Research indicates there are different subcategories of individuals who use Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) based on their personal characteristics, past experiences, and current psychopathy. While no agreed upon standard exists, both Johnson’s and Holtzworth-Munro & Stuart’s typology theories are well-respected, commonly utilized, evidence-based typologies outlining characteristics common to certain users of IPV. Further research indicates that interventions are more effective when tailored to meet the particular needs of each subtype. This research practicum report details completed review and analysis of best-practice risk assessment tools used to identify typologies of IPV users, research and reviewed literature regarding typology theories, and identified intervention treatments. This report outlines the evaluation of current practices of IPV assessment throughout all Family Service Regina service programs and provides research groundwork for future agency endeavours regarding the engagement and service of IPV users. Common themes identified included the impact of language to include or exclude, the necessity for purposeful assessment tools that are seamlessly incorporated with informal risk assessment skills of clinicians, and interventions that move from victim-centred to client-centred in a concerted effort to ensure that services are provided in anti-oppressive, trauma-informed ways that engage clients to be participants in their own growth. Finally, this report provides recommendations to encourage continued use of person-centred language, to incorporate understandings of typologies of IPV to inform interventions, and to pair best-practice, evidence-based assessments and interventions with the family-centred mission and values for which Family Services Regina stands.