Financial contingency planning is critical in protecting victims of sexual assault and domestic violence. Victims usually flee their homes and seek shelter and food in a safer environment. Government and non-governmental organizations come in handy in housing and funding legal processes for victims of domestic violence and sexual assault. In instances where the offender and the victim are parents, they tend to meet because of their children thus endangering the life of the victim. Emergency planning is essential since it significantly alleviates the suffering of such victims (Kurz, 2018). As such, formulating a fiscal emergency policy is akin to controlling and effectively managing potential future eventualities of victims of sexual assault and domestic violence. Financial contingency plans will ensure that there is shelter and food for victims who flee their homes. Additionally, emergency planning will speed up the process of justice since victims are able to seek legal resources with the emergency finances. Provision of care services to victims of sexual assault and domestic violence require contingency funding from the various state actors, not state actors or a collaboration of both.
Public-Private Partners.
To avail food, shelter, children services and pay advocates representing sexual assault and domestic violence victims, funds must be available. One of the reliable sources of finances is the public-private partners. A public-private partnership refers to a long-term contract between a private entity and a government body for the provision of a public good or service (OECD, 2012). The private entity harbors the greatest risk and bears the risk of management, further, remuneration is tied to performance. Public-private partnerships are of various types and all can be integral in making funds accessible to victims of sexual assault and domestic violence. Direct support from the federal government to a private entity is given in cash or kind. Examples include defraying of construction costs in case where a private entity is in charge of constructing a rescue centre. Further, this support by a federal or a state entity can be in the form of provision of assets, compensation for bid costs is supporting a major maintenance work. Secondly, the federal or state entity can waive fees, for in the construction of a rescue facility, a federal entity or state organ can waive fees associated with construction such as design approvals and licenses. In addition, this can be in the form of a tax holiday on the private entity or waiving of tax liabilities. Further, the government can provide financing for a project in the form of a long-term loan or equity investment in order to fill the financing gap. A state can fund shadow tariffs and thus lower the cost of providing social amenities to the victims. Private entities in this arrangement are mandated with formulation of any required emergency while the public entity holds the authority of ensuring performance and sustenance of projects aimed at helping victims of domestic violence or sexual assault (Darling, 2020. Draft performance agreements between public entities and private sector actors require private actors to ensure sustenance with planning, creation and performance of every plan, whereas possession is in the hands of a public entity.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Community-based organizations (CBO’S)
These are non-profit-making entities and community organizations whose main drive is the delivery of social justice. Saathoff & Stoffel (1999) observes that community-based organizations are increasingly coming up with innovative ways of funding community outreach programs geared towards supporting domestic violence victims. CBO provides shelter and emotional support to victims. Their support ranges from funding housing, relocating, and providing for a safe environment for victims. Family Violence Prevention Services (FVPSA) offers to fund emergency shelters and other services to victims (Kurz, 2018). Finances are pooled from the community members. Further, these CBO’s offer advanced training on ways of handling violence, build partnerships with other domestic violence prevention actors, review plans and ensures effective implementation ad constantly update the public on available resources.
Grants
Grants are awarded to CBO and other non-profit entities upon solicitation and are a critical source of funding. This can be from the government, private businesses, individuals, or other countries. Grant requests must address the key priority areas they are seeking to solve a social problem. In this case, soliciting is tied to providing housing, legal support and social services and training to address challenges faced by victims of sexual assault and domestic violence victims (OECD, 2012).
Multilateral government financing
Bilateral and multilateral development partners advance grants to each other to finance projects that are geared towards supporting social justice and economic sustenance. Providing humanitarian aid to victims of domestic violence and sexual harassment victims has been greatly influenced by bilateral and multilateral ties
Taxation harms pooling of contingency finances. Where bilateral and multilateral donors are not exempt from tax, the amount of finances is significantly reduced. Moreover, in public-private partnership arrangements, taxation stalls the progress of projects aimed at improving the welfare of domestic violence victims. On the other hand, governments rely on taxes to offer public services. The higher the tax revenue, the more funds are dedicated to contingency funding. This can be through public-private partnerships, and grants to community-based organizations. Therefore, taxation can have both positive and negative impacts on financial contingency planning.
At the state and local levels, financial efficiency is critical in accessing this funding. The federal and state laws require a comprehensive, transparent and realistic plan before granting funding. The community-based organizations must provide risk mitigation plans and an overall impact to the society of the funds they are seeking. Where a CBO or a private entity wants to provide shelter for victims of sexual assault and domestic violence, they should present a complete financial plan, detailing the impact of the project and a further sustenance mechanism of the facility. Additionally, in public-private partnership projects, private entities must provide a realistic repayment plan before a facility becomes fully public. Unclear and exaggerated financial plan risk not being funded through these sources of funds (Darling, 2020). To curb the potential mismanagement of funds, constructive ambiguities and different states have developed laws that guide access to financing whenever a project aimed at promoting social justice is involved.
Financial contingency planning requires a broad spectrum of financing. In my quest for developing shelter structures for victims of sexual assault and domestic violence, I would source financing from the following sources. First, I would do an adequate planning for the potential projects to be financed from contingent funds. These would include paying legal fees for sexual assault and domestic violence victims and also proving ample shelter for victims after projecting the prevalence for such cases in a state. After developing a contingent plan, I would approach the federal government and state governments. Secondly, I will forge public-private partnerships in pooling funds and executing planned projects. Thirdly, I would approach community-based organizations which would in return sensitize and source for financing from the public, private businesses and grants. In addition, I forge for equity and debt financing which will be guided by the viability of a contingent financial plan. Finally, I would explore capital markets financing, bank guarantees and performance guarantees.
References
Darling, E. (2020). The Community’s Role in Reducing the Impact of Domestic Violence in Times of Emergency. Administration for Children and Families .
OECD. (2012). Public Governance of Public-Private Partnerships. OECD Better Policies for Better Lives , 1 -28.
Saathoff, A., & Stoffel, E. (1999). Community-Based Domestic Violence Services. The Future of Children, 9 (3), 97-110. doi:10.2307/1602784
Kurz, D. (2018). 6. Women, Welfare, and Domestic Violence. In Whose welfare? (pp. 132-151). Cornell University Press.
