Peer-to-peer connection with Duluth SAKI as well as providing examples of MOUs and releases that we have available.
Please check the box next to the following questions if the answer is 'yes'.
Please enter the applicable Event Date if there is an Event associated with this TTA.
When entering an Event Date, the Time is also required.
If the TTA is targeted to a particular audience or location, please complete the questions below.
Milestones are an element, activity, work product, or key task associated with completing the TTA (e.g. kick-off meeting, collect data from stake holders, deliver initial data analysis).
Please complete the fields below, if applicable, to create a milestone for this TTA.
At the Eastern Regional Training, Hannah heard so much about what Community Based Advocates could do to help with case review and supporting investigations that she wanted to know more about how they could provide that support to the MDT. She talked to Amy about MOUs and asked for examples and to be able to talk to other sites that have set these agreements up previously.
Paige suggested Duluth SAKI as a peer-to-peer connection. She also said that Amy could be available for a call on this topic.
Paige sent the Duluth SAKI examples that she had from early in their project. This included MOUs, confidentiality agreements, and release forms.
Byron appreciated the resources and said that they were working on an MOU.
Paige had discussed being a peer-to=peer resource for GA SAKI with Mary Faulkner, who said she would be happy to help. Paige sent Mary's contact information to GA and let them know that Duluth SAKI was in the process of renewing their agreements so they would have good insight about lessons learned and ways they were planning to improve these documents.
Byron said that would be helpful. He let Paige know they were working on a document with Hannah's organization. There was also a confidentiality agreement now on the attendance sheet for the MDT meetings.
Hannah contacted Mary about setting up a call to discuss their questions and other needs. Mary confirmed a time, and then, she also sent information about their MOUs.
Maryann from Hannah's organization reached out to Amy Durall to also ask for information about MOUs and co-located spaces.
Amy provided a long email of information of things to think about in terms of co-located spaces. She suggested a call. Maryann thanked her for the information, but at this time, she didn't ask for a call.
Maryann from Hannah's organization reached out to Amy Durall to also ask for information about MOUs and co-located spaces.
Amy provided a long email of information of things to think about in terms of co-located spaces. She suggested a call. Maryann thanked her for the information, but at this time, she didn't ask for a call.
Maryann from Live Safe Resources reached out to ask Amy Durall about the MOUs and shared space conversation challenges they have had. Amy provided great information for Maryann: I’m so glad you found the conference helpful and it’s encouraging that your team is working on policies/procedures. Paige is being copied on this correspondence so that she can keep track of conversations/suggestions offered to your team.
You are right that the role play of the SART involved a team that was not co-located. Co-location can definitely pose some minor challenges, but in my opinion the benefits (for both victims and system professionals) far outweigh any challenges.
You are definitely heading in the right direction by working on an MOU. Even with an MOU in place, you may want to reconsider the initial conversations you have with victims to explain team dynamics/purpose/and communication channels. If you meet with victims in person, you may be able to have a conversation with them while you are explaining your role about a limited release of information to LE/prosecution/SAKI Team – often times, victims want specific information shared with CJ representatives while keeping other information confidential. If you are connecting with victims by phone, you may be able to discuss their communication/release of information preferences and document that accordingly until you can get a signed release – consider sending releases via email with electronic signature capabilities or arranging for signatures on releases at the first available in-person contact (absolutely check with your agency’s legal representative about this option). In shared spaces, some staff retraining may need to occur – not utilizing names/identifying information for victims during phone conversations until victim preferences have been established for release of information.
Amy will be checking back in with Maryann towards the end of February.
Amy checked in with Maryann about how things were going with the confidentiality and co-located space.
A summary of our conversation is below:
• She was appreciative of the repeat contact
• She communicated that the co-location is overall working well – aiding in building relationships and increased communication
o She has forwarded a request to consider separate offices in the future to address the need for confidential conversations between community-based advocates and victims
o Currently they have one room that advocates are using for initial/confidential conversations with victims – this room is separate from their work stations/area
• She mentioned connecting with Duluth
o said she was surprised to learn that advocates in their jurisdiction are entering data into the database – this is handled by investigators in GA
o she indicated the advocates in Duluth are community-based advocates from the rape crisis center
• she mentioned recently receiving assistance from Paige and Ryan Gallagher on a case – felt this assistance was really helpful
Paige emailed Hannah and Maryann to see if they felt like they needed anything else for the MOUs or for the co-located space discussion.
Response from Hannah: We were actually able to phone conference with Duluth a few weeks ago and chat through what their process looks like as well as what ours looks like as far as statewide work/structure. I think that it was helpful for us all. We have a draft of the MOU and once we finalize it I will be sure to send it your way so that you can share with other sites as appropriate.
Please respond to the Performance Metrics below. The Performance Metrics questions are based on the TTA Type indicated in the General Information section of the TTA.
Please submit a signed letter of support from your agency’s executive or other senior staff member. The letter can be emailed to or uploaded with this request. The letter should be submitted on official letterhead and include the following information:
- General information regarding the request for TTA services, i.e., the who, what, where, when, and why.
- The organizational and/or community needs specific to the request for TTA services.
- The benefits or anticipated outcomes from the receipt of TTA services.
By submitting this application to BJA NTTAC, I understand that upon approval of this application for TTA, the requestor agrees to keep BJA NTTAC informed of any circumstances that may impact the delivery of the TTA, including changes in the date of the event, event cancellation, or difficulties communicating with the assigned TTA provider.
Please call [site:phone] if you need further assistance completing this application.