Journal of Family Violence

, Volume 34, Issue 1, pp 55–64 | Cite as

Intersectional Trauma-Informed Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) Services: Narrowing the Gap between IPV Service Delivery and Survivor Needs

  • Shanti KulkarniEmail author
Original Article


Over the past 50 years, programs serving intimate partner violence (IPV) survivors have expanded nationally. However, despite IPV program growth service gaps remain, particularly for the most marginalized and vulnerable survivor populations. Emerging practice models call for reimagining current IPV service delivery within an intersectional feminist, trauma-informed framework. An overview of intersectional (e.g. survivor-centered, full-frame, culturally specific) and trauma-informed IPV service approaches will be presented highlighting their shared emphasis on power sharing, authentic survivor-advocate relationships, individualized services, and robust systems advocacy. These approaches have the potential to transform IPV services and narrow service gaps if organizations can embed key elements into program design, implementation and evaluation processes. Recommendations for moving the IPV field forward include: 1) expanding survivors’ roles/input; 2) strengthening funding streams and organizational commitment to anti-oppressive, survivor-defined, trauma-informed services; 3) forging cross-sector advocacy relationships; and 4) building knowledge through research and evaluation.


Domestic violence Intimate partner violence Service delivery Survivor-centered Trauma-informed Full-frame Culturally specific 


  1. Arnold, G., & Ake, J. (2013). Reframing the narrative of the battered women’s movement. Violence Against Women, 19, 557–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Asian Pacific Institute on Gender-Based Violence (n.d.). Culturally specific advocacy. Retrieved from
  3. Bell, H., Kulkarni, S., & Dalton, L. (2003). Organizational prevention of vicarious trauma. Families in Society, 84(4), 463–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bennett, L., Riger, S., Schewe, P., Howard, A., & Wasco, S. (2004). Effectiveness of hotline, advocacy, counseling, and shelter services for victims of domestic violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19(7), 815–829. Scholar
  5. Black, M.C., Basile, K.C., Breiding, M.J., Smith, S.G., Walters, M.L., Merrick, M.T., … & Stevens, M.R. (2011). The national intimate partner and sexual violence survey (NISVS): 2010 summary report. Atlanta: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.Google Scholar
  6. Bloom, S. L. (2013). Creating sanctuary: Toward the evolution of sane societies. Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Caminar Latino (n.d.). About our programs. Retrieved from
  8. Carlson, J., Casey, E., Edleson, J., Tolman, R., Walsh, T., & Kimball, E. (2015). Strategies to engage men and boys in violence prevention. Violence Against Women, 21(11), 1406–1425. Scholar
  9. Casa de Esperanza (n.d.). What we do. Retrieved from
  10. Cattaneo, L., & Goodman, L. A. (2010). Through the lens of therapeutic jurisprudence: The relationship between empowerment in the court system and well-being for intimate partner violence victims. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25(3), 481–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Identity politics, intersectionality, and violence against women. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299.Google Scholar
  12. Davies, J., & Lyon, E. (2013). Domestic violence advocacy: Complex lives/difficult choices (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  13. Donnelly, D. A., Cook, K. J., Van Ausdale, D., & Foley, L. (2005). White privilege, color blindness, and services to battered women. Violence Against Women, 11(1), 6–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Edleson, J. L., Lindhorst, T., & Kanuha, V. K. (2015). Ending gender-based violence: A grand challenge for social work (Grand Challenges for Social Work Initiative Working Paper No. 15). Cleveland: American Academy of Social Work and Social Welfare.Google Scholar
  15. End Domestic Abuse, W. I. (2017). Transformative justice. Coalition Chronicles, 36(2), 1–23.Google Scholar
  16. Fleck-Henderson, A. (2017). From movement to mainstream: A battered women’s shelter evolves (1976–2017). Affilia, 32(4), 476–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fugate, M., Landis, L., Riordan, K., Naureckas, S., & Engel, B. (2005). Barriers to domestic violence help seeking. Violence Against Women, 11(3), 290–310. Scholar
  18. Full Frame Initiative (n.d.). The five domains of wellbeing (fact sheet). Retrieved from: on 3/20/2018.
  19. Goodman, L. A., & Epstein, D. (2008). Listening to battered women: A survivor-centered approach to advocacy, mental health, and justice. American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  20. Goodman, L. A., & Smyth, K. (2011). A call for a social network-oriented approach to services for survivors of intimate partner violence. Psychology of Violence, 1, 79–92. Scholar
  21. Goodman, L. A., Cattaneo, L. B., Thomas, K., Woulfe, J., Chong, S. K., & Smyth, K. F. (2015). Advancing domestic violence program evaluation: Development and validation of the measure of victim empowerment related to safety (MOVERS). Psychology of Violence, 5(4), 355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Goodman, L. A., Fauci, J. E., Sullivan, C. M., DiGiovanni, C. D., & Wilson, J. M. (2016). Domestic violence survivors’ empowerment and mental health: Exploring the role of the alliance with advocates. Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 86(3), 286–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Goodman, L., Thomas, K., Serrata, J., Lippy, C., Nnawulezi, N., Ghanbapour, S., Sullivan, C., & Bair-Merritt, M. (2017). Power through partnerships: A CBPR toolkit for domestic violence researchers. Available at:
  24. Goodman, L. A., Epstein, D., & Sullivan, C. M. (2018a). Beyond the RCT: Integrating rigor and relevance to evaluate the outcomes of domestic violence programs. American Journal of Evaluation, 39(1), 58–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Goodman, L., Thomas, K., Nnawulezi, N., Lippy, C., Serrata, J., Ghanbarpour, S., Sullivan, C., & Bair-Merritt, M. (2018b). Bringing community based participatory research to domestic violence scholarship: An online toolkit. Journal of Family Violence, 33(2), 103–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Goodmark, L. (2012). A troubled marriage: Domestic violence and the legal system. New York: NYU Press.Google Scholar
  27. Goodmark, L. (forthcoming). Decriminalizing domestic violence: A balanced policy approach to intimate partner violence. University of California Press.Google Scholar
  28. Harris, M., & Fallot, R. D. (2001). New directions for mental health services. Using trauma theory to design service systems. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  29. Herman, J. L. (2015). Trauma and recovery: The aftermath of violence--from domestic abuse to political terror. Hachette UK.Google Scholar
  30. Interaction Institute for Social Change. (2016). Facilitative leadership for social change training resource: What is a stakeholder? Boston: Interaction Institute for Social Change.Google Scholar
  31. Koss, M. P., White, J. W., & Lopez, E. C. (2017). Victim voice in reenvisioning responses to sexual and physical violence nationally and internationally. American Psychologist, 72(9), 1019–1030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kulkarni, S. J., & Bell, H. (2013). Trauma and the organization: Understanding and addressing burnout and secondary trauma in a trauma-informed system. In B. Doolittle (Ed.), Psychology of Burnout: New Research. Haupage. New York: Nova Publications.Google Scholar
  33. Kulkarni, S. J., Bell, H., & Wylie, L. (2010). Why don't they follow through?: Intimate partner survivors' challenges in accessing health and social services. Family & Community Health, 33(2), 94–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kulkarni, S. J., Bell, H., & Rhodes, D. (2012). Back to basics: Essential qualities of services for survivors of intimate partner violence. Violence Against Women, 18(1), 85–101. Scholar
  35. Kulkarni, S.J., Stylianou, A.M., & Wood, L.G. (in review). Successful rules reduction implementation process in domestic violence shelters from vision to practice. Social Work.Google Scholar
  36. Laney, G. (2011). Violence Against Women Act: History and Federal Funding. (CRS Report No. RL33539). Retrieved from:
  37. Lehrner, A., & Allen, N. E. (2009). Still a movement after all these years? Current tensions in the domestic violence movement. Violence Against Women, 15(6), 656–677.Google Scholar
  38. Lehrner, A., & Allen, N. E. (2008). Social change movements and the struggle over meaning making: A case study of domestic violence narratives. American Journal of Community Psychology, 42, 220–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Logan, T. K., & Walker, R. (2018). Advocate safety planning training, feedback, and personal challenges. Journal of Family Violence, 33(3), 213–225. Scholar
  40. Lyon, E., Lane, S., & Menard, A. (2008). Meeting survivors’ needs: A multi-state study of domestic violence shelter experiences, executive summary. National Institute of Justice. Retrieved from VAWNET:
  41. Macy, R., Giattina, M., Parish, S., & Crosby, C. (2010). Domestic violence and sexual assault services: Historical concerns and contemporary challenges. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25(1), 3–32. Scholar
  42. Mehrotra, G., Kimball, E., & Wahab, S. (2016). The braid that binds us: The impact of neoliberalism, criminalization, and professionalization on domestic violence work. Affilia Journal of Women and Social Work, 31(2), 153–163. Scholar
  43. Melbin, A., Jordan, A. & Fels Smyth, K. (2014). How do survivors define success? A new project to address an overlooked question. Full Frame Initiative: Greenfield.Google Scholar
  44. Mennicke, A., & Kulkarni, S. J. (2016). Understanding gender symmetry within an expanded partner violence typology. Special Issue of Journal of Family Violence., 33(8), 1013–1018. Scholar
  45. Nichols, A. (2013). Meaning-making and domestic violence victim advocacy. Feminist Criminology, 8(3), 177–201. Scholar
  46. Nnawulezi, N.A. (2016). From organizational culture to survivor outcomes: A process and outcome evaluation of the district alliance for safe housing. Washington, D.C.: District Alliance for Safe Housing, Inc. Available at:
  47. Nnawulezi, N. A., & Sullivan, C. M. (2014). Oppression within safe spaces: Exploring racial microaggressions within domestic violence shelters. Journal of Black Psychology, 40(6), 563–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. O’Neal, E. N., & Beckman, L. O. (2017). Intersections of race, ethnicity, and gender: Reframing knowledge surrounding barriers to social services among Latina intimate partner violence victims. Violence Against Women, 23(5), 643–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Potter, H. (2013). Intersectionality and criminology: Gender, race, class and crime. London:Routledge.Google Scholar
  50. Schechter, S. (1982). Women and male violence: The visions and struggles of the battered women’s movement. Boston: South End.Google Scholar
  51. Serrata, J. & Notario, H. (n.d.). Trauma-informed principles through a culturally specific lens. Available for download at:
  52. Siegel, J. (2013). An expanded approach to batterer intervention programs incorporating neuroscience research. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 14(4), 295–304. Scholar
  53. Smyth, K., Goodman, L., & Glenn, C. (2006). The full-frame approach: A new response to marginalized women left behind by specialized services. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 76(4), 489–502. Scholar
  54. Sokoloff, N. J., & Dupont, I. (2005). Domestic violence at the intersections of race, class, and gender: Challenges and contributions to understanding violence against marginalized women in diverse communities. Violence Against Women, 11, 38–64. Scholar
  55. Stith, S., & McCollum, E. (2011). Conjoint treatment of couples who have experienced intimate partner violence. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 16(4), 312–318. Scholar
  56. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (2014). Trauma- Informed Care in Behavioral Health Services. Treatment Improvement Protocol (TIP) Series 57. HHS Publication No. (SMA) 13–4801. Rockville: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.Google Scholar
  57. Sullivan, C. M. (2018). Understanding how domestic violence support services promote survivor well-being: A conceptual model. Journal of Family Violence, 33, 123–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Thoennes, N., & Pearson, J. (2015). Fatherhood programs and intimate partner violence. Philadelphia: Fatherhood Research and Practice Network, Temple University.Google Scholar
  59. Thomas, K. A., Goodman, L., & Putnins, S. (2015). “I have lost everything”: Trade-offs of seeking safety from intimate partner violence. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 85(2), 170–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Thomas, K. A., Goodman, L. A., Vainer, E. S., Heimel, D., Barkai, R., & Collins-Gousby, D. (2018a). “No Sacred Cows or Bulls”: The Story of the Domestic Violence Program Evaluation and Research Collaborative (DVPERC). Journal of Family Violence, 1–13.Google Scholar
  61. Thomas, K. A., Mederos, F., & Rodriguez, G. (2018b). “It shakes you for the rest of your life”: Low-income fathers’ understanding of domestic violence and its impact on children. Psychology of Violence. Advance online publication.
  62. Warshaw, C., Tinnon, E., & Cave, C. (2018). Tools for transformation: Becoming accessible, culturally responsive, and trauma-informed organizations. Washington, D.C.: National Center on Domestic Violence, Trauma & Mental Health. Available for download at: Accessed 1 Sep 2018.
  63. Wies, J. R. (2008). Professionalizing human services: A case of domestic violence shelter advocates. Human Organization, 221–233.Google Scholar
  64. Wilson, J. M., Fauci, J. E., & Goodman, L. A. (2015). Bringing trauma-informed practice to domestic violence programs: A qualitative analysis of current approaches. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 85(6), 586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Wood, L. (2015). Hoping, empowering, strengthening: Theories used in intimate partner violence advocacy. Affilia, 30(3), 286–301. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of North Carolina at CharlotteSchool of Social WorkCharlotteUSA

Personalised recommendations