This study was conducted in 1976 at the University of New Hampshire. 2,134 respondents were interviewed in a nationwide sample of 960 males and 1,183 females. The purpose of the study was to ascertain methods of conflict resolution within the family. Information was gathered regarding the following areas: resolution of conflicts between spouses and between parents and children, including detailed information on the development of conflicts resulting in violence, resolution of conflicts in respondent's childhood family, family power structure, marital closeness and stability, personality, and stress factors.

Investigators: Straus, M. A. & Gelles, R. J.

A representative national sample of 6,002 families were studied with an emphasis on psychological and medical consequences, costs, and help-seeking patterns of intra-family violence. The study is a follow-up to the 1975 National Family Violence Survey. Investigators: Straus, M. A. & Gelles, R. J.

This survey of prosecutors was undertaken to describe current practice and identify "promising practices" with respect to cases involving domestic violence and child victims or witnesses. It sought to answer the following questions: (1) What are the challenges facing prosecutors when children are exposed to domestic violence? (2) How are new laws regarding domestic violence committed in the presence of children, now operating in a small number of states, affecting practice? (3) What can prosecutors do to help battered women and their children? To gather data on these topics, the researchers conducted a national telephone survey of prosecutors. Questions asked include case assignment, jurisdiction of the prosecutor's office, caseload, protocol for coordinating cases, asking about domestic violence when investigating child abuse cases, asking about children when investigating domestic violence cases, and how the respondent found out when a child abuse case involved domestic violence or when a domestic violence case involved children. Other variables cover whether police routinely checked for prior Child Protective Services (CPS) reports, if these cases were heard by the same judge, in the same court, and were handled by the same prosecutor, if there were laws identifying exposure to domestic violence as child abuse, if there were laws applying or enhancing criminal penalties when children were exposed to domestic violence, if the state legislature was considering any such action, if prosecutors were using other avenues to enhance penalties, if there was pertinent caselaw, and if the respondent's office had a no-drop policy for domestic violence cases. Additional items focus on whether the presence of children influenced decisions to prosecute, if the office would report or prosecute a battered woman who abused her children, or failed to protect her children from abuse or from exposure to domestic violence, how often the office prosecuted such women, if there was a batterers' treatment program in the community, how often batterers were sentenced to attend the treatment program, if there were programs to which the respondent could refer battered mothers and children, what types of programs were operating, and if prosecutors had received training on domestic violence issues.

Users can request data and reports related, but not limited to child abuse, neglect, foster care, and child well-being. Background The National Data Archive on Child Abuse and Neglect collects data on the well-being of children. The archive is a project of the Family Life Development Center, Department of Human Ecology at Cornell University. The archive collects data sets from the The National Survey of Child Health and Well-being, The Adoption and Foster Care Analysis Reporting System, The National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System, and other data related to child abuse, neglect, victimization, m altreatment, sexual abuse, homelessness, and safety. User functionality Users can access abstracts of data sets which discuss the time period and logistics of collecting the data. There are different requirements for accessing different data sets. All requirements are clearly outlined. All data sets must be ordered through the National Data Archive on Child Abuse and Neglect. Application materials must be mailed to the archive for access permission. Requirements for access vary by amount of personal information included in the data set. Data Notes The chief investigator, the years of data collection and a description of the data set is available on the website for every data set. The website does not convey when new data sets will be added.

NFHS-5 (2019-21)

The National Family & Health Survey (NFHS) is a survey in India that attempts to collect information on health conditions, nutrition, family planning, domestic violence, and a host of other factors through conducting surveys on a random ("representative") sample of Indian households in all states. The fifth NFHS was conducted through 2019-21, and the reports were released to the public in 2021 and can be found at this link. The original data was released as PDFs; this Kaggle dataset was created by extracting the tabular data from PDFs into JSONs.

What kind of information is collected in this survey?

Here's a non-comprehensive list of some indicators collected by this survey:

1. Female population age 6 years and above who ever attended school (%)
2. Women age 20-24 years married before age 18 years (%)
3. Institutional births in public facility (%)
4. Children with diarrhoea in the 2 weeks preceding the survey who received oral rehydration salts (ORS) (%)
5. Blood sugar level - high or very high (>140 mg/dl) or taking medicine to control blood sugar level (%)
6. Women age 15 years and above who use any kind of tobacco (%)

Major news outlets in India analysed the results of the study too - here are some interesting articles that show what sorts of "stories" or insights you van look for in this data:

• 50% women, kids in 14 states and UTs are anaemic: National Family Health Survey
• Latest Family Health Survey Proves Prohibition Has Not Worked In Bihar, Alcohol Consumption Is Rife
• Sex Ratio In India Was Estimated As 1,020 By National Family Health Survey During 2019 to 2021, Says MoS Health Dr Bharati Pravin Pawar
• A close reading of the NFHS-5, the health of India
• What the latest NFHS data says about the New Welfarism
• More hospital births, but limited gains in childhood nutrition: National Family Health Survey-5

Note: I used a Python script to parse the data automatically. I tried my best to make sure the data was parsed correctly, but there is a possibility that some data in JSON might not be 100% accurate - there is no way I could have manually verified all 704 PDF files and their outputs, so I randomly sampled and verified a couple of files, all of which looked okay. If you want to see the scripts used to parse this PDFs, please visit my GitHub repo.

Dataset cover photo by Naveed Ahmed on Unsplash.com

Domestic abuse numbers, prevalence, types and victim characteristics, based upon findings from the Crime Survey for England and Wales and police recorded crime.

The National Survey of the Family and Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Workforces, 2017 study involved two surveys, the design and interpretation of which was informed by stakeholder consultations. Two survey instruments were used: (1) a survey of service leaders, which was distributed for completion by a senior staff member responsible for workforce management or workforce development in their service; and (2) a survey of workers. This is the survey of service leaders, which captured experiences of leaders in services used by people affected by violence. It captured their characteristics, and their perspectives on various areas of practice. Questions include levels of contact with people affected by violence in their organisations, their experience and qualifications, employment arrangements, competence in recognising and responding to violence, training and support, supervision, and job quality.

The National Survey of Children's Exposure to Violence (NatSCEV) series involved three rounds of data collection, NatSCEV I (baseline), NatSCEV II, and this study, NatSCEV III. For more information on other parts to the series, please use the following links: NatSCEV I (ICPSR 35203) - http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR35203.v1 NatSCEV II (ICPSR 36177) - http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR36177.v1 The National Survey of Children's Exposure to Violence III was designed to obtain lifetime and one-year incidence estimates of a comprehensive range of childhood victimizations across gender, race, and developmental stage. Conducted between August 2013 and April 2014, it assessed the experiences of a nationally representative sample of 4,000 children less than 18 years of age living in the contiguous United States (excluding New Hampshire). A short interview was conducted with an adult caregiver (usually a parent) to obtain family demographic information. One child was randomly selected from all eligible children in a household by selecting the child with the most recent birthday. If the selected child was 1 month to 9 years old, the main interview was conducted with the caregiver. If the selected child was 10-17 years old, the main interview was conducted with the child.The NatSCEV III questionnaire was very similar to the previous wave minus the extended family exposure to violence follow-up section that was included in NatSCEV II. The questionnaire asked for household demographics and questions about the focal child's health. A series of 52 juvenile victimization screening questions (JVQ) were asked, and for every screener the respondent endorsed, a series of follow-up questions about that victimization was asked. In addition, the survey included sections on lifetime and past year adversity, internet victimization, community disorder, bullying, delinquency, and the child/parent relationship.

Abstract (en): The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS) is an ongoing nationally representative survey that assessed experiences of sexual violence, stalking, and intimate partner violence among adult women and men in the United States and for each individual state. The survey focused exclusively on violence and collected information about Sexual violence by any perpetrator, including information related to rape, being made to penetrate someone else, sexual coercion, unwanted sexual contact, and non-contact unwanted sexual experiences ; Stalking, including the use of newer technologies such as text messages, emails, monitoring devices (e.g., cameras and GPS, or global positioning system devices), by perpetrators known and unknown to the victim ; Physical violence by an intimate partner ; Psychological aggression by an intimate partner, including information on expressive forms of aggression and coercive control ; Control of reproductive or sexual health by an intimate partner ; In addition to collecting lifetime and 12 month prevalence data on sexual violence, stalking, and intimate partner violence, the survey collects information on the age at the time of the first victimization, demographic characteristics of respondents, demographic characteristics of perpetrators (age, sex, race/ethnicity) and detailed information about the context in which these types of violence occur. The primary objectives of the survey are to describe the prevalence and characteristics of sexual violence, stalking, and intimate partner violence in the United States; who is most likely to experience these forms of violence; the context in which sexual violence, stalking, and intimate partner violence are experienced; and the consequences and impacts of these forms of violence. The data file contains 18,957 cases and 26,114 variables. The primary objectives of the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey were to describe (1) the prevalence and characteristics of sexual violence, stalking, and intimate partner violence; (2) who is most likely to experience these forms of violence; (3) the patterns and impact of the violence experienced by specific perpetrators; and (4) the health consequences of these forms of violence. The survey was conducted in 50 states and the District of Columbia and was administered using a computer-assisted telephone interview from January 22, 2010 through December 31, 2010. In 2010, a total of 18,049 interviews were conducted (9,970 women and 8,079 men) in the United States general population. This included 16,507 completed and 1,542 partially completed interviews. A total of 9,086 females and 7,421 males completed the survey. Approximately 45.2 percent of interviews were conducted by landline telephone and 54.8 percent of interviews were conducted using a respondent's cell phone. Advance Letters Reverse address matching was used to link available addresses to the landline sample. Approximately 50 percent of telephone numbers in the landline sample were matched. Prior to contacting participants, informational letters addressed to "Resident" were sent to available addresses to make residents aware that they would be receiving a request for an interview in the coming days. Following the World Health Organization's guidelines for research on domestic violence, introductory letters were carefully written, providing only general information about the survey to maximize safety and confidentiality. Incentives Respondents in the landline and cell phone samples were offered an incentive of 10 dollars to participate in the survey. Respondents could choose to have the incentive mailed to them or donated to the United Way on their behalf; 58.4 percent of respondents chose to donate their incentive. For respondents who chose to receive the incentive, mailing information was obtained so the incentive check could be sent to them. Mailing information was kept in a separate database from data collected during the administration of the survey and destroyed at the end of data collection. Graduated Informed Consent Process A graduated informed consent protocol was used to ensure respondent safety and confidentiality in accordance with recommended guidelines for surveys on sensitive topics such as violence victimization (Sullivan and Cain, 2004; WHO, 2001). With a graduated informed consent protocol, the initial person who answers the telephone is provided general non-specific information about the surv...

The national evaluation of the Legal Assistance for Victims (LAV) program had three main objectives: (1) to document the range of local activities and programs supported by the Fiscal Year 1998 to Fiscal Year 2000 LAV grants, (2) to conduct a process evaluation by examining and documenting LAV grantee planning and implementation efforts, and (3) to evaluate the effectiveness of LAV programs in meeting the needs of the victims they serve. A mixed method approach was developed to conduct the evaluation. The researchers used a classic triangulation framework of quantitative agency data, telephone survey interviews, mail surveys, interviews and focus groups with service providers, and case studies. The evaluation of effectiveness included (1) before-after analysis of caseload data on 88,901 clients and (2) interviews with 124 LAV clients. The range of local activities and programs was documented primarily through two mail surveys of grantees. For Part 1 (2001 Mail Survey), data include information regarding project staffing, partnerships, legal and advocacy services provided, and implementation challenges. It was completed by 156 grantees. Part 2 (2003 Mail Survey) was administered to the 2001 survey respondents who had also received continuation grants in 2001 or 2002. It was completed by 79 grantees. This survey sought information on successful practices for achieving key project objectives. It also attempted to quantify the number and types of legal services provided and gain more quantitative information on unmet needs. Part 3 (Legal Assistance for Victims Data) contains caseload data including demographics related to clients such as gender, ethnicity, and income. It also contains information regarding the case including type of case, hours worked on the case, and results of the case. There are also data related to the agency such as jurisdiction of the agency and type of agency. For Part 4 (Victims Interviews), data include demographic information, history and background of the case, legal services received, satisfaction with legal services, impact of legal services, and the victim's current situation.

ABSTRACT: Introduction: The isolated negative impacts of community violence and family violence on individuals’ self-rated health (SRH) are known, but there is little evidence on the combined effect of these two types of interpersonal violence. Objective: To analyze the association between exposure to community violence/by strangers and family violence/by acquaintances and negative SRH, distinguishing the type of violence suffered and also considering its cumulative exposure. Methods: Epidemiological cross-sectional study developed with data from the National Health Survey (PNS) 2013. Crude multinominal logistic regression models were performed and adjusted to test the association of variables. Results: All types of violence analyzed were associated with negative SRH. Isolated community/unknown interpersonal violence was associated with SRH as regular (odds ratio - OR = 1.38) and bad (OR = 1.79). Exposure to family violence/by acquaintances was associated with regular (OR = 1.52) and bad (OR = 2.70) self-assessment. Concomitant exposure to the two types of violence was associated with regular (OR = 4.00) and bad (OR = 7.81) health assessments, with this association being of greater magnitude than those for isolated violence. Conclusion: The cumulative effect of exposure to family/known and community/unknown violence enhances the negative assessment of health status. Health professionals must be aware of the multivitaminization and its impact on the health of victims who access health services.

The main purpose of the EU survey on gender-based violence against women and other forms of inter-personal violence (EU-GBV) is to assess the prevalence of violence in order to address the requirements of the Istanbul Convention. The survey covers psychological, physical and sexual violence by intimate partner, physical and sexual violence by non-partner, sexual harassment at work, violence experienced in childhood and stalking by any perpetrator.

The data collection for the first wave (year 2021) was conducted in voluntary bases and took place between September 2020 and March 2024 in the EU countries, based on their national timetables. Eurostat coordinated data collection in 18 Member States (BE, BG, DK, EE, EL, ES, FR, HR, LV, LT, MT, NL, AT, PL, PT, SI, SK, FI). Additionally, Italy agreed to share data from their national survey on violence against women, but the implementation of the survey was postponed from 2022 to 2024 due to administrative difficulties. The indicators disseminated for Italy are based on the last national survey conducted in 2014, given that the prevalence of gender-based violence is not expected to differ significantly over time, specifically for prevalence of lifetime violence, and the indicators will be updated when 2024 survey results will be available. Moreover, indicators on sexual harassment at work disseminated for Italy are based on the national victimisation survey of 2022-2023. To cover the full EU, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) and the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) launched a joint data collection in the eight Member States not covered by Eurostat (CZ, DE, IE, CY, LU, HU, RO, SE) following the EU-GBV manual. Accordingly, data disseminated for wave 2021 and estimated EU-average is based on a joint data collection by Eurostat, FRA and EIGE.

The disseminated indicators focus on violence by perpetrator, disaggregated by type of violence, by time of occurrence, by age and by personal characteristics of the respondent; and on frequency, severity, seriousness and reporting of the experienced violence.

However, it is necessary to point out that survey data might only be a close proxy to real prevalence as survey data depends on the willingness of the respondent to disclose any violence experienced. Therefore, to understand the prevalence of violence and disclosure rates by survey respondents, it is important to take into account the extent to which violence is tolerated in the wider community. For example, in cultures where people are ready to talk about their painful experiences, their answers may reflect more accurately their own experiences rather than community norms. To provide some background on country specific context, few indicators on commonness and awareness of support services are disseminated.

It is essential to avoid using sensitive terms that could cause anxiety or concern when introducing the survey. Accordingly, the general recommendation was that the survey name should be neutral when contacting the respondents. The aim was to avoid alerting any perpetrators of domestic violence to the nature of the survey or frightening off any victims of violence, in order to minimise non-response, as some respondents might be discouraged from taking part if the name of the survey included terms like ‘assault’, ‘sexual violence’, or ‘gender-based violence’.

Majority of countries have followed this recommendation and the title of the survey was translated as survey on health, safety or security and well-being or living conditions; quality of life or relationship survey. Only few countries (BG, SK) used gender-based violence in the title of the survey during data collection and explained that this decision was taken as no issue appeared during testing the survey using the word “violence”, or the word "violence" was used in order to avoid misunderstanding regarding the aim of the survey and to reduce non-response due to the fact that respondents were not aware of the real theme of the survey.

However, the pilot survey results indicate that respondents understood the rationale for the choice of neutral survey name once they had been given an explanation, and agreed that it was right. Due to the sensitivity of the topic, the participating countries were strongly encouraged to include experts on violence against women and/or gender-based violence as well as psychologists and psychotherapists in every step of the survey - from the preparation, through the field work to the data dissemination.

Majority of countries included experts on the topic in the project team: gender statisticians, gender-based violence or violence against women researchers, policy experts, psychologists, social workers, experts working on victim support or NGOs, experts on victimization surveys. External experts were included in the preparation of the survey, training of the interviewers and in order to provide support to the interviewers.

Few countries (MT, FI) established the focus group or expert group consisting of different experts in the field and providing the support to the survey during all phases.

The purpose of this project was to use statistical modeling techniques to estimate rape and domestic assault rates, adjusting for interviewing conditions under which the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) was administered. Data for women 16 years of age and older interviewed in the NCVS (see NATIONAL CRIME SURVEYS: NATIONAL SAMPLE, 1986-1990 [NEAR-TERM DATA] [ICPSR 8864]) were analyzed. The researchers considered whether the type of interview (personal or telephone) and the presence of another person (particularly a spouse) influenced or "gagged" the reporting of rape and domestic violence in the NCVS. The researchers also investigated correlates, primarily demographic in nature, of reporting rape, domestic violence, other assaults, and breaking and entry. In total, the data file contains reports of 434 rapes, 1,973 incidents of domestic violence, 13,459 other assaults, and 88,950 incidents of breaking and entry. The binary-coded variables provide information on whether the respondent was alone during the interview, others who were present, whether the interview was by telephone, whether the respondent refused a telephone interview, the number of persons who lived in the household, whether the respondent owned her home, whether the land use was urban, whether the household the respondent was living in was the same household from the last interview, whether the respondent had moved more than three times in the last five years, and whether an assault, domestic violence incident, rape, breaking and entry, or no crime was reported. Demographic information includes the respondent's education, income, employment during the last six months, marital status at the time of the interview, and whether the respondent was white (or non-white) or Hispanic (or non-Hispanic). Variables coded the same as the NCVS variables include age, respondent's relationship to the offender, type of crime, year and quarter of interview, NCVS control number, and person weight.

Domestic abuse numbers, prevalence, types and attitudes experienced by women and men aged between 16 and 59 years and 60 to 74 years, based upon annual findings from the Crime Survey for England and Wales.

The National Family Health Survey 2019-2021, the fifth in the NFHS series, provides information on the population, health, and nutrition of India and each state and union territory. Like NFHS-4, NFHS-5 also provides district-level estimates for many important indicators. The contents of NFHS-5 are similar to NFHS-4 to allow comparisons over time. However, NFHS-5 includes some new topics, such as preschool education, disability, access to a toilet facility, death registration, bathing practices during menstruation, and methods and reasons for abortion. The scope of clinical, anthropometric, and biochemical testing has also been expanded to include the measurement of waist and hip circumferences, and the age range for the measurement of blood pressure and blood glucose has been expanded. However, HIV testing has been dropped. The NFHS-5 sample has been designed to provide national, state and union territory, and district level estimates of various indicators covered in the survey. However, estimates of indicators of sexual behaviour, husband's background and woman's work, HIV and AIDS knowledge, attitudes and behaviour, and domestic violence are available only at the state and union territory and national level.

The main purpose of the EU survey on gender-based violence against women and other forms of inter-personal violence (EU-GBV) is to assess the prevalence of violence in order to address the requirements of the Istanbul Convention. The survey covers psychological, physical and sexual violence by intimate partner, physical and sexual violence by non-partner, sexual harassment at work, violence experienced in childhood and stalking by any perpetrator.

The data collection for the first wave (year 2021) was conducted in voluntary bases and took place between September 2020 and March 2024 in the EU countries, based on their national timetables. Eurostat coordinated data collection in 18 Member States (BE, BG, DK, EE, EL, ES, FR, HR, LV, LT, MT, NL, AT, PL, PT, SI, SK, FI). Additionally, Italy agreed to share data from their national survey on violence against women, but the implementation of the survey was postponed from 2022 to 2024 due to administrative difficulties. The indicators disseminated for Italy are based on the last national survey conducted in 2014, given that the prevalence of gender-based violence is not expected to differ significantly over time, specifically for prevalence of lifetime violence, and the indicators will be updated when 2024 survey results will be available. Moreover, indicators on sexual harassment at work disseminated for Italy are based on the national victimisation survey of 2022-2023. To cover the full EU, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) and the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) launched a joint data collection in the eight Member States not covered by Eurostat (CZ, DE, IE, CY, LU, HU, RO, SE) following the EU-GBV manual. Accordingly, data disseminated for wave 2021 and estimated EU-average is based on a joint data collection by Eurostat, FRA and EIGE.

The disseminated indicators focus on violence by perpetrator, disaggregated by type of violence, by time of occurrence, by age and by personal characteristics of the respondent; and on frequency, severity, seriousness and reporting of the experienced violence.

However, it is necessary to point out that survey data might only be a close proxy to real prevalence as survey data depends on the willingness of the respondent to disclose any violence experienced. Therefore, to understand the prevalence of violence and disclosure rates by survey respondents, it is important to take into account the extent to which violence is tolerated in the wider community. For example, in cultures where people are ready to talk about their painful experiences, their answers may reflect more accurately their own experiences rather than community norms. To provide some background on country specific context, few indicators on commonness and awareness of support services are disseminated.

It is essential to avoid using sensitive terms that could cause anxiety or concern when introducing the survey. Accordingly, the general recommendation was that the survey name should be neutral when contacting the respondents. The aim was to avoid alerting any perpetrators of domestic violence to the nature of the survey or frightening off any victims of violence, in order to minimise non-response, as some respondents might be discouraged from taking part if the name of the survey included terms like ‘assault’, ‘sexual violence’, or ‘gender-based violence’.

Majority of countries have followed this recommendation and the title of the survey was translated as survey on health, safety or security and well-being or living conditions; quality of life or relationship survey. Only few countries (BG, SK) used gender-based violence in the title of the survey during data collection and explained that this decision was taken as no issue appeared during testing the survey using the word “violence”, or the word "violence" was used in order to avoid misunderstanding regarding the aim of the survey and to reduce non-response due to the fact that respondents were not aware of the real theme of the survey.

However, the pilot survey results indicate that respondents understood the rationale for the choice of neutral survey name once they had been given an explanation, and agreed that it was right. Due to the sensitivity of the topic, the participating countries were strongly encouraged to include experts on violence against women and/or gender-based violence as well as psychologists and psychotherapists in every step of the survey - from the preparation, through the field work to the data dissemination.

Majority of countries included experts on the topic in the project team: gender statisticians, gender-based violence or violence against women researchers, policy experts, psychologists, social workers, experts working on victim support or NGOs, experts on victimization surveys. External experts were included in the preparation of the survey, training of the interviewers and in order to provide support to the interviewers.

Few countries (MT, FI) established the focus group or expert group consisting of different experts in the field and providing the support to the survey during all phases.

The National Family Health Survey 2019-2021, the fifth in the NFHS series, provides information on population, health, and nutrition for India and each state and union territory. Like NFHS-4, NFHS-5 also provides district-level estimates for many important indicators. The contents of NFHS-5 are similar to NFHS-4 to allow comparisons over time. However, NFHS-5 includes some new topics, such as preschool education, disability, access to a toilet facility, death registration, bathing practices during menstruation, and methods and reasons for abortion. The scope of clinical, anthropometric, and biochemical testing has also been expanded to include the measurement of waist and hip circumferences and the age range for the measurement of blood pressure and blood glucose has been expanded. However, HIV testing has been dropped. The NFHS-5 sample has been designed to provide national, state, and union territory, and district-level estimates of various indicators covered in the survey. However, estimates of indicators of sexual behavior, husband's background and woman's work, HIV and AIDS knowledge, attitudes and behavior, and domestic violence are available only at the state and union territory and national level

Financial overview and grant giving statistics of National Council on Domestic Violence

Abstract

Violence against children under 18 years of age is a major human rights violation and social and health problem throughout the world. Generally, child abuse is divided into three major categories: physical, emotional, and sexual, all of which can have significant short- and long-term health consequences for children. These include injury, sexual and reproductive health problems, unintended pregnancy, increased risk of HIV, mental health issues, alcohol and drug abuse, social ostracism, and increased incidence of chronic disease in adulthood. Those who have experienced childhood violence are more likely to engage in risk behaviors as adolescents and adults, and may be more likely to become perpetrators themselves.

The key objectives of Cambodia VACS are:

• To estimate the national prevalence of physical, emotional and sexual violence perpetrated against boys and girls, including touching without permission, attempted sexual intercourse, physically forced sexual intercourse, and pressured sexual intercourse perpetrated against boys and girls prior to turning age 18 and more recently;

• To identify risk and protective factors for physical, emotional and sexual violence against children to inform stakeholders and guide prevention efforts;

• To identify the health and social consequences associated with violence against children;

• To assess the knowledge and utilization of medical, psychosocial, legal, and protective services available for children who have experienced sexual, emotional and physical violence;

• To identify areas for further research; and

• To make recommendations to the Government of Cambodia and international and local partners on developing, improving and enhancing prevention and response strategies to address violence against children as part of a larger, comprehensive, multi-sectoral approach to child protection.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Households

• Individuals (Eligible from 13-24 years old)

Universe

Children aged 13-24 years old, male and female, who have been victims of physical, emotional, and sexual violence

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

VACS 2013 makes use of a four-stage cluster sample survey design. In the first stage, a total of 225 villages were selected using probability proportional to size with an allocation by urbanization (27% urban/ 73% rural). In stage 2, enumeration areas known as EAs - the primary sampling units based on geographical subdivisions in Cambodia determined by the department of demographic statistics, censuses and surveys - were selected. The 225 sample EAs were gendered (106 female and 119 male EAs) and one EA was randomly selected from each of the 225 sampled villages. In stage 3, a fixed number of 25 households were selected by equal probability systematic sampling from each selected EA. In stage 4, one eligible respondent (female or male depending on the EA) was randomly selected from the list of all eligible respondents (females or males) 13-24 years of age in each household.

The sampling frame was originally compiled by the National Institute of Statistics for the national population census in 2013. In preparation for several national surveys, the sampling frame was updated in 2012 and takes into account the 2011 reclassification of urban areas in Cambodia.

To calculate separate male and female prevalence estimates for violence victimization, a split sample was used. This means that the survey for females was conducted in different EAs than the survey for males. The split sample approach serves to protect the confidentiality of respondents, and eliminates the chance that a male perpetrator of a sexual assault and the female who was the victim of his sexual assault in the same community would both be interviewed. The design also eliminates the chance that a female perpetrator and a male victim of sexual violence from the same community would both be interviewed.

Prior to the implementation of the survey, a mapping and listing team, primarily composed of supervisors identified for the actual survey, visited all of the randomly selected EAs from the second stage of sampling. It was necessary to map and list all structures within each EA. After the list was constructed, a cluster of 25 households, based on sample size estimates, were selected using either simple random selection, or systematic selection with a random start.

During survey implementation, 25 households were randomly selected in each EA. Upon entering a randomly selected household, interviewers were tasked to identify the head of household or the person representing the head of household in order to introduce the study and complete a household list to determine eligibility of household members to participate in the study. The head of household were requested to participate in a short (15 minute) survey to assess the socio-economic conditions of the household (Appendices W/AA). When there was more than one eligible participant, the interviewer randomly selected one respondent using the Kish Method. If there was no eligible participant, the household was still requested to participate in the household questionnaire. In the case that the head of household is a female or male 13-24 years old, she or he was included in the household listing and may be selected as the respondent. In this case, she or he completed the household questionnaire and the respondent questionnaire. If the selected respondent was not available after three attempts or refused to participate, the household was skipped regardless of whether another eligible respondent existed in the household, thus, the household was not replaced.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The development of a standardized global questionnaire was led by CDC scientists with extensive external consultation. A broad range of academic background and subject-matter expertise is represented in the team at CDC and among the external consultants who developed this tool. The questionnaire draws questions and definitions from a number of well-respected survey tools which has the benefit of (a) being able to compare data on various measures with other studies as a useful validation and an interesting comparison and (b) using measures that have already been field tested in other studies. In addition, the questionnaire has been previously implemented in five other countries (i.e. Swaziland, Tanzania, Kenya, Zimbabwe and Haiti) after being adapted based on vital country-level review by stakeholders.

The following international and violence surveys helped to inform the questionnaire:

• Cambodia Demographic and Health Survey (CDHS)

• National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Surveillance System (NISVSS)

• The Child Sexual Assault Survey (CSA)

• Longitudinal Studies of Child Abuse and Neglect (LONGSCAN)

• ISPCAN Child Abuse Screening Tool (ICAST)

• HIV/AIDS/STD Behavioral Surveillance Surveys (BSS)

• Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS)

• National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health)

• World Health Organization (WHO) Multi-country Study on Women's Health and Domestic Violence against Women

• Behavioral Risk Fact Surveillance System (BRFSS)

• Hopkins Symptoms Checklist

• ISPCAN Child Abuse Screening Tool (ICAST)

The questionnaire has been further adapted for Cambodia (Appendices W/AA, X/BB, Y/CC). Consultation with key informants from Cambodia and input from stakeholders participating in the Technical Working Group on Questionnaire Development (part of the Steering Committee), who are familiar with the problem of violence against children, child protection, and the cultural context, helped to further adapt the questionnaire and survey protocol for Cambodia.

The questionnaire includes the following topics: demographics; parental relations, family, friends and community support, school experiences, sexual behavior and practices; physical, emotional, and sexual violence; perpetration of sexual violence, health outcomes associated with exposure to violence; and utilization and barriers to health services. The background characteristics of the study respondents and the head of household survey include questions that assess age, socio-economic status, marital status, work status, education, and living situation. The sexual behavior and HIV/AIDS component utilizes questions from the CDHS, BSS, and WHO Multi-country study. Sexual behavior questions are divided among the following topics: sexual behavior, including sex in exchange for money or goods, pregnancy, and HIV/AIDS testing. The sexual violence module, the primary focus of the study, includes questions on the types of sexual violence experienced and important information on the circumstances of these incidents, such as the settings where sexual violence occurred and the relationship between the victim and perpetrator. This information will be collected on the first and most recent incidents of sexual violence, which will include a question on whether sexual violence occurred within the past 12-months. In addition, we developed several questions assessing potential risk and protective factors, including attitudes around sexual violence. Some of these questions were based on DHS, YRBS, and Add Health. We also ask questions regarding the negative health and social consequences as well as health-seeking behaviors related to these events.

The questionnaire was administered in Khmer and has already been translated into Khmer (Appendices AA, BB, CC). The Technical Working Group on Questionnaire Development made up of representatives from the ministries of women's affairs, justice, social affairs, planning (National

The current study was a national evaluation that examined the effects of implementing The Greenbook recommendations on collaboration, systems change, and practice within and across the three primary systems of child welfare agencies, courts, and domestic violence service providers. The national evaluation utilized data collected through stakeholder surveys, direct service worker surveys, child welfare case file reviews, and site visit interviews between 2001 and 2006. The purpose of the national evaluation was to develop and implement a strategy for gaining a formative understanding of sites' planning and implementation processes and a summative assessment of the impact of such work on communities, systems, and families. Part 1 (Stakeholder Survey Data) includes variables on the respondent's level of involvement in the organization and barriers to implementing Greenbook initiatives. The baseline stakeholder survey was conducted in 2002 with a total of 86 respondents across sites, and follow-up data were collected three years later (2005) with a total of 62 respondents. Part 2 through Part 7 (Direct Service Worker, and Supervisor Data) include variables on the respondents' race, gender, and length of time at the child welfare agency, court, or domestic violence service provider. Respondents are asked about the hours of training received over the past year, the presence of written reporting guidelines, screening tools, and working relationships with the other agency types. The baseline direct service worker survey was conducted after the end of the demonstration planning period (2003) with a total of 275 respondents across sites, and follow-up data were collected two years later (2005) with a total of 224 respondents. Part 8 (Case Abstractions Data) includes variables on substantiated cases of child maltreatment, risk factors contributing to maltreatment attributed to the mother, the father, or other caregiver, documentation of domestic violence and services provided to the victims and perpetrators. A random sample of substantiated cases of child maltreatment was reviewed in each site at the beginning of the demonstration initiative (2001) with a total of 616 case files reviewed across sites, after the end of the planning period (2003) with a total of 642 case files reviewed across sites, and toward the end of the implementation period (2005) with a total of 562 case files reviewed across sites. Part 9 (Site Visit Interview Notes Qualitative Data) includes questions on structure of services, policies and procedures, training, and the strengths and needs of the site. Site visits were conducted between January 2001 and June 2006 with interviewers with at least one collaborative member from each of the three primary systems (child welfare agency, courts, domestic violence service provider).