change component of the MCRI project.  The systems change component is comprised of a geo-mapping project to identify gaps between need and available resources for children exposed to violence, a policy analysis committee that attempts to establish a picture of how key elements of the social system work together to serve children and make recommendations about more efficient collaboration and service delivery, and the community needs assessments, which are the focus of this report.

 

Community Needs Assessments

The primary goal of the community needs assessments is to gain more information about how particular communities perceive the problems of violence and how these perceptions relate to the needs of children. Within this context, the needs assessments attempt to identify what barriers exist in terms of service delivery and collaboration with mental health workers.  A prominent theme of the community needs assessments is the effort to understand culturally specific needs with regard to children and violence.  MCRI’s focus on partnership is also exemplified in this piece of the project.  Each community needs assessment has been developed in close collaboration with key stakeholders and leaders in the communities.  The goal has been for each community to establish the best method(s) for obtaining this information.  The communities have varied somewhat in their original approaches but, somewhat surprisingly; short surveys have proved the most effective method for gathering this information.  To date, needs assessments have been conducted in the African American, African immigrant, and mainstream or Caucasian communities.  Grant support for this project offered the opportunity to expand this work to include other communities in the Twin Cities in the future. 

 

This analysis describes the methodology used in a recent survey conducted in partnership with the American Indian Family Center in St. Paul, MN.

 

The Center was approached because it is a hub for culturally appropriate services for American Indian children and families in the Twin Cities area.   A center that was initially one of the St. Paul/Ramsey County Children’s Initiative, it become early on an independent non-profit organization.  Its purpose is to support families to help ensure the development of healthy children.  “We believe that parents can find strength in cultural traditions.  It is the traditions and values of the ‘old ways’ that will strengthen the family, keep families together and make communities healthy and strong.”

 

The Systems Change Coordinator met with staff and the management of the center to make a presentation about MCRI.  The request to conduct a survey with program participants was made and the Center staff was assured that the survey results would be presented to respondents and the staff.  They felt it would be a wonderful tool in their program decision-making, and program management.

 

The existing survey was submitted for the Executive Director and her Assistant Director’s reviews and suggestions for change were made.  They suggested modifying some questions, adding others, or expanding on some of questions to more directly gain input form the community the Center serves.

 

Due to low sample number, this is a pilot.  We intend to offer this survey to a higher number of respondents in the near future.  Three survey meetings were set where surveys were conducted:   a Mothers Circle, at the Center, an Early Childhood Family Education (ECFE) class; and at a family Pow Wow at Mounds Park, the American Indian Magnet School.  A total of 28 individuals, average age 24 years responded the 3-page questionnaire. 

 

Demographics

The majority of the respondents (71%) in the American Community needs assessment lived in St. Paul, 18% lived in Minneapolis.  Most of the respondents that answered the question about race/ethnicity listed Native American/American Indian ethnicity (82%);  4% each identified themselves at Indian, Alaskan Eskimo, Somali and White.  89% were female.  The majority of the respondents (58.6%) were married.  27.6% were divorced, separated, or widowed.  The mean age for the respondents was 23.82%.  62.1% of the respondents had children.

 

Perceptions of Violence and Its Impact on Children

One of the key objectives of the community needs assessment was to gain a better understanding of how people conceptualize violence and its impact on children.  The manner in which people define and perceive violence is partly determined by what they consider to be the sources of violence.  There seemed consensus among the American Indian survey respondents that violence is learned behavior: 72.4% said that people learn violence from video games and television, 65.5% said that violence is learned from families, and 82.8% cited “society” as a source of learned violent behavior.   20.7% thought that people are “born violent”.

 

The perception that violence is learned behavior was also reflected in the responses to questions about the impact that violence has on children.  For example, none of respondents said that it was true that “violence does not affect children”.  96% of the respondents agreed with the statement “violence at home interferes with a child’s performance at school.”  There was also consensus that children witnessing a violent act is a form of violence (79% of respondents agreed with that statement).  Overall the results indicate that respondents believed exposure to violence is harmful for children. 

 

Understanding and Communicating About Violence

Central to effectively advocating for children exposed to violence is getting people to talk about the problem.  From this perspective, it is important to understand what people perceive as appropriate or effective venues for communicating about violence in both the public and private spheres.  When asked about the most effective way to get information about domestic violence out to the community, there was most consensus (76%) that Talking Circles were effective methods.  There was less support for more passive approaches to providing information about domestic violence, such as advertisements and pamphlets (45% and 48% respectively).  When asked with whom they feel comfortable sharing information more generally, there was most consensus (90%) around family.  Friends and people in the community (59% and 55% respectively) came in close “seconds.”

 

The survey also asked questions about how and whether people discuss violence at home.  Many of these questions suffered from relatively low response rates in the mainstream community (see data tables in Appendix 2 for details).  This was possibly due to a perception among respondents that discussing violence at home or with others meant that they had experienced domestic violence.  Among those that did respond to the questions, there was consensus that it was appropriate to talk with children about domestic violence at home (79% agreed with that statement).  68% said that “other people talk to my kids about domestic violence.”   Of the people with children that answered the survey, 100% agreed with the statement “I feel comfortable talking to my children about domestic violence”.  A somewhat smaller number of respondents (80%) agreed with the statement “I feel comfortable with others talking to my children about domestic violence.” 

 

Responding to Violence

Tailoring domestic violence services and education requires information about how people currently feel violence should be handled.  The responses from the American Indian survey participants displayed a general feeling that domestic violence is a public issue that requires outside intervention.  For example, 85% of the respondents did not agree with the statement “When couples hurt each other, it is their own business.”  93% also disagreed with a similar statement about harming children.  Additionally, 84% agreed with the statement “People who are victimized should involve the police.”  There was considerably less agreement about whether “violence should be responded to by leaving the situation”.  55% agreed with this statement, 44% did not.

 

Perceptions of Social Service Agencies and Other Public Advocates

Trust is an extremely important factor in developing effective intervention and advocacy systems for children exposed to domestic violence.  A few of the questions on the survey tried to get a feel for how social service agencies and their capacity to deal with the problems of domestic violence were perceived.  These responses are potentially biased because all respondents knew that the survey was being conducted by a group of domestic violence advocacy agencies.  As a result, people may have been less willing to express unfavorable opinions about such organizations.  69% of the respondents considered social service agencies to be “helpful”.  24% consider them “overly involved”.  10% said that social service agencies are “unnecessary”. 

 

When asked about who or what helps address domestic violence in the community, there was most consensus (76%) that domestic violence advocates served this purpose.  Community organizations, neighborhood community organizers, school social workers and child protection workers were also cited as serving this purpose.  76% of the respondents indicated that activities in schools were an effective way to help kids deal with domestic and community violence.  Trainings about domestic violence for people that work with kids on a daily basis was also commonly cited as an effective way to help children deal with violence (66%) of the respondents selected this response).

 

Parenting Strategies

A set of questions on the survey was only asked of people with children.  A few of these questions dealt with parenting strategies.   (84%) of the respondents with children felt that their parenting strategies were effective.  When asked about parenting techniques, the most frequently cited methods were talking about the behavior (69%) and positive reinforcement (52%).  Physical punishment was also selected (59%).  Most of the respondents are young families attending parenting classes.

 

Feelings of Inclusiveness and Security

An important component of successful intervention is helping families feel more secure and connected to their communities.  Most (52%) of the respondents felt that their basic needs in terms of clothing, shelter, and food were being met.  (89%) of the respondents with children agreed with the statement “I feel that the community we live in welcomes and cares about my children.”  (97%) of all respondents felt welcomed in the community. 

 

Definition of Domestic Violence

The American Indian Family Center suggested questions that would inform their work about program participants knowledge about the definition of domestic violence.

 

(100%) of the respondents agreed with the list provided as “all of the above,” with a few choosing some specific responses over others:  only 5% agreed that unwanted touching/unfaithfulness/false accusations;   (65%) agreed that name calling/yelling/making threats;   (55%) marked intimidating/disrespecting/isolating; and (75) chose punching/throwing objects/kicking; as forms of domestic violence.

 

Similarly at the question:  Violence is an attempt to initially harm an individual:

 

(100%) marked on a physical level; (30%) on an emotional level; (25%) on a verbal level; (20%) on sexual level; and (20%) marked all of the above.

 

To the questions whether Domestic violence is violence involving people in intimate relationships, (84%) responded True, and (16%) False.

 

 

Multiple-choice questions also contain an “other” option for respondents to write in.

 

Their comments to questions such as: 

1. People learn violence from:

Role models/childhood problems/molestation/abandonment/mental illness/learned behaviour

 

2. Who/what helps address domestic violence in the community:

Police intervention-sometimes they aren’t helpful/legal services/Women of Nation Shelter/the ones who are abused should start training their spouse/family

 

3. Who/what might help kids deal with domestic violence and community violence:

Parents/adult classes on human development/community role models(healthy)/outside activities

 

4. Information about domestic violence could best be provided to the community by:

Human development classes/also family/legal forums/phone help lines

 

5. I feel comfortable sharing information and getting help from:

Community classes/anyone who can help/professionals/American Indian Family Center

 

6. I perceive social service support agencies as:

All three at the same time –(helpful/overly involved/unnecessary/other)

Note: everybody has been impacted by violence at least one time in their life

Other: necessary

I’m not sure

Some people/agency really understand and care and then there a some who don’t know anything

 

7. My parenting strategies are:

I don’t know what to do when nothing seems to work.