West Virginia Domestic Violence Coordination Framework
Statewide DV response and inter-agency coordination guidelines for West Virginia organizations.
West Virginia Coordination Overview
Context and Operating Environment
West Virginia’s domestic violence service ecosystem is shaped by dispersed rural communities, limited transportation infrastructure, and a mix of small nonprofit providers, county agencies, and regional coalitions. Effective coordination depends on structured rural access strategies, county-level collaboration models, and clear integration readiness standards for new partners and systems.
This page outlines frameworks that agencies and organizations may use to align services, reduce duplication, and improve predictable access across West Virginia’s 55 counties.
Rural Access Considerations
Rural geography, workforce constraints, and connectivity gaps influence how services can be coordinated and scaled. Agencies often operate across multiple counties, share staff, and rely on regional partnerships with law enforcement, courts, and health systems.
Key rural access considerations include:
- Extended travel times for in-person services and court participation
- Limited public transportation and reliance on informal transport networks
- Variable broadband and mobile coverage impacting remote service delivery
- Small provider footprints with shared roles across adjacent counties
- Dependence on county-level relationships with prosecutors, magistrates, and law enforcement
Rural Access Models
The following models describe options for structuring access in West Virginia’s rural and micropolitan areas. Agencies can adapt or blend these approaches based on local capacity and county characteristics.
1. Regional Service Hubs with Satellite Access Points
In this model, one or more organizations anchor a multi-county hub and coordinate satellite access points in outlying counties.
- Regional hubs: Centralized offices or shelters that coordinate intake, case assignment, data entry, and inter-county referrals.
- Satellite access points: Part-time presence within county partners (e.g., community action agencies, health centers, legal aid offices) for scheduled intakes and meetings.
- Shared protocols: Common intake, referral, and documentation procedures across counties to enable predictable routing.
- Transportation coordination: Agreements with local partners to coordinate rides, mileage reimbursement structures, or centralized scheduling.
2. Circuit-Rider Service Delivery
This model uses scheduled rotations of staff who serve multiple counties on a predictable calendar.
- Standardized calendar: Regularly scheduled days per county (e.g., “First and third Tuesdays in County A; second and fourth Wednesdays in County B”).
- Co-located operations: Use of shared space within county agencies, health departments, or community-based organizations.
- Central coordination: One organizing entity manages scheduling, communication, and data consolidation for circuit staff.
- Communication protocols: Clear points of contact in each county for appointment referrals, cancellations, and case updates.
3. Hybrid Remote–In-Person Access
Hybrid models combine remote intake and coordination with strategic in-person activities.
- Remote intake and triage: Centralized phone or virtual intake stations that can serve all counties, with shared intake forms and routing rules.
- Scheduled in-person follow-up: Pre-planned in-person presence for court coordination, multi-agency meetings, and high-priority case work.
- Use of existing county infrastructure: Co-use of libraries, community centers, or health clinics for confidential meeting spaces, as appropriate.
- Contingency plans: Protocols for service continuity during weather events or connectivity disruptions.
County Collaboration Models
County-level structures in West Virginia are central for aligning law enforcement, courts, social services, and community-based providers. The models below outline options for collaborative governance and coordination.
1. County Domestic Violence Coordination Committees
County coordination committees bring together core agencies to establish shared expectations, workflows, and communication norms.
- Membership: Local law enforcement representatives, prosecutors, magistrate court designees, probation/parole contacts, social services, hospitals/clinics, school system liaisons, and domestic violence program representatives.
- Core functions:
- Reviewing referral pathways and response times
- Clarifying information-sharing expectations within legal and organizational constraints
- Mapping gaps in county-level coverage and coordination
- Aligning with regional coalitions and state-level requirements
- Operating protocols: Written meeting charters, documented decision-making processes, and clear points of contact.
2. Multi-County Clusters
For smaller counties, multi-county clusters can consolidate coordination while preserving local relationships.
- Shared governance: A cluster steering group with representation from each participating county.
- Common tools: Shared referral forms, standardized memoranda of understanding (MOUs), and cluster-wide data categories.
- Role differentiation: One county or organization may lead training; another may lead data coordination; another may host shared meetings.
- Performance monitoring: Periodic review of cross-county metrics such as response times, referral volumes, and case coordination outcomes.
3. Court-Centered Collaboration
In counties where court processes are the primary organizing structure, collaboration can be built around court calendars and procedures.
- Standardized court days: Align service presence with civil and criminal domestic violence docket days.
- Designated liaisons: Named points of contact within magistrate and circuit courts for coordinating documentation and hearing schedules.
- Joint training: Periodic multidisciplinary sessions with judges, magistrates, clerks, law enforcement, and service providers on shared workflows and documentation standards.
- Case coordination templates: Use of structured checklists for court-related communication among agencies.
Integration Readiness for New Partners
Integration readiness refers to the extent to which an organization, agency, or program is prepared to participate in regional domestic violence coordination processes in a consistent, predictable manner.
In West Virginia, integration readiness can be supported through standardized assessments during partnership development, grant collaborations, and coalition-building efforts.
Organizational Readiness Criteria
Partners evaluating integration readiness may consider the following organizational criteria:
- Defined service geography: Clear list of counties served and any sub-county coverage distinctions (e.g., specific districts or regions).
- Documented policies: Written policies for referrals, confidentiality, data handling, and inter-agency communication.
- Staffing structure: Role descriptions, coverage schedules across counties, and escalation pathways.
- Training and orientation: Standard onboarding for staff regarding regional coordination expectations and county partners.
- Infrastructure: Reliable communication tools (phone, secure email, or messaging platforms) and basic data management systems.
Data and Information-Sharing Readiness
Data-sharing arrangements in West Virginia often rely on informal relationships and varying systems. Integration readiness includes the ability to participate in agreed information practices without requiring a single shared database.
- Standard data elements: Agreement on minimum data points for referrals, case coordination, and cross-agency reporting.
- Secure transmission: Use of secure channels for transmitting sensitive information, aligned with organizational and legal requirements.
- Access controls: Internal protocols for limiting data access to appropriate staff and documenting access decisions.
- Data quality processes: Routine checks for completeness and accuracy of shared information.
- Reporting capability: Ability to produce periodic summary reports for county committees or multi-county clusters.
Operational Alignment Readiness
Operational alignment focuses on whether an organization can reliably participate in joint processes and timelines.
- Participation expectations: Capacity to attend county or regional coordination meetings on a set schedule.
- Response timelines: Ability to respond to partner inquiries and referrals within agreed timeframes.
- Coverage planning: Contingency plans for staff turnover, leave, or temporary reductions in service.
- Documentation alignment: Use of common forms, templates, and terminology agreed by the county committee or regional coalition.
Sample County Collaboration Framework
The following example framework can be adapted by West Virginia counties or multi-county clusters to define domestic violence coordination roles and processes.
Core Components
- Purpose statement: Brief description of the collaboration’s scope (e.g., referrals, information exchange, training, system improvement).
- Geographic scope: List of participating counties and any sub-county distinctions.
- Membership roster: Named organizations and positions (not individuals) with designated alternates.
- Meeting cadence: Agreed schedule (e.g., quarterly, bi-monthly) and format (virtual, in-person, hybrid).
- Decision processes: Description of how agreements, protocols, and changes are adopted.
Role Definitions
- Convening entity: Responsible for scheduling meetings, preparing agendas, and maintaining shared documentation.
- Data coordination lead: Aggregates shared metrics and prepares county or cluster-level summaries.
- Training coordinator: Identifies training needs and coordinates cross-agency sessions.
- Liaison to state/regional bodies: Communicates with statewide coalitions or regional task forces and relays updates.
Example MOUs and Agreements
County and multi-county groups can use MOUs or written agreements to formalize expectations without creating binding legal obligations.
- Scope of collaboration: Services, activities, and processes included and excluded from the agreement.
- Information handling: General description of what information may be shared, in what form, and for what purposes.
- Referral procedures: Standard referral pathways, contact points, and expected response times.
- Review cycle: Frequency for reviewing and updating the agreement based on practice experience.
- Termination and changes: Steps for modifying or discontinuing participation.
Regional Alignment and Funding Collaboration
Given the scale of West Virginia’s rural areas, funding and resource-sharing collaborations can support more stable coverage across counties.
Regional Alignment Options
- Shared grant applications: Multi-county proposals that allocate roles based on each organization’s strengths and geography.
- Resource pooling: Shared use of specialized staff (e.g., data coordinators, trainers, systems navigators) funded across several counties.
- Joint performance metrics: Region-level indicators (e.g., referral completion rates, inter-agency response times) used in common for reporting.
- Shared infrastructure: Co-funded technology platforms or scheduling tools used by multiple agencies.
Planning and Evaluation Practices
- Annual coordination review: County or cluster-level assessment of what is working, gaps, and needed adjustments.
- Partner feedback loops: Structured mechanisms for agencies to provide input on coordination processes.
- Documentation of changes: Written summaries of any protocol updates, role adjustments, or new partner integrations.
- Alignment with state priorities: Review of how local frameworks correlate with state-level policy directions and funding criteria.