03 Jun For the completion of the research proposal, please? the following. Include an executive summary of no more than two pages formatted properly. Descri

Introduction

Eccovia has retained Corvidae Consulting’s services to gain insight into the strengths and weaknesses of their database software currently in use by Domestic Violence (DV) Case Workers. The results of this survey will be used to better understand how the end user utilizes the ClientTrack software and how to cater the application to better suit their needs. The database system should be a tool that allows DV Case Workers to more efficiently allocate their time. All answers obtained in the survey will be kept anonymous and any identifying information will be removed prior to submitting the resulting analysis to Eccovia.

1. Please select your age range.

□ 18 – 25

□ 26 – 35

□ 36 – 45

□ 46 – 55

□ Over 55

2. What is your current level of education? (Select the best option)

□ Some Highschool

□ Highschool diploma or GED

□ Some College

□ Bachelor’s level degree

□ Master’s level degree

□ PhD level degree

3. Please select the option that best answers the following question:

How long have you been a Domestic Violence Case Worker?

□ Less than 1 year

□ 1-3 years

□ 4-6 years

□ 7-9 years

□ 10 years or more

4. What are your daily responsibilities as a caseworker? (Select all that apply)

□ Submitting reports    

□ Meeting with clients   

□ Counseling    

□ Referring to services

□ Scheduling appointments    

□ Escorting clients    

□ Monitoring visits between families 

□ Reporting abuse  

□ Data entry  

□ Aftercare Follow up 

5. What is your overall satisfaction in your career? (Select the best option).

1 2 3 4 5

Not satisfied at all Moderate satisfaction Very satisfied

6. How long have you been using ClientTrack as a caseworker? (Select the best option)

□ Less than one year

□ 1 – 3 years

□ 4 – 7 years

□ 8 – 11 years

□ Over 11 years

7. On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is drastically less work and 5 is drastically more work, please answer the following question:

Compared to your workload from before the pandemic, how has your workload changed?

1 2 3 4 5

Drastically less work About the same Drastically more work

8. On a scale of one to five, how has the COVID-19 pandemic impacted your reliance on technology where one is no impact and five is vastly impacted.

1 2 3 4 5

No impact Moderately impacted Very impacted

9. On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 = no experience and 5 = very experienced, please answer the following question:

How experienced are you with using computers, tablets, and other technologies?

1 2 3 4 5

No experience Moderate experience Very experienced

10. On a scale of one to five, how would you rate yourself on your ability to navigate and use ClientTrack where one is novice and five is expert.

1 2 3 4 5

Novice Expert

11. On average, how many hours a day do you spend using ClientTrack? (Select the best option)

□ Less than an hour

□ 1 – 2 hours

□ 3 – 4 hours

□ More than 5 hours

12. It was found that financial assistance, employment assistance, and housing were of most interest to domestic violence survivors. On a scale of one to five, please share how adequate ClientTrack as it relates the following categories.

(One being not efficient at all. Five being extremely efficient.)

a. Finding resources for financial assistance. (Select the best option)

1 2 3 4 5

Not adequate at all Moderate satisfaction Very adequate

b. Finding resources for employment assistance. (Select the best option)

1 2 3 4 5

Not satisfied at all Moderate satisfaction Very satisfied

c. Finding resources for housing. (Select the best option)

1 2 3 4 5

Not satisfied at all Moderate satisfaction Very satisfied

13. On a scale of one to five, please rate ClientTrack software referral process. (Select the best option)

1 2 3 4 5

Highly dissatisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied

14. On a scale of one to five, how useful is ClientTrack in relation to your day-to-day tasks where one is not useful and five is extremely useful. (Select the best option)

1 2 3 4 5

Not useful Neutral Extremely useful

15. Do you believe ClientTrack adds time or saves time in your daily tasks as a case worker? (Please slide the scale to where you feel describes the situation best)

Adds Time ————————————-|————————————-Saves Time

16. On a scale of one to five, how satisfied are you with ClientTrack where one is not satisfied and five is very satisfied. (Select the best option)

1 2 3 4 5

Not satisfied at all Moderate satisfaction Very satisfied

17. Of the following, what do you believe negatively affects your job satisfaction in relation to ClientTrack support? (Select all that apply)

□ Long wait times

□ Long resolution times

□ Unresolved issues (reoccurrence of same issue)

□ Hard to receive assistance

□ No formal training on software

18. Rate ClientTrack on a scale of one to five regarding the efficiency of the software. (One being not efficient at all. Five being extremely efficient.)

1 2 3 4 5

Not efficient at all Somewhat efficient Extremely efficient

19. Please choose the answer that best matches your opinion of the following statement.

“There are improvements that can be made on ClientTrack that would make your work more efficient.”

1 2 3 4 5

Strongly disagree No opinion Strongly agree

20. What would make the ClientTrack’s experience more efficient? (Select all that apply):

□ Simplified User Interface

□ Improved Customer Support

□ Improved Integration

□ Improved Software Release Notes

□ More Customization Options

□ More Flexible Reporting

□ Faster Loading Time

21. What types of tech support do you use? (Select all that apply)

□ Support videos          

□ Phone                 

□ FAQ          

□ Email  

□ LMS 

□ Other 

If you selected “Other”, please write what type of tech support you use. ____________________________________________________________

22. In your opinion, which aspect of ClientTrack could be improved most? (Select the best option)

□ Customer service/technology support

□ System performance (system glitches, crashes, or speed)

□ Referral process

□ Other

23. Do you believe the available tech support options are effective in resolving your issues?

□ Yes

□ No

24. Of the following, select all case management software you have previously used? 

□ Clarity  

□ AWARDS  

□ Apricot  

□ ETO   

□ ServicePoint  

□ AdsysTech  

□ Charity Tracker

25. In the space provided, please write any suggestions you would like to add about improving ClientTrack? ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

26. In the space provided, please share what you believe is ClientTrack’s best feature. 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

27. In the space provided, please share how you feel ClientTrack can be improved. 

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

28. In the space provided, please share how you feel ClientTrack failed or was not help.

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

29. Please choose the answer that best matches your opinion of the following statement.

“The ClientTrack database always works properly.”

1 2 3 4 5

Strongly disagree No opinion Strongly agree 

30. What is the likelihood of you recommending ClientTrack to others? (Circle best option).

1 2 3 4 5                 

Not likely                                             Likely                                               Very likely

2

,

Caseworkers & Victims of

Domestic & Inmate Partner Violence against women in the society and possible solutions.

Introduction

Violence against women whether subtle o overt is a major human rights violation and a widespread human public problem that requires a practical and immediate address to create a platform for human rights respect and dignity. Intimate partner violence is one notable strategy of violence against women that define domestic violence by a current or former partner, describing behavior in an intimate relationship against women that can accommodate sexual, physical, and emotional impacts of the victims (Bogat et al., 2016). Noteworthy, the physical and emotional violence among romantic partners occurring frequently worldwide thus requires significant and practical study to identify existing intimate partner violence. Ditcher and Rhodes (2011) estimate that more than one in four women may encounter physical or sexual assault, or stalking, at the hands of an intimate partner throughout their lives. Victimization of intimate partner violence (IPV) may result in a range of short- and long-term physical, financial, and emotional issues, and victims may have a range of associated social support requirements (Ditcher & Rhodes, 2011). The existing pervasive and prevalence of Intimate partner violence motivates a need to conduct a qualitative study via survey and in-depth literature and a systematic literature review to identify existing Intimate partner violence and formulate possible strategies to manage the existing IPV in the society. Specifically, the research areas will focus on primary data from the survey and secondary data from a systematic and in-depth literature review to identify existing Intimate partner violence, noble impacts such as physical, psychological, and emotional influence, and possible strategies and recommendations to counteract existing IPV against women in the society.

Problem Statement

Violence against women whether subtle o overt is a major human rights violation and a widespread human public problem that requires a practical and immediate address to create a platform for human rights respect and dignity. Intimate partner violence is one notable strategy of violence against women that define domestic violence by a current or former partner, describing behavior in an intimate relationship against women that can accommodate sexual, physical, and emotional impacts of the victims (Bogat et al., 2016). With the existing pervasive and prevalent Intimate partner violence in the society, focusing a study to identify existing Intimate partner violence, its noble impacts such as physical, psychological, and emotional influence, and possible strategies and recommendations to counteract existing IPV against women in the society are necessary for the social problem management.

Specifically, the research will be seeking to answer three critical questions:

1. What is the prevalent and pervasive existence of Intimate Partner Violence in society?

2. What are the possible, physical, and emotional impacts of IPV on the victims in society?

3. What are practical solutions and recommendations to manage the existing IPV against women in society?

Objectives

In a study to identify existing Intimate partner violence, noble impacts such as physical, psychological, and emotional influence, and possible strategies and recommendations to counteract existing IPV against women in the society, the objectives will be:

1. To identify the prevalent and pervasive existence of the Intimate Partner Violence in the society

2. To investigate the possible, physical, and emotional impacts of the IPV on the victims in the society

3. To evaluate and suggest practical solutions and recommendations to manage the existing IPV against women in the society

Literature Review

Abuse against a person's partner is a prevalent kind of violence against women that is perpetrated by a husband or a personal male accomplice. Numerous women who leave an abusive relationship suffer deterioration in their quality of life, ending up in neediness, reliant on government assistance, or being penniless. Ditcher and Rhodes (2011) estimate that more than one in four women may encounter physical or sexual assault, or stalking, at the hands of an intimate partner throughout their lives. Victimization of intimate partner violence (IPV) may result in a range of short- and long-term physical, financial, and emotional issues, and victims may have a range of associated social support requirements (Ditcher & Rhodes, 2011). This indicates the existing IPV cases in society and the needed support system.

Close accomplice viciousness (IPV) is a well-known kind of violence against women that is committed by a husband or a private male accomplice. It is a legitimate general medical condition associated with positive physical, degenerative, and mental health outcomes. The global aspects of IPV are concerning, with between 15%–and 71% of females reporting experiencing IPV over their lives (Postmus, Plummer, & Stylianou, 2016). Different sorts of abuse often coexist within the same relationship; nonetheless, disclosed measures are contingent upon the terminology used, how inquiries are posed, the amount of security during meetings, and the populace's set norms (Nwabuzor Ogbonnaya & Kohl, 2018). IPV is often characterized as an instance of coercive behaviors in a relationship in which one partner employs methods of intensity and control over the other partner over time. Despite the abundance of literature on various forms of maltreatment, few have focused on financial maltreatment, with scholars emphasizing the need to include monetary maltreatment as a kind of IPV, given the concept of business injury, financial control, and monetary abuse.

Along with the consequences of immediate harm, research has shown that a history of IPV victimization is related to short- and long-term physical and mental health issues, as well as financial and social difficulties. IPV may result in respiratory and gastrointestinal system difficulties, as well as a variety of gynecological and chronic illnesses (Ditcher & Rhodes, 2011). Another research by Nwabuzor Ogbonnaya and Kohl (2018) looked at work sabotage among African American female victims of violent conduct at home who were residing in abusive behavior at home safe homes. The investigation discovered that perpetrators effectively interfered with unfortunate victims' ability to support themselves by obliterating their automobiles, physically injuring or limiting them, failing to provide childcare, stealing their vehicle keys and cash, and refusing to provide transportation to work. Showalter's (2016) review of the writing found many examples of work-related harm, such as keeping people awake all night before job interviews, crushing clothes, inflicting visible facial wounds, immobilizing the car, trying to take the children from childcare, not showing up for childcare or transportation, and pestering the victim at work.

Miller defines psychological maltreatment as "remarks or actions intended to undermine the victim's sense of important value and self-esteem." This often involves taunting, affronts, ridicule, and public humiliation. Mental abuse includes tactics used by the perpetrator to impair the victim's ability to reason and think, as well as creating the impression that the victim is losing his or her mind (Arslan, 2016). Childcare professionals come into contact with clients who have a history of IPV, and studies indicate that this is a common occurrence in child welfare, with up to 70% co-occurrence (Mennicke et.al, 2018). Infected children have behavioral and emotional issues because of IPV. Numerous studies have shown how seeing domestic violence may be detrimental to children (An & Choi, 2019). As a result, Eccovia, a software startup, attempts to assist health and human care providers by managing cases and data. Caseworkers gather data to assist experts in taking action to protect children living in violent conditions.

Hester (2011) argues that levels of support and forms of empowerment for women in domestic violence situations have not developed in parallel with child protection work, and, as such, the two currently fail to mutually reinforce one another. Indeed, statutory agencies invariably overlook the complex relationship between the safety of the mother and that of the child (Kelly, 1994). Instead, there is an emergent culture of mother-blaming, in which social workers have viewed domestic violence situations as a child protection issue (Humphreys, 1999). Social workers have tended to focus on the mother’s deficiencies and failures, which, inadvertently, serve to obfuscate the male violence that generated them (Lapierre, 2008). Radford and Hester (2006, p.9) challenge what they view as the 'denigration of mothering' within child protection agencies

Research has routinely demonstrated how witnessing domestic violence can be harmful to children (Holt et al., 2011). Consequently, legislation and guidance in the UK have been updated to aid professionals in taking action to support children living within ‘climates of violence’ (Bentovim et al., 2009, p14). Thus, creating a possible platform to support Caseworkers ad victims of IPV.

Hester (2011) contends that since levels of assistance and types of empowerments for women experiencing domestic abuse did not emerge along with child protection work, the two now do not reinforce one another. Indeed, statutory authorities generally neglect the intricate link between the mother's safety and the child's (An & Choi, 2019). Rather than that, a culture of mother-blaming has developed, with social workers seeing domestic violence situations as a child safety concern. Social workers tend to concentrate only on the mother's shortcomings and failings, which serves to hide the male aggression that resulted in them. Joshi, Thomas, and Sorenson, (2012) speak out against what they perceive to be a 'denigration of mothering' inside child protective services. Through the Eccovia, it is possible to argue that a more integrated strategy for women empowerment and child protection is required in domestic abuse scenarios.

There is a lot of violence against women at home, which includes beatings and rapes, as well as other types of abuse (Stöckl et al., 2014). The average abuse of 30–60 percent of women around the world is documented. Domestic violence is common among Central Asian women in Kyrgyzstan, but little is known about how abused women think, feel, and act in this country (Joshi & Childress, 2017; National Statistical Committee and UNICEF, 2014). UNDP (2019) says that family violence is the result of male-dominated social systems that make women feel like second-class citizens. Societal structures can make it hard for a woman to choose between culture and her safety. Women can choose not to have children or to make other choices that will not have big social, physical, or psychological effects. However, some of these women may do this to keep the peace in their home, but not for their good.

Methodology

The primary research method of this qualitative study will be a literature review that will be providing research-based data on existing Intimate Partner Violence. A systematic literature review will be conducted to identify literature on existing IPV at global, regional, national, and community levels will be the first step in the research. The second approach in the study will include a mail-in survey will contain a questionnaire on the impacts the possible, physical, and emotional impacts of the IPV on the victims in the society and suggest practical solutions and recommendations to manage the existing IPV against women in the society by caseworkers and victims will be adopted in the research. Finally, the outcomes from the literature review and mail-in survey will be subject to content analysis and thematic analysis to provide practical implications in managing Caseworkers and Victims’ Intimate Partner Violence and practical implications.

APPENDICES

Appendix I: Timeframe

Task	Timeframe
Initial meeting	1st May 2022
Literature Review	2-6th May 2022
Survey	7-20 May 2022
Data Analysis	23-31st May 2022
Report Writing	1-30th June 2022

Appendix II: Budget

Item	Charge	Total
Meeting charge	$150*20	$3,000.00
Questionnaire development and revision	$250.00	$250.00
Survey	$1159.00	$1,159.00
Report Writing and Submission	$100.00	$100.00
	$4,509.00

 

References

An, S., & Choi, G. Y. (2019). Is TANF truly accessible and helpful? Victims’ experiences with domestic violence screening under the family violence option. Affilia, 34(4), 461-480.

Arslan, G. (2016). Psychological maltreatment, emotional and behavioral problems in adolescents: The mediating role of resilience and self-esteem. Child abuse & neglect, 52, 200-209.

Bogat, G., Garcia, A., and Levendosky, A. (2016). Assessment and Psychotherapy with Women Experiencing Intimate Partner Violence: Integrating Research and Practice. Psychodynamic Psychiatry, 41(2) 189–218,

Dichter, M. E., & Rhodes, K. V. (2011). Intimate partner violence survivors’ unmet social service needs. Journal of Social Service Research, 37(5), 481-489.

Hester, M. (2011). The three planet model: Towards an understanding of contradictions in approaches to women and children's safety in contexts of domestic violence. British journal of social work, 41(5), 837-853.

Joshi, M., Thomas, K. A & Sorenson, S. B. (2012). “I didn't know I could turncolors”: Journal of Women and Social Work. 24(3), 244-256.

Mennicke, A., Langenderfer-Magruder, L., & MacConnie, L. (2019). “It’s tricky…”: Intimate partner violence service providers’ perspectives of assessments and referrals by child welfare workers. Journal of family violence, 34(1), 47-54.

Nwabuzor Ogbonnaya, I., & Kohl, P. L. (2018). Profiles of child-welfare-involved caregivers identified by caseworkers as having a domestic violence problem: Then and now. Journal of interpersonal violence, 33(18), 2802-2825.

Postmus, J. L., Plummer, S. B., & Stylianou, A. M. (2016). Measuring economic abuse in the lives of survivors: Revising the Scale of Economic Abuse. Violence against women, 22(6), 692-703.

Showalter, K. (2016). Women's employment and domestic violence: A review of the literature. Aggression and violent behavior, 31, 37-47.

Stöckl, H., Devries, K., Rotstein, A., Abrahams, N., Campbell, J., Watts, C., & Moreno, C. G. (2014). The global prevalence of intimate partner homicide: a systematic review. The Lancet, 382(9895), 859-865.

UNDP. (2019). Changing Minds about domestic Violence. UNDP Georgia: United Nations Development Programme.

2