BCIFV home > Newsletter > 1996 Archives > Spring 1996 articles

Producing a Protocol Document in Burnaby, B.C. Interview with Joyce Rigaux

We are talking about the development of the new community protocols in Burnaby on violence against women in relationships. Can you provide me with the background of the VINA Interagency Co-ordination Committee for Burnaby prior to the development of the new protocols?

VINA stands for Violence Is Never Acceptable. It is a sub-committee of Burnaby Interagency Council and was formed in 1990 following a task force on family violence. The task force recommended an ongoing co-ordinating committee, which became VINA.

VINA is made up of all the agencies in Burnaby which provide services to violence in the family, any form of family violence. This particular project was concerned only about violence against women in relationships. The goals of the VINA committee are larger than that. They include all kinds of family violence.

Was the committee that directed the project to develop protocols a sub-committee of VINA?

No, VINA is the committee that decided to pursue this particular project, as part of its overall mandate and strategy.

Please describe the protocol project. How long did it take to develop the protocols?

The whole project will have taken a bit longer than six months, maybe 6 1/2 to seven months, but it was designed for six months because that was the type of funding that VINA received. VINA applied for funding to conduct this project about three years ago, so it takes a while.

Our funders are the Vancouver Foundation, the Ministry of Women's Equality and Ministry of the Attorney General. It is similar to other projects that are funded across British Columbia, but I think it's interesting to note that very often projects concerning women's issues have very ad hoc funding. There is no predictability or consistency as to how some communities receive funding and others don't.

For example there are seven communities in B.C. that have received ongoing funding as pilot projects for community co-ordination, Vancouver being one of them, and these communities have recently received a guarantee of another three years of funding. Some of these communities have moved towards written protocols and some haven't, but their stated purpose has been to increase community collaboration in the area of violence against women. There are other communities similar to Burnaby that have received short-term funding and still other communities that are doing these processes on their own without any funding.

So the VINA committee is not funded, as such, but is a voluntary commitment of time from all the agencies?

Right. VINA is a voluntary committee made up all the agencies in Burnaby which provide services to violence in the family. Just to reiterate, the funding is not on an even basis throughout the province. There are other communities that are really integrated and strong committed to the collaboration process and they didn't receive funding to develop protocols. So I don't think the criteria was that communities had to be moving in that direction, because other communities are too, and they are not getting funding. I'm thinking here of New Westminster. Surrey has received 12 months of funding but the amounts have differed. I think that it's typical that programs for women are funded on an ad hoc basis which makes it hard for communities to plan.

I think it makes it hard to see the same justice in the criminal law system if there isn't the same provision of services for women. To continue, the Community Protocol Project was planned and you were hired as the co-ordinator of the project. What was your process of starting to reach out to all of the agencies to get an agreement on where they would be in the protocol and their commitment?

When I was hired, there had been strong commitment to the process on the part of all of the involved agencies. But the process had happened over such a long period of time that by the time I was hired, sometimes it was like starting over to make sure this project was still a priority for agencies.

I very quickly became aware that agencies that were providing services, whether in the social service area or health care or education or criminal justice, were getting very stretched, and people didn't have extra time. It was going to be a challenge to be able to use people's limited time to produce a document, and to produce one in six months was the expectation of the funders. But it was also critical from my perspective that the community feel it had been able to accomplish something, even given very difficult times for service providers, with increased public expectations and often dwindling resources. People needed to feel a success behind them and that doing something on a community-wide basis was possible.

I started off by having a meeting fairly soon in September of all of the involved agencies to discuss the project and determine people's willingness to remain involved. It became obvious to me at that meeting that people did not want to attend a lot of meetings, that people felt they had very limited time and did not want to form standing committees, and there was even some question whether people felt it was important to continue with this project.

I decided I would meet individually with all the agencies and assist them to create protocols. Either I would gather the information from the agencies and write a draft protocol or I would assist the agency to convene a meeting and involve as many people as the agency wanted involved. Or I would give the agency help in examining other communities' protocols and then help them with it. I see myself as being very flexible; however the agencies felt they wanted to be involved in the project, I would assist that.

I also wanted to be sensitive to agencies not feeling coerced into being part of a project just because the funders had decided this was something they would fund, and that they only had six months. Some agencies were at a different point and didn't want to be part of the process for now. I wanted them to feel like that was all right as well. My involvement in the community was not going to be divisive. It was going to make people feel better about themselves and each other, not worse. That was my own bottom line, that however the project unfolded, I wanted to be respectful of where people were coming from.

Because different agencies have different...?

Just different realities. Agencies you deal with may either have huge problems or just other priorities. So the advisory committee and myself decided that the protocol document itself would not be a bound document, but would be a three-ring binder, so it could be easily added to if additional agencies wanted to go through the same process once the document was produced. It could also be updated easily or you could take sections out and photocopy to give to clients or maybe to the general public. So it's a working document that will be of use to agencies and clients and communities.

The advisory committee was absolutely critical to this process, so that I didn't feel that I was on my own, the project wasn't just riding on myself. There was strong support from the advisory committee. There were 10 people on the advisory committee. They made the decisions and took them back twice to the larger committee to endorse, but they were basically given approval in that September meeting that they could act as executive; and just continue with the project and not feel bogged down in having to rely on a larger group.

As a community development worker (I have been involved with many projects in the past) in some ways I feel it's not the most ideal way, I feel that working individually with agencies and relying on the advisory committee to make these decisions may be bypassing some of the developmental aspects. However, Burnaby is a self-contained, well-defined community. This process was possible in a community like Burnaby where people know each other and there is a high degree of trust and commitment. It may not be the same process you should use in a community that hasn't had an opportunity to coalesce.

Perhaps it worked because VINA had already been in existence long enough to develop those links.

That's exactly right. All the background work had been done. But if someone were to go into another community that didn't have a co-ordinating committee, that didn't have a history of working together and making decisions, then you would spend more time doing that developmental stuff.

You are talking very clearly about process and also about the reality of that process within a community. When you would go to an agency to discuss what protocol they wanted to have on record in this binder, did you come equipped with examples for them from other communities?

Yes, I did, and that is another key point. The process had already happened in other communities, and I think it's good to use what has happened elsewhere and not have to start over each time. So I used information from both Prince George and Kelowna, that really were the pioneers in this area, as well as information that had been produced in other parts of Canada and the U.S., including from London, Ontario, and Duluth, Minnesota. But it was mainly based on the process that happened in Prince George and Kelowna.

Once the community protocols were gathered from the agencies, what was the next step?

We had a meeting in December of the larger VINA committee to update people on where the protocol process was at that point and to discuss the idea of a workshop. There was approval at that meeting that the logical next step would be to bring everyone together for a one-day workshop.

What were some of the issues that were raised in the one-day workshop?

We had about 75 people that came to the workshop, both management and front line workers. There was a good mix of people - those who were more concerned about policies and issues and people who were actually providing service.

A sub-committee of the advisory committee planned the workshop. We decided to come up with case scenarios we thought were typical cases that occurred in Burnaby. We asked various people from agencies to produce case scenarios that protected confidentiality but were usually based on real life situations.

The scenarios illustrated two things: 1. where there were gaps in services or where services didn't exist in Burnaby, or 2. where there were problems in how agencies used each other's services, whether there was a breakdown in collaboration or people fell between agencies.

We broke the workshop participants into ten groups and each group had a different case scenario to work on. The groups reported back later in the morning what the issues were that came out of the scenarios, where there were gaps in services. Then the same groups met in the afternoon to brainstorm possible strategies for action.

The brainstorming actually divided into two areas, process and service. The brainstorming was on how Burnaby could put different systems in place to ensure greater community collaboration and have a more effective response to violence against women in relationships, children who witness, and men who are assaultive, both in a process and then in actual services, although it is more long term coming up with new services.

I have a summary of that discussion, including all the issues that were raised and all the recommendations for the future. I think that the feedback from the workshop was that people really enjoyed the day, they felt they had learned a lot about the whole area of violence against women, the dynamics of it, and the difficulties in providing services to this area. I think it is one of the more frustrating areas of family problems to provide service to because of the fact that very often couples reconcile and it may be a long, drawn-out cycle. People get frustrated and feel futile and there is no one easy answer. There is also no one agency that owns the problem, which is different from other areas of family problems where it is clear that it is either a justice system problem or health problem or a case for MSS. In violence against women it really does cut across all service systems.

In terms of feedback, people felt they had learned a lot and had also learned about new community resources, and that was a surprise to me. In my process of contacting people, I found some services in Burnaby that weren't yet part of VINA, but that should be. These were agencies that are kind of outside of the structure, but even agencies that were in the structure weren't clearly understood by other services, in terms of what they could and couldn't do.

We also showed the film, "The Mountain and Beyond". It is a Canadian-made video that illustrates the value of community collaboration in responding to violence against women. It is such an uplifting film. I would highly recommend it to other groups that haven't seen it.

The process of this one-day workshop where participants examined all of the agencies' responses to scenarios seems to be an effective way to clarify the issues for any community.

Yes. People can obtain workshop kits for this from Burnaby Family Life, which include a background sheet on the incidents on violence against women and ten case scenarios. These would be useful for any community because they are quite typical, There is also a discussion guide to help groups approach these scenarios. It is also an nonthreatening way to approach the problem by having case scenarios, because you soon begin to realise that every agency in the community has a problem in some way, and there have been problems with every agency in the past in some way. There are examples of this.

Also in the kit is a summary of gaps in service. As part of the process for creating protocols I asked agencies to tell me what they felt were gaps in service, either in their own agency or in the community. I summarised those, and put them on a sheet. There was also a five-year-old list of gaps in service that the task force on family violence had created. It was interesting to see what has happened and not changed in five years. It helps to give people more of a historical perspective on gaps in services.

What are the stages for implementing the protocol in Burnaby and is there specific funding to support this? Does the protocol now become a working document that a sub-committee of VINA will use to ensure the protocol is implemented?

I think those are really key questions. Once we've been through this process and have protocols, how can we ensure that they continue to be relevant and that they make a difference in how service is provided?

There are two answers to that. One is that the Burnaby VINA committee has applied to the B.C. Health Research Foundation for funding to conduct a three-year study evaluating the effectiveness of services in Burnaby for violence against women in relationships and children who witness, and to examine whether the protocols have made an impact. But the committee won't know about funding until later this year. People are hopeful that this project will receive funding because there has been very little in the way of evaluations done as to what kind of impact a community process like this makes. There has also been very little evaluation of men's groups in the whole area of how to effectively intervene in violent families.

Secondly, VINA will continue but people feel they want some staffing, so the committee may look at trying to get funding for some ongoing staff to co-ordinate the work at VINA and follow up on the implementation of protocols. If VINA is not able to get funding then the committee will meet to look at how there can be a monitoring role in insuring that the protocols are followed.

There is a built-in accountability section in the protocol that informs agencies and clients who within each system is accountable and what the process is for ensuring accountability, but that puts the onus on either clients receiving service or other agencies referring to follow up if there are problems. The overall monitoring role would be undertaken by VINA. Whether that's feasible without funding for ongoing staff is something we will need to look at.

The whole point of having protocols is that they be followed, and if you can't monitor whether you can follow them these programs might sit there.

Yes, except that they are also written in ways that we hope will be useful to clients who can look at the protocol document, know what they can expect from agencies, what each agency's basic commitment is in response to violence against women and its range of services. So it's a more detailed directory of services.

I see what you mean, as well, whether VINA gets a funded position for part-time co-ordination, that would certainly speed up the process of implementation of the protocols on all levels. Yes, cases could be brought up in VINA meetings, and if there were problems then one of the recommendations that came from the workshop was that VINA play a monitoring role and try and resolve difficulties. All of those recommendations have been priorized to be taken to a larger VINA meeting at the end of March for approval. It's an ongoing process.

What violence prevention programs would be helpful in the city of Burnaby?

I think broad community education initiatives, like we were just talking about with the City of Burnaby, to create the zero tolerance zone for violence against women, or proclaiming that a week or a month is "Freedom from Family Violence Week". These are all small steps but they help people at the local level recognize there is a problem. I think that it would also help if there was an ability in Burnaby General Hospital to respond to women who have been sexually assaulted. That is not there, so women in Burnaby who have been physically and sexually assaulted need to go outside of Burnaby for medical attention. There are no sexual assault teams in Burnaby General Hospital so the Emergency Department will not treat women who have been sexually assaulted, which means that women already in trauma can take all night to get medical assistance.

I think there is also a need for more free, long-term counselling programs for women, men and children. They are putting some programs in place, but the free ones are really short-term and have very specific criteria. The longer term ones aren't there unless you've got money for a private therapist.

There is a lack of cultural and language appropriate services in Burnaby for aboriginal people and visible and nonvisible minorities.

What about prevention? Is there more that can be done in terms of education of children and education of men about violence against women? At the B.C. Institute on Family Violence we get requests for counselling for men who are physically or emotionally abusive to their partner, and these men are saying they are willing to go to counselling. The problem we have seen is that we do give them the referral to community counselling, but there seems to be long waiting lists. It's usually after the fact, it's after a crime has already been committed, and it's also at a very stressful point in the relationship, whereas a more helpful approach would be to be to solve the problem by preventing the problem. I was trying to figure out ways that this could be done, whether through marriage counselling or something else.

People mentioned at the workshop the need for more for more emphasis on prevention and awareness of sex roles and stereotyping, how to have a healthy relationship, how to resolve conflict, the roles of men and women, what does it mean to be masculine and feminine. It's all part of conditioning and the roles that society has assigned men and women, and it can start very early with children. Schools have a policy of zero tolerance of violence in the classroom and on the playground, but that relates to violence between students. But what is the school's role in helping educate students for future relationships; that is not clear. Sometimes I think society expects a lot from schools, that they have to be responsible for all areas of future role performance, but I think it's a shared responsibility.

A number of agencies mentioned that they thought professionals lack knowledge of family violence and the dynamics around violence against women. They may not be sensitive to that as an issue in families they are providing service to, the power and control dynamics and the insidious aspects to violence against women in relationships that relate more to emotional and psychological abuse. Professionals may not always recognize the signs of violence in a relationship and that we all need to have greater sensitivity.

In closing, I would like to extend thanks on behalf of VINA to the funders for the project, the Ministry of Women's Equality, Ministry of Attorney General and the Vancouver Foundation, and to acknowledge the assistance of the United Way, the Burnaby School Board and Burnaby Family Life Institute in producing the protocol document. The BC Institute on Family Violence has also assisted with production of a Burnaby pamphlet on Violence Against Women in Relationships. I also want to express my appreciation to the VINA members and the advisory committee for their hard work and support in making the project such a success.

This interview was conducted by BCIFV Editor, Barbara Sherman at the offices of Burnaby Family Life Institute.