British Columbia Domestic Violence Coordination Framework
Guidelines for DV-related agency collaboration and provincial coordination across British Columbia.
British Columbia: Regional Coordination Overview
1. Vancouver Metro Ecosystem
The Vancouver metro area includes a dense network of domestic violence service providers, justice partners, health systems, municipal services, and community-based organizations. Coordination is typically organized around functional clusters rather than a single centralized structure.
Common ecosystem components include:
- Emergency and transition housing providers
- Community-based anti-violence programs and outreach teams
- Police and specialized domestic violence units or teams
- Court-based victim support, legal aid, and duty counsel services
- Health and mental health services, including hospital-based social work
- Child and family-serving agencies and school-based liaison staff
- Municipal social planning and community safety offices
Agencies in Vancouver metro often align using:
- Local interagency tables focused on domestic and sexual violence
- Issue-specific working groups (e.g., high-risk cases, housing pathways, data coordination)
- Standardized referral pathways between shelters, outreach programs, and legal supports
- Shared participation in provincial networks and coalitions
1.1 Operational Priorities in Vancouver Metro
Common priorities for partners operating in the Vancouver metro ecosystem include:
- Managing high-volume, high-complexity caseloads across multiple agencies
- Maintaining coordinated pathways between short-term crisis responses and longer-term supports
- Aligning service eligibility criteria and referral thresholds to reduce duplication
- Standardizing protocols for interagency communication, including consent and information sharing
- Integrating culturally-specific and Indigenous-led services into mainstream referral networks
2. Provincial Service Networks
Across British Columbia, domestic violence-related services are supported through provincial frameworks, funding streams, and sector networks. These structures provide coherence between urban, rural, remote, and Indigenous-serving providers.
2.1 Network Functions
Provincial service networks typically support:
- Common definitions and terminology for domestic and sexual violence service delivery
- Baseline service expectations and program models across funded agencies
- Training, technical assistance, and sector-wide practice development
- Data collection frameworks and reporting standards for funded services
- Provincial-level coordination with justice, health, and child-serving systems
2.2 Coordination Options with Provincial Networks
Organizations in BC often engage provincial service networks through:
- Formal membership or participation agreements with coalitions or associations
- Provincial working groups or task forces focused on specific populations or service types
- Shared practice guidelines, toolkits, and training curricula
- Coordinated funding applications and joint reporting frameworks
Agencies can use provincial networks to harmonize terminology, eligibility criteria, and referral protocols across regions, which supports consistency when people move between communities or service areas.
3. Indigenous Communities’ Coordination in BC
Indigenous communities in British Columbia operate a range of services, programs, and community safety initiatives. Coordination with domestic violence systems is most effective when it respects self-determination, governance structures, and community-led priorities.
3.1 Structural Considerations
When designing coordination with Indigenous communities and services, partners commonly consider:
- Community governance structures (e.g., band councils, tribal councils, Indigenous organizations)
- Existing Indigenous-led justice, health, and family services
- Distinct urban Indigenous service organizations in metropolitan areas
- Jurisdictional intersections between federal, provincial, and Indigenous systems
- Data stewardship principles grounded in Indigenous data governance frameworks
3.2 Coordination Practices and Agreements
Multi-agency partners often utilize tailored coordination approaches, such as:
- Custom MOUs or protocol agreements that recognize Indigenous governance and service mandates
- Joint planning tables or advisory circles with Indigenous-led organizations
- Clearly defined referral pathways between Indigenous and non-Indigenous services
- Parallel reporting structures that align with both provincial requirements and Indigenous governance expectations
Co-creating protocols with Indigenous partners, rather than adapting existing non-Indigenous models, supports clearer roles, better alignment of expectations, and more consistent interagency communication.
4. Multi-Agency Integration Processes in BC
British Columbia’s regional diversity requires flexible integration models that can be adapted to dense urban environments, smaller communities, and remote or Indigenous-led contexts.
4.1 Integration Models
Common multi-agency integration models used in BC include:
- Interagency case coordination tables focused on information sharing and role clarification for complex situations, within applicable consent frameworks.
- Co-located or hub models where multiple services (e.g., justice, housing, outreach) operate from a shared site or virtual hub.
- Networked outreach models that link rural and remote communities to urban-based specialists via scheduled circuits or virtual platforms.
- Thematic working groups (e.g., high-risk teams, housing access, legal coordination) that address structural barriers across agencies.
4.2 Components of an Integration Process
Multi-agency integration processes in BC often include the following components:
- Mapping of services in the region, including Indigenous-led, urban Indigenous, and mainstream organizations.
- Shared objectives that specify the scope of integration (e.g., high-risk coordination, housing pathways, court-related collaboration).
- Protocol development covering referral pathways, information-sharing processes, and communication expectations.
- MOU structures that outline roles, responsibilities, and governance of the collaboration.
- Data and reporting alignment to coordinate indicators and reduce duplication across funders and networks.
- Review mechanisms for regular assessment of how the integration process is functioning.
4.3 Alignment Between Vancouver Metro and Provincial Structures
Because Vancouver metro hosts many provincial and regional actors, integration processes frequently serve as a bridge between local and provincial systems. Typical alignment strategies include:
- Using provincial guidelines as a shared reference for local protocols
- Integrating provincial reporting indicators into local interagency dashboards
- Structuring Vancouver-based working groups so they can inform or connect to provincial task forces
- Ensuring local MOUs remain compatible with broader provincial frameworks and Indigenous governance expectations
Additional coordination resources, including examples of multi-agency integration structures relevant to British Columbia, are available through the wider ecosystem hosted at DV.Support.