We'll be updating our mapping tool as states pass new policies. Sign up below and we'll send you an email when the state(s) you select passes a policy that impacts survivors' financial security.
Report missing info
×
With the help of some truly incredible pro bono partners, FreeFrom was able to complete research on policies impacting survivors’ financial security in every state and D.C. One of our priorities is to ensure that all of the information in our tool is correct and up-to-date. To that end, we welcome any correction on inaccurate or incomplete information. Thank you in advance for helping us make the Policy Map and Scorecard the best tool it can possibly be!
Scoring guide.
×
Overall State Score
Model State
This state prioritizes survivors’ financial security across all policy categories and is a model for other states to follow!
Financial Security Friendly
This state is prioritizing survivors’ financial security in a broad range of policies and is on its way to becoming a Model State!
Taking Steps
This state considers survivors’ financial security in multiple policies, and is making progress towards becoming a survivor financial security friendly state
Some Accountability
This state somewhat considers survivors’ financial security in a few policies, but has a lot of work to do
Little Accountability
This state does not prioritize survivors’ financial security or consider their unique circumstances or needs
Policy Category Scores
Model
This policy has it all!
Strong
This policy includes a majority of our Model Policy characteristics
Promising
This policy includes some of our Model Policy characteristics, but needs improvement
None
This state does not have this policy
Adverse
This policy is harmful for survivors
Share Your Feedback!.
×
GLOSSARY
Alternatives to law enforcement responses refers to responses without police, law enforcement or a carceral system (a system that includes prison or jail). Survivor experience and research shows that involving law enforcement in intimate partner violence cases can be more harmful and devastating for survivors. Read our statement on defunding the police. Alternative responses to law-enforcement and incarceration as used in the Policy Map and Scorecard refers to alternative approaches and responses to intimate partner violence that do not rely solely on police, law enforcement, or incarceration.
Coerced and fraudulent debt (which 52% of survivors experience) occurs when a harm-doer uses coercion or fraud to access credit in the survivor’s name. Some examples include a harm-doer applying for a credit card and incurring debt in the survivor’s name without their knowledge or threatening a survivor with violence unless they sign a credit card application.
Economic abuse (which is prevalent in 99% of intimate partner violence cases) occurs when a harm-doer exerts control over a survivor’s ability to acquire, use, and / or maintain economic resources. Harm-doers use a range of economic abuse tactics. These include putting a survivor on a strict allowance and/or demanding receipts for all purchases made, monitoring online bank accounts, forcing a survivor to quit a job or preventing them from going to work, requiring them to hand over their paychecks, and incurring debt via credit cards or loans in a survivor’s name without their knowledge or consent.
Harm-Doer refers to someone who has caused harm to another. We understand the complexity of intimate partner violence and that harm-doers or people who cause harm are often survivors themselves. We use harm-doer instead of perpetrator or abuser to acknowledge their ability to heal and not be indefinitely defined by their actions as well.
Litigation abuse occurs when a harm-doer misuses the legal system to assert power and control over a survivor, including by doing things in court or through their attorney to increase a survivor’s legal fees. Some examples include: filing multiple groundless motions to increase costs for the survivor, serving irrelevant and / or harassing discovery requests on the survivor (e.g., “identify all of your sexual partners”) and asking for unnecessary hearings to force the survivor to appear in court and miss work / find affordable child care.
“No Drop Policy” refers to a policy that gives the state prosecutor the sole authority to decide whether or not to prosecute a harm-doer for intimate partner violence in criminal court, whether or not the survivor wants to press charges or take the case to trial. Under a “no drop policy”, a survivor has no say in how the state will proceed with a criminal case against their harm-doer.
Reasonable accommodations are any changes to a job, the way a job is done, or the work environment made by an employer to ensure the safety of a survivor while at work. Examples of reasonable accommodations include, but not limited to the ability to work from home, a modified or flexible schedule, and transfer to another work facility.
Special considerations for public benefits exempt or defer certain applicants from some program requirements and / or speed up their applications. For example, under certain circumstances, a survivor’s application for a public benefit may be considered more quickly or they may be exempted from applicable work requirements.
Survivor wealth refers to a state of abundance and thriving where survivors have sustaining income, savings, and credit with which to build wealth and the resources to support individual, intergenerational, and community healing.
Torts describe what happens when one person injures another. For example, assault, battery, and the intentional infliction of emotional distress are all torts. Tort law allows the person who was injured to sue the person who caused the injury in court to recover some of the costs the injury caused. Some examples of costs that can be covered in a tort case include medical bills, damaged property, mental health costs, and attorneys’ fees.
Continuing tort refers to torts that continues or repeats over time as one single tort rather than multiple torts. When a tort is a continuing tort, the statute of limitations does not begin to run until the last in the series of the torts occurs.