Department on the Status of Women Gender Analysis

Department on the Status of Women
GENDER ANALYSIS
2006

2013 Update

 

DOSW Gender Analysis Report (Word)
DOSW Gender Analysis Executive Summary (Word)

The San Francisco Commission on the Status of Women (Commission) was established in 1975 by a resolution of the City andCounty of San Francisco Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco. The mission of the Commission is to foster the advancement and ensure the equitable treatment of women and girls throughout San Francisco. In 1994, the citizens of San Francisco passed Proposition E to make the Commission a permanent body under the City Charter. Today, the seven-member Commission, appointed by the Mayor, establishes policy priorities to be implemented by the Department on the Status of Women (Department) that has a staff of eight (two are part-time). Together, the Commission and the Department promote the status of the women and girls of San Francisco through policy development and support, the funding of community-based anti-violence programs, and continually working to meet the ever-changing needs of women and girls.

In April 1998, the Department partnered with community organizations to spearhead the passage of local legislation reflecting the principles of the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), a comprehensive international bill of rights for women adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1979. San Francisco became the first municipality in the country to implement a local CEDAW Ordinance (City and County of San Francisco Administrative Code Chapter 12K).[2] At the October 2005 annual planning retreat, the Commission elected to utilize the CEDAW framework as a means to organize the Department's work. All of the Department's programs and policy work fall under 1 of the 5 core principles of CEDAW:

  • The Implementation of Women and Girls' Human Rights
  • The Right to an Adequate Standard of Living
  • The Right to Bodily Integrity
  • The Right to Adequate Health Care
  • The Human Rights of Girls to Education and Social Services[3]

Specific examples of the Department's work to advance the status of women and girls are as follows:

  • Promoting access to and developing policy with local government agencies to advance equity;
  • Advocating, proposing, and monitoring legislation to improve the quality of life;
  •  Supporting programs that increase public awareness and understanding of violence against women and its prevention;
  • Administering funds for emergency shelter for women and their children, and coordinating City and community support services for survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault;
  • Promoting public education and awareness to prevent sexual harassment and discrimination;
  • Providing technical assistance and referrals related to employment and social services to individuals, community organizations, businesses, and government agencies; and
  • Working with community organizations and coalitions on human rights.

The Commission on the Status of Women adopted this report in December 2006.

 

OVERVIEW OF CEDAW AND ITS LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION

CEDAW was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1979.[4] The human rights framework of CEDAW is based on the following principles:

  • The inherent right of all people to be treated with dignity and respect.
  • The need for a high level of moral and ethical standards of government accountability.
  • Freedom from intolerance and bias.

The treaty defines discrimination as follows:

[Any] distinction, exclusion, or restriction made on the basis of sex that has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment, or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital status, on a basis of equality of men and women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil, or any other field.[5]

Specifically, CEDAW mandates the protection of the human rights and fundamental freedoms for women and girls in political, economic, social and cultural, civic, and legal arenas. CEDAW formally recognizes that culture, tradition, and difference in life experiences determine how decisions are made, thereby potentially resulting in social, economic, and political inequities affecting women and girls throughout society.

The historic passage of the 1998 CEDAW Ordinance (Ordinance) in San Francisco resulted from a unique public/private partnership between the Commission, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, the Mayor, and a consortium of community organizations spearheaded by the Women's Institute for Leadership Development for Human Rights (WILD for Human Rights), the Women's Foundation, and Amnesty International. The Ordinance focuses on gender equity and the elimination of bias in political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field, including gender-based violence, that is, violence directed against a woman because she is a woman or that affects women disproportionately. It also condemns acts that inflict physical, mental, or sexual harm or suffering, threats of such acts, coercion, and other deprivations of liberty by family, community, or government.

The local Ordinance called for the development of gender analysis as a preventive tool to use against discrimination. The Ordinance requires City and County departments to undergo gender analysis to determine whether they were abiding by the principles of the CEDAW Ordinance in three key areas:1) service delivery, 2) employment practices, and 3) budget allocation. The aim was to integrate gender into the daily operations of local government so that women and men are assured equitable access to services and fairness in the workplace. In 1999, a CEDAW Task Force (Task Force), composed of City officials and human rights advocates from the community, began to develop a set of gender analysis guidelines, including protocols and questions to be used for the analysis.

Between 1999 and 2001, the following 6 departments underwent gender analysis:

  • Department of Public Works
  • Juvenile Probation Department
  • Adult Probation Department
  • Arts Commission
  • Department on the Environment
  • Rent Stabilization Board

Each department collected extensive data and developed a full gender analysis report, including its own recommendations as well as those from the Task Force.[6] Later, each department gave periodic progress updates to the CEDAW Task Force. The central findings from these analyses identified the following common issues:

  • Need for training on human rights with a gender perspective
  • Lack of comprehensive data for evaluating the gender equity of departmental budgets and services
  • Need to increase effective recruitment to diversify the workforce
  • Importance of providing meaningful work-life balance policies
  • Need to increase professional development opportunities for all employees

In 2003, before it was scheduled to sunset, the Task Force developed a Five-Year Action Plan that was adopted by the Commission to be carried out by a CEDAW Committee appointed by the Commission. The members of the CEDAW Committee were expected to have a commitment to the values and principles of CEDAW and represent stakeholder community organizations and government agencies. The goal of the Committee was to ensure the implementation of the local Ordinance and, in particular the Action Plan, and thereby positively impact the lives of women and girls throughout San Francisco.

 

METHODOLOGY

Similar to previous departments that have undergone gender analysis, the Department on the Status of Women began the process utilizing the gender analysis tool by reviewing and responding to the questions from the original guidelines. The overall goal was to examine the extent to which the Department effectively responded to the needs of the communities served, and that available resources were used to work towards concrete human rights for women and girls. The analysis reviewed programs and data from a span of years beginning with the initial implementation of CEDAW in 1998, and focused on fiscal year (FY) 2004-2005 Violence Against Women Program service data.

This report responds to the first 3 of 5 steps outlined in the guidelines. Not surprisingly, the Department encountered challenges similar to other departments and found the process difficult at times, but extremely informative, overall. In particular, the time spent collecting data seemed repetitive throughout the first 3 steps, yet without the data, it would have been impossible to identify potential obstacles to equality.

A. Step 1: Data Collection

The first step was to collect data, both quantitative and qualitative, about the Department's annual budget, services, and employees. Ideally, this information would have already been disaggregated by gender, race, and other intersecting identities (e.g., race, ethnicity, sexual preference, physical handicap, etc.). The Department was able to collect some disaggregated data related to services and employment by utilizing voluntary and confidential sources. Due to its small size and close working relationships with Partner Agencies (community-based agencies who receive grant funding from the Department), the Department collected qualitative data informally from staff, Partner Agencies, and members of the public.

B. Step 2: Data Analysis

The second step was to analyze the disaggregated data collected from Step 1 to both identify benchmarks and analyze trends within the data, with an eye towards understanding how the day-to-day operations of the Department impacted gender and other intersecting identities of customers/clients, the Department's employees, and the various communities it serves. The final analysis consisted of a series of highlights, including best practices that promote the human rights of woman and girls, and areas in need of improvement that may unintentionally limit the human rights of women and girls.

C. Step 3: Recommendations

The third step was to formulate specific recommendations to prevent gender-based discrimination and other identities in both the Department and the City's practices and policies. The gender analysis resulted in recommendations that was presented to the CEDAW Committee for feedback. Comments or recommendations were incorporated into this report.

D. Step 4: Action Plan

The fourth step of a gender analysis is to implement recommendations through an Action Plan. Input from the CEDAW Committee, the public, and the Commission will be incorporated into an Action Plan to addresses any and all deficiencies identified in this report. Specific means to correct any deficiencies will also be addressed. These will be presented to the Commission for approval and incorporation in the Commission's Strategic Plan.

E. Step 5: Monitoring

The fifth and final step of the gender analysis is to monitor the Plan. The CEDAW Committee will ensure the implementation of the Department's Plan through regular monitoring.

 

DEPARTMENT BUDGET

The Executive Director of the Department on the Status of Women, submits an annual budget to the 7-member Commission on the Status of Women.[7] The budget reflects the policy priorities established by the Commission at an annual strategic planning meeting that is open to the public.

A. Budget Process and Planning

The budget process, similar to the annual strategic planning process, garners input from the Commission, Department staff, Partner Agencies, and other members of the public. This input is gathered through monthly Commission meetings, as well as meetings with community groups. Staff members provide input on the budget and the strategic plan throughout the year. The Commission convenes community meetings at least twice a year. These community meetings are public meetings held in various neighborhoods throughout San Francisco. In advance of these meetings, the Commission and Department go to great lengths to reach out to and involve community members to ensure attendance and input. The same 5 CEDAW principles reflected in the Commission's strategic plan cited above serves as the framework for the Department budget.

B. Funding Issues

The Department's annual budget for FY04-05 was approximately $2.42 million, and the City and County of San Francisco 's overall budget was approximately $5.02 billion. In FY05-06, the Department's annual budget was $2.58 million, while the City's overall budget was $5.34 billion. Though women compose 49% of the City's population of 776,733,[8] and the Commission is mandated to represent and address their needs, the Department's budget accounts for a miniscule amount, roughly 1/25 of 1% of the annual budget for the City and County of San Francisco.

Most of the Department's total budget is derived from the City's General Fund, with small portions derived from the Children's Fund, and the Marriage License Fee. In addition, the Department received a $150,000 two-year federal grant from the Department of Justice, Office of Violence Against Women, to fund the Justice and Courage Project, an initiative to oversee reform of the City-wide response to domestic violence.

Most of the Department's funding is generally from stable General Fund sources. However as San Francisco faced historic deficits, over the past few years, the Department was subject to reductions that would have had a devastating impact on services to women and girls in San Francisco . Community members voiced concerns about the impact of cuts to the Partner Agencies who, as part of the Department's Violence Against Women Prevention and Intervention (VAW) Grants Program, provide direct services to victims of domestic violence and sexual assault. Commissioners also asserted that cuts to the VAW Grants Program were deleterious to the welfare of the women and girls of San Francisco and, therefore, unacceptable. As a result, the Commission rejected proposed cuts to the Department's annual budget for the past 2 years. The anti-violence community has worked especially hard over the past years to preserve the Department's funding of the VAW Grants Program. A recommendation of this analysis is that, to ensure more secure funding sources especially for programs that serve women and girls, the Department should explore increasing its share of funds from voter mandated bond monies (e.g. the Children's Fund and the Public Education Fund) the Marriage License Fee.[9]

C. Performance Measures

Annually, City Departments must identify performance measures to ensure accountability. Given the mission of the Department, these measures have always been directly related to women and girls. In FY06-07, the Department overhauled existing measures in order to align them with the CEDAW framework. Measures were developed in each of the following areas:

  • Advancing the human rights of women and girls, including the workforce, services, and budget of city government;
  • Advocating for policies reflecting the right to an adequate standard of living;
  • Conducting outreach to underserved communities on the right to adequate healthcare;
  • Promoting access to education and social services for girls; and
  • Monitoring City-wide programs and policies that address the right to bodily integrity.

While all of the Department's measures and indicators relate to the human rights of women and girls, one recommendation of this gender analysis is that these measures can be further improved to better reflect how policies and legislation improve the lives of women and girls by focusing on outcomes.

SERVICES

A. Right to Bodily Integrity

Since its inception, a primary focus of the Department has been on the Right to Bodily Integrity, or freedom from violence, for women and girls. As part of this focus, the Department administers the Violence Against Women Prevention & Intervention (VAW) Grants Program which distributes public funds to community-based agencies in order to provide direct services to women and girls.

1. Violence Against Women Prevention and Intervention (VAW) Grants Program

To address the needs of women experiencing violence, the Department provides 25 grants to 20 organizations in 6 different program areas:

  • Crisis Lines provide 24-hour telephone support for survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault.
  • Intervention and Advocacy provide counseling, social services, and advocacy for women and their children.
  • Legal Services create access to family law for survivors of domestic violence.
  • Prevention, Education, and Training promotes public awareness of violence against women, with a particular focus on youth.
  • Shelters provide emergency shelter and support services for domestic violence victims
  • and their children. There are 3 facilities in San Francisco.
  • Transitional Housing provides housing and support services for battered women and their children. The Department funds 3 facilities dedicated to women residents.

Below is the budgetary data for the six primary funding categories, organized by funding source, and in order of allocation size, for FY04-05.

FY04-05 VAW GRANT PROGRAM FUNDING*

 

 

 

Service Category

 

 

General Fund

 

Marriage License Fees

(Shelters Only)

Children's Fund

(Violence Prevention Programs)

 

Violence Against Women Grants Program (Total)

Percent of VAW

Grants Program

 

Shelters

 

282,968

 

194,000

 

 

476,968

 

27%

 

Prevention, Education, & Training

 

 

 

252,815

 

 

 

 

127,577

 

 

 

380,392

 

 

 

22%

 

Crisis Line

 

256,914

 

 

 

256,914

 

15%

 

Legal Services

 

246,698

 

 

 

246,698

 

14%

 

Intervention & Advocacy

 

 

198,470

 

 

 

28,759

 

 

227,229

 

 

13%

 

Transitional Housing

 

 

130,713

 

 

 

42,341

 

 

173,054

 

 

10%

 

Totals

 

1,368,578

 

194,000

 

198,677

 

1,761,255

 

101%**

*These figures are based on the grant contracts for FY 2004-2005. They may not match final budgetary amounts,
as changes were made during the year. **Total is over100% due to rounding.

In FY04-05 the Department budgeted approximately $1.77 million for the VAW Grants Program. The bulk of this funding, $1.37 million, came from the City's General Fund, with $198,677 from the Children's Fund, and $194,000 from the Marriage License Fee.

a. Budget

For a number of years, the Department has acknowledged that the bulk of its funding was devoted to anti-violence programs, but the gender analysis revealed just how great the scope of that work is and that it, in fact, constitutes over 90% of the Department's overall budget. In reviewing the questions from the gender analysis guidelines, the Department realized it had not accurately accounted for the staff resources devoted to this area. Until now, the Department focused on the direct grant funds in this area, which has constituted approximately 70-75% of the Department's budget. Upon review, it was determined that a large percent of the staff work on anti-violence policies and programs was directly addressing the CEDAW principle of the Right to Bodily Integrity. Not only does the Grants Administrator spend all of his time in this area, the Justice and Courage Policy Analyst is also dedicated to this area. In addition, the Executive Director and one administrative support staff spend approximately 50% of their time on these issues. The Department's part-time accountant spends the majority of his time with invoices and payment to the grant programs as well. Accounting for all staff time and overhead expenses, approximately $375,000, or roughly 50% of all staff costs was devoted toward the Right to Bodily Integrity in FY05-06.

b. Program Data

Services are evaluated through quarterly reports, submitted by Partner Agencies, that document client demographics and performance measures as outlined in grant agreements. Disaggregated data is collected in a confidential manner and includes information from the following areas, but is not limited to:

  • Service Program Type (Crisis Line, Shelter, Education, etc.)
  • Primary Language
  • History and type of Violence
  • Disability (including HIV/AIDS)
  • Sexual Orientation (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender)
  • Age
  • Race/Ethnicity.

Through the overall VAW Grants Program, 11,142 unduplicated individuals received services in FY04-05. Graphed below are examples of relevant disaggregated data by race/ethnicity in 3 of the Department's 6 primary funding categories for FY04-05. Funding levels and disaggregated data on individuals served are included in the appendix for all 6 program areas.[10]

1) Shelters Total Funding: $ 476,968 (27% of all VAW Grants)

Partner Agencies provided 10,055 bed-nights of shelter and 5,878 hours of support services to victims of domestic violence and their families. Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) individuals represented approximately 2% of individuals served. Partner agencies exceeded contracted goals for bed nights by nearly 10% and support services by almost 30%.

2) Prevention, Education, & Training Total Funding: $ 380,392 (22% of all VAW Grants)

Partner Agencies provided 3,884 hours of educational and preventive activities. The service data include many programs for young people and a program for seniors. The 8 Partner Agencies in this category provided services to 3,639 individuals, 10.5% of which were from the LGBT community.Partner agencies distributed 6,484 pieces of material and averaged meeting 90% of their contracted goals.

3) Legal Services Total Funding: $ 246,698 (14% of all VAW Grants)

Partner Agencies provided 15,849 hours of legal services and 5,014 hours of support services. LGBT individuals represented 2.5% of individuals served. Partner agencies exceeded their contracted goals for legal services by almost 10% and for support services by 65%.

c. Service Data Analysis

For the analysis, we compared the above data with benchmarks and trends identified in 3 studies.

  • City and County of San Francisco and the Department on the Status of Women's 2000 Needs Assessment: Violence Against Women and Girls in San Francisco (December 2000), a study undertaken to provide data to the Commission as it determined allocations for the VAW Grants Program.[11]
  • United States Census Bureau 2000 data for the City and County of San Francisco.[12]
  • I Tried To Stop Them: Children's Exposure to Domestic Violence in San Francisco (2006), a study commissioned by the Department of Children, Youth, and their Families as part of its federally-funded SafeStart Initiative designed to address childhood exposure to violence.[13]

1) Year 2000 Needs Assessment

In 2000, the Department conducted a needs assessment for anti-violence programs.

The methodology consisted of the following:

  • A survey of Commission-funded and non-funded agencies for existing services
  • Focus groups of diverse women to determine the needs of current and potential clients
  • A general survey of women to determine the types of services needed, reasons for lack of program awareness, and barriers women face in seeking services.

The report identified service gaps and access barriers and proposed corresponding recommendations. Priority populations, identified as underserved by existing services and/or at a high risk for victimization, included the following categories: sex workers, adult, child, and adolescent survivors of sexual assault, the disabled, the elderly, youth, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender women, recent immigrants, Muslim women, Asian American women, Native American women, African American women, Latina women, and perpetrators. Based on these findings, the Commission allocated monies to community-based agencies which did not previously receive funding from the Department to provide services to Arab-American women, seniors, and sex workers.

An analysis of the data shows that many woman and children, and a few men, in the City and County of San Francisco, seek services through any one of our 20 Partner Agencies of the VAW Grants Program. While the Department does not currently fund an organization dedicated to the African American community, a review of the data indicates that African American women and children are, in fact, receiving services provided by Partner Agencies in numbers roughly comparable to the city-widepopulation of 8%. The percent of African Americans served range from 8.7% to 18.8% across the 6 program areas.

The analysis also indicated that in the Intervention and Advocacy category, the Asian Pacific Islander population for both women and men was the highest of all ethnicities, equaling approximately 93%, of total individuals served. This reflects the Department's concerted outreach efforts to the Asian/Pacific Islander population following an alarming trend of recent domestic violence homicides in that community. The Asian/Pacific Islander community was also identified as a priority population in the 2000 Needs Assessment. The gender analysis determined that the Partner Agencies also served other priority populations, in particular Latinas, and LGBT communities. As demonstrated in the service data discussed above, a majority of our Partner Agencies have met and/or exceeded their contracted performance goals.

2) Census Bureau Data

United States Census Bureau data from 2000 indicated that, in San Francisco, over 50% of the total population of 776,733[14] were people of color. Asian/Pacific Islanders represented approximately 31%, Latino(a)s constituted 14%, African Americans were 8%, Native Americans under 1%, and Multi-Race and Other Race combined equaled approximately 3%. The 2000 Census data utilized to analyze the VAW Grants Program service data. The group most underrepresented in every category was White women. One recommendation from this analysis is that this data should be explored in any future needs assessment, including the role of economic disparity and access to resources among different race/ethnic groups.

3) Police Responses to Domestic Violence Incidents

In the study,  I Tried to Stop Them: Children's Exposure to Domestic Violence in San Francisco, police reports for domestic violence incidents for San Francisco in 2004 were analyzed in detail.[15] As part of the federally-funded SafeStart Initiative, researchers collected data from the San Francisco Police Department's Domestic Violence Response Unit (DVRU) and Crime Analysis Unit. The Researchers reviewed over 3,000 domestic violence felony investigation files. Each file described formal domestic violence felony investigations that were initiated between June 2003 and December 2004 in the DVRU. Researchers also analyzed data from the 16,599 calls made to the police dispatch unit about domestic violence incidents between January 2003 and December 2005. In addition, researchers analyzed administrative data provided by the DVRU from January 2001 to May 2006. The results indicate that domestic violence victims were primarily women (85%). The race of the victims reporting violence included African-Americans (35%), Latina (21%), White (30%), and Asian (10%). Approximately 6% of cases stemmed from same sex relationships, and, of these, less than 1% involved women. The report highlighted the following profile of victims.

Most cases where a male was identified as a victim involved mutual battery between female and male. According to police data, less than 5% of cases involved men in same-sex relationships, and less than 1% of cases included women in same-sex relationships. Adult victims tended to be in long-term relationships – they reported to officers that they had been in a relationship with the alleged perpetrator for an average of five years. Nearly 40% of victims reported they were dating the alleged perpetrator, 36% lived with the alleged perpetrator, and 25% were married to the alleged perpetrator.[16]

The data reflected in the chart below is a partial listing for comparison (by percent of race/ethnicity) of the 2000 census data, 2004 police reports, and 2004 Department on the Status of Women service data for the City and County of San Francisco in the specific areas of legal and shelter services. [Note: see Word version of document for chart.]

In most cases the Department's service data and the police data reflect that violence against women cuts across all demographics with different ethnic groups reporting incidents to a greater or lesser amount than their populations. There is some documentation indicating that the Asian/Pacific Islander community underreports incidence of violence.[17]

d. Partner Agencies

Developing and reinforcing collaborations with community-based organizations has always been a hallmark of the Department's work. In particular, the Department maintains close working relationships with organizations working towards the elimination of violence against women, including the Domestic Violence Consortium which represents 17 domestic violence prevention and intervention service agencies in San Francisco. In addition, the Department has taken a lead role in revitalizing the Family Violence Council, which serves as a clearinghouse for information on family violence and makes policy recommendations to the Board of Supervisors and the Mayor to improve services in the community. Council membership is inclusive of all areas of family violence (child abuse, domestic violence, and elder abuse), and all areas and issues are considered from a human rights perspective. An illustrative, but not exhaustive, list of agencies that the Department collaborates with follows:

  • Asian Pacific Islander Legal Outreach
  • Arab Cultural & Community Center
  • Asian Perinatal Advocates
  • Asian Women's Shelter
  • Bar Association of San Francisco Volunteer Legal Services Program
  • Bay Area Legal Aid
  • Community United Against Violence (focus on LGBT community)
  • Community Youth Center (focus on API community)
  • Cooperative Restraining Order Clinic
  • Donaldina Cameron House (focus on API community)
  • Gum Moon Women's Residence (focus on API community)
  • Institute on Aging
  • La Casa de las Madres (domestic violence shelter and services)
  • Lavender Youth Recreation Center (focus on LGBT community)
  • Mary Elizabeth Inn (transitional housing)
  • Mission Neighborhood Centers (targets Latinas)
  • San Francisco Women Against Rape
  • St. Vincent de Paul (Riley Center) & Brennan House (shelter and transitional housing)
  • W.O.M.A.N., Inc. (24 hour hotline and services)
  • Women in Dialogue (focus on anti-violence among sex workers)

e. Evaluation

Both Partner Agencies and their clients are involved in the evaluation process. Performance measures focus on the quality of service rendered and client satisfaction of these services. In addition, the Department requires that Partner Agencies establish a procedure that allows clients, agencies, and the general public to file complaints about services rendered or not rendered and assessments of these services. Over the past 2 years, the Department has received fewer than

5 complaints filed against Partner Agencies. These were based on a variety of issues ranging from quality of food on premises, lack of language access, substance use on the job, and employment issues. All issues were resolved with the Department playing a support role to the Partner Agencies.

6. Justice & Courage Project

In October 2000, Claire Joyce Tempongko was brutally murdered, allegedly by her ex-boyfriend Tari Ramirez, in front of her two young children. Ms. Tempongko made repeated attempts to stop the violence in her life, but, tragically, all of the local government services and systems designed to protect her failed to do so. Following an extensive investigation by the City Attorney's Office, the Department released Justice and Courage: A Blueprint for San Francisco's Response to Domestic Violence in April 2002.[18] This report called for significant reforms to the criminal justice system's response to domestic violence and specifies, by City or regulatory agency, 100 policy recommendations. The Commission established an Oversight Panel, composed of community advocates and experts in the field of domestic violence, and chaired by a Commissioner to ensure that the recommendations are implemented to improve the City's response to domestic violence. The goal of the Justice and Courage Project is to create a coordinated and seamless system response to domestic violence, and to monitor the implementation of the recommendations outlined by the Justice and Courage Report.

Since the creation of the Justice and Courage Oversight Panel (Panel), the Department has provided staff support and leadership to the Panel and its multidisciplinary committees, all of which work to examine and improve the policies and practices that guide the criminal and legal systems' response to incidences of domestic violence. Panel members represent a diverse array of community stakeholders, including service providers, advocates, and legal professionals. Additionally, the Panel has strived to maintain a membership that reflects the diversity of San Francisco. Of the current eight members, three are bilingual and one is native Spanish-speaking. In regards to gender, the chair or co-chairs have always been women, and men have always participated on the panel. The analysis noted, however, that individuals with children may be underrepresented.

Following is a list of the organizations and public agencies who have participated in the Justice and Courage Project:

Public Agencies

  • Adult Probation Department
  • Office of Citizen Complaints
  • Department of Children, Youth and Their Families -SafeStart Initiative
  • District Attorney's Office- Domestic Violence Unit, Victim Services Division
  • Emergency Communications Department
  • Police Department
  • Sheriff's Department
  • Superior Court

Community-based Partners

  • Bay Area Legal Aid
  • Domestic Violence Consortium
  • Filipina Women's Network
  • Greenbook Project
  • Institute on Aging
  • Mujeres Unidas y Activas

a. Budget

Presently, one Policy Analyst oversees the work of the Justice and Courage Project. This position was initially funded by a federal grant from the Department of Justice Office on Violence Against Women for a 2-year renewable period. After 4 years of grant funding, the Department felt that maintaining staff support for the Justice and Courage Project was critically important to its mission and its goals for women and girls and the Commission successfully advocated for and secured funding from the Mayor to create a permanent staff position. This Policy Analyst is responsible for advancing the goals set forth by the Justice and Courage Project.

b. Programs

The Justice and Courage Project is currently focused on data collection, systems evaluation, and training issues. Highlights from the work of the Justice and Courage Project follow.

1) JUSTIS Domestic Violence Query and Reporting Service

The Department has been instrumental in advocating for the full implementation of JUSTIS, a city-wideeffort to computerize the paper records of criminal justice agencies and facilitate digitized exchange of information among agencies, as this will have a significant impact on the criminal justice system's capacity to respond to domestic violence and its ability to hold offenders accountable. The Department has partnered with the Department of Telecommunications and Information Services to create a Domestic Violence Query and Reporting Service. This software program will enable the Department to access data on closed domestic violence cases, from ethnicity of victims to prior stalking charges of perpetrators, to identify key trends and recommend policies and funding allocations. The service, expected to be deployed on a field testing basis by the end of 2007, will provide valuable disaggregated data that will further improve decision-making, not only at the Department, but city-wide.

2) Domestic Violence Victim Safety and Accountability Audit

The Department adopted an innovative evaluation methodology to evaluate the domestic violence response systems: a Domestic Violence Victim Safety and Accountability Audit. This innovative approach will employ ethnography as a means to evaluate the reforms introduced since the release of theJustice & Courage Report. The centerpiece of the audit is a "blitz week" in which a multidisciplinary team of criminal justice personnel and community-based professionals and advocates, will examine how workers in the system are organized to think about or act upon victim safety in domestic violence cases by observing key domestic violence response agencies and personnel. While smaller U.S. cities have conducted similar audits (e.g., Nashville, Minneapolis) San Francisco will be the first major metropolitan city to adopt this methodology. Results of the audit should be available for public release by the end of the year. The combination of qualitative and quantitative data resulting from the audit will further inform the gender analysis of the Department. Results are expected to be released in January 2007.

3) Domestic Violence Response Cross-Training Institute

Following a planning process spanning 2 years, the Justice & Courage Oversight Panel submitted a proposal to the Blue Shield of California Foundation to fund a Domestic Violence ResponseCross-Training Institute for first-response criminal justice personnel. Blue Shield has agreed to fund the pioneering Institute with a two-year grant of $200,000. Scheduled to be launched in spring 2007, the Institute will be conducted in close collaboration with community-based trainers and will train personnel from Emergency Communications, the Police Department, the District Attorney's Office, the Adult Probation Department, and the Sheriff's Office, using a victim-centered, case-based approach. By expanding training in this way, the Department seeks to improve the manner in which criminal justice agencies respond to domestic violence victims and promote a seamless response. The goal of the Institute is to provide criminal justice personnel with updated, culturally competent, and victim-centered training on domestic violence.

B. Implementation of Women and Girls' Human Rights

The Department is charged with implementing the CEDAW Ordinance and, as evidenced by the work outlined above, continues to strive for full implementation on a city-widelevel.

1. CEDAW Committee

The Five-Year Action Plan identified several priorities to move the City towards full implementation of CEDAW, with an overall vision that the public and private sector eventually adopt and integrate CEDAW into their structures.[19] The CEDAW Committee convened for the first time in September 2004 and has focused on creating CEDAW and human rights trainings. The Committee is in the process of reviewing and monitoring departments that have previously undergone a gender analysis, simplifying the gender analysis process, and selecting key programs to undergo analysis in the future. The need for education on CEDAW principles remains, and continues to be one of the challenges facing the Department as it moves CEDAW forward.

2. Outreach

Department staff have provide technical assistance to the following locations that are interested in implementing CEDAW locally and possibly pursuing a CEDAW Ordinance: New York City, Santa Clara County, Alameda County, Los Angeles County, and Santa Cruz.

3. National Recognition

In June 2006, the National Association of Counties (NACo), the only national organization that represents county governments, recognized San Francisco for its public policy work developing the CEDAW gender analysis methodology promote human rights at the local level. This pioneering approach was recognized as a valuable tool for other government bodies to utilize because it ensures an equitable approach to government that upholds the human rights of women and girls, provides key information for policy makers, and promotes government accountability.

C. The Human Rights of Girls

In keeping with the CEDAW principle of ensuring the right of girls to education and social services, the Department has gathered external data and partnered with the San Francisco Unified School District to address safety concerns.

1. Girls Report

The Commission and Department underscored their commitment to girls and young women with the 2003 release of A Report on Girls, Benchmarks for the Future.[20] This report, based on the data collection protocls developed by the CEDAW Task Force, provides a snapshot of girls in San Francisco in the areas of social, economic, educational, health, and criminal justice environments. With then important benchmarks in hand, the Department and community-based organizations are now in a position to use the data for planning and policy development for girls. The creation of centrally located girl's data has proved invaluable. The chart below, excerpted from the Girls Report, is an example of data collected by age and ethnicity. [Note: see Word version of document for chart.]

This graph shows that 1 in 3 African American girls who reside in San Francisco live in poverty. The report also highlighted a previously noted trend: African American girls are not only disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system, but also in most social services programs, notably the foster care system. Recent research indicates that girls in the juvenile justice system are disproportionately African American.

Findings from the report revealed other new and significant trends for girls in San Francisco. For example, in terms of self image, the report found that a majority of both public middle and high school girls were dissatisfied with their weight and almost 1 in 5 high school girls diet without any perceived need. Over 1/4 of public high school girls and 1/5 of middle school girls reported that they were harassed about their appearance and 3/4 of middle school girls reported being depressed. During a public hearing on the report findings, speakers highlighted the lack of media literacy programs to teach young women to resist the numerous media influences that shape their self-image. As recently as April 2006, the Mayor's Office and the Department of Public Health held a Mayor's Shape-Up Summit focusing of promoting health life styles. Presenters noted the influence marketing had on young people's health and choices, yet media literacy was not outlined as a priority in the Summit's priority actions. The Girls Report continues to serve as a valuable reference for policy makers.

2. Partnership with the San Francisco Unified School District

In June 2005, the Department reprinted the Girls Report and provided over 300 copies to San Francisco Unified School District administrators. In addition, Department staff met with school district staff to initiate a dialogue about steps to improve sexual harassment and violence prevention programming.

More recently, the Department has been involved with the San Francisco Unified School District which was cited by the United States Office of Civil Rights for violating Title IX requirements on measures to ensure prohibitions on sexual harassment. The Department has worked collaboratively with the School District's Office of Equity Assurance and staff attended mandated trainings of school district personnel presented by the United States Office of Civil Rights. In addition, the Department has formed a partnership with the Youth Leadership Institute, school district administrators, and Partner Agencies to create a comprehensive training program that will address the needs of students, teachers, campus and district administrators to address sexual harassment on school grounds.

3. Commission on the Status of Women Girls Committee

With the release of the Girls Report and recent attention surrounding girls' issues, the Commission has taken pro-active steps to meet the unique needs of girls through the development of a Girls Committee. This committee, scheduled to launch in early 2007, will be composed of local girls, ages 13 to 17 years old, who will meet monthly to discuss and advocate on issues directly impacting girls, ranging from education to health, socioeconomic, and criminal justice issues. The Committee will also provide a youth voice to advise the Commission on issues impacting young women and girls. Currently, Department staff members are visiting local youth organizations, meeting with young women, and distributing announcements and applications for the Girls Committee.

D. Economic Development

An example of responding to community input can be found in the Department's work on the labor and safety conditions of exotic dancers. This issue was first brought to the Department's attention by exotic dancers who alleged that clubs were charging the dancers nightly stage fees as a requirement of their employment. In order to pay these fees, and keep their jobs, dancers testified that they were encouraged, and even forced, to commit acts of prostitution in private booths that exist in nearly all of San Francisco's exotic dance clubs, despite provisions in the San Francisco Police Code banning such private enclosures. The Commission began an 18-month investigation that included extensive verbal and written testimony by current and former dancers on the labor and safety conditions of these clubs. Additional testimony came from the California State Labor Commission Department on Industrial Relations, police officers, dance club owners and their attorneys, attorneys representing dancers in class action suits, and many community members.

After months of testimony and information gathering as part of the investigation, the Commission developed legislation that would underscore the state prohibition on fees to work, introduce safety measures, including a ban on private booths, and create an enforcement mechanism to ensure fair labor practices and a safe work environment in the exotic dance clubs. Draft legislation was approved by the Commission on the Status of Women and is now being handled by a member of the Board of Supervisors.

E. Assistance to Underserved Communities

The Department strives to provide technical assistance and referrals to the public regarding women and girls in need of information and referrals. Periodically, the Department releases a Social Services Directory for Women. This resource was last updated in 2005. In addition, the Department maintains an extensive paper-based job library, where community organizations, private companies, and City employment announcements are posted for individuals, particularly those who lack internet access, to review as part of their job search. The job library is open to both women and men, but is primarily utilized by women. Our data collection in this area could be improved. We lack a dedicated job announcement distribution system, and while there are frequent visitors in the office for the job library, we do not have an accurate count of who is utilizing the service, where they are referred from, and the success of the service after their visit.

F. Department Administration

As much as possible the Executive Director has attempted to incorporate CEDAW principles into the administration of the Department. Identifying areas for improvement has also been a priority.

 

EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES

The Department of the Status of Women is a small and dynamic office with a staff of 8 (which includes two part-time people who split one position). Women have dominated staff positions at the Department, and only within the past 3 years has the Department had a man on staff in a permanent position. Over 60% of staff are people of color and the most recently hired employee is fluent in Spanish. The Commission is equally diverse in terms of racial/ethnic breakdown. Currently, all members of the Commission are female and 3/4 are women of color. Historically, men have sat on the Commission, but this has not been the case for the past 7 years.

There is some diversity of classifications and salaries within department staff positions, with a woman of color filling the highest staff position at the Department. When compared to other small departments within the City, the executive director's salary is on the low end of the scale and only one formal executive management position exists. Because of the Department's small size, there is limited opportunity for upward management growth or advancement within the Department.

The Department welcomes the opportunity to count interns and volunteers as a key part of the staff and critical to the Department's overall mission. Over the past 3 years, we have had over 7 interns, including local high school students, hired through the Mayor's YouthWorks Program, and other interns from universities and colleges, representing both gender and ethnic diversity. Since fall 2005, the Department has hosted a Graduate Policy Intern from the San Francisco State University Graduate School of Social Work during the academic school year. These graduate interns are required to complete 720 academic hours for the year, and work closely with staff on numerous issues affecting women and girls. The Department has also hosted undergraduate policy interns, for course credit, from universities across the country during the summer months. Interns continue their education and fill critical roles in the work environment, addressing employment and work life issues, as well as overall health issues for women, including violence and violence prevention.

2. Work-Life Balance

The Department is proud of its policy work to promote work-life balance policies and options, a centerpiece being the Work-Life Policies and Practices Survey Report released in 2001. This survey of all City and County departments grew out of the gender analysis process of the original 6 departments, and focuses on the need of City employees for alternative work options.

In the last 5 years, this important work has grown tremendously. In 2002, San Francisco passed a new parental leave charter amendment (Measure I - Paid Parental Leave County of San Francisco) and the Department of Human Resources now promotes both a telecommuting program and flexible schedule options.[21] Given our small staff size, the office has struggled with the right balance between promoting work-life balance polices for all staff, regardless of children, and striving for office coverage and the effective delivery of services. The Department on the Status of Women has offered a telecommuting policy for the past 2 years and a flexible work option for the past 7 years. Staff members are encouraged to create their own schedule, within parameters, that meet both work and family obligations. Flexible work options are available and encouraged.

3. Training and Recruitment

Given limited resources, the Department strives to provide training opportunities for all staff, seeking first and foremost free or low-cost community trainings and, second, city-wide training opportunities for where Union monies can be accessed. There is a newfound energy and emphasis on staff training and professional development. Staff should be cross-trained in key areas of operations.

Similar to previous departments that have undergone gender analysis, this Department's recruitment efforts could be improved and expanded. The Department's recruitment efforts meet minimum standards set forth by the City and County of San Francisco, but due to the specialized nature of our work, more attention could be paid to this critical and key area. While the Civil Service Rules have been improved, there are still gaps that do not address the specialized needs of small departments. The current Civil Service job descriptions can often sound bureaucratic, making important policy positions less than desirable for candidates. An example of this is the office reception position. As a funder of community programs working to eliminate violence against women, the Department receives numerous requests for information or referrals of a sensitive nature. Staff must be able to provide information in an effective and comprehensive manner while maintaining confidentiality and professionalism. The challenge comes when front desk staff, usually hired on a temporary basis due to budget constraints, is trained and familiar with services, but then must be released from employment due to temporary employment status.

The analysis also revealed, what other department's have struggled with, the need for a more extensive recruitment program when job openings occur. When recruiting for a job opening, the Department posts the job announcement on the Department's website, as well as the Department of Human Resources website. The job announcement is also distributed via email to a number of community lists, including the Women's Leadership Alliance and California Women's Agenda, and any departmental lists of individuals requesting Commission agendas or meeting notices. While this approach may meet the minimum standards set forth by the City and County of San Francisco, the Department should embark on broad recruitment efforts that would include personal contacts and targeted solicitations to diverse groups of applicants or at job fairs.

4. Safety

Safety at work is an important issue and the Department recognizes staff concerns about safety. As we are located on the ground floor, our front door is locked at all times and opened by a buzzer, thus alerting staff to the arrival of visiting individuals. Front desk staff are encouraged to attend trainings provided by the by Department of Human Resources for dealing with potentially difficult customers and clients. The Department's Personnel Policies and Procedures handbook clearly outlines steps for ensuring everyone's safety and security, such as maintaining two staff members in the office at any given time. The Department has a zero tolerance policy for violence or harassment or discrimination in the workplace, as does the City.

 

RECOMMENDATIONS

It is important to bear in mind the role the Department on the Status of Women plays in the advancement of women and girls in San Francisco and to understand that we are not limited to the issues outlined in our mission, but are empowered to effect change and impact all aspects of public and private life in the interest of promoting equitable opportunities and outcomes for women and girls. The following Department recommendations are made to promote the human rights of women and girls in the City and County of San Francisco.

A. Budget

  1. Mission – Review the mission of the Commission and Department on the Status of Women and revise as necessary to reflect, more accurately, the human rights principles outlined in CEDAW.
  1. Commission Appointments – Outreach to underrepresented communities to increase representation of diverse communities in public/political life, i.e., appointment to local Boards and Commissions.
  1. Increase Resources for Violence Prevention Funding – Develop a long-term funding plan to increase resources for violence prevention funding. In particular, review voter mandated bonds and the structure of the Marriage License Fee.
  1. Performance Measures – Review and revise the Department's performance measures to evaluate policies and their impact on women and girls' lives.

B. Services

  1. Needs Assessment – In order to understand the current climate and determine the changing needs of San Francisco communities, the Department should conduct a needs assessment in advance of the upcoming VAW grant cycle. The role of economic disparity and access to resources should be explored.
  1. Program Evaluation – Initiate an independent program evaluation of current partner agencies to gauge client experience and expectations.
  1. Community Outreach – Continue to outreach to community groups, especially underserved communities. Continue to convene Commission meetings in the community and conduct public outreach for regularly scheduled Commission meetings.
  1. Language Access – Continue to expand the Department's efforts to reach non-English speaking populations.
  1. Justice and Courage – Continue to monitor the implementation of the Justice and Courage recommendations and ensure that the results of the Safety and Accountability Audit are fully examined and that a strategic action plan for implementation is developed.

C. Women and Girls' Human Rights

  1. Department Gender Analysis – Complete the Gender Analysis for the Department, present it before the Commission on the Status of Women, and monitor its implementation.
  1. Gender Analysis Monitoring – Ensure that departments that have undergone gender analysis are monitored and continue to receive feedback and assistance as requested and necessary.
  1. Gender Analysis Guidelines – Revise the gender analysis guidelines and select new departments or programs and private sector companies or nonprofits to undergo gender analysis.
  1. Community Outreach – Outreach to government and non-government organizations to educate and train on CEDAW principles. Encourage other local, state, and national municipalities to adopt and promote CEDAW.
  1. CEDAW – Maintain relationships with international organizations working on and advancing CEDAW and keep them informed about San Francisco's progress and local implementation.

D. Right to Health Care

  1. Violence Prevention – Continue to work with community organizations to develop sexual harassment awareness and violence prevention curriculum.
  1. Health – Continue outreach efforts to underserved communities about existing health resources.

E. Human Rights of Girls to Education and Social Services

  1. Girls Committee – Convene a Girls Committee of the Commission and train girls and young women to utilize a human rights approach to policy analysis and advocacy.
  1. Media Policy Development – Develop a public policy and media literacy campaign to ensure healthy life choices for young women.

F. Department Administration

  1. Work-Life Policies – Advance and model both work-life balance personnel practices and promote work-life balance policies throughout San Francisco.
  1. Recruitment – Promote model recruitment strategies to outreach to diverse groups and individuals, with a focus on ways to recruit women to non-traditional fields.
  1. Data Collection – Develop a voluntary form for individuals to complete, which includes a variety of questions for data collection to be used at Commission meetings and in conjunction with the Department's job library.
  1. Internships – Work to secure funds for paid internship positions in order to make intern opportunities available to an economically diverse pool of candidates.

APPENDIX

San Francisco Department on the Status of Women's Violence Against Women (VAW)

Intervention, Prevention, and Education Grants Program FY 2004-2005, 12 Month Performance Summary

San Francisco Department on the Status of Women's Violence Against Women (VAW)

Intervention, Prevention, and Education Grants Program

FY 2004-2005

12 Month Performance Summary

The Department on the Status of Women distributed grants totaling $1,761,255 to twenty (20) community based organizations that provided services in six areas including Crisis Lines; Intervention & Advocacy; Legal; Prevention, Education, and Training; Shelter; and Transitional Housing.

Total Number of Unduplicated Individuals Served:

11,142 individuals received services among the six program areas provided by the 20 community based organizations in FY 2004-2005.

 

1. Crisis Line

Total Funding: $ 256,914 15% of total Grant Funding

Providers: (2) 
 

Unduplicated Individuals Served by Program:

Ethnicity

Female

Male

Sub-Total

% of Total

Unknown

3,189

102

3,291

57.92%

White

785

3

788

13.9%

Latino

716

0

716

12.6%

African American

494

2

496

8.7%

Asian Pacific Islander

260

1

261

4.6%

Mixed Race

98

0

98

1.7%

Middle Eastern

21

0

21

0.4%

Native American

10

1

11

0.2%

Total

5,573

109

5,682

 

 

LBGT Identity

 

% of Total

Lesbian

49

 

Bisexual

27

 

Transgender

18

 

Gay

5

 

Total

99

1.74%

 

Units of Services Provided by Program

Agency Partners responded to 12,594 calls and provided 2,753 hours of support services with 7 staff at 3.12 FTE funded by the Department.

Service

# of Calls

Contracted Amount

% of Completion

Crisis Line Calls

12,594

10,075

125%

 

Support Service

# of Hours

Contracted Amount

% of Completion

Counseling – Individual

1,698

570

298%

Trainings

518

350

148%

Case Management

481

643

75%

Counseling – Group

56

192

29%

Totals:

2,753

1,755

157%

 

2. Intervention & Advocacy

Total Funding: $ 227,229 13% of total Grant Funding

Providers: (3)

Unduplicated Individuals Served by Program:

Ethnicity

Female

Male

Sub-Total

% of Total

Asian Pacific Islander

282

167

449

93.0%

White

23

2

25

5.2%

Unknown

4

0

4

0.8%

Latino

3

0

3

0.6%

African American

2

0

2

0.4%

Middle Eastern

0

0

0

 

Native American

0

0

0

 

Mixed Race

0

0

0

 

Total

314

169

483

 

 

LBGT Identity

 

% of Total

Lesbian

1

 

Bisexual

0

 

Gay

0

 

Transgender

0

 

Total

1

0.2%

 

Units of Services Provided by Program

Agency Partners provided 4,017 hours of advocacy services with 10 staff at 3.62 FTE funded by the Department.

Service

# of Hours of Service

Contracted Amount

% of Completion

Presentations

97

66

147%

Outreach Events

94

72

131%

Information & Referral

131

125

105%

Counseling – Individual

608

600

101%

Counseling – Group

165

165

100%

Accompaniment

1,456

1,642

89%

Case Management

1,538

1,906

81%

Trainings

59

222

27%

Totals:

4,017

3,459

113%

3. Legal

Total Funding: $ 246,698 14% of total Grant Funding

Providers: (4)

 

Unduplicated Individuals Served by Program:

Ethnicity

Female

Male

Sub-Total

% of Total

Latino

333

0

333

25.5%

Asian Pacific Islander

321

3

324

24.8%

Unknown

211

4

215

16.5%

African American

207

0

207

15.8%

White

194

2

196

15.0%

Mixed Race

24

0

24

1.8%

Middle Eastern

5

0

5

0.4%

Native American

3

0

3

0.2%

Total

1,298

9

1,307

 

 

LBGT Identity

 

% of Total

Bisexual

14

 

Lesbian

12

 

Transgender

5

 

Gay

1

 

Total

32

2.45%

 

Units of Services Provided by Program

Agency Partners provided 15,849 hours of legal services and 5,014 hours of support services with 15 staff at 3.7 FTE funded by the Department.

Service

# of Hours

Contracted Amount

% of Completion

Legal

15,849

14,418

110%

 

Units of Services Provided by Program

Support Service

# of Hours

Contracted Amount

% of Completion

Outreach Events

17

5

340%

Trainings

1,073

420

255%

Accompaniment

3,336

1,740

192%

Advocacy

252

200

126%

Presentations

42

62

68%

Events

294

603

49%

Totals:

5,014

3,030

165%

 

4. Prevention, Education, & Training

Total Funding: $ 380,392 22% of total Grant Funding

Providers: (8)

Unduplicated Individuals Served by Program:

 

Ethnicity

Female

Male

Sub-Total

% of Total

Asian Pacific Islander

741

411

1,152

31.7%

White

618

190

808

22.2%

Latino

464

133

597

16.4%

Unknown

250

200

450

12.37%

African American

287

107

394

10.8%

Mixed Race

117

45

162

4.5%

Middle Eastern

40

17

57

1.6%

Native American

14

5

19

0.5%

Total

2,531

1,108

3,639

 

 

LBGT Identity

 

% of Total

Lesbian

229

 

Bisexual

58

 

Transgender

51

 

Gay

43

 

Total

381

10.47%

 

Units of Services Provided by Program

Agency Partners provided 3,884 hours of educational activities with 28 staff @ 7.43 FTE funded by the Department.

 

 

Service

# of Hours of Service

Contracted Amount

% of Completion

Media Contacts

5

1

500%

Events

724

489

148%

Trainings

1,202

1,210

99%

Outreach Events

27

40

68%

Advocacy

935

1.395

67%

Counseling – Group

108

179

60%

Presentations

35

60

58%

Case Management

122

306

40%

Totals:

3,884

4,293

90%

 

 

Service

# of Pieces

Material Distribution

6,484

 

5. Shelters

Total Funding: $ 476,968 27% of total Grant Funding

Providers: (3)

 

Unduplicated Individuals Served by Program:

 

 

Ethnicity

Female

Male

Sub-Total

% of Total

Asian Pacific Islander

65

18

83

35.0%

Latino

48

11

59

24.9%

African American

36

7

43

18.1%

White

27

2

29

12.2%

Mixed Race

8

0

8

3.4%

Middle Eastern

2

0

2

0.8%

Native American

1

1

2

0.8%

Unknown

4

7

11

4.64%

Total

191

46

237

 

 

 

LBGT Identity

 

% of Total

Bisexual

3

 

Transgender

1

 

Gay

0

 

Lesbian

0

 

Total

4

1.69%

 

Units of Services Provided by Program

Agency Partners provided 10,055 bednights of shelter and 5,878 hours of support services to victims of domestic violence and their families by 15 staff at 8.06 FTE funded by the Department.

Service

# of Bed Nights

Contracted Amount

% of Completion

Bed Nights

10,955

10,055

108.95%

Indiv. Turn Aways

137

 

 

 

Support Service

# of Hours

Contracted Amount

% of Completion

Counseling - Group

723

437

165.45%

Counseling - Individual

2,642

1,894

139.49%

Advocacy

770

600

128%

Case Management

2,880

2,442

117.94%

Accompaniment

345

335

102.98%

Totals:

7,360

5,708

128.94%

 

6. Transitional Housing

Total Funding: $ 173,054 10% of total Grant Funding

Providers: (3)

Unduplicated Individuals Served by Program:

 

Ethnicity

Female

Male

Sub-Total

% of Total

Asian Pacific Islander

20

4

24

33.3%

Latino

16

6

22

30.6%

African American

7

2

9

12.5%

White

7

1

8

11.1%

Mixed Race

3

1

4

5.6%

Unknown

4

0

4

5.6%

Native American

1

0

1

1.4%

Middle Eastern

0

0

0

0.0%

Total

58

14

72

 

 

LBGT Identity

 

% of Total

Bisexual

2

 

Transgender

1

 

Gay

0

 

Lesbian

0

 

Total

3

4.17%

Units of Services Provided by Program

Agency Partners provided 14,705 bednights of shelter and 2,454 hours of support services to victims of domestic violence and their families by 4 staff at 2.45 FTE funded by the Department.

 

Service

# of Bed Nights

Contracted Amount

% of Completion

Bed Nights

14,705

14,462

102%

Indiv. Turn Aways

358

 

 

 

Support Service

# of Hours

Contracted Amount

% of Completion

Counseling - Group

110

78

141%

Accompaniment

331

250

132%

Counseling - Individual

1,067

1,000

107%

Case Management

665

625

106%

Advocacy

281

300

94%

Totals:

2,454

2,253

109%

 

 

[2] The San Francisco CEDAW Ordinance is available at the Department on the Status of Women website: https://sfgov.org/dosw/node/229 A number of other cities, namely Los Angeles, San Jose, Santa Cruz and New York, are in various stages of developing their own CEDAW Ordinances based on the San Francisco model.

[3] These principles are among those prioritized in the CEDAW Action Plan adopted by the Commission in February 2003. Available at the Department website at https://sfgov.org/dosw/cedaw-action-plan

[4] Signed by President Jimmy Carter, but not yet ratified by the Senate, in part due to the debate over the reproductive rights. Meanwhile 185 countries (as of November 2006) have adopted the treaty. For a complete list of signatories, including Afghanistan, Iraq, and Korea, refer to the United Nations website at https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-8&chapter=4&clang=_en

[5] The full text of the CEDAW treaty is available at the above website.

[6] The final gender analysis reports and progress reports are available at the Department website: https://sfgov.org/dosw/gender-analysis-reports

[7] Commission members as well as the Executive Director are all Mayoral appointees.

[8] United States Census Bureau, State and County Quick Facts. (https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/sanfranciscocitycalifornia,US/PST045218), 2000.

[9] Currently, the Department receives a portion of marriage license fees in order to fund domestic violence shelters. These fees are set by the state legislature, however, so any increases require state-wide support.

[10]See Appendix for a detailed FY04-05 Violence Against Women 12-Month Performance Summary and Partner Agency Quarterly Report Form.

[11] Price, J.L., Lee, S. Soo-Jin and Quiroga, Szkupinski, December 2000, Violence Against Women and Girls in San Francisco: Meeting the Needs of Survivors. <ftp/uploadedfiles/dosw/projects/VAW/reports/vawreport.pdf>

[12] United States Census, 2000, https://www.census.gov/

[13] Shields, J.P. Shields, 2006,  I Tried to Stop Them Children's Exposure to Domestic Violence in San Francisco, Education, Training & Research Associates. San Francisco, CA.

[14] United States Census Bureau, State and County Quick Facts. (https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/sanfranciscocitycalifornia,US/PST045218), 2000.

[15] Shields, J.P., 2006 I Tried to Stop Them: Children's Exposure to Domestic Violence in San Francisco, p. 12 Education, Training & Research Associates. San Francisco, CA.

[16] Ibid.

[17] McDonnell, K.A. and Abdulla, S.E., 2001. Project Aware. Asian/Pacific Islander Domestic Violence Resource Project. Washington, D.C.

[18] The report Justice and Courage: A Blueprint for San Francisco's Response to Domestic Violence is available at index.aspx?page=150.

[19] The Five-Year Action Plan was adopted by the Commission on the Status of Women in February 2003 and is available on the Department's website index.aspx?page=131.

[20] A Report on Girls, Benchmarks for the Future is available on the Department's website index.aspx?page=190.

[21] San Francisco Charter Appendix A Employment Provisions A8.365 Compensation During Parental Leave.