Economic Justice in IPV Services: Service Providers' Perspectives on Financial Empowerment for Latinx Immigrant IPV Survivors

Background and Purpose: Economic abuse and financial instability are pervasive consequences of intimate partner violence (IPV), with 21–60% of survivors experiencing job loss, housing insecurity, and long-term economic hardship. These challenges are particularly acute for Latinx immigrant survivors, who face intersecting barriers such as immigration-related restrictions, systemic inequities, limited language access, and cultural norms and stigma surrounding abuse. While economic vulnerability is well-documented as a barrier to leaving abusive relationships, limited research has explored how service providers conceptualize and respond to survivors’ financial needs through an economic justice lens. This study aims to explore service providers’ perspectives on financial empowerment and the structural barriers that shape service delivery for Latinx immigrant IPV survivors.

Methods: This qualitative study employed a phenomenological design to explore the lived experiences and perspectives of service providers who support Latinx immigrant survivors of IPV. Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted with 18 service providers employed in both mainstream and Latinx-focused community-based organizations across New York and New Jersey. Participants were recruited through snowball sampling and social media outreach. Inclusion criteria required participants to be (1) 18 years or older, (2) currently employed full-time in an IPV-related human service setting, (3) have a minimum of two years’ experience working with immigrant Latinx IPV survivors, and (4) fluent in English. Data were analyzed using ATLAS.ti software.

Results: Service providers identified economic abuse, such as restricted employment, financial control, and credit sabotage, as a key mechanism of control that reinforces survivors’ financial dependency and limits their ability to leave abusive relationships. Structural and institutional barriers, including limited access to public benefits, immigration-related exclusions, and inconsistent funding, were frequently cited as compounding survivors’ economic vulnerability. Latinx-focused organizations implemented more flexible and culturally grounded approaches. Providers emphasized long-term strategies such as entrepreneurship programs, culturally tailored financial workshops, and peer-led income-generating initiatives. These efforts were embedded within holistic, community-based models that addressed both financial stability and emotional healing. Trust-building, cultural affirmation, and survivor leadership were core components of these programs. In contrast, mainstream organizations primarily focused on immediate needs using crisis-driven models, such as emergency financial assistance, budgeting support, and workforce referrals. While mainstream providers recognized the value of these services, they also noted that institutional constraints—particularly limited funding and a lack of cultural and linguistic responsiveness—often hindered their ability to meet the complex and long-term needs of Latinx immigrant survivors.

Conclusion and Implications: Findings underscore the urgent need for comprehensive, culturally responsive, and survivor-informed economic justice interventions that address both short- and long-term financial needs. Service providers highlighted the importance of expanding childcare, language access, and immigration relief, as well as investing in long-term workforce development and community-based entrepreneurship. This study offers critical implications for advancing equity-focused practice, informing culturally attuned policy development, and reimagining social work education to integrate economic justice frameworks into IPV intervention strategies. Strengthening collaborations with grassroots organizations that center survivor agency is essential to promoting long-term financial stability and healing for Latinx immigrant survivors of IPV.