Appendix 5: Family Violence Risk Assessment and Management Survey

The key purposes of the Family Violence Risk Assessment and Management Survey is to assess the understanding, track progress and implementation of the MARAM Framework. Identify challenges, inform future training and support strategies, and monitor annual improvements.

This year, DFFH designed the survey with the Family Violence Principal Strategic Advisers. This aimed to reduce the number of surveys in the field and gather consistent and comparable data across regions and sectors.

The survey targeted frontline practitioners, organisational leaders, and policy leads from all sectors prescribed under the MARAM Framework who identify, assess, and manage family violence risk in Victoria.

Across sectors

The survey received 1,387 responses, a 33% increase from 2023–24.

Participants

Participants included:

• 1,024 (73.8%) professional or frontline staff who identify, assess or manage family violence risk in their day-to-day work
• 242 (17.4%) leaders or executives who set organisational policies, procedures, practice guidance and tools for assessing family violence risk
• 113 (8.1%) who are not leaders or executives, but whose role involves developing organisational policies, procedures, practice or program guidance and tools relevant to family violence risk.

Most participants were employed in human services (62.9%) and health (19.8%). Figure 5 sets this out.

Limitations

We received 1,387 responses to the survey. This includes 233 incomplete surveys from participants who did not complete all questions available to them. We have included them on the basis that they did complete a significant portion of the survey.

Although survey data is one of the best available sources available for understanding MARAM alignment across the state, response rates limit the survey:

• There are more than 6,700 Victorian organisations prescribed to align with MARAM, representing an estimated 407,500 employees. This gives our survey an overall response rate of approximately 0.34% .
• Response rates varied significantly across sectors. While some sectors had low and unrepresentative response rates, others were significantly higher.
• There was no limit on the number of participants who could complete the survey per organisation. Some organisations may be overrepresented in the results due to uneven response rates.