In the State of Massachusetts, a female offender is likely to be white, in her thirties, and a custodial parent. She is likely to have committed a non-violent offense, usually a drug or property crime. There is a strong chance that she has a substance abuse problem or a history of physical, sexual, or emotional trauma. When she leaves prison, she is likely to lack medical insurance, safe and affordable housing for her and her children, and access to reliable transportation. Her options for employment are likely to be limited to low-paying jobs that do not offer the flexibility that she needs in order to care for her children.¹

Just one of these challenges by itself may be enough to push someone to the limits of her ability to cope. However, women leaving prison in Massachusetts are likely to face all of these challenges simultaneously. It is perhaps due to these challenges that nearly one-half of female offenders released from jail or prison re-offend within three years of their release.² There is reason to believe that to improve female offenders’ levels of success post-release, the current model of service provision must change.

This is position taken in Foundations for Success: Meeting the Needs of Female Offenders Returning to Massachusetts Communities, a report released in May 2006 by the Crime and Justice Institute. Authors Kristin Collins and Meghan Howe survey the needs of female offenders and suggest changes to the current system of services to help female offenders re-enter the community successfully. Below, we summarize the main features of the report:³

• Five guiding principles for working with female offenders,
  
• Descriptions of model programs serving female offenders in other parts of the country,
• A review a sample of programs and services designed for women that are currently operating in Essex,Suffolk, and Hampden counties, and
• Six recommendations to improve service provision to female offenders upon their release from incarceration.

Guiding Principles/Foundations for Successful Practice:

1. Assessment of Risk and Needs:
Currently, many facilities use needs/risk assessments developed for use with men. However, assessments developed for men do not necessarily evaluate risks or needs of female offenders accurately. Women often get involved in criminal activity through different means than men; for example, they may get pressured from a partner to sell drugs. They may have to contend with abusive relationships or the need to reunify with children upon release. Therefore, when trying to assess risk and needs of women reentering the community, these factors must be addressed. A scientifically tested and validated risk/needs assessment for women would help to determine a woman’s needs and risks post-release.

2. Comprehensive Case Management:
Because women’s needs are interrelated, they must be addressed simultaneously. For example, providing a woman with a substance abuse program without housing, transportation, childcare or healthcare is only addressing one aspect of her reintegration to society. It is easy to see how this might heighten a woman’s risk of re-offending. The report cites the Women’s Prison Association, which has developed a model of the reentry process that spans five dimensions: subsistence/livelihood, residence, family, health and sobriety, and criminal justice compliance.

3. Gender-Responsive Services:
It is important to provide services that consider the social and historical contexts of women and their needs. For example, many women offenders enter treatment with low self-esteem. Therefore reintegration should be focused on providing services that foster self-efficacy and competency.

4. Relational Services:
It is equally important to recognize that women benefit from a relational perspective that fosters strong, trusting relationships when providing services. Similarly, transitional programming would ease women through the sudden termination of relationships formed within the correctional institution upon their release.

5. Trauma-Informed Care:
The majority of female offenders have a history of childhood or adult sexual, physical, or emotional abuse. These histories have tremendous influence on their current lives and prospects for successful reentry. For example, if a female offender returns to an abusive relationship upon release from incarceration, she may have trouble abiding by probation conditions such as curfews, and she may return to using substances in order to escape from the trauma of her relationship.

It is important that all service providers be aware of trauma histories that female offenders may bring to their reentry transition. Then they can help to support the woman’s coping capacities, empower her, and structure her post-release services as to avoid re-traumatization.

Promising Policy and Practice

The above recommendations are based on research with women offenders and have led to the implementation of new programming in Massachusetts and in other parts of the United States. The following are some examples of programming that could be used as models for programmatic change in Massachusetts.

Coordinated Case Management

1. Women’s Prison Association, Reentry Services:
This New York City-based association opened the Sarah Powell Huntington House Family Reunification Residence (SPHH) in 1993. This is a residence where homeless women involved in the criminal justice system can reunite with their children. SPHH has the capacity to house 37 women awaiting reunification as well as post-reunification with their children. This program does a comprehensive needs assessment at intake and connects residents with on-site case management, day care, recreational activities for children, counseling for mothers and their children, and ongoing assistance with securing permanent housing. This program attends to the variety of needs that female offenders present all under one roof. This allows for a smoother reunification process, as well as a stabilization of the life circumstances for both mothers and children. (A detailed report on this program and a short overview are available online.)

2. Family Justice:
This is an organization in New York City that offers a direct service program called La Bodega de la Familia. This program connects families involved in the criminal justice system with Bodega case managers, government, and community service providers. La Bodega facilitates relationships between probation and parole officers, family members, and other service providers. This program simultaneously addresses the multiple needs of families who are involved in the criminal justice system. Research has shown that families who had members involved in this program had an overall reduction in drug use among the participants. More information if available at www.familyjustice.org.

Gender Responsive Services

1. Project WAVE (Women Achieving Vital Empowerment):
This is a program operated through the Institute for Health and Recovery in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The theoretical foundation of the program is the Relational Model of Women’s Psychology from the Stone Center at Wellesley College. Treatment is focused on current relationships and also a woman’s relationship with her current issues, her past, present and future. This approach strives to examine all of women’s relationships and how they interact with each other in order to address the root cause of a problem, instead of focusing simply on the outward behavior. This program offers Integrated Care Facilitators who are clinicians cross-trained in substance abuse, mental health, sexual trauma or violence. In addition clients are given the option of working with a Family Care Coordinator who helps to identify and connect clients to necessary services.

2. Forever Free:
This is a voluntary intensive residential drug addiction treatment and reentry program for female offenders located at the California Institution for Women in Corona, California. The program lasts from 4-6 months during incarceration and up to six months post-release while on supervised parole. Forever Free focuses on relapse prevention and uses the disease model to understand and treat addiction. Sessions focus on topics particularly relevant to women: self-esteem, anger management, assertiveness training, post-traumatic stress disorder, healthy relationships, abuse, codependency, parenting, sex, and health. Research funded by the National Institute of Justice has found lower rates of recidivism and drug usage and higher rates of employment, improvements in parenting and mental health. More information is available at www.cdcr.ca.gov/Visitors/fac_prison_ CIW.html.

3. Seeking Safety:
Lisa Najavits of McClean Hospital and Harvard Medical School developed this manual-based treatment for co-occurring post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and substance abuse disorder. This has been implemented both in community and correctional settings and focuses on safety, integrated treatment of PTSD and substance abuse, ideals, cognitive, behavioral, and interpersonal therapies with case management and the relationship with the therapist. More information in available at www.seekingsafety.org.

Relational Programming

1. Indiana Women’s Prison Family Preservation Program:
This program provides a child friendly visiting room, services such as educational and support groups for mothers and grandmothers, case management, nursing services, and a staff member who helps to connect mothers and children with resources in the community. The goal is to support the connection between mothers and their children during incarceration so that the bond between mother and child can still thrive post-release.

2. Rhode Island Department of Corrections Mentoring Program:
Women who are within a few months of their release date from the state facility can apply to this program and be matched with a trained mentor in the community. Meetings between offender and mentor begin during the end of incarceration and then continue through post-release. The mentor provides a concrete example of a successful woman functioning in the community. Immediately upon release, the relationship is most intense, and contact decreased the longer the offender is in the community. Research on this program has shown lower rates of recidivism for the offenders who participate.

Trauma Informed Care

1. Helping Women Recover:
This is a substance abuse treatment program curriculum designed specifically for women involved in the criminal justice system by Stephanie Covington. The foundation for the curriculum integrates theories of addiction, female psychology, and trauma while also addressing self-esteem, parenting, relationships, sexual concerns, and spirituality. Further, Covington designed the program to be very user friendly and self-instructive in order to increase the possibility for implementation across a broad spectrum of settings. For more information, see http://www.stephaniecovington.com.

Services Currently Provided in Massachusetts

It is important to note that many incarcerated women in Massachusetts are housed in facilities that are not near their home communities or operated by the counties in which they live. Consequently, a woman who was offered particular programming during pre-release may need but not find that same kind of programming once she returns to her home town and county. However, there are some programs and services currently available to women in Essex, Suffolk, and Hampden Counties both pre- and post-release. They are among the following five service programs that were covered in the Foundations for Success report.

1. Women in Transition (WIT):
This is a facility in Salisbury, Massachusetts (Essex County) that houses twenty-four women in-house and electronically supervises twenty in a sober housing community. The facility serves the dual function of minimum security and pre-release setting for female offenders. The program was originally designed specifically for women returning to Essex County, but they are now accepting applications from women from other counties.

Women attend weekly group counseling sessions, many of which are focused on enhancing women’s self-esteem. There is additional programming such as yoga, creative writing, and parenting classes and employment opportunities. Data from the WIT Annual Report indicates that only 19.7% of the women recidivated and 80.3% of women achieved successful reintegration.

2. Community Reentry for Women (CREW):
This is an eight-week program that operates out of the Suffolk County Sheriff’s Department and provides case managers and career coaches to women incarcerated in Suffolk County. The program is intended to help women with employment, health care, and life skills to promote successful living in the community. Project Place and South End Community Health Center work as partners with Suffolk County Sheriff’s Department, providing concrete resources, services and care to help with the reintegration transition.

3. McGrath House:
This is a pre-release program operated by the Suffolk County Sheriff’s office where up to ten women receive case management services for employment housing, and treatment. Pre-release women stay approximately three months and participate in other programming addressing substance abuse, trauma, and life skills. The McGrath House also serves as transitional housing for five female offenders through a contract with the Massachusetts Parole Board. These women stay an average of six months and also participate in the programming mentioned above. Five other female offenders are provided beds through the Census Reduction for Ex-Offenders (CREO), which serves homeless ex-offenders. These five women stay an average of two months, participate in the standard programming, and work on finding permanent housing.

4. Women Offender Reentry Collaborative (WORC):
The Department of Labor funds this program housed at The Work Place that is located in downtown Boston. The mission is to assist female offenders returning to Boston and surrounding areas with assistance with employment. The program additionally provides mentoring, counseling, parenting training, life skills and self-esteem workshops. Each woman’s individual needs are recognized and services are tailored accordingly. Women outside of Suffolk County may participate, but the majority of women that participate in this program come from Boston and surrounding communities.

5. After Incarceration Support Systems (AISS):
For the past ten years, Hampden County has been offering this program to female offenders serving sentences at the Hampden County House of Corrections in Ludlow. In the structure of this program, staff meet with the women while they are still incarcerated and prepare a discharge plan. They work with the women to form plans for reintegration into the community. Once the women finish their sentence, they have two caseworkers that provide ongoing individual and group supportive services. This program is especially helpful because the women can remain in it as long as they want or need and can work up to being a mentor to other program participant. Research conducted to evaluate the relationship of this program with rates of recidivism has revealed a drop in recidivism rates for 2004 releases.

Recommendations:

1. Employ Validated, Gender-Specific Risk and Needs Assessment Tool

Corrections should be using these kinds of instruments to provide services to women. Furthermore, these instruments should be administered upon intake so as to begin planning to discharge as soon as possible.

2. Utilize an Integrated Case Management Model

Case managers can play essential roles in the reintegration process. Specifically, they connect women with a wide range of services while encouraging her to be proactive in her own discharge plan can help her develop necessary skills for living successfully in the community.

3. Integrate Principles of Trauma-Informed Care

Trauma histories are highly prevalent among female offenders. It is essential that this be taken into account when delivering any kind of service. Moreover, services addressing trauma during incarceration should be continued after release to improve women’s long-term chances for success.

4. Utilize Relational Models

Helping women to recognize the network of relationships in her life and their effect on her decisions is an important component of service delivery. Instead of addressing a woman’s issues in a fragmented way, this would foster insight into how to achieve goals while still attending to important relationships.

5. Develop Collaborative Responses

Service providers must collaborate and communicate in order to deliver continuity of care to women after they leave jail or prison. Furthermore, developing a web of supportive relationships can help to enhance a woman’s chances for success.

6. Provide Services at the Local Level

Women serving sentences of two years or less should be housed at the county level to help provide for a smooth reintegration. Also, there should be more pre-release facilities for women returning to their home county from another county. This would help foster familial relationships and continuity of care.

The Foundations for Success report provides a comprehensive view of the experiences of female offenders as they reenter their communities. It helps us see that this is an extremely vulnerable population given their struggles and needs. It is also clear that the current models of service provision are not meeting their struggles and needs adequately enough. Further, the current methods of service provision can actually cause extra stress and make women vulnerable to re-offending. Part of the reason for this, the authors suggest, is that current services have been designed primarily for men. For this reason, it is important to revise the way that services are delivered and programs are structured. Implementing the recommendations made in this report could only help foster women’s successes so that they can make better lives for themselves and their children.

______________________________

¹Kristin Collins and Meghan Howe, Foundations for Success: Meeting the Needs of Female Offenders Returning to Massachusetts Communities. Boston: Crime & Justice Institute May 2006. The report soon will be available at www.crjustice.org
² Recidivism of 1999 Released Department of Correction Inmates. Concord, MA: Massachusetts Department of Correction, Research and Planning Division, 2005. Cited in Success: Meeting the needs of female offenders returning to Massachusetts communities, May 2006, 7.
³The facts presented in this article come from Foundations for Success, unless otherwise noted.

The Hampden County Correctional Facility currently houses a small population of women in the predominantly male facility, but a new, women-only facility is under construction in Chicopee. The ongoing controversy over this project, which picks up on themes discussed in Foundations for Success, was covered July 5th in The New Standard in “Fight Against New Women’s Prison Takes on Incarceration Habit,” by Megan Tady. Those favoring the new prison assert that women incarcerated in Hampden have inadequate access to facilities and programs, and the environment is hostile and intimidating. Organizations like the Statewide Harm Reduction Coalition (ShaRC) and researchers at New York’s Women’s Prison Association – see next article - agree that the state and county must remedy the situation that women face in the Hampden facility. However, they contend that the Chicopee facility is, at best, an easy and short-sighted response to some of the salient problems posed by housing women in a men’s facility. By accommodating the growing population of women in prison, building new facilities distracts, they argue, from the reasons that this population is growing and from thinking about alternatives to imprisonment. Easing the burden of imprisoning an increasing number of women will aid the community as well, they point out, since the imprisonment of women has a disproportionately negative effect on their communities, since women form “so much of the informal system of support" that is difficult to quantify, but crucial to the well-being of many.

Women’s Prison Association (WPA), New York, NY: "The Punitiveness Report-HARD HIT: The Growth in Imprisonment of Women, 1977-2004," by Natasha Frost, Judith Greene, and Kevin Pranis studies female prison population growth patterns and regional trends, and it includes a state-by-state analysis of female imprisonment from 1977 to 2004. The report was commissioned by The Institute on Women and Criminal Justice (IWCJ), a part of the Women’s Prison Association. According to the WPA website, the WPA is “the nation’s oldest service and advocacy organization committed to helping women with criminal justice histories.” The IWCJ) aims to “foster a national conversation on women and criminal justice, create a breakthrough in the ways in which our public systems deal with women and crime, and promote innovative solutions and highlight what works.”

Also see a four-page Portrait of Women in Prison fact sheet that was produced by the WPA.

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU): “Caught in the Net: The Impact of Drug Policies on Women and Families,” is an 80-page report released in March of 2005 on which the Brennan Center for Justice collaborated. It stresses the need to address the causes of women’s involvement with drugs and, when shaping policies regarding their incarceration, give much greater attention to their role on families and the damage done to children by their mothers’ incarceration.

Center for Women and Politics and Public Policy, U-Mass Boston: “Women in Prison in Massachusetts: Maintaining Family Connections,” by Erika Kates, Paige Ransford, with Carol Cardozo, is a 48-page report published in March, 2005. The Center is conducting ongoing research into the impact of incarceration on women and children in Massachusetts.

Friends:

Many of you have been following the progress of CORI reform and mandatory minimum sentencing reform in the State Budget (Amendments 688 and 705 to the Senate Budget) and in the Judiciary Committee (Public Safety Act of 2006).

You have written letters, called, emailed and met with legislators in-district, and journeyed to the State House.

Unfortunately, Amendments 688 & 705 did not make it through the Budget Conference Committee; nonetheless your voice has been heard.

We received overwhelming support in the Senate, spearheaded by Amendment 688 lead sponsors Senator Creedon and Senator Wilkerson, who were joined by seven additional co-sponsors and Amendment 705 lead sponsor, Senator Creem, who was joined by Senators O'Leary and Tisei.

While the House was more cautious, it agreed to form a Commission to study the issue with the goal of releasing new legislation by December of 2006.

In unprecedented fashion, mandatory minimum sentencing and CORI reform advocates spoke with one voice, building a movement that could not be ignored.

In response: legislators funded a CORI training and audit unit and created a commission to study the issue of CORI and make reform reccomendations to the legislature. 29 Senators went on record in favor of Mandatory Minimum Sentencing Reform in the roll call vote that added Amendment 705 to the Senate Budget.

While this legislative session has come to a close, and we will not see substantive law changes on these issues through the budget or bill process this year, this is a lot of momentum to build on.

Thank you for your time, energy and dedication. There is a lot more work to be done as we gear up for the bill filing deadline for the new legislative session. We want to be ready to hit the ground running so that we can build on all of the progress that was made this year.

Please don't hesitate to call or e-mail me with any questions and/or to find out how you can become more deeply involved.

Remember: together we can make a difference.

With gratitude,

Brandyn