Identifying Gaps and Bridges of Intra- and Inter-Agency Cooperation Deliverable 2.4 Deliverable report for IMPRODOVA Grant Agreement Number 787054 This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 787054. This report reflects only the authors’ views and the European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains. Published by the IMPRODOVA Consortium, Deutsche Hochschule der Polizei, Münster (Germany), March 2020 H2020-SEC-2016-2017 IMPRODOVA Deliverable 2.4 Authors of the IMPRODOVA Consortium involved in this report are: Lisa Bradley, Oona Brooks-Hayes, Michele Burman, Francois Bonnet, Fanny Cuillerdier, Thierry Delpeuch, Sergio Felgueiras, Stefanie Giljohann, Gabor Hera, Paul Herbinger, Jarmo Houtsonen, Jean-Marc Jaffré, Karmen Jereb, Joachim Kersten, Norbert Leonhardmair, Charlotte Limonier, Branko Lobnikar, Paulo Machado, Marianne Mela, Sonia Morgado, Marion Neunkirchner, Suvi Nipuli, Martta October, Lucia Pais, Bettina Pfleiderer, Lisa Richter, Bostjan Slak, Dora Szegő, Margarita Vassileva, Catharina Vogt TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: THE CHARACTERISTICS OF A “GOOD PARTNERSHIP” AGAINST DV . 6 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................. 6 1. AN ACTION THAT TARGET PRIORITY AUDIENCES ........................................................................................... 7 2. AN EXTENDED STEERING BODY THAT IS AN AUTHORITY................................................................................ 8 3. AN EXTENSIVE ORGANISATION FOR INFORMATION SHARING AND USE ..................................................... 10 4. THE PRESENCE OF SPECIALIZED RELAYS IN EACH PARTNER ORGANISATION ............................................... 12 5. AN EFFORT TO TRAIN PROFESSIONALS AND PRODUCE KNOWLEDGE .......................................................... 13 CONCLUSION: THE DEVELOPMENT OF “GOOD COOPERATION” IS NOT JUST AN ORGANISATIONAL MATTER 14 REPORT - CASE DOCUMENTATION: GOOD PRACTICES IN EIGHT EU COUNTRIES (COUNTRY REPORTS) ......................................................................................................................... 16 1. AUSTRIA ....................................................................................................................... 16 1.1 Child and victim’s protection units in hospital ........................................................................................... 16 1.1.1 Methodological Information ................................................................................................................ 16 1.1.2 Presentation of the case ...................................................................................................................... 17 1.1.3 Discussion of the case .......................................................................................................................... 21 References ................................................................................................................................................... 22 1.2 Multi agency risk assessment conference (MARAC) ................................................................................... 23 1.2.1 Methodological information ................................................................................................................ 23 1.2.2 Presentation of the case: goals and stakes of the practice (what problem is it designed to solve) ....... 24 1.2.3 Conclusion and perspectives ................................................................................................................ 28 References ................................................................................................................................................... 29 2 of 160 H2020-SEC-2016-2017 IMPRODOVA Deliverable 2.4 2. FINLAND ....................................................................................................................... 31 2.1 Multiagency Anchor team „ANKKURI“ ....................................................................................................... 31 2.1.1 Methodological information ................................................................................................................ 31 2.1.2 Presentation ofthe case ....................................................................................................................... 31 2.1.3 Discussion oft he case .......................................................................................................................... 40 2.2 The DV investigation team ......................................................................................................................... 41 2.2.1 Methodological information ................................................................................................................ 41 2.2.2 Presentataion of the case .................................................................................................................... 41 2.2.3 Discussion of the case .......................................................................................................................... 51 3. FRANCE ........................................................................................................................ 54 3.1 Best practice: embedded social workers .................................................................................................... 54 3.1.1 Methodological information ................................................................................................................ 54 3.1.2 Presentation of the case ...................................................................................................................... 55 3.1.3 Discussion of the case .......................................................................................................................... 57 3.2 Strategy for better VIF management in Region 1 ....................................................................................... 60 3.2.1 Methodological information ................................................................................................................ 60 3.2.2 Description of the case ........................................................................................................................ 60 3.2.3 Discussion of the case .......................................................................................................................... 65 4. GERMANY .................................................................................................................... 67 4.1 The Berlin Police ......................................................................................................................................... 67 4.1.1 Methodological information ................................................................................................................ 67 4.1.2 Presentation of the case ...................................................................................................................... 67 4.1.3 Discussion of the case .......................................................................................................................... 72 4.1.4 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................... 73 4.2 HAIP-Network (Hannoversches Interventionsprogramm gegen häusliche Gewalt / Hanover’s Intervention project against domestic violence) ................................................................................................................... 74 4.2.1 Methodological information ................................................................................................................ 74 4.2.2 Presentation of the case: practice’s goals and stakes, what problem is it designed to solve ................. 75 4.2.3 Discussion of the case .......................................................................................................................... 90 5. HUNGARY ..................................................................................................................... 92 5.1 Best practice 1: Responsiveness to victims’ needs ..................................................................................... 92 5.1.1 Methodological information ................................................................................................................ 92 5.1.2 Presentation of the case ...................................................................................................................... 92 3 of 160 H2020-SEC-2016-2017 IMPRODOVA Deliverable 2.4 5.2 Best practice 2: Responsiveness to victims’ needs ..................................................................................... 99 5.2.1 Methodological information ................................................................................................................ 99 5.2.2 Presentation of the case ...................................................................................................................... 99 5.2.3 Discussion of the case ........................................................................................................................ 103 Bibliography ..............................................................................................................................................