Purpose
The impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on promising intimate partner violence (IPV) housing interventions are largely unknown. We compare IPV housing interventions’ effectiveness and explore women’s perceived safety and stability relative to the pandemic.
Methods
Data are from a prospective, quasi-experimental evaluation with sequential mixed methods of IPV housing interventions in Baltimore, Maryland. Mixed-effects logistic and linear regression measured changes regarding COVID-relative study participation between baseline and three-month follow-up. In-depth interviews (n = 20) contextualized findings from baseline to six-month follow-up.
Results
The sample includes 70 women, 57 with a complete IPV follow-up data point at three months. Thirty-eight percent of women completed baseline and follow-up surveys pre-COVID, 22% completed baseline pre-COVID and follow-up after the COVID-19 pandemic began (“crossing-COVID”), and 38% completed baseline and follow-up during the pandemic (“COVID”). Concern about housing stability and safety regarding the COVID-19 pandemic peaked for all visit types around 6–12 months after the pandemic began. Physical and sexual IPV decreased at three-month follow-up compared to baseline in all COVID-relative groups (i.e., regardless of pandemic exposure), significantly among women enrolled in the COVID group (p = 0.002) in adjusted models. Women living with an abusive partner described increased safety concerns. However, early pandemic mobility restrictions reduced abusive partner contact among survivors receiving housing support.
Conclusions
Findings highlight the robustness of housing support for IPV survivors. This study demonstrates sustained improvements in safety and housing stability among survivors during the first six months of the pandemic despite tremendous social and economic uncertainty.
(Publisher abstract provided.)