An Evaluation of the VIP Program (2007-2008 - BC Society of ...

Project Overview
Project Background
The “Violence Is Preventable” (V.I.P.) project was initiated in 2004 in British
Columbia with the goal of establishing a province-wide system that would provide
children and adolescents with school-based support and education related to
issues of domestic violence. Leading this initiative was the B.C. Yukon Society of
Transition Houses (BCYSTH, established 1978), a non-profit charitable society
which represents transition houses, safe homes, second stage transition houses,
and Children Who Witness Abuse Programs that serve the needs of battered
women and their children.
Phase one of the V.I.P project involved the:
establishment of a provincial advisory group
development of an overview of existing programs and models
exploration of potential collaboration between the existing Children Who
Witness Abuse (CWWA) Programs and B.C. schools
development of a service delivery model and
creation of a working document and manual for counselors to facilitate
implementation of violence prevention activities in schools.
With the success of phase one, phase 2 of the V.I.P project saw the development
and delivery of training and implementation of eight pilot projects in communities
throughout B.C. In these diverse pilot communities, educational presentations
and group interventions were delivered in schools by trained counselors selected
from the Children Who Witness Abuse (CWWA) programs.
Phase three, the current phase and focus of this evaluation, has built upon the
previous phases by adding twenty new communities throughout B.C. Within
these communities, the focus has been development of partnerships with schools
so that the critical need of violence prevention and education can be met through
educational presentations to children, adolescents and adults. Furthermore, this
process has enabled group interventions to continue to grow in number and
scope. In terms of the evaluation process, it must be noted that a change of
evaluators occurred halfway through (February 2008) the implementation of the
program 1 . As a result, a period of approximately five months passed with no
evaluator leading the process.
1 In order to become current with the evaluation, the second evaluator contacted each agency in March
2008 to discuss the agency’s status in regards to the use of the evaluation tools. Other key information was
also gathered at this time.
An Evaluation of the VIP Project 8