SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
COMMISSION
Meeting Date: August 14, 2002 4:00 PM
Location: Commission for the Prevention of Violence Against Women (CPVAW)
915 Cedar Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Recommendation: Approve Alan Hiromura as vice chair to the committee, replacing Lisa Gifford who resigned from the DV Commission.
Committee chair
Laurie McWhorter called the meeting to order at 4:15 PM. Committee members
present: David Rabow, Linda Starn, Alan Hiromura, Ernesto Lopez-Molina, and Kim
Austin. Paula Gammel notified us that she couldn’t make the meeting. Alan
Hiromura was approved as Vice Chair: D. Rabow/L. Starn/unanimous.
None.
None.
Both Approved: A. Hiromura/D.
Rabow/unanimous (with E. Lopez-Molina abstaining).
Recommendation: To create a
goal statement that will guide us through this work and serve to inspire
participants to eagerly comply. I.e. The goal of this survey tool is to
reduce/end domestic violence in SC County. The questions asked serve to assess
the current situation so that informed actions can be taken to reach our goal.
Goal Statement: To gather information to provide to the DV Commission and community to assist in developing strategies to reduce and/or end domestic violence in Santa Cruz County.
A. Hiromura/L. Starn/unanimous.
The committee decided to use recommendation #1
in conjunction with the 3 screening questions created by A. Hiromura: 1. Why does the DV Commission need the
information? 2. From which agency(ies)
can we collect the data? If none, is it important enough that we ask the
Commission to request the agency (ies) to collect that information? 3. How will the DV Commission use the data?
Task 2. A. from the Overview Report:
Reporting DV Cases (Law enforcement)
The 3 questions were reduced to one and adjusted as follows:
# of DV incidents/month/agency/ethnicity/age/language/gender/children
D. Rabow and K. Austin will report back about how to
word a question regarding the stats of children affected.
Screening ? 1: Why do we need this info:
# |
Need to know how much of an issue DV is…getting worse or better. |
Month |
Trends/ when DV is more on rise/ take extra actions then. |
Agency |
Will give general geographical location via jurisdiction |
Ethnicity |
Who is underserved/ compare with census as to # reporting |
Language |
Help determine need for bilingual services |
Age |
Trends/ how to educate |
Gender |
Violent women or self-defense issues/ # of arrests are disproportionate to # of no-file according to gender/ enough services for male victims |
Children |
To determine the number of children affected by DV in their lives. |
Screening ? 2. From which agency(ies) can we collect the data? If none, is
it important enough that we ask the Commission to request the agency (ies) to
collect that information?
We
want from all law enforcement agencies |
Need
to ask them to obtain if they don’t have. |
All 4 municipalities |
They have |
Parks |
Not sure their technical capabilities |
Harbor |
Small enough load, should be able to do by hand. |
UCSC |
Not sure their technical capabilities |
Screening ? 3. How will the DV
Commission use the data?
Same as answers to Screening ? 1. above.
Recommendation: review
proposed timeline, revise, approve.
The timeline was revised and approved. See attached document.
A. Hiromura/K.
Austin/unanimous.
The chair will give a verbal only report at the
August 14 general meeting.
None.
Thursday, August 29th,
11a.m. – 1p.m. at the CPVAW office.
Members gave final remarks.
The meeting adjourned at 5:25 p.m.