Nunavut Domestic Violence Coordination Framework
Guidelines for DV coordination, Indigenous partnerships, and remote community service support across Nunavut.
Nunavut Coordination Framework
Context and Regional Considerations
Nunavut presents distinct operational conditions for domestic and family violence service coordination, shaped by Inuit self-determination, extreme remoteness, limited physical infrastructure, and high travel costs. Any multi-agency framework in the territory benefits from centring Inuit-led governance, supporting community-based approaches, and aligning with territorial and Inuit organizations’ mandates.
This page outlines non-binding coordination options for organizations seeking to collaborate in Nunavut, with a focus on Inuit leadership, territorial partnerships, and cross-regional integration.
Inuit-Led Governance and Partnership Principles
Inuit-led governance is a core consideration for any partnership model operating in Nunavut. Territorial and regional structures are complemented by Inuit organizations, local hamlets, and community councils that may hold key roles in decision-making.
Partnership design can reflect the following principles:
- Recognition of Inuit organizations and local leadership as primary decision-making partners for community-based initiatives.
- Respect for existing Inuit governance frameworks, land-claim agreements, and community protocols when designing joint programs.
- Use of co-design processes that include Inuit women’s organizations, Elders, youth, and community representatives, where feasible.
- Operational flexibility to adapt models to local knowledge, language needs, and community-defined priorities.
Territorial Government and Key Institutional Partners
Most coordinated responses in Nunavut involve collaboration with relevant Government of Nunavut departments and Inuit organizations, as well as federal and pan-territorial actors where appropriate. Potential institutional partners may include:
- Territorial ministries and departments responsible for justice, community and family services, health, and housing.
- Territorial victim services and community justice programs.
- Inuit land-claim organizations and regional Inuit associations.
- Hamlet councils, local justice committees, and community wellness committees.
- School authorities, health centres, and community health representatives.
- Legal aid organizations, courtworkers, and duty counsel services.
- Regional and national Indigenous, Inuit, and women’s organizations.
Partnerships often benefit from a clear mapping of roles, mandates, and jurisdictional boundaries before entering formal coordination agreements.
Impacts of Remoteness and Travel Constraints
Nunavut’s geographic realities significantly influence service design, response times, and partnership logistics. Coordination frameworks may need to accommodate:
- Air travel as the primary mode of inter-community transport, with high cost and weather-related delays.
- Limited scheduled flights and seasonal accessibility constraints.
- Scattered small communities with no road connectivity between most locations.
- Limited access to specialized professionals (e.g., legal, clinical, and forensic services) within communities.
Organizations can consider layered response models that combine local capacity with regional and out-of-territory support, while documenting realistic service standards and communication expectations.
Limited Shelter Presence and Alternatives
Physical shelters and second-stage housing options are limited in Nunavut and not consistently available across communities. Coordination approaches often rely on a mix of:
- Existing shelter facilities in select communities, where present.
- Short-term local arrangements (e.g., safe temporary accommodations enabled through community partners).
- Out-of-community or out-of-territory placements, coordinated with territorial services and Inuit organizations where appropriate.
- Strengthening non-residential community supports to complement scarce shelter capacity.
MOUs and operating protocols can clarify when and how out-of-community placements are considered, the roles of territorial ministries and Inuit partners, and communication pathways between sending and receiving locations.
Community-Based Justice and Coordination
Community-based justice mechanisms—such as local justice committees, restorative processes, Elders’ circles, and diversion programs—may be active in some Nunavut communities. Coordination with these structures should be approached with sensitivity to local governance and applicable policies.
Operational frameworks can address:
- Clear articulation of when matters are referred to community justice versus territorial justice processes, consistent with applicable policies and agreements.
- Protocols for communication between community justice bodies, territorial victim services, and any external service partners.
- Information-sharing practices that respect privacy, local customs, and relevant legislation.
- Mechanisms for monitoring outcomes, documenting lessons learned, and adapting community-based approaches over time.
Eligibility Guidelines for Participating Organizations
Participation in structured coordination efforts in Nunavut can be guided by transparent eligibility criteria. These criteria may be adapted for specific initiatives but commonly include:
Organizational Profile and Alignment
- Clear mandate related to domestic or family violence, victim support, justice, housing, child and family services, health, or community wellness.
- Demonstrated commitment to Inuit self-determination and Inuit-led decision-making in Nunavut-based work.
- Willingness to work within territorial and Inuit organizational frameworks and to adapt operations to local protocols.
- Capacity to meet agreed-upon reporting, data, and accountability expectations.
Cultural and Regional Competence
- Commitment to integrating Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit (IQ) principles or other locally articulated knowledge frameworks, where applicable.
- Policies or practices that support use of Inuktut languages (e.g., access to translation, interpretation, or bilingual staff where feasible).
- Evidence of prior engagement or consultation with Inuit organizations, local councils, Elders, or community-based groups, when working in Nunavut.
Operational and Risk Management Capacity
- Ability to operate effectively in a remote, high-cost, and weather-constrained environment.
- Documented internal policies for confidentiality, information management, and staff conduct.
- Internal procedures for staff wellness and supervision, recognizing the complexity of remote and small-community work.
Integration Pathways for New Partners
Organizations newly engaging in Nunavut can use a phased integration model to support coordinated, Inuit-led responses. The following non-prescriptive stages illustrate one possible approach:
Stage 1: Orientation and Relationship-Building
- Initial briefings with territorial ministries and relevant Inuit organizations to understand mandates, existing programs, and gaps.
- Community-level engagement with hamlet councils, local justice or wellness committees, and relevant community-based organizations.
- Mapping existing services, travel constraints, and communication channels in the communities where work is proposed.
Stage 2: Pilot Participation and Limited Scope Activities
- Participation in joint case discussions, cross-referral protocols, or shared training initiatives, as agreed with local and territorial partners.
- Time-limited pilot projects that test small-scale interventions (e.g., remote legal information sessions, specialized consultation, training support).
- Use of joint reflection processes to gather feedback from Inuit partners and territorial ministries before scaling.
Stage 3: Formalized Coordination
- Development of written MOUs outlining roles, responsibilities, communication pathways, cultural protocols, and review mechanisms.
- Inclusion in regional or territorial coordination tables, working groups, or standing committees where appropriate.
- Alignment of organizational policies (e.g., data, HR, communications) with agreed territorial and Inuit partner expectations.
Stage 4: Ongoing Review and Adaptation
- Regular joint reviews of partnership outcomes, including Inuit-led assessments of relevance and effectiveness.
- Adjustments to service models based on community feedback, logistical realities, and updated territorial or Inuit organizational priorities.
- Planned knowledge transfer processes to maintain continuity despite staff turnover or leadership changes.
Coordination Mechanisms with Territorial Ministries
Given the central role of territorial ministries in Nunavut, multi-agency approaches often benefit from documented coordination pathways. Example mechanisms include:
- Territorial-level working groups that bring together ministries, Inuit organizations, justice partners, shelters, and community agencies.
- Protocols outlining how referrals are made between territorial victim services, community programs, and external partners.
- Agreed points of contact for urgent coordination needs, including after-hours or weather-related disruptions.
- Joint planning cycles aligned with territorial budgeting and program development timelines.
Additional coordination resources relevant to cross-jurisdictional domestic violence work are available through the broader ecosystem hosted at DV.Support, which can complement Nunavut-specific partnership efforts.
Data-Sharing and Information Management Considerations
Information-sharing in Nunavut occurs within a context of small communities, close relationships, and heightened confidentiality concerns. Coordination frameworks can address data-sharing at a high level by:
- Clarifying what categories of information may be shared for coordination purposes and under what conditions.
- Establishing secure communication channels for inter-agency contact (e.g., encrypted platforms, designated contact points).
- Documenting how data is stored, accessed, and retained by each partner agency.
- Building in review processes to adapt information-sharing practices as technology, legislation, or local preferences evolve.
Funding Collaboration and Resource Leveraging
Given the high cost of delivering services in Nunavut, coordinated funding and resource-sharing models can improve sustainability. Potential approaches include:
- Joint proposals that include Inuit organizations, territorial ministries, and community partners as co-applicants or formal collaborators.
- Shared staffing models (e.g., positions jointly funded across agencies, or itinerant specialists serving multiple communities).
- Pooling travel budgets to optimize site visits, training delivery, and community engagement activities.
- Coordinated investments in technology (e.g., secure video-conferencing infrastructure) to support remote service delivery.
Funding collaborations can be documented through written contribution agreements, MOUs, or partnership addendums that set out expectations for governance, reporting, and renewal.
Governance and Accountability Structures
Nunavut-focused partnerships often benefit from governance arrangements that formally embed Inuit leadership and local representation. Options include:
- Steering committees co-chaired by Inuit organizations and territorial ministries, with representation from community agencies.
- Advisory circles or councils including Inuit Elders, youth representatives, and community-based service providers.
- Working groups focused on specific themes (e.g., justice coordination, housing pathways, clinical supports, training).
- Annual or semi-annual territorial forums to review progress, adjust priorities, and plan cross-agency initiatives.
Non-binding terms of reference can be used to clarify membership, decision-making processes, meeting frequency, quorum expectations, and review timelines for these structures.