ARIZONA
SEXUAL VIOLENCE
PRIMARY PREVENTION
AND EDUCATION
EIGHT YEAR PROGRAM PLAN

Arizona Department of Health Services
The Bureau of Women’s and Children’s Health
Sexual Violence Prevention and Education Program
January 2010

1

Leadership for a Healthy Arizona

Janice K. Brewer, Governor
State of Arizona
Will Humble, Interim Director
Arizona Department of Health Services

Arizona Department of Health Services
Public Health Prevention Services
Bureau of Women’s and Children’s Health
Sexual Violence Prevention and Education Program
150 North 18th Avenue, Suite 320
Phoenix, Arizona 85007-3242
(602) 542-7343

This report is supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Cooperative
Agreement Number CDC-RFA-CE07-701. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the
authors and do not necessary represent the official views of the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention
Please contact the Sexual Violence Prevention and Education Program at (602) 542-7343
for permission to quote from or reproduce materials from this publication.

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Foreword………………………………………………………………………………………………….4
Executive Summary …………………………………………………………………………………….5
Sexual Violence Prevention Planning Committee …………………………………………………..7
Purpose of the Comprehensive Primary Prevention Plan ………………………………………….8
Shared Definition of Sexual Violence ………………………………………………………………..10
Shared Prevention Vision ……………………………………………………………………………..10
Resources and Needs Assessment
 Overview ……………………………………………………………………………………….11
 Profiles of three major counties ……………………………………………………………..13
 Magnitude of sexual violence in Arizona …………………………………………………...15
 Gaps in Data and Services ...………………………………………………..……...……….16
 Focus and Delphi findings ……………………………………………………………………18
Goals, Rationales, and Outcome Statements
 Goal Statement One: Selected Populations………………………………………………... 22
 Goal Statement Two: Universal Populations………………………………………………...25
 Goal Statement Three: Prevention Systems Capacity ……………………………………..28

3

FOREWORD
Sexual violence affects men, women, and children in every community in Arizona. Even if we
have been fortunate enough not to be affected personally, we all know someone who was
molested as a child, sexually abused as a teen, or raped, even if we are not aware of his or her
trauma. We care about these people: they are our sisters, our brothers, our co-workers, and
our neighbors. We want them to heal—and we want to prevent others from experiencing the
same life-altering devastation.
In 2007, the Arizona Department of Health Services/Sexual Violence Prevention and Education
Program, under the direction of Carol Hensell, Program Manager, established the Sexual
Violence Prevention Planning Committee. This committee was comprised of representatives
from every corner of the state, and included state and county public health departments, social
service agencies, law enforcement and public safety agencies, justice system, medical
providers, faith communities, and youth organizations. Diverse in experience and expertise, we
were united in our commitment to prevent sexual violence in all of its forms.
The committee met four times during 2007 and 2008 to develop a prevention plan based on the
needs and resources assessment. This report is a result of that process. During the four allday meetings, members of the committee developed the plan’s sexual violence prevention
vision statement, and based on needs and priorities identified in the needs assessment, drafted
goals, outcomes, and strategies for the final strategic plan. The vision statement reflects our
belief that all Arizonans have the right to live free from sexual violence, and our collective and
individual commitment to work toward that future.
Despite our idealism, we have developed a plan grounded firmly in reality. We insist that all
work must be based on best practices in the field, and must be held accountable through
thorough evaluation, and that innovation and creativity must be encouraged to develop locally
meaningful programs. Our strategies are based on a socio-ecological model in which bystander
intervention messages are delivered at the individual, interpersonal, community, and social
level. We recognize that implementation will require strong political will and community
advocacy over an extended period of time. Changing false beliefs about sexual violence and
passive acceptance of behaviors that facilitate it will take prolonged investment of resources
and energy. It is the vision we share as Arizonans—our diverse communities united in a culture
that does not tolerate sexual violence—that gives us the determination to implement this plan.
We know that it is possible. We thank all of those whose work has already contributed to that
dream, and we welcome those who will join us to make our vision a reality.
Rowan Frost
Member of the Sexual Violence Prevention Planning Committee

4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
“There is a need for more public awareness around the issues of sexual/relationship
violence.… All too often youth and young adults are unaware and ill-equipped to address
issues of domestic and relationship violence in their lives.”
Delphi Respondent

In 1996, an amendment was added to the Preventive Health and Health Services Block Grant
(PHHSBG) that authorized funds for rape prevention and education. Under the Violence
Against Women Act of 2000, several changes became law. In 2001, the PHHSBG created a
new stand-alone categorical grant, the Rape Prevention and Education Program (RPEP) Grant
Program, and designated the Centers for Disease Control/National Center for Injury Prevention
and Control (CDC/NCIPC) the programmatic responsibility for this new grant. In 2006, RPEP
was renamed the Sexual Violence Prevention and Education Program (SVPEP) to reflect its
broader goals of ending all sexual violence.
In order to continue to provide crucial sexual violence prevention and education services to its
statewide community, the Arizona Department of Health Services, Sexual Violence Prevention
and Education Program (ADHS/SVPEP) began comprehensive planning in November 2006, the
second year of a five-year funding cycle from CDC/NCIPC. As recommended by CDC,
ADHS/SVPEP used the Guidance Document for the Sexual Violence Prevention and
Education Cooperative Agreement CE07-701(Rape Prevention and Education) to guide its
planning process. This document provided detailed information on several key public health
concepts and updated guidance on planning expectations outlined in CDC/ NCIPC, Sexual
Violence Prevention and Education Cooperative Agreement CE07-701 for Part A grantees.
Aha! Inc., state contractors for facilitation, organizational development and planning,
coordinated the planning, facilitation, and writing of this Comprehensive Prevention Plan.
As recommended by the CDC Guidance document, a sexual violence prevention planning
committee was created. A diverse group of individuals from sexual assault coalitions, state
agencies, non-profit agencies, military, and community-based entities were recruited. Twentyseven individuals became members of Arizona’s sexual violence prevention planning
committee.
As part of the planning process, a comprehensive statewide needs and resources assessment
was conducted to provide data to inform the development of the plan. This assessment included
the following:
• Description of the geographic area of interest;
• Review of Arizona demographic and economic data;
• Review of present sexual violence prevention and education assets and resources;
• Description of present influential circumstances in Arizona;
• Assessment of the magnitude of sexual violence in Arizona;
• Profiles of three major Arizona counties;
• Identification of gaps in Arizona’s ability to track the statewide magnitude of sexual
violence;
• List of risks and protective factors;
• Focus group and Delphi survey data.
As a result of this extensive needs and resources assessment, five needs were identified.

5

•
•
•
•
•

Sexual violence prevention education in schools and universities;
Healthy relationship/respect training, self-esteem for kids;
More prevention funding, more sources of funding;
Education of communities, all populations, including hospitals;
Media campaign, public service announcements.

The Sexual Violence Primary Prevention Committee (SVPPC) SVPPC met four times to
develop a prevention plan based on the needs and resources assessment. During four all-day
meetings, members developed a shared definition of sexual violence and a vision statement.
Based on needs and priorities identified in the needs assessment, committee members drafted
goals, outcomes, and strategies for the final strategic plan.
The plan was developed as a means of achieving the vision of a culture that supports healthy,
respectful relationships through primary prevention efforts and zero tolerance of sexual violence
in Arizona communities.
Arizona’s Comprehensive Prevention Plan has three goals:
• Increase respect for self and others through sexual violence prevention education for
Arizona children, youth, and young adults;
• Increase Arizonans’ engagement in sexual violence prevention;
• Increase Arizona’s resources to support sexual violence prevention and education.
The goals listed above will be accomplished through various strategies that include statewide
media campaigns, identification of sustainable funding sources through mandatory fees of
convicted sex offenders and prevention education for;
• Youth from kindergarten through 12th grade,
• Young adults through age 24 with a targeted focus on those attending state universities
and local community colleges) as well as young adults through age 24, both on and off
college university campuses,
• Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual., Transgender and Questioning Youth,
• Faith-based organizations,
• Staff employed at alcohol serving establishments.
The committee members were resolute in their belief that the prevention of sexual violence is a
community issue and proposed working with some non-traditional partners such as
nightclubs/bars, faith based organizations and professional sports teams. The committee also
established measurable outcomes for each goal as means of tracking and reporting on progress
during the life span of the Arizona Sexual Violence Primary Prevention and Education Eight
Year Program Plan.

6

SEXUAL VIOLENCE PREVENTION PLANNING COMMITTEE

LIST AND AFFILIATIONS OF ARIZONA’S SEXUAL VIOLENCE PREVENTION
PLANNING COMMITTEE MEMBERS
The table below lists committee members and their affiliations at the time this plan was
developed.
Arizona Sexual Violence Prevention Planning Committee Members
Arizona Sexual Violence Prevention Planning Committee Members
Name
Albert Crespo
Barbara Strachan, M.Ed.
Juvenile Justice Program Manager
Carol Hensell, Sexual Violence Prevention and
Education Program Manager
Deborah Morrison, Sexual Assault Response
Coordinator
Dorothy Hastings, Education Section Manager
Elizabeth Ditlevson, Director of Domestic
Violence Services
Elizabeth Houde, President/CEO
Evelyn Perez, CMSW
JAnn Pope, Rural Domestic Violence Services
Network Program Manager
Jean Agamie, Director of School Safety and
Prevention
Joice Jones, Sexual Assault Response
Coordinator
Karen Stegenga, Crime Prevention Officer
Kate Henderson, Crime Victim Services
Kay Pulatie, Employee Assistance Programs
Counselor
Kim Yedowitz, Registered Nurse, Sexual
Assault Nurse Examiner- Adults/Adolescents,
Certified Forensic Nurse, CMI-III
Laura Guild, Domestic Violence Program
Coordinator
Lawanda Roberson
Leah Myers, Program Administrator
Maria E. Chaira, Health Educator
Martha Rodriguez, Program Coordinator
Nicole P. Yuan, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor, Principal Investigator
Pam Wessel, Director of Victim Services
Rachel Mitchell,
Sex Crimes Bureau Chief

Affiliation
Governor's Office for Children, Youth and Families Division for Women
Girl Scouts, AZ Cactus-Pine Council Inc.
Arizona Department of Health Services/Bureau of Women's and Children's
Health
SARC, Davis-Montham Air Force Base
Arizona Department of Health Services/Bureau of Women's and Children's
Health
Arizona Coalition Against Domestic Violence
Arizona Sexual Assault Network
Luke Air Force Base
Arizona Department of Health Services/Bureau of Women's and Children's
Health
Arizona Department of Education
SARC, Luke Air Force Base
Mesa Police Department
Arizona Department of Public Safety
Scottsdale Healthcare
Forensic Nurse Examiner and Consultant

Arizona Department of Economic Security
Beacon Light Seventh Day Adventist Church
Governor's Office for Children, Youth and Families Division for Women
Yuma County Health Department
Yuma County Health Department
Sexual Violence Prevention and Education Program, Mel and Enid Zuckeman
College of Public Health, University of Arizona
Attorney General's Office

Sheila Sjolander, MSW, Bureau Chief
Sonja Burkhalter, ED

Sex Crimes Bureau
University of Arizona, Mel and Enid Zuckeman College of Public Health,
SVPEP
Arizona Department of Health Services/Bureau of Women's and Children's
Health
Northland Family Help Center, Flagstaff

Therese Wagner, Director

Maricopa County Adult Probation

Rowan Frost, MPA

7

PURPOSE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PRIMARY PREVENTION PLAN
“If we want to end sexual violence, putting money in primary prevention
will give us the biggest bang for our buck.”
Delphi Respondent

HISTORY
In 1996, an amendment was added to the Preventive Health and Health Services Block Grant
(PHHSBG) that authorized funds for rape prevention and education. Under the Violence
Against Women Act of 2000, several changes became law. In 2001, the PHHSBG created a
new stand-alone categorical grant, the Rape Prevention Education Program (RPEP) Grant
Program, and designated the Centers for Disease Control/National Center for Injury Prevention
and Control (CDC/NCIPC) the programmatic responsibility for this new grant. In 2006, RPEP
was renamed the Sexual Violence Prevention and Education Program (SVPEP) to reflect its
broader goals of ending all sexual violence.

In order to continue to provide crucial sexual violence prevention and education
services to its statewide community, the Arizona Department of Health Services, Sexual
Violence Prevention and Education Program (ADHS/SVPEP) began comprehensive
planning in November 2006, the second year of a five-year funding cycle from
CDC/NCIPC. As recommended by CDC, ADHS/SVPEP used the Guidance
Document for the Sexual Violence Prevention and Education Cooperative
Agreement CE07-701(Rape Prevention and Education) to guide its planning process.
PURPOSE OF THE PLAN
Historically Sexual Violence Prevention and Education Programs have focused on reducing the
risk of victimization or raising awareness of sexual violence. Although these efforts have been
beneficial to communities, they have not targeted primary prevention of sexual violence as
defined as “an effort or strategy to prevent a problem before it occurs the first time.”
In order to prevent sexual violence from initially occurring, strategies are needed that stop first
time perpetration rather than relying on efforts that seek only to reduce the risk of victimization.
To facilitate the transition to primary prevention, the CDC is supporting states in establishing
effective, comprehensive prevention plans. The goal of this development process is for states
to collaboratively design through inclusive, community stakeholder involvement realistic, datadriven, and outcome-based comprehensive primary prevention program plans. These plans
include goals and measurable outcomes and strategies that target prevention of both first time
perpetration and victimization. Through these plans, state SVPEP grantee administrators can
effectively monitor, evaluate, and modify SVPEP programs in their implementation of their state
SVPEP plans.
In addition to assisting states, these new comprehensive prevention plans assist the CDC. The
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993 is a law that requires federal
agencies to identify both long term and annual goals, collect performance data, and justify
budget requests based on these data. In response to GPRA, the Program Assessment Rating
Tool (PART) was developed to assess and improve federal program performance and
effectiveness. PART provides a framework for targeting and designing program improvements

8

by linking program actions to intended outcomes and identifying program strengths and
weaknesses to inform funding and management decisions aimed at making the program more
effective. The PART measures approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
the SVPEP program are:
Annual Performance Measure: reduce victimization of youth enrolled in grades 9-12 as
measured by reduction in the lifetime prevalence of unwanted sexual intercourse;* and
Long-term Performance Measure: impact self-reported victimization of youth enrolled in
grades 9-12 as measured by reduction in the lifetime prevalence of unwanted sexual
intercourse*
*based on Youth Risk Behavior
Survey data
The alignment of SVPEP comprehensive state plans to appropriate CDC Goals for Healthy
People in Every Stage of Life, Healthy People in Healthy Places, and the proposed National
PART Objective will provide Congress and other stakeholders’ valuable information on the
progress and impact on attaining the goals and the PART Objective. Thus, it is important for
states to have population-based data sources. These data sources, including surveillance
information, could be used to measure program impact as well as the progress in attaining
CDC’s Goals and the proposed PART Objective.

9

SHARED DEFINITION OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE
“Work primary sexual violence prevention into our day-to-day conversations; encourage
the courage to say, ‘It’s not all right.’ Values are the same core values in every culture.
What’s right is right, what’s wrong is wrong.”
Phoenix Focus Group Member

THE SVPPC SHARED DEFINITION OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE

Arizona’s Sexual Violence Prevention Planning Committee
Definition of Sexual Violence
“any sexual act, attempt to obtain a sexual act, unwanted sexual
comments or advances, or acts to traffic a person’s sexuality, using
coercion, threats of harm or physical force, by any person
regardless of relationship to the victim, in any setting, including but
not limited to home and work.”

PREVENTION VISION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
“Programs should be implemented at all Arizona schools that teach individuals to
respect themselves and each other. These programs must be evidence-based and be
expandable to all community members, not only students.”
Delphi Respondent

Arizona’s Sexual Violence Prevention Vision Statement
“The Arizona community embraces a culture that values healthy,
respectful relationships, as demonstrated through primary
prevention efforts and non-tolerance of sexual violence.”

10

NEEDS AND RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
“We live in a community where it is OK to rape women.
Rapists do not go to jail and rapists know they won’t go to jail.”
Flagstaff Focus Group Member

OVERVIEW
A statewide needs and resources assessment provides fundamental data essential to the
development of an inclusive and relevant statewide and community-based strategic plan for
sexual violence prevention and education. An effective assessment process requires data from
a variety of sources and perspectives. Analysis of current programs and demographics and
identification of current and changing conditions also are essential for the development of a vital
state prevention plan that can adapt to the changing conditions and environment within Arizona.
This chapter provides a state assessment that includes a review of Arizona’s demographic and
economic data, primarily from the U.S. Census Bureau 2006 American Community Survey
(ACS). Also included are separate profiles for major regions of Arizona. This chapter describes
present influential circumstances in Arizona and a listing of present assets and resources in
Arizona, including currently funded sexual violence prevention and education programs. In
addition, the chapter presents data on the magnitude of sexual violence in Arizona. Finally, the
chapter presents the methodology and findings of two major statewide needs assessment
efforts conducted in Fall 2007.

GEOGRAPHIC AREA OF INTEREST DEFINED AND DESCRIBED

Arizona Sexual Violence Prevention and Education Resources
Most sexual violence funding is provided for the intervention and after the act of sexual violence
has been committed. Several sources of funding exist to aid victims of sexual assault, but there
is only one federal funding source dedicated to prevention of sexual violence: the stand-alone
categorical grant administered by the CDC, the Sexual Violence Prevention and Education
Program.
During the last funding year (November 1, 2008- October 31, 2009), the ADHS/SVPEP provided
funding to eight programs in three Arizona counties: Coconino, Maricopa, and Pima. Over the
past years, the SVPEP has received between 1-3% cuts in each funding cycle. Funding for the
current fiscal year (November 1, 2009 – October 31, 2010) is undergoing a cut of the allotted
$711,008 funding. The program also receives $125,693 from the Preventative Health and
Health Services Block Grant (PHHSBG). Funded SVPEP primarily provide education in the
schools and communities, as well as to service professionals. When possible, the programs
undertake a saturation technique, which includes workshops built upon one another. They also
cover the individual, relationship, community, and societal layers of the social-ecological model.
Methods for awakening and increasing public awareness include printed resource materials to
students and the community through handouts, posters (at the university level), and brochures.
Other efforts, although not primary prevention, include providing communities with information

11

through newspaper articles, radio spots and appearances, and television stories and
appearances.

Present Influential Circumstances in Arizona
Like the rest of the nation, Arizona has endured serious negative economic news. Shortfalls in
municipal, county, and state budgets have required government officials to make difficult
choices in order for Arizona, at all governmental levels, to live within its means. State agencies
have experienced significant budget cuts and have been in a hiring freeze since February 2008.
In spite of the national and state economic downturn, Governor Brewer continues to
address sexual violence in Arizona. The Governor’s Commission to Prevent Violence
Against Women is tasked with developing policy recommendations and potential legislative
actions on issues impacting violence against women. The commission also oversees the
implementation of those recommendations. In addition, the commission supports the
coordination and expansion of successful prevention initiatives as well as services for victims of
domestic and sexual violence. It serves as a clearinghouse for domestic and sexual violence
related work in Arizona, and seeks to unite and enhance statewide efforts to prevent and end
domestic and sexual violence.

In the Governor’s Office, there also is a Division for Women, which is committed to ensuring that
all women in Arizona live productive, healthy lives, free from violence, with access to health care
and an adequate means of self-sufficiency. The Division administers grants, provides training
and information, and guides public policy on issues critical to women. The Division administers
federal funds including the STOP Violence Against Women formula funds, Rural Domestic
Violence and Child Victimization grant, Women’s Workforce Development grant, and the
Innovative Domestic Violence Prevention Grant. The Division also staffs the Governor’s
Commission to Prevent Violence Against Women.
In addition to the Governor’s Office activities, several Arizona Departments are actively involved
in supporting sexual violence prevention and education. For example, the Arizona Department
of Education has a vision to develop youth to act and live with positive character values.
Through their Character Education and Development efforts, their mission is to inspire and
support educators, parents and others who touch the lives of youth to instill in youth the traits of
positive character. Character education teaches universally accepted values, such as
trustworthiness, respect, responsibility, fairness, caring and citizenship, and motivates youth to
incorporate these values into their lives. The focus on teaching youth respect and self-esteem
lays a cornerstone for the prevention of sexual violence.
Arizona will be a leader and model state for character education by providing voluntary
education and training on the core values of trustworthiness, respect, responsibility, fairness,
caring and citizenship to educators, leaders of youth nonprofit organizations, children and their
families in Arizona. This will be made possible through collaborations with businesses,
educators, community organizations, the State of Arizona, state, and local agencies that deal
with parents and youth, youth sports programs and all stakeholders that work with youth.

12

Profiles of Three Major Arizona Counties
There are 15 counties in Arizona: Apache, Cochise, Coconino, Gila, Graham, Greenlee, La Paz,
Maricopa, Mohave, Navajo, Pima, Pinal, Santa Cruz, Yavapai, and Yuma. Three of the major
counties are Maricopa, Pima, and Coconino. These three each have a state college or
university: Arizona State University is based in Tempe, Maricopa County; University of Arizona
is based in Tucson, Pima County; and Northern Arizona University is in Flagstaff, Coconino
County. According to the 2006 FBI Uniform Crime Report, the rate of forcible rape in Flagstaff
(77.2 per 100,000 residents) was more than twice as great as the rate of forcible rape
throughout Arizona (31.5 per 100,000 residents).
The FBI’s Crime Statistics are provided in the next section of this report: Magnitude of Sexual
Violence in Arizona.

Maricopa County. Maricopa County is the largest Arizona County. Four of the five most
highly populated Arizona cities are in Maricopa County: Phoenix, Mesa, Glendale, and
Chandler.
General census data: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/04/04013.html
Population: 2006 estimate: 3,768,123 (growth 22.6% from 2000-2006)
White: 88.7%
American Indian: 2.0%
Black: 4.5%
Asian: 2.9%
Hispanic: 30%
Language other than English spoken at home, age 5+: 24.1%
Median annual household income, 2004 $48.304
Persons below poverty line, 2004: 13.3%
Land area, square miles (2000): 9,203.14
Persons per square mile (2000): 333.8
Adult Felony history:
2005: 120 sexual assaults
2006: 100 sexual assaults
Source: http://www.mcaodocuments.com/annual-report/2006.pdf, p. 23)
Crime Statistics for 2007:
Number of offenses, regardless of number of offenders
(From Crime in Arizona 2007 Report, An annual report compiled by Access Integrity Unit of
the Arizona Department of Public Safety, written by Roger L. Vanderpool, Director.
http://www.azdps.gov/crimereport/2007_Crime_in_Arizona.pdf)
Forcible Rapes: 1045
Rape by Force: 901
Attempts to Commit: 144
Aggravated Assaults: 10,627

13

Pima County. Pima County is the second-largest county in Arizona. Arizona’s secondlargest city, Tucson, is in Pima County.
General census data: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/04/04019.html
Population: 2006 estimate: 946,362 (growth 12.2% from 2000-2006)
White: 88.8%
American Indian: 3.4%
Black: 3.4%
Asian: 0.2%
Hispanic: 32.5%
Language other than English spoken at home, age 5+: 27.5%
Median annual household income, 2004: $38,687
Persons below poverty line, 2004: 15.6%
Land area, square miles (2000): 9,186.27
Persons per square mile (2000): 91.9
Crime Statistics of 2007:
Number of offenses, regardless of number of offenders
(From Crime in Arizona 2007 Report, An annual report compiled by Access Integrity Unit of
the Arizona Department of Public Safety, written by Roger L. Vanderpool, Director.
http://www.azdps.gov/crimereport/2007_Crime_In_Arizona.pdf )
Forcible Rapes: 381
Rape by Force: 331
Attempts to Commit: 50
Aggravated Assaults: 2853
Coconino County. Coconino County’s major city is Flagstaff, which is home to Northern
Arizona University.
General census data: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/04/04005.html
Population: 2006 estimate: 124,953 (growth 7.4% from 2000-2006)
White: 66.7%
American Indian: 28.8%
Black: 1.3%
Asian: 1.2%
Hispanic: 12.1%
Language other than English spoken at home, age 5+: 28.2%
Median annual household income, 2004: $40,040
Persons below poverty line, 2004: 16.5%
Land area, square miles (2000): 18,617.42
Persons per square mile (2000): 6.2
Crime Statistics of 2007:
Number of offenses, regardless of number of offenders
(From Crime in Arizona 2007 Report, An annual report compiled by Access Integrity Unit of
the Arizona Department of Public Safety, written by Roger L. Vanderpool, Director.
http://www.azdps.gov/crimereport/2007_Crime_In_Arizona.pdf )
Forcible Rapes: 74
Rape by Force: 70
Attempts to Commit: 4

14

Aggravated Assaults: 389
MAGNITUDE OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE IN ARIZONA
Arizona has experienced rapid growth over the past twenty years. This population explosion
has proportionally increased the number of cases of sexual victimization. Crime statistics were
shared for Maricopa, Pima, and Coconino Counties.
Nationally, reports of rape incidences were higher for younger populations, although the
statistics do not indicate whether this higher incidence of rape for younger populations was due
to a higher number of crimes or greater reporting of sexual offences. The national data also
shows that most women had reported being raped at a young age, less than 24 years old.
Arizona has a growing population under 25 years old. Based on these national rape trends,
Arizona will need to focus on effective sexual violence prevention strategies for youth.
Arizona has a higher Native American population than many other states. According to the U.S.
Department of Justice/Office of Justice Programs’ Extent, Nature, and Consequences of Rape
Victimization: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey, Native Americans
have a higher incidence of rape compared to other racial and ethnic groups.
Age and ethnicity shifts plus Arizona’s increased population are factors that impact the
incidence of sexual violence in Arizona. The Arizona Department of Public Safety, Crime in
Arizona 2006, stated that 1909 rapes (1659 completed and 250 attempted) were reported to law
enforcement. Arrests were made in 218 cases (29.5%). Of those individuals arrested for rape
in 2006, 191 were adult males and 27 were male juveniles. According to the Arizona Criminal
Justice Commission (2007), The Reporting of Sexual Assault in Arizona: 2004 and 2005, there
were 470 charges of sexual assault in 282 reports in 2004. Note that a report can contain more
than one sexual assault charge. From these reports, 69 convictions were obtained, of which 55
were for the original charge of sexual assault. Referring to the U.S. Department of
Justice/Office of Justice Programs’ Extent, Nature, and Consequences of Rape Victimization:
Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey, only some rapes are actually
reported. In that survey, only 19% of the survey participants stated that they had reported the
crime to law enforcement. Based on this data, the actual number of sexual assaults for the year
would be much higher.
In comparison to the United States as a whole, Arizona had a slightly higher rate of rape.
According to the FBI’s Crime in the United States, 2006: Uniform Crime Reports (UCR), in 2006:
• Arizona had 31.48 rapes per 100,000 compared to average of 30.88 rapes per 100,000
for the entire United States.
• Arizona’s overall number of 31.48 rapes per 100,000, however, does not reflect the
discrepancies in the number of rapes within cities.
• Flagstaff had a rate of 77.2 rapes per 100,000 residents.
• Tucson had a rate of 54.93 rapes per 100,000 residents.
• Yuma and the Phoenix area were lower; Yuma had a rate of 37.53 rapes and Phoenix
had a rate of 36.25 rapes per 100,000 residents.
Clearly, there are geographical differences within the state.

15

The FBI’s Crime in the United States, 2006: Uniform Crime Reports, provides a comparison of
2005 and 2006 population and rate of forcible rapes per 100,000 data. The comparison of the
2006 data to 2005 data shows that although the population increased in Arizona and nationally,
the number of rapes decreased. Nationally, the rate decreased from 31.69 rapes per 100,000 in
2005 to 30.88 rapes per 100,000 in 2006, a decrease of 1.6%. The decrease in rape rate in
Arizona was twice as great as the decrease in rape rate for the whole United States. In Arizona,
the rate decreased from 33.70 rapes per 100,000 inhabitants in 2005 to 31.48 rapes per
100,000 in 2006, a decrease of 3.2%.
The national, regional, and Arizona state data indicate the significant impact of sexual violence
and the need to provide effective prevention strategies. Individual states and local communities
need to aggressively and collaboratively design prevention plans to curb sexual violence.

GAPS IN DATA AND SERVICES
Arizona’s ability to track the statewide magnitude of sexual violence provides serious gaps in
the knowledge we have about the incidents of sexual violence. One of the issues Arizona faces
is how rape is defined when it is included in the crime statistics. The FBI UCR definition of
forcible rape is “the carnal knowledge of a female (adult) forcibly and against her will. Statutory
rape (no force used and the victim is under the age of consent) is excluded.” Therefore, not
included in the FBI statistics are females under age 18 or males of all ages who have been
raped. By its definition, the number of rapes reported is much lower than the number of rapes
or attempted rapes that actually occurred. In addition, sexual violence is much more than
heterosexual rape as defined by penetration. The Arizona SVPPC has defined sexual violence
as “any sexual act, attempt to obtain a sexual act, unwanted sexual comments or advances, or
acts to traffic a person’s sexuality, using coercion, threats of harm or physical force, by any
person regardless of relationship to the victim, in any setting, including but not limited to home
and work.”
The difference between the FBI definition of forcible rape used to compile their crime statistics
and the much more inclusive Arizona definition of sexual violence creates a great un-bridged
gap that impedes accurate tracking of occurrences of sexual violence. Data on other types of
sexual assault, including unwanted sexual comments or advances, are not systematically
collected. In addition, many victims of sexual violence are hesitant to report the occurrences
because of multiple reasons, including embarrassment, fear of reprisal, and family honor.
DESCRIPTION OF THE QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DATA SOURCES USED
TO INFORM THE DEVELOPMENT AND PRIORITIZATION OF GOALS
Multiple quantitative and qualitative data sources were used to shape the development and
prioritization of goals. In September 2007, the Arizona Department of Health Services, Sexual
Violence Prevention and Education, under the direction of Carol Hensell, Program Manager,
retained the services of an Arizona state contractor, Aha! Inc. The Aha team of Suzy Seibert
and Cindy Turner were contracted to design and facilitate the needs assessment process, to
facilitate the work of the Sexual Violence Prevention Planning Committee, and to draft the EightYear State Plan for Sexual Violence Prevention in Arizona. The Aha team and Ms. Hensell
elected to use focus groups and a two-level Delphi Investigation survey process in order to
access broad, inclusive, and diverse participation in the needs assessment process.

16

The data gathering processes are complementary and mutually exclusive, and they provide
excellent balance. Focus groups employ an interactive process through which participants
respond to a set of questions and typically group discussion ensues. Individual responses in
focus groups are naturally influenced by the responses from other participants. In contrast, the
Delphi is an information collection method through which individuals can provide reflective
written responses and freely express their own ideas, issues, and concerns. The Delphi
process can be successful with as few as 6 to 12 panelists, independent of each other, who
respond to a set of questions. Delphi respondents do not interact with each other. In a Delphi
survey process, participants are assigned numbers that are used to record their responses.
Feedback is anonymous and aggregated.

Focus Group Process
On September 26, 27, and 28, 2007, focus groups were conducted in Flagstaff, Phoenix,
Tucson, and Yuma. These locations were selected because they are major population centers
in Arizona, and they include large youth populations (K-12 and post-secondary), multiple
cultures and ethnicities, and are in different regions of the state (northern, central, southern,
western). Each focus group was approximately two hours, included 6 to12 participants, and
featured a variety of stakeholders in sexual violence prevention. Focus group participants were
recruited by locally funded contractors and followed the same agenda framework.
After the overview, focus group participants at all four sites were asked to respond to eleven
questions. These are listed in the following box.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Is sexual violence a serious problem in your community/town/county?
In your opinion, how big is the problem in your community?
Why do you think sexual violence is occurring in your community?
Who in your community do you think is most affected by sexual violence?
Do you think certain population groups appear to be at a higher risk of
experiencing sexual violence?
6. When you think about current primary prevention approaches in your community,
where do you think that there are gaps in services?
7. What are the major (barriers) issues and concerns unique to your community in
creating effective sexual violence primary prevention strategies?
8. What are your suggestions on how changes can be made at a community level?
At a societal level?
9. When you think of primary prevention, what comes to mind as the most innovative
and effective approaches that you would like to see in place in Arizona?
10. What do you think might prevent you from being able to implement effective
PRIMARY sexual violence prevention strategies?
11. Are there any additional ideas or information that you would like to share with us?

Focus Group Findings
Members of all four focus groups stated that sexual violence is underreported, and that
individuals are afraid to approach law enforcement, issues which are interrelated. These same
members mentioned that providing sexual violence prevention education in schools and clearly
defining sexual assault were possible solutions to the problem of sexual violence. They also

17

identified cultural ideas about relationships and stereotypical roles as barriers to ending sexual
violence.
Delphi Survey Process
The Delphi Investigation survey process is an information collection method well suited for
evaluations that focus on: “What do we need?” Named after an oracle who predicted the future,
Delphi is ideally suited for needs assessments or analyses of future directions. Delphi
investigations are multi-level. Level One presents a broad perspective of questions for written
response from participants.
Delphi Survey Findings: Delphi One
The Delphi One survey was sent to 54 individuals in the state who have an interest in sexual
violence prevention. The survey asked one question with an open-ended response: “What are
the most urgent and critical needs and conditions that must be addressed in your specific
community and/or statewide to prevent sexual violence? Please explain. Provide details.”
There were 33 responses to the Delphi One survey. Responses were sorted into the following
categories: “Funding and Resources,” “Collaboration,” “Education,” “Media,” “Programs,” and
“Other.” In addition, the responses to each of these categories were noted as either primary
prevention or secondary prevention. The definition of primary prevention had been given as
part of the Delphi One survey, but despite this, there still seemed to be confusion about which
activities were primary or secondary prevention. For the purposes of Delphi Two, only the
primary prevention topics were used.
Whenever possible, similar responses were generalized and tabulated in order to show what
issues were most important to respondents. Over half of the Delphi One survey respondents
(19 of 33 respondents, 57.6%) identified the need for sexual violence prevention education
programs in schools and universities. The second most-identified need was for education about
healthy relationships, self-esteem and respect (16 of 33, 48.5%). Fourteen respondents
(42.4%) identified the need for education for the communities, including hospitals (14 out of 33
or 42.4%). A third of the Delphi respondents (11 of 33) identified the need for more funding
sources for prevention as the most urgent and critical need. The fifth most-cited need was the
need for a media campaign including public service announcements, which was mentioned by 9
out of 33 respondents, or 27.3%. The following chart shows these general responses and the
number of respondents who mentioned them in their survey replies. In order to be included on
the chart, an issue had to be identified by at least two respondents. The yellow highlighted
items are the most frequently mentioned topics. The five most frequently mentioned topics
became the top five needs, ranked by the number of respondents who mentioned them in their
survey reply.

18

Table 5
Needs/Issues Identified by Delphi One Participants

Identified Issue/Need

#

Education
Sexual violence prevention education in schools & universities
Healthy Relationship/Respect Training, Self-Esteem for kids
Educate communities, all populations, including hospitals
Alcohol & drug use & sexual violence, drinking & dating norms
Bystander Training
Peer Education
Educate schools on mandatory reporting
Professional development for educators
Raise awareness to support programs providing services
Educate parents (how to talk about healthy/unhealthy, SV)
Educate professionals to screen and identify victims
Internet safety courses for children, teens, parents
Funding & Resources
More prevention funding, more sources
More manpower & equipment, health educators, programs
Funding support from Governor's Office
Collaboration
Engage men in effort, SV issues not gender specific
Work together, with community leaders, raise awareness
Work with media
Media
Media campaign, PSAs
Combating positive perception of violent male role models
Degrading language, actions in cultural and societal norms
Programs
Resources and referral for victims
Expansion of current programs, additional prevention progs.
Treatment for perpetrators
Emergency Housing
Positive youth development
Crisis intervention to sexual abuse survivors
Family Advocacy Center needed in Cochise, Apache
Mentoring
Improve medical professionals expertise in sexual assault
examinations
Need more student organizations
Outreach, including Spanish-speaking, Navajo-speaking

19

Delphi One
%
Rank
19
16
14
6
4
4
3
3
3
2
2
2

57.6% 1st
48.5% 2nd
42.4% 3rd
18.2%
12.1%
12.1%
9.1%
9.1%
9.1%
6.1%
6.1%
6.1%

11
5
2

33.3% 4th
15.2%
6.1%

8
7
2

24.2%
21.2%
6.1%

9
4
3

27.3% 5th
12.1%
9.1%

7
5
5
3
2
2
2
2

21.2%
15.2%
15.2%
9.1%
6.1%
6.1%
6.1%
6.1%

2
2
2

6.1%
6.1%
6.1%

With the exception of funding, four of the five top-ranked concerns identified in Delphi One were
also frequently mentioned in the focus groups. The Table 6 shows the comparisons.
Table 6
Needs/Issues Identified by Focus Groups and Delphi One Participants

IDENTIFIED
NEEDS/SOLUTIONS
Sexual violence
prevention education in
schools and universities
Define healthy
relationships / Teach
healthy relationships,
self-esteem, respect
Lack of money / Get
more funding
Educate
community/medical field
Saturate the community
with the messages/
Media campaign, PSA’s

FOCUS GROUPS

DELPHI ONE

Flagstaf
f

Phoeni
x

Tucso
n

Yum
a

TOTA
L

1

1

1

1

4

100.0
%

19

1

1

3

75.0%

16

1

25.0%

14

2

50.0%

11

48.5
%
42.4
%
33.3
%

3

75.0%

9

27.3
%

1

1
1

1

1

1

1

%

Tota
l

%

Ran
k

57.6
%

1st

2nd
3rd
4th

5th

Delphi Survey Findings: Delphi Two
For the second round of the Delphi process, the responses for Delphi One were tabulated, and
the five most-cited needs were tabulated. A questionnaire was sent to all who participated in
Delphi One. Participants were asked to select what they considered to be the top two needs
from the listed five, and to provide a detailed response concerning specific strategies that could
be implemented in their community and statewide to address these needs. They were also
asked how these strategies would fit into the ecological model, and whether they would apply at
the Individual, Relationship, Community, and/or Societal level. Sixteen of the 33 (48.5%) who
were sent the Delphi Two survey responded.
In addition to providing strategies for the top two priority needs, respondents were also asked to
rank all five according to what they considered the rank in priority of the need. The ranking was
in exactly the same order as the needs had been ranked in Delphi One.

First need: sexual violence prevention education in schools & universities.
According to the Delphi panelists, the top need that must be addressed to prevent sexual
violence is sexual violence prevention education in schools and universities. There is an acute
shortage of sexual violence prevention education. Only 1.5% of Arizona students in K-12 or
college participated in the sexual violence prevention and education program during the 10month period of January 1, 2007 through October 31, 2007. Only one-tenth of one percent of
elementary school students received any sexual violence prevention education in the 10-month
period of January 1, 2007 through October 31, 2007. Yet, during that same period, one of the
45 (2.2%) disclosures to a counselor involved in the sexual violence prevention and education
program in schools was from an elementary school child. Statistics collected by ADHS from
funded contractors show the lack of sexual violence prevention and education at all grade levels
and at the college level.

20

Second need: healthy relationship/respect training, self-esteem for kids. Closely
aligned to the need for a dramatic increase in sexual violence prevention education is the need
to increase the amount of healthy relationship and respect training provided in schools, which
includes teaching self-esteem for children and youth.
Third need: more prevention funding, more sources of funding. There are over 1.6
million students in Arizona and a general population in the state of over 6 million. Arizona is one
of the fastest growing states, in the country. Yet, despite Arizona’s growth rate, Arizona’s
current prevention federal funding is being cut rather than increased. As stated by one Delphi
respondent, “Without funding and resources, we cannot offer effective and ongoing prevention.”
Fourth need: educate communities, all populations, including hospitals. Delphi
respondents believed that educating all populations in Arizona communities, including hospital
staff, was important enough to rank fourth overall.
Fifth need: media campaign, public service announcements. Through media
campaigns and public service announcements, an untold number of people can learn about
self-respect and respecting others; the message that “no means no” and “yes means yes” can
carry through the print media and the airwaves. The public can be introduced to the concepts of
sexual violence prevention and education.
DESCRIPTION OF UNIVERSAL AND SELECTED POPULATIONS TO BE ADDRESSED BY THIS PLAN
In Arizona, children and youth from kindergarten through 12th grade (K-12) as well as young
adults through age 24, both on and off college and university campuses, will be targeted for
sexual violence prevention and education services. In addition, young adults who patronize
bars and other establishments that serve alcohol, as well as bartenders and bar personnel are
selected populations to be addressed by this plan. Finally, members of faith-based
organizations, such as churches and synagogues, will be targeted, especially women’s groups
within the faith-based organizations.

GOALS AND OUTCOMES
“Teachers should be required to provide a curriculum about sexual violence that begins
with appropriate and inappropriate relationships…. Institutionalize education in sexual
violence primary prevention by getting it into statute as part of health education.”
Tucson Focus Group Member

GOAL STATEMENT ONE: SELECTED POPULATIONS
Goal One: Increase respect for self and others through sexual violence prevention education
for Arizona children, youth, and young adults.
Rationale
Nationally, reports of rape incidences were higher for younger populations, although the
statistics do not indicate whether this higher incidence of rape for younger populations was due
to a higher number of crimes or greater reporting of sexual offenses. The national data also
shows that most women reported being raped at a young age, under 24 years old. Arizona has

21

a growing population under 25 years old. Based on these national rape trends, Arizona will
need to focus on effective sexual violence prevention strategies for youth.
Since 2000, there has been a 15% increase in Arizona’s population, while the population growth
in the nation for the same time period was only 5%. By 2005, the Maternal Child Health
population included 2,901,142 women of childbearing age and children under age 21. Maricopa
County alone added 576,396 people since 2000. During the 12 months ending July 1, 2006,
Arizona was the fastest growing state with a population increase of 3.6%. Over the next 25
years, the U.S. Census projects that Arizona will grow by five million people, doubling by the
year 2030.
The National Center for Education Statistics’ state profile of Arizona for 2005-2006, lists over a
million children and youth in kindergarten through twelfth-grade in 2,078 schools. Of this
number, 45% are either free lunch eligible (403,731 students) or reduced-price lunch eligible
(88,719 students). When college students are included in the student population, there are
more than 1.6 million students in school in Arizona, of which a third are in college, 30% are in
elementary school, 22% are in high school, and 15% are in middle school.
There is an acute shortage of sexual violence prevention education. Only 1.5% of Arizona
students who are in K-12 and in college, participated in the sexual violence prevention and
education program during the 10-month period of January 1, 2007 through October 31, 2007.
Only one-tenth of one percent of elementary school students received any sexual violence
prevention education in the 10-month period of January 1, 2007 through October 31, 2007. Yet,
during that same period, one of the 45 (2.2%) disclosures to a counselor involved in the sexual
violence prevention and education program in schools was from an elementary school child.
The statistics collected by the ADHS from funded contractors show the lack of sexual violence
prevention and education at all grade levels and at the college level.
Goal Statement One focuses on the critical need to provide sexual violence prevention
education to students attending primary, secondary, and post secondary schools. In addition,
this goal addresses the two top-ranking needs identified by focus group and Delphi survey
participants. All four focus groups (100%) and more than half of the Delphi participants (19 of
33 respondents, 57.6%) identified the need for sexual violence prevention education for
“schools and universities.” One Delphi participant stated, “Youth through college age need
training, skill building, and education, both on healthy relationships as well as sexual violence, in
order to be equipped to have safe and healthy relationships with others, the self-esteem to set,
maintain, and respect safe boundaries, and to know how to identify, avoid, and or escape risk
situations/people. These are the people most at risk of experiencing sexual violence, due to
their vulnerable developmental stage(s).” Three focus groups (75%) and slightly less than half
of the Delphi participants (16 of 33, 48.5%) identified the need for sexual violence prevention
education that focuses on healthy and respectful relationships and positive self-esteem.
Outcome Statement One:
By October 31, 2010, a minimum of 2,500 college/university student participants will
demonstrate a 25% decrease in attitudes and beliefs that support sexual violence prevention as
measured by pre/posttest behavior intention scores.
Outcome Statement Two:
By October 31, 2010, college/university student participants will demonstrate a 25% increase in
intention to use sexual violence prevention strategies as measured by pre/posttest behavior
intention scores.

22

Outcome Statement Three:
By October 31, 2010, college/university student participants will demonstrate a 25% decrease in
attitudes and beliefs that support sexual violence through participation in a minimum of six
theory-based, evidence-informed sexual violence prevention-training sessions, seminars, online
education and/or workshops as measured by pre/posttest behavior intention scores
Strategy One
Implement a minimum of six theory-based, evidence-informed, age appropriate, and
culturally relevant sexual violence prevention-training sessions, seminars, online education
and/or workshops for college and university student participants.
Activity one
Review and adapt sexual violence prevention curriculum to create a minimum of six
sessions of evidence-informed, theory-based, age appropriate, and culturally relevant
sexual violence prevention education for college and university student participants.
Activity two
Establish a mandatory sexual violence prevention and education program for incoming
student participants, working in collaboration with campus and community-based
organizations.
Activity three
Develop an online vehicle, such as MySpace or Face Book, to communicate sexual
violence prevention information, resources, and education programs.
Outcome Statement Four: Individual Level
By October 31, 2014, Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgender/Questioning (LGBTQ) youths and
young adult participants will demonstrate a 25% increase in proactive sexual violence
prevention behaviors and skills as measured by practice skills demonstrations/dramatizations,
observations, and focus groups.
Strategy One
Implement a minimum of six theory-based, evidence-informed, age appropriate, and
culturally relevant sexual violence prevention-training sessions, seminars, online education
and/or workshops for LGBTQ and young adult participants
Activity one
Review and adapt sexual violence prevention curriculum to create a minimum of six
sessions of evidence-informed, theory-based, age appropriate, and culturally relevant
sexual violence prevention education in partnership with the LGBTQ community.
Activity two
Review and adapt sexual violence prevention curriculum to create a minimum of six
sessions of evidence-informed, theory-based, age appropriate, and culturally relevant
sexual violence prevention education in partnership with the diverse representation from
young adults and organizations serving this population.
Outcome Statement Five:
By October 31, 2017, 50,000 kindergarten through twelfth grade student participants will
demonstrate a 20% increase in positive interpersonal skills and behaviors that promote healthy

23

relationships as measured by pre/post-testing of students and key informant interviews or focus
groups.
Strategy One
Implement evidence-informed, theory-based, age appropriate, and culturally relevant sexual
violence prevention education for kindergarten through twelfth-grade student participants.
Activity one
Review and adapt sexual violence prevention curriculum to create a minimum of six
sessions of evidence-informed, theory-based, age appropriate, and culturally relevant
sexual violence prevention education for kindergarten through twelfth-grade student
participants.
Activity two
Develop/adapt an effective evidence-informed pre and post assessment instrument for
kindergarten through twelfth grade student participants to measure students’ degree of
demonstration of positive interpersonal skills and behaviors that promote healthy and
respectful relationships, and positive self-esteem as a result of participation in sexual
violence prevention education programs.

GOAL STATEMENT TWO: UNIVERSAL POPULATIONS
Goal Two: Increase Arizonans’ engagement in sexual violence prevention.
Rationale
The need for community education was identified by participants in two of the four focus groups
and by a third of the Delphi survey participants. In the Tucson focus group, one individual
commented, “We must teach people how to intervene; it’s okay to care and ask someone if they
are okay.” It was stated that the “community should be responsible for correcting the problem.”
One Delphi respondent stated, “I think this (sexual violence prevention and education in the
community, all populations) is the most difficult level of the ecological model to address. We
have to be persistent and creative in getting this message out.”
This goal of increasing Arizonans’ engagement in sexual violence prevention addresses the
need to improve individual and collective behaviors, to educate people so that they know what is
permitted by law and what is not permitted, and to train individuals on how to effectively prevent
sexual violence.
Outcome Statement One:
By October 31, 2014, five participating faith-based organizations will demonstrate a 20%
increase in knowledge of behaviors that promote sexual violence prevention through
participation in a minimum of six sessions on sexual violence prevention education as measured
by pre/post -testing of participants and key informant interviews or focus groups.
Strategy One
Implement an evidence-informed and theory-based sexual violence prevention and
education program for participating members of faith-based organizations.

24

Activity one
In partnership with the faith-based community, SVPEP program(s) will develop SVPEP
training curriculum, messages, and materials for use in faith-based settings.
Outcome Statement Two:
By October 31, 2013, community member participants will increase their knowledge and
bystander intervention skills by 25 as measured/demonstrated by pre/post-testing and practice
skills demonstrations and observations.
Strategy One
Implement bystander intervention campaign to increase knowledge and skills of bystanders
in the community to prevent sexual assault from initially occurring.. For purposes of this plan,
bystander intervention is the act of interceding when a person observes an individual in an
uncomfortable, uninvited sexual situation.
Activity one
Contract with community-based organizations to provide evidence-based, promising
practices, bystander intervention skills programs to participating community members.
Activity two
Monitor implementation of the programs.
Activity three
Develop uniform evaluation tools (with regional variations, as needed) and a
standardized evaluation process that will be required of all contractors.
Outcome Statement Three:
By October 31, 2017, develop and implement statewide anti-sexual violence education and
awareness media campaign.
Strategy One
Secure funding of at least $120,000 for development of a media campaign or obtain pro
bono media consulting services.
Activity one
Identify potential funding sources or pro bono opportunities.
Activity two
Contract with a media consultant to develop a sexual violence prevention message and
marketing plan.
Activity three
Integrate marketing materials into presentations conducted by contracted communitybased organizations.
Outcome Statement Four:
By October 31, 2012, increase utilization of the ADHS sexual violence prevention and education
website by 25% as measured by page views, user sessions, and return visitors.

25

Strategy One
Promote availability of website through community-based organizations, funded contractors
and partnerships across the state.
Activity one
Update website at least every six months with current research, educational resources,
abstracts, as well as summary of accomplishments and evaluation results from SVPEP
funded contractors.
Activity two
Include website address on all materials funded by SVPEP.
Outcome Statement Five:
By October 31, 2011, participating establishments that serve alcohol will participate in the
statewide campaign by displaying sexual violence prevention and education posters and
materials in plain view.
Outcome Statement Six:
By October 31, 2010, staff at establishments that serve alcohol will increase their knowledge of
sexual violence prevention by 25% through participation in a minimum five sexual violence
prevention workshops/seminars as measured by pre/post-testing.
Strategy One
Conduct outreach and training to management staff of alcohol-serving establishments that
are frequented by college students to increase their knowledge of sexual violence prevention
issues, strategies and policies
Activity one
Identify existing policy models developed for use by alcohol serving establishments.
Activity two
In partnership with alcohol-serving establishments, alcohol licensing board, and/or
bartending schools, develop SVPEP staff training and materials and modify annually if
needed
Activity three
Provide toolkits that include at a minimum, materials identified in activities one and two to
support management in implementing effective sexual violence prevention and education
policies.
Activity four
Visit participating alcohol-serving establishments to assess staff training, placement of
SVPEP materials and provide technical assistance as needed or requested.
Activity five
Offer continuing training opportunities

26

GOAL STATEMENT THREE: PREVENTION SYSTEM CAPACITY: LEADERSHIP
Goal: Increase Arizona’s financial and related resources to support sexual violence prevention
and education.
Rationale
A lack of funding and the need for more money for primary sexual violence prevention was the
third-highest need identified in the Delphi process. Fourteen of 33 Delphi respondents (42.4%)
as well as participants in the Tucson focus group identified money as a significant need. One
Delphi respondent stated, “Speaking for communities in Southern Arizona, I would say that the
obvious top priority is funding. Funding is needed to increase the numbers of health educators
at various agencies and the University of Arizona, to support training, and foster the
development, implementation, and design of evidence-based primary sexual violence
prevention programs.” Another Delphi respondent wrote, “It’s a real tragedy when an effective
(sexual violence prevention and education) program exists to address such a serious and
devastating issue but the monies are not available to fund such programs. Funding should
come from multiple, solid sources.” When the Tucson focus group was asked what might
prevent them from being able to provide effective primary sexual violence prevention programs,
the group responded that a lack of money was the primary barrier.
As stated in the needs and resources assessment chapter, Arizona’s funding is being cut rather
than increased for the present and immediate future because of declines in the state’s revenues
and the worldwide recession that affects this and other federally and state funded programs.
Therefore, with declining federal and state funding, other funding options must be pursued to
ensure adequate funding for Arizona’s sexual violence prevention and education programs.
In- state training for prevention educators is limited due to a lack of available sexual violence
prevention-training opportunities and therefore staff only receives training at costly national
conferences on a bi-annual basis when funds are available.
Outcome Statement One:
Through legislation, by October 31, 2011, increase by 100% the State of Arizona’s financial
resources to support sexual violence prevention and education efforts as evidenced by new
mandatory fee legislation.
Outcome Statement Two:
Through community partnerships, by October 31, 2011, increase by 100% the State of Arizona’s
financial resources to support sexual violence prevention and education efforts as evidenced by
annual commitment/contracts from professional sports organizations.
Strategy One
Pass state legislation that requires convicted sex offenders to pay a one-time fine to be
placed in a sexual violence prevention activity fund, administered by the ADHS, Bureau of
Women’s and Children’s Health, SVPEP, to fund sexual violence prevention and education
programs in Arizona.
Activity one
Identify champion and resources to lead and garner support for the proposed legislation
mandating a fine. The champion would need to find a sponsor for the proposed
legislation.

27

Activity two
Create a grassroots network to educate and engage state legislators about this proposed
change.
Activity three
Create a letter writing and telephone campaign to state legislators.
Activity four
Educate and train individuals in the network on how to engage legislators.
Activity five
Write the new language, possibly amending current sexual violence statutes.
Activity six
Discuss the idea with all stakeholders: courts; probation; victims in court committee;
sexual assault providers; sexual assault and domestic violence coalition; survivors of
sexual assault; Arizona Coalition for Victims Services; and the Government Council to
Prevent Violence Against Women.
Activity seven
Research legality of establishing a sexual violence prevention activity fund administered
by the ADHS, Bureau of Women’s and Children’s Health, SVPEP or identify an
alternative fund collection and administration vehicle.
Strategy Two
Obtain annual donations from Arizona’s major professional sports teams to be placed in a
sexual violence prevention activity fund, administered by the ADHS, Bureau of Women’s and
Children’s Health, SVPEP to fund sexual violence prevention and education programs in
Arizona
Activity one
Identify which teams have foundations.
Activity two
Identify how much money they currently give to sexual violence prevention.
Activity three
Identify the point person/taskforce or organization to lead this effort
Activity four
Develop partnerships with professional sports organizations.
Activity five
Research and develop a training program for professional sports organizations in Arizona
on sexual violence, primary prevention, and partnering.
Activity six
Educate individuals in professional sport organizations on sexual violence/assault and
prevention.

28

Activity seven
Establish a SVPEP fund for receiving donations and other private funds allocated to
sexual violence prevention efforts.
Strategy Three
Provide two trainings a year for sexual violence prevention and education contractors and
others who might benefit.
Activity one
Conduct a needs assessment to identify training needs of current and prior SVPEP
providers
Activity two
Identify qualified trainers and provide training to individuals working to prevent sexual
assault violence in Arizona.
Strategy Four
Investigate strategies for the development and adoption of a more comprehensive approach
to data collection by all reporting sources in Arizona.
Activity one
Identify and meet with key law enforcement agency personnel to initiate dialogue
regarding strategies for improving Arizona’s reporting system.
Activity two
Collaborate with the ADHS Injury Prevention Advisory Council and its violence
subcommittee to identify data needs and potential data sources in an effort to strengthen
their ability to report on violence related to sexual assaults as well.
“Sex and sexual assault are not talked about. They seem to be a rite of passage, with some
questioning in some cases if you haven’t had sex or a child by the age of 14.”
Yuma Focus Group Member

29