Planning a Domestic Violence Prosecutor-Led Diversion (PLD) Program
This toolkit is intended to guide prosecutors and program planners through the process of developing a diversion program for domestic violence (DV) cases. The Association of Prosecuting Attorneys (APA) acknowledges the complexity of DV prosecution and the desire of state, local, and federal prosecutors to build sustainable, data-informed diversion programs for DV-related offenses. Criminal justice reform efforts have increasingly provided a pathway for prosecutors to explore new ways to manage DV cases in a manner that focuses on the safety of the victim while delivering alternative treatment options to the accused.
This toolkit seeks to provide guidepost questions and considerations for program developers and highlight innovative alternatives to incarceration for DV-related offenses. With the implementation of this toolkit, DV diversion programs can bolster victim safety, prevent recidivism, address the root causes of violence to disrupt the cycle of violence, and create safer communities.
Glossary of Terms
APA acknowledges that prosecutors’ offices, criminal justice stakeholders, and the public often utilize the same or similar terms to describe certain individuals, offenses, and diversion programs. However, these terms may have different meanings or implications depending upon the geographic region, professional discipline, or intended audience. To ensure clarity and uniformity throughout this toolkit, definitions for these common terms are provided below.
Key Considerations and Program Basics
In conjunction with the particularized sections of this toolkit, these key themes and considerations can bolster programmatic success when maintained as the centric focus at each stage of DV diversion program planning. These key themes and considerations can bolster programmatic success when maintained as the central focus at each stage of DV diversion program planning.
Availability of Free or Low-Cost Options
The availability of free or low-cost evidence-informed treatment for enrolled individuals that responds to their behavioral health needs to reduce risk, recidivism, and prevent escalation of violent behavior is key to programmatic success.
Culturally Competent Programming
Culturally competent programming is necessary to address behavioral health needs of the enrolled individuals from communities of color and ameliorate disparate impacts on marginalized communities with a focus on risk factors and addressing root causes.
Strong Partnerships
Strong partnerships between prosecutors, law enforcement, civil attorneys, court personnel, treatment providers, and diversion program administrators can bolster diversion programming. A multidisciplinary team dedicated to DV diversion can communicate regularly to monitor the progress of cases and facilitate necessary interventions and treatment models for programmatic success. Partnerships should host regular case management meetings to discuss diversion potential, treatment plans, high-risk cases, and review progress for ongoing cases can ensure the safety of victims and continued success of diversion participants.
Judicial involvement, training, and buy-in is also critical for successful court-based diversion. Post-Charge diversion programs can have a dedicated judge for DV diversion to receive updated DV training and track ongoing cases. In the absence of judicial involvement, pre-charge diversion programs can have a navigator or someone to supervise the participant as they progress through the program and provide periodic updates and/or address breaches of the program.
Data and Technology
Utilize data and technology to inform diversion creation and track success. Planners can draw from research, data, and technology to provide evidence-informed diversion programs by highlighting behavioral health needs of enrolled individuals, victimization rates and populations, current options for treatment, and racial and ethnic or socioeconomic disparities in both enrolled individuals and victims. These programs can utilize linked data sets, whenever possible. Establishing partnerships with academic institutions and public health professionals can assist with understanding and modifying data collection and analysis to improve data-informed responses to DV. Ongoing internal and external evaluation of program implementation can create a learning model for policy adjustments and increased efficacy. Case Management Systems (CMS) or internal tracking likely have capacity to track a number of successful participants and recidivism rates.
Below are some data metrics to consider tracking to ensure programmatic success and efficacy.
- Racial and socioeconomic demographics of both victim and enrolled individual.
- Treatment dosage and success rates.
- How to analyze participation.
- Criminal history.
- Number and history of successful participants including qualitative narratives of program participants.
- Victim pre- and post-diversion input, both qualitative and quantitative data.
A robust victim services component is crucial to an impactful DV diversion program. The considerations outlined in this section can assist prosecutors in building a strong victim services response to increase victim safety and empowerment throughout the criminal justice process.
Case Study: Survivor’s FIRST (King County, Washington)
The Survivor’s FIRST (Facilitating Information and Resources for Survivors of Trauma) program in King County, Washington was launched in 2019 by the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office in partnership with the Young Women’s Christian Association (YWCA). Housed in the YWCA, Survivor’s FIRST aims to directly connect survivor-defendants with intervention services in lieu of criminal charges.
To learn more, sign up for the APA DV listserv or contact us directly at info@APAInc.org Division: Domestic Violence Unit.
For additional information and resources, see:
Here are additional things to consider in relation to developing a behavioral health prosecutor-led diversion program. Click on the links below to access information on each stage of the diversion planning process.
Articulating clear goals of a DV diversion program at the outset of the planning process can be critical to long-term programmatic success. Some of the most common and important goals of diversion include addressing the underlying cause of violent behavior, reducing recidivism, improving community behavioral health, addressing victim safety, and ensuring accountability.
Program planners should carefully review whether prosecutors are authorized to create such programs by caselaw, statute, court rule, or by their inherent prosecutorial discretion. In the absence of such authority, program planners may have to initiate action to create such authority.
Eligibility standards are central to the structure of any diversion program, but are especially significant with respect to the handling of DV offenses. When setting eligibility standards, potential considerations include an individual’s criminal record or prior offenses, treatment history (prior diversion participation), and the likely effect of diversion in minimizing the likelihood of future violent behavior. In cases of DV, these standards should also account for the existence of injury caused by the incident, a lethality assessment, and the presence of mental health or substance abuse concerns, among other relevant factors.
When crafting eligibility requirements, it is critical for program planners to determine the appropriate timing of program referrals in the diversion process, the role of prosecutorial discretion, and ways to reduce barriers to program enrollment, such as an enrolled individual’s inability to pay.
When outlining a successful DV diversion program, program planners should account for the way external factors, such as resource constraints or costs associated with diversion, may shape diversion outcomes or violations of program requirements. It is also important to keep in mind that a variety of options, including trauma-informed therapy, a Basic Needs Assessment, and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, can be offered to enrolled individuals on a case-by-case basis and under the direction of mental health professionals.
Program administrators with limited resources can generate a list of treatment providers to refer enrolled individuals if existing treatment partnerships are not built into the diversion program. Additionally, when establishing program conditions, it is necessary to consider the outcome for successful completion of the diversion program. These options may include expungement after completion, a graduation ceremony, or dismissal of reduction of charges.
The complexity of DV cases warrants a consistent and thorough process for screening potential candidates for diversion. Program planners should actively seek the input of prosecutors and victim advocates from specialized DV units, or those trained to handle DV matters, because they are in the best position to understand the intricate case review process and lethality screenings for diversion. When such specialized units or staff are not available, program planners can proactively seek to engage clinical partners and treatment providers in this process. In addition, program planners should include a review of an enrolled individual’s history to ensure that any past trauma can be addressed through counseling.
Case Study: Early Intervention Plan (Milwaukee County, Wisconsin)
In 2016, the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s Office partnered with the Sojourner Family Peace Center, the largest nonprofit provider of domestic violence prevention and intervention services in Wisconsin, to address cases of domestic violence.
To learn more, sign up for the APA DV listserv or contact us directly at info@ APAInc.org. For additional resources:
Program planners should seek the input of DV specialists and treatment providers and work to facilitate partnerships with mental health and substance misuse agencies at the initial stages of designing the diversion program. It is also essential to prioritize several other program components, including restitution for DV victims, remote treatment options for enrolled individuals, and the establishment of consistent channels of communication between prosecutors, court, and treatment providers.
Case Study: New York City-Wide Diversion Programming
Toolkit Note: The two citywide programs differ from Manhattan’s TI-APIP (seen below) in that they permit enrollment of defendants citywide due to funding from the NYC Mayor’s Office of Criminal Justice.
Taking steps to carefully track individual and programmatic success is crucial for demonstrating that DV diversion programs are effective and for making policy adjustments when necessary. Program planners have many different options available to them when it comes to program evaluation. Research partners, such as local universities and public health offices, a diversion coordinator in the prosecutor’s office, or pretrial services are just a few of the many resources program planners can engage with to develop effective evaluation mechanisms. Maintaining records to assess completion and recidivism rates and a Case Management System (CMS) are also useful tools for assessing the success of a DV diversion program.
DV cases in which families, children, or pets are involved can complicate diversion eligibility and conditions. Program planners and prosecutors can account for the possibility of any prior or co-existing abuse in their program conditions and eligibility requirements. They should also understand the role that pets can play in providing support to survivors who are often forced to enter shelter or safe housing and the protections that animals in their jurisdictions can be afforded during the diversion process (i.e., including pets or animals on stay away or protective orders).
Case Study: Trauma-Informed Abusive Partner Intervention Program (TI-APIP) (Manhattan, New York)
The Trauma-Informed Abusive Partner Intervention Program (TI-APIP) originated in 2018 from the Manhattan DA’s Domestic Violence Initiative, a year-long working group comprised of criminal justice stakeholders, public health officials, victim advocates, and community-based organizations tasked with developing citywide recommendations to reduce domestic violence recidivism and enhance responses across systems. Implemented in partnership with the Urban Resource Institute (URI), TI-APIP aims to address domestic violence as a public health crisis and incorporates best and promising practices for working with enrolled individuals who have experienced trauma. These practices include foundational techniques in group therapy and somatic practice.
To learn more, sign up for the APA DV listserv or contact us directly at info@APAInc.org Division: Domestic Violence Unit.
For additional resources:
Manhattan DA Domestic Violence Unit
Manhattan DA Criminal Justice Investment Initiative (CJII)
Additional Resources and Trainings
**This page will be updated as resources become available!**
A Roadmap to Designing a Successful Diversion Program: What Questions Should My Office Be Asking?
While there is no one-size-fits-all approach to designing a DV diversion program, there are several questions that can serve as a roadmap for program planners. The key questions contained in the below resource can help program planners better identify program goals and overcome potential obstacles to programmatic success.