Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Domestic Violence Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Victim Services Advisory Board urges county to create 12–18 month bridge housing for domestic violence survivors
Summary
Shanqueta Anderson told the Montgomery County Health and Human Services committee that IPV survivors need longer-term bridge housing—12–18 months—and more victim advocates; current shelter stays (about 60 days) and staffing shortages force costly hotel placements and risk returning survivors to unsafe situations.
Shanqueta Anderson, representing the Victim Services Advisory Board, told the Health and Human Services committee on Oct. 17 that Montgomery County must establish stable 12–18 month bridge housing for survivors of intimate partner violence to help them become self-sufficient.
Anderson said existing shelter capacity is insufficient for the long-term needs of survivors and that the Betty Ann Crank Shelter generally allows stays of about 60 days, while "studies show that IPV victims need 12 to 18 months of independence to become self sufficient survivors." She said the county currently uses hotel placements at substantial expense when longer transitional housing is unavailable.
The advisory board also called for more paid victim advocates and better case management: advocates help survivors file peace and protective orders, attend hearings, prepare impact statements and connect victims with community services. Anderson said trauma services reported over 1,500 service requests in FY24 and more than 50 homicide-related referrals requiring sustained support.
Specific proposals and gaps raised in testimony included: expanding housing priority for IPV survivors within the county’s vulnerability-index scoring; offering HUD Continuum of Care application training to local providers so available bonus funds translate into usable case management; and improving transportation options so victims can access crisis centers and services.
What’s next: Committee members asked staff to follow up with written details about partner organizations, current funding levels and staffing status so the council can evaluate funding and programmatic options for FY26. No formal action was taken at the meeting.
