The Audit Coordinator’s Logistics Guide (Logistics Guide) is intended to offer behind-the-scenes planning and organizational support for conducting a successful Praxis Safety and Accountability Audit (or Audit). While some sections will be of interest to anyone involved in designing an Audit, the primary audience for this guide is a coordinator assigned to overseeing the process from start to finish—from obtaining agreements with agencies to gathering information and preparing recommendations. It is intended to help Audit Coordinators manage the details of the operation—the “logistics.”
Praxis originally developed the Logistics Guide in 2011 after 10 years of working with communities to analyze criminal legal system responses to domestic violence using The Praxis Safety and Accountability Audit (Audit). As a result of these many collaborations, we learned a considerable amount about the types of tools, worksheets, and examples that support the smooth coordination and implementation of Audit logistics. Over the past ten years we have worked with more and more communities that have applied the Audit methodology to institutions other than the criminal legal system. Consequently in 2019, Praxis reviewed and revised this Guide to incorporate attention to how the Audit can analyze institutional responses to sexual assault and system-generated inequities based on race, gender and gender expression, class, sexual orientation, ability, and/or age. We are deeply grateful to the many communities who have joined with us over the years to answer complex questions about how their communities are responding to gender-based violence through the Audit. Many of the revisions reflected here are due to their engaged involvement, diligent application of the model and strong partnership. Specific thanks goes out to:
- Our partners in the Sexual Assault National Demonstration Audit, a project funded by the Office on Violence Against Women, that included involvement of: Bellingham-Whatcom County, Washington; the Minnesota Indian Women’s Sexual Assault Coalition; Mending the Sacred Hoop; the Sexual Violence Justice Institute at Minnesota Coalition Against Sexual Assault; Battered Women’s Justice Project; Leah Lutz, Leah Lutz Consulting and Training; and Rhonda Martinson.
- Our partners at the New Orleans Blueprint for Safety and Casa de Esperanza who collaborated on an intensive Audit to assess and improve language access in cases involving domestic violence.
- Our partners in the Blueprint for Safety Adaptation Demonstration Initiative Demonstration Sites: New Orleans, Louisiana; Shelby County, Tennessee; and Duluth, Minnesota.
- And the following:
- Center for Regional and Tribal Child Welfare Studies in Duluth, Minnesota for their work to implement the full spirit and intent of the Indian Child Welfare Act;
- The New Jersey Division on Women and key organizations and individuals in Asbury Park for their work to regarding domestic violence services for recently immigrated Latinas; and in New Brunswick for their work regarding language access for South Asian survivors of domestic violence;
- The St. Paul and Ramsey County Intervention Project and key agencies and individuals within the St. Paul Blueprint for Safety for their work to address no contact order violations involving young Black men;
- Mending the Sacred Hoop, Program for Aid to Victims of Sexual Assault, and key agencies and individuals within Duluth, Minnesota’s criminal justice system for their work regarding the response to Native women who report sexual assault;
- Center for the Study of Social Policy and key agencies and individuals in Michigan for their work to address disproportionate foster care placement of African American children; and
- Apna Ghar, Branch Family Services, Mujeres Latinas en Accíon, and the Mayor’s Office on Domestic Violence in Chicago, Illinois for their work to account for culture in supervised visitation practices.
This project is supported by Grant No. 2015-TA-AX-K056 awarded by the Office on Violence Against Women, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, conclusions and recommendations expressed in this document are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Department of Justice.