Howard Brown Health’s Sexual Harm Response Project: Linking LGBTQ Survivors Of Sexual Violence To LGBTQ-Affirming Services
Location
SU 217
Department
Social Work
Abstract
This program evaluation assesses Howard Brown Health’s “in.power*” Sexual Harm Response Project to determine which Chicago populations the program serves and which program services these populations access and decline; and to assess the strengths and challenges that exist within the program. The outcomes of which may help in.power* to determine whether program objectives are being met, how services are being implemented, and to inform future programming for the populations being served. Studies show that lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) people of color tend to experience higher rates of sexual harm and have nuanced needs as a result of those experiences. Howard Brown Health’s in.power* Sexual Harm Response Project is currently the only program to offer services tailored to meet the specific needs of LGBTQ survivors of sexual harm. This program evaluation pulls back the curtain on the in.power* program to reveal what those needs are, why the heteronormative approaches used in other sexual harm response programs can often be more harmful than helpful to LGBTQ-identified survivors, and how the approaches used in the in.power* program benefit those who access its services. To obtain data on the program outcomes and processes, a multi-method evaluation was used, which included reviewing of existing patient health record data for quantitative data and a non- randomized questionnaire distributed to key in.power* staff members to capture qualitative data. As such, the study used both quantitative and qualitative data analysis and interpretation. Projected results of this program evaluation include that the in.power* program population will consist mostly of transgender, gender non-conforming, and cisgender lesbian, gay, and bisexual people of color. The study projects that program participants will tend to access LGBTQ- affirming services and will tend to decline legal advocacy and other services that may require them to interact with law enforcement or traditional medical staff that have historically displayed homophobic or transphobic behaviors or lacked LGBTQ-affirming training. The study projects that program strengths will include the use of harm-reductive and trauma-informed frameworks and that program challenges will include inconsistencies in staff following agency protocol. The program evaluation will also likely generate further study into how services offered by in.power* programming may benefit LGBTQ populations among other providers of after-care support services for survivors of sexual harm and how to minimize barriers to access for those services.
Howard Brown Health’s Sexual Harm Response Project: Linking LGBTQ Survivors Of Sexual Violence To LGBTQ-Affirming Services
SU 217
This program evaluation assesses Howard Brown Health’s “in.power*” Sexual Harm Response Project to determine which Chicago populations the program serves and which program services these populations access and decline; and to assess the strengths and challenges that exist within the program. The outcomes of which may help in.power* to determine whether program objectives are being met, how services are being implemented, and to inform future programming for the populations being served. Studies show that lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) people of color tend to experience higher rates of sexual harm and have nuanced needs as a result of those experiences. Howard Brown Health’s in.power* Sexual Harm Response Project is currently the only program to offer services tailored to meet the specific needs of LGBTQ survivors of sexual harm. This program evaluation pulls back the curtain on the in.power* program to reveal what those needs are, why the heteronormative approaches used in other sexual harm response programs can often be more harmful than helpful to LGBTQ-identified survivors, and how the approaches used in the in.power* program benefit those who access its services. To obtain data on the program outcomes and processes, a multi-method evaluation was used, which included reviewing of existing patient health record data for quantitative data and a non- randomized questionnaire distributed to key in.power* staff members to capture qualitative data. As such, the study used both quantitative and qualitative data analysis and interpretation. Projected results of this program evaluation include that the in.power* program population will consist mostly of transgender, gender non-conforming, and cisgender lesbian, gay, and bisexual people of color. The study projects that program participants will tend to access LGBTQ- affirming services and will tend to decline legal advocacy and other services that may require them to interact with law enforcement or traditional medical staff that have historically displayed homophobic or transphobic behaviors or lacked LGBTQ-affirming training. The study projects that program strengths will include the use of harm-reductive and trauma-informed frameworks and that program challenges will include inconsistencies in staff following agency protocol. The program evaluation will also likely generate further study into how services offered by in.power* programming may benefit LGBTQ populations among other providers of after-care support services for survivors of sexual harm and how to minimize barriers to access for those services.
Comments
Job Ngwe is the faculty sponsor for this project.