Women's Aid (England) loses funding for National Helpline

[stumbledin]

Have just seen this on a facebook thread.

Women's Aid is the National Federation of women's refuges and has been providing this service seen they set it up in 1987!

Although they (were forced) to share it with Refuge in 2003, Refuge is just a member group.

I wonder what is behind this, particularly as it seems it isn't that long ago that Refuge was investigated by the Charity Commission.

www.womensaid.org.uk/update-regarding-the-national-domestic-violence-helpline/

(I very much doubt it has anything to do with trans issues, but much more to do with who has more political clout. Or that the Government like other funders think the corporate style is more worthy than those silly grass roots feminist organisations that hand on to autonomous working.)

Oh my God. If I had had to talk to a man when I was trying to escape I might never have left.

Home office announcement [says Women's Aid wantsd to apply independently of refuge]

Refuge is pleased to announce the Home Office has awarded Refuge a grant of £1.2 million to run the National Domestic Violence Helpline from November 2019 to March 2022.

Refuge has run the National Domestic Violence Helpline since 2003, in partnership with Women’s Aid. Last year, the Home Office re-tendered the service and Women’s Aid decided to bid independently. Following a competitive process, Refuge was awarded the contract to continue running the helpline.

Refuge will run the Helpline in partnership with Women’s Aid until 31 October 2019, from which point the service will be run by Refuge only. Callers will receive specialist support from the same dedicated, highly-trained team of Helpline staff and volunteers and the Freephone number will remain the same.

Refuge has also secured additional support to develop new digital and mobile resources to empower even more victims. This includes increasing capacity to answer more live calls, developing web-chat services and publishing information on social media channels to widen the availability of the helpline service.

For more information, please read the Home Office’s press statement.

Refuge looks forward to continuing and expanding this life-saving service for women. If you or anybody you know thinks they may be experiencing domestic violence, please call the Freephone 24/7 National Domestic Violence Helpline on 0808 2000 247.

Refuge are cagey about supporting men,but they do. But then WA have a line for men too.

Refuge let men into refuges though.

I am not understanding how exactly WA are out in this position. Do they not seek their own funding to do what they want with. How is it that anyone has control of them that they have to tender and application. They set this service up.

Name changed for this. It's longer than I meant it to be, I'm sorry.

I'm a DV survivor. Still in the relationship because it's so very hard to leave. Especially with financial abuse, and fewer and fewer places to actually go to. Even if I get a refuge space, I need somewhere to go after that. Some refuges have limited time that you can stay, which adds to the fear and pressure at an already traumatic time.

This change, the winning bid by refuge (presumably offering lower cost service) just seems to be yet another show of contempt for women, especially any of us who end up in a vulnerable position.

There's nowhere near enough funding. The helpline, which had been a lifeline for me when I've been terrified, traumatised, and with nowhere else to turn, is so often extremely difficult to get through to. I particularly needed it and am so grateful for it when I was badly letdown by my local WA.

Putting services out to tender, lowest bids winning. The services suffer. You get what you pay for. Services have been cut, help rationed, less experienced (and sometimes completely unsuitable) staff and volunteers, all dealing with bigger, frequently unmanageable caseloads.

I've experienced the consequences firsthand. My local WA merged some years ago with a neighbouring area. Both areas are large and highly populated. They also offer advice and support to men (no separate services, which is a potential issue for victims whose partners make counter allegations, a fairly common thing that abusers do). The support offered is therefore spread thin is limited, mainly ensuring child protection via referrals to police or social services, and some support if you go to court. No real emotional support, no help with housing (when people wonder why women don't leave abusive relationships, I wish they'd realise women need somewhere to actually leave to).

The council used to fund an additional service that provided counselling, support with leaving, advocates to help find alternative housing, guide you with finances, dealing with the police, etc. The merged WA service undercut them a few years ago, offering a cheaper contract. I was too scared and confused to take up support a few years ago, now that support has gone.

The national helpline means so much to me, they've been the support I can't access locally. I'm scared their ability to help me and all other women in need will be further limited if this change has come about because of reduced funding, if Refuge won the tender because they, like my local WA will do it cheaply by cutting the help on offer.

It also scares me a lot that a possibly violent man could be in refuge with me. I'm scared of going to a refuge as it is and still hope to find some other way out of this.

I'm scared about writing this on such a public forum but I feel I need to speak out.

Are you heading this Refuge???!!!

Trying to undercut the founding specialists is shocking behaviour and flagrant disregard for the specialist care of women and dc, if this is what's happened.

cheaperforareason . They are still there for now, use them all you can, and find a refuge that won't allow male bodies, if there's any left.

Be safe

@TruthOnTrial

Can yo give the link to the Government web site where it says Women's Aid wanted to apply serparately.

I have searched .gov.uk and cannot find anything.

Thanks

Hi other posters on this thread!

When I posted this last night I was quite tired and sort of assumed everyone would know of the destructive history of Refuge in relation to building the network of feminist grass roots refuges that eventually became the Women's Aid Federation (England and Wales)

Popular myth, ie media "facts", say that the first women's refuge in the UK was the one set up by Erin Pizzey. In fact the first refuge (although not called that) was set up by Black women in Brixton.

Erin Pizzey was anti feminist and accused what was the the Women's Liberation Workshop of being a hotbed of lesbianism and communism, and felt it was such a threat she report discussion there to the police!!! But what was worse was that she fed the media the myth that women in abusive relationships "chose" to be in one, because they were as likely to be abusive.

For years she was a highly popular figure in the mainstream media as she help them with their narrative of the "unfeminine, anti men" women's libbers.

For a long time her public influence was very destructive on the growing network of women's refuges set up at grass roots level by local women, who had a very different basis on which they worked with and supported women escaping male violence.

Because of Refuge's high media profile they got a lot of famous patrons and money, and expanded into basically a large corporation.

At some time (maybe after Erin Pizzey was no longer directly involved) Refuge refuges started affilliated to Women's Aid which had become recognised as the groups setting the standards for refuge provision etc..

Refuge only got to be joint provider of the National Helpline because of the direct intervention of Cherie Blair / Booth who was on their MC.

In awarding the Helpline funding to Refuge on its own, the Government is effectively saying it doesn't respect the work of the Women's Aid federation. And it comes as no surprise to see it is not just the Helpline funding but additional funding.

Also worth pointing out that Refuge was only recently investigated by the Charity Commission for how workers were treated, and suggestions that some well paid jobs went to family members.

Another aspect of the Helpline work is the collection each day of the number of refuge spaces available so as to be able to tell women in an emergency if there is anywhere for them to go. Some are saying this is a conflict of interest as Women's Aid does not directly run any refuges, but that Refuge now has a large number of refuges so in could prioritise spaces in their refuges over others. It is hard to explain how Refuge has managed to expand its chain (ie they operate on a corporate level) when so many other locally run refuges cant survive financially.

The use of funding to create mission drift, is not new. But it is obvious that it is also being used to undermine, and erase the feminist politics that were the basis of women's services. This started with funders dangling the opportunity of continued funding by saying women's refuges should also support men who had suffered domestic violence. And although even the Government has stated that the EA allows single sex services, we know that the combination of funders, a younger generation of "woke" workers means that many refuges are reluctant to use this for fear of a trans onslaught.

So what has happened here is that a group that has no tradition of feminist based services has been given the contract for the work that was originated and run by a feminist organisation.

(The other big inroad into refuge provison by local women's groups, was effectively undermined over the years by Labour encouraging through funding streams, Housing Associations to apply for funding. The concept of Labour's that refuges are a housing issue is why historically many refuges rely on users claiming housing benefit. And this was to save Labour from having to accept the concept of male violence - old time Labourites claimed the campaign to end domestic violence was an attack on the working class - so rather than look at funding to protect women from male violence they just said its a housing issue!!!!!!!)

I am not understanding how exactly WA are out in this position. Do they not seek their own funding to do what they want with. How is it that anyone has control of them that they have to tender and application. They set this service up.

Unfortunately it can be difficult to find enough funding, and things have got worse with austerity. It may be that WA could have done more, but tendering for a service can be a massive piece of work and worried have been a priority for them. Also sometimes if you're not the commissioner's chosen provider they can make it difficult for you to access networks and publicity, as they prefer to work with whoever they have chosen, so it's worth more than money.

As for the ethics of taking a service that someone else has designed and built and putting it out to tender I agree this is crap, though v common in the voluntary sector. I do wonder whether there could be a challenge under intellectual property law or something, though the services might have been funded for so long by the govt that they could now say they had funded the development (IANAL probably fairly obviously!)

*@stumbledin
this is the refuge statement on the home office press release

Yes to crowd funding for WA to keep this running without Refuge who seem to be quite an aggressive concern if recent reports and investigations are anything to go by, and perhaps why WA have acted independent of refuge.

@stumbledin.. It's written in the extract I posted

Cheaperforareason

I stayed for many many years for exactly the same reason as you: I had nowhere to go.

I tried leaving with my kids, managed it for 18 months, but in the end couldn't afford the childcare and had to go back to him. The second time I left it was without my children because I just wasn't in any financial position to leave with them. They are still with him. I console myself that at least they're being provided for.

Some people might wonder why I loathe the patriarchy so much, going by some of my posts on here.
This is why.

Sakura

@TruthOnTrial

Thanks for the clarification. I read what you wrote as it being part of a Government statement not something from Refuge!

And quite honestly if it was Women's Aid who said they wanted to bid independently I think Refuge should have accepted that the enforced partnership hadn't worked and that it was Women's Aid's project they should have just stepped down gracefully (or even sisterly?).

I suspect it will also be that they put in a cheaper bid as they are London based and have such a huge income, whereas Women's Aid isn't directly funded (not even sure if member groups pay some sort of membership) but has some project funding.

Whether intentionally or not the Government have questioned Women's Aid's competence, and possibly worse, will make some women loose confidence in the Helpline.

I don't trust refuge, but I do trust WA and they need financial help to continue their specialist work.

I'm really not into the piggy-backing in any sphere but this is pretty grostesque commercially aggressive behaviour towards a grass roots organisation has saved so many women's lives.

How could they act so insistently and uncharitably as to attempt to gain access to the WA helpline!?

Not a thought for the impact on women,I don't care what their blurb says.

Horley has again acted inproperly

I am still trying to find out more about this as it is such a strange decision and has huge implications for the future of WAFE as an autonomous organisation.

Saw this comment from Women's Aid in an article:

^ ... the decision to bid independently for the funding was driven by a concern that the existing model of delivery was not offering sufficient support to victims of domestic violence.

"Our decision to bid independently for the National Domestic Violence Helpline was not taken lightly and was motivated by our concern that the existing model of delivery does not and cannot give survivors the best-value service in terms of consistent quality and number of calls answered, which is important when approximately 30 per cent of calls remain unanswered.

"In short, we could be doing more for less. Our goal has always been, and continues to be, to maintain and promote the very best service for survivors, with the highest levels of integrity and efficiency." ... ^

So the organisation that sets the standards for the DV sector has said it wants to ensure the standards of the Helpline and as a result are NOT given the money to do it.

And from another article:

^ ... For the year to March 2018, Women’s Aid had an income of £4.2m
For the year to March 2018, Refuge had an income of £14.4m

Last year former Refuge employees complained about working conditions at the charity. There has also been criticism of the high pay awarded to its chief executive at over £200,000.

Refuge faced a Charity Commission compliance case early last year, which was closed when the regulator was satisfied that trustees were making appropriate changes to its governance structures.

Meanwhile Women’s Aid is currently without a permanent chief executive after the sudden departure of Katie Ghose, amid allegations of ties to UKIP. ... ^

Not forgetting that this grant award is in increase in funding as it is for additional services.

Even if the decision is not as a result of (in)direct lobbying it adds to the continuing threat to smaller voluntary groups, which is what women's groups nearly always are, that funders will always give money to larger more corporate groups with a high turnover, irrespective of the quality or politics of the service.

Thank you for coming back with that.

What i find most interesting is how with higher income on such a scale there were concerns from wa that they could provide more for less!!!!!

Refuge has now a dubious history at best, and now they are in charge of these services.

I want to see an investigation into this vital publix service for women.

Odd the way the ceo acted whilst there, then left!

There needs to be a public investigation.

I am sure there is massive concern out there for how this is going to pan out.

TruthonTrial What i find most interesting is how with higher income on such a scale there were concerns from wa that they could provide more for less!!!!!

This is not unusual where what I call corporate charities are pitted against traditional or local charities.

Even though both kinds of charities are covered by strict rules regarding profits, those in control of corporate charities have found a way to benefit from the charity. If you look into what has happened across the entire charity sector, regardless of what area they operate in, this becomes evident very quickly. One of the giveaways is indeed CEO salaries.

I've unfortunately been witness to how far this can go. What shocks me to this day is not what is going on (although for the decade that it went on, I was regularly shocked by what went on) but the compliance of the media, complicity of politicians, local and national, and the corruption of the regulatory process.

Regulatory capture is not just an issue with transgender ideology and legislation.

What I'm saying with that is if your priority is providing the best service you can deliver to as many of your service users as possible, it is often possible to do so for less money without sacrificing quality.

If I had shit loads of money (rich list level dough) I'd write a book about the case l know. But I can't afford the law suits.

It would be worth some crowd-funding though to expose it? Wouldn't it?

The charities commission need to do their job theyre paid to do, and do it properly.

I also know of a similar scenario where spare funds basically meant ooo, lets pay ourselves more

There is promise of more access through greater use of technology.

I think they massively miss the point, technology tracks women continually, women know this and will often use this service anonymously.

WA have systems set up to do this and wont take your number.

Anything more, will have access to your number and hold data on a woman.

How wil they know if they're putting up blocks to women? Women will die as a result.

If, as WA state 30% of calls are lost, whilst in partnership with Refuge...

Sakura, I'm so sorry.

I'm very grateful to everyone who cares enough to want to look into this. I can't help feeling a bit disheartened by the lack of interest in the media. I don't know if there's a hope without media attention or concern?

@Truthontrial. The online support, I'd actually (cautiously) welcome. Although I absolutely get your concerns, there's been times when I've so desperately wanted and needed to contact the helpline but been unable to speak. At those times I've felt utterly alone and with nowhere to turn. So online access would be good for me. Although obviously it's not great that a record could exist of the conversation. I don't know the answer.

I'd use a VPN and separate email address under a pseudonym (and I realise not everyone would think or know how to do that). It's often so difficult to make private calls. I also find it easier at times to write rather than speak about it all. I'm guessing its the same for many other women.

So maybe the concern around online support is more over how it's administered, what's being done to ensure confidentiality, who's running it? Also, will it be a human or a chatbot?

I've had to, very reluctantly, leave my number with the helpline. Couldn't get through again and again at a time when I was scared, distressed, and desperate for help. They were excellent when they called back, very supportive, so kind and understanding. But I did hold back on certain details that I might have given had the call been truly anonymous.

Really, the main concern for me regarding anonymity is that the helpline doesn't go the way of local support services, DV, CAB, and similar. It might differ around the country but certainly in my area they refuse to give any support or help unless you provide your contact details - name, address, phone or email. They're only funded to help local residents and they religiously enforce this.

Oh sorry Cheaperforareason
It was the confidentiality that i have concerns with too.

Theres a diffixulty in calling, but technology is a trackable record by a perpetrator, putting a woman at greater risk.

Currently the number doesn't appear anywhere if called, on a contract for instance and the call record is easily removed from the phone.

The anonymity is key with WA that any can call without any trace. Its vital to their safety.

Certainly they offer a totally anonymous service and dont record anything if thats whats wanted.