Batterer intervention providers, anger management counselors, mental health professionals, and research scholars dedicated to evidence-based practice worldwide.
Join us virtually on June 16-17, 2022 for the NCPAT Conference. This year’s conference will feature a highly interactive learning experience from the House of Ruth Maryland Training Institute. Topics will include research on effectiveness of intervention programs, program design, being part of a community coordinated response, and supporting resilience and self-care.
Objectives:
Describe how approaches to working with abusive partners have evolved over time and the current variance in programming.
Identify tools for developing a program philosophy and engaging your participants, survivors, victim advocates and the broader community in program design.
Have increased confidence and skills to engage partners who are abusive in a change process.
Please tell us a little more about your conference, please, especially regarding research on the effectiveness of BIPs. Along with Fred Buttell of Tulane University of Social Work, and Clare Cannon at U.C. Davis, I have been doing research on evidence-based group facilitation. Would be happy to share our results with anyone interested.
The abstract to our research paper is below. Anyone can ask for the published paper by e-mailing me, or calling (415) 516-8086.
Abstract
Based on the emerging literature being developed in Motivational Interviewing that suggests certain group process factors and facilitator attributes predict treatment outcomes, this study sought to investigate the relationship between both client and facilitator ratings of the batterer intervention group experience. This study presents data from 16 group facilitators drawn from five agencies and 175 clients being served by these facilitators. The data gathered included both facilitator ratings of clients (i.e., Group Engagement Measure-GEM) and client ratings of facilitators and the group experience (i.e., Client Rating of Facilitator-CRF, Client Perceived Benefits of GroupCPBG). Results indicate that facilitators rated clients as being engaged in the group process across all the domains assessed by the GEM and that clients viewed the facilitators and group experiences favorably as assessed by the CRF and CPBG. There was no significant correlation between the GEM and CRF or the GEM and CPBG, but there was a strong, positive correlation between the CRF and CPBG. The results here support previous research findings suggesting a strong correlation between client engagement in the therapeutic process, based on their perception of the facilitator, and their perceived benefits of the group experience. Implications of the findings for improving empirical investigations of the batterer intervention group experience were explored and discussed
John Hamel
Jun 14, 2022 @ 18:42:57
Please tell us a little more about your conference, please, especially regarding research on the effectiveness of BIPs. Along with Fred Buttell of Tulane University of Social Work, and Clare Cannon at U.C. Davis, I have been doing research on evidence-based group facilitation. Would be happy to share our results with anyone interested.
John Hamel
Jun 17, 2022 @ 16:57:43
The abstract to our research paper is below. Anyone can ask for the published paper by e-mailing me, or calling (415) 516-8086.
Abstract
Based on the emerging literature being developed in Motivational Interviewing that suggests certain group process factors and facilitator attributes predict treatment outcomes, this study sought to investigate the relationship between both client and facilitator ratings of the batterer intervention group experience. This study presents data from 16 group facilitators drawn from five agencies and 175 clients being served by these facilitators. The data gathered included both facilitator ratings of clients (i.e., Group Engagement Measure-GEM) and client ratings of facilitators and the group experience (i.e., Client Rating of Facilitator-CRF, Client Perceived Benefits of GroupCPBG). Results indicate that facilitators rated clients as being engaged in the group process across all the domains assessed by the GEM and that clients viewed the facilitators and group experiences favorably as assessed by the CRF and CPBG. There was no significant correlation between the GEM and CRF or the GEM and CPBG, but there was a strong, positive correlation between the CRF and CPBG. The results here support previous research findings suggesting a strong correlation between client engagement in the therapeutic process, based on their perception of the facilitator, and their perceived benefits of the group experience. Implications of the findings for improving empirical investigations of the batterer intervention group experience were explored and discussed