The bulk of project data came from key stakeholders who were (1) directly involved in the initiative (e.g., actually providing services); (2) indirectly involved in the initiative (e.g.,
FINAL REPORT: “A MULTI-SITE ASSESSMENT OF FIVE COURT-FOCUSED ELDER ABUSE INITIATIVES”
serving on the initiative's advisory committee); (3) tangentially related to the initiative (e.g., other service providers who are not involved in the initiative but who serve the same client base);
and (4) elder abuse victims who had been assisted by the initiative. Key stakeholders represented the following domains:
long-term care ombudsman program
domestic violence services
aging and disability services
lawyers (working for legal aid or in private practice)
victims of elder abuse
Professional stakeholders were identified through snowball sampling. The research team asked key informants to suggest key stakeholders whom we should interview, and then we asked those stakeholders for additional recommendations. The key informants identified victims who had been served by the initiative and who were willing and able to participate in an interview.
We also treated the key informants as key stakeholders and interviewed them during the site visits; the questions asked were different than those we asked in the key informant survey. We interviewed 89 professional stakeholders during or after the site visits and three victims during the site visits.
With input from the advisory committee members and NIJ grant manager, we developed three sets of questions for the key stakeholder interviews. These included:
a basic set of questions that was used for most key stakeholders, with minor tweaking to eliminate questions that were not pertinent to professionals working in certain domains;
an abbreviated version of the basic question set for use with certain judges who were not directly involved in the initiative;
an even shorter version of the basic question set for use with the court’s chief judge;
and
a very short and different set of questions for victims of elder abuse.
Each of the three question sets concluded with an open-ended question asking the stakeholder if there was anything else he or she wanted to say about the initiative.
1. Questions for Most Key Stakeholders
The basic question set used for most key stakeholders was informed by the guidelines and standards for state courts handling cases involving elder abuse (Stiegel 1995; Bureau of Justice
FINAL REPORT: “A MULTI-SITE ASSESSMENT OF FIVE COURT-FOCUSED ELDER ABUSE INITIATIVES”
Assistance 1997; Rothman, Dunlop, and Seff 2006). The 39-question set addressed an array of topics including:
the role of key stakeholders in the initiative;
the impact of the initiative on elder abuse victims, the court, the stakeholder or stakeholder’s agency, and other stakeholders;
the relationship between and expectations for the stakeholder or stakeholder’s agency and the initiative;
process issues such as eligibility criteria, barriers to collaboration, delays in services, accommodations, intra-court coordination, and the use of mediation;
training that had been or would be useful in relation to the initiative’s work;
whether the initiative duplicated existing community resources;
whether there were personality or turf issues that affected the initiative;
funding and staffing;
conflicts of interest and other ethical issues;
evaluation of the initiative by victims or other stakeholders;
whether there are other entities in the community that should be involved in the initiative;
institutionalizing the initiative to withstand changes in personnel, placement, or political support;
strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats; and
implications of the initiative for local and national audiences.
A copy of this question set is provided in Appendix E-1.
2. Questions for Certain Judges
We thought it was important to interview certain judges who were not directly involved with the initiative, some of whom had played a critical role in establishing or supporting the initiative. It made no sense to ask these judges all the same questions that we asked key
stakeholders who were more directly involved in or affected by the initiative, so we truncated the question set for them. The 31-question set focused on:
their role in the initiative;
the impact of the initiative on the court;
process issues, such as eligibility criteria, barriers to collaboration, delays in services, accommodations, intra-court coordination, and the use of mediation;
training that had been or would be useful in relation to the initiative’s work;
funding and staffing;
conflicts of interest and other ethical issues;
evaluation of the initiative by victims, the court, or other stakeholders;
whether there are other entities in the community that should be involved in the initiative;
institutionalizing the initiative to withstand changes in personnel, placement, or political support;
FINAL REPORT: “A MULTI-SITE ASSESSMENT OF FIVE COURT-FOCUSED ELDER ABUSE INITIATIVES”
strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats; and
implications of the initiative for local and national audiences.
A copy of this question set is provided in Appendix E-2.
3. Questions for Chief Judges
We also interviewed the chief judge of the entire court or court division in which the initiative was housed or with which it coordinated. It made no sense to ask these judges all the same questions that we asked key stakeholders who were more directly involved in or affected by the initiative or certain other judges who had played a key role in establishing or supporting the initiative, so we further truncated the question set for them. The 18-question set focused on:
the impact of the initiative on the court;
funding and staffing;
conflicts of interest and other ethical issues;
evaluation of the initiative by victims, the court, or other stakeholders;
whether there are other entities in the community that should be involved in the initiative;
institutionalizing the initiative to withstand changes in personnel, placement, or political support;
strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats; and
implications of the initiative for local and national audiences.
A copy of this question set is provided in Appendix E-3.
4. Questions for Elder Abuse Victims
Reflecting our desire to impose as little as possible on victims’ time, we asked them only seven questions. The issues these questions addressed were:
the problem that the victim was experiencing when he or she encountered the initiative;
how the victim learned about the initiative;
if the project helped him or her and, if yes, how;
if he or she would use the initiative’s services again and, if not, why not;
if a customer satisfaction document was sent or provided; and
whether he or she had any recommendations regarding the initiative.
A copy of this question set is provided in Appendix E-4.