state
Oregon Domestic Violence Coordination Framework
Partnership and inter-agency DV coordination guidance for Oregon-based organizations.
oregoncoordination
REGIONAL COORDINATION
Oregon Domestic Violence Service Coordination
State Coordination Overview
Oregon’s domestic violence service landscape is organized through a mix of statewide coalitions, state agencies, and regional collaborations that coordinate policy implementation, funding flow, and service standards. Agencies typically engage at three levels: state policy and funding, regional coordination, and local service delivery.
Key statewide coordination functions generally include:
- Aligning domestic violence service priorities with broader state health, human services, housing, and justice system strategies
- Supporting standardized data collection and reporting across programs funded through state and federal sources
- Facilitating training, technical assistance, and cross-sector learning for community-based programs
- Coordinating with courts, law enforcement, and legal aid entities on system response protocols
- Providing frameworks for culturally specific and tribal program collaboration with mainstream agencies
State-level partners commonly involved in Oregon domestic violence coordination include:
- State human services and victim services program offices
- Statewide domestic and sexual violence coalitions
- Housing and homelessness coordinating bodies
- Behavioral health, public health, and healthcare integration initiatives
- Judicial and criminal-legal system partners
State-level structures in Oregon tend to function as conveners and standard-setters, while service provision, housing support, and direct advocacy are primarily managed by community-based and regional partners.
Local Partnerships
Within Oregon, local coordination is organized around counties, regional service areas, and urban–rural linkages. Many domestic violence organizations participate in multi-agency collaboratives that include:
- Domestic and sexual violence advocacy organizations and shelters
- Tribal programs and culturally specific community-based organizations
- Homeless and housing providers, including rapid rehousing and transitional housing programs
- Legal aid, civil legal services, and court-based navigator programs
- Law enforcement, community corrections, and victim assistance units
- Health systems, behavioral health providers, and coordinated care organizations (CCOs)
- Child welfare-linked teams and multidisciplinary teams (MDTs)
Common local partnership models in Oregon include:
- Regional domestic violence task forces: Multi-agency groups that develop shared priorities, referral pathways, and coordination protocols.
- Co-located service hubs: Arrangements where advocates, housing navigators, and legal partners share physical or virtual space for coordinated service navigation.
- Justice system coordination tables: Regular meetings between advocates, prosecutors, courts, and supervision agencies to address process barriers and information flow.
- Health and human services integration teams: Partnerships between advocacy programs, CCOs, and human services agencies to connect clients to benefits, healthcare, and stabilization supports.
Local agreements often specify:
- Shared definitions for referral eligibility and priority populations
- Expected response timelines for warm hand-offs and information requests
- Communication channels for complex cases and cross-system coordination
- Data elements to be shared, aggregated, or jointly reported within privacy constraints
Eligibility
Eligibility parameters in Oregon vary by funding source, program model, and regional capacity. Agencies can align more effectively when they document and share clear criteria across partners. Typical dimensions of eligibility include:
Program-Level Eligibility Dimensions
- Service type: Advocacy, shelter, housing support, legal assistance, healthcare linkage, or economic stabilization services may each have distinct entry criteria.
- Geography: County of residence, service region, or tribal affiliation requirements tied to contracts or funding agreements.
- Household composition: Specific parameters related to adult-only households, households with children, or youth/young adult-focused services.
- Income or resource thresholds: Requirements associated with public benefits, housing subsidies, or specific grant programs.
- Immigration and documentation factors: Where relevant, how documentation status intersects with particular funding streams or legal remedies.
Coordination-Oriented Eligibility Practices
- Maintaining a shared matrix of program eligibility across county and regional partners
- Using common intake or pre-screening tools to determine appropriate referrals
- Establishing clear guidance for cases that fall outside standard eligibility (e.g., regional exceptions, discretionary slots)
- Defining how high-barrier or high-complexity situations are handled across systems
Partners in Oregon often benefit from written eligibility summaries and simple visual flow charts that can be shared across agencies, enabling staff to identify appropriate referral destinations without accessing confidential records.
Integration Pathways
Integration pathways describe how organizations in Oregon connect their operations, information flows, and decision-making with other agencies. These pathways can be formal (e.g., MOUs, contracts) or informal (e.g., standing meetings, liaison roles).
Operational Integration Models
- Coordinated referral networks: Shared processes for referring clients between domestic violence programs, housing providers, and legal or healthcare partners, often supported by standardized forms or secure communication channels.
- Shared access points: Participation in regional entry systems for housing or social services, with defined roles for domestic violence organizations in screening, prioritization, and follow-up.
- Embedded staff roles: Advocates or navigators stationed within courts, hospitals, or human services offices under formal partnership agreements.
- Cross-training and protocols: Regular joint training on roles, limitations, and information-sharing practices, paired with written protocols for specific coordination scenarios.
Governance and Agreement Structures
- Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs): Clarify roles, referral expectations, data elements to be shared, and escalation routes when coordination issues arise.
- Data-sharing arrangements: Outline what information can be exchanged, under what conditions, and through which systems, while respecting confidentiality and relevant privacy requirements.
- Joint planning processes: Inclusion of domestic violence partners in local and regional strategic planning for housing, health, and human services.
- Funding collaboration mechanisms: Subgranting, braided funding, or collaborative grant applications that recognize distinct organizational roles.
When Oregon agencies design or refine integration pathways, it can be useful to:
- Map all existing referral routes, co-located services, and shared entry points in a region
- Identify where survivors routinely interact with multiple systems and where hand-offs are most complex
- Prioritize a small number of high-impact coordination changes (e.g., standardized warm referral process to housing partners)
- Document and periodically revisit agreements to reflect changing capacity, funding, and policy environments
Many Oregon partners draw on broader national resources and tools to inform local coordination models. Additional coordination resources are available through the broader ecosystem hosted at DV.Support.