Hawaii Domestic Violence Coordination Framework
Partnership guidelines for DV-related organizations across Hawaii, with multi-island coordination considerations.
Hawaii Coordination and Integration Overview
Regional Context and Inter-Island System Design
Hawaii’s domestic violence service ecosystem operates across multiple islands, each with distinct infrastructure, transportation patterns, and partner networks. Coordinated response depends on clear regional roles, standardized eligibility pathways, and predictable protocols for cross-island referrals and shared service delivery.
This page outlines operational considerations for:
- Structuring inter-island logistics and service pathways
- Supporting remote and rural communities, including outer islands
- Defining eligibility, intake, and integration standards across agencies
- Aligning state-level, county-level, and island-based partnerships
Inter-Island Logistics and Service Pathways
Inter-island coordination in Hawaii depends on transportation constraints, limited specialized services on some islands, and variable local capacity. Agencies typically combine local service delivery with regionalized functions that are concentrated on Oʻahu or specific neighbor islands.
Common Inter-Island Coordination Models
- Hub-and-spoke model – A primary hub (often on Oʻahu, Maui, or Hawaiʻi Island) provides specialized services (e.g., complex legal advocacy, specialized clinical services, data management), while local partner agencies on each island deliver core, in-person supports and maintain community linkages.
- Regional clusters – Neighbor islands with closer transportation links (e.g., Maui–Lānaʻi–Molokaʻi) coordinate shared staffing, rotating outreach, and pooled training resources to reduce duplication and address service gaps.
- Function-based distribution – Certain program functions (data coordination, training, evaluation, technical assistance) are managed centrally, while direct services remain island-specific.
Transportation and Travel Coordination
When designing inter-island logistics, agencies can document:
- Conditions under which inter-island travel is considered (e.g., access to specialized services unavailable locally)
- Preferred transportation modes, booking processes, and decision authority for travel approvals
- Cost-sharing agreements between sending and receiving agencies or through joint funding mechanisms
- Contingency approaches when flights are cancelled or limited, including remote service substitution
- Protocols for coordinating with airlines, ferry services, or other transport partners where relevant
Island-Specific Roles and Coverage Maps
Hawaii partners frequently formalize roles using coverage maps that indicate:
- Primary agency for each island or county for core domestic violence services
- Secondary or backup agencies that can accept cross-referrals
- Specialized providers (e.g., culturally-specific programs, legal aid, behavioral health) and their service islands
- Telehealth or virtual providers available to all islands
These maps are often referenced in MOUs to clarify expectations and referral pathways for each island.
Remote and Rural Community Support
Remote communities in Hawaii, including outer islands and rural areas on larger islands, may experience limited in-person access to domestic violence services, law enforcement, healthcare, and legal systems. Cross-agency coordination can prioritize reliable remote access, culturally relevant service delivery, and strong relationships with local community-based partners.
Remote Access Service Models
- Telephonic and virtual service hubs – Centralized intake and information services that can be accessed from any island, with standardized scripts, data collection, and referral protocols.
- Mobile and rotating outreach – Scheduled visits to remote communities by advocate teams, legal partners, or multidisciplinary groups, coordinated in advance with local organizations and facilities.
- Local partner integration – Collaboration with community-based organizations that already have a presence in remote communities (e.g., health centers, faith-based entities, community associations) through training, referral protocols, and shared communication tools.
- Hybrid in-person/remote models – Initial contact conducted remotely with follow-up in-person visits for specific services (e.g., documentation, court support, or intensive case coordination).
Operational Considerations for Remote Service Delivery
When planning remote and rural support, partners may address:
- Minimum technology requirements, including secure devices, connectivity, and backup communication channels
- Processes for scheduling, confirming, and documenting remote appointments across time zones and islands
- Protocols for three-way coordination among the remote client location, local partner, and central service provider
- Translation and interpretation workflows for communities with language access needs
- Agreements on who leads follow-up contact and ongoing case coordination after initial remote engagement
Eligibility and Integration Across Hawaii Partners
In a multi-island environment, misalignment in eligibility criteria and intake practices can create confusion for referring agencies and gaps in coverage across islands. Regional partners can benefit from shared definitions of eligibility, standardized intake data elements, and transparent integration pathways.
Common Eligibility Dimensions
Hawaii organizations often structure eligibility frameworks around:
- Geographic coverage – Island, county, or specific zones where the agency is the designated or primary provider
- Population focus – Adults, youth, families, marginalized communities, or other identified groups
- Service type – Advocacy, legal services, housing-related support, behavioral health, or specialized programs
- Funding conditions – Grant- or contract-specific requirements that affect who can be served or on which islands
- Capacity thresholds – Waitlist criteria, prioritization factors, and alternative referral plans when capacity is constrained
Standardized Intake and Referral Information
To support coordinated eligibility determination across islands, partners can define a core data set used by all agencies at intake or referral, such as:
- Island and community of residence
- Primary service needs and urgency level
- Funding or program criteria relevant to placement (if known)
- Preferred communication method and language
- Existing connections to local agencies or community-based organizations
Standardized intake information supports more efficient triage and reduces repeated questioning when cases are transferred between islands or programs.
Integration with Statewide and County Systems
Eligibility and integration planning in Hawaii typically includes alignment with:
- State-level contracts and program standards for domestic violence services
- County-level human services and public health programs
- Courts, law enforcement, and legal aid structures that may be island- or circuit-specific
- Housing and homelessness systems, especially where regional coordinated entry or by-name lists exist
Partners may formalize these relationships through MOUs that describe:
- Eligibility criteria that apply statewide vs. island-specific criteria
- Which agency or system conducts the initial eligibility screening
- How referrals move between county or island programs and central state-funded services
- Shared definitions for “enrollment,” “active case,” and “case closure” across agencies
Data Sharing and Inter-Island Information Management
Given the distributed nature of Hawaii’s service network, cross-agency data practices are central to coordination. Partners often blend local case records with shared, regional data systems.
Data-Sharing Framework Elements
Agencies can develop data-sharing frameworks that outline:
- Data elements that are shared regionally (e.g., anonymized utilization trends, inter-island referral volumes)
- Case-level information that may be shared between specific agencies when coordinating services across islands
- Roles and responsibilities for data entry, validation, and updates when multiple agencies are involved
- Use of common identifiers or reference numbers to track cross-island coordination
- Reporting formats and timelines to state and county funders
Technology and Access Considerations
- Use of secure, cloud-based systems accessible from multiple islands
- Tiered access rights based on agency role, island coverage, and function
- Agreements on how offline or low-connectivity interactions are documented and later entered into shared systems
- Defined procedures for data corrections, case transfers, and case note ownership
Funding Collaboration and Resource Alignment in Hawaii
Funding structures in Hawaii often combine state, county, federal, and private resources. Multi-island service delivery can benefit from coordinated approaches to funding applications, cost-sharing, and resource allocation.
Joint Funding and Cost-Sharing Options
- Multi-island consortia – Coalitions of agencies across several islands submit joint proposals to support shared infrastructure (e.g., data systems, training, travel funds).
- Sub-award arrangements – A lead agency manages a primary grant and distributes sub-awards to island-specific partners with clearly defined scopes of work.
- Shared staffing models – Specialized staff (e.g., trainers, technologists, evaluators) are funded through pooled resources and scheduled across islands.
- Designated travel funds – Specific budget lines for inter-island travel, lodging, and related logistics that can be accessed by multiple partners under agreed protocols.
Resource Inventory and Gap Analysis
To align funding and program development, Hawaii partners can periodically compile:
- Island-by-island inventories of existing domestic violence programs and allied services
- Identified service gaps for particular populations or geographic areas
- Available physical infrastructure (e.g., office space, meeting rooms, technology hubs) that can support multi-island work
- Overlapping or duplicative services that may be streamlined through collaboration
These inventories can be used to inform joint funding priorities, advocacy positions, and coordinated engagement with state and county funders.
Governance and Partnership Structures
Multi-island coordination in Hawaii is strengthened by clear governance mechanisms that define decision-making, dispute resolution, and shared standards.
Inter-Island Governance Options
- Statewide steering committees – Representatives from each island or county convene to set shared priorities, review performance data, and update protocols.
- Island-based coordination tables – Localized groups focus on operational issues specific to each island while aligning with statewide frameworks.
- Designated lead agency per island – An organization assumes coordination responsibilities for convening partners, managing communication, and representing island-specific needs at statewide forums.
- Time-limited working groups – Task-focused groups (e.g., on data, training, or inter-island referrals) that develop recommendations and then transition responsibilities to standing bodies.
Key MOU Components for Hawaii Partnerships
MOUs and similar agreements often include:
- Island and geographic areas covered by each partner
- Eligibility criteria and referral pathways for inter-island coordination
- Data-sharing expectations and documentation standards
- Funding responsibilities and resource-sharing arrangements
- Communication schedules (e.g., regular inter-island coordination meetings)
- Procedures for revising agreements as capacity or funding changes