ENGLISH

And one respondent of the police seems to be quite dissatisfied with the SARA instrument:’Even if I’ve done a proper training on SARA in Rome (it lasted for one week; one/two members from each Questura in Italywere attending), I find the instrument quite difficult to manage in my office.’Safety planning:Of the 14 respondents, 13 have standards for protection and safety for high risk victims. But only 5 of those 13 provide themin writing. One agency stated:’The members of the staff have contributed to write it and they all have a copy.’All respondents use safety planning and a multi-agency approach as a measure to protect and ensure safety of high riskvictims of intimate partner violence. One respondent considered the ’24-hour availability of AVC operators for the hospital staffand police’ as another safety measure. One respondent stated that the safety measures also apply to their own staff:’The operators are always working in teams of two, when they have to deal with women in dangerous situations’.One agency voiced a very pressing concern:’A gap in the safety planning exists: there are not enough places in the shelters available to address women who are in danger.’9 of 14 respondents regularly provide special training to work with high risk victims, and 7 of those 9 offer a special trainingon high risk victims for newcomers in their agency. 40% of the AVC respondents (4 out of 10) do not receive a regular trainingof this kind.With the exception of 2 AVC all remaining respondents analyse homicide, attempted homicide and severe violence caseswithin their agency.’Yes, we analyse all DV cases at the First Aid in the 2 city hospitals. We have not had homicides and attempted homicidescases during 2009.’In 3 agencies this task was fulfilled by a professional of the agency only, in 2 agencies it was the supervisor and the professional,in 2 cases the multidisciplinary team, in 1 case the supervisor plus the multidisciplinary team and in 2 agencies all 3 parties(professional, supervisor, multidisciplinary team) are involved in the analysis.Seven out of 12 are engaged in this analysis on an irregular basis whenever a case occurs. All 5 remaining respondents saidthat they do this kind of analysis at least once a year.Cooperation with other agenciesOf the 14 respondents, 13 share information on the assessed high risk victims with other agencies; the only exception here isthe investigative unit of the police. The interviewee said that this would be against the data protection laws.The 3 representatives of the police sectors and 1 AVC stated that they do not need the victim’s consent to share this kindof information. 50% of the remaining 10 responses need the consent of the women in writing. The other remaining 50% aresatisfied with at least a verbal statement, but 2 of them require additionally a written consent later in the process.The documentation of the case is available for the case manager only in 11 participating organisations. In 3 agencies therelevant unit plus the case manager have this access. One respondent of the police stated: ’There are special cautions(limitations of access) in cases where the perpetrator is a police member.’P 45