The Community Advocacy Project (CAP)

Designed for and tested with survivors of domestic abuse who have utilized shelters. Can be expanded to non-shelter users.

The Community Advocacy Project involves providing home-based and community-based advocacy services for survivors of intimate partner abuse. Highly trained paraprofessionals, receiving intensive supervision, work with survivors of domestic abuse (and their children), helping them obtain the community resources and social support they desire. This is an empowerment-based, strengths-focused intervention designed to increase women's quality of life and decrease their risk of re-abuse.

Cris M. Sullivan, PhD

• Agency/Affiliation: Michigan State University
• Website: https://cap.vaw.msu.edu/
• Email: sulliv22@msu.edu
• Phone: (517) 353-8867

Nicole Allen, PhD

• Agency/Affiliation: University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana
• Website: https://cap.vaw.msu.edu/
• Email: allenne@illinois.edu
• Phone: (217) 333-6739

The goals of The Community Advocacy Project (CAP) are:

• Increase children's self-competence
• Decrease women's depression
• Increase women's quality of life
• Increase women's access to resources
• Increase women's social support
• Increase women's and children's safety

The essential components of The Community Advocacy Project (CAP) include:

• Services offered are community-based and home-based.
• Activities are driven by the women, not the advocates.
• Advocates are proactive and engaged in linking women with community resources.
• Advocates are knowledgeable about available community resources and effective strategies for obtaining them.
• Advocates focus on enhancing women's social support.
• Advocates should be highly trained in empathy and active listening.

Recommended Intensity

4-6 hours per week

Recommended Duration

10 weeks

Delivery Settings

This program is typically conducted in a(n):

• Adoptive Home
• Birth Family Home

Homework

This program does not include a homework component.

Resources Needed to Run Program

The typical resources for implementing the program are:

No specific resources are needed to implement the intervention. It occurs in women's homes and communities

Prerequisite/Minimum Provider Qualifications

Advocates must be highly trained in strengths-based philosophy, domestic abuse dynamics, safety planning, and obtaining community resources. Advocates need ongoing, intensive supervision to ensure they are maintaining fidelity of the model.

Supervisors should have at least two years experience providing domestic abuse services, ideally in community settings. They should be highly trained in empathy, active listening, strengths-based services, and safety planning.

Manual Information

There is a manual that describes how to deliver this program.

Training Information

There is training available for this program.

Training Contact

Training Type/Location:

Tailored to each request

Number of days/hours:

8 hours

Additional Resources:

There currently are additional qualified resources for training:

Nicole Allen
Psychology Dept.
University of Illinois
email: allenne@illinois.edu

Pre-Implementation Materials

There are no pre-implementation assessments to evaluate readiness.

Formal Support for Implementation

There are certified instructors who train on this model and provide technical assistance.

Fidelity Measures

A fidelity measure, in the form of a self-report checklist with scoring instructions, is available from the certified instructors.

Established Psychometrics

There are no established psychometrics for The Community Advocacy Project.

Fidelity Measures Required

No fidelity measures are required for The Community Advocacy Project.

Implementation Guides or Manuals

Training tools and manuals are available by contacting the certified instructors.

Implementation Cost

There are no studies of the costs of The Community Advocacy Project.

Research on How to Implement the Program

Research has not been conducted on how to implement The Community Advocacy Project.

Child Welfare Outcomes: Child/Family Well-Being, Safety

"What is included in the Relevant Published, Peer-Reviewed Research section?"

• Sullivan, C. M., & Bybee, D. I. (1999). Reducing violence using community-based advocacy for women with abusive partners. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67(1), 43–53. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.67.1.43

  Type of Study: Randomized controlled trial

  Number of participants: 278

  Population:

  • Age — 17–61 years
  • Race/Ethnicity — 45% African American, 42% European American, 7% Latina, 4% Other, and 2% Asian American
  • Gender — Not specified
  • Status — Participants were from a shelter program for women with abusive partners.

  Location/Institution: Midwestern U.S.

  Summary:

  The purpose of the study was to test the efficacy of the Community Advocacy Project (CAP) for women who experienced physical abuse. Participants were randomly assigned to CAP or to a comparison condition. Measures utilized include the Conflict Tactics Scale, the Index of Psychological Abuse and the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale. Results indicate that women in the CAP experienced less violence over time, reported higher quality of life and social support, and had less difficulty obtaining community resources. More than twice as many women receiving in the CAP experienced no violence across the two years post-intervention compared to women in the comparison condition who did not receive services. However, there was a significant difference in violence experienced that did not appear until the two-year post-intervention assessment. Limitations include small sample size, and reliance on self-reported measures.

  Length of controlled postintervention follow-up: 2 years.

• Bybee, D. I., & Sullivan, C. M. (2002). The process through which an advocacy intervention resulted in positive changes for women over time. American Journal of Community Psychology, 30(1), 103–132. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014376202459

  Type of Study: Randomized controlled trial

  Number of participants: 278

  Population:

  • Age — 17–61 years
  • Race/Ethnicity — 45% African American, 42% European American, 7% Latina, 4% Other, and 2% Asian American
  • Gender — 100% Female
  • Status — Participants were from a shelter program for women with abusive partners.

  Location/Institution: Midwestern U.S.

  Summary:

  The study used the same sample as Sullivan & Bybee (1999). The purpose of the study was to report on an analysis of the factors influencing the improved outcomes of women who received help from the Community Advocacy Project (CAP) relative to those who did not. Participants were randomly assigned to CAP or to a comparison condition. Measures utilized include the Conflict Tactics Scale. Results indicate that the CAP first resulted in women successfully obtaining desired community resources and increasing their social support, which enhanced their overall quality of life. This improvement in well-being appeared to serve as a protective factor from subsequent abuse, as women who were in the CAP were significantly less likely to be abused at two-year follow-up than were women in the control condition. Limitations include a lack of economic diversity in the sample, and reliance on a small number of measures of re-abuse and well-being.

  Length of controlled postintervention follow-up: 2 years.

• Allen, N. E., Bybee, D. I., & Sullivan, C. M. (2004). Battered women’s multitude of needs: Evidence supporting the need for comprehensive advocacy. Violence Against Women, 10(9), 1015–1035. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801204267658

  Type of Study: Randomized controlled trial

  Number of participants: 278

  Population:

  • Age — 17–61 years
  • Race/Ethnicity — 45% African American, 42% European American, 7% Latina, 4% Other, and 2% Asian American
  • Gender — 100% Female
  • Status — Participants were from a shelter program for women with abusive partners.

  Location/Institution: Midwestern U.S.

  Summary:

  The study used the same sample as Sullivan & Bybee (1999). The purpose of the study was to examine whether the extent to which the Community Advocacy Project (CAP) was effective was dependent on the types of needs that survivors presented. Participants were randomly assigned to CAP or to a comparison condition. Measures utilized include the Effectiveness in Obtaining Resources (EOR) Scale, questions regarding resources needed, and strategies used to obtain resources. Results indicate that there were five distinct subgroups of survivors: one group focused primarily on activities to acquire housing, a second worked more on education and employment, a third focused heavily on legal issues, and two groups were characterized by survivors’ overall activity level over a variety of needs (“high” and “low”). Broad-based advocacy appeared to enhance survivors’ self-reported effectiveness and level of activity in mobilizing needed community resources. Limitations include lack of generalizability to women who did not seek shelter services, and reliance on self-reported measures.

  Length of controlled postintervention follow-up: 2 years.

• Bybee, D., & Sullivan, C. M. (2005). Predicting re-victimization of battered women 3 years after exiting a shelter program. American Journal of Community Psychology, 36(1–2), 85–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-005-6234-5

  Type of Study: Randomized controlled trial

  Number of participants: 124

  Population:

  • Age — 17–61 years
  • Race/Ethnicity — 46% White, 42% African American, 7% Latina, 3% Other, and 2% Asian American
  • Gender — 100% Female
  • Status — Participants were recruited from a domestic violence shelter program.

  Location/Institution: Michigan

  Summary:

  The study used a subset of the same sample as Sullivan & Bybee (1999). The purpose of the study was to examine interpersonal and ecological predictors of re-victimization of a sample of women with abusive partners. Participants were randomly assigned to receive assistance from the Community Advocacy Project (CAP) or to a control condition. Measures utilized include the Conflict Tactics Scale and self-report scales focusing on quality of life, social support, and difficulty obtaining resources. Results indicate that the CAP effect on risk of revictimization did not continue at three years. However, having worked with an advocate three years earlier continued to have a positive impact on reported quality of life and social support. Women also reported less re-abuse if, one year prior to the study, they were employed and/or reported higher quality of life. Limitations include participants had at one time been residents of a domestic violence shelter program and most had low incomes, all lived in a mid-sized urban community, and lack of generalizability to other ethnic populations.

  Length of controlled postintervention follow-up: 3 years.

• Note: The following study was not included in rating The Community Advocacy Project on the Scientific Rating Scale.

  Sullivan, C. M., Bybee, D. I., & Allen, N. E. (2002). Findings from a community-based program for battered women and their children. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 17(9), 915–936. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260502017009001

  Type of Study: Randomized controlled trial

  Number of participants: Adutls: 80, Children: 80

  Population:

  • Age — Adults: Mean=31 years; Children: 6.5-11 years
  • Race/Ethnicity — Adults: 49% Non-Hispanic White, 39% African American, 5% Hispanic/Latina, 5% Multiracial, 1% Asian, and 1% Native American; Children: 44% African American, 40% Non-Hispanic White, 10% Multiracial, 5% Hispanic, and 1% Asian.
  • Gender — Adults: 100% Female ; Children: 55% Female
  • Status — Participants were exiting a domestic violence shelter program (79%) or obtained services from a community-based family service organization (4%) or a state Social Services department (18%).

  Location/Institution: Midsize urban city

  Summary:

  The purpose of the study was to examine the impact of the Community Advocacy Project (CAP) for battered women and their children. Participants were randomly assigned to CAP combined with the Learning Club (TLC) for children or a control group. Measures utilized include a shortened version of the Index of Psychological Abuse, a modified version of the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS), the Self-Perception Profile for Children, the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Inventory, along with several project developed measures. Results indicate that children in the CAP/TLC group reported significantly higher self-competence in several domains compared to children in the control group. Women in the CAP/TLC group had improvements in depression and self-esteem over time. Limitations include differences between the two groups at baseline and the small sample size. Note: Because this study examined CAP combined with TLC, it cannot be used in the rating of CAP, as it is not possible to determine whether the outcomes resulted from CAP, TLC, or the combination.

  Length of controlled postintervention follow-up: 4 months.

• Note: The following study was not included in rating The Community Advocacy Project on the Scientific Rating Scale.

  Allen, N. E., Larsen, S., Trotter, J. L., & Sullivan, C. M. (2013). Exploring the core components of an evidence-based community advocacy program for women with abusive partners. Journal of Community Psychology, 41(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.21502

  Type of Study: Qualitative study

  Number of participants: 51

  Summary:

  The purpose of the study was to examine survivors’ reflections on the Community Advocacy Project (CAP). The study examined the service delivery processes that survivors affirmed or identified as core components of the intervention. Measure utilized include a semi-structured qualitative interview protocol. Results indicate that 3 main service delivery elements contributed to positive outcomes: orientation to the whole person, unconditional validation and acceptance, and an orientation to information provision and action. Limitations include concerns regarding possible bias in the responses. Note: Since this study is a Qualitative study, it was not used in the rating/review process.

• Sullivan, C. M. (2000). A model for effectively advocating for women with abusive partners. In J.P. Vincent & E.N. Jouriles (Eds.), Domestic violence: Guidelines for research-informed practice (pp. 126-143). Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

• Sullivan, C. M. (2003). Using the ESID model to reduce intimate male violence against women. American Journal of Community Psychology, 32(3), 295-303. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:AJCP.0000004749.87629.a3