Te Whakaruruhau

Waikato Women's Refuge

GoodMeasure Results

March 2025

Te Whakaruruhau, Waikato Women's Refuge, is a social change agency dedicated to providing continuous support, empowering wāhine, and ensuring the safety and resilience of their tamariki.

Image 1: Members of WWRT team.

Scope - Te Whakaruruhau

This GoodMeasure considers the social value created for participants who engaged in Te Whakaruruhau's services, during the period 1 November 2023 - 31 October 2024.

Te Whakaruruhau operates a 24/7 crisis service, addressing immediate needs and safety concerns. Kaimahi advocates make initial contact, assess the situation, and create a personalised safety plan. Wahine, tamariki, whānau, and sometimes tāne receive full wraparound support through community-based or residential services.

Entry Process: Referrals come from government agencies (OT, Police, Corrections, Hospitals, WINZ) and the community (whānau or self-referral). Advocates make initial contact, often via a cold call to the home, with a response time of 30–40 minutes. The severity of the case determines the next steps.

Needs Assessment: Each wahine is assigned a core kaimahi advocate. They discuss needs, risks, and create a safety plan. The assessment considers risks posed by others (e.g., gang affiliations, drug use, violent history) and the wahine’s own circumstances. This phase is crucial for building trust.

Safety Plan: Each safety plan is tailored to the wahine’s needs. It may involve safe housing, family safety alarms, relocation, or temporary motel stays. Safe housing can take longer to secure, so short-term solutions are available.

Goal Setting: Advocates help wahine set realistic goals, prioritising immediate safety, followed by medium- and long-term objectives.

Wraparound Support Services Provided:

Residential Support – Safe housing and care for wahine and their children.
Legal Assistance – Help with legal status, court support, asset redistribution, and justice processes.
Health & Wellbeing – Medical, dental, injury care, trauma rehabilitation, and counselling for women and children.
Child Advocacy – Support with schools and other services.
Financial & Practical Support – Food parcels, transport, education, training, and work assistance.

Accessibility

Te Whakaruruhau offers ongoing advocacy with an open-door policy, allowing wahine and their whānau to return when needed.

How ImpactLab defines social value

Social value is the estimated social impact in dollar terms that a programme achieves for participants over their lifetime.

Throughout our lives, different events occur that impact our overall wellbeing journey. ImpactLab measures the impact on an individual’s wellbeing across multiple domains when they’re supported by a programme to make positive changes in their life.

We measure this impact in terms of both positive benefits (such as increased income) and avoided costs to government.

To calculate social value, we combine these impact values with:

evidence from global literature about how effective a programme can be;
the size of the opportunity for the people a programme serves to achieve more positive outcomes; and
the number of people supported.

By combining these inputs, the social value calculation helps us understand how a programme or intervention helps change lives for the better. We combine the social value with cost information to calculate a programme’s social return on investment.

Image 2: Impact Lab Social Value visual showing the life trajectory of an individual or family before and after an effective programme intervention. While the upward trajectory is depicted as linear, well-being naturally fluctuates over time. However, the overall trend is generally positive

The four key components to measure social value

1. Outcomes

What positive long-term changes do the services help to create in participants' lives?

ImpactLab uses programme data and evidence from academic literature to substantiate what long-term outcomes a service creates. These outcomes are then matched to ImpactLab’s library of GoodMeasure outcomes (outcomes with a dollar value, derived from public data).

2. Effectiveness

What academic evidence is there about how effective service(s) like these can be at achieving those changes?

ImpactLab estimates the effectiveness of your service's activities and delivery approach in achieving each outcome, based on features of effective practice evidenced in similar services, in the academic literature.

3. Population

How many people does Te Whakaruruhau reach, and how many engage long enough to meaningfully benefit?

4. Opportunity

Who does Te Whakaruruhau serve, and what is the opportunity to make a difference for those people?

The opportunity input seeks to reflect the proportion of participants who have the opportunity to achieve a particular outcome (at X effectiveness) as a result of engaging in the programme.

Social Value

/ Cost = Social Return on Investment (SROI)

Social value metrics:

Te Whakaruruhau

$ 19,241,807

Total social value

Social value: The estimated lifetime social value that this service generates for the cohort of participants supported during the measurement period.

$ 6,483

Social value per person

Social value per person: When we divide your social value through the number of people engaging, we can derive a social value per person.

$1 : $6.70

SROI (Social Return on Investment)

SROI: The measurable social value as a proportion of programme costs. This is calculated from dividing the total social value by the programme costs (and rounding to the nearest 10 cents).

Population

Who do you serve, how many people do you reach,
and how many engage enough to meaningfully benefit?

Participant groups	Total starting	Total minimally engaging	Total meaningfully engaging	Meaningful engagement rate
Wahine	2953	2586	1273	43%
Tamariki & pēpē	2866	2551	1632	57%
Tāne	119	109	63	53%
Households	2966	2599	1299	44%
Total participants	5938	5245	2968	50%

Note: Social value is measured per meaningfully engaged participant, while costs are calculated per starting participant. Although initial contact meets the minimal engagement definition for WWRT, ImpactLab found it too limited to attribute long-term outcomes to participant groups. In other programmes, this level of engagement would typically be considered the starting point.

Demographics

Most whānau are of Māori descent:

62% of wahine, 72% of tamariki/pēpē and 70% of tāne/partners.

Outcomes

What positive, long-term changes in peoples’ lives does this service help to create?

Wahine	Tamariki	Tāne/partner	Household
Improve mental health	Improve mental health	Improve mental health	Reduce family violence
Improve physical health	Improve physical health	Improve physical health	Reduce victimisation (family violence)
Reduce addiction	Reduce addiction	Reduce addiction	Reduce child placement
Reduce offending	Reduce offending	Reduce offending	Improve housing
Reduce risky behaviour	Reduce risky behaviour	Reduce risky behaviour
Increase employment	Increase academic achievement (NCEA L3)	Increase employment
Improve oral health	Improve infant safety
Reduce emergency benefit

Effectiveness

What academic evidence is there about how effective service(s) like these can be at achieving those changes?

Effective programme features

Family violence is a highly complex issue, making it challenging to achieve meaningful and lasting outcomes. Amid these challenges, research suggests that it is crucial for support and social workers to adopt strengths-based, client-centred, and trauma-informed care models. These approaches foster an environment of trust and non-judgement while promoting client autonomy, informed decision-making, and education throughout the process (Elliott et al., 2005; Harris & Fallot, 2001; Knight, 2015; Levenson, 2017; Morrison et al., 2015).

Mental health research highlights

Wahine

Research suggests that among survivors accessing shelter services, empowerment moderated the link between IPV severity and PTSD symptoms, beyond the benefits of resource access (Perez, Johnson, & Wright, 2012). Additionally, a randomized trial found that an intervention focused on empowerment was associated with a reduction in PTSD symptoms over time and a lower likelihood of repeated abuse (Johnson, Zlotnick, & Perez, 2011). Lastly, a study examining different prosecution tracks for IPV victims found that repeat abuse was least likely when survivors had the autonomy to decide whether to press charges and chose to proceed (Ford & Regoli, 1992).

Tamariki

Exposure to IPV has been linked to increased rates of cognitive, psychological, and emotional impairments in children. Those most affected often struggle with behavioral and emotional regulation, as well as cognitive functioning and attitudes (Huang et al., 2015). Research by Graham-Bermann et al. (2011) found that improvements in a mother’s mental health, particularly regarding traumatic stress, were associated with greater reductions in children’s internalizing problems.

Opportunity

Who do you serve, and what is the opportunity to make a difference for those people?

Support services	Wahine	Tamariki	Tāne/partner
Justice	62%	-	53%
Specialist mental health	23%	1%	43%
Addiction	7%	-	10%
Medical	24%	2%	30%
Dental	1%	-	-
Benefit	44%	-	43%
Employment	7%	-	20%
Education	5%	2%	3%
Residential	42%	-	43%
Kai	51%	-	90%
Child Advocacy	12%	25%	7%
Disability	1%	1%	-
Safety alarms/cameras	19%	-	3%

Mental health

We assumed that all wahine referred into Te Whakaruruhau crisis services had poor mental health.

Therefore, 100% of wahine had poor mental health.

Addiction

32% of wahine, 37% of tamariki (rangatahi) & 37% of tāne had alcohol or drug abuse issues at referral.

We were able to use this data as opportunity for the reduce addiction outcome.

OT Involvement

18% of wahine and 26% of tāne/partner had involvement with Oranga Tamariki in their household.

We used the OT involvement sub-population for the reduce child placement outcome applied to households.

Offending

26% of tāne/partner and 10% of wahine had been charged with a criminal offence in the last 5 years.

We were able to use this data as opportunity for the reduce offending outcome.

Unemployment

40% of wahine and 25% of tāne/partner were unemployed at programme start.

We used the unemployed sub-population for the increase employment outcome.

Costs

$ 2,857,475

Total investment

Total investment: The sum of the programme's direct and indirect costs.

$2,090,928

Direct costs

Direct costs: The expenses involved with running the programme.

$766,547

Indirect costs

Indirect costs: Expenses that don't come from directly running the programme but are still needed as part of it.

$481

Average cost per starting participant

Average cost per starting participant: The total investment divided by the number of starting participants.

Disclaimer: The above costs stated are for the period in scope, 1 November 2023 - 31 October 2024. These costs are assumed to be representative of the investment required to achieve programme outcomes.

Future opportunities

What might you do to enhance your view of the social value Te Whakaruruhau creates?

Consolidating case note data into an integrated system to reflect the situational factors and full range of supports provided to each participant.

We understand current data is recorded in case notes. Consider adapting data collection into a system where it may be easier to track situational factors and types of support over time.

Collecting outcomes data

Where participants are engaging in many services at Te Whakarurahau (internal or external), consider tracking outcomes data. This could happen at the exit/last interaction with the whānau. Visibility over engagement in your services and associated outcomes, would enable us to more accurately understand the effectiveness.

Optimising visibility of type of victimisation in the household

Within an integrated data system of data collection, it will be important to have types of violence experienced by wahine, tāne and/or tamariki to better understand the level of trauma.

Next Steps

What you could do with your results

Share your GoodMeasure report with funders and supporters

Funders will appreciate your commitment to impact measurement as it demonstrates transparency and a desire to do good, better. Invite input from both existing and prospective funders. They may have helpful insights and advice – or additional funding – to help you further increase impact.

Review your GoodMeasure report as a team

Discuss key insights from the Report with your leadership, programme and finance team. How could you increase your impact even further?

Celebrate with your team

Your team has put in a lot of hard work to achieve the social value metrics captured in your GoodMeasure Report, it’s important to pause every so often to reflect on the impact you’re achieving together.

How we utilise research

Research informs the Outcomes and Effectiveness components of our social value equation. We conduct a rapid literature review to:

Identify what long-term outcomes your programme is having on participants (by substantiating the link between the activities of the programme and outcomes for participants).
Estimate the effectiveness of your programme in achieving each outcome by checking how closely it follows proven methods for the participants in the programme.

Summary of Inputs and Assumptions

The inputs and assumptions used to calculate your SROI

	Inputs to this SROI	Key Assumptions
Outcomes	ImpactLab’s library of quantified outcomes	‘Lifetime’ value of an outcome is conservatively valued over a 5-year period, in line with New Zealand Treasury's approach to measuring value within a contained period.
Effectiveness	Findings from programmes in the ImpactLab research evidence base.	Research is analogous to your programme. Higher effectiveness is assigned to immediate outcomes and those substantiated with longitudinal studies.
Population	Programme participation data, provided by Te Whakaruruhau.
Opportunity	Eligibility for outcomes was based on the percentage of participants who acecssed a relevant service (i.e. eligibility for an outcome required that a participant accessed a relevant support). New Zealand European, Māori and asian populration rates used for the improve oral health outcome.	Opportunity rates for all other GoodMeasure outcomes are derived from New Zealand general population rates.
Cost	Total programme costs over period in scope, provided by Te Pae Manaaki Tangata

Definitions

Intervention - An intentional process through which a defined group of people have the opportunity to create a positive change in their life trajectory.

Intervention type - A categorisation to group similar interventions based on their activities (i.e. how resources are used). These categories have been developed by ImpactLab based on academic literature and the input of organisations participating in the SROI process.

Organisation - The organisation delivering the programmes measured.

Programme - The unit of measurement of an SROI which consists of one or more interventions.

Participant - A person or group of people for whom a programme exists to make a positive difference.

Sector - The part of the charity or social sector within which the organisation primarily operates. This is an organisation-level categorisation.

Social value - The social impact in dollar terms that the amount invested achieves for participants over their lifetime. The social value is calculated by combining outcome values with a service delivery quality score, the size of the opportunity to support a population, and the number of people supported.

Key References

Bennett Cattaneo, Lauren and Lisa A. Goodman. “What is empowerment anyway? A model for domestic violence practice, research, and evaluation”, Psychology of Violence, 2015, 5(1): 84-94.

Carman, Mary Jean., et al. “Long-term recovery from intimate partner violence: definitions by Australian women”, Journal of Family Violence, 2023, 38: 747-760.

Dillon, Gina., et al. "Mental and physical health and intimate partner violence against women: A review of the literature", International Journal of Family Medicine, 2013, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/313909

Eckhardt, Christopher L., et al. "The effectiveness of intervention programs for perpetrators and victims of intimate partner violence", Partner Abuse, 2013, 4(2): 196-231.

Flasch, P., et al. “Overcoming abuse: A phenomenological investigation of the journey to recovery from past intimate partner violence”, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 2015, 32(22): 1-29.

Hackett, Shannon., et al. “The therapeutic efficacy of domestic violence victim interventions”, Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 2016, 17(2): 123-32.

Hashemi, Laden., et al. “Exploring the health burden of cumulative and specific adverse childhood experiences in New Zealand: Results form a population-based study”, Child Abuse & Neglect, 2021, 122: 1-15.

Hing, Nerilee., et al. "Impacts of male intimate partner violence on women: A life course perspective", International Journal of Environmental Research on Public Health, 2021, 18(16): 8303.

Hodgkinson, William., et al. “Comparing panic alarm systems for high-risk domestic abuse victims: a randomised controlled trial on prevention and criminal justice system outcomes”, Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2023, 19: 595-613.

Huang, Chien-Chung., et al. “Children’s exposure to intimate partner violence and early delinquency”, Journal of Family Violence, 2015, 30: 953-965.

Levenson, Jill. “Trauma-informed social work practice”, Social Work, 2017, 62(2): 105-113.

Little, Gaylene., et al. “Themes for family violence intervention practice: Manaakitanga, whakawhanaungatanga, professional integrity, and authenticity”, Social Workers Registration Board Conference, 2013, pp. 47-55.

Mehr, Jacqueline B., et al. “Intimate partner violence, substance use, and health comorbidities among women: A narrative review”, Frontiers in Psychology, 2023, 13: 1-14.

Moylan, Carrie A., et al. “The effects of child abuse and exposure to domestic violence on adolescent internalizing and externalizing behaviour problems”, Journal of Family Violence, 2010, 25(1): 53-63.

Peterson, Kevin., et al. “Effects of second responder programs on repeat incidents of family abuse: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis”, Campbell Systematic Reviews, 2022, 18: 1-37.

Robbins, Rachel and Kate Cook. “‘Don’t even get us started on social workers’: Domestic violence, social work and trust – An anecdote from research”, British Journal of Social Work, 2018, 48: 1664-1681.

Warshaw, Carole., et al. A Systematic Review of Trauma-Focused Interventions for Domestic Violence Survivors, 2013, National Center on Domestic Violence, Trauma & Mental Health.

Limitations

The themes analysed in this report are based on observed correlations and provide broad conclusions rather than tight causative claims.
Programme intervention practices are determined via narrative and operational data provided by an organisation. It does not include direct observation of programmes, and as such social value forecasts do not capture variation in programme practice e.g., in workforce skills or programme fidelity across locations.
Comparisons should be considered indicative only, as metrics can be influenced by a variety of factors, including differences in data quality, scoping decisions, improvements to methodology over time and limitations in the available academic literature.
Many aspects of social impact cannot appropriately be quantified in dollar terms, and SROI findings should be considered alongside other important sources of information such as participant feedback and more bespoke forms of evaluation.
GoodMeasure is a standardised measurement model — different interventions are treated as consistently as possible to enable comparability, which means the uniqueness of each intervention is not fully reflected.
Cost and participant data inputs are provided by the organisation. Responsibility sits with each organisation to ensure their data is accurate and genuinely reflects the programme.
Estimates have varying confidence levels due to differing quality and availability of data inputs. The GoodMeasure methodology takes the approach of using the data that is available in order to support ongoing data improvement.
The lifetime (dollar) value of an outcome is conservatively valued over a 5-year period. This is aligned with New Zealand Treasury’s approach of measuring impact within a contained period.

Disclaimer

This disclaimer sets out important information about the scope of ImpactLab Limited’s services. ImpactLab endeavours to ensure that all material and information used for and presented in any GoodMeasure, including ROI calculations and impact numbers, is accurate and reliable (information). However, the information is based on various sources, including information organisations provide to ImpactLab which is not independently verified. ImpactLab does not make any representations or warranties in respect of information it uses or presents in relation to any GoodMeasure or this report. This includes any representation or warranty relating to the accuracy, adequacy, availability or completeness of information, or that it is suitable for its intended use. ImpactLab does not provide advice or make recommendations for any decisions made by any person, financial or otherwise, either in relation to any GoodMeasure, or this report. Data and percentages stated in this report may have been rounded.

Aggregated data stated in this report is based upon data provided to ImpactLab pursuant to its privacy policy and terms and conditions. Data ImpactLab uses except in exceptional circumstances must be aggregated and anonymised so that no participant in any programme ImpactLab analyses can be identified within data Impactlab uses or produces. Where ImpactLab uses the New Zealand Integrated Data Infrastructure (IDI), it does so subject to the conditions for access set by Stats NZ for IDI data users.

Attribution

Some data and information used in the Social ROI calculations is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Licence. It is attributed to the New Zealand Treasury.

ImpactLab - Do good, better.

ImpactLab’s vision is to help create a world where investment works for communities, so that people can live the lives they choose.

We work with the best available data and evidence to estimate social value in dollar terms – a metric that is measurable, consistent, and comparable.

We build close relationships with our customers to understand them, and the needs of their communities, supporting them to do good, better.

Contact:

04 391 2755

info@impactlab.co.nz

LinkedIn | Facebook

Level 1, 2-8 Chancery Street, Auckland, 1010
Level 8, 187 Featherston Street, Wellington 6011

Te Whakaruruhau

Waikato Women's Refuge

GoodMeasure Results

March 2025

​

Scope - Te Whakaruruhau

Exclusions

How ImpactLab defines social value​

The four key components to measure social value

1. Outcomes

2. Effectiveness

3. Population

4. Opportunity

Social Value

/ Cost = Social Return on Investment (SROI)

Social value metrics:

Te Whakaruruhau

$ 19,241,807

Total social value

$ 6,483

Social value per person

$1 : $6.70

SROI (Social Return on Investment)

Insights

Population​

Definitions

Inputs & insights

Demographics

Outcomes

Outcome Definitions

Effectiveness

Effective programme features

Mental health research highlights

Opportunity

Support services

Insights

Mental health

Addiction

OT Involvement

Offending

Unemployment

Costs

$ 2,857,475

$2,090,928

$766,547

$481

Insights

Future opportunities

Next Steps

How we utilise research

Research Processes

Summary of Inputs and Assumptions

Definitions

Key References

Limitations

Disclaimer

Attribution

ImpactLab - Do good, better.

How ImpactLab defines social value

Population