Needs 
Assessment 
Report 


from 
the 
Washington 
State 


disAbility 
Advocacy 
Project 


This project 
is supported 
by 
Grant 
No. 
2006-FW-AX-K015 
awarded 
by 
the 
Office 
on 
Violence 
Against 
Women, 
U.S. 
Department 
of 
Justice. 
The 
opinions, 
findings, 
conclusions, 
and 
recommendations 
expressed 
in 
this publication 
are 
those 
of 
the 
authors and 
do 
not 
necessarily 
reflect 
the 
views of 
the 
Department 
of 
Justice, 
Office 
on 
Violence 
Against 
Women. 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


Table 
of 
Contents 


Section1–OverviewoftheProject.................... 
3 
Section 
2 
– 
Overview 
of 
Selected 
Communities 
. 
. 
. 
. 
. 
. 
. 
. 
. 
. 
. 
5 
Section 
3 
– 
Overview 
of 
the 
Needs 
Assessment 
Plan 
. 
. 
. 
. 
. 
. 
. 
7 
Section4–NeedsAssessmentFindings................. 
12 
GapsandBarrierstoServices............ 
12 
Gaps 
and 
Barriers 
to 
Effective 
Outreach 
. 
. 
. 
. 
28 
Opportunities 
for 
Collaborative 
Advocacy 
. 
. 
. 
32 
Appendix 
A 
– 
Mission 
& 
Vision 
of 
the 
disAbility 
Advocacy 
Project 
36 
Appendix 
B 
– 
Criteria 
for 
the 
Selection 
of 
Pilot 
Sites 
. 
. 
. 
. 
. 
. 
. 
. 
37 
Appendix 
C 
– 
Themes 
from 
Focus 
Groups 
and 
Interviews 
. 
. 
. 
38 
Appendix 
D 
-Demographic 
and 
Statistical 
Information 
. 
. 
. 
. 
. 
48 


2 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


_____________________________________
Section1OverviewoftheProject
In 
2006, 
the 
disAbility 
Advocacy 
Project 
(dAP) 
of 
the 
Washington 
State 
Collaboration 
received 
a 
three 
year 
award 
from 
the 
Office 
on 
Violence 
Against 
Women, 
Education 
and 
Technical 
Assistance 
Grants 
to 
End 
Violence 
Against 
Women 
with 
Disabilities 
Grant 
Program. 
The 
lead 
agency 
for 
the 
grant 
is 
the 
Washington 
State 
Coalition 
Against 
Domestic 
Violence. 
The 
collaborative 
partners 
of 
the 
disAbility 
Advocacy 
Project 
include 
the 
Abused 
Deaf 
Women’s 
Advocacy 
Services, 
Disability 
Rights 
Washington, 
and 
the 
Washington 
Coalition 
of 
Sexual 
Assault 
Programs. 


Survivors 
of 
domestic 
violence 
or 
sexual 
assault 
who 
have 
disabilities 
need 
accessible 
services 
wherever 
they 
choose 
to 
seek 
them 
– 
whether 
at 
a 
local 
domestic 
violence 
program, 
a 
local 
sexual 
assault 
program, 
or 
a 
disability 
advocacy 
agency. 
The 
immediate 
goal 
of 
the 
dAP 
partnership 
is 
to 
improve 
the 
accessibility 
of 
services 
for 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
at 
the 
local 
level. 


Needs 
Assessment 


To 
accomplish 
this 
goal, 
the 
dAP 
decided 
to 
conduct 
a 
needs 
assessment 
in 
a 
variety 
of 
Washington 
state 
communities 
that 
reflect 
the 
demographic 
and 
cultural 
diversity 
of 
the 
state. 
Following 
the 
needs 
assessment, 
the 
partners 
want 
to 
form 
pilot 
sites, 
which 
we 
call 
dAP 
Community 
Collaborations 
(dAPCC) 
in 
communities 
where 
local 
advocates 
and 
people 
with 
disabilities 
will 
collaborate 
on 
projects 
aimed 
at 
addressing 
the 
gaps 
and 
barriers 
to 
services 
identified 
by 
the 
needs 
assessment. 
The 
dAP 
will 
provide 
technical 
assistance 
and 
support 
as 
needed 
to 
the 
dAPCCs. 


Prior 
to 
embarking 
on 
this 
project, 
the 
dAP 
partners 
evaluated 
our 
capacity 
for 
conducting 
a 
needs 
assessment 
and 
for 
supporting 
dAPCCs. 
The 
partners 
determined 
that 
we 
had 
the 
time 
and 
resources 
to 
conduct 
needs 
assessments 
in 
four 
communities 
and 
ultimately 
to 
support 
three 
community 
collaborations. 
Four 
communities 
were 
selected 
to 
participate 
in 
the 
project 
based 
on 
demographics 
and 
the 
presence 
of 
domestic 
violence, 
sexual 
assault 
and 
disability 
advocacy 
resources 
in 
the 
community. 
The 
partners 
also 
developed 
criteria 
for 
determining 
which 
of 
the 
four 
communities 
would 
eventually 
be 
selected 
as 
dAPCCs 
(see 
appendix 
B). 


The 
partners 
engaged 
in 
significant 
planning 
prior 
to 
beginning 
their 
needs 
assessment 
activities. 
Working 
with 
the 
Vera 
Institute 
of 
Justice, 
the 
technical 
assistance 
provider 
for 
the 
project, 
the 
dAP 
developed 
a 
comprehensive 
plan 
that 
outlined 
the 
processes 
and 
activities 
that 
would 
be 
undertaken 
in 
the 
needs 
assessment. 
For 
a 
detailed 
summary 
of 
that 
plan, 
please 
see 
Section 
3 
of 
this 
report. 


The 
needs 
assessment 
plan 
was 
carried 
out 
in 
October 
and 
November 
of 
2007. 
Nineteen 
focus 
groups 
or 
interviews 
were 
conducted 
by 
dAP 
partners 
with 
a 
variety 


3 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


of 
points 
of 
view 
represented. 
The 
staffs 
of 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
programs 
in 
all 
four 
communities 
participated, 
disability 
advocates 
from 
all 
four 
areas 
also 
took 
part 
in 
focus 
groups 
and 
interviews. 
People 
with 
disabilities 
were 
scheduled 
to 
have 
their 
own 
focus 
groups 
in 
each 
community 
as 
well. 
Following 
the 
focus 
groups 
and 
interviews, 
the 
dAP 
partners 
compiled 
and 
synthesized 
their 
findings 
into 
this 
report. 


Strategic 
Planning 


Once 
our 
needs 
assessment 
findings 
have 
been 
accepted 
by 
the 
Office 
on 
Violence 
Against 
Women 
(OVW), 
we 
will 
engage 
in 
a 
strategic 
planning 
process. 
One 
of 
our 
first 
steps 
will 
be 
to 
select 
which 
three 
of 
the 
four 
communities 
will 
act 
as 
dAPCCs 
in 
years 
two 
and 
three 
of 
the 
grant. 
Following 
that 
determination, 
we 
will 
identify 
activities 
that 
will 
address 
the 
needs 
of 
the 
three 
community 
collaborations, 
as 
identified 
in 
the 
needs 
assessment. 


The 
strategic 
planning 
process 
will 
include 
discussions 
among 
the 
core 
partners 
of 
our 
collaborative, 
as 
well 
as 
input 
from 
invited 
guests 
who 
have 
particular 
expertise 
to 
offer. 
Among 
the 
experts 
will 
be 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates, 
disability 
advocates, 
people 
with 
disabilities, 
and 
survivors. 


From 
these 
discussions, 
and 
through 
the 
ongoing 
support 
of 
our 
technical 
assistance 
provider, 
the 
Vera 
Institute 
of 
Justice, 
we 
will 
develop 
a 
strategic 
plan 
that 
will 
address 
the 
gaps 
and 
barriers 
identified 
by 
our 
needs 
assessment, 
utilize 
the 
strengths 
and 
assets 
already 
present 
in 
the 
three 
selected 
communities, 
create 
opportunities 
for 
collaborative 
advocacy 
among 
advocates 
and 
organizations, 
and 
adopt 
strategies 
for 
the 
sustainability 
of 
the 
project 
beyond 
the 
life 
of 
the 
grant. 


4 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


_____________________________________
Section2OverviewoftheCommunitiesInvolved
The 
dAP 
conducted 
needs 
assessment 
activities 
in 
four 
communities; 
Tacoma, 
Spokane, 
Grays 
Harbor, 
and 
Pullman. 
Three 
of 
the 
four 
will 
be 
selected 
to 
continue 
with 
the 
project 
as 
a 
dAPCC. 
Each 
of 
the 
four 
communities 
has 
unique 
strengths 
and 
challenges, 
and 
these 
are 
discussed 
below. 


Tacoma 
Area 


Tacoma 
is 
a 
large 
city 
located 
30 
miles 
south 
of 
Seattle 
on 
the 
I-5 
corridor. 
It 
has 
an 
active, 
healthy 
disability 
advocacy 
community 
that 
has 
expressed 
strong 
interest 
in 
participating 
in 
this 
project. 
There 
is 
both 
a 
Center 
for 
Independent 
Living 
(CIL) 
and 
a 
large 
community 
resource 
center 
(Tacoma 
Area 
Center 
for 
Individuals 
with 
Disabilities 
or 
TACID) 
that 
serves 
the 
disability 
community 
and 
promotes 
self-
determination. 
The 
two 
organizations 
work 
well 
together 
and 
have 
expressed 
strong 
interest 
in 
our 
project 
and 
in 
improving 
existing 
relationships 
with 
local 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
programs. 


In 
addition, 
the 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocacy 
available 
in 
Tacoma 
is 
varied 
and 
diverse. 
The 
Tacoma 
YWCA, 
the 
Korean 
Women’s 
Association, 
and 
the 
Sexual 
Assault 
Center 
of 
Pierce 
County 
all 
participated 
in 
our 
needs 
assessment 
activities 
and 
want 
to 
continue 
to 
make 
connections 
that 
will 
improve 
their 
advocacy 
for 
people 
with 
disabilities. 


Another 
resource 
in 
the 
community 
is 
an 
inter-agency 
group, 
called 
Untold 
Stories, 
that 
meets 
at 
TACID. 
They 
organize 
workshops 
on 
domestic 
violence 
and 
disabilities. 
Representatives 
come 
from 
a 
wide 
variety 
of 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
programs, 
disability 
advocates, 
social 
service 
agencies, 
and 
survivors. 
The 
group 
works 
together 
to 
identify, 
plan, 
organize 
and 
implement 
domestic 
violence 
trainings 
for 
the 
public 
and 
disability 
trainings 
for 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
agency 
staff. 


Spokane 
Area 


Spokane 
is 
a 
large 
city 
on 
the 
eastern 
edge 
of 
Washington. 
Although 
it 
has 
a 
large 
metropolitan 
area, 
the 
city 
falls 
off 
into 
rural 
communities 
rather 
quickly, 
unlike 
the 
metropolitan 
sprawl 
of 
the 
I-5 
corridor 
in 
western 
Washington. 
Both 
the 
Spokane 
YWCA 
(domestic 
violence 
program) 
and 
the 
Safety 
Response 
Center 
(sexual 
assault 
program) 
have 
worked 
hard 
to 
understand 
accessibility 
and 
have 
taken 
steps 
in 
their 
communities 
to 
make 
connections 
in 
the 
disability 
community. 
The 
Safety 
Response 
Center 
has 
close 
ties 
with 
a 
relatively 
new 
organization 
called 
the 
Partnership, 
a 
multi-discipline 
task 
force 
to 
address 
sexual 
assault 
among 
people 
with 
developmental 
disabilities. 


In 
the 
disability 
community, 
there 
is 
strong 
support 
for 
connecting 
the 
disability 
and 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocacy 
communities. 
Spokane’s 
CIL, 
the 


5 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


Coalition 
of 
Responsible 
Disabled 
(CORD) 
has 
devoted 
much 
time 
and 
energy 
to 
this 
work, 
and 
the 
staff 
and 
board 
of 
the 
Partnership 
have 
also 
expressed 
strong 
interest 
in 
having 
the 
dAP 
come 
to 
Spokane. 


Grays 
Harbor 
Area 


Grays 
Harbor 
County, 
on 
the 
central 
Washington 
coast, 
contains 
two 
small 
cities 
and 
extensive 
rural 
areas. 
Grays 
Harbor 
has 
been 
a 
dAP 
pilot 
site 
in 
the 
past, 
headed 
by 
the 
DV 
Center 
of 
Grays 
Harbor. 
It 
has 
been 
difficult 
for 
the 
pilot 
site 
to 
recruit 
community-based 
disability 
advocates 
and 
self-advocates 
to 
be 
a 
part 
of 
pilot 
site 
activities. 
Grays 
Harbor 
is 
served 
remotely 
by 
the 
Center 
for 
Independent 
Living 
in 
Tacoma, 
approximately 
80 
miles 
away. 
Disability 
advocacy 
in 
the 
Grays 
Harbor 
area 
is 
fragmented 
and 
lacks 
funding. 
They 
have 
a 
strong 
advocacy 
community 
for 
people 
with 
developmental 
disabilities, 
with 
a 
small, 
but 
active 
People 
First 
chapter 
and 
a 
local 
Arc 
with 
a 
strong 
parent 
coalition. 
The 
local 
National 
Advocates 
for 
Mental 
Illness 
(NAMI) 
chapter 
and 
Clubhouse 
have 
recently 
re-organized 
and 
have 
not 
expressed 
strong 
interest 
in 
participating 
in 
the 
project. 
Most 
other 
disability 
resources 
in 
the 
community 
are 
service-based, 
rather 
than 
having 
an 
advocacy 
focus. 


The 
DV 
Center 
of 
Grays 
Harbor 
and 
Beyond 
Survival 
(the 
local 
sexual 
assault 
program) 
both 
have 
expressed 
interest 
in 
the 
work 
of 
the 
project 
and 
have 
demonstrated 
a 
commitment 
to 
increasing 
accessibility 
for 
survivors 
with 
disabilities. 
The 
two 
programs 
have 
experienced 
a 
high 
rate 
of 
turnover 
recently 
among 
their 
advocates, 
due 
in 
part 
to 
the 
economic 
pressures 
facing 
the 
Aberdeen-
Hoquiam 
area. 
Both 
programs 
are 
maintaining 
their 
quality 
of 
work 
as 
they 
address 
these 
challenges. 


Pullman/Whitman 
County 
Area 


Pullman, 
located 
in 
Whitman 
County 
in 
southeast 
Washington 
is 
the 
most 
rural 
of 
our 
four 
communities. 
Alternatives 
to 
Violence 
of 
the 
Palouse 
(ATVP) 
is 
the 
local 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
program 
and 
has 
been 
involved 
in 
the 
disAbility 
Advocacy 
Project 
as 
a 
pilot 
site 
through 
earlier 
rounds 
of 
OVW 
funding. 
ATVP 
has 
made 
a 
strong, 
organization-wide 
commitment 
to 
making 
their 
services 
more 
accessible 
and 
has 
integrated 
their 
consciousness 
of 
disability 
issues 
throughout 
their 
program. 
There 
is 
a 
CIL 
in 
Spokane, 
approximately 
one 
and 
one-
half 
hours 
by 
car, 
that 
makes 
regular 
(though 
not 
frequent) 
trips 
to 
Pullman 
and 
Whitman 
County. 
The 
CIL, 
the 
Coalition 
of 
Responsible 
Disabled 
or 
CORD, 
has 
expressed 
strong 
interest 
in 
the 
disAbility 
Advocacy 
Project 
and 
has 
already 
made 
meaningful 
connections 
with 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
programs 
both 
in 
Spokane 
and 
in 
many 
of 
the 
rural 
areas 
of 
eastern 
Washington. 
Pullman 
is 
the 
home 
of 
Washington 
State 
University, 
and 
the 
disabilities 
studies 
community 
at 
WSU 
has 
also 
been 
involved 
at 
the 
Pullman 
pilot 
site. 


6 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


___________________________________________
Section3OverviewoftheNeedsAssessmentPlan
Goals 
for 
the 
needs 
assessment 


Through 
our 
needs 
assessment 
activities, 
we 
hoped 
to 
learn 
from 
people 
with 
disabilities 
about 
their 
experiences 
of 
domestic 
and 
sexual 
violence 
and 
the 
barriers 
they 
face 
when 
seeking 
services. 
Perhaps 
even 
more 
importantly, 
we 
wanted 
to 
learn 
from 
people 
with 
disabilities 
why 
they 
may 
choose 
not 
to 
access 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
services. 
Additionally, 
we 
wanted 
to 
ascertain 
how 
people 
with 
disabilities 
learn 
about 
resources 
in 
their 
communities, 
thereby 
identifying 
opportunities 
for 
organizational 
change 
in 
outreach 
strategies 
utilized 
by 
advocacy 
organizations. 


We 
also 
wanted 
to 
learn 
from 
domestic 
and 
sexual 
violence 
advocacy 
programs 
and 
disability 
advocacy 
agencies 
about 
their 
organizational 
accessibility 
(physical, 
programmatic, 
and 
attitudinal) 
and 
how 
they 
remove 
barriers 
to 
access. 
We 
wanted 
to 
identify 
opportunities 
for 
organizational 
change 
in 
service 
delivery 
and 
examine 
outreach 
strategies 
utilized 
by 
community-based 
advocacy 
organizations. 


Finally, 
we 
wanted 
to 
identify 
strategies 
that 
would 
support 
collaborative 
advocacy 
and 
respect 
the 
choices 
made 
by 
survivors 
with 
disabilities. 
One 
way 
we 
hoped 
to 
accomplish 
this 
goal 
was 
to 
identify 
ways 
that 
community 
based 
organizations 
are 
already 
collaborating. 


Boiling 
these 
objectives 
down, 
we 
identified 
four 
statements 
that 
defined 
the 
goals 
of 
our 
needs 
assessment. 
They 
are: 


1. 
Identify 
gaps 
and 
barriers 
to 
services 
experienced 
by 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
when 
they 
seek 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
services 
from 
community-based 
domestic 
violence, 
sexual 
assault 
or 
disability 
advocates. 
2. 
Identify 
the 
current 
strengths 
and 
assets 
of 
community-based 
domestic 
violence, 
sexual 
assault 
and 
disability 
advocacy 
organizations 
currently 
providing 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
services 
to 
survivors 
with 
disabilities. 
3. 
Identify 
gaps 
and 
barriers 
to 
effective 
outreach 
by 
community-based 
advocacy 
organizations 
that 
discourage 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
from 
seeking 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
services. 
4. 
Identify 
the 
elements 
that 
contribute 
to 
effective 
collaborative 
advocacy 
between 
community-based 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocacy 
programs 
and 
community-based 
disability 
advocacy 
organizations. 
Methodology 


To 
ensure 
that 
our 
community 
needs 
assessments 
were 
comprehensive, 
we 
utilized 
a 
variety 
of 
available 
data 
in 
addition 
to 
new 
data. 
We 
used 
both 
quantitative 
and 
qualitative 
data 
analysis, 
ranging 
from 
descriptive 
statistics 
from 
previous 


7 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


community 
surveys 
to 
thematic 
coding 
of 
new 
focus 
group 
and 
interview 
data. 
Due 
to 
the 
exploratory 
nature 
of 
our 
needs 
assessment 
goals, 
the 
majority 
of 
the 
new 
data 
was 
collected 
through 
focus 
groups 
and 
interviews. 


Target 
Audiences 
for 
Focus 
Groups 
and 
Interviews 


Our 
needs 
assessment 
focused 
on 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
services 
for 
people 
with 
disabilities. 
Those 
services 
might 
be 
provided 
by 
a 
domestic 
violence 
program, 
a 
sexual 
assault 
program, 
or 
a 
disability 
advocacy 
organization. 
There 
are 
four 
distinct 
groups 
of 
individuals 
who 
have 
first-hand 
experience 
regarding 
the 
provision 
of 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
services 
to 
individuals 
with 
disabilities: 
a) 
survivors 
with 
disabilities, 
b) 
community-based 
disability 
advocates, 
c) 
community-based 
domestic 
violence 
advocates, 
and 
d) 
community-based 
sexual 
assault 
advocates. 
Consequently, 
we 
interviewed 
or 
conducted 
focus 
groups 
with 
individuals 
belonging 
to 
each 
of 
these 
four 
target 
groups. 


Methodological 
Framework 


We 
are 
employing 
a 
modified 
version 
of 
the 
“Getting 
to 
Outcomes” 
(GTO)1 
methodology 
of 
doing 
a 
needs 
and 
resources 
assessment. 
GTO 
is 
a 
comprehensive 
program 
planning 
and 
evaluation 
process 
that 
was 
originally 
designed 
to 
improve 
substance 
abuse 
prevention 
program 
planning, 
and 
is 
now 
being 
expanded 
to 
other 
social 
and 
health 
areas, 
such 
as 
mental 
health, 
intimate 
partner 
abuse 
and 
sexual 
violence. 
Our 
evaluator 
is 
experienced 
in 
using 
GTO 
and 
worked 
with 
dAP 
staff 
to 
collect 
and 
analyze 
appropriate 
data 
to 
arrive 
at 
a 
thorough 
understanding 
of 
the 
context 
in 
the 
selected 
communities 
for 
addressing 
the 
needs 
of 
survivors 
with 
disabilities. 


Needs 
Assessment 
Activities 
Conducted 
in 
Four 
Communities 


To 
ensure 
geographic 
and 
demographic 
diversity, 
we 
selected 
communities 
from 
a 
rural 
and 
a 
small 
urban 
area, 
and 
two 
urban 
communities 
from 
opposite 
sides 
of 
the 
state. 


Our 
rural 
community 
is 
centered 
on 
the 
small 
town 
of 
Pullman, 
in 
the 
far 
eastern 
part 
of 
the 
state. 
The 
small 
urban 
setting 
is 
in 
an 
economically 
depressed 
area 
of 
the 
state 
on 
the 
Pacific 
coast, 
called 
Grays 
Harbor. 
This 
community 
includes 
the 
small 
cities 
of 
Aberdeen 
and 
Hoquiam. 
One 
of 
our 
larger, 
urban 
communities, 
Tacoma, 
is 
located 
on 
the 
I-5 
corridor 
in 
western 
Washington. 
The 
other, 
Spokane, 
is 
on 
the 
eastern 
edge 
of 
the 
state. 


Breakdown 
of 
Focus 
Groups 
and 
Interviews 


In 
all, 
we 
conducted 
19 
focus 
groups 
and 
interviews. 
Below 
is 
a 
breakdown 
of 
needs 
assessment 
activities 
by 
target 
group 
and 
community, 
including 
the 
number 
of 
participants. 
We 
conducted 
interviews 
and 
focus 
groups 
in 
three 
populations 
that 
were 
not 
located 
within 
our 
selected 
communities 
because 
we 
felt 
that 
without 
these 
important 
perspectives, 
large 
segments 
of 
individuals 
might 
not 
be 
represented. 


1 
More 
information 
about 
GTO 
can 
be 
found 
at 
http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR101/ 


8 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


Community 
Domestic 
Violence 
(DV) 
Disability 
Advocates 
People 
with 
Disabilities 
(total 
# 
of 
and 
Sexual 
Assault 
(SA) 
(# 
of 
participants) 
(# 
of 
participants) 
participants) 
Advocates 
(# 
of 
participants) 
Tacoma 
• 
40 
DV/SA 
advocates 
• 
6 
Disability 
advocates 
• 
27 
people 
with 
disabilities 
or 
survivors 
• 
Pierce 
County 
YWCA 
(DV) 
(20) 
• 
Korean 
Women’s 
Association 
(DV) 
(6) 
• 
Sexual 
Assault 
Center 
of 
Pierce 
County 
(SA) 
(14) 
• 
Center 
for 
Independence 
(CFI) 
(6) 
Note: 
CFI 
covers 
both 
Tacoma 
and 
Grays 
Harbor 
• 
Tacoma 
Area 
Center 
for 
Individuals 
with 
Disabilities 
(14) 
• 
Pierce 
County 
YWCA 
shelter 
residents 
(13) 
Grays 
Harbor 
• 
9 
DV/SA 
advocates 
• 
6 
Disability 
advocates 
• 
0 
people 
with 
disabilities 
or 
survivors 
• 
DV 
Center 
of 
Grays 
Harbor 
(DV) 
(5) 
• 
Beyond 
Survival 
(SA) 
(4) 
• 
Center 
for 
Independence 
(CFI) 
(6) 
Note: 
CFI 
covers 
both 
Tacoma 
and 
Grays 
Harbor 
A 
focus 
group 
was 
scheduled, 
but 
not 
held 
due 
to 
capacity 
issues 
faces 
by 
the 
DV 
Center 
of 
Grays 
Harbor 
Spokane 
• 
18 
DV/SA 
advocates 
• 
5 
Disability 
advocates 
• 
5 
people 
with 
disabilities 
or 
survivors 
• 
Spokane 
YWCA 
(DV) 
(8) 
• 
Safety 
Response 
Center 
(SA) 
(10) 
• 
Coalition 
of 
Responsible 
Disabled 
(3) 
• 
The 
Partnership 
(2) 
• 
Coalition 
of 
Responsible 
Disabled 
(invited 
guests) 
(5) 
Pullman 
– 
Whitman 
County 
• 
12 
DV/SA 
advocates 
• 
4 
Disability 
advocates 
• 
6 
people 
with 
disabilities 
or 
survivors 
• 
Alternatives 
to 
Violence 
of 
the 
Palouse 
(DV/SA) 
(12) 
• 
Local 
disability 
advocates 
(4) 
• 
Alternatives 
to 
Violence 
of 
the 
Palouse 
(invited 
guests) 
(6) 
Other 
Perspectives 
• 
5 
DV/SA 
advocates 
• 
4 
Disability 
advocates 
• 
0 
people 
with 
disabilities 
or 
survivors 
• 
Northwest 
Network 
(DV) 
– 
advocates 
for 
gay, 
lesbian, 
bi-sexual, 
transgendered 
community 
(5) 
• 
Advocate 
who 
works 
in 
the 
Deaf 
and 
deaf-
blind 
communities 
(1) 
• 
Advocates 
for 
survivors 
of 
traumatic 
brain 
injuries 
(3) 


9 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


Focus 
Group 
Processes 
and 
Protocols 


Each 
focus 
group 
was 
conducted 
using 
a 
“Confidentiality, 
Safety 
& 
Disclosure” 
plan 
that 
was 
developed 
in 
consultation 
with 
the 
Vera 
Institute 
of 
Justice 
and 
approved 
by 
OVW. 
Accessibility 
was 
ensured 
in 
a 
variety 
of 
ways. 
We 
had 
local 
organizations 
collect 
any 
requests 
for 
reasonable 
accommodations, 
we 
researched 
our 
meeting 
sites 
to 
ensure 
that 
they 
were 
accessible, 
and 
we 
asked 
all 
participants 
at 
the 
beginning 
of 
each 
focus 
group 
or 
interview 
if 
there 
were 
any 
access 
issues 
that 
could 
be 
addressed 
that 
would 
make 
their 
participation 
more 
effective. 


At 
the 
beginning 
of 
each 
focus 
group, 
we 
administered 
a 
brief 
survey, 
which 
we 
called 
an 
orientation 
exercise. 
These 
surveys 
were 
tailored 
to 
the 
participants 
of 
the 
focus 
group 
and 
designed 
to 
help 
participants 
focus 
on 
issues 
of 
service 
delivery 
and 
outreach. 
Additionally, 
the 
exercise 
provided 
important 
quantitative 
data 
for 
our 
needs 
assessment. 
Relevant 
data 
from 
those 
surveys 
has 
been 
included 
in 
Section 
4 
of 
this 
report. 


During 
the 
focus 
groups 
and 
interviews 
we 
used 
a 
variety 
of 
techniques 
to 
ensure 
that 
all 
who 
wished 
to 
participate 
were 
included. 
In 
many 
cases, 
we 
went 
around 
the 
room 
asking 
each 
person 
if 
they 
had 
any 
comments 
– 
assuring 
the 
group 
that 
it 
was 
alright 
to 
“pass.” 
We 
often 
asked 
questions 
in 
several 
different 
ways, 
and 
gently 
steered 
conversation 
back 
to 
the 
subject 
at 
hand 
when 
it 
strayed. 
We 
found 
an 
effective 
technique 
was 
to 
refer 
participants 
back 
to 
a 
comment 
made 
by 
another 
participant, 
rather 
than 
continually 
re-stating 
the 
question. 


During 
each 
of 
the 
focus 
groups, 
the 
discussion 
was 
documented 
by 
a 
note 
taker 
on 
a 
computer. 
When 
possible, 
notes 
were 
taken 
verbatim 
to 
capture 
the 
substance 
and 
tone 
of 
what 
each 
participant 
said. 
Many 
quotes 
from 
the 
focus 
groups 
are 
included 
in 
our 
findings 
report. 


Compiling 
the 
Data 
from 
the 
Focus 
Groups 
and 
Interviews 


As 
each 
of 
the 
focus 
groups 
were 
completed, 
the 
notes 
were 
distributed 
electronically 
to 
each 
of 
the 
dAP 
partners 
for 
review. 
Each 
dAP 
partner 
independently 
coded 
themes 
for 
each 
type 
of 
focus 
group 
(disability 
advocates, 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates, 
people 
with 
disabilities). 
At 
the 
November 
partner 
meeting, 
each 
partner 
brought 
their 
identified 
themes 
to 
the 
table 
and 
participated 
in 
a 
group 
coding 
process 
facilitated 
by 
the 
project’s 
evaluator. 
Partners 
shared 
the 
themes 
they 
had 
identified 
for 
each 
focus 
group 
question, 
and 
each 
unique 
theme 
was 
written 
on 
a 
large 
card 
and 
placed 
on 
a 
“sticky 
wall” 
so 
that 
the 
entire 
group 
could 
view 
the 
themes. 


After 
the 
partner 
meeting, 
all 
themes 
were 
compiled 
into 
comprehensive 
tables. 
These 
tables 
became 
particularly 
valuable 
to 
us 
as 
we 
compared 
the 
perspectives 
of 
the 
four 
groups 
and 
synthesized 
their 
understanding 
of 
gaps 
and 
barriers 
to 
services 
for 
survivors 
with 
disabilities. 
Those 
tables 
are 
included 
in 
Appendix 
C 
of 
this 
document. 
The 
reader 
is 
encouraged 
to 
refer 
to 
them 
as 
the 
findings 
discussion 
evolves 
in 
the 
next 
section. 


10 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


At 
the 
December 
partner 
meeting, 
the 
themes 
from 
the 
tables 
were 
organized 
into 
broad 
categories: 


• 
Gaps 
and 
barriers 
to 
services 
for 
survivors 
with 
disabilities; 
• 
Gaps 
and 
barriers 
to 
effective 
outreach 
to 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
by 
advocacy 
organizations; 
• 
Strengths 
and 
assets 
of 
the 
advocacy 
organizations 
and 
opportunities 
for 
collaborative 
advocacy. 
11 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


___________________________________________
Section4NeedsAssessmentFindings
The 
findings 
listed 
in 
this 
section 
are 
organized 
into 
headings 
and 
sub-headings 
to 
assist 
the 
reader. 
No 
attempt 
at 
prioritizing 
the 
findings 
has 
been 
made, 
and 
the 
order 
in 
which 
they 
are 
listed 
does 
not 
necessarily 
reflect 
the 
importance 
the 
dAP 
attaches 
to 
any 
given 
finding. 
Prioritizing 
these 
themes 
will 
be 
done 
during 
our 
strategic 
planning 
process. 


In 
various 
places 
in 
this 
section 
of 
our 
report 
we 
have 
used 
personal 
pronouns 
to 
identify 
survivors, 
advocates, 
or 
abusers. 
These 
individuals 
could 
be 
of 
any 
gender. 
For 
expediency, 
however, 
we 
have 
chosen 
to 
use 
the 
pronouns 
“she” 
or 
“her” 
for 
advocates 
or 
survivors 
because 
the 
majority 
of 
those 
we 
spoke 
with 
were 
female. 
When 
referring 
to 
abusers, 
we 
used 
the 
pronouns 
“he” 
or 
“him.” 
National 
studies 
indicate 
that 
the 
majority 
of 
abusers 
are 
male, 
which 
also 
aligns 
with 
what 
we 
heard 
in 
the 
focus 
groups. 


Gaps 
and 
Barriers 
to 
Services 


FINDING 
-Access 
is 
more 
than 
ramps 
and 
ADA 
bathrooms. 
Real 
access 
happens 
after 
survivors 
get 
in 
the 
front 
door. 


A 
major 
theme 
related 
to 
the 
gaps 
and 
barriers 
that 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
face 
when 
they 
seek 
community 
services, 
is 
that 
real 
access 
is 
about 
what 
happens 
after 
they 
get 
in 
the 
front 
door. 
Although 
significant 
barriers 
exist 
in 
physically 
getting 
to 
a 
community 
services 
organization, 
this 
study 
finds 
that 
substantial 
barriers 
to 
services 
exist 
when 
a 
survivor 
begins 
working 
with 
advocates. 


For 
an 
organization 
to 
be 
fully 
accessible 
to 
a 
survivor 
with 
a 
disability, 
the 
building 
and 
office 
space 
must 
be 
physically 
accessible, 
processes 
and 
protocols 
at 
the 
organization 
must 
be 
navigable, 
and 
the 
staff 
must 
be 
willing 
to 
examine 
and 
change 
attitudes 
and 
pre-conceived 
notions 
that 
perpetuate 
bias 
against 
people 
with 
disabilities. 
Additionally, 
survivors 
must 
believe 
that 
advocates 
are 
comfortable 
talking 
about 
issues 
of 
abuse 
and 
have 
resources 
and 
strategies 
to 
offer. 


What 
we 
learned 
from 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 


In 
many 
cases, 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
organizations 
fail 
to 
recognize 
that 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
have 
unique 
service 
needs. 
Without 
this 
understanding, 
intake 
processes 
are 
confusing 
or 
inappropriate, 
reasonable 
accommodations 
are 
not 
offered, 
and 
services 
offered 
are 
not 
individualized 
to 
the 
survivor’s 
needs. 
As 
a 
consequence, 
the 
survivor 
feels 
unwelcome 
and 
may 
not 
get 
what 
they 
need. 


12 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


Recognition 
that 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
have 
unique 
needs 
is 
a 
first 
step 
for 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
programs. 
This 
recognition 
will 
allow 
the 
organization 
to 
change 
their 
practices 
in 
order 
to 
become 
ready 
to 
provide 
effective, 
thoughtful 
services 
to 
survivors 
of 
domestic 
and 
sexual 
violence 
who 
have 
disabilities. 
For 
example, 
many 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
said 
they 
felt 
unsure 
of 
how 
to 
respectfully 
approach 
the 
topic 
of 
disability 
with 
survivors. 
An 
advocate 
who 
is 
uncomfortable 
sends 
the 
signal 
that 
they 
don’t 
know 
how 
to 
work 
with 
people 
who 
have 
disabilities, 
and 
thus 
trust 
is 
not 
established. 


“I 
did 
an 
intake 
with 
a 
young 
girl. 
She 
couldn’t 
read 
our 
form, 
she 
pretended 
to 
read 
it 
– 
I 
was 
embarrassed.” 


-sexual 
assault 
advocate 


What 
we 
learned 
from 
disability 
advocates 


Disability 
advocates 
are 
usually 
comfortable 
asking 
about 
and 
skilled 
in 
addressing 
disability 
issues. 
We 
found, 
however, 
that 
most 
have 
little 
experience 
or 
training 
about 
discussing 
abuse 
issues 
with 
a 
survivor. 
During 
the 
pre-focus 
group 
surveys, 
disability 
advocates 
were 
asked 
how 
often 
they 
received 
training 
about 
ways 
to 
serve 
people 
with 
disabilities 
who 
experienced 
domestic 
or 
sexual 
violence. 
One 
third 
of 
the 
advocates 
replied, 
“once.” 
The 
remainder 
said, 
“less 
than 
once 
a 
year.” 


Discussions 
at 
the 
focus 
groups 
provided 
further 
information. 
Disability 
advocates 
shared 
that 
they 
were 
often 
unsure 
how 
to 
respond 
when 
abuse 
was 
disclosed 
to 
them. 
This 
creates 
a 
problem 
for 
survivors. 
If 
the 
disability 
advocate 
is 
not 
comfortable 
and 
skilled 
when 
talking 
about 
the 
abusive 
situation, 
the 
survivor 
is 
unlikely 
to 
continue 
the 
discussion. 
Survivors 
may 
also 
be 
dissuaded 
from 
seeking 
appropriate 
referrals 
or 
future 
support. 
It 
is 
important 
to 
recognize 
that 
sharing 
experiences 
of 
personal 
abuse 
is 
frightening 
and 
potentially 
dangerous 
for 
a 
survivor. 
If 
the 
person 
to 
whom 
the 
survivor 
discloses 
reacts 
poorly, 
it 
can 
further 
a 
survivor’s 
isolation 
and 
confirm 
fears 
she 
will 
not 
be 
believed 
or 
will 
be 
blamed 
for 
the 
abuse. 
This 
can 
jeopardize 
the 
survivor’s 
safety 
or 
inhibit 
her 
desire 
to 
seek 
help 
from 
other 
advocates. 
However, 
participants 
in 
the 
disability 
advocate 
focus 
groups 
reported 
that 
their 
organizations 
do 
not 
screen 
for 
abuse, 
nor 
have 
core 
job 
training 
about 
how 
to 
support 
victims 
who 
choose 
to 
disclose 
abuse. 


What 
we 
learned 
from 
people 
with 
disabilities 


People 
with 
disabilities 
note 
that 
it 
is 
a 
significant 
barrier 
when 
an 
advocate 
or 
service 
provider 
cannot 
deal 
forthrightly 
with 
disability 
issues. 
Provider 
hesitation 
often 
causes 
people 
with 
disabilities 
to 
be 
reluctant 
to 
disclose 
their 
disability 
to 
service 
providers 
because 
they 
have 
learned 
that 
when 
their 
disability 
becomes 
known, 
they 
are 
treated 
differently 
than 
others. 
If 
a 
survivor 
does 
not 
disclose 
her 


13 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


disability, 
the 
advocate 
is 
often 
unable 
to 
identify 
the 
individual’s 
service 
needs 
and 
offered 
services 
are 
therefore 
inappropriate 
or 
insufficient. 


This 
can 
be 
especially 
problematic 
for 
survivors 
with 
invisible 
disabilities, 
such 
as 
mental 
illness, 
traumatic 
brain 
injuries, 
learning 
disabilities 
and/or 
many 
medical 
conditions 
whose 
disabilities 
are 
not 
apparent 
to 
advocates. 
People 
with 
invisible 
disabilities 
often 
decline 
to 
disclose 
to 
service 
providers 
unless 
they 
believe 
they 
will 
not 
be 
discriminated 
against, 
and 
any 
advocacy 
plan 
developed 
without 
full 
knowledge 
of 
the 
survivor’s 
service 
needs 
is 
therefore 
incomplete. 


“You 
go 
into 
their 
office 
and 
you 
want 
to 
say 
something, 
but 
. 
. 
. 
they 
don’t 
know 
how 
to 
bring 
a 
subject 
up 
because 
it’s 
a 
touchy 
subject. 
It’s 
like 
a 
big 
white 
elephant 
in 
the 
middle 
of 
the 
room.” 


-person 
with 
a 
disability 


Provider 
discomfort 
plays 
a 
role 
in 
the 
relationship 
between 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
and 
disability 
advocates, 
too. 
Survivors 
with 
disabilities 
spoke 
about 
feelings 
of 
shame, 
guilt 
and 
low 
self-esteem 
that 
were 
created 
or 
exacerbated 
by 
their 
abusers. 
When 
disability 
advocates 
are 
uncomfortable 
talking 
about 
a 
person’s 
experiences 
of 
abuse, 
it 
makes 
a 
topic 
that 
is 
already 
very 
hard 
to 
talk 
about 
even 
harder. 


Summary 


With 
some 
notable 
exceptions, 
most 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
programs 
have 
not 
examined 
their 
practices, 
policies 
and 
protocols 
or 
engaged 
in 
meaningful 
staff 
discussions 
about 
programmatic 
or 
attitudinal 
accessibility 
at 
their 
programs. 
Disability 
advocacy 
organizations 
have 
not 
developed 
methods 
of 
screening 
for 
abuse 
and 
supporting 
survivors 
who 
disclose 
abuse. 


FINDING 
– 
There 
is 
incomplete 
knowledge 
among 
the 
three 
types 
of 
advocates 
about 
appropriate 
service 
provision 
to 
survivors 
with 
disabilities. 
Survivors 
with 
disabilities 
have 
incomplete 
knowledge 
of 
the 
array 
of 
services 
available 
to 
them. 


When 
a 
survivor 
of 
domestic 
violence 
or 
sexual 
assault 
has 
a 
disability, 
it 
is 
difficult 
to 
find 
all 
the 
services 
they 
may 
need. 
If 
the 
survivor 
turns 
to 
a 
domestic 
violence 
or 
sexual 
assault 
advocate, 
the 
advocate 
may 
not 
have 
the 
experience 
and 
knowledge 
to 
ascertain 
how 
the 
survivor’s 
disability 
might 
impact 
an 
advocacy 
plan 
created 
to 
address 
the 
abuse. 
If, 
on 
the 
other 
hand, 
she 
approaches 
a 
disability 


14 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


advocate, 
these 
advocates 
may 
have 
incomplete 
knowledge 
of 
advocacy 
practices 
that 
will 
address 
the 
abuse. 
People 
with 
disabilities 
often 
don’t 
know 
the 
full 
range 
of 
service 
options 
that 
are 
available 
to 
them, 
or 
distrust 
those 
options. 


DOMESTIC 
VIOLENCE 
AND 
SEXUAL 
ASSAULT 
ADVOCATES 


Lack 
of 
knowledge 
of 
the 
impact 
of 
disability 


The 
vast 
majority 
of 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
expressed 
a 
belief 
that 
they 
serve 
everybody 
and 
are 
welcoming 
and 
non-judgmental 
regarding 
a 
survivor’s 
disability. 
At 
the 
same 
time, 
they 
report 
that 
they 
are 
not 
accustomed 
to 
regularly 
serving 
people 
with 
disabilities, 
which 
can 
make 
service 
provision 
less 
fluid 
and 
heighten 
advocate 
discomfort. 
Survivors 
with 
disabilities 
reported 
that 
a 
service 
provider 
who 
is 
uncomfortable 
discussing 
issues 
related 
to 
disability 
sends 
the 
message 
that 
people 
with 
disabilities 
are 
not 
welcome 
or 
will 
not 
receive 
appropriate 
services; 
the 
dichotomy 
is 
apparent. 


Domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
understand 
that 
people 
who 
talk 
about 
their 
abuse 
are 
frequently 
not 
believed 
or 
deemed 
credible. 
But 
many 
of 
these 
same 
advocates 
lack 
understanding 
of 
how 
the 
experience 
of 
living 
with 
a 
disability 
– 
i.e., 
confronting 
daily 
misunderstandings 
or 
assumptions 
and 
bias 
about 
disability 
– 
influences 
a 
person’s 
daily 
choices 
and 
decisions. 
Cultural 
misperceptions 
and 
the 
stigma 
associated 
with 
disability 
are 
influential 
forces 
affecting 
the 
survivor 
on 
many 
levels. 
It 
may 
affect 
internalization 
and 
recognition 
of 
abuse, 
whether 
or 
not 
to 
disclose, 
who 
to 
disclose 
to, 
and 
how 
to 
seek 
support. 
Abusers 
often 
exploit 
a 
survivor’s 
fears 
by 
utilizing 
societal 
bias 
to 
coerce, 
manipulate 
and 
isolate 
the 
targeted 
person. 
The 
compounding 
impact 
of 
living 
with 
these 
realities 
leaves 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
an 
array 
of 
inadequate 
options. 


“My 
caregiver 
sometimes 
refused 
to 
bring 
my 
groceries. 
He’d 
say, 
‘who 
is 
going 
to 
take 
care 
of 
you? 
I’m 
the 
only 
one 
who 
wants 
to 
do 
this 
nasty 
job.’” 


-person 
with 
a 
disability 


If 
the 
survivor 
believes 
a 
domestic 
violence 
or 
sexual 
assault 
advocate 
engages 
in 
any 
behavior 
or 
practice 
that 
reflects 
a 
misunderstanding 
or 
assumption 
about 
what 
people 
with 
disabilities 
can 
and 
cannot 
do 
or 
need, 
the 
person 
seeking 
services 
is 
faced 
with 
an 
all 
too 
familiar 
daily 
hurdle 
– 
from 
a 
resource 
that 
promotes 
itself 
as 
accessible 
and 
welcoming. 
For 
example, 
many 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
host 
support 
groups 
for 
survivors. 
Advocates 
reported 
that 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
often 
felt 
more 
isolated 
when 
attending 
support 
groups 
comprised 
of 
women 
who 
were 
unfamiliar 
with 
the 
experience 
of 
living 
with 
a 
disability. 
Despite 
the 
good 
intentions 
of 
the 
advocates, 
these 
survivors 
were 
provided 
with 
a 
service 
that 
did 
not 
meet 
their 
needs. 
Participants 
in 
the 
focus 
groups 
for 
people 
with 
disabilities 
related 
several 
stories 
of 
similar 
circumstances, 


15 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


leading 
them 
to 
the 
conclusion 
that 
the 
service 
provider 
could 
not 
accommodate 
their 
disability. 


Confusing 
social 
service 
system 
for 
people 
with 
disabilities 


Domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
were 
baffled 
by 
the 
complicated, 
and 
often 
contradictory, 
workings 
of 
the 
disability 
social 
service 
system. 
Many 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
felt 
stymied 
by 
barriers 
to 
eligibility 
for 
such 
programs 
as 
Supplemental 
Security 
Income 
(SSI), 
Social 
Security 
Disability 
Income 
(SSDI), 
Medicaid, 
and 
GAU 
(a 
Washington 
state 
program 
for 
individuals 
who 
are 
deemed 
“unemployable” 
due 
to 
disability). 


“I 
don’t 
know 
what 
services 
are 
out 
there. 
I 
wonder 
what 
is 
out 
there 
that 
I 
don’t 
know 
about.” 


-domestic 
violence 
advocate 


Domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
seemed 
to 
underestimate 
the 
need 
people 
with 
disabilities 
have 
for 
a 
network 
of 
services 
that 
provide 
needed 
support 


– 
and 
the 
fragility 
of 
that 
network. 
When 
one 
needed 
support 
disappears, 
the 
entire 
support 
network 
can 
collapse. 
Moreover, 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
had 
limited 
or 
no 
contacts 
within 
the 
disability 
advocacy 
community 
to 
help 
them 
learn 
about 
how 
domestic 
violence 
or 
sexual 
assault 
affects 
people 
with 
disabilities 
or 
how 
to 
navigate 
the 
service 
system. 


DISABILITY 
ADVOCATES 


Lack 
of 
knowledge 
of 
the 
dynamics 
of 
abuse, 
advocacy 
strategies 


For 
survivors 
with 
disabilities, 
seeking 
services 
from 
disability 
advocates 
may 
address 
barriers 
relating 
to 
access 
or 
bias. 
Indeed, 
disability 
advocacy 
organizations 
were 
clearly 
more 
successful 
in 
developing 
support 
groups 
and 
other 
resources 
that 
alleviated 
some 
of 
the 
sense 
of 
isolation 
that 
most 
people 
with 
disabilities, 
and 
particularly 
survivors, 
experience. 
However, 
disability 
advocates 
are 
not 
familiar 
with 
the 
principles 
of 
safety 
planning 
or 
other 
advocacy 
practices 
that 
support 
survivors’ 
decisions 
and 
hold 
abusers 
accountable. 


Lack 
of 
familiarity 
with 
domestic 
or 
sexual 
violence 
advocacy 


Many 
disability 
advocates 
have 
a 
limited 
understanding 
of 
what 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
do, 
or 
how 
those 
services 
might 
be 
added 
to 
a 
person’s 
support 
network. 
They 
have 
an 
incomplete 
knowledge 
of 
how 
abusers 
can 
manipulate 
systems 
and 
exploit 
societal 
bias 
against 
people 
with 
disabilities. 
Disability 
advocates 
receive 
little 
or 
no 
training 
about 
options 
for 
survivors 
of 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault, 
including 
legal 
remedies, 
housing 
options, 
economic 
benefits 
(i.e. 
civil 
protective 
orders, 
family 
violence 
option 
under 
the 
Temporary 
Assistance 
to 
Needy 
Families 
program, 
or 
HUD 
housing 
placement). 


16 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


SURVIVORS 
WITH 
DISABILITIES 


Unaware 
of 
full 
array 
of 
service 
options 


Survivors 
with 
disabilities 
who 
use 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
services 
appreciate 
that 
support, 
but 
often 
are 
not 
aware 
of 
any 
available 
assistance 
to 
access 
the 
disability 
service 
system. 
Conversely, 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
who 
use 
disability 
advocacy 
organizations 
find 
many 
needed 
supports, 
but 
do 
not 
always 
receive 
necessary 
advocacy 
to 
address 
abuse 
issues. 


People 
with 
disabilities 
have 
incomplete 
knowledge 
of 
the 
services 
that 
are 
available 
to 
them 
when 
they 
experience 
abuse. 
Survivors 
who 
were 
familiar 
with 
disability 
advocacy 
services 
discussed 
their 
lives 
through 
a 
lens 
of 
their 
disability 
and 
expressed 
frustration 
about 
the 
lack 
or 
inadequacy 
of 
advocacy 
that 
related 
to 
the 
abuse 
they 
experienced. 
If, 
on 
the 
other 
hand, 
survivors 
were 
familiar 
with 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
services, 
they 
talked 
of 
their 
experiences 
of 
abuse 
and 
how 
they 
were 
dealing 
with 
those 
issues, 
but 
expressed 
frustration 
that 
issues 
relating 
to 
their 
disabilities 
were 
not 
adequately 
addressed. 


SUMMARY 


Domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
have 
not 
yet 
figured 
out 
what 
practices 
they 
engage 
in 
that 
unintentionally 
mirror 
societal 
bias 
against 
people 
with 
disabilities. 
They 
have 
not 
yet 
found 
ways 
to 
talk 
openly 
with 
survivors 
about 
where 
they 
need 
support. 
Domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
don’t 
have 
strategies 
to 
help 
them 
figure 
out 
what 
they 
don’t 
know 
about 
providing 
accommodation 
and 
support 
to 
people 
with 
disabilities 
who 
are 
experiencing 
abuse. 


Disability 
advocates 
have 
not 
found 
ways 
to 
talk 
about 
abuse 
with 
people 
who 
come 
to 
them 
for 
services 
or 
familiarize 
themselves 
with 
basic 
information 
about 
the 
dynamics 
of 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault. 
Some 
disability 
advocates 
were 
eager 
to 
begin 
work 
on 
this 
issue 
and 
suggested 
that 
internal 
processes 
should 
be 
established 
wherein 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
could 
provide 
regular 
input 
to 
advocates 
on 
how 
services 
could 
be 
more 
effective 
for 
people 
who 
experience 
abuse. 


FINDING 
– 
Washington’s 
Mandatory 
Reporting 
law 
for 
‘vulnerable 
adults’ 
is 
poorly 
understood. 
The 
autonomy 
and 
safety 
of 
all 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
is 
threatened 
by 
the 
limited 
understanding 
of 
advocates. 


This 
could 
be 
a 
subsection 
under 
“Incomplete 
Knowledge,” 
but 
the 
gaps 
in 
knowledge 
among 
all 
three 
groups 
– 
domestic 
violence, 
sexual 
assault 
and 
disability 
advocates 
-warrants 
its 
own 
heading. 
Washington 
State 
law 
defines 
a 
class 
of 
individuals 
as 
“vulnerable 
adults,” 
and 
requires 
certain 
workers, 
volunteers 
or 
other 
staff 
to 
report 
to 
the 
state 
and/or 
law 
enforcement 
if 
they 
have 
reason 
to 
believe 
a 
vulnerable 
adult 
is 
being 
abused. 
Some 
Washington 
residents 
who 
have 
disabilities 
are 
considered 
vulnerable 
adults 
as 
defined 
under 
state 
law, 
but 
many 
are 
not. 


17 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


Differing 
views 
of 
the 
value 
of 
mandatory 
reporting 


Disability 
advocates 
tend 
to 
view 
mandatory 
reporting 
requirements 
as 
a 
small 
beacon 
of 
hope 
in 
a 
dark 
morass 
of 
abuse 
that 
takes 
place 
in 
institutional 
settings. 
Although 
the 
independent 
living 
movement 
has 
made 
strides 
in 
ending 
the 
forced 
segregation 
of 
people 
with 
disabilities, 
many 
people 
with 
disabilities 
end 
up 
living 
in 
congregate 
residential 
facilities 
such 
as, 
“schools” 
for 
people 
with 
developmental 
disabilities, 
nursing 
homes, 
psychiatric 
hospitals, 
boarding 
homes 
and 
adult 
family 
homes. 
The 
nature 
of 
these 
facilities 
is 
that 
staff 
have 
control 
of 
what 
is 
documented 
regarding 
a 
resident 
and 
in 
many 
cases 
over 
communications 
a 
resident 
has 
with 
others. 
When 
a 
staff 
member 
or 
a 
volunteer 
becomes 
abusive, 
the 
victim 
has 
virtually 
no 
avenue 
to 
seek 
help. 
Mandatory 
reporting 
laws 
require 
any 
staff 
member 
or 
volunteer 
to 
report 
to 
authorities 
outside 
of 
the 
facility 
when 
they 
have 
reason 
to 
believe 
that 
abuse 
is 
occurring. 
Disability 
advocates 
value 
mandatory 
reporting 
requirements 
highly, 
because 
it 
is 
often 
the 
only 
way 
abuse 
can 
be 
revealed. 


Domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
tend 
to 
view 
mandatory 
reporting 
for 
adults 
as 
a 
grotesque 
obligation 
that 
runs 
counter 
to 
their 
values 
and 
often 
endangers 
the 
survivor. 
A 
core 
value 
of 
domestic 
and 
sexual 
violence 
advocates 
is 
to 
honor 
the 
choices 
and 
autonomy 
of 
survivors. 
Mandatory 
reporting 
undermines 
this 
principle. 
There 
are 
practical 
as 
well 
as 
philosophical 
consequences 
of 
mandatory 
reporting 
that 
concern 
advocates. 
Among 
these 
consequences 
is 
that 
an 
abuser 
often 
retaliates 
against 
a 
survivor 
when 
he 
finds 
out 
that 
a 
report 
has 
been 
made 
to 
authorities. 
This 
can 
be 
true 
whether 
the 
survivor 
reports 
herself, 
or 
if 
authorities 
are 
alerted 
by 
others. 
Mandatory 
reporting 
laws 
sometimes 
force 
advocates 
to 
expose 
the 
survivor 
to 
retaliation 
by 
her 
abuser. 


The 
point 
of 
view 
of 
both 
groups 
of 
advocates 
is 
accurate, 
but 
incomplete. 
Mandatory 
reporting 
requirements 
can 
be 
either 
beneficial 
or 
harmful 
to 
survivors 
of 
abuse, 
depending 
on 
the 
circumstances. 
However, 
because 
of 
a 
lack 
of 
understanding 
about 
the 
legal 
requirements 
of 
reporting, 
difficulties 
in 
rooting 
out 
institutional 
abuse, 
and 
the 
dynamics 
of 
domestic 
and 
sexual 
violence, 
these 
differing 
perspectives 
make 
it 
difficult 
for 
disability 
advocates 
and 
domestic 
and 
sexual 
violence 
advocates 
to 
have 
productive 
discussions 
on 
the 
topic. 
Neither 
group 
has 
a 
nuanced 
understanding 
of 
the 
subject, 
and 
their 
clashing 
points 
of 
view 
overlay 
other 
aspects 
of 
this 
subject, 
as 
discussed 
below. 


Conflation 
of 
“disability” 
and 
“vulnerable 
adult” 


Although 
the 
focus 
group 
questions 
did 
not 
specifically 
mention 
the 
subject 
of 
mandatory 
reporting, 
the 
topic 
was 
raised 
in 
virtually 
every 
focus 
group. 
It 
became 
clear 
that 
there 
was 
massive 
misunderstanding 
among 
advocates 
regarding 
who 
in 
Washington 
state 
is 
considered 
a 
legally 
defined 
vulnerable 
adult. 
In 
some 
cases, 
advocates 
seemed 
to 
use 
the 
terms 
“person 
with 
a 
disability” 
and 
“vulnerable 
adult” 
interchangeably. 


When 
there 
is 
a 
danger 
of 
abuser 
retaliation, 
this 
confusion 
on 
the 
part 
of 
advocates 
represents 
a 
potentially 
dangerous 
situation 
for 
the 
majority 
of 
people 
with 
disabilities 
in 
Washington 
who 
do 
not, 
in 
fact, 
fall 
under 
the 
state’s 
definition 
of 


18 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


vulnerable 
adult. 
If 
a 
mandatory 
reporter 
cannot 
make 
the 
distinction 
between 
“disability” 
and 
“vulnerable 
adult,” 
all 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
are 
at 
risk. 


Advocates 
do 
not 
have 
the 
training 
necessary 
to 
address 
this 
problem. 
A 
first 
step 
must 
be 
to 
determine 
if 
the 
survivor 
is 
– 
or 
is 
not 
– 
a 
legally 
defined 
vulnerable 
adult. 
If 
she 
is 
a 
vulnerable 
adult, 
the 
second 
step 
involves 
building 
an 
advocacy 
plan 
that 
takes 
into 
account 
both 
safety 
and 
autonomy 
for 
the 
survivor, 
given 
the 
requirements 
of 
mandatory 
reporting. 


Limited 
understanding 
of 
mandatory 
reporting 
can 
threaten 
safety 
and 
autonomy 


Disability 
advocates 
did 
not 
express 
a 
complete 
understanding 
of 
the 
impact 
and 
unintended 
consequences 
regarding 
loss 
of 
autonomy 
and 
safety 
that 
could 
result 
from 
making 
a 
mandatory 
report. 
The 
potential 
escalation 
of 
violence 
by 
an 
abuser 
when 
he 
discovers 
that 
the 
authorities 
have 
been 
called 
represents 
a 
threat 
to 
the 
safety 
of 
the 
survivor. 
The 
situation 
can 
be 
compounded 
if 
the 
survivor 
is 
unaware 
the 
report 
has 
been 
made, 
and 
she 
will 
be 
unprepared 
for 
her 
abuser’s 
retaliation. 


Sexual 
assault 
advocates 
have 
an 
incomplete 
understanding 
of 
the 
value 
of 
mandatory 
reporting 
in 
institutional 
settings. 
Although 
many 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
reported 
that 
they 
had 
worked 
with 
survivors 
in 
congregate 
residential 
facilities, 
they 
expressed 
frustration 
at 
the 
difficulty 
they 
sometimes 
faced 
working 
with 
staff 
or 
facility 
rules. 
A 
better 
understanding 
of 
the 
requirements 
for 
facility 
staff 
to 
file 
mandatory 
reports 
could 
provide 
advocates 
with 
some 
leverage 
when 
advocating 
for 
a 
resident. 


Is 
there 
a 
“safe” 
way 
to 
make 
a 
mandatory 
report? 


Domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
wanted 
clarification 
about 
the 
“safest” 
way 
to 
make 
a 
mandatory 
report. 
A 
number 
of 
issues 
surfaced 
in 
the 
focus 
groups: 
Who 
is 
a 
legally 
defined 
vulnerable 
adult? 
How 
do 
you 
determine 
if 
the 
survivor 
you 
are 
working 
with 
is 
defined 
as 
such? 
How 
and 
when 
do 
you 
tell 
the 
survivor 
that 
you 
are 
a 
mandatory 
reporter, 
and 
how 
do 
you 
explain 
the 
possible 
repercussions 
for 
the 
survivor? 
How 
can 
you 
find 
resources 
for 
a 
survivor 
if, 
after 
learning 
the 
advocate 
is 
a 
mandatory 
reporter, 
she 
chooses 
not 
to 
disclose 
the 
abuse 
she 
is 
experiencing? 


“[The 
problem 
is] 
not 
only 
who 
is 
a 
mandatory 
reporter, 
but 
who 
is 
a 
vulnerable 
adult? 
What 
are 
the 
dangers 
that 
mandatory 
reporting 
brings? 
A 
lot 
of 
advocates 
haven’t 
thought 
of 
that.” 


-domestic 
violence 
advocate 


19 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


Summary 


Mandatory 
reporting 
is 
a 
complex 
subject. 
Lack 
of 
training 
for 
advocates 
poses 
dangers 
to 
people 
with 
disabilities 
whether 
or 
not 
they 
are 
a 
legally 
defined 
vulnerable 
adult. 
There 
is 
also 
confusion 
about 
who 
is 
considered 
a 
mandatory 
reporter 
and 
what 
their 
responsibilities 
are 
under 
the 
law. 
There 
is 
a 
lack 
of 
training 
for 
advocates 
regarding 
the 
best 
advocacy 
practices 
when 
a 
legally 
defined 
vulnerable 
adult 
discloses 
abuse 
to 
a 
mandatory 
reporter. 
Additionally, 
there 
is 
a 
lack 
of 
recognition 
by 
some 
advocates 
that 
mandatory 
reporting 
can 
also 
be 
a 
constructive 
tool 
for 
advocates, 
especially 
in 
institutional 
settings. 


FINDING 
– 
Reasonable 
accommodations 
that 
could 
make 
services 
accessible 
are 
often 
not 
offered 
by 
advocates 
or 
requested 
by 
survivors 
with 
disabilities. 
The 
result 
is 
that 
domestic 
violence 
or 
sexual 
assault 
services 
are 
often 
inadequate 
or 
inappropriate. 


The 
importance 
of 
advocates’ 
building 
trust 
with 
a 
survivor 
who 
has 
a 
disability 
emerged 
as 
a 
paramount 
need 
among 
all 
focus 
group 
participants. 
People 
with 
disabilities 
learn 
to 
trust 
a 
service 
provider 
when 
they 
believe 
that 
their 
disability 
will 
not 
prevent 
them 
from 
accessing 
services. 
Accommodations 
are 
the 
most 
common 
way 
that 
providers 
can 
demonstrate 
that 
disability 
is 
not 
a 
barrier 
to 
their 
services. 


There 
are 
two 
ways 
a 
person 
can 
get 
a 
needed 
accommodation 
-they 
can 
request 
it, 
or 
the 
service 
provider 
can 
ask 
– 
directly 
or 
indirectly 
-when 
the 
need 
for 
accommodations 
becomes 
apparent. 
Most 
people 
with 
disabilities 
have 
had 
bad 
experiences 
asking 
for 
accommodations 
because 
they 
are 
often 
made 
to 
feel 
that 
they 
are 
placing 
a 
burden 
on 
the 
provider, 
even 
for 
simple, 
no-cost 
accommodations. 
For 
example, 
a 
person 
who 
has 
hearing 
loss 
may 
ask 
a 
service 
provider 
to 
speak 
loudly 
and 
clearly. 
After 
the 
first 
few 
minutes, 
the 
provider 
forgets, 
and 
begins 
speaking 
more 
softly. 
When 
the 
person 
with 
hearing 
loss 
is 
forced 
to 
make 
a 
second 
or 
third 
request, 
she 
begins 
to 
feel 
that 
the 
provider 
does 
not 
perceive 
her 
request 
for 
accommodation 
as 
important. 


Alternatively, 
if 
in 
the 
above 
example 
the 
service 
provider 
perceives 
that 
the 
client 
has 
hearing 
loss, 
she 
could 
ask 
if 
her 
voice 
is 
loud 
enough. 
If, 
upon 
receiving 
a 
negative 
answer 
she 
adapts 
her 
behavior 
by 
consistently 
speaking 
loudly 
and 
clearly 
and 
periodically 
checks 
to 
be 
sure 
she 
is 
understood, 
the 
person 
with 
hearing 
loss 
is 
likely 
to 
feel 
that 
what 
she 
says 
is 
valued 
by 
the 
provider, 
and 
a 
relationship 
based 
on 
trust 
has 
been 
initiated. 


Accommodation 
provision 
and 
accommodation 
awareness 


Domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
were 
proud 
of 
some 
of 
the 
physical 
and 
interpersonal 
accommodations 
they 
had 
achieved, 
such 
as 
wheelchair 
ramps 
and 
TTY 
machines. 
However, 
when 
talking 
about 
how 
they 
asked 
survivors 
about 
accommodations 
needs, 
it 
becomes 
clear 
that 
there 
is 
confusion 
among 
domestic 


20 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
about 
what 
it 
means 
to 
provide 
accessible 
services. 


When 
discussing 
the 
subject 
of 
accommodations 
with 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates, 
it 
becomes 
necessary 
to 
note 
the 
distinction 
between 
accommodation 
provision 
and 
accommodation 
awareness. 
Most 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
state 
that 
they 
provide 
accommodations 
when 
asked. 
However, 
in 
the 
pre-focus 
group 
surveys, 
63% 
of 
domestic 
and 
sexual 
violence 
advocates 
reported 
that 
they 
ask 
about 
accommodations 
in 
the 
initial 
screening 
call, 
when 
a 
survivor 
may 
be 
particularly 
concerned 
about 
being 
declared 
ineligible 
for 
services. 
Another 
12.3% 
said 
that 
they 
do 
not 
ask 
survivors 
about 
accommodation 
needs. 
During 
the 
focus 
groups, 
many 
advocates 
said 
that 
they 
struggle 
to 
find 
ways 
to 
ask 
about 
accommodations 
respectfully, 
which 
may 
increase 
the 
likelihood 
that 
a 
survivor 
will 
not 
ask 
for 
what 
could 
be 
perceived 
as 
“special 
treatment.” 


It 
is 
not 
clear 
to 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
if 
their 
organization 
provides 
reasonable 
accommodations. 
When 
responding 
to 
the 
survey, 
26.3% 
of 
domestic 
and 
sexual 
violence 
advocates 
said 
they 
were 
“unsure” 
if 
their 
organization 
provided 
requested 
accommodations. 


Domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
need 
a 
process 
to 
increase 
their 
awareness 
of 
the 
kinds 
of 
accommodations 
a 
survivor 
with 
a 
disability 
might 
need. 
For 
example, 
a 
few 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
described 
policies 
and 
practices 
that 
helped 
them 
become 
aware 
of 
accommodations 
a 
survivor 
might 
need. 
When 
talking 
with 
a 
survivor, 
these 
advocates 
often 
described 
examples 
of 
accommodations 
they 
had 
provided 
to 
past 
program 
participants 
to 
emphasize 
that 
disability 
had 
no 
effect 
on 
eligibility 
for 
services. 
Also, 
these 
advocates 
described 
a 
process 
of 
regularly 
asking 
the 
survivor 
about 
accommodations, 
at 
the 
initial 
screening 
call, 
during 
intake, 
and 
after 
the 
survivor 
has 
been 
declared 
eligible 
for 
services. 


“We 
have 
moved 
beyond 
ADA 
compliance. 
We 
have 
taken 
a 
step 
forward 
as 
a 
team, 
not 
as 
individuals. 
” 


-domestic 
violence 
advocate 


People 
with 
disabilities 
say 
that 
accommodations 
routinely 
are 
not 
provided 


Although 
the 
vast 
majority 
of 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
report 
that 
they 
ask 
about 
the 
need 
for 
accommodations 
when 
talking 
with 
survivors, 
people 
with 
disabilities 
expressed 
deep 
frustration 
with 
many 
aspects 
of 
service 
delivery. 
They 
spoke 
of 
the 
many 
barriers 
they 
routinely 
experience, 
both 
from 
domestic 
and 
sexual 
violence 
advocates 
and 
from 
other 
service 
providers. 
All 
of 
the 
typical 
barriers, 
described 
in 
the 
list 
below, 
could 
be 
eliminated 
with 
low 
cost 
– 
or 
in 
many 
cases, 
no 
cost 
– 
accommodations. 
People 
with 
disabilities 
stated 
that: 


21 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


• 
Domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
are 
uncomfortable 
talking 
about 
disability; 
• 
Domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
underestimate 
the 
barrier 
created 
by 
the 
lack 
of 
accessible 
transportation; 
• 
Paperwork 
is 
often 
a 
barrier 
for 
individuals 
with 
cognitive 
or 
learning 
disabilities, 
people 
who 
have 
difficulty 
writing, 
people 
who 
are 
blind 
or 
have 
low 
vision, 
people 
who 
are 
Deaf 
(or 
others 
for 
whom 
English 
is 
not 
their 
first 
language); 
• 
Communication 
can 
be 
a 
major 
issue 
for 
Deaf 
people, 
individuals 
who 
do 
not 
speak 
clearly, 
or 
are 
non-verbal. 
Communication 
can 
also 
break 
down 
if 
a 
service 
provider 
talks 
to 
a 
person 
as 
if 
they 
were 
a 
child, 
simply 
because 
they 
have 
a 
disability; 
• 
Shelter 
policies 
and 
rules, 
such 
as 
chore 
requirements, 
resistance 
to 
service 
animals, 
requirements 
to 
take 
prescribed 
medications, 
personal 
questions 
about 
diagnoses 
and 
types 
of 
disability 
make 
people 
with 
disabilities 
feel 
the 
shelter 
is 
not 
welcoming 
to 
them; 
• 
Questions 
about 
accommodations 
are 
often 
perceived 
as 
methods 
to 
screen 
people 
out 
of 
services; 
• 
Materials 
are 
not 
accessible 
or 
welcoming 
to 
people 
with 
disabilities, 
such 
as 
brochures 
in 
small 
fonts, 
materials 
that 
do 
not 
portray 
people 
with 
disabilities, 
posters 
and 
outreach 
materials 
that 
use 
jargon, 
such 
as 
“intimate 
partner.” 
“I 
didn’t 
get 
abused 
by 
my 
partner, 
I 
got 
abused 
by 
my 
caregiver. 
That 
poster 
isn’t 
written 
for 
me.” 


-person 
with 
a 
disability 


Summary 


Domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
are 
not 
well 
informed 
about 
providing 
accommodations 
to 
people 
with 
disabilities. 
Moreover, 
they 
sometimes 
lack 
the 
skills 
or 
training 
to 
become 
more 
aware 
of 
possible 
service 
needs 
and 
how 
to 
ask 
survivors 
about 
them. 
People 
with 
disabilities 
do 
not 
feel 
welcome 
and 
are 
not 
receiving 
the 
accommodations 
they 
need 
to 
access 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
services. 


FINDING 
– 
Survivors 
with 
disabilities 
believe 
in 
many 
cases 
that 
they 
are 
not 
eligible 
for 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
services. 


Multiple 
issues 
around 
“eligibility” 
for 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
services 
emerged 
from 
the 
focus 
groups. 
People 
with 
disabilities 
often 
believe 
they 
will 
not 
receive 
services 
if 
they 
seek 
them. 
In 
some 
cases, 
their 
belief 
is 
justified. 


22 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


Screening 
people 
out 
of 
services 


All 
participants 
noted 
that 
there 
was 
a 
perception 
among 
survivors 
that 
answers 
they 
provided 
to 
screening 
questions 
would 
determine 
whether 
or 
not 
they 
received 
services. 
Domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
clearly 
observed 
that 
survivors 
carefully 
weighed 
their 
responses 
to 
questions 
about 
disability 
and 
accommodation 
needs 
in 
particular. 
Indeed, 
in 
some 
cases, 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
acknowledged 
that 
they 
often 
felt 
the 
screening 
process 
needed 
to 
be 
changed 
so 
that 
people 
were 
screened 
in, 
rather 
than 
out. 


“A 
lot 
of 
people 
are 
desperate 
for 
help 
and 
they 
don’t 
want 
to 
say 
the 
wrong 
thing. 
How 
do 
you 
get 
them 
to 
be 
honest 
and 
not 
feel 
like 
you 
are 
going 
to 
kick 
them 
out? 
People 
are 
afraid.” 


-sexual 
assault 
advocate 


Eligibility 
when 
the 
abuser 
is 
a 
personal 
attendant 


Eligibility 
is 
also 
a 
primary 
concern 
for 
people 
with 
disabilities 
who 
are 
abused 
by 
their 
personal 
attendant 
(caregiver). 
Domestic 
violence 
advocates 
are 
accustomed 
to 
thinking 
of 
abusers 
as 
“intimate 
partners,” 
(i.e. 
boyfriend/girlfriend/spouse) 
and 
their 
definition 
of 
this 
term 
often 
does 
not 
extend 
to 
people 
who 
provide 
personal 
assistance 
services 
(PAS). 
The 
issue 
of 
abuse 
by 
PAS 
workers 
is 
at 
the 
front 
of 
the 
minds 
of 
people 
with 
disabilities 
and 
disability 
advocates. 
Many 
domestic 
violence 
advocates, 
while 
seemingly 
aware 
that 
abuse 
happens 
in 
some 
PAS 
relationships, 
have 
not 
thought 
through 
the 
implications 
around 
eligibility 
for 
services. 
The 
advocates 
at 
ATVP 
in 
Pullman 
are 
notable 
exceptions, 
and 
some 
of 
their 
work 
on 
this 
issue 
may 
be 
able 
to 
be 
exported 
to 
other 
domestic 
violence 
programs. 


Survivors 
with 
disabilities 
who 
are 
men 


Eligibility 
for 
services 
is 
also 
a 
concern 
for 
men 
with 
disabilities 
who 
are 
victims 
of 
abuse. 
The 
perception 
of 
people 
with 
disabilities 
and 
disability 
advocates 
is 
overwhelmingly 
that 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
programs 
are 
for 
women 
who 
experience 
abuse. 
Many 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
note 
that 
this 
perception 
has 
some 
basis 
in 
fact. 
One 
sexual 
assault 
advocate 
stated 
that 
her 
program’s 
screening 
practices 
likely 
screen 
out 
men 
with 
disabilities 
who 
have 
been 
sexually 
assaulted 
because 
of 
their 
gender. 


23 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


“Men 
don’t 
feel 
they 
are 
in 
a 
position 
to 
do 
anything 
about 
it. 
Like 
the 
[local 
domestic 
violence 
agency], 
they 
only 
serve 
women. 
Well, 
they 
will 
help, 
but 
they 
don’t 
make 
it 
readily 
apparent. 
You 
have 
to 
push 
it.” 


-disability 
advocate 


Summary 


The 
way 
that 
screening 
is 
conducted 
by 
many 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
organizations 
creates 
barriers 
for 
people 
with 
disabilities 
who 
are 
seeking 
services. 
Eligibility 
criteria 
often 
do 
not 
take 
into 
account 
the 
needs 
of 
people 
with 
disabilities. 
Many 
domestic 
violence 
programs 
do 
not 
address 
eligibility 
issues 
for 
survivors 
whose 
abuser 
is 
a 
PAS 
worker. 
Policies 
and 
practices 
at 
many 
sexual 
assault 
and 
domestic 
violence 
programs 
have 
the 
practical 
effect 
of 
excluding 
men 
with 
disabilities 
who 
are 
survivors. 
Policies 
and 
practices 
at 
many 
sexual 
assault 
programs 
were 
developed 
without 
a 
full 
understanding 
of 
the 
negative 
effect 
those 
practices 
have 
on 
survivors 
of 
sexual 
assault 
who 
have 
disabilities. 


One 
domestic 
violence 
organization 
has 
developed 
and 
provides 
training 
on 
screening 
tools 
that 
do 
not 
rely 
on 
gender 
to 
determine 
who 
is 
an 
abuser 
and 
who 
is 
a 
victim 
in 
a 
relationship. 
The 
knowledge 
and 
experience 
of 
this 
organization 
can 
help 
us 
as 
we 
move 
into 
implementation 
of 
our 
strategic 
plan. 


FINDING 
– 
Abusers 
use 
tactics 
that 
are 
designed 
to 
exploit 
the 
disabilities 
of 
the 
survivor. 


Survivors 
with 
disabilities 
often 
stated 
that 
their 
options 
are 
limited 
because 
the 
resources 
they 
use 
to 
maintain 
autonomy 
and 
independence 
are 
often 
controlled 
and 
exploited 
by 
their 
abuser. 
When 
asked 
how 
an 
abuser 
“uses 
your 
disability 
against 
you,” 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
rattle 
off 
a 
laundry 
list 
of 
tactics. 
Abusers 
maintain 
power 
over 
the 
person 
through 
control 
of: 


• 
Medical 
equipment; 
• 
Finances, 
often 
by 
being 
appointed 
as 
the 
victim’s 
legal 
payee; 
• 
Medications; 
• 
Disability 
services 
(including 
access 
to 
the 
case 
manager 
or 
social 
worker); 
• 
Access 
to 
the 
telephone 
or 
other 
communication. 
For 
example, 
if 
a 
survivor 
is 
Deaf 
or 
has 
speech 
that 
is 
difficult 
to 
understand, 
abusers 
often 
control 
communication 
with 
others 
because 
they 
are 
able 
to 
“translate” 
for 
the 
person; 
and/or 
• 
Access 
to 
friends 
and 
family 
members 
who 
provide 
necessary 
support. 
24 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


Tactics 
that 
exploit 
social 
bias 


Tactics 
utilized 
by 
abusers 
against 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
usually 
exploit 
the 
social 
bias, 
misinformation 
and 
stigma 
surrounding 
people 
with 
disabilities. 
For 
example, 
if 
a 
survivor 
wants 
to 
leave, 
her 
abuser 
knows 
she 
has 
little 
choice 
because 
of 
the 
lack 
of 
affordable 
accessible 
housing 
and 
that, 
in 
fact, 
she 
may 
be 
faced 
with 
a 
nursing 
home 
or 
homelessness. 


Abusers 
often 
exploit 
the 
diminished 
credibility 
that 
people 
with 
disabilities 
experience 
every 
day. 
Survivors 
reported 
that 
they 
often 
heard 
comments 
such 
as, 
“Nobody 
will 
believe 
you, 
you’re 
crazy.” 
“If 
you 
leave 
me 
I’ll 
get 
the 
kids, 
no 
judge 
in 
his 
right 
mind 
would 
give 
you 
custody.” 
“I’ll 
tell 
them 
you 
get 
nutty 
when 
you 
don’t 
take 
your 
meds.” 
All 
focus 
group 
participants 
noted 
criminal 
justice 
system 
personnel 
do 
not 
treat 
people 
with 
disabilities 
as 
credible. 


What 
this 
means 
for 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 


Because 
many 
tactics 
used 
by 
abusers 
are 
specific 
to 
a 
survivor’s 
disability, 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
must 
communicate 
with 
survivors 
about 
disability-related 
issues 
in 
order 
to 
effectively 
safety 
plan 
and 
support 
survivor 
autonomy. 
This 
becomes 
even 
more 
important 
when 
one 
considers 
that 
a 
person 
with 
a 
disability 
may 
need 
a 
network 
of 
coordinated 
services 
that 
a 
safety 
plan 
must 
comprehensively 
address. 


“People 
with 
disabilities 
don’t 
have 
credibility. 
They 
threaten 
your 
benefits, 
you 
have 
to 
give 
up 
control 
over 
your 
budget, 
your 
spending. 
. 
. 
You’re 
afraid 
they’re 
going 
to 
take 
your 
children.” 


-disability 
advocate 


Safety 
planning 
is 
not 
the 
only 
reason 
advocates 
need 
to 
communicate 
effectively 
with 
survivors 
with 
disabilities. 
Survivors 
may 
need 
assistance 
in 
prioritizing 
their 
options, 
figuring 
out 
how 
their 
abuser 
may 
react 
to 
actions 
they 
take, 
and 
how 
to 
safely 
share 
information 
with 
other 
supportive 
individuals. 
Sexual 
assault 
advocates 
are 
familiar 
with 
abusers 
who 
seek 
to 
“groom” 
potential 
victims. 
People 
with 
disabilities 
are 
sometimes 
targeted 
by 
such 
an 
abuser 
because 
of 
their 
perceived 
vulnerability. 


Summary 


Advocates 
who 
are 
providing 
services 
to 
survivors 
do 
not 
have 
a 
full 
understanding 
of 
how 
abusers 
use 
the 
survivor’s 
disability 
against 
them, 
either 
directly 
or 
by 
exploiting 
societal 
bias. 
Advocates 
do 
not 
fully 
understand 
the 
implications 
this 
has 
for 
providing 
services 
to 
survivors. 


25 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


FINDING 
-Survivors 
with 
disabilities 
don’t 
feel 
welcome 
at 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
programs. 


The 
primary 
barrier 
for 
people 
with 
disabilities 
when 
they 
seek 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocacy 
services 
is 
a 
belief 
that 
advocates 
will 
not 
have 
the 
time 
or 
knowledge 
to 
provide 
services 
or 
accommodations 
that 
best 
fit 
their 
situation. 
People 
with 
disabilities 
and 
disability 
advocates 
talked 
about 
their 
experiences 
working 
with 
other 
service 
providers 
and 
described 
their 
frustrations 
when 
service 
providers 
fail 
to 
take 
time 
to 
listen 
and 
support 
people 
in: 


• 
Understanding 
and 
filling 
out 
forms; 
• 
Discussing 
options 
that 
address 
legitimate 
fears 
about 
bias 
against 
people 
with 
disabilities; 
or 
• 
Explaining 
in 
clear 
language 
what 
services 
are 
available 
to 
a 
program 
participant. 
“I 
didn’t 
have 
a 
good 
experience 
at 
_______. 
It’s 
not 
a 
very 
welcoming 
building, 
it’s 
a 
maze 
in 
there 
and 
there 
are 
no 
signs. 
I 
finally 
got 
up 
to 
the 
receptionist 
and 
there 
was 
nothing 
there.” 


-person 
with 
a 
disability 


Challenges 
for 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
organizations 


When 
seeking 
services, 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
want 
the 
services 
provided 
to 
be 
appropriate 
to 
their 
circumstances, 
taking 
into 
account 
how 
their 
disability 
might 
require 
accommodation. 
They 
want 
service 
providers 
to 
demonstrate 
they 
are 
willing 
to 
take 
the 
necessary 
time 
to 
establish 
trust 
with 
survivors. 
For 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
in 
particular, 
survivors 
want 
them 
to 
demonstrate 
a 
willingness 
to 
increase 
their 
knowledge 
base 
about 
how 
disability 
issues 
affect 
survivor 
decision-making, 
autonomy 
and 
abuser 
accountability. 


It 
can 
be 
an 
organizational 
challenge 
for 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
programs 
to 
figure 
out 
ways 
to 
find 
more 
time 
when 
working 
with, 
for 
example, 
people 
with 
cognitive 
disabilities. 
It 
takes 
time 
to 
go 
over 
every 
form, 
check 
for 
understanding 
or 
figure 
out 
how 
to 
deal 
with 
memory 
issues. 
Many 
of 
these 
same 
challenges 
are 
present 
when 
working 
with 
survivors 
who 
are 
Deaf, 
have 
cerebral 
palsy, 
or 
are 
non-verbal. 


26 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


“One 
of 
the 
things 
I’ve 
learned 
is 
that 
even 
when 
you 
have 
a 
lot 
of 
resources 
available, 
it 
takes 
time 
to 
figure 
out 
what 
works. 
. 
. 
. 
Trust 
happens 
on 
both 
sides 
when 
you 
have 
face-to-face 
time.” 


-disability 
advocate 


Inappropriate 
or 
illegal 
practices 


In 
some 
cases, 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
wanted 
to 
“help” 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
by 
asking 
about 
their 
disability 
or 
diagnosis. 
These 
advocates 
voiced 
the 
opinion 
that 
knowing 
this 
information 
would 
prepare 
them 
for 
situations 
that 
might 
arise. 
People 
with 
disabilities, 
however, 
often 
found 
questions 
about 
their 
particular 
disability 
or 
diagnosis 
as 
invasive 
and 
an 
attempt 
to 
screen 
them 
out 
of 
services. 
Domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
who 
proposed 
this 
approach 
seemed 
unaware 
of 
the 
Americans 
with 
Disabilities 
Act 
or 
Fair 
Housing 
Act 
proscriptions 
against 
inquiring 
about 
a 
person’s 
disability 
and 
are 
missing 
an 
opportunity 
to 
build 
trust. 


“We 
ask 
them 
during 
intake 
about 
medications. 
It’s 
good 
for 
us 
to 
know 
what 
meds 
they 
are 
on 
. 
. 
. 
so 
we 
can 
respond 
in 
the 
right 
way.” 


-domestic 
violence 
advocate 


Summary 


Peer-reviewed 
national 
studies 
show 
that 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
disclose 
abuse 
less 
often 
than 
other 
survivors. 
In 
our 
focus 
groups, 
people 
with 
disabilities 
supported 
this 
finding 
by 
saying 
that 
they 
do 
not 
believe 
they 
will 
get 
the 
services 
they 
need 
when 
they 
disclose 
abuse 
to 
a 
service 
provider. 
Survivors 
with 
disabilities 
reported 
that 
they 
did 
not 
feel 
welcome 
at 
many 
domestic 
violence 
or 
sexual 
assault 
advocacy 
organizations. 


A 
second 
reason 
for 
lower 
disclosure 
rates 
may 
be 
that 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
have 
had 
negative 
experiences 
with 
domestic 
violence 
or 
sexual 
assault 
programs. 
In 
our 
pre-focus 
group 
survey, 
we 
asked 
people 
with 
disabilities 
if 
they 
had 
contacted 
a 
domestic 
violence 
or 
sexual 
assault 
advocate 
about 
the 
abuse 
that 
happened 
to 
them 
(or 
someone 
they 
knew). 
Of 
the 
52.8% 
who 
replied 
“yes,” 
only 


half 
said 
they 
got 
“what 
they 
wanted.” 


27 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


Gaps 
and 
Barriers 
to 
Effective 
Outreach 
to 
Survivors 
with 
Disabilities 


FINDING 
-Disability 
advocates 
don’t 
know 
what 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
offer, 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
are 
largely 
unaware 
that 
disability 
advocates 
exist. 


Outreach 
efforts 
used 
by 
advocacy 
organizations 
have 
often 
failed 
to 
communicate 
to 
people 
with 
disabilities, 
and 
in 
some 
cases 
to 
other 
advocates, 
what 
services 
they 
offer. 


Disability 
advocates 
expressed 
frustration 
about 
not 
knowing 
what 
to 
do 
or 
not 
feeling 
that 
they 
could 
do 
anything 
further 
for 
a 
person 
with 
disabilities 
who 
disclosed 
abuse. 
Some 
disability 
advocates 
wondered 
if 
a 
person 
with 
a 
disability 
would 
be 
eligible 
for 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
services, 
particularly 
if 
the 
abuser 
was 
a 
personal 
assistant. 
Survivors 
with 
disabilities 
echoed 
this 
confusion, 
and 
in 
talking 
with 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates, 
it 
became 
clear 
the 
majority 
had 
not 
given 
the 
matter 
much 
thought, 
either. 


Disability 
advocates 
also 
expressed 
reservations 
whether 
the 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
program 
had 
the 
time 
or 
skills 
to 
provide 
appropriate 
accommodations 
and 
services. 
Lack 
of 
trust 
was 
a 
major 
issue. 


Many 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
have 
had 
little 
or 
no 
contact 
with 
Centers 
for 
Independent 
Living 
or 
other 
disability 
organizations, 
although 
there 
are 
some 
notable 
exceptions. 
One 
domestic 
violence 
advocate, 
when 
asked 
about 
existing 
relationships 
with 
disability 
advocates, 
replied, 
“I 
didn’t 
know 
there 
were 
disability 
advocates. 
What 
do 
they 
do?” 


“I 
didn’t 
know 
there 
were 
disability 
advocates. 
What 
do 
they 
do?” 


-domestic 
violence 
advocate 


FINDING 
– 
Domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
programs 
rarely 
have 
outreach 
materials 
that 
are 
welcoming 
to 
survivors 
with 
disabilities. 


There 
were 
multiple 
issues 
regarding 
the 
outreach 
and 
program 
materials 
created 
by 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
programs. 


• 
Materials 
and 
brochures 
don’t 
show 
people 
with 
disabilities 
receiving 
services, 
raising 
the 
question 
if 
they 
were 
welcome. 
28 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


• 
Materials 
and 
brochures 
are 
usually 
not 
available 
in 
large 
print 
or 
other 
alternate 
formats. 
• 
Materials 
and 
brochures 
don’t 
contain 
clear 
language 
and/or 
try 
to 
say 
too 
much. 
• 
Materials 
and 
brochures 
don’t 
help 
people 
with 
disabilities 
understand 
that 
what 
they 
are 
experiencing 
is 
abuse. 
• 
Materials 
and 
brochures 
don’t 
explain 
what 
to 
expect 
when 
you 
contact 
a 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
program. 
• 
People 
in 
wheelchairs 
can’t 
reach 
brochure 
holders. 
• 
Materials 
and 
brochures 
use 
jargon 
and 
limiting 
language, 
such 
as 
“intimate 
partner 
violence.” 
One 
person 
with 
a 
disability 
said, 
“I 
didn’t 
get 
abused 
by 
my 
partner, 
I 
got 
abused 
by 
my 
caregiver. 
That 
poster 
isn’t 
written 
for 
me.” 
“The 
poster 
says, 
‘if 
you 
are 
abused 
by 
your 
partner 
. 
. 
.’ 
What 
does 
that 
mean? 
It 
tells 
me 
if 
my 
caregiver 
is 
being 
[abusive] 
to 
me, 
it 
doesn’t 
count.” 


-person 
with 
a 
disability 


In 
the 
pre-focus 
group 
surveys, 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
were 
asked 
if 
they 
had 
any 
outreach 
materials 
specifically 
for 
people 
with 
disabilities. 
78.4% 
responded 
either 
“no” 
or 
“not 
sure.” 


Disability 
advocates 
usually 
do 
not 
have 
materials 
about 
abuse 
available 
for 
people 
with 
disabilities 
that 
seek 
information. 
When 
those 
materials 
are 
available, 
they 
are 
often 
brochures 
distributed 
by 
domestic 
or 
sexual 
violence 
advocacy 
programs 
that 
are 
seldom 
written 
with 
people 
with 
disabilities 
in 
mind. 


FINDING 
– 
All 
three 
groups 
of 
advocates 
do 
community 
outreach 
activities, 
but 
there 
has 
been 
little 
or 
no 
coordination 
between 
disability 
advocates 
and 
domestic 
and 
sexual 
violence 
advocates. 


Both 
groups 
of 
advocates 
maintain 
a 
community 
presence 
and 
have 
an 
intuitive 
knowledge 
of 
the 
value 
of 
such 
a 
presence. 
Both 
groups 
report 
that 
they 
have 
insufficient 
resources 
to 
expand 
their 
community 
presence 
where 
they 
would 
like 
it 
to 
be. 
Domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
are 
largely 
unaware 
of 
where 
people 
with 
disabilities 
meet 
in 
their 
communities. 
For 
the 
most 
part, 
disability 
advocates 
have 
not 
partnered 
with 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates. 


29 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


FINDING 
– 
Transportation 
is 
a 
major 
concern 
for 
survivors 
with 
disabilities. 
Outreach 
efforts 
currently 
being 
utilized 
by 
advocates 
do 
not 
communicate 
a 
willingness 
to 
solve 
transportation 
problems. 


Transportation 
is 
major 
barrier 
for 
people 
with 
disabilities, 
and 
one 
that 
advocates 
must 
take 
into 
account 
in 
their 
outreach 
efforts. 
People 
with 
disabilities 
express 
strong 
desire 
for 
one-stop 
shopping 
for 
services. 


Shelter 
advocates 
expressed 
concerns 
about 
confidentiality 
of 
their 
shelter 
if 
a 
resident 
uses 
paratransit 
services. 
Advocates 
need 
to 
think 
through 
this 
issue 
so 
people 
aren’t 
denied 
shelter 
because 
of 
their 
disability. 


“A 
lot 
of 
people 
use 
paratransit, 
but 
they 
don’t 
understand 
our 
need 
to 
keep 
our 
location 
confidential. 
The 
closest 
place 
to 
drop 
them 
off 
is 
Safeway. 
We 
don’t 
want 
different 
drivers 
coming 
here.” 


-domestic 
violence 
advocate 


Sexual 
assault 
advocates, 
on 
the 
whole, 
had 
more 
flexibility 
to 
meet 
with 
survivors 
in 
their 
homes 
or 
in 
other 
accessible 
locations. 
Domestic 
violence 
advocates 
need 
to 
do 
more 
problem-solving 
around 
accommodating 
those 
who 
face 
transportation 
issues. 


People 
with 
disabilities 
identify 
transportation 
as 
one 
of 
the 
most 
critical 
of 
the 
network 
of 
services 
that 
allows 
them 
to 
live 
independently. 
Survivors 
who 
do 
not 
have 
adequate, 
accessible 
transportation 
do 
not 
have 
the 
option 
of 
using 
many 
services. 
If 
an 
organization’s 
outreach 
materials 
do 
not 
indicate 
agency 
willingness 
to 
address 
transportation 
issues, 
the 
survivor 
will 
likely 
not 
consider 
using 
those 
services. 


FINDING 
-Domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
programs 
don’t 
do 
outreach 
where 
people 
with 
disabilities 
are. 


People 
with 
disabilities 
primarily 
find 
out 
about 
resources 
via 
word 
of 
mouth. 
In 
the 
pre-focus 
group 
survey, 
people 
with 
disabilities 
were 
asked 
how 
they 
learned 
about 
resources 
and 
events 
in 
their 
community. 
94.4% 
said 
they 
learned 
about 
things 
happening 
in 
their 
communities 
by 
“talking 
to 
my 
friends 
and 
family,” 
which 
was 
the 
most 
frequently 
selected 
answer. 
The 
next 
most 
frequent 
was 
“radio, 
TV 
or 
newspaper,” 
with 
86.1%. 
“Community 
events” 
and 
“social 
service 
agencies” 
were 
also 
high 
on 
the 
list 
of 
methods 
used 
to 
gather 
information. 


30 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


Participants 
suggested 
that 
general 
outreach 
efforts 
focus 
on 
public 
areas 
that 
people 
with 
disabilities 
access, 
such 
as 
food 
banks, 
bus 
stops, 
health 
clinics 
and 
grocery 
stores. 
Survivors 
with 
disabilities 
described 
how 
helpful 
it 
is 
when 
community 
agencies 
coordinate 
to 
provide 
services 
in 
one 
place 
at 
a 
specified 
time 


– 
particularly 
food 
and 
health 
services. 
31 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


Strengths 
and 
Assets 
of 
Advocacy 
Organizations 
and 
Opportunities 
for 
Collaborative 
Advocacy 


It 
is 
worth 
taking 
the 
time 
here 
to 
talk 
about 
the 
term, 
“collaborative 
advocacy.” 
Advocacy 
is 
a 
word 
that 
has 
a 
variety 
of 
meanings. 
It 
can 
mean 
one 
person 
assisting 
another 
in 
achieving 
that 
person’s 
specific 
goals, 
or 
it 
can 
mean 
an 
organization 
asserting 
the 
rights 
of 
an 
aggrieved 
community 
of 
people. 
In 
the 
domestic 
violence, 
sexual 
assault 
and 
disability 
advocacy 
worlds, 
people 
talk 
of 
individual 
advocacy, 
system 
advocacy 
and 
legal 
advocacy. 
So, 
on 
what 
type 
of 
advocacy, 
one 
may 
ask, 
will 
these 
advocates 
collaborate? 


The 
dAP 
uses 
the 
term 
“collaborative 
advocacy” 
to 
encompass 
all 
possible 
types 
of 
advocating. 
Our 
partners 
have 
all 
engaged 
in 
collaborative 
system 
advocacy, 
by 
cooperating 
with 
other 
agencies 
to 
achieve 
systemic 
goals. 
The 
concept 
of 
collaborative 
advocacy 
relating 
to 
an 
individual’s 
needs 
is 
less 
clear 
to 
us. 
Confidentiality 
issues 
alone 
present 
enormous 
challenges 
to 
advocates 
from 
different 
disciplines 
cooperating 
to 
provide 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
services 
to 
a 
survivor. 


This 
section 
is 
titled, 
in 
part, 
“opportunities 
for 
collaborative 
advocacy,” 
and 
represents 
a 
starting 
point 
where 
domestic 
violence 
programs, 
sexual 
assault 
programs, 
disability 
advocates, 
and 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
can 
begin 
the 
difficult 
conversations 
that 
– 
we 
hope 
– 
will 
lead 
to 
meaningful 
collaborations 
that 
support 
the 
decisions 
of 
survivors 
with 
disabilities. 


FINDING 
– 
The 
three 
types 
of 
advocates 
and 
people 
with 
disabilities 
have 
many 
shared 
values 
that 
can 
provide 
a 
strong 
foundation 
for 
successful 
collaboration. 


Domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
described 
their 
main 
strengths 
as 
being 
non-judgmental, 
welcoming 
and 
supporting 
survivor 
autonomy. 
Disability 
advocates 
talk 
about 
the 
importance 
of 
self-advocacy, 
promoting 
self-determination 
and 
individualizing 
their 
services. 
People 
with 
disabilities 
want 
their 
choices 
to 
be 
respected. 
The 
three 
groups 
have 
strong, 
shared 
values 
around 
these 
issues. 
These 
shared 
values 
can 
be 
a 
basis 
for 
collaboration. 


All 
three 
groups 
talked 
about 
the 
benefit 
of 
learning 
from 
and 
listening 
to 
people 
with 
disabilities. 
Building 
systems 
and 
processes 
that 
feature 
the 
input 
of 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
represents 
a 
major 
opportunity 
for 
collaborative 
advocacy. 


32 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


FINDING 
– 
Advocates 
understand 
that 
collaboration 
with 
other 
organizations 
in 
their 
communities 
allows 
them 
to 
provide 
better 
advocacy. 


Domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
understand 
that 
in 
order 
to 
support 
survivors 
and 
work 
for 
social 
change, 
they 
need 
to 
ally 
themselves 
with 
other 
community 
members 
and 
organizations. 
Most 
advocacy 
organizations 
spend 
some 
of 
their 
time 
trying 
to 
establish 
relationships 
with 
other 
organizations. 
Unfortunately, 
when 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
programs 
talk 
about 
collaborating 
in 
the 
community, 
they 
are 
not 
– 
for 
the 
most 
part 
-referring 
to 
disability 
organizations. 


Disability 
advocates 
seem 
to 
know 
about 
the 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
programs 
in 
their 
communities, 
but, 
with 
few 
exceptions, 
have 
not 
established 
working 
relationships 
with 
them. 


This 
chapter 
is 
about 
strengths, 
assets 
and 
opportunities 
for 
collaborative 
advocacy. 
It 
is 
interesting 
to 
note 
a 
positive 
development 
that 
has 
come 
about 
because 
of 
the 
dAP’s 
involvement 
in 
planning 
this 
Needs 
Assessment. 
We 
were 
able 
to 
introduce 
the 
domestic 
violence 
and 
disability 
organizations 
to 
each 
other 
in 
Spokane. 
Advocates 
and 
management 
from 
the 
two 
organizations 
have 
formed 
relationships 
that 
have 
changed 
each 
participant 
organization’s 
policy 
and 
practice. 
We 
look 
to 
this 
developing 
relationship 
as 
a 
way 
that 
advocacy 
organizations 
can 
collaborate 
to 
do 
this 
work. 


FINDING 
-Cross 
training 
is 
merely 
a 
first 
step 
to 
effective 
collaboration. 
To 
create 
a 
successful 
partnership, 
in-depth 
exploration 
of 
a 
variety 
of 
issues 
must 
take 
place. 


All 
three 
groups 
of 
advocates 
have 
engaged 
in 
a 
limited 
amount 
of 
cross 
training 
and 
understand 
its 
benefits. 
Perhaps 
more 
importantly, 
they 
also 
know 
its 
limitations 
and 
are 
eager 
to 
find 
more 
meaningful 
ways 
to 
collaborate. 


“That’s 
what 
it 
is 
coming 
down 
to 
– 
bringing 
domestic 
violence 
and 
disability 
workers 
together, 
because 
the 
biggest 
agencies 
aren’t 
getting 
things 
done.” 


-disability 
advocate 


Although 
disability 
advocates 
feel 
that 
they 
have 
many 
community 
connections 
and 
resources 
at 
their 
disposal, 
they 
receive 
limited 
training 
or 
coordination 
with 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocacy 
organizations. 
At 
the 
same 
time, 


33 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
feel 
that 
there 
is 
a 
lack 
of 
resources 
for 
survivors 
with 
disabilities. 
This 
exemplifies 
the 
need 
for 
improved 
communication 
between 
both 
kinds 
of 
advocates 
to 
determine 
how 
to 
work 
more 
closely 
together. 
Cross-training 
about 
each 
other’s 
work, 
practices 
and 
philosophical 
approach 
is 
merely 
the 
first 
step 
in 
relationship 
building. 


Domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
can 
offer 
information 
about 
maintaining 
confidentiality, 
safety 
planning, 
healing 
from 
trauma, 
system 
and 
abuser 
accountability, 
and 
system 
change 
advocacy 
strategies. 
Disability 
advocates 
can 
offer 
strategies 
to 
support 
autonomy 
and 
independence 
in 
a 
culture 
where 
people 
may 
not 
expect 
a 
person 
with 
a 
disability 
to 
live 
independently 
or 
to 
work 
and 
contribute 
to 
society. 


FINDING 
– 
Many 
advocacy 
organizations 
have 
developed 
a 
“culture 
of 
learning” 
that 
makes 
change 
– 
and 
planning 
for 
change 
– 
easier. 


Many 
of 
the 
advocacy 
organizations 
that 
participated 
in 
our 
focus 
groups 
have 
developed 
innovative 
methods 
of 
sharing 
knowledge 
within 
their 
organizations. 
In 
each 
case 
where 
we 
observed 
strong 
internal 
communication, 
we 
found 
that 
the 
organization 
had 
developed 
a 
“culture 
of 
learning,” 
either 
a 
formal 
or 
informal 
system 
where 
learning 
from 
each 
other 
was 
valued 
by 
both 
staff 
and 
management. 


Each 
organization 
had 
its 
own 
methods 
of 
operationalizing 
this 
culture 
of 
learning 
as 
it 
relates 
to 
accessibility. 
Among 
the 
models 
we 
observed 
were: 


• 
Integrating 
practice 
across 
an 
agency 
by 
using 
a 
comprehensive 
manual 
that 
is 
continually 
updated; 
• 
Scheduling 
formal 
and 
informal 
times 
for 
staff 
to 
share 
what 
they 
have 
learned; 
• 
Developing 
“intake” 
systems 
where 
a 
large 
amount 
of 
time 
is 
invested 
on 
the 
front 
end 
to 
get 
a 
full 
picture 
of 
a 
survivor’s 
needs 
and 
resources, 
building 
in 
opportunities 
for 
multiple 
staff 
members 
to 
participate 
in 
the 
process; 
• 
Building 
accessibility 
discussions 
into 
all 
phases 
of 
organizational 
planning; 
• 
Building 
time 
into 
staff 
meetings 
to 
share 
practices 
and 
resources; 
• 
Encouraging 
informal 
resource 
sharing 
among 
staff; 
• 
Rotating 
staff 
members 
assigned 
to 
outreach 
outings. 
“Where 
I’ve 
had 
the 
most 
training 
and 
education 
was 
from 
my 
peers.” 


-sexual 
assault 
advocate 


34 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


FINDING 
-The 
“disability 
community” 
is 
not 
a 
single, 
identifiable 
entity. 
This 
creates 
confusion 
among 
some 
advocates, 
but 
represents 
an 
opportunity 
for 
creating 
change 
in 
local 
communities. 


One 
of 
things 
that 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
find 
confusing 
about 
working 
within 
the 
“disability 
community,” 
is 
that 
it 
does 
not 
seem 
to 
be 
a 
homogenous 
community. 
Several 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
expressed 
frustration 
when 
trying 
to 
make 
connections 
with 
the 
disability 
community 
because 
it 
seemed 
to 
be 
a 
series 
of 
smaller 
communities, 
identified 
by 
type 
of 
disability. 
This 
perception 
is 
largely 
true. 


The 
Deaf 
community 
has 
historically 
organized 
and 
developed 
a 
particular 
culture 
informed 
by 
language 
(American 
Sign 
Language). 
The 
Blind 
disability 
organizations 
were 
exceptionally 
powerful 
in 
governmental 
lobbying 
and 
organizing 
among 
themselves. 
The 
developmental 
disability 
advocacy 
world 
has 
often 
worked 
in 
an 
insular 
fashion. 
Organizing 
across 
disability 
is 
rare 
and 
not 
typical 
among 
“the 
disability 
community.” 


In 
the 
disAbility 
Advocacy 
Project, 
we 
are 
asking 
people 
with 
disabilities 
and 
their 
advocacy 
organizations 
to 
come 
together. 
That 
assumption 
alone 
is 
powerful 
and 
asks 
a 
lot. 
Disability 
Rights 
Washington 
is 
a 
statewide 
agency 
that 
works 
cross-
disability, 
and 
the 
Centers 
for 
Independent 
Living 
are 
also 
cross-disability 
organizations. 
There 
are 
CILs 
operating 
in 
each 
of 
our 
four 
needs 
assessment 
communities. 
Their 
presence 
and 
willingness 
to 
participate 
represents 
opportunities 
for 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
to 
have 
a 
comprehensive 
resource 
for 
understanding 
the 
many 
facets 
of 
the 
disability 
community. 


35 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


_____________________________________
AppendixAMissionandVisionofthedisAbilityAdvocacyProject
Vision, 
mission 
and 
context 
for 
our 
work 


The 
vision 
of 
the 
disAbility 
Advocacy 
Project 
is 
that 
people 
with 
disabilities 
and 
Deaf 
individuals 
who 
experience 
domestic 
or 
sexual 
violence 
are 
aware 
of 
the 
range 
of 
services 
that 
are 
available 
to 
them 
and 
they 
have 
the 
same 
access 
to 
those 
services 
as 
others. 
We 
believe 
that 
all 
people 
should 
have 
equal 
opportunity 
to 
participate 
in 
a 
society 
where 
Abilities, 
rather 
than 
disabilities, 
are 
recognized. 


36 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


___________________________________________
AppendixBCriteriafortheSelectionofPilotSites
Criteria 
for 
Selection 
of 
Pilot 
Sites 


Our 
collaboration 
has 
determined 
that 
we 
will 
use 
the 
following 
criteria 
to 
determine 
which 
three 
communities 
will 
operate 
as 
pilot 
sites 
in 
years 
two 
and 
three 
of 
the 
grant. 


1. 
Pilot 
sites 
should 
be 
selected 
to 
reflect 
the 
geographic 
and 
demographic 
diversity 
of 
Washington 
state. 
2. 
It 
is 
important 
that 
a 
potential 
pilot 
site 
have 
existing 
community-based 
resources; 
a 
domestic 
violence 
program, 
a 
sexual 
assault 
program, 
and 
a 
Center 
for 
Independent 
Living 
(CIL) 
or 
similar 
disability 
advocacy 
agency. 
3. 
It 
is 
important 
that 
the 
local 
advocates 
express 
a 
strong 
interest 
in 
the 
project 
and 
a 
willingness 
to 
do 
the 
work 
necessary 
to 
form 
a 
strong 
collaborative 
presence 
in 
the 
community. 
4. 
The 
local 
advocacy 
organizations 
should 
also 
express 
a 
desire 
to 
work 
with 
the 
dAP 
to 
receive 
technical 
assistance 
and 
create 
and 
document 
model 
collaborative 
advocacy 
strategies 
between 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
and 
disability 
advocates. 
5. 
The 
community 
would 
optimally 
include 
a 
specialized 
program 
or 
resource 
unique 
to 
the 
state 
that 
addresses 
issues 
of 
domestic 
and 
sexual 
violence. 
6. 
The 
advocacy 
organizations 
in 
the 
community 
should 
express 
a 
strong 
interest 
in 
improving 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
services 
for 
individuals 
with 
disabilities; 
and 
7. 
The 
advocacy 
organizations 
in 
the 
community 
should 
express 
a 
strong 
interest 
in 
improving 
outreach 
regarding 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
services 
for 
individuals 
with 
disabilities. 
37 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


_____________________________________
AppendixCTablesofFocusGroupThemes
Focus 
Groups 
and 
Interviews 
with 


Domestic 
Violence/Sexual 
Assault 
Advocates 


Focus 
Group 
Question: 
What 
have 
you 
done 
at 
your 
program 
for 
survivors 
with 
disabilities 
that 
you 
are 
proud 
of? 


ServicesAccessible,flexibleandadaptedStaffBuildingacultureofrespectCollaboration
Accessibility 
Fostering 
respect 


• 
Collaborate 
with 
other 
• 
Support 
groups 
• 
Staff 
is 
nonjudgmental 
– 
organizations 
that 


• 
Free 
transportation 
treat 
all 
people 
with 
specialize 
in 
mental 


• 
People 
can 
bring 
their 
own 
respect 
health 
and 
disability 
interpreter 


• 
Staff 
recognizes 
that 
issues 


• 
Allow 
service 
animals 
everyone 
has 
the 
same 


• 
Community 
partnerships 
• 
Improved 
physical 
rights 


• 
Leveraging 
resources 
– 
accessibility 
• 
Treat 
people 
like 
a 
human 
especially 
in 
small 


• 
Services 
are 
client-directed 
being 
communities 


– 
focus 
on 
what 
the 
client 
• 
The 
sexual 
assault 
wants 
and 
their 
programs 
reject 
the 
individualized 
needs 


notion 
that 
people 
with 


Adapted 
Services 
disabilities 
are 
asexual 


• 
Not 
relying 
on 
usual 
• 
Understand 
that 
they 
are 
method 
of 
services 
currently 
working 
with 


• 
Varied 
in 
outreach 
– 
wide 
people 
who 
don’t 
identify 
variety 
of 
methods 
– 
go 


their 
disability 
where 
people 
are 


Training 
and 
Development 


• 
Flexibility 
with 
crisis 
line 
• 
Foster 
a 
culture 
that 
is 
• 
Ask 
about 
disability 
on 
receptive 
to 
learning 
intake 


• 
Flexibility 
(NW 
network, 
• 
Willingness 
to 
figure 
out 
praxis) 
accessibility 
needs 


• 
Staff 
is 
trained 
to 
be 
• 
Trying 
to 
talk 
about 
what 
accessible 
works 
and 
what 
doesn’t 


• 
Education 
through 
• 
Disentangling 
mental 
conferences 
health, 
substance 
use 


and 
dv/sa 
trauma 
(also 
a 


barrier 
to 
serving 
people 


with 
disabilities) 


Focus 
group 
question: 
When 
you 
took 
the 
volunteer 
or 
new 
employee 
training, 
did 
you 
learn 
about 
specific 
disability-related 
domestic 
violence/sexual 
assault 
issues? 


38 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


Majority 
of 
training 
occurs 
during 
the 
30-hour 
advocacy 
training 
and/or 
during 
an 
anti-
oppression 
training. 
Generally, 
there 
is 
a 
lack 
of 
communication 
among 
staff 
and/or 
cross-
training. 


TopicsCoveredinTrainingNeedMoreTraining
Disability 
Awareness 


Cross-training 
within 
own 
agency 


• 
General 
disability 
awareness 
• 
Lack 
of 
integration 
about 
info 
throughout 
• 
Values 
questionnaire/assessment 
agency 


• 
Learning 
about 
working 
with 
individuals 
• 
Need 
cross 
training 
who 
have 
issues 
with 
mental 
health 
and 
• 
Staff 
need 
to 
educate 
each 
other 
and 
share 
sexual 
assault 
-who 
can 
benefit 
from 
info 
their 
services 


• 
Conflicting 
information 
among 
staff 
-not 
all 
• 
Learning 
about 
who 
they 
could 
serve 
(or 
staff 
are 
trained 
not) 


• 
Need 
internal 
staff 
training 
– 
across 
• 
People 
talked 
about 
specific 
disabilities 
services/jobs 


• 
Basic 
training 
More 
Detailed 
Training 
Accessibility 


• 
Need 
ongoing 
training 
• 
Learned 
to 
use 
TTY 
• 
Need 
training 
to 
figure 
out 
who 
is 
a 
• 
How 
to 
improve 
physical 
accommodations 
mandated 
reporter 


• 
Working 
with 
service 
animals 
• 
It 
is 
important 
to 
have 
practical 
experience 
• 
People 
are 
confused 
to 
ask 
about 
disability, 
Policies 


when 
to 
ask, 
how 
and 
also 


• 
How 
to 
provide 
written 
material 
accommodation 


• 
Self-identification 
of 
disability 
and 
figuring 
out 
accommodation 
Cross-training 
with 
other 
agencies 


• 
Need 
cross 
training 
across 
community 
orgs 
Focus 
group 
question: 
Do 
you 
have 
contacts 
in 
the 
disability 
community 
to 
help 
you 
learn 
about 
how 
domestic 
violence/sexual 
assault 
issues 
affect 
people 
with 
disabilities? 


LimitedAwareness/ContactwithDisabilityOrgsWhatWouldImproveCollaboration

Didnotknowdisabilityorgsorselfadvocates

LimitedexperiencewithDeafadv/orgs

Participatedinexistingtaskforces

Didnotdistinguishbetweensocialserviceanddisabilityadvocateorg

Facetofacecontactwithotheradvocates/orgssoyouknowwhotocontact

Needcontactlist/directorywithallprovidersandwhatservicestheyoffer–
includingmorethanoneissue(mh/dv)

Needtimetomakecontact

Goouttocommunitytoidentifyneeds,
offerservices

Crosstraining–internal/external

Includesurvivorinput

Anti-oppressionvalueofbothkindsoforganizationshelpedcollaboration

Confidentialityisabarriertocollaboration

Providingaccessibility/lackofaccessibilityisbarriertocollaboration
39 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


Entire 
staff 
of 
each 
agency 
needs 
to 
be 
involved 
in 
collaboration 


• 
Entire 
org 
develop 
relationships 
– 
not 
individual 
based, 
combats 
high 
turn 
over 
of 
staff, 
burnout 
• 
Need 
to 
develop 
a 
web 
of 
relationships 
across 
orgs 
• 
Collaboration 
without 
services 
– 
doesn’t 
help, 
no 
relief 
• 
Services 
within 
agency 
are 
compartmentalized 
– 
one 
person 
“doing 
it” 
(responsible 
for 
disability 
training, 
etc.) 
Focus 
group 
question: 
Often 
survivors 
who 
have 
a 
disability 
will 
not 
tell 
an 
advocate 
that 
they 
have 
one. 
Why 
do 
you 
think 
that 
is? 
Is 
there 
any 
question 
you 
ask 
during 
intake 
that 
might 
make 
a 
person 
with 
a 
disability 
hesitant/afraid 
to 
disclose 
they 
have 
a 
disability? 


PhysicalBarriersPolicyandPracticeBarriersBarrierstotheSurvivor

Phoneisbarrier

HospitalsettingisabarrierLackofTrust

Ittakestimetobuildtrust

Timetolisten–survivorshaveacomplexsituationthattakestimetoworkthrough–oftendon’tdisclosebecauseadvocatesdon’taskenoughquestionsIntakeorScreeningBarriers

Lackofconfidentiality

Fillingoutpaperwork

Needtoknowdiagnosis,
medstobeprepared

Screeninginoroutforservices

RulesStaffPerceptions

ADV/orgperceptionthatPeoplewithdisabilitieslivesarecontrolledandlackofautonomy

Advocatessometimesassumetheskillsofapersonwithadisability

Fearoflosingtheirchildren-shameandguilt

Generaldiscouragementwithsystemresponseinthepast

Peoplewithdisabilitiesmisunderstandwhatisanunhealthyrelationship

Peoplewithdisabilitiesdistrustdomesticviolenceandsexualassaultadvocates

Lackofoutreachandnotenoughaccesstoself-
advocates
40 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


Focus 
group 
question: 
What 
are 
the 
barriers 
you 
have 
to 
serving 
people 
with 
disabilities? 


AccommodationBarriersPolicyBarriersServiceBarriers
Physical 
Accommodation 


• 
Disentangling 
mental 
Lack 
of 
Trust 


• 
Accessibility 
of 
housing 
health, 
substance 
use, 


• 
It 
takes 
time 
to 
establish 
units 
dv/sa 
issues 
is 
complex 


trust 


• 
Materials 
not 
translated 
and 
confusing 


• 
How 
to 
ask 
intrusive 
• 
Need 
transportation 
• 
Shelter 
policies 
questions 
-asking 
about 


• 
Need 
funding 
for 
cab 
• 
Filling 
out 
paperwork 
disability 
– 
integrate 
into 
rides/pros 
and 
cons 
of 


• 
Need 
more 
time 
to 
talk 
intake 
questions 
or 
being 
on 
a 
bus 
line 


about 
what 
works 
and 


separating 
out 
as 


• 
Need 
ASL 
interpreters 
what 
doesn’t 
demographic 
question 
and 
then 
we 
have 
service 


What 
is 
Accommodation? 
need 
questions 


• 
Uncertainly 
about 
what 
• 
Need 
a 
welcoming 
accommodation 
is 
environment 


• 
Lack 
of 
accommodation 
provision 
and 
awareness: 
Staff 
Perceptions 
including 
the 
range/types 


• 
Discomfort 
talking 
with 
of 
people 
with 
disabilities, 
people 
with 
disabilities 
equipment, 
transportation 


• 
Complexity 
of 
disability 
• 
Reading 
– 
learning 
culture 
disabilities 
– 
hard 
to 


• 
The 
perception 
that 
people 
know 
if 
someone 
cannot 
with 
disabilities 
might 
read/fill 
out 
paperwork 


think 
they 
won’t 
get 


• 
Personal 
assistance 
issues 
services 


• 
Hard 
to 
distinguish 
between 
access 
needs 
vs. 
System 
Coordination 
service 
needs 


• 
Advocates 
are 
discouraged 
• 
Who 
is 
a 
vulnerable 
adult? 
with 
lack 
of 
services 
and 


• 
Don’t 
understand 
system 
resources 
for 
people 
with 
and 
rules/services 
for 


disabilities 
people 
w/disability 


• 
State 
systems 
need 
to 
be 
• 
Lack 
of 
experience 
with 
coordinated 
Deaf/Deaf 
Blind 


• 
Community 
orgs 
need 
to 
be 
Community 
coordinated 


• 
Confidentiality 
issues 
• 
People 
with 
disabilities 
are 
left 
out 
of 
support 
groups 
or 
do 
not 
fit 
in 
– 
become 
more 
isolated 
Focus 
group 
question: 
What 
should 
disability 
advocates 
do 
to 
inform 
people 
with 
disabilities 
about 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault? 


Service/OrganizationalNeedsStaffInteractions

Haveaccessiblewrittenmaterialsaboutdomesticviolenceandsexualassault

Clarifyrolesbetweendv/saadvocatesanddisabilityadvocates

Collaborateanddoco-advocacy—donot

Haveanopenapproach–believeandrespectsurvivors

Donotmakeassumptions

Includecaregiversasabusers

Understandthatpeopleclosetoyoucould
41 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


just 
hand 
off 
survivors 
to 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
agencies 


• 
Maintain 
confidentiality 
about 
abuse 
• 
Do 
safety 
planning 
• 
Acknowledge 
that 
people 
with 
disabilities 
are 
sexual 
and 
have 
a 
right 
to 
relationships 
• 
Participate 
in 
cross-trainings 
with 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocacy 
orgs 
and 
disability 
advocate 
orgs 
• 
Use 
special 
tools 
to 
screen 
for 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
• 
Educate 
staff 
about 
mandatory 
reporting 
considerations 
when 
the 
abuser 
is 
also 
the 
caretaker 
• 
Bigger 
need 
for 
public 
awareness 
– 
including 
educating 
disability 
advocates 
that 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
exist 
be 
perpetrators 


• 
Respect 
survivors’ 
choices 
and 
decisions 
• 
Understanding 
why 
people 
with 
disabilities 
are 
exploited 
is 
a 
larger 
issue 
• 
Be 
open 
with 
LGBT 
community 
• 
Play 
a 
role 
in 
prevention 
– 
get 
info 
before 
bad 
things 
happen 
• 
Dispose 
of 
stereotypes 
about 
receiving 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
services 
(e.g., 
requires 
divorce) 
Focus 
Groups 
and 
Interviews 


with 
Disability 
Advocates 


Focus 
group 
question: 
What 
have 
you 
done 
at 
you 
organization 
for 
people 
with 
disabilities 
who 
have 
experienced 
domestic 
violence 
or 
sexual 
abuse 
that 
you 
are 
proud 
of? 


AccommodatingServicesEmpoweringPracticesCollaboration&Training
• 
Office 
is 
a 
safe 
place 
• 
Know 
how 
to 
connect 
• 
Provide 
education/ 
• 
Communication 
with 
people 
people 
with 
individualized 
workshops 
with 
disabilities 
– 
we 
info/resources, 
break 
• 
Have 
many 
community 
know 
how 
learn 
to 
isolation, 
empowerment 
partners. 
Can 
communicate 
with 
• 
Making 
folks 
feel 
safe 
– 
provide/receive 
training 
anyone. 
We 
follow 
seeing 
the 
danger 
from 
them 
through 
with 
their 
• 
Know 
how 
to 
hook 
people 
problem 
and 
learn 
how 
to 
up 
with 
peers 
– 
either 
interface 
support 
groups 
or 
other 
• 
Individualized 
responses 
to 
community 
groups 
(in 
problems/barriers 
contrast 
to 
domestic 
• 
Assistance 
with 
legal 
violence 
and 
sexual 
bureaucratic 
assault 
advocates 
who 
barriers/processes 
experienced 
difficulty 
finding 
support 
groups 
for 
survivors 
with 
disabilities) 
• 
Link 
self-advocacy 
principles 
to 
violence 
awareness. 
Empowering 
people 
to 
be 
leaders 


42 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


Focus 
group 
question: 
Do 
volunteers 
and 
employees 
receive 
training 
on 
how 
domestic 
violence/sexual 
assault 
issues 
affect 
people 
with 
disabilities? 


No 
or 
limited 
training 
currently 
offered; 
both 
dv/sa 
and 
disability 
advocates 
believe 
in 
collaborative 
advocacy, 
but 
are 
not 
actively 
engaged 
in 
cross-training 
or 
other 
collaborations. 


CurrentandSuggestedTopicsforTrainingOtherTrainingIssuesCurrenttrainingfordomesticviolenceandsexualassaultissues

None–domesticviolenceandsexualassaultisnotacomponentofanytraining,eitheratlocalcenteroratregionaltrainings

AdvocatesneedconcretestepsabouthowtoworkwithsurvivorsSuggestedtopics

Mandatoryreportingisnotfullyunderstood–notonlywhois/isnotavulnerableadult,butthedangerofretaliationbyabuserwasnotbroughtupbydisabilityadvocates.

Trainingshouldaddressstickyissues–
peoplewithdisabilitiesasperpetrators,
mandatoryreporting,familymembersasperpetrators,retaliation(esp.whensystemfailsthevictim),perpetratorswhoaretheguardianorpayee,lackofcredibilityofpeoplewithdisabilitieswhendealingwithAPS,police,otherfirstresponders

Letstaffbeguidedbypeoplewithdisabilitieswhohaveexperienceddv/sa–letthemguideusabouthowtochangeourmaterials/policies/practicestoaddressdv/saissues.
Cross-trainingwithinownagency

Lackofsharingofstaffknowledgeamongsteachother,needtoworkasateambetter.
Cross-trainingwithotheragencies

Needcrosstrainingacrosscommunityorgs

Needtoworkbetterwithotherorgs.Wedon’tknowwhoincommunityprovidestrainingondomesticviolenceandsexualassault.Needtoteacheachother,workasateam(co-advocacy).
Focus 
group 
question: 
When 
you 
are 
contacted 
by 
a 
person 
with 
a 
disability 
who 
is 
experiencing 
domestic 
violence/sexual 
assault, 
what 
do 
you 
do? 



• 
Reluctant 
to 
recommend 
mental 
health 
services 
because 
they 
often 
don’t 
address 
the 
problems 
• 
Provide 
information 
& 
referrals 
• 
Any 
successful 
approach 
will 
blend 
self-advocacy 
with 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
training 
• 
Take 
the 
time 
necessary 
to 
figure 
out 
what 
is 
going 
on 
• 
Mandatory 
reporting 
is 
often 
the 
first 
thought 
when 
abuse 
issues 
surface 
• 
Want 
more 
info 
on 
accessibility/availability 
of 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
services 
in 
their 
community 
• 
Need 
to 
build 
partnerships 
with 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
advocates 
• 
Abuse 
is 
not 
always 
physical 
or 
criminal 
– 
sometimes 
psychological 
• 
Need 
clarification 
about 
abuse 
by 
family 
members 
• 
Use 
technology 
for 
creative 
solutions 
to 
problems 
43 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


Focus 
group 
question: 
Sometimes 
people 
with 
disabilities 
who 
experience 
domestic 
violence 
or 
sexual 
abuse 
don’t 
disclose 
their 
experience. 
Why 
do 
you 
think 
that 
is? 


LackofTrustIdentifyingtheAbuseBarrierstoServicesFear/LossofResources
• 
Many 
social 
service 
• 
Don’t 
identify 
what 
Lack 
of 
Services 
• 
Fear 
cops 
won’t 
agencies 
seek 
to 
is 
happening 
to 
• 
There 
are 
few 
peer 
believe 
or 
abuser 
preserve 
family 
them 
as 
abuse 
support 
groups 
will 
interpret. 
first 
and 
• 
Don’t 
want 
to 
for 
people 
with 
Lack 
of 
credibility 
foremost. 
Can 
betray 
the 
disabilities 
who 
• 
Fear 
of 
losing 
kids 
lead 
to 
distrust 
relationship 
with 
experience 
dv/sa 
– 
people 
with 
• 
People 
with 
abuser 
• 
Men 
aren’t 
served 
disabilities 
at 
high 
different 
by 
domestic 
risk 
of 
losing 
ethnicity, 
culture, 
violence 
and 
parental 
rights 
sexual 
sexual 
assault 
• 
Fear 
of 
losing 
orientation, 
adds 
orgs/don’t 
get 
the 
housing, 
PAS, 
another 
layer 
of 
help 
they 
need 
independence 
advocacy 
• 
Fear 
of 
retaliation 
considerations 
Discouraged 
with 
by 
abuser 
• 
People 
want 
time 
to 
Services 
• 
Don’t 
want 
to 
rock 
know/trust 
• 
Are 
accustomed 
to 
the 
boat 
– 
they 
agency 
before 
things 
going 
may 
lose 
what 
going 
there. 
wrong 
or 
not 
they 
have. 
“The 
People 
with 
happening 
at 
all 
situation 
you 
disabilities 
are 
when 
seeking 
know 
is 
safer 
more 
likely 
to 
talk 
help. 
They 
are 
than 
the 
situation 
with 
a 
friend 
than 
discouraged 
and 
you 
don’t” 
a 
domestic 
need 
to 
feel 
safe 
• 
Guilt/shame 
– 
if 
violence 
and 
before 
disclosing 
PAS 
worker 
is 
sexual 
assault 
abuser, 
survivor 
agency 
may 
feel 
guilty 
• 
domestic 
violence 
complaining 
and 
sexual 
about 
people 
who 
assault 
advocates 
perform 
essential 
should 
be 
tasks 
consistently 
• 
Money 
plays 
key 
present 
to 
build 
role 
– 
can 
only 
trust 
afford 
to 
live 
in 
certain 
areas, 
hard 
to 
find 
new 
place 
if 
you 
leave 


Focus 
group 
question: 
What 
should 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
programs 
do 
for 
outreach 
to 
people 
with 
disabilities? 


Service/OrganizationalNeedsStaffInteractions

Needstrategiesthatreachpeopleingrouplivingsituations

Outreachtoruralareas

Websitesormaterialsshouldhavedomesticviolenceandsexualassaultinfo&resources,clearlanguagethathelps

Havedomesticviolenceandsexualassaultadvocatesthatunderstanddisability;
understandhowtoworkwithinterpreters

Anyeffortmustbesustained–needtimetobuildtrust

Takingtimeisimportant–peoplewith
44 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


people 
understand 
what 
they 
have 
experienced 
is 
abuse, 
and 
what 
to 
do/expect 
when 
you 
contact 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
program 


• 
Presentations 
to 
people 
with 
disabilities 
in 
accessible 
meeting 
rooms 
-with 
food 
and 
accessible 
transportation. 
Make 
people 
feel 
welcome 
• 
Hold 
meetings 
at 
different 
times 
during 
the 
day, 
to 
accommodate 
different 
schedules 
• 
Need 
to 
include 
a 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
component 
in 
self-
advocacy 
trainings 
• 
Do 
no 
harm! 
Don’t 
jeopardize 
home, 
kids, 
necessary 
supports 
• 
Increase 
networking 
through 
DSHS, 
DVR, 
211 
system 
. 
. 
. 
• 
There 
should 
be 
clarity 
about 
what 
the 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
program 
will 
and 
will 
not 
do 
• 
Brochures 
reachable 
by 
people 
in 
wheelchairs 
• 
Brochures 
for 
men 
with 
disabilities 
– 
are 
they 
welcome 
• 
Language 
in 
materials 
should 
be 
general, 
broad 
and 
welcoming 
• 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
programs 
should 
exhibit 
flexibility 
about 
transportation 
for 
people 
with 
disabilities 
• 
People 
with 
disabilities 
often 
need 
a 
network 
of 
services 
to 
provide 
needed 
support. 
Good 
advocates 
need 
good 
connections 
to 
other 
advocates 
-if 
one 
link 
in 
the 
chain 
breaks, 
it 
all 
collapses 
• 
Linking 
info/websites 
– 
there 
should 
be 
info 
about 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
on 
disability 
websites 
and 
vice-
versa 
disabilities 
need 
more 
of 
your 
time, 
and 
giving 
it 
is 
the 
single 
most 
important 
thing 
you 
can 
do 


• 
Do 
no 
harm! 
Don’t 
jeopardize 
home, 
kids, 
necessary 
supports 
• 
A 
person’s 
disability 
is 
often 
blamed 
for 
the 
things 
that 
go 
wrong 
in 
their 
lives. 
Don’t 
blame 
the 
abuse 
on 
a 
person’s 
disability 
• 
There 
are 
tactics 
of 
abuse 
that 
are 
specific 
to 
people 
with 
disabilities, 
so 
safety 
planning 
needs 
to 
be 
individualized 
Focus 
Groups 
and 
Interviews 


with 
People 
with 
Disabilities 


Focus 
group 
question: 
Who 
in 
your 
community 
serves 
you 
the 
best? 
What 
makes 
their 
service 
the 
best? 
Can 
you 
give 
some 
examples? 


Services 
Staff 
Interactions 
• 
Support 
groups 
• 
Offer 
one 
place 
to 
go 
to 
get 
services 
– 
jobs, 
mental 
health 
care, 
food, 
homelessness, 
undocumented 
• 
Building 
trust 
is 
essential 
• 
Face 
to 
face 
contact 
• 
Spending 
a 
long 
time 
with 
each 
person, 
listening 


45 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


• 
Free 
food 
and 
clothes, 
and 
meeting 
people 
like 
yourself 
(night 
gathering) 
• 
Mental 
health 
service 
agencies 
• 
Transportation 
is 
available, 
close 
by 
• 
Available 
service 
is 
hard 
to 
get 
to 
• 
Have 
a 
feedback 
process, 
complaint 
process 
• 
Credibility 
– 
certain 
organizations 
have 
a 
reputation 
for 
“knowing 
their 
stuff” 
• 
Service 
is 
appropriate 
to 
what 
is 
needed 
• 
People 
have 
fears 
about 
mandatory 
reporting 
and 
it’s 
effect 
on 
confidentiality 
• 
Do 
not 
be 
judgmental 
• 
Do 
not 
make 
assumptions 
about 
what 
people 
need, 
access 
to 
things 
• 
Consistency 
over 
the 
long 
haul 
• 
Valuing 
people 
• 
Respect 
• 
Know 
the 
whole 
person 
• 
The 
receptionist 
is 
an 
important 
first 
contact 
who 
needs 
to 
be 
well 
trained 
and 
welcoming 
Focus 
group 
question: 
What 
advice 
would 
you 
give 
an 
advocate 
about 
how 
to 
better 
serve 
people 
with 
disabilities 
who 
have 
experienced 
domestic 
violence/sexual 
assault? 



• 
Understand 
that 
when 
things 
are 
not 
accessible 
it 
takes 
more 
time; 
people 
should 
not 
be 
penalized 
for 
being 
late 
• 
Be 
an 
active 
listener 
and 
model 
respect 
• 
Ask 
the 
person 
what 
they 
need, 
don’t 
tell 
them 
what 
they 
need 
• 
Take 
time 
to 
build 
trust 
• 
Resources 
need 
to 
fit 
basic 
survival 
needs 
• 
Be 
compassionate 
and 
be 
genuine 
• 
Offer 
help 
with 
paperwork 
(and 
explain 
things 
calmly) 
• 
Remember 
to 
check 
in 
and 
ask 
questions 
• 
Don’t 
be 
afraid 
to 
ask 
and 
talk 
about 
disability 
• 
There 
needs 
to 
be 
diversity 
in 
outreach 
material 
– 
people 
need 
to 
be 
able 
to 
identify 
with 
the 
materials 
-includes, 
class, 
race, 
disability, 
language 
Focus 
group 
question: 
Often 
there 
are 
good 
reasons 
not 
to 
tell 
a 
service 
provider 
things 
about 
you, 
for 
example, 
about 
your 
disability 
or 
about 
bad 
things 
that 
happened 
to 
you. 
What 
do 
service 
providers 
do 
or 
say 
to 
make 
you 
trust 
them? 
What 
do 
service 
providers 
do 
or 
say 
that 
makes 
you 
hesitant 
or 
careful 
about 
giving 
too 
much 
information 
about 
yourself? 



• 
Earn 
the 
right 
to 
ask 
personal 
questions 
• 
Don’t 
minimize 
a 
person’s 
situation 
• 
Be 
open 
and 
honest 
• 
Be 
an 
active 
listener 
• 
Consistency 
and 
prompt 
response 
– 
no 
matter 
what 
the 
question 
is 
• 
People 
want 
their 
advocate 
to 
understand 
their 
fears 
– 
understand 
“what 
the 
stakes 
are” 
for 
receiving 
help 
— 
potential 
loss 
of 
housing, 
children 
• 
When 
a 
person 
has 
multiple 
issues, 
dv/sa 
is 
often 
ignored/is 
secondary: 
mental 
health 
providers, 
substance 
use 
providers 
are 
not 
responding 
to 
dv 
or 
sa 
• 
Advocates 
need 
to 
develop 
individual 
strategies 
for 
each 
person 
• 
Good 
signs 
that 
clearly 
tell 
someone 
where 
to 
go 
• 
Offer 
help 
connecting 
to 
other 
effective 
resources 
in 
community 
Focus 
group 
question: 
What 
do 
abusers 
say 
or 
do 
that 
makes 
people 
with 
disabilities 
think 
nobody 
will 
believe 
or 
help 
them? 


46 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


PhysicalActionsVerbalAbuse
• 
Isolation 
Fostering 


• 
Monitor 
daily 
actions 
• 
Fostering 
false 
dependency 
– 
can’t 
function 
• 
Threats 
to 
kill 
without 
abuser 


• 
Economic 
abuse 
• 
Fostering 
a 
fear 
of 
the 
“unknown” 
• 
Using 
kids 
– 
threatening 
to 
take 
children, 
• 
Fostering 
systems 
distrust 
etc. 
• 
Survivors 
fear 
of 
loss 
of 
independence 
Self-Esteem/Guilt 


• 
Telling 
her 
no 
one 
will 
believe 
her 
• 
Telling 
other 
people 
to 
not 
believe 
her 
or 
him 
• 
Verbal 
abuse, 
cutting 
down 
self-esteem 
• 
Threats 
and 
bullying, 
intimidation 
– 
telling 
others 
• 
Using 
guilt 
• 
Caregiver 
dynamic 
– 
fear 
of 
not 
having 
services, 
using 
guilt, 
can’t 
function 
daily, 
care 
giver 
as 
saints 
• 
Devalued 
-verbal 
abuse 
is 
tactic 
to 
achieve 
devaluation 
• 
All 
actions 
above 
increase 
people 
with 
disabilities’ 
internalized 
oppression 
Focus 
group 
question: 
If 
domestic 
violence 
or 
sexual 
abuse 
programs 
want 
to 
talk 
to 
people 
with 
disabilities, 
where 
should 
they 
go 
to 
talk 
about 
the 
services 
they 
offer? 


PlacesStrategies

Medicalsettings

Mentalhealthproviders

Disabilityorganizations

Substanceuseagencies

Publicspaces–busstops,communitybillboards,library

Foodbanks,Goodwill

Wheretransportationis–accessibletransportation

Clubhouses

LGBTcommunitycenters

Publicizeservicesbutdon’tseekpeopleout:
Don’tcometome/letmecometoyou

Materialsshouldbeinvariouslanguagesthatreflectpeoplewithdisabilities’perspective

Accessible,inclusive,welcomingmaterials

Spreadingtheword–“wordofmouth”
amongpersonswithdisabilities,peopleshareinfowitheachother–thisisamainwayofgettinginformationaboutresources
47 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


___________________________________________
AppendixDDemographicandStatisticalInformation
The 
State 
of 
Washington 
is 
located 
in 
the 
upper 
Northwestern 
region 
of 
the 
United 
States 
and 
has 
a 
population 
of 
6,395,798. 
Washington’s 
population 
is 
growing, 
with 
a 
net 
migration 
rate2 
from 
2000-2006 
that 
was 
almost 
twice 
the 
rate 
of 
the 
rest 
of 
the 
country 
(4.9% 
in 
Washington 
compared 
to 
2.7% 
in 
the 
U.S.)3. 
In 
2005, 
12.5% 
of 
the 
state’s 
population 
resided 
in 
rural 
counties, 
which 
account 
for 
59.4% 
of 
the 
state’s 
land 
area4. 
Rural 
populations 
tend 
to 
be 
older, 
less 
diverse, 
are 
more 
likely 
to 
live 
in 
poverty 
and 
have 
lower 
median 
incomes 
than 
urban 
populations. 
The 
rural 
counties 
in 
the 
Northeastern, 
South 
central 
and 
Southeastern 
regions 
of 
Washington 
have 
the 
highest 
percentage 
of 
people 
who 
have 
incomes 
that 
are 
at 
or 
below 
200% 
poverty 
level 
(over 
37% 
of 
population). 


There 
are 
twenty-nine 
federally 
recognized 
tribes 
in 
Washington 
State, 
which 
are 
independent 
sovereign 
governments 
with 
similar 
status 
as 
other 
states 
and 
foreign 
nations. 


Disability 
in 
Washington 


The 
U.S. 
Census 
collects 
data 
about 


Figure 
3:Age 
ofPersons 
withaDisabilityin 


people 
who 
identify 
as 
having 
a 
disability. 
Just 
over 
7% 
of 
the 
state’s 
population 
reported 
that 
they 
had 
one 
disability 
and 
8.6% 
reported 
that 
they 
have 
two 
or 
more 
disabilities. 
The 
majority 
of 
persons 
in 
Washington 
State 
who 
have 
a 
disability 
are 
between 
6 
and 
64 
years 
of 
age5 
(see 
Figure 
3). 


It 
is 
important 
to 
note 
that 
the 
prevalence 
of 
disabilities 
among 
Washington’s 
population 
quoted 
in 
this 
section 
only 
includes 
non-
institutionalized 
populations. 
Unfortunately, 
U.S. 
Census 
provides 
no 
information 
specific 
to 
institutionalized 


2 
Net 
migration, 
or 
the 
difference 
between 
how 
many 
people 
moved 
in 
and 
how 
many 
moved 
out, 
is 
one 
part 
of 
population 
change. 
The 
other 
part 
is 
natural 
change, 
or 
the 
difference 
between 
births 
and 
deaths. 
3 
Northwest 
Area 
Foundation 
-Indicators 
Website. 
Accessed 
online 
November 
28, 
2007. 
4 
Washington 
State 
Department 
of 
Health 
(Feb 
2006). 
What 
is 
Different 
About 
Rural 
Washington 
– 
A 
rural 
health 
snapshot. 
5 
U.S. 
Census. 
2006 
American 
Community 
Survey: 
Washington 
State. 


WashingtonState16to64,14%
5to15,7%
under5,16%
65andover,42%
48 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


persons 
with 
disabilities. 


Income, 
Housing 
& 
Employment 
among 
People 
with 
Disabilities 


In 
Washington 
State, 
over 
20% 
of 
people 
over 
the 
age 
of 
five 
who 
are 
disabled 
live 
below 
the 
poverty 
level, 
and 
only 
41.4% 
are 
employed6. 
It 
is 
well 
documented 
that 
people 
with 
disabilities 
(including 
mental 
illness) 
are 
often 
living 
below 
poverty 
level, 
are 
unemployed, 
and 
struggle 
to 
retain 
housing7. 


Even 
if 
a 
person 
with 
Figure 
1: 
Percent 
of 
County 
Population 
with 
disabilities 
is 
employed, 
they 
an 
Income 
Less 
than 
200% 
Poverty 
Level 
often 
have 
a 
lower 
income 
(1999)8 


compared 
to 
those 
without 
disabilities. 
For 
example, 
one 
study 
found 
that 
the 
mean 
household 
income 
of 
women 
without 
disabilities 
increased 
by 
almost 
three 
times 
as 
much 
as 
women 
with 
disabilities 
who 
were 
employed 
between 
1989 
and 
2000 
(12.6% 
increase 
compared 
to 
5.6% 
increase)9. 
In 
addition, 
both 
men 
and 
women 
with 
disabilities 
experienced 
a 
higher 
decline 
in 
employment 
rate 
during 
this 
entire 
period, 
compared 
to 
people 
without 
disabilities. 
Income 
and 
housing 
have 
immense 
impact 
on 
the 
well-being 
of 
people 
with 
disabilities. 


While 
urban 
areas 
of 
Washington 
State 
are 
experiencing 
a 
rise 
in 
the 
cost 
of 
living 
that 
impacts 
most 
rental 
populations 
(Seattle’s 
cost 
of 
living 
is 
8% 
higher 
than 
the 
rest 
of 
the 
U.S.), 
people 
with 
disabilities 
are 
routinely 
“priced 
out” 
of 
housing. 
In 
King 
County 
(where 
Seattle 
in 
located), 
four 
out 
of 
five 
rental 
households 
earning 
less 
than 
half 
of 
median 
income 
pay 
more 
than 
30% 
of 
their 
monthly 
income 
toward 
housing10. 
More 
than 
two 
thirds 
of 
King 
County’s 
residents 
who 
have 
an 
income 
of 
less 
than 
$25,000 
a 
year 
cannot 
afford 
more 
than 
$625 
a 
month 
for 
rent. 
In 
Seattle, 
in 
2007, 
the 
median 
two-bedroom 
apartment 
rental 
cost 
was 
$853. 
In 
Spokane, 
the 
second 
largest 
city 
in 
Washington 
State, 
the 
median 
monthly 
rental 
apartment 
cost 
was 
$530. 


18.4to27.8%
27.9to37.4%
37.5to47.0%
6 
Ibid. 


7 
Mental 
Health: 
A 
Report 
of 
the 
Surgeon 
General 
(1999) 


8 
Northwest 
Area 
Foundation 
-Indicators 
Website. 
Accessed 
online 
November 
28, 
2007. 


9 
Stapleton, 
DC, 
& 
Burkhauser, 
RV 
(2003). 
The 
Decline 
in 
Employment 
of 
People 
with 
Disabilities: 
A 
policy 
puzzle. 


W.E. 
Upjohn 
Institute 
for 
Employment 
Research, 
Kalamazoo, 
Michigan. 
10 
King 
County 
Benchmarks 
2006: 
Housing. 
Available 
online 
at: 
http://www.metrokc.gov/budget/benchmrk/bench06/AffHsg/AffHsg_06nomap.pdf 


49 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


Urban 
areas 
typically 
offer 
more 
resources 
than 
rural 
areas 
for 
people 
with 
disabilities, 
including 
public 
transportation, 
accessible 
shopping 
and 
services, 
hospitals 
and 
clinics. 
However, 
the 
catch-22 
for 
people 
with 
disabilities 
living 
in 
urban 
areas 
of 
Washington 
State, 
such 
as 
Seattle, 
is 
the 
rising 
cost 
of 
housing. 
In 
2007, 
the 
average 
federal 
monthly 
SSI 
income 
was 
$467 
or 
$5,604 
per 
year 
– 
only 
25% 
of 
the 
typical 
one-person 
income 
in 
the 
U.S.11,12. 
In 
King 
County, 
WA, 
the 
cost 
of 
renting 
a 
two-bedroom 
apartment 
alone 
would 
amount 
to 
over 
twice 
a 
person’s 
income13. 
This 
represents 
an 
increase 
from 
2002’s 
estimates 
that 
124% 
of 
a 
person’s 
SSI 
would 


Percent 
of 
SSI 
for 
1-Bedroom 
Apartment 
in 
2002 
in 
Select 
Areas 


need 
to 
go 
toward 


of 
Washington 
State 


housing14. 
According 
to 
at 
least 
one 
major 
150% 
national 
report, 
a 


person 
receiving 
SSI 
125% 


would 
need 
to 
pay 
109.6% 
of 
his/her 


monthly 
income 
to 
rent 
a 
one-bedroom 


% 
of 
SSI 


100% 


94%
84%
124%
78%
107%
apartment15. 
It 
has 
75% 
been 
estimated 
that 
in 
Washington 
State, 
there 
is 
a 
$595 
gap 
50% 
Tacoma 
Spokane 
Seattle-
Bellevue-
Combined 
Non-Metro 
State 
between 
affordable 
Everett 
Areas 
rent 
and 
SSI 
Region/County 
recipients’ 
income 
– 


the 
largest 
gap 
among 
all 
income 
earners 
residing 
in 
the 
state16 
. 


Prevalence 
of 
Domestic 
Violence 
and 
Sexual 
Assault 
in 
Washington 
State 


Estimates 
of 
the 
prevalence 
of 
domestic 
violence 
in 
Washington 
vary, 
for 
many 
of 
the 
same 
reasons 
that 
national 
rates 
of 
abuse 
are 
difficult 
to 
determine. 
According 
to 
one 
of 
the 
larger 
population 
studies 
of 
health 
in 
Washington 
State, 
26% 
(499,000) 
of 
the 
women 
over 
18 
years 
old 
who 
responded 
had 
experienced 
domestic 
violence 
at 
some 
point 
in 
their 
lifetime17. 
From 
January 
1997 
through 
June 
2006 
at 
least 
359 
people 
were 
killed 
by 
domestic 
violence 
abusers 
in 
Washington 


11 
Social 
Security 
Administration, 
Supplemental 
Security 
Record. 
Accessed 
Online 
November 
30, 
2007. 
12 
Priced 
Out 
in 
2004 
– 
The 
Housing 
Crisis 
for 
People 
with 
Disabilities. 
Consortium 
for 
Citizens 
with 
Disabilities 
Housing 
Task 
Force. 
13 
Based 
on 
a 
monthly 
median 
rental 
rate 
of 
$853 
($10,236 
per 
year). 
Source: 
King 
County 
AIMS 
high. 
Accessed 
online 
November 
30, 
2007 
at 
http://www.metrokc.gov/aimshigh/search2.asp?HHAffordableHousing 
14 
Priced 
Out 
in 
2002. 
Technical 
Assistance 
Collaborative 
and 
Consortium 
for 
Citizens 
with 
Disabilities 
Housing 
Task 
Force, 
Washington, 
DC., 
2003. 
15Priced 
Out 
in 
2004 
– 
The 
Housing 
Crisis 
for 
People 
with 
Disabilities. 
Consortium 
for 
Citizens 
with 
Disabilities 


Housing 
Task 
Force. 
16 
National 
Low 
Income 
Housing 
Coalition 
– 
Out 
of 
Reach 
2006. 
17 
MMWR 
Weekly: 
Prevalence 
of 
Intimate 
Partner 
Violence 
and 
Injuries 
-Washington, 
1998 
(BRFSS). 
July 
07, 
2000 


/ 
49(26);589-592. 


50 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


State18. 
In 
2005, 
50% 
of 
women 
who 
were 
murdered 
in 
Washington 
were 
killed 
by 
their 
current 
or 
former 
intimate 
partner19 
. 


From 
June 
2005 
to 
June 
2006, 
19,456 
Washington 
adults 
and 
children 
were 
served 
at 
domestic 
violence 
emergency 
shelters20. 
Of 
these, 
6,147 
were 
sheltered 
overnight 
with 
an 
average 
stay 
length 
of 
19.09 
days. 
Providers 
turned 
away 
over 
36,000 
people 
from 
shelter21. 
The 
majority 
of 
those 
served 
at 
domestic 
violence 
emergency 
shelters 
were 
White 
(62%), 
followed 
by 
Hispanic/Latina 
(19%), 
Native 
American/Alaska 
Native 
(5%) 
and 
African/African-American 
(5%). 


Domestic 
Violence/Sexual 
Assault 
and 
People 
with 
Disabilities 


National 
Research 


Nationally, 
the 
rate 
of 
abuse 
against 
people 
with 
disabilities 
is 
quite 
high. 
One 
national 
study 
estimated 
that 
people 
with 
disabilities 
experience 
criminal 
victimization 
at 
a 
rate 
four 
times 
higher 
than 
rest 
of 
the 
population 
(and 
may 
be 
five 
to 
ten 
times 
higher)22. 
A 
five 
year 
retrospective 
study 
of 
children 
with 
disabilities 
in 
a 
pediatric 
hospital 
found 
that 
68% 
of 
the 
children 
with 
disabilities 
were 
victims 
of 
sexual 
violence 
and 
32% 
were 
victims 
of 
physical 
violence23 
. 
Another 
study 
indicated 
that 
90% 
of 
people 
with 
developmental 
disabilities 
will 
be 
sexually 
assaulted 
at 
some 
point 
during 
their 
lifetime. 
Forty 
percent 
will 
experience 
ten 
or 
more 
incidents24. 
One 
study 
of 
adult 
women 
with 
disabilities 
found 
that 
62% 
had 
been 
sexually 
assaulted 
and 
had 
been 
victimized 
by 
a 
greater 
number 
of 
perpetrators 
for 
longer 
durations 
of 
violence 
than 
women 
without 
disabilities25. 
A 
recent 
study 
found 
that 
67% 
of 
women 
with 
disabilities 
experienced 
lifetime 
physical 
abuse 
and 
53% 
experienced 
lifetime 
sexual 
abuse26. 
These 
estimates 
are 
twice 
the 
rates 
of 
women 
without 
disabilities27. 
Conditions 
in 
staffed 
housing 
facilities 
do 
not 
improve 
rates 
of 
abuse 
against 
people 
with 
disabilities. 
For 


18 
If 
I 
Had 
One 
More 
Day: 
Findings 
and 
Recommendations 
from 
the 
Washington 
State 
Domestic 
Violence 
Fatality 
Review 
(December 
2006). 
Washington 
State 
Coalition 
Against 
Domestic 
Violence. 
19 
Crime 
in 
Washington 
State 
2005, 
Uniform 
Crime 
Reporting 
Project, 
Washington 
Association 
of 
Sheriffs 
and 
Police 
Chiefs 
(2006) 
and 
Domestic 
Violence 
Fatality 
Review 
data. 
20 
Data 
provided 
by 
43 
domestic 
violence 
shelter/safe 
home 
programs 
that 
contracted 
with 
the 
Washington 
Department 
of 
Social 
and 
Health 
Services. 
21 
Includes 
those 
turned 
away 
due 
to 
unavailable 
space/beds, 
not 
being 
a 
victim 
of 
domestic 
violence, 
or 
who 
had 
certain 
needs 
that 
they 
shelter 
could 
not 
accommodate. 
This 
is 
not 
an 
unduplicated 
number. 
22 
Sobsey, 
D. 
& 
Doe, 
T. 
(1991). 
Patterns 
of 
sexual 
abuse 
and 
assault. 
Journal 
of 
Sexuality 
and 
Disability, 
9 
(3), 
243-259. 
23 
Willging, 
J.P., 
Bower, 
C.M., 
and 
Cotton, 
R.T. 
(1992). 
Physical 
abuse 
of 
children: 
A 
retrospective 
review 
and 
otolaryngology 
perspective. 
Archives 
of 
Otolaryngology 
and 
Head 
and 
Neck 
Surgery, 
118 
(6), 
584-590. 
24 
Valenti-Hein, 
D. 
& 
Schwartz, 
L. 
(1995). 
The 
sexual 
abuse 
intervention 
for 
those 
with 
developmental 
disabilities. 
Santa 
Barbara, 
CA: 
James 
Stanfield 
Company. 
25 
Nosek, 
M. 
A., 
Howland, 
C. 
A., 
& 
Young, 
M. 
E. 
(1997). 
Abuse 
of 
women 
with 
disabilities: 
Policy 
implications. 
Journal 
of 
Disability 
Policy 
Studies, 
8, 
157-176. 


26 
Powers, 
L., 
Currie, 
M.A., 
Oschwald, 
M., 
Maley, 
S., 
Saxton, 
M., 
& 
Eckels, 
K. 
(2002). 
Barriers 
and 
strategies 
in 
addressing 
abuse: 
A 
survey 
of 
disabled 
women’s 
experiences. 
Portland, 
Oregon: 
Oregon 
Health 
and 
Science 
University. 


27 
National 
Research 
Council. 
(1996). 
Understanding 
violence 
against 
women. 
Washington, 
DC: 
National 
Academy 
Press. 


51 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


example, 
one 
study 
found 
that 
85% 
of 
staffed 
housing 
residents 
reported 
sexual 
abuse, 
and 
males 
and 
females 
were 
abused 
in 
equal 
numbers28 
. 


Similar 
to 
prevalence 
rates 
of 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
found 
in 
national 
studies, 
more 
men 
than 
women 
-either 
as 
intimate 
partners 
or 
as 
health 
care 
workers 
-are 
reported 
to 
commit 
acts 
of 
physical 
violence, 
sexual 
violence, 
emotional 
abuse, 
or 
neglect 
against 
persons 
with 
disabilities29,30 
. 


Low 
income 
and 
unemployment 
are 
seen 
as 
risk 
factors 
for 
abuse 
among 
persons 
with 
disabilities. 
Unemployment 
or 
underemployment 
of 
persons 
with 
disabilities 
restricts 
their 
income 
and 
limits 
their 
choices 
for 
caregivers, 
leading 
to 
an 
increased 
risk 
of 
physical 
and 
sexual 
violence, 
emotional 
abuse, 
or 
neglect31. 
Lack 
of 
money 
also 
often 
causes 
persons 
with 
disabilities 
to 
live 
in 
areas 
where 
crime 
rates 
are 
high 
and 
the 
potential 
for 
physical 
and 
sexual 
violence 
is 
greater 
than 
in 
wealthier 
neighborhoods32 
. 


Washington 
State 


The 
exact 
rate 
of 
abuse 
of 
people 
with 
disabilities 
in 
Washington 
is 
difficult 
to 
determine. 
Not 
only 
are 
there 
limitations 
to 
prevalence 
data 
for 
domestic 
violence 
and 
sexual 
assault 
among 
the 
general 
population 
but 
low 
rates 
of 
disclosure 
among 
persons 
with 
disabilities 
compounds 
the 
underreporting 
of 
abuse. 
It 
has 
been 
suggested 
that 
persons 
with 
disabilities 
are 
more 
reluctant 
to 
report 
crimes 
of 
violence, 
especially 
if 
the 
perpetrator 
is 
an 
individual 
upon 
whom 
the 
victim 
depends 
for 
essential 
services33. 
One 
study 
found 
that 
only 
3% 
of 
sexual 
abuse 
cases 
involving 
people 
with 
developmental 
disabilities 
are 
ever 
reported34. 
Another 
study 
found 
that 
71% 
of 
crimes 
against 
people 
with 
severe 
intellectual 
disabilities 
go 
unreported 
(compared 
to 
37% 
of 
crimes 
among 
the 
general 
population)35 
. 


28 
Brown, 
H., 
Stein, 
J. 
& 
Turk, 
V. 
(1995). 
Sexual 
abuse 
of 
adults 
with 
learning 
disabilities: 
Report 
of 
a 
second 
two-
year 
incidence 
survey. 
Mental 
Handicap 
Research, 
8 
(1) 
, 
3-24. 


29 
Brown 
H, 
Turk 
V. 
Sexual 
abuse 
in 
adulthood: 
ongoing 
risks 
for 
people 
with 
learning 
disabilities. 
Child 
Abuse 
Review 
1994;3(1):26–35. 


30 
Marley 
JA, 
Buila 
S. 
Crimes 
against 
people 
with 
mental 
illness: 
types, 
perpetrators, 
and 
influencing 
factors. 
Social 
Work 
2001;46(2):115–24. 


31 
Stromsness 
MM. 
Sexually 
abused 
women 
with 
mental 
retardation: 
hidden 
victims, 
absent 
resources. 
Women 
& 
Therapy 
1993;14(3–4):139–52. 


32 
Curry 
MAA, 
Hassouneh-Phillips 
D, 
Johnston-Silverberg 
A. 
Abuse 
of 
women 
with 
disabilities: 
an 
ecological 
model 
and 
review. 
Violence 
Against 
Women 
2001;7(1):60–79. 


33 
Tyiska, 
C.G. 
(1998). 
Working 
with 
victims 
of 
crime 
with 
disabilities. 
Office 
for 
Victims 
of 
Crime 
Bulletin. 
Washington, 
DC: 
U.S. 
Department 
of 
Justice. 


34 
Valenti-Hein, 
D. 
& 
Schwartz, 
L. 
(1995). 
The 
sexual 
abuse 
intervention 
for 
those 
with 
developmental 
disabilities. 
Santa 
Barbara, 
CA: 
James 
Stanfield 
Company. 


35 
Wilson, 
C. 
& 
Brewer, 
N. 
(1992). 
The 
incidence 
of 
criminal 
victimization 
of 
individuals 
with 
an 
intellectual 
disability. 
Australian 
Psychologist, 
27 
(2), 
114-117. 


52 



Needs 
Assessment 
Report 
-dAP 


Institutional 
Settings 


Institutions 
and 
congregate 
care 
facilities 
for 
people 
with 
disabilities 


There 
are 
two 
state 
psychiatric 
hospitals 
and 
five 
institutions 
that 
serve 
developmentally 
disabled 
persons36 
,37. 
There 
are 
hundreds 
of 
nursing 
homes 
across 
the 
state 
as 
well 
as 
numerous 
group 
homes, 
adult 
family 
homes, 
boarding 
homes 
and 
other 
congregate 
care 
facilities. 
There 
is 
no 
reliable 
data 
on 
the 
prevalence 
of 
abuse 
among 
people 
with 
disabilities 
living 
in 
institutional 
settings. 


36 
Western 
State 
Hospital 
(Pierce 
County), 
Eastern 
State 
Hospital 
(Spokane 
County) 


37 
State 
institutions 
for 
people 
with 
developmental 
disabilities 
(5): 
Fircrest 
(King 
County), 
Rainier 
(Pierce 
County), 
Frances 
Haddon 
Morgan 
(Kitsap 
County), 
Yakima 
Valley 
(Yakima 
County), 
Lakeland 
Village 
(Spokane 
County) 


53