Digital Tools
+ Submit

Transparency

How this directory works, who maintains it, and how tools are assessed.

About this directory

This directory catalogues digital tools relevant to gender-based violence (GBV) — including tools for survivors, practitioners, researchers, and law enforcement. It is maintained by an editorial team in partnership with activist organisations working on GBV across Europe.

Team details to be added — awaiting team input

How the score is calculated

Every tool is reviewed against 49 criteria grouped into 8 weighted categories. Each criterion is answered on a four-point scale:

A category's score is the mean of its applicable criteria. The overall score is the weighted mean across categories, counting only those where at least one criterion applied — so a tool is never penalised for criteria that could not reasonably apply to it. A tool does not need to meet every criterion to be listed.

Score bands

Critical criteria

8 of the 49 criteria are marked critical — things like collecting no personal data by default, or offering a quick-exit button. A tool that fails one is flagged as a red flag on its page regardless of how high it scores overall, because a strong average cannot make up for a missing safety feature.

Trauma-informed design criteria

Tools are assessed against a rubric of 49 criteria across 8 weighted categories. Each category contributes to the overall score in proportion to its weight, shown below. Every answer, the per-category score and any red flags appear on the tool's own page.

Privacy & data — 8 criteria, 5 critical20%
  1. Core content accessible without creating an account
  2. No PII collected by default (name, email, IP, location)Critical
  3. Privacy policy in plain language with a short summaryCritical
  4. User data not sold or shared with third partiesCritical
  5. Option to use pseudonym or alternative name
  6. No auto-save of form content (shared device risk)Critical
  7. Opt-in (not opt-out) consent — granular and revocableCritical
  8. End-to-end encryption used where applicable
Safety by design — 6 criteria, 1 critical20%
  1. Quick-exit button present (redirects discreetly to neutral page)Critical
  2. Content warnings before sensitive or triggering content
  3. Disguised notifications or discreet app icon option
  4. No "people you may know" feature that could expose users to abusers
  5. Two-factor authentication available
  6. Safe alternative contact options supported (distinct from personal accounts)
Agency, consent & participatory design — 7 criteria15%
  1. User controls what information is public vs. private
  2. Multiple content formats available (video, text, audio)
  3. Self-paced use possible — no forced sequential flows
  4. User can opt out of tracking and cookies
  5. Survivors co-designed AND co-iterated — not consulted once only
  6. Tool does not force a single pathway (e.g. 'call police' only)
  7. Feedback mechanism exists for users to flag issues or suggest content
Accessibility, equity & inclusion — 9 criteria15%
  1. Available in more than one language
  2. Free to use — no paywall for core content
  3. Mobile-friendly / responsive design
  4. WCAG 2.1 AA accessibility compliance documented
  5. Gender-neutral, non-stigmatising language throughout
  6. Covers intersectional forms of GBV — not single-issue only
  7. Works on low bandwidth / poor connectivity
  8. Not geographically restricted in access
  9. Mitigates risks for users on shared or monitored devices
Transparency & accountability — 6 criteria10%
  1. Creator / organisation clearly identified on the tool
  2. Last update date visible (signals active maintenance)
  3. Scope and limitations clearly stated — including what the tool cannot do
  4. Funding sources disclosed
  5. Methodology publicly documented
  6. Content aligned with global GBV/HP standards and reviewed
Tone & trauma-informed UX — 5 criteria, 1 critical10%
  1. No graphic or violent imagery — no sensationalised depictions of violenceCritical
  2. Uses "survivor" rather than "victim" language throughout
  3. Warm, non-judgmental, validating tone throughout the interface
  4. Visuals are empowering and gender-diverse — not stereotyping
  5. Does not minimise or hierarchise different forms of abuse
AI & algorithmic ethics — 5 criteria, 1 critical5%
  1. Clearly states if and how AI is used in the tool
  2. Clearly states what AI is usedCritical
  3. Provides details of how user's inputs are processed/ saved/ shared with third parties.
  4. Chatbots / automated tools clearly identify themselves as non-human
  5. Human escalation pathway available when AI cannot safely respond
Sustainability & feminist tech ethos — 3 criteria5%
  1. Led or co-led by women, gender-diverse people, or Global Majority organisations
  2. Openly licensed — can be used, remixed or adapted by others
  3. Clearly states compliance with feminist values or trauma-informed design or survivor-centred approach

Where the criteria come from

Privacy & data

See something wrong or missing?Send feedback orsuggest a tool.