The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

SECTION 4: GAPS AND BARRIERS

4.1 It is evident that, despite substantial progress, there remain some gaps in the support available to victims and witnesses and barriers to accessing this ²⁶. These include gaps and barriers in the criminal justice system itself, gaps in availability of provision and problems with the means of provision.

Gaps and barriers in the criminal justice system

4.2 Although there have been many developments to policy, legislation and the overall system of support, there are seen to remain barriers and gaps in some aspects of the criminal justice system itself (e.g. Office for Criminal Justice Reform, 2004). These include potential gaps in the implementation of legislation, issues with the perceived position of victims in the court process, the adversarial approach, delays and time limits.

Gaps in legislation

4.3 There are seen to be some remaining gaps in legislation, particularly in terms of the implementation or interpretation of existing provisions. For example, although there is legislation in many jurisdictions to enable special measures for victims in court, it has been suggested that there can be differences in implementation and availability. A small number of respondents to the review of services suggested that the provisions of the Vulnerable Witnesses (Scotland) Act (2004) do not go far enough, and that many more women and other potentially vulnerable witnesses should be eligible for measures. It was also suggested at interview that judicial discretion can lead to uncertainty in expectation and experience.

4.4 Concerns have also been raised with the level of protection available to victims of domestic abuse through civil measures and through the court processes. The lack of access to civil legal aid for women experiencing violence, both to pursue actions and to ensure measures of protection can be put in place, was highlighted in the review of services. The time taken with Legal Aid in the pleading process and the decreasing number of lawyers carrying out Legal Aid work were also identified.

4.5 It has also been noted that the impact of some legislation relating to restorative justice has been less than anticipated. There are also other examples of concerns with the translation of new forms of legislation into practice. It was also suggested at interview in the review of services that some protective measures can be somewhat 'toothless'.

The criminal justice process

4.6 There is also seen to be a continuing issue in the balance of the criminal justice process (although this may have lessened). There is a criticism amongst some victims whose cases proceed to trial that, in their view, the process is weighted in favour of offenders. This was raised during interview in the review of services, with the suggestion that witnesses remain 'ancillary'. There have been well-documented problems with sexual assault and rape prosecutions. More broadly, the Office for Criminal Justice Reform (2004) noted that three quarters of the public believed that the criminal justice system respected the rights of defendants, whereas only one third believed it met victims' needs. Branchflower (2004) suggested that victims are often still treated as 'uninvolved bystanders' by the criminal justice system. Both the Home Office (2004a) and the Northern Ireland Office (2004) recognised continuing concerns.

4.7 There are also concerns with the outcome (e.g. Wilson & Klein, 2005), and other aspects of the process, such as plea-bargaining (e.g. Rock, 1998).

The approach

4.8 There are also seen to be issues with the adversarial approach and the consequent treatment of victims and prosecution witnesses (e.g. Brathwaite & Yeboah, 2004). Some highlighted a 'gap' in mechanisms to protect these participants in court. A study by the Northern Ireland Office (2004) of victims' and witnesses' views on their treatment in the criminal justice system suggested that "many were quite distressed by how they had been treated in the witness box and they reported that the behaviour and manner of the defence barrister during cross-examination was quite unacceptable" (p.78).

4.9 Many studies of victims of rape and of domestic abuse have highlighted inappropriate behaviour by defence advocates and solicitors (e.g. Jordan, 2004). It was also suggested in the review of services (in the survey and interviews) that the way defence agents question witnesses remains an issue. Wider issues posed by the court process for victims of violence against women were also identified.

Delays and time limits

4.10 Delays in the legal process are also problematic for victims and witnesses and are seen to persist ²⁷. It was suggested during interview in the review of services, however, that these may lessen in Scotland for some with the implementation of new developments through the Criminal Procedure (Amendment) (Scotland) Act 2004 (following Lord Bonomy's recommendations). Since April 2005, preliminary hearings have been introduced in the High Court, designed to reduce the level of delays in cases which proceed to trial and to remove the need for witnesses to attend court until a trial. One of the objectives of the domestic abuse court is to reduce delays in the process, with an intention that cases should proceed to trial in not more than 6 weeks.

4.11 Delays on the trial day have also been highlighted. The Scottish Court Service User Satisfaction Survey (2004) identified that satisfaction at court was strongly correlated with the length of time spent waiting. Another issue identified in this context was the lack of information being provided to witnesses about the progress of cases they are waiting to testify in. In the 2005 survey, it was found that, excluding previous contact as an explanatory variable, respondents' satisfaction with the court staff's attempts to let them know the reasons for having to wait another day was the most important predictor of overall satisfaction. SCS is addressing this issue through service standards and revisiting the agreement with the Crown Office, but other agencies also hold information.

4.12 There are also seen to be time-related gaps in investigation and prosecution. Most jurisdictions have legal or practical limitations on when crimes, such as sexual abuse and other crimes, can be investigated. There is also frustration evident with time-limited Criminal Injuries Compensation (e.g. Victim Support, 2002).

Gaps in types of services and availability of provision

4.13 Overall, about half of all organisations in the postal strand of the review of services believed that there are gaps in the services available to victims and witnesses in Scotland. The literature review also suggested some issues.

Specialist support to victims and witnesses of crime

4.14 It was found that, despite the provision of Victim Support and VIA in all areas, there are perceived gaps in the provision of specialist support to victims and witnesses. The main problem identified with these services (despite the growth in provision) is that not all of those who require support receive or use services. There are also issues about services' ability to meet demand.

4.15 Specific gaps have been identified for people who do not report crimes, or whose cases are not taken forward. While there are many victims whose crimes are unreported, few self-refer to Victim Support. Victim Support (2004) noted that less than half of all crimes are reported to the police and only about 6% of victims of reported crimes see their cases come to court. Some crimes are particularly recognised as being under-reported (e.g. racially motivated crime, domestic abuse, and childhood sexual abuse) for well-documented reasons (e.g. Mendel, 1995; Mirrlees-Black 1999). A lot of minor crime is also under-reported. Police forces are addressing this, for example through their use of reporting via websites.

4.16 There are some gaps in coverage of parts of the services. VIA targets some groups of victims, but not all are included. The Witness Service is not funded to make provision in District or Appeal Courts.

4.17 It has also been noted that witnesses who are not themselves victims may be less likely to come into contact with some specialist service providers, although clearly many will have contact with the Witness Service. The Witness Service works with 45,000 witnesses who are not victims and this is the largest category of users of the Witness Service. It was suggested in the review of services, however, that there may be a lack of support to witnesses who are not victims beyond the immediate support which is available for their appearances in court.

4.18 There is also some concern that the requirements of the justice process (e.g. the principle of 'orality') limit the assistance some victims and witnesses can receive from these services. Riding (1999) noted that:

"It is an unfortunate indictment of our criminal justice system that an organisation whose clear aim is to assist witnesses is hindered in doing so because of certain features of the system which are inherently, and arguably unnecessarily, unpleasant for witnesses." (p.418)

4.19 There were also some issues raised at interview in the review of services. Although the developments and improvements of the Bonomy reforms were recognised, it was suggested that the limited use of agreed evidence may mean that more witnesses are being cited than may be necessary. There was also some concern about the number of witnesses having to attend court who are not ultimately required to give evidence as a result of changed pleas.

Other specialist services, self-help groups and campaigning organisations

4.20 There are also gaps in the provision of other specialist services (e.g. Mawby, 2004), with variation by offence type and evidence of unmet need. Some of the gaps relate to addressing the specific needs of the groups identified in Section 1, with almost all of these groups identified.

4.21 The most commonly noted gap from the review of services related to provision to women, and to children and young people. One respondent suggested that "women and children are often lost in legal process and children not appropriately supported".

4.22 Some service providers in the review of services, and not only those working in these areas, noted the lack of specific provision for some groups. These included, for example, disabled people (with mental and physical impairments and learning disabilities), LGBT people, people from minority ethnic communities, prisoners, asylum seekers and refugees.

4.23 Additionally, a number of services (particularly Women's Aid and some counselling services) identified that they could not meet demand from men and women with drug and alcohol issues, or experiencing mental health issues. This is more likely to be the case in services with an element either of one to one working, or groupwork in a counselling or therapeutic setting. A small number also highlighted the complexity of needs of men and women with chaotic lifestyles, who are regularly victims of crime.

4.24 Some sexual abuse and health services noted that they were unable to meet the demand from men experiencing abuse, due to the practical demands this would place on resources. For example, it was suggested that it would not be appropriate to place men and women together, and there may be issues with the availability of counsellors to work with male survivors. Adult males over 16 cannot access Women' Aid services, although a small number of groups mentioned that they would try to assist men by referring them to appropriate services, where available. For abuse survivors, some services are available to women only, while some are also available to men. Some services for survivors of childhood sexual abuse are only open to adults.

4.25 A number of organisations identified that they would not generally work with victims or witnesses who were themselves offenders. In some cases, this was qualified with reference to excluding men who have been convicted of Schedule 1 offences (and, it is assumed, offences liable to lead to a requirement to register as a sex offender). Men who disclose childhood sexual abuse, but are themselves abusers, may have difficulty in securing support.

4.26 Parents of older children, or adults who have no children, generally cannot access services from family centres. Similarly, children who have left school cannot access school-based services. Some housing associations who provide additional services do so only to their own tenants. It was also noted during interview that children and young people who experience domestic abuse cannot access services independently.

4.27 There are also seen to be gaps in the provision of specialist support to meet the needs of some who experience particular crimes, including

• rape and sexual assault (including male victims) (e.g. Rogers, 1998; review of services);
• gender-based violence (e.g. Victim Support, 2004; review of services);
• stalking (e.g. Bahm, 2004);
• harassment (review of services);
• assault, attempted murder and homicide (e.g. Victim Support, 2006; review of services);
• homophobic crime (e.g. Victim Support, 2004; review of services);
• racist crime (e.g. Clark & Moody, 2002; review of services);
• identity theft (e.g. Newman & McNally, 2005);
• anti-social behaviour (Hunter et al, 2004; review of services);
• crime against businesses (e.g. Tilley, 1993b);
• youth crime (review of services);
• serious road traffic incidents (review of services); and
• other serious crime (review of services).

4.28 The most commonly mentioned gaps in provision by types of crime were to victims of domestic abuse, childhood sexual abuse and rape. There was a related concern that some of these services tend to be time limited, either as a matter of policy or as a result of demand, resources or pressure. A small number of service providers, particularly housing associations and counselling services, noted an increased demand from men claiming to have experienced domestic abuse.

4.29 It should be noted that all of these gaps are also relevant to provision by specialist victim and witness services and other services, in terms of their provision to address particular additional needs. It was also suggested that there are gaps in provision to specific groups by generic providers.

Other services

4.30 The review of services noted that other services have particular difficulties in dealing with 'high dependency' victims, often those with multiple needs in combination. There is also limited provision to address the additional needs of equalities groups.

4.31 It has also been suggested that there is a lack of housing for victims of crime and anti-social behaviour, particularly in rural areas and areas where private let costs are high. Issues have also been raised with availability of refuge provision. This can lead to some women and children being accommodated in temporary accommodation, in other areas, or not at all. Concerns with some aspects of the police response have been highlighted, but two police forces in the review of services identified that unreasonable expectations can create demand which cannot be met. This was also identified by an antisocial behaviour team.

4.32 A number of authorities mentioned the emerging area of provision to victims of antisocial behaviour, in terms of perceived gaps in this. Provision, for example, was seen to depend to an extent on the priority given in particular authorities and on perceptions of 'criminality', as well as differences in developing practice.

4.33 There are also seen to be some problems with aspects of health provision for victims of crime, with a perceived lack of involvement and engagement by some services. It has also been suggested that the medical environment is dominated by the need to treat injuries, and that concerns with confidentiality mean that some health professionals ignore the potential psychological impact of injury. One interviewee in the review of services suggested that health providers do not become involved unless there is established clinical need and research. It has also been suggested that rape victims in emergency health settings may not receive basic services. They can have a long wait and may have evidence collected by people lacking training and experience. It was also suggested at interview that the response of psychiatric services can be inappropriate and that Community Psychiatric Nurses may be unwilling to 'open up' issues.

4.34 Other interviewees highlighted that some social workers see themselves as having a minimal role unless children are involved. Social Security arrangements have also been identified as not meeting the financial needs of victims. The Home Office (2004a) report 'Supporting Victims' suggested gaps in the involvement of education services in provision to children.

4.35 Three organisations, including two police forces and a specialist voluntary organisation, noted a lack of particular staff within organisations. A more general issue is a perceived unwillingness of some agencies to get involved in issues affecting victims (noted above), or to recognise their own or others' roles. This clearly impacts upon the process and likelihood of referral on to appropriate provision.

Gaps in forms of support

Information

4.36 There are also some perceived continuing gaps in information. Some studies show that generally only a relatively small proportion of those who wish to receive information from the criminal justice system actually do. For example, the Office for Criminal Justice Reform (2004) suggested that only about a quarter of victims who wished to receive information from the criminal justice system actually did so.

4.37 More specifically, the literature review identified some gaps in information about other sources of support. Some victims and witnesses are left unclear about where else they might get help, and this issue was also raised at interview in the review of services. The extent to which staff provide information about other services is impossible to measure. It is, however, likely to be inconsistent, with some providers not recognising their role in information provision. There may also be issues with variation in quality of the advice, depending on the knowledge and awareness of the member of staff making the response. For example, the review of services highlighted a lack of awareness of some GPs and others about specialist services. Some respondents to the review suggested that there is a lack of information for service providers on who to refer clients to, and how to do this. Most 'other' services, however, appear to refer clients to Victim Support in the first instance, or the police where necessary.

4.38 Some gaps in the provision of information about case progress have also been noted. These include bail, court dates, when cases have been discontinued, why cases are dropped, why there are changes to charges and when an appeal can be made. There are studies in most jurisdictions to suggest that victims and witnesses are not always satisfied with these issues. The lack of mechanisms to feed back the court's decision was also highlighted by one police force in the review of services.

4.39 One interviewee also believed that the Victim Notification Scheme is too restrictive in terms of the victims eligible (see para 3.36) and does not always work in terms of flagging cases and the way in which information is delivered. Another suggested that some victims may wish to know the risk posed by a perpetrator on release. One interviewee also stated that there is no locus at parole to consult a victim.

4.40 More generally, it has been suggested that there is a lack of information about aspects of the criminal justice system overall and court processes. These are seen to remain confusing to many. One interviewee stated that services cannot tell people what they want to know, but rather "what they can tell them".

4.41 The nature and dissemination of information provided may also be problematic, in terms of whether it is available and whether it meets the needs of those who receive it. The review of services noted, for example, that some websites did not seem particularly good at communicating the information victims actually need (such as what actual help can be provided, and how to get access to it). Other problems with website information were also highlighted. There were potential difficulties for victims and witnesses in being aware that resources exist, and being able to navigate the sites, as well as issues relating to how the information will be interpreted.

4.42 The review of services noted that search engines can prove problematic for victims of crime. It was found, for example, that "victim domestic violence Scotland" produced no links to Scottish Women's Aid or individual groups on its first two pages. The first choice link, the BBC information page, provided only a link to Women's Aid in England and Wales. A range of other issues were also identified, including, for example, problems in some sites with addresses, lack of availability of PDF versions of material, requirements to make contact with organisations or provide personal information before receiving some material, lack of advice on removing browsing histories, difficult structures and design features, haphazard and sometimes broken links, gaps in information (e.g. to children) and gaps in provision in languages other than English.

4.43 In terms of written information, the mystery shopping exercise identified that this is not readily available. There was little evidence of any material of relevance to victims and witnesses on display in a wide range of locations in a medium sized town. Additionally, the exercise found little consistency in the material on display, and a number of problems with the way in which material is presented and updated. It was also suggested at interview that information is not always delivered in a form people want.

4.44 Some services in the review (in both the postal survey and at interview) raised issues about the use of language and lack of plain English in some of the information provided. It was suggested in the interviews that there can also be a lack of clarity about the support which is actually available.

Practical support, protection and safety

4.45 There are still some perceived gaps in support to repeat victims, in terms of the input of crime prevention measures. The literature review suggested that many repeat victims have low expectations of provision, and that there are some crimes for which there have been limited developments of this type. The review of services also suggested that the input of personal security measures may be dependent on the willingness of relevant services to treat cases as a priority. It was also suggested that some victims and witnesses may have limited access to private measures as a result of cost and a concern about being 'sold' expensive solutions. The dangers of 'victim-blame' in preventive work have also been highlighted. Additionally, although new measures are being developed to undertake detailed risk assessment and safety planning with some victims, these are not yet widespread.

4.46 One of the key gaps in preparation for court and support on the day of trial is that not all victims and witnesses take this up. There can be a number of reasons for this, including practical problems such as not being referred in time, pressures on volunteer time and lack of courtrooms available for familiarisation. It was reiterated in some interviews in the review of services that the Witness Service is not funded to make provision in the District or Appeal Courts and that it has no locus in Children's Hearings proofs. A potential specific gap in provision to those caring for children was also suggested. Where witnesses do take up these types of service, the constraints identified earlier with the criminal justice system may impact on the nature of the support.

4.47 There are also some concerns about variation in the provision of special measures in court, as well as availability and practical constraints. Burton et al (2006) highlighted that vulnerable and intimidated witnesses were often first identified at court, making it difficult to arrange special measures, if needed. They also found that some measures were rarely offered or used. Interviewees in the review of services raised a number of continuing concerns relating to special measures. These included the cost of provision, possible variation in provision, ability to satisfy demand in the future, current lack of demand and need for awareness, logistics of making provision available, and lack of certainty of provision and clarity of entitlement.

4.48 There remain concerns relating to the court environment. These include the comprehensive provision of safe facilities, as well as potential problems with other facilities such as parking, signposting, and facilities for parents and children). The design of courtrooms and layout of court buildings can make it difficult to address concerns about facing the accused person and their associates. Some postal respondents to the review of services (in some areas) identified issues with the lack of effective separation. Some interviewees suggested a shortage of, and pressure on, space for support agencies in court. A lack of access to the victim room for specialist organisations unless Victim Support volunteers are there was also highlighted.

4.49 Some problems have been identified for those who participate in witness protection programmes. These include insecurity, anxiety and anger, as well as its effects on the family, community concerns, strict entry requirements and the cost of provision. Some victims fall outwith the scope of the programme, but may have concerns. Some victims experience ongoing fear for their safety, but may not always feel that their protection is adequate nor their concerns taken seriously.

Emotional and psychological support

4.50 Gaps have also been identified relating to emotional and psychological support. There are particular concerns about access to counselling and mental health services, as well as concerns about long waiting lists and difficulties in finding therapists and counsellors who are knowledgeable about the issues. There appears to be a particular gap in provision for people experiencing severe psychological distress and the symptoms of this. Marandos (2005), for example, identified "a lack of specialist services for victims of crime who demonstrate high levels of adverse psychological symptoms" (p.2)

4.51 It was suggested in the review of services (in the postal survey and interviews) that there is a specific gap in the provision of emotional support to victims of youth crime. It was also suggested that there is a gap in provision to victims of some antisocial behaviour. This may be traumatic and distressing, while still not being regarded as criminal by some police officers.

4.52 Access to some forms of emotional support is directly linked to issues raised previously about access to other specialist services (such as Women's Aid, Rape Crisis and a range of others). This will be constrained by all of the factors highlighted earlier in relation to these.

4.53 The availability of counselling services tends to be restricted outside the central belt. The availability of these services for crime victims with additional needs (for example, relating to drugs or alcohol), is likely to be very limited in most areas. The number of services apparently targeted at equalities groups is very small, and they tend to be concentrated in the cities. The availability of private counselling services is more patchy still. There are also issues with cost, although some counsellors identified that they can be flexible in relation to the level of charges for people on low incomes. The review of services also identified more emotional support for women than men, as a result of the need for services providing support for victims of crimes involving violence against women.

Empowerment, restorative justice and advocacy

4.54 As well as the problems already noted with some restorative justice measures and other measures relating to victim empowerment, there are also gaps in provision. In terms of availability, some local authority respondents in the review of services mentioned gaps in mediation services. SACRO, which provides mediation and reparation support, noted that this is not available in all areas. A specific issue for mediation and restorative justice services is that it requires that both parties agree to participate, and concerns about the actual level of participation were raised in the literature review. Where only one party wishes a service, but the other does not wish to take part, this demand cannot be satisfied. The focus of much of this work has also tended to be on young offenders and their victims. In some cases, there may be a lack of staff and resources to deliver restorative justice work. One interviewee also noted constraints in getting procedures in place for work with victims of serious crime, as well as geographical differences, lack of comprehensive provision of this option and a lack of resources.

4.55 It has also been suggested (e.g. Williams, 2005) that there are issues with the operation of court-ordered compensation. The literature identified issues with restitution and compensation, including that compensation orders may not always be imposed, that there may be inequalities in provision and gaps in enforcement. It was also noted that, even where compensation orders are paid, the low level of instalments may mean that it will take a long time for full compensation to accrue to the victim. Gaps in access to criminal injuries compensation were also noted, along with problems with procedures. There were also issues with level of provision, and perceptions that the system is unsympathetic to victims' needs. The lack of information about criminal injuries compensation was also raised in the review of services.

4.56 Although little literature was identified on specific problems with advocacy, the gaps in provision of services will clearly impact on the availability of such support. It has also been suggested that it can be difficult for victims and witnesses to highlight their problems and complaints. One interviewee in the review of services noted the lack of availability of someone in court to oversee the process and to 'advocate' for victims and witnesses.

Other provision

4.57 A small number of issues have been highlighted with domestic abuse courts. There is currently one such court being piloted in Scotland, operating in Glasgow. Issues raised with these courts in the literature include resources, attitudes and approaches, policies and procedures and evaluation difficulties. One interviewee in the review of services also noted the need to ensure that new provision complements existing services. Another noted that new initiatives sometimes face resistance from the established system.

4.58 A small number of services in the review identified a perceived lack of awareness raising/preventive work in schools with young people. The review suggested that self-help groups, which often have a campaigning role, often struggle for resources and face problems in carrying out work on a large scale, country-wide basis.

4.59 Issues have also been raised with the availability of remote reporting and difficulties in community involvement in criminal justice work.

4.60 Some problems with the use of specific funding sources have also been identified. These include the high level of demand, competition between different types of work for limited resources, the time limited nature of the funding, difficulties in match funding, lack of monitoring and evaluation by individual projects, and limited links between local work and national developments.

4.61 A small number of interviewees in the review of services suggested that, when resources are provided, new services sometimes develop which lack the specialist knowledge required.

Cross cutting issues and common constraints

4.62 Around half of the respondents to the postal strand of the review of services identified that they faced some constraints in providing services to victims and witnesses. Cross-cutting issues were also identified in the literature review and interviews. These tended to relate particularly to specialist services, groups and projects largely in the voluntary sector, although it is recognised that statutory services also face constraints. A number of services (particularly those dealing with domestic and sexual abuse, as well as vulnerable children), identified the potentially negative consequences for victims and witnesses of some of these constraints.

Resources

4.63 Some respondents to the postal survey and many interviewees in the review of services noted restrictions to their service as a result of the funding structure. Issues included the general lack of resources, specification of work covered by the funding ²⁸, and the level of administration tied to grant funding, registration, audit, etc. It was noted that services meeting different but equally important needs may have to compete for limited resources. The Home Office (2004a) identified that:

"Small voluntary organisations often lack the capacity to engage at a local level and access funding. Many small specialist national organisations are in precarious funding situations due to lack of national funds." (p.33)

4.64 The service review also highlighted that a specific project may be limited as a consequence of overall funding available for the organisation. A small number of services suggested that there were endemic gaps in services, and that all aspects of support required additional investment.

Capacity / waiting lists

4.65 About half of the respondents in the postal strand of the review of services identified difficulty in meeting demand. There were a number of problems with capacity and a number of issues arose frequently from a number of sources. These included

• high level of demand;
• lack of staff generally, or lack of hours for the staff in post;
• lack of time to deliver all aspects of services and limitation of provision;
• lack of flexibility;
• lack of opportunity for long term planning; and
• lack of ability to offer 'customised' support to particular groups.

One respondent noted that lack of capacity also constrains participation in new developments, even where a role has been identified.

4.66 It was suggested in the review of services that these capacity problems could lead to a failure to seek services by some, on the assumption that service requests could not be met or that there would be extensive waiting times. Additionally, some services felt that they could not raise awareness of their provision, as they would be unable to meet demand.

4.67 A number of respondents were concerned that Victim Support and the Witness Service would be unable to cope with increasing demands placed upon the services, as well as the number of new initiatives they are becoming involved in.

4.68 Thirty-six services in the postal strand of the review of services (excluding housing waiting lists) identified that they operated waiting lists, although some noted that victims of crime were prioritised. The services with waiting lists covered virtually all areas of work with victims and witnesses, with the exception of services delivered in the immediate aftermath of the crime and services relating to court processes. The main areas in which waiting lists were found were

• one to one support for women experiencing domestic abuse;
• counselling services;
• psychological and other mental health services;
• law centre services; and
• advocacy services.

4.69 A number of Women's Aid groups also identified delays in securing access to refuge or permanent accommodation. Although it was impossible to identify the average waiting time across services, it can be 6 - 8 months for some services (particularly in the areas of mental health and family support). For others, however, 2 weeks to 2 months would be more typical. One service (Wise Women) noted having a waiting list of 745 women.

Staff / volunteer issues

4.70 Some organisations, particularly those in the voluntary sector, also faced difficulties in recruiting staff or volunteers with suitable qualifications. There are also pressures on volunteer time leading, in some cases, to a need to prioritise responses or the types of provision made. This might constrain, for example, undertaking awareness raising or preventative work, or providing training to other services, as a result of the need for client contact time. It was also seen to constrain the ability of services to react quickly to changes in arrangements (e.g. accompanying victims and witnesses to a court hearing, or an appointment of some kind).

Facilities / hours

4.71 Some organisations in the review of services also identified issues relating to their facilities. Examples included limited space and equipment, inaccessible premises, or a lack of availability of viable alternatives. A number also reported limited opening hours, or limited ability to provide out of hours services or 24 hour helpline support.

Geographical issues

4.72 In some cases, services are only available to clients in specific geographical areas. This is a common criterion, although it is often implicit. Some services suggested that, while they would not exclude clients from other areas, they would prioritise clients from their own areas.

4.73 Some provision is limited by geographical location, particularly in rural and island areas. Some respondents to the review of services noted that they covered a large geographical area and/or population base. The most common gap identified in the review was in services in rural areas. Logan et al (2004) noted that "rural areas have fewer available services and the few that do exist must cover large geographic areas, the quality and consistency of staff are problematic" (p.56)

4.74 Some services in the review identified the particular lack of specialist support in rural areas. One organisation based in Wick noted that the nearest Victim Support office is in Inverness, more than 100 miles south. One interviewee noted, however, that any rural gaps are sometimes addressed at a local level through the involvement of other professionals.

4.75 Transport, housing and childcare provision can be limited in many areas, but may be particularly problematic in rural areas. Difficulties for women (who may have more limited access to cars and public transport, and who may find it difficult to make childcare arrangements) were identified particularly. There may also be barriers to seeking confidential help in small or rural communities (e.g. Mirrlees-Black, 1999) as well as problems for some victims with community attitudes, stigma, etc. (e.g. McNeil et al, 2004). A support project in Glasgow also raised the issue that some victims of crime would prefer to access support outside their own area, but may be limited either by practical issues, or by the policies of service providers in these areas only to see (or to prioritise) victims from their own area.

4.76 A lack of good public transport was also identified, however, in some central belt areas (such as West Lothian). Some issues were raised in the review of services to suggest gaps in urban areas, largely as a result of services provided through initiative funding where this is tied to particular areas of deprivation. The geographical variation in services to adult survivors of sexual abuse was highlighted. It was also noted that there are no specialist rape and sexual assault services in many parts of Scotland.

Confidentiality

4.77 Some services in the review, particularly in the health and counselling sectors, noted that client confidentiality could constrain provision, in terms of being able to secure the most appropriate support and the need for potentially vulnerable clients to restate their issues each time.

4.78 Confidentiality, in general terms, was identified as being particularly problematic in small communities, and a potential barrier to some clients seeking services.

Access

4.79 There appear to remain barriers for people with physical impairments, in terms of a lack of specialist facilities and understanding of needs. There can also be problems with, for example, interpretation and translation. Limitations to childcare have also been identified. Specific provision to equalities groups to meet their particular needs was found to be limited, including provision by non-specialist services and in particular geographical areas. It was also noted that barrier-free refuge space, temporary and permanent accommodation are problematic in most areas.

4.80 There are issues with the ready availability of information in other formats, and variation in this by area and organisation. Although some is available in a wide variety of languages and formats, the review of services suggested that much of the information would require a significant lead time for preparation.

Timing

4.81 As noted earlier, there are limitations to the availability of some services. A number of services are available for a time limited period, and unable to continue to make provision in the longer term. The review of services identified gaps in the provision of ongoing, longer term support in relation to the period after active police involvement and the period after the end of a court case. The literature review noted that much provision ceases after involvement in the criminal justice process, suggesting that although the period following a trial can be critical for a victim this is often the point at which the support is withdrawn. The need for support (particularly emotional and psychological support) at particular times (e.g. on significant dates, when there is renewed media coverage, notification of an offender's release, etc.) may be unmet due to a lack of availability, or a lengthy waiting list.

Integrated / joint working

4.82 It is also suggested that there are continuing issues relating to the fragmentation of services and problems with joint working. These make it difficult for victims and witnesses to receive a comprehensive and integrated response for all of their needs. Issues relating to fragmentation were also raised in the review of services. Some, for example, noted their frustration with the varying pattern of provision and policy in Scotland. It was suggested that services can vary greatly from area to area, not only in whether or not they exist, but also in terms of who they will work with, how they work and the nature of the service which is delivered. One Women's Aid group in the review of services, for example, suggested that one of the key 'gaps' was the lack of a joined-up approach to providing support to victims and witnesses. This issue also emerged frequently in the literature. A lack of consistent data gathering was also highlighted, both in the review of services and literature. Some services also noted receiving insufficient information with a referral to allow proper consideration of needs.

4.83 Several interviewees commented on the lack of joint working and difficulties of communication, as well as organisations failing to recognise each other's strengths, and a consequent lack of co-ordination. One provider noted that a victim is "… presented with an unmade jigsaw, and they have to make it. They have to tell their story over and over."

4.84 The literature review and the review of services identified a number of barriers to, and issues with, joint working. These included

• lack of communication/willingness to communicate between agencies;
• data protection, or other information sharing issues;
• limited understanding of the roles of specialist services;
• competing demands of performance measures and other issues;
• cost of multi-disciplinary work;
• lack of direction;
• variation in participation; and
• exclusion/difficulties for voluntary and community sector organisations, and difficulties in attending meetings.

Staff attitudes, awareness and training

4.85 A number of providers noted a lack of consistency in how victims of crimes are treated by criminal justice agencies and a lack of awareness among some service providers of victims' needs. The literature identified some problems with attitudes and consistency of provision.

4.86 The lack of understanding of victim issues was identified by around one in ten respondents to the postal strand of the service review. The literature review suggested that many victims believe that the issues facing them remain scarcely understood or considered by some service providers. For example, there can be an overall lack of awareness of the nature of victimisation and a lack of understanding of specific issues for particular groups or by particular service providers. There can also be a lack of local referral information, awareness of other services and their roles. These issues were also raised at interview in the review of services.

4.87 It has been suggested that domestic abuse and sexual violence and abuse are still poorly understood by some service providers. Additionally, problems such as intrusive and insensitive treatment from housing officers (e.g. for victims of domestic abuse) or a failure to take incidents seriously enough (e.g. for some racist incidents) and problems with some health staff (e.g. victim-blaming) have been highlighted in the literature and the review of services.

4.88 Closely related to the lack of understanding is the suggestion that there are still gaps in training for some services on how to deal with victims and witnesses of crime appropriately. These are seen to impact on the way support is provided. Some service providers in the review highlighted a lack of capacity building and training. Although there have been developments to specialist training, there still remain many staff who have not received general or specific input.

Other constraints

4.89 Other constraints which were identified in the review of services included the eligibility criteria discussed previously which may exclude potential service users, limitations imposed by partner services and, in some cases, clients' financial circumstances (for example being able to afford treatments, or personal or home security).

Gaps in literature / information

4.90 As well as gaps in provision to victims and witnesses, some gaps in research knowledge relating to these issues were also identified, particularly in the literature review and during interviews in the review of services.

Overall impact and effectiveness of particular measures

4.91 There is a perceived continuing lack of comprehensive information about the overall 'effectiveness' of measures to support victims and witnesses (e.g. Johnson, 1997). There is also seen to be a lack of information about their impact on issues such as victims' and witnesses' participation in the criminal justice process and particular outcomes (such as the alleviation of psychological distress). Although evaluation is built into projects perhaps more frequently than was the case in the past, there remain gaps. Blomberg et al (2002) suggested that "when questions of scarce funding and program priorities are determined, program evaluation is commonly viewed as secondary to the provision of direct services" (p.173).

The views of victims and witnesses

4.92 A particular gap in information about impact and effectiveness relates to the systematic collection of victims' and witnesses' views of provision ²⁹. Although there are some studies exploring victims' and witnesses' views (notably in much of the work by Victim Support), there are many examples of studies based largely or entirely on the views of staff and other stakeholders. Where studies of victims' or witnesses' views do exist, they are often 'victim satisfaction surveys' (with constraints to their completion and influences on their findings), rather than studies of the impact of support or the effectiveness of the provision (e.g. National Audit Office, 2002). It was also noted in the service review that their views of issues such as participation/involvement and inclusion in discussions are seldom sought.

Information across jurisdictions

4.93 It has also been identified that studies may be based on experiences in a small area, with a need for information across jurisdictions. Additionally, the Office for Criminal Justice Reform (2004) highlighted a need for more evidence at local levels. It has also been noted that local evaluations may not be independent, are often unpublished and difficult to obtain.

Particular initiatives

4.94 It is suggested that there is a lack of information about the impact of some forms of work, and few examples of the overall synthesis of information about types of support (although there are now some examples of such issue-specific reports). There is seen to remain a lack of comprehensive and systematic information about, for example

• restorative justice (e.g. Cormier, 2002; Gehm, 1998; Sanders, 1999);
• special measures (e.g. Reid Howie Associates, 2001);
• victim statements and their impact (e.g. Graham et al, 2004);
• intervention programs for abusive men (e.g. Lyon, 2005);
• crisis interventions (e.g. Sims, 1999);
• what works in health provision (service review interviews); and
• what works for different kinds of victims (service review interviews).

Methodological issues

4.95 A number of studies have identified methodological constraints to carrying out studies to examine the impact and 'success' of provision, including

• differences in the bases of assessment (and the criteria used);
• lack of baseline data (e.g. Crime Concern, 2004);
• difficulties in isolating the impact of a particular project from other interventions taking place (e.g. Crime Concern, 2004);
• variations in the extent of evaluation information available between different forms of provision;
• problems of definition (e.g. Orr et al, 2005);
• problems of accurate measurement of some issues, such as the extent of repeat victimisation (e.g. Farrell & Pease, 1993); and
• lack of methodological controls or comparisons to rigorously test effectiveness (Campbell, 2004).

4.96 Some relate to difficulties in examining the views of victims and witnesses, such as

• the potentially low level of completion and return of survey material and response rates (e.g. Orr et al, 2005; Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency, 2004);
• small samples making it difficult to generalise from the subjective experiences of participants (e.g. Miers et al, 2001; Umbreit & Fercello, 1997);
• sampling methods which can exclude some groups (e.g. Newman & McNally, 2005);
• practical/systemic issues such as court protocols and processes (e.g. Lyon, 2005);
• victims' reluctance to participate (e.g. Lyon, 2005);
• difficulties in seeking victims' views during traumatic times, and ethical issues in relation to retrospective research accessing victims being perceived as intrusive or "re-opening old wounds" (service review interviews);
• concerns about the impact of evaluations on service users and client confidentiality (e.g. Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency, 2004);
• lack of resources/databases to produce information (e.g. Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency, 2004);
• difficulties in longitudinal designs (e.g. Lyon, 2005);
• lack of control groups and inability to measure longer term changes (e.g. Fyfe & McKay, 1998; Saunders & Anderson, 2000);
• dependence on victims' memory, awareness and comprehension of the crime (e.g. Newman & McNally, 2005); and
• difficulties in contacting and exploring issues with those who do not use services (service review interviews).

Specific groups of victims / specific types of crime

4.97 The literature review and the review of services identified variations in the information available about specific groups of victims, types of crime and the impact of measures. Studies and the service review interviews identified that there remain gaps in information about some of the issues facing the specific groups which were identified earlier as having particular requirements. Some specific gaps in information about issues have also been identified, with many individual issues highlighted about which further information would be potentially beneficial.

4.98 These gaps, both in provision and information, help to identify some of the issues which are seen to require further consideration in the development of support to victims and witnesses in the future.

« Previous | Contents | Next »