ENGLISH

of the violence. We ask if the victim sought help from institutions, were there witnesses, other people of agencies involved, inorder to complete our information with theirs.’What is quite interesting is that all 3 respondents who used either Big 26, DA or SARA never used just one tool in theiragencies, but at least two of those mentioned. This is due to the different experts they work with; the choice of method is upto the psychologist, not to the organisation, which would hardly apply 2 or more methods together.In all responding organisations, the women experiencing violence were involved in the assessment. The risk assessment iseffected by the case worker (all) and additionally in a multidisciplinary team (3 out of 7). With one exception (Child ProtectionAuthority) risk assessment is done systematically. The Child Protection Authority does not use an instrument in cases of sexualviolence and when they don’t have the consent of the woman.As to the question in how many cases an assessment tool was applied, the numbers vary greatly, and in many cases theyare the same as in Table 1 (see above).Table 2: In how many cases did you apply a risk assessment tool?Police regional –Women’sSupportServicesInterventionCentresregional 59regional 300regional –regional31ChildProtectionAuthoritiesregionalregionalNetwork (national)regional11923363All participants stated that they found it helpful to use a risk assessment tool. It is significant to see in what way such a tool isregarded as helpful: 6 out of 8 participants stated that the tool helps to identify high risk, and all said it is helpful in the senseof avoiding further violence. One pointed out that she finds it very helpful because the risk assessment is done by the clientherself together with an expert. One criticism was also voiced:’It is not helpful, because it takes too much time, the results do not coincide with my personal evaluations and because notall colleagues can apply it’.Safety planningAll Bulgarian respondents stated that their organisation/agency has standards for protection of high risk victims of intimatepartner violence and that they are available as written policies/guidelines. Taking a closer look at the answers, it turns out thatthe understanding of policy/guideline is actually the existing law and not a special guideline the respective organisation hasdeveloped for itself. The Women’s Support Services are an exception here: ’We have such standards and we apply themcase by case depending on the facts of the case and with the consent of the victim.’P 29