Service Needs and Barriers to Access after Crime Victimization: Variation and Commonalities across Underserved and Minoritized Populations

Background: Victims of crime, whether property crimes or violent crimes, need services and supports post-victimization. The types of services needed can vary from short-term financial assistance to long-term counseling and access to healthcare for physical conditions that resulted from the crime experienced. In order for local crime victims service systems to be responsive to the community, more information is needed about how crime victims’ needs may vary across historically underserved and minoritized populations and the potential disparate impact of barriers to accessing services. This paper presents on findings from 55 interviews with service providers, advocates, and people with lived experience from across the state who shared their perspectives about service needs post crime victimization and the challenges to accessing supports to meet these needs.

Methods: The research team developed a comprehensive interview guide that examined the service and support needs of victims of crime and barriers to accessing services. To recruit interview participants, the research team used purposive and snowball sampling methods. Specifically, the research team first interviewed the study’s community advisory board (CAB) members (i.e., people with professional, volunteer, or lived experience with the study’s identified priority populations). The research team then asked CAB members to recommend additional potential participants. Purposive sampling methods were then used to identify any underrepresented demographic groups, regions, types of service, or types of crime. This process continued until all interviews were complete (n = 55). Rapid qualitative analysis was used to summarize the results of the interviews and identify salient themes.

Results: Of the 55 interviews conducted, 21 (38%) respondents were victim service providers, 11 (20%) were victim advocates, and 23 (41%) were from culturally specific organizations. Participants indicated that, while any population may experience any of the crimes listed, specific populations may experience certain types of crimes more often. For example, fraud, scams, and exploitation may be more common among older adults, people with disabilities, refugees, and immigrants. In addition, participants more often named state violence in reference to BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and people of color) communities, immigrants, people who are unhoused, and those involved in the criminal legal system. Further, participants identified multiple types of barriers to individuals reporting the crime and/or accessing victims services, including lack of trust in the service system, fear of law enforcement, lack of language interpretation, lack of cultural competence and representation among staff, lack of transportation, and stigma associated with reporting a crime. The salience of these barriers to accessing services varied by the underserved or minoritized group referenced.

Conclusions: Service needs vary by type of crime victimization as well as population demographic. However, crime victim services are largely a one-size-fits-all model that is ill-equipped to respond to the unique needs and circumstances of individuals seeking services. Based on this needs assessment, crime victim service and culturally specific organizations should expand language accessibility, increase cultural competence among service providers, ensure representation from the community(ies) being served, provide fiscal support for community-led approaches to victims’ services, and enhance the coordination of different types of services.