MARILYN VAN DIETEN, PH.D. 

MVANDIETEN@ORBISPARTNERS.COM

AUGUST 1, 2015

Collaborative Case 

Work with JusticeInvolved Women

ALSO KNOWN AS THE WOMEN OFFENDER CASE MANAGEMENT 

MODEL (WOCMM)
i

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Preface

This technical assistance activity was funded by the Community Services Division of the National 

Institute of Corrections (NIC TA No. 14C7403). The Institute is a federal agency in the US that 

was established to provide assistance to strengthen state and local correctional agencies by 

creating more effective, humane, safe and just correctional services.

This report provides a description of the Collaborative Case Work Model for Justice-Involved 

Women (CCW-W), previously known as the Women Offender Case Management Model 

(WOCMM). CCW-W is an intensive casework model that was developed specifically for justiceinvolved women. Since the first pilot of this model by the State of Connecticut Judicial

Branch/Court Services Division, CCW-W has demonstrated favorable outcomes in several 

settings. It is now being implemented in Connecticut, Iowa, Maine and Larimer County in 

Colorado. The model has also been customized for use by the Michigan Department of 

Corrections and Utah Department of Corrections. In addition to an overview of the model, we 

will describe the strategies that contribute to the successful implementation of CCW-W.

The contents of this report reflect the views of NIC TA consultant, Dr. Marilyn Van Dieten. 

Points of view or opinions expressed in the Technical Assistance Report are those of the author 

and do not necessarily represent the official opinion or policies of the U.S. Department of 

Justice. 
ii

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Acknowledgements

The development of Collaborative Case Work was a cooperative effort between justice-involved

women and the scholars and professionals who work with them. This project was inspired by 

Phyllis Modley (formerly with the National Institute of Corrections) who recognized the need to 

develop gender-responsive strategies to enhance the lives of women at risk for criminal justice 

involvement. The Women Offender Case Management Model (WOCCM) was initially published 

in 2006 as a case management model for women who are incarcerated or under 

probation/parole supervision. The overarching goal of the project was the creation of a 

comprehensive gender-specific (women) case management model that was implemented and 

evaluated within pilot sites and then replicated in institutional and community settings.

We are particularly grateful to a group of individuals who supported the development of the 

model and served on a national advisory committee:

Julie Boehm, Missouri Department of Corrections

Maureen Buell, National Institute of Corrections

Yolanda Johnson-Peterkin, Women’s Prison Association

Georgia Lerner, Women’s Prison Association

Phyllis Modley, National Institute of Corrections

Carol Shapiro, Family Justice

Mary Scully Whitaker, Private Consultant

Pat Van Voorhis, University of Cincinnati

We are also grateful to the initial pilot sites: 

The executive team at the Court Support Services Division (CSSD) of the Connecticut Judicial 

Branch were instrumental in helping us work through the complexities of implementation. We 

are particularly indebted to Rena Goldwasser, Tom Hogan, and Susan Glass who monitored the 

progress of this project and worked tirelessly to ensure that the professional needs of each team 

member were addressed so that the model could be delivered with fidelity. We are also

extremely grateful to the original WOCMM officers and the resource specialists who 

volunteered to participate in this project and whose efforts and contributions were 

unquestionably the reason it was successful. 

Anne Brown and Katrina Carter-Larson from the Iowa Department of Corrections who 

coordinated efforts with four of the Judicial Districts – First District (Wendy Lyons and Denise 

Cooper); Fourth District (Pam Taylor, Brian Richmond, and Paul Witt); Fifth District – (Peggy 

Urtz; Robin Merk, Jennifer Reynoldson, and Angela Karaidos); Sixth District – (Kim McIrvin, 

Melanie Steffens) and the Iowa Correctional Institution for Women (Brenda Miller, Jennifer 

Swihart, Robin Bagby and Kathy Culbertson). To all of the IOWA staff who worked hard to 

ensure the successful transition of women from prison into the community.

Finally, we would like to acknowledge the creative input of Alyssa Benedict (CORE Associates) 

for her assistance with the development of the curriculum and implementation of the initial 

pilots. 
iii

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Table of Contents

PREFACE.................................................................................................................................................... I

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................................ II

TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................................................................................................................ III

PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT ....................................................................................................................... 1

NAVIGATING THIS REPORT....................................................................................................................... 1

CHAPTER 1: RESEARCH AND IMPETUS FOR THE CCW-W MODEL.............................................................. 2

GENERAL CORRECTIONAL LITERATURE ................................................................................................................. 2

CASE MANAGEMENT OUTCOME RESEARCH.......................................................................................................... 3

RESEARCH ON JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN .......................................................................................................... 4

THE CCW-W: A NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CORRECTIONS INITIATIVE.......................................................................... 5

THE CCW-W PILOT: A HISTORICAL SNAPSHOT..................................................................................................... 6

CHAPTER 2: COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK WITH WOMEN ...................................................................... 8

CCW-W: AN INTEGRATED APPROACH................................................................................................................ 8

DEVELOPING THE MODEL.................................................................................................................................. 8

DEFINING THE CCW-W MODEL (ONCE KNOWN AS WOCMM)............................................................................... 8

GUIDING PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES .................................................................................................................. 8

CHAPTER 3: THE CCW-W PROCESS ......................................................................................................... 14

STAGE 1: ENGAGE AND ASSESS ........................................................................................................................ 15

STAGE 2: ENHANCE MOTIVATION..................................................................................................................... 16

STAGE 3: IMPLEMENT THE CASE PLAN............................................................................................................... 18

STAGE 4: REVIEW AND SUPPORT CHANGE......................................................................................................... 20

THE PROCESS IS RECURSIVE ............................................................................................................................. 22

CHAPTER 4: IMPLEMENTING THE CCW-W MODEL.................................................................................. 23

A: CLIENT SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................................ 24

B: COLLABORATIVE TEAMS.............................................................................................................................. 27

C: AGENCY PARTNERSHIPS .............................................................................................................................. 36

D: MONITORING FIDELITY AND OUTCOMES........................................................................................................ 38

PROCESS AND OUTCOME EVALUATION .............................................................................................................. 41

CHAPTER 5: PRELIMINARY FINDINGS OF THE CCW-W MODEL................................................................ 42

CHAPTER 6: LESSONS LEARNED AND REVISITED..................................................................................... 44

‘FIXER’ VERSUS ‘GUIDE’.................................................................................................................................. 44

BOUNDARIES ................................................................................................................................................ 44

ON BEING NICE............................................................................................................................................. 45

TRANSITIONING FROM CCW-W....................................................................................................................... 45

SOME FINAL COMMENTS....................................................................................................................... 47

REFERENCES........................................................................................................................................... 49
iv

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

APPENDIX A: SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION AND RESOURCES ............................................................ 54

APPENDIX B: STANDARDIZED ASSESSMENT TOOLS................................................................................ 55

APPENDIX C: MENU OF ADAPTIVE STRATEGIES..................................................................................... 58

APPENDIX D: THE IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS...................................................................................... 59

APPENDIX E: TRAINING CONTENT ......................................................................................................... 62

APPENDIX F: SUPERVISION AND COACHING ACTIVITIES........................................................................ 64

APPENDIX G: QUALITY ASSURANCE TOOLS ............................................................................................ 65

APPENDIX H: CCW-W LOGIC MODEL ...................................................................................................... 66
1

Purpose of this Report

The purpose of this report is to describe the Collaborative Case Work for Justice-Involved 

Women (CCW-W) model and to summarize the various refinements that have been made over 

the years of delivery. The guiding principles, intervention strategies and key elements for 

implementation are described. 

Navigating This Report

Chapter 1 reviews the growing awareness that women at risk for criminal justice involvement 

have not been the subject of much research nor have post-release programs been tailored to 

their unique needs. In Chapter 2 we begin with a brief description of the research that helped 

inform the development of the model and the principles and core practices that help to 

operationalize the approach. Chapter 3 is designed to give the reader a sense of the case work 

process, and the various tasks completed by staff at each stage of the model. In addition to the 

process of effective case work, CCW-W has a number of structural components that must be 

implemented. These are explored in detail in Chapter 4. Throughout this report we reference 

the challenges and complexities associated with implementing this model with integrity. These 

are summarized and discussed in greater detail in Chapter 5. Finally, we encourage the reader 

to explore the references and recommended resources listed in the appendices.
2

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Chapter 1: Research and Impetus for the CCW-W Model

Over the last three decades there has been considerable interest in exploring the circumstances 

that place women at risk for criminal justice involvement. Attention to gender can be attributed 

to the scholarly works of many writers and a growing movement from the field that is 

demanding a shift from traditional, gender-neutral approaches to models and practices that 

systematically incorporate the research on women. A body of research is amassing, and there is 

compelling evidence to suggest there are important differences in how men and women

experience the world politically, economically, socially, and biologically. These results have 

served as a springboard for new possibilities and innovative options to enhance our day-to-day 

work with justice-involved women. 

Despite shifts in the political and social climate that impact the field of corrections, a focus on 

rehabilitation has always played a more or less central role. By the late 90’s researchers were 

able to summarize ‘what works’ and the language of evidence-based practices became wellestablished in the lexicon of corrections. Noteworthy is that the policies and practices emerging 

from the available research focused primarily on men, who also comprised the largest 

correctional population until this time. Unfortunately, the new millennium brought with it an 

increase in the number of incarcerated individuals and a significant rise in the number of 

convicted women. Women were swept into the mainstream of corrections and policies and 

practices already in place for men were adopted, often with little regard to the differential 

impact they might have. Reports of negative outcomes resulting from litigation and from the 

writings of feminist scholars, researchers, and professionals in the field confirmed that 

refinements to existing practices were essential and prompted government and state agencies 

to more fully understand and address the needs of women 1.

General Correctional Literature

During the 1990’s, interest in offender rehabilitation gained considerable momentum largely 

through the efforts of Andrews and colleagues in Ottawa, Canada (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). 

These authors systematically reviewed the research and formulated four principles of effective 

intervention hypothesized to contribute to reductions in recidivism. These principles are now 

widely accepted in corrections and they continue to dominate reform efforts. 

The first component is known as the risk principle and refers to targeting offenders who are 

most likely to recidivate. 

The need principle is the second component and underscores the importance of targeting 

dynamic risk factors (or criminogenic needs) in correctional settings. Criminogenic needs, such 

as antisocial attitudes and poor problem solving, are factors that have been statistically linked to 

 

1 For a detailed exploration of the study of women offender in corrections see On Behalf of Women 

Offenders: Women’s Place in the Science of Evidence-Base Practices, written by Patricia Van Voorhis 

(2012) when she received the prestigious Vollmer Award from the American Society of Criminology.
3

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

criminal conduct. When these need areas are targeted appropriately in treatment (e.g., through 

techniques such as modeling, guided skill practice, etc.), the likelihood of committing further 

crime is diminished. 

The third component of this model is the responsivity principle, which can be further 

conceptualized as having general and specific subcomponents. The underlying premise of the 

general responsivity principle is that certain evidence-based approaches like Cognitive 

Behavioral Therapy (CBT) are most likely to reduce recidivism with justice-involved populations. 

The specific responsivity principle asserts that individual client factors such as motivation, 

cognitive ability, gender, ethnicity, and cultural background may require a differential and 

individualized response from professionals to enhance opportunities for learning and 

engagement. 

The final principle focuses on implementation integrity and the need to ensure that staff are 

provided with ongoing supervision and support to ensure adherence to the model. 

The principles of effective intervention were used to guide the development of the CCW-W 

(formerly known as the WOCMM) model. However, we were mindful that the preponderance 

of empirical evidence supporting the Risk, Need, Responsivity (RNR) principles rested with 

samples consisting almost entirely of men (Van Voorhis, 2012; Blanchette & Brown, 2006). For 

the most part, studies that included women failed to disaggregate samples by gender (Blanchette 

& Brown, 2006) and thus the full relevance of these principles for justice-involved women remained 

unexplored. 

Case Management Outcome Research

During the development of the model in 2006 we also conducted an extensive review of the 

case management literature to identify promising and evidence-based practices2. With few 

exceptions, we were unable to find research that examined the impact of case work or 

supervision with a correctional population3. A notable exclusion, was a qualitative study 

undertaken by Partridge (2004). Using a survey method, Partridge reviewed the case 

management practices of probation officers in England and Wales. She discovered that during 

the initial stages of supervision, offender and officer satisfaction were highest when efforts were 

made to build rapport and explore the client’s experiences and needs. As the offender 

 

2 Van Dieten, M. & Robinson, D. (2008). Case Management: A Response paper. International Community 

Corrections Association.

3 As we were conducting the WOCMM pilot a number of case management and supervision models were 

being evaluated in Australia, Canada and the United States to enhance outcomes with clients under 

community supervision. These models incorporate fundamental strategies used in CBT programs 

including modeling, reinforcement, and behavioral and cognitive change as well as other complementary 

approaches such as Motivational Interviewing. Outcome research reported by Chris Trotter (2006) and 

the ongoing work of Jim Bonta and his colleagues in Ottawa Canada, has demonstrated that officer 

training contributes to enhanced outcomes with probation clients (see for example, Bonta, Bourgon, 

Rugge, Scott, Yessine, Gutierrez, and Li, 2011). 
4

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

progressed through probation, other factors such as, continuity of contact with the initial officer 

and service providers as well as, the ability for the officers to demonstrate openness, flexibility 

and support were seen as most critical. 

Partridge’s work provided an important reference point as we began to formulate the principles 

and practices of CCW-W (formerly known as WOCMM) and we were able to validate her 

findings when we expanded our search to include target populations outside of corrections. In 

fact, we found a wealth of information emerging from the health care, mental health and 

addictions literature as well as family wrap-around services. One of the most rigorously studied 

models of case management is assertive community treatment (ACT). 

Assertive community treatment, or ACT, was initially designed for individuals with serious 

mental health issues (Stein & Test, 1980). A series of meta-analyses have been conducted on 

this approach and findings consistently suggest that ACT offers significant advantages over 

standard case management models in reducing hospital admissions (Ziguras & Lyle Stuart, 2000) 

and in reducing homelessness and symptom severity in homeless persons with severe mental 

illness (Coldwell & Bender, 2007). 

As we reviewed this body of research we were excited by the parallels with the RNR principles 

described above (e.g., intensive services for high risk cases; focus on individual needs; multiple 

service options to respond to the differential needs of clients, highly collaborative, team-based 

approaches vs. service brokerage). We were also struck by the fact that regardless of the “target 

population” and “intended outcome”, a number of identified practices and principles were 

consistently linked to favorable results. The most frequently identified practices included the 

delivery of intervention within a multidisciplinary team; an emphasis on continuity of care; the 

provision of comprehensive services; and a collaborative process that extends from the 

identified client to family members, professionals, and partner agencies. Each of these 

principles and practices was subsequently integrated into the model.

Research on Justice-Involved Women

Our goal at the onset of this project was to ensure that the research on women was represented 

and fully incorporated into the model.4 Though a confluence of evidence from across disciplines 

such as medicine, psychology and sociology was starting to emerge in support of a gendered 

approach, the research on women in corrections was still relatively scarce and often 

undermined (Van Voorhis, 2012). 

Despite this, when we started to formalize the principles and practices of CCW-W (WOCMM) 

there was sufficient theoretical and empirical data to suggest that the model would be 

enhanced by expanding the need principle to include items that were salient to women. As 

indicated above, mainstream correctional theories such as RNR place an emphasis on antisocial 

attitudes, thinking errors, and other criminogenic needs as an explanation for criminal behavior. 

However, the emerging research suggested that women enter the justice system differently 

 

4 A review of the available literature is beyond the scope of this report. For a summary of the research see 

for example: (Ney, Ramirez & Van Dieten, 2012; Blanchette & Brown, 2006; Bloom et al, 2003).
5

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

than men and that at least a subset of risk factors and dynamic needs presented by women have 

a unique or differential impact (Jones, 2011; Blanchette & Brown, 2010; Van Voorhis, Wright, 

Salisbury & Bauman, 2010). Specifically, research supported the need to assess mental health 

issues, the impact of childhood victimization and trauma, the quality of intimate partner 

relationships, parental stress and the capacity and confidence to manage child behavior. 

The complexity of needs presented by women shaped our decision to adopt a holistic approach. 

Thus, CCW-W (WOCMM) was designed to address change at multiple levels and to support 

outcomes beyond reductions in recidivism. The inclusion of women’s needs allowed us to focus 

on personal strategies that help women to mobilize and build adaptive skills to cope with the 

impact of trauma, mental health issues, parental stress and other personal criminogenic needs. 

It also prompted us to expand the importance of helping women build connections with natural 

and formal supports. Finally, it directed our attention to structural factors such as poverty, 

unemployment, and unsafe housing all of which contribute to further marginalization and 

elevated risk for future justice involvement and that require a coordinated cross-system effort 

to address.

Perhaps the most notable revision that appears in this report is the change we made to the 

name of model. Though WOCMM captured the client group and the type of intervention 

delivered, we were compelled to change the name of this model to Collaborative Case Work for 

Justice-Involved Women (CCW-W) for two reasons. First, the label “women offender” can 

sometimes be pejorative and does not adequately characterize the positive qualities and 

strengths of the women who we worked with on this project and who have and are making 

significant changes in their lives. Second, this project has been a collaborative effort from the 

beginning and the word “collaboration” more fully describes the process of the work that occurs 

on the teams, within the organization, and across agencies. Thus, while some of the studies 

cited in this report use the original name of the model or its acronym - WOCMM, we employ 

Collaborative Case Work for Justice-Involved Women (CCW-W) as the model name in our text as 

it reflects the new name (and acronym) for the model.

The CCW-W: A National Institute of Corrections Initiative

The National Institute of Corrections (NIC) became a forerunner in exploring the impact of 

gender and has sponsored several large-scale, multi-year initiatives to advance work with 

justice-involved women. One of the first undertaken by NIC was completed by Bloom, Owen & 

Covington (2003). Over a three-year period, these authors conducted a series of focus groups 

with correctional professionals and justice-involved women across the United States. They

identified a number of strategies considered appropriate with women offenders and 

demonstrated the need for a more comprehensive and holistic approach than previously 

developed for men. The results of their work were published by NIC in a report entitled Genderresponsive strategies: Research, practice, and guiding principles for women offenders. 

A second initiative undertaken by NIC in conjunction with Patricia Van Voorhis and colleagues at 

the University of Cincinnati (UC) was designed to focus more specifically on women’s needs. Van 
6

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Voorhis, Wright, Salisbury & Bauman (2010) conducted a large scale investigation across 

correctional settings (e.g., prison, probation and parole, and pre-release) in four states and 

discovered a number of criminogenic factors that are more salient for women. The most highly 

predictive gender-responsive factors included current mental health needs, family support, 

parental stress, child abuse, and adult victimization. They also found that when these needs are 

assessed the ability to predict future offending, prison misconduct and behavior under 

community supervision is enhanced (Van Voorhis, 2012). The major findings reported by Van 

Voorhis and colleagues have been validated by other authors (Blanchette & Brown, 2006; Jones, 

2011) and together these studies provide important implications not only for assessment but in 

directing case work efforts and identifying gender specific intervention strategies designed to 

address them. 

The CCW-W (WOCMM) model was initiated by the NIC in response to findings emerging from 

these and other research efforts. The goals of this project were threefold. First, to replicate and 

expand our understanding of this population. Second, to begin to identify gender-responsive 

approaches and strategies to address the needs of women and guide professionals in their dayto-day work. And third, to determine the benefits and impact of using a gendered approach 

when compared to intervention as usual. 

The NIC continues to expand our understanding of this growing population and to develop tools 

and training initiatives to advance our work with women. We encourage readers of this report 

to visit the NIC website at www.nicic.gov for information about the initiatives described above 

as well as new endeavors.

The CCW-W Pilot: A Historical Snapshot 

As indicated above, the momentum for this project emerged in large part from requests by the 

field and preliminary research results which supported the need for a gendered approach to 

advance outcomes with justice-involved women. In October 2005, the National Institute of 

Corrections contracted Orbis Partners Inc. to design, develop, and evaluate the Women 

Offender Case Management Model. The ultimate goal of this initiative was to integrate 

evidence-based research and the available literature on women in an effort to define and 

identify processes and practices that facilitate favorable outcomes with this population. 

The first draft of the model was submitted for review in February 2006 to a national advisory 

committee5. The committee consisted of a small group of advocates, researchers and 

practitioners who shared a common vision to expand opportunities for justice-involved women, 

their families, and other stakeholders. Over the next six months the model was revised and a 

 

5 Members of the national advisory committee included: Julie Boehm, Missouri Department of 

Corrections; Maureen Buell, National Institute of Corrections; Yolanda Johnson-Peterkin, Women’s Prison 

Association; Georgia Lerner, Women’s Prison Association; Phyllis Modley, formerly with the National 

Institute of Corrections; Carol Shapiro, formerly with Family Justice; Mary Scully Whitaker, Private 

Consultant, and Pat Van Voorhis, formerly with the University of Cincinnati.

(footnote continued)
7

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

variety of implementation materials including intervention protocols, training manuals, and 

quality assurance methods were developed.

In October 2006 the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) 

to pilot WOCMM (now called CCW-W). State agencies from across the United States were 

invited to participate as pilot sites to test the efficacy of the model. The Court Support Services 

Division (CSSD) of the Connecticut Judicial Branch and the Utah Department of Corrections6

were selected from among the initial applicants. 

Subsequent to this – the executive team at CSSD participated in an extensive planning process 

and the project was officially launched in the summer of 2007. Between 2007 and2009, CCW-W 

(WOCMM) teams consisting of probation and community agency staff were formed and crosstrained in the model. CSSD in conjunction with Orbis Partners provided ongoing coaching to 

ensure fidelity to the model. This included audio/video tape reviews of individual and team 

interactions, clinical supervision, and advanced training in a variety of topics. A process 

evaluation7 was conducted in 2009 to elicit agency-wide feedback with respect to the project. As 

such, focus groups were conducted with women participating in WOCMM; staff and team 

members participating in WOCMM; and non-WOCMM staff. Encouraged by the positive 

response from all parties, WOCMM was subsequently introduced in several additional settings 

including Iowa, Maine and Larimer County, Colorado. 

Since the initial pilot, a series of quasi-experimental outcome studies have been undertaken in 

Connecticut8 and Iowa9. A brief summary of the results is presented below. As is evident in the 

results outlined in Chapter 5 of this report, CCW-W (WOCMM) has a significant and positive 

impact on reducing recidivism and other intermediate outcomes.

 

6 The Utah Department of Corrections participated fully in the implementation of WOCMM but was

unable to collect data due to changes in the size of the population of women incarcerated in the state.

7 Millson, Robinson, Rubin, & Van Dieten (2010). A Process Evaluation of the Women Offender Case

Management Model, Implemented by the Court Support Services Division of the Connecticut Judicial 

Branch. Available through NIC. 

8

 The first outcome study was conducted by Orbis Partners Inc. and two research papers were 

subsequently released: (1) Millson, Robinson, & Van Dieten (2010) and, (2) Robinson, Van Dieten & 

Millson (2012). A second outcome study was conducted in 2012 by the research department of State of 

Connecticut Judicial Branch/Court Services Division. For additional information, please contact Susan 

Glass at CSSD.

9 The third outcome study was conducted by Sarah Rabey, in partial completion of her thesis and 

supervised by Paul Stageberg, Ph.D. This unpublished study is available from the Iowa Department of 

Human Rights Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning Statistical Analysis Center.
8

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Chapter 2: Collaborative Case Work with Women

CCW-W: An Integrated Approach 

An integration of the case work literature across corrections, mental health, and family wraparound services helped us to define and shape the guiding principles, core practices, and key 

elements of the Collaborative Case Work (CCW-W) model. A complete summary of the CCW-W 

model is provided in Appendix H. Each of these components is described below. 

Developing the Model

The development of CCW-W was inspired to a large extent by corrections professionals who 

were eager to implement evidence-based approaches that were also gender-responsive. To 

address this need we conducted an extensive review of the research in three areas. First, we 

turned to the general correctional literature to provide a framework for our work. We then

expanded our search to look more closely at principles and practices in case work models that

target populations outside of corrections. Finally, we reviewed the available research on women

within and outside of the justice system. The end result was a model that integrated the major 

findings from all three bodies of research. 

Defining the CCW-W Model (once known as WOCMM)

CCW-W is an intensive, individualized case work process for justice-involved women with 

multiple and complex needs. During the case work process an emphasis is placed on assisting 

her to mobilize existing strengths, build new skills and, to connect with resources that provide 

advocacy, awareness, treatment, and any other relevant services. 

A salient characteristic and defining feature of the CCW-W model is that it is NOT a program but 

a process. As women participate in CCW-W they are provided with opportunities to promote 

the successful transition from prison and/or supervision into the community. Ideally CCW-W

begins at the moment a woman enters the criminal justice system and continues in a seamless 

fashion until intervention is no longer required. 

CCW-W is rooted in the belief that when women reach an optimum level of success and 

wellness, everyone benefits, including: the woman being served, her family, her natural support 

system, and the larger community. To achieve this goal we believe that each woman must be a 

collaborative partner in the change process. This means that she is one member of a team of 

individuals who work together to prioritize the focus of change, develop a plan, implement the 

plan, and monitor progress. 

Guiding Principles and Practices

A series of guiding principles were identified from the three bodies of research discussed in 

Chapter 1 and imbedded into the CCW-W model. These are summarized in Table 2.1 and

discussed below.
9

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Table 2.1: Guiding Principles

1. Gender Responsive 

2. Individualized Service

3. Team Approach

4. Continuity of Care

5. Agency Partnerships

6. Comprehensive and Holistic

7. Committed to Program Integrity

8. Committed to Process and Outcome Evaluation

Principle 1: Gender-Responsive 

Perhaps the most salient feature of this model is that issues related to gender have a direct 

influence on how CCW-W was developed and is currently delivered. CCW-W recognizes that 

important differences (in life circumstances, experiences and behavioral expression) exist 

between female and male offenders and these differences must be taken into account in order 

to obtain the best outcomes for women10. Our growing understanding of the pathways as well 

as, the needs and characteristics of this population provided a framework for intervention. As 

such, CCW-W requires that professionals using this model demonstrate knowledge and 

competence in the following areas11:

Trauma-Informed Care:

A significant percentage of justice-involved women have experienced a large number of early –

age traumatic events. This increases the likelihood of victimization in adulthood, unhealthy and 

unsupportive relationships, mental health issues including depression, PTSD, anxiety and, an 

increased reliance on maladaptive coping strategies such as substance use. 

Professionals are aware of the impact of trauma and learn to prevent and/or mitigate the 

impact of trauma so that women can feel safe and thus more engaged and motivated while 

participating in the CCW-W process.

Relationship-Oriented:

Miller and Stiver (1997) suggest that it is not unusual for women to experience a ‘disconnection’

in one or more relationships by the time they reach adolescence or early adulthood. However,

for many justice-involved women, relational disruptions begin with exposure to violence, the 

impact of which can persist into adulthood in the context of unhealthy romantic attachments, 

subjugation to criminal romantic partners, criminal behavior, substance abuse, and poor 

decision-making (Cernkovich, Lanctot, & Giordano, 2008; Chesney-Lind, 2006; Salisbury & Van 

Voorhis, 2009). 

 

10 Bloom, Owen & Covington. Gender Responsive Strategies; National Institute of Corrections and US 

Department of Justice, June, 2003. 

11 Alyssa Benedict from CORE Associates (2006) helped us to identify the core practices used to define a 

gender-responsive approach. 
10

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Research and practice clearly suggest that relationships contribute to emotional health and 

wellness. Given the central role that relationships play in female socialization and development, 

as well as a pathway to crime, we hold that building a professional relationship should be an 

overarching goal rather than a precursor to intervention. Professionals are encouraged to model 

empathy, genuineness, and positive regard, and to encourage the reciprocation of these 

behaviors. 

Strengths-Based: 

A strengths–based approach assumes that all women, regardless of their level of risk or crimes

committed, have strengths that can be mobilized to enhance positive outcomes. The use of 

strengths-based approaches and resiliency models have become increasingly popular in 

corrections to promote engagement, decrease resistance and to enhance outcomes. Werner 

and Smith (1992) have demonstrated that protective factors can serve as buffers to mediate the 

impact of adversity and may have a more profound influence on criminal justice outcomes than 

specific risk factors. In a criminal justice context, Jones, Brown, Robinson and Frey (in press) 

have demonstrated that strengths buffer the impact of risk by reducing recidivism. Sorbello, 

Eccleston, Ward, and Jones (2002) argue that an emphasis on criminogenic needs may fail to 

capture many of the real life issues faced by justice-involved women. They suggest that by 

focusing on the enhancement of strengths we can better assist women to lead a more fulfilling 

and balanced life. For example, as a woman’s ability to engage in meaningful interactions with 

others increase, she is more likely to thrive in the community which in turn reduces recidivism. 

Salisbury and Van Voorhis (2009) and our own research (Robinson, Millson, & Van Dieten, 2010) 

confirm the importance of protective factors in mitigating risk and in creating a more optimistic 

outlook among professionals who work with justice-involved women. 

The practitioner who uses a strengths-based approach recognizes the client’s struggles and at 

the same time sends a clear message of optimism and hope. This requires the practitioner to 

build a relationship with each client in the early stages of intervention that “conveys a respect 

for her struggles” (Smith, 2006, p.16). It also necessitates that the practitioner listen attentively 

for the exceptions or times when the client felt in control. By working intentionally to identify 

and then reinforce the use of these existing strategies, we build promise and support selfefficacy. 

Cultural Competence:

Justice-involved women are not a homogenous group in regard to racial identity, gender identity 

or sexual orientation. The CCW-W process demonstrates respect for and builds on the values, 

preferences, beliefs, culture, and identity of the woman, her family, and community. This means 

that all efforts are made to let her select culturally and linguistically matched care team 

members, as well as culture-based services (i.e., Black Effective Parenting Group, Healing Lodge, 

etc.). It also suggests that professionals appreciate the insights of diverse knowledge, spiritual 

beliefs and have access to culturally responsive treatment and support options. 
11

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Principle 2: Individualized Services

At the core of effective case work is an emphasis on individualized intervention. This requires a

comprehensive assessment and the development of a case plan that is unique to the individual. 

The prevailing research supports the use of gender-responsive assessment and supplemental 

measures that are designed to provide a more complete picture of her individual strengths, 

needs, hopes, and desires for the future.

12 The plan is then used in a dynamic way to monitor 

progress and is modified and updated to reflect her changing needs.

Principle 3: Team Approach

The use of multi-disciplinary teams has become an essential feature of wrap-around services 

delivered across disciplines and target populations (e.g., clients with serious mental health 

needs, etc.). Outcome studies13 suggest that the use of a team approach contributes to 

improvements in identified outcomes (e.g., decreases in hospitalizations, etc.), the delivery of 

services (e.g., more immediate and effective response), and organizational development (e.g., 

enhanced resource allocation, staff satisfaction and professional growth, etc.). 

Given the complex and multiple needs of justice-involved women a ‘team’ approach was 

essential to the delivery of CCW-W. Team members consisted of the woman and other natural 

connections (e.g., family members who will help her to achieve actions steps) as well as

representatives from a variety of disciplines that might include correctional, health 

professionals, clergy, and other resources.

Principle 4: Continuity of Care

The central importance of relationships in the lives of women argues strongly for continuity in 

services. This means that whenever appropriate the case manager and members of the team 

are encouraged to offer direct services including assessment, treatment and mentoring. When 

services cannot be provided directly by a team member another professional within the team 

should be present to introduce the woman to external resources and to facilitate a relational 

approach.

 

12 To ensure that traditional criminogenic as well as, gender-salient needs were assessed we recommend 

the use of a gender-informed standardized assessment12 as well as a series of supplemental measures. 

Sites that do not have access to a gender-informed assessment should assess factors that are relevant for 

women (see Chapter 3 for details). 

13 See for example Lemieux-Charles and McGuire (2007).
12

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Principle 5: Agency Partnerships

The movement from working in isolation toward working in collaborative teams helped to 

ensure that professionals implementing CCW-W have access to essential resources and services. 

Principle 5 seeks to expand the focus on working teams to include a wide range of community 

partners engaged in cross-system collaboration. These partners may not play a direct 

intervention role however, it is critical that other agencies are engaged and informed about 

CCW-W. Having a minimum of one or two strong community partners helps to increase 

awareness and provides the CCW-W team with non-financial support that might include actual 

services, advocacy, advice, etc. 

CCW-W builds partnerships with service providers who wish to work more effectively with 

women. The goal is to provide a variety of services including: 

• Individual supportive therapy including trauma groups and treatment

• Medical services

• Child-Care

• Housing

• Family Reintegration/Parenting/ Domestic Violence counselling?

• Substance abuse services

• Work-related services

• Social, interpersonal relationship, and leisure skills training

• Vocational supports

• Other support services

Principle 6: Holistic and Comprehensive

The model recognizes that women often present with complex needs and challenges. Therefore, 

a critical element of CCW-W is to address change at multiple levels designed to help women 

build personal resources as well as social capital14. Services may include, information, advice, 

treatment, assessment, brokerage and referral across an array of need areas including, 

vocational, family/social, personal, and life needs. Also essential to a holistic approach is the 

engagement and inclusion of informal supports. Helping women to strengthen and leverage 

social capital and interdependence with informal, prosocial supports and networks is essential in 

sustaining outcomes beyond the formal service delivery system.

Principle 7: Implementation Integrity

Recent advances in research that focus on implementation suggest that there are a number of 

drivers that influence the outcome of effective programs including staff selection, training, 

 

14 Social capital refers to connections among individuals – social networks and the norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise 

from them. In that sense social capital is closely related to what some have called “civic virtue.” The difference is that “social capital” 

calls attention to the fact that civic virtue is most powerful when embedded in a sense network of reciprocal social relations. 
13

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

coaching and supervision and quality assurance (Fixsen, Naoom, Blase, Friedman, & Wallace

(2005). These findings were integrated into the pilot implementation of WOCMM in order to 

ensure that the teams were able to deliver the model with integrity. Team members were crosstrained and provided with immediate and ongoing access to supervision, coaching, and the 

resources necessary to ensure adherence to the model.

Principle 8: Process and Outcome Evaluation

The initial evaluation of the model was critical to establish the efficacy and usefulness of this 

approach with justice-involved women. Process and outcome research should continue at each 

site that implements the model in order to refine operational practices and more fully explore 

its impact.

A series of measurement tools have been developed to monitor individual progress in CCW-W

(WOCMM). In addition, an evaluation framework for CCW-W was designed to study its impact 

across the following outcomes: reductions in recidivism (new arrests, new convictions,

violations, and institutional misconducts) and improvements in overall well-being (e.g. decrease 

in dynamic risk scores suggesting gains in employment, education, decreases in drug use; 

increased financial and housing stability, mental health indicators, etc. and increases in 

strengths scores for quality of social supports; the use of adaptive strategies and access to 

formal services). 
14

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Chapter 3: The CCW-W Process

CCW-W was designed to be a dynamic, seamless process that consists of four overlapping 

stages. Throughout the process:

The professional team works collaboratively with the woman (and her family) in an effort to 

define individual needs and strengths and to establish mutually agreed upon outcomes...

A visual representation of the process is presented in Figure 3.1. Ideally change goals are 

achieved by moving through each stage in a sequential fashion. However, it is anticipated that 

as women transition through the system or face alternate life circumstances, priority goals will 

change and/or shift. Thus the process is best conceptualized as recursive.

Figure 3.1: Four Stages of CCW-W

Stage 1: 

Engage and 

Assess

Stage 2: 

Enhance 

Motivation

Stage 3: 

Implement 

the Case Plan

Stage 4: 

Review and 

Support
15

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Stage 1: Engage and Assess

Description:

The first stage of the CCW-W is completed with the woman and the lead case worker15. Of primary 

importance at this stage is the rapport that is built between the lead case worker and the woman. 

Using a relational, conversational, “tell me your story” style, the case worker orients the woman 

to CCW-W and then conducts a semi-structured interview to elicit information regarding her 

strengths, needs and experiences. 

A critical component of CCW-W is an individualized case plan that is monitored and updated 

throughout the intervention process. The administration of a comprehensive standardized 

assessment and supplemental measures are used to guide the interview. The assessment process 

was designed to increase awareness about her strengths (factors which buffer or mitigate risk) 

and challenges (factors that might contribute to future criminal justice involvement and impact 

survival, stability, and self-sufficiency). During the pilot of the model and subsequent 

implementations we encouraged sites to use a gender-responsive assessment (see Chapter 4 for 

additional details).

Once the assessment is complete, the case worker integrates the assessment results and begins

the case formulation process. This requires a closer look at the strengths and resources that exist 

and can be mobilized to mitigate and buffer risk factors and challenges. It is also essential that 

her desires for the future are represented in the case formulation and that any personal incentives 

for change described during the assessment be included in the summary. Finally, the case worker 

is asked to specify the priority focus areas. Prioritization occurs through a close examination of 

her current situation (e.g. strengths, needs and challenges) and the circumstances (predisposing 

life events) that relate directly or indirectly to her current behavior. This can be achieved as 

follows:

1. Identify any survival needs that could potentially interfere with her immediate success

(e.g., stable and safe housing;sufficient funds for food, clothing; access to child care, etc.).

2. Review results of the overall risk assessment to determine the domains that place her at 

greatest risk for future problems. Summarize the domains that are most closely linked to 

criminal behavior as well as, the domains she is most motivated to work on right now.

3. Identify the top three major challenges. 

Once the case formulation is complete, the case worker should be prepared to summarize these 

results to the woman and other identified members of the CCW-W Team. 

 

15 For ease of presentation, we have adopted the language of – “lead case worker” to designate the 

individual who has primary responsibility for the case. Depending on the setting in which CCW-W is 

implemented this individual may have the formal designation of probation or parole officer, discharge 

planner, re-entry specialist, intake worker, etc.
16

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Application and Outcome:

This stage typically requires two – 60 to 90 minute sessions, and each of the various tasks is

completed by the lead case worker. The tasks and outcomes associated with this stage are 

briefly summarized in Table 3.1 below. 

Table 3.1: Stage 1 - Engage and Assess

Tasks Outcomes

Case Preparation: Review file and any other collateral 

information prior to meeting with her. Explore her current 

situation and anticipate any practical concerns (e.g., child-care, 

financial, transportation, etc.) that might impact her participation 

in the CCW-W process.

At the end of this phase 

the woman should feel 

safe and supported.

There is a more complete, 

shared picture of the 

circumstances, situations 

and the context in which 

problem behaviors occur 

or are sustained. We also 

have a picture of the 

client’s strengths, existing 

supports and personal 

incentives for change. 

Engage: Introduce her to CCW-W and describe the case work 

process. Work intentionally to create a safe and trusting 

environment by eliciting any concerns or barriers she might have 

to fully participate in CCW-W. Use relationship-building 

strategies characterized by a caring, empathic, non-judgmental, 

warm and supportive approach.

Assess: Administer the gender-responsive risk/needs/strengths 

assessment and all supplemental measures.

Case Formulation: Summarize the assessment results to identify 

challenges and strengths. Specify current and predisposing life 

events or stressors that impact current behavior and personal 

incentives or motivations for change.

Stage 2: Enhance Motivation

Description:

The second stage of CCW-W focuses on working collaboratively with the woman to prioritize the 

focus of intervention and to enhance motivation. At this stage, team members may be invited 

to participate in the meeting, however their role is strictly advocacy until they are asked to 

participate in supporting this aspect of the case plan.

Many justice-involved women describe a personal history fraught with pain, loss, failure, and a 

sense of hopelessness for the future. As we were designing the tools and intervention strategies 

for this stage we were strongly influenced by a number of complementary strengths-based 

approaches including Motivational Interviewing (Miller & Rollnick, 2012) and Solution Focused 

Intervention (de Shazer & Dolan, 2007). We believe that regardless of past events and current 

challenges, each woman should be considered the best “expert” about what to change and 

what it will take to make that happen. 

To honor her strengths and more fully engage her in developing a personal change plan, each 

woman is given feedback. Feedback begins with a review of the strengths identified across all 

major domains of the assessment (e.g., education, employment, family, marital, etc.). The case 
17

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

worker also reviews any personal incentives raised during the assessment. These include her 

expressed desires, wants, reasons for change, or any abilities or resources that will support her 

ability to make a change. 

Feedback is then provided with respect to the major challenges identified during the case 

formulation process. At this stage it is important not to review each challenge identified by the 

woman during the assessment but those that she spoke most urgently about and that were 

prioritized during the case formulation phase. 

As feedback is provided, the woman is encouraged to reflect and expand upon the summary 

statements and it is not uncommon for her to add more detail. We also find that many women 

are surprised to discover that they have strengths and resources available to them and pleased 

that correctional practitioners identify and reflect these strengths. This sets the stage for the 

second strategy which we have adapted from Motivational Interviewing – called focusing. At 

this time the woman is asked to reflect on the feedback and to decide where she would like to 

start. Once she has picked a priority focus we then work with her to very clearly define the 

problem and the behavior that she will have to change to address the problem.

Before actually setting a goal we encourage the lead case worker to intentionally explore 

importance and build confidence. Miller and Rollnick (2012) refer to this process as evoking 

change talk and present compelling evidence to suggest that when change talk moves from a 

wish or desire (preparatory) to commitment talk, then the client is more likely to succeed. A 

series of strategies can be employed to assess readiness and to evoke change talk including 

exploring potential obstacles, exception-seeking, and scaling questions. For example, the case 

worker might ask the woman the following scaling question to determine how much she values 

the change: “On a scale of 1-to-10, with 10 being very important and 1 being not so important, 

how motivated are you to work on this problem.”

Once the woman indicates that she is comfortable with the target for change – the case worker 

assists her to set a personal goal. We strongly recommend that goals be framed as a positive 

outcome and describe what will be better if she is successful in achieving this endgame.

Application and Outcome:

This stage typically requires a 45 to 60 minute session and each of the various tasks is completed 

by the lead case worker. At this stage, additional team members may be introduced to the 

woman, however, they are asked to play a supportive role and do not become fully involved 

until the case plan is implemented. The major tasks and outcomes associated with this stage are 

briefly summarized in Table 3.2 below. 
18

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Table 3.2: Stage 2 - Enhance Motivation

Tasks Outcomes

Feedback: Review the assessment results and summarize 

strengths; personal incentives and the three challenges identified 

during the case formulation phase. At the end of this phase 

one priority focus has 

been identified in 

collaboration with the 

woman and a personal 

goal has been set.

Focus: Encourage her to identify one focus for change and work 

with her to clearly define the problem. 

Evoke Change Talk: Use scaling questions and other strengthsbased strategies to enhance importance and increase confidence.

Set goal: Specify the outcome and what will be different if the 

problem is no longer a problem.

NOTE: Repeat the Focus; Evoke Change Talk and Goal Setting

sequence for up to two additional target behaviors identified by 

the woman.

Stage 3: Implement the Case Plan

Description:

A key task at this stage is to work collaboratively with each woman to operationalize the 

personal goal(s). The simplest and most effective method we have found to date is to identify 

the actual short-term steps or tasks that will need to be completed to achieve the goal. These 

action steps are then clearly defined and characterized by the acronym SMART (i.e., simple, 

measurable, achievable, realistic, and timely). Given the range of challenges, strengths and 

resources evidenced by justice-involved women, it is vital that a holistic approach be used in a 

variety of different ways to address her personal goals. Therefore we encourage team members 

to include at least three different types of actions steps that include personal strategies, natural 

supports and formal services when developing action steps for each goal. This is achieved in 

two ways. First available strengths identified at Stage 1 and 2 (e.g., internal competencies, skills, 

immediate support systems and formal networks) are anchored to each goal. Secondly, if the 

women lacks a skill, resource or support vital to ensure goal attainment then efforts are made 

by identified team members to either deliver and/or coordinate an array of services. 

To mobilize and expand existing resources it is critical that women be presented with a variety 

of options and opportunities. The types of services identified by women and other team 

members who participated in the WOCMM pilot are summarized in Table 3.3. It should be 

noted that the most frequently identified needs requested by women when transitioning from 

prison included housing, medical and mental health services.

In many settings with scarce resources this can appear to be an insurmountable challenge. 

Several methods used during the pilot project to overcome this obstacle are described in 

Chapter 4 (see for example: Agency Partnerships). However, the most common solution 

employed by team members who could not identify services or were dissatisfied with the 

quality of what was available, was to develop the capacity to provide services directly. Some 
19

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

received formal training in the delivery of gender-responsive cognitive-based intervention

programs (e.g., Seeking Safety, Moving On, Trauma and Recovery, etc.) and others used the skill 

development worksheets that were created to support the delivery of CCW-W.

Table 3.3: Options and Opportunities

VOCATIONAL PERSONAL FAMILY/SOCIAL LIFE NEEDS

Job training Trauma Custody & Access Housing

Education Substance Abuse Parent Counseling Financial

Employment Emotional Regulation Intimate Partner 

Violence

Formal Supports

Medical Care

Literacy training Interpersonal Skills Transportation

Vocational counseling Cognitive Skills Visitation Programs Food

Life Skills Telephone contact Clothing

Spirituality Family Reunification Medication

Eating disorders, selfinjury Child Welfare Liaison Legal assistance

Reproductive health Family Therapy Hygiene

Exercise Parenting Skills Documentation

Nutrition Bereavement

Leisure and recreation Healthy Relationships

Application and Outcome:

This stage is often completed immediately following the last and requires approximately 45 

minutes to complete. At this stage, the team works to fill the gaps needed to operationalize the 

case plan. The major tasks and outcomes associated with this stage are briefly summarized in 

Table 3.4 below. 
20

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Table 3.4: Stage 3 - Implement the Case Plan

Tasks Outcomes

Operationalize the goal: Brainstorm the steps needed to achieve 

the goal. Ensure that each step corresponds to the acronym –

SMART. Ensure that action steps include personal strategies, 

natural supports, and formal services that will help to enhance 

success.

At the end of this phase 

the woman and other 

team members have 

worked collaboratively to 

identify action steps and 

complete the case plan. Identify existing strengths: Ensure that internal competencies, 

skills, immediate support systems and formal networks are 

anchored to the action steps.

Identify gaps: Identify additional resources necessary to achieve 

the goal.

Complete the case plan: Ensure that the goal and action steps 

are recorded and that the woman and other team members are 

clearly committed to complete assigned tasks in accordance with 

a predefined target date. 

NOTE: Repeat this process for each personal goal. 

Stage 4: Review and Support Change

Description:

The primary tasks of the CCW-W team during Stage 4 include reviewing: (1) successes, (2) 

barriers to success and, (3) developing new goals and action steps that promote resiliency and 

facilitate positive change. An important tool used by the woman and all other team members is 

the case plan. Though the content of the case plan can vary in accordance with the needs of 

each site, it should be used in a dynamic way and serve as a formal method to communicate 

progress to the team members. The case plan also provides a summary of contacts, services 

and commitments. By reviewing the case plan prior to an individual or team session, the focus 

on interaction remains on the identified targets. It is not unusual for the women to present at a 

team or individual session in crisis. Though the crisis should not be ignored, we encourage team 

members to return to the identified goal as soon as possible. 

During the pilot stages of the model, supervisors and team members routinely expressed 

concerns regarding the ideal session length, the use of gender-responsive strategies and, how to 

assess the quality or effectiveness of a given interaction. Over time we developed a protocol to

guide individual case work sessions and team meetings and an observation form (see quality 

assurance measures in Chapter 4) to ensure adherence to gender-responsive practices. The 

protocol and observation forms were well-received by staff and both are now introduced in 

training and used as standard coaching tools.
21

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Protocol:

Core team members (e.g., probation and parole officers, counselors, discharge planners and 

case workers within the institution, etc.) who worked with the women on an individual basis 

were encouraged to use the protocol to guide their individual sessions. The sessions are typically 

delivered within 30-45 minutes. In contrast, team meetings typically involve the woman, 

identified supports, and all individuals involved with her case. The frequency of team meetings 

varied across sites in accordance with practical concerns such as the availability of staff, needs 

of the woman, etc. Typically a team meeting was called on a monthly basis or in response to 

significant change (e.g., to reinforce successes made or to intervene when a woman was in 

crisis). 

The 5-step protocol for individual interactions is briefly described below. The same elements 

were included in the team conference meeting. 

Step 1: Re-engage and Reconnect

The primary task at Stage 1, was to build rapport and develop a working relationship with 

the woman. Once rapport is built, it is natural to assume that it is a given, a constant, 

something that will always be stable and present. The reality is that relationships are fluid

and ever-changing and it is not uncommon for rapport to be damaged or to depreciate over 

time or in response to something happening in her life. For these reasons, we encourage 

staff to ’check-in‘ not only as a social formality but to be mindful of any behavioral reactions 

that might signal that she is disengaging (e.g., starts arriving late, misses sessions, is hostile 

or irritable, overly solicitous, etc.) and intentionally reconnect with her. 

At this time, we also encourage staff to engage in reassessment, using a gender responsive 

risk assessment (see Chapter 4). We recommend staff conduct reassessment on a quarterly 

basis or as frequently as required by agency policy. The information from reassessment 

should provide the lead case manager with valuable information about progress made as 

well as remaining challenges to inform feedback and future planning.

Step 2: Summarize Progress to Date

This step takes a few moments, however, we found that staff who took the time to provide 

a general summary of her successes were more likely to have a productive session. They 

were also better able to help the woman mobilize those strengths in the service of 

obstacles. Successes might include the completion of goals, the use of a specific skill or 

compliance with probation/parole conditions and/or agency rules. 

Step 3: Review the Case Plan

The third step focuses on the actual specifics of the case plan. The goal and progress made 

on the actions steps are reviewed. Successes are affirmed and reinforced and new actions 

steps are negotiated. If the goal has been achieved then a new goal is set. When only 

partial or limited success on the actions steps are achieved, we encourage the use of 

motivational strategies to assess motivation and address obstacles and barriers. 
22

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Step 4: Prepare To Use Strategies, Supports, Services 

At step four every effort is made to mobilize strengths identified previously or to help her to 

develop new skills. All staff are trained to use a guided skill development approach that 

includes skill practice, role play and skill rehearsal and feedback. A series of skill worksheets 

were designed to address critical need areas.

Step 5: Set the Next Meeting and Update the Case Plan

The case plan is updated in collaboration with the woman and a future session is scheduled. 

The Process is Recursive

One of the greatest challenges faced by CCW-W team members is the realization that the 

women they serve make mistakes and have setbacks, as all humans do. This means that even 

when a woman is highly motivated and has made significant progress she may change priorities, 

slip back to old ways of behaving, and/or elect to drop-out of the process. The literature on 

behavioral change suggests that these behaviors should be expected and anticipated. We can 

help to ensure she gets back on track more quickly by accepting that the CCW-W is a recursive 

process and that sometimes we need to return to the opening strategies introduced during 

Stage 1 and Stage 2. 
23

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Chapter 4: Implementing the CCW-W Model

Our experience in piloting CCW-W across several different settings and agencies assisted us in

developing innovative methods and approaches to test the model. It has also helped us to 

identify and address major challenges that can impede effective implementation. In this 

segment we will highlight the essential activities necessary to implement the CCW-W model and 

guiding principles with fidelity.

As we introduced the first pilot, we quickly realized that successful implementation would 

require a strong commitment from the executive team. In this segment we look closely at four 

structural components of the model that require formal consideration prior to implementation 

and then throughout the delivery of CCW-W (see Figure 4.1). We will discuss the steps to ensure 

that these components are addressed and operationalized, as well as include tips that reflect 

lessons learned in delivering the model.

Figure 4.1: Four Critical Activities for Implementation

• Involve in strategic 

planning

• Case management 

team and 

organizational 

culture

• Begin to establish partnerships 

with agencies who work with 

JIW and/or where there are 

gaps in exisitng services

• Create formal realationships 

• Justice-involved 

women and natural 

supports

• Changes in Organizational 

Culture

• Criminal justice measures 

including decreased recidivsm

• Increased well being

Outcomes Client 

Selection

Collaborative 

Teams

Agency 

Partnerships
24

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

A: Client Selection and Assessment

CCW-W is an intensive wrap-around intervention. It was designed to mobilize strengths and 

reduce the challenges faced by justice-involved women assessed to be at moderate-to-high risk 

for future difficulties.

Who Benefits from CCW-W (WOCMM)?

One of the first and most critical considerations that we faced when implementing the model

was client selection. Initially it was felt that all justice-involved women should be eligible. 

However, as discussed in Chapter 2, the available research on effective interventions supports 

the need to identify individuals who both require the service and are most likely to benefit from 

it (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). This premise, most commonly referred to as the risk principle,

16

has been demonstrated across studies and settings. Results show that individuals with the 

greatest need for service are more likely to benefit and those considered to be low need fail to 

show positive outcomes and may actually get worse. 

Consistent with this principle, pilot sites were instructed to select women assessed to be at risk 

for future offending and who presented with complex and multiple needs. Given that the 

selection criteria for entry into the pilot was limited to moderate and high risk women, very few 

of the women (5.4%) were assessed as low risk (Millson, Robinson, & Van Dieten, 2010). 

However, research results clearly supported the risk principle. In fact, the women who 

benefited the most from the model were the women assessed to be at greatest risk (Robinson, 

Van Dieten, & Milson, 2012). Lower risk women presented with fewer needs and a greater 

number of strengths and resources. Consistent with the risk principle, we encourage agencies 

to decrease the intensity of intervention and supervision of low risk women and assist them in

accessing mainstream services as quickly as possible.

 

16 The risk principle is the first of four principles of effective intervention- first articulated by Don Andrews 

and colleagues in the late 1980’s. For additional information see Andrews and Bonta (2010)>

Tip #1

Provide more intensive services to women who have the greatest need.
25

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Assessing Risk, Needs and Strengths

The completion of a comprehensive assessment is a critical first step in the case work process

and lays the foundation for all future work. When implemented effectively the assessment helps 

to: (1) build rapport; (2) provides a more complete picture of needs, strengths and resources, 

and (3) enhances awareness and motivation. Consistent with the emerging research we 

strongly encourage agencies to use a gender-responsive assessment. Several gender-responsive 

assessments have been validated for use with justice-involved women. For example, the 

Women’s Risk Need Assessment (WRNA) is available through the University of Cincinnati 

(http://www.uc.edu/womenoffenders.html) and the Service Planning Instrument for Women 

(SPIn-W) is available through Orbis Partners Inc., http://www.orbispartners.com. A description 

of both tools is available in Appendix B.

Adaptive Strategies

One of the ultimate outcomes identified for the CCW-W process is an increase in adaptive skills 

to improve overall well-being. Research suggests social, emotional and cognitive skills such as 

decision-making, goal-setting, problem-solving, emotional regulation, and stress management,

can reduce the risk for a range of behavioral problems including substance use and criminal 

justice involvement (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). 

A variety of assessments designed to assess coping behaviors, attitudes, and skills were used 

during the WOCMM pilot and then on a re-test basis in order to determine changes in the use of 

adaptive strategies over time. The scales are briefly described below.

General Self-Efficacy Scale: The 12-item General Self-Efficacy Scale self-report assesses 

optimistic self-beliefs to cope with a variety of difficult life demands. The measure explicitly 

refers to personal agency, the belief that one’s actions are responsible for successful outcomes 

(Sherer & Maddux, 1982). 

Tip #2

Use a gender-responsive assessment to address the needs and strengths of 

women offenders. If a gender-responsive assessment is not available, ensure 

that staff assess areas that are salient and unique to women.
26

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Personal Strategies for Success: This 36-item self-administered scale identifies strategies that 

women might use to address a broad range of situations and circumstances (Orbis Partners, 

2006).

Parenting Scale: This scale was developed by Pat Van Voorhis and colleagues (2010) and 

measures the level of stress that women feel with respect to raising their children as well as,

confidence in their ability to manage their children’s behavior.

Identifying Natural and Formal Supports

Natural supports are the day-to-day connections we form with others. Such supports usually 

involve relationships with family members, friends, co-workers, neighbors and acquaintances. 

Ideally natural supports are reciprocal in nature, where both parties give-and-take and share 

mutual interests. In contrast, formal supports might include line staff, probation and parole 

officers, and caseworkers. They might also involve service providers such as counselors, 

therapists, lawyers, and medical staff.

The availability of natural and formal supports has been linked to positive outcomes including 

reductions in stress (Gerung, 2007; Taylor et al., 2000); mental health symptoms such as 

depression and anxiety (Lakey & Cronin, 2008); and response to medical treatment (Uchino, 

2006, 2009). Studies have also shown that individuals with a greater diversity of relationships 

and/or involvement in a broad range of social activities have healthier lives and live longer than 

those who lack such supports (Taylor, 2011). Finally, research suggests that social supports are 

a critical factor in promoting desistance from crime (Maruna, 2001; Mc Neil & Maruna, 2007). 

Gender differences have been found in the social support research. For example, women tend 

to provide more social support to others and are more likely to seek out social support to deal 

with stress (Taylor, 2011; Tamres, Janicki, & Helgeson, 2002). 

The dilemma faced by many justice-involved women is that over time, connections with natural 

supports are often disrupted, violated or broken. This is compounded by the fact that women 

who have experienced pervasive abuse as a child have difficulties in forming healthy, trusting 

relationships. The desire for relationships with others may prevail. However, the ability to 

establish and maintain healthy supports may be impaired or compromised.

One of the most critical outcomes of CCW-W is to provide women with opportunities to expand 

formal resources, and perhaps even more critically, to build a diverse group of natural supports. 

To determine who is currently available in her life and to monitor progress in achieving this goal, 

the case worker administers the following tools:

Tip #3:

The use of self-report measures to augment the general risk/needs 

assessment is optional. However, these simple tools can provide the CCW-W 

team with important information about existing strengths that can be 

targeted for use in the case plan.
27

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Social Support Questionnaire (SSQ)

The Social Support Questionnaire (SSQ) was developed by Sarason, Sarason, Shearin, and Pierce 

(1987) as a means of identifying who is available to support the individual and the level of 

satisfaction with that support. There are a total of seven items that focus on different types of 

support received from others. For example, people who are dependable; people who help take 

the pressure off and relieve stress; people who accept your good and bad qualities; people 

available you can count on to make you feel better when you are down; people who care about 

you; people who console you when upset; and, people who support your goals and share your 

interests. 

Eco-Map

The Eco-Map is a technique that has been used since the 70’s to provide a graphic 

representation of the client’s ecosystem. Hartman (1978) developed one of the first maps for 

child welfare workers to examine the needs of families and to create a diagram of existing 

supports. Since that time, various iterations of the Eco-Map have emerged and it has been used 

successfully as an assessment, planning, intervention, and evaluation tool (Longress, 1990).

The Eco-Map is administered as part of the assessment process and is designed to elicit dynamic 

information about a woman’s support network. The women are asked to consider each of the 

major systems that are (or ought to be) part of her life and the nature of her relationship with 

those various systems. The map also provides an overview of the woman in context by 

identifying relationships that are healthy or conflict-laden. It demonstrates whether the 

relationships are reciprocal and points to situations to be mediated, bridges to be built, and 

resources to be sought and mobilized. 

B: Collaborative Teams

The incorporation of teams as a key feature of CCW-W was one of the greatest implementation 

challenges. It was also one of the greatest sources of satisfaction for professionals. However, to 

derive the many and varied benefits of a team approach requires attention to a number of 

issues. In this section we will review five essential considerations.

Tip #4:

Conduct a comprehensive assessment of natural and formal supports.
28

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

1: Team Size and Composition

Critical to the effective delivery of CCW-W is that each woman referred for service is considered 

a member of the team. Beyond her involvement, the issue of how ’big‘ and who should be on 

the team was an important source of discussion in each site where we delivered this model. 

Our initial feeling was that the greater the representation from across disciplines the stronger 

the team. However, we quickly discovered that the size of the team and how well resourced,

was far less important than how the team functioned. Interestingly, at each site team size and 

composition varied dramatically, from as few as three members (the woman, the 

probation/parole officer and a resource specialist from a partner agency), to as many team

members as dictated by the needs of each individual woman participating in the process.

We routinely found that most functional teams consisted of team members who:

• Volunteered for the project.

17

• Were interested in working with women and valued the opportunity to learn an 

integrated, gender-responsive approach.

• Were excited about enhancing their skills and receiving performance-based feedback.

• Recognized the intrinsic value of working in a team both to meet the needs of the 

women as well as increase professional satisfaction and development.

We also discovered that team membership tended to expand in size and composition as the 

lead agency systematically identified and invited partner agencies (that share the same clients)

to participate in the process. Having one team, one meeting, and one case plan enhanced 

efficiencies, increased professional satisfaction, and reduced work load sizes. The realization of 

these benefits became important catalysts for team membership in many sites.

18

2: Matching for Gender and Race

 

17 During the pilot implementation of WOCMM, the implementation team with the State of Connecticut 

Judicial Branch/Court Services Division prepared an invitation with a description of WOCMM and the 

perceived benefits of participating in the pilot. Candidates interested in the project completed an 

application and were interviewed to determine suitability.

18 A process evaluation was completed (Millson, Robinson, Rubin & Van Dieten, 2009) to determine client 

and team member perceptions of the process and overall level of satisfaction with service. We also 

interviewed staff who were not involved in the pilot. Overwhelmingly staff trained in the model reported 

greater levels of professional satisfaction than their counter-parts.

(footnote continued)

Tip #5:

Build dynamic, well-facilitated teams across formal and informal support 

areas.
29

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Another important consideration that emerged during the implementation of the model was 

gender and racial matching. Unfortunately, there is a paucity of research available in the 

correctional literature that focuses on this topic. The responsivity principle (Andrews & Bonta, 

2010) described earlier, as well as results reported in the treatment outcome literature19

suggest that ideally, individuals (whether men or women) benefit from client-matching. This is 

also known as staff-client responsivity. 

During focus groups that were conducted with women who participated in the pilot we often 

heard comments reflecting the impact of gender matching. The comments below are excerpts 

taken directly from the transcripts made during the focus groups. 

“The training PO’s are getting now is working... 20 odd years in and out of the system and 

now I am doing really well... the new resources, training, female-to-female officer... it’s 

great”. 

“Fact that it is all female is great for me... love it because of my street life; love men but 

when it comes to help... I prefer women because there is no sexual tension and I think she 

will call me out.”

“Feel more understood and respected by women and I can’t manipulate them... very 

comfortable.”

Generally speaking, the women reported greater comfort, initial satisfaction, and were more 

willing to trust a woman in the role of case manager (Millson, Robinson, Rubin, & Van Dieten, 

2009). Interestingly, a number of probation and parole departments across North America have 

adopted gender-specific caseloads. Unfortunately, we were unable to more fully explore and 

evaluate the impact of gender and race on outcome. We recommend that whenever possible 

efforts be made to match women and the case worker by race and gender. When this is not 

possible, it is critical that all team members are trained in gender-responsive principles and 

 

19 Generally speaking, people prefer to work with someone that they identify with and who they feel will 

understand them. Kirshner (1978) studied a large number of therapist-client matches in short-term 

counseling and found that female clients showed greater responsiveness (e.g., self-reported satisfaction 

and improvement) when working with women. Other studies have matched clients by virtue of race and 

gender and found that gender-matched dyads reported greater satisfaction with the therapeutic 

relationship (Johnson & Caldwell, 2011; Wintersteen, Mensinger & Diamond, 2005). Farismadan, DraghiLorenz & Ellis (2007) randomly assigned adults to matched and non-matched therapeutic dyads – and 

found that therapy outcome, bond with therapist, and therapist credibility were all significantly higher in 

the ethnically matched dyads. These authors also discovered that the therapeutic bond and therapist 

credibility mediated the relationship between matching and outcome. Results suggest that matching is 

desirable. However, when this is not possible it is essential that staff are able to engage the client, build a 

therapeutic bond or alliance and that clients feel they have the expertise to assist them.
30

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

practices. Further, the ability to build rapport and develop a working alliance appears to be

critical to support the intervention process. 

3: Roles and Functions

Individuals were invited to participate on the team by virtue of their professional skills and 

expertise. As such, efforts were made to ensure that each team member functioned in 

accordance with their existing roles and responsibilities. Though team members were 

encouraged not to intervene with the women beyond their job descriptions and credentials,

many staff requested permission to enhance their professional training in an effort to expand 

personal responsibilities. For example, a number of probation, parole and correctional officers 

participated in training for facilitators of group programs like Moving On (Van Dieten, 2010), 

Seeking Safety (Najavits, 2000), etc. 

Despite the collaborative nature of the process, we encouraged one member of each team

(typically a probation/parole officer in the community or a discharge planner in the facility) to 

assume primary responsibility for the case. This entailed reviewing referral information, 

conducting the initial assessment, coordinating the team meetings, filing court information, and 

updating the case file.

4: Building Collaboration and Cohesion

Cohesion is essential to team effectiveness and refers to the ability of team members to stick 

together and remain united in pursuit of goals despite difficulties and setbacks (Lemieux, 

Charles & McGuire, 2006). Team cohesion is also a dynamic process that can be dramatically 

impacted by a woman’s presenting needs, her response to intervention, changes in team 

composition and, an array of practical issues (e.g., available resources, workload of individual 

team members, turnover of personnel, prevailing organizational environment, etc.). We 

discovered that building and maintaining team cohesion was one of the greatest challenges we 

Tip #6:

Whenever possible, match staff to client by gender and race.

Tip #7:

Ensure there is a lead case manager to convene and facilitate the team and 

that team roles for other members are well-defined.
31

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

faced in implementing this model. The essential strategies that we found most effective in 

working toward this goal included:

a) Mission and Vision Statement: One of the most important first steps in the bonding process is

to develop a team mission and vision statement. 

A sample statement is presented below. 

The team works together to create an environment that is safe and respectful for all. The 

team respects the unique roles and functions of each individual member and the value of 

combining the specific strengths, skills and resources of each individual in an effort to 

maximize available experiences and knowledge.

b) Formalize roles and responsibilities: To ensure continuity and accountability in services 

provided to women, we found that it was essential to clearly formalize each team member’s

roles, responsibilities and participation within the team. This included establishing team 

leadership, norms and processes for making decisions, communicating approval and 

disapproval, resolving conflict, coordinating new resources, and other functions.

c) Remove obstacles to team functioning: The move toward a team approach, particularly 

across agencies requires careful consideration and respect for differences that might exist with 

respect to policy and practice (e.g., access to information, confidentiality, reporting 

requirements, storage of information; meeting contract obligations such as number of client 

contacts, etc.). It was critical that each individual was able to identify potential obstacles to 

working on a multidisciplinary team and that the team and supporting organizations helped to 

overcome these challenges.

d) Promote opportunities for team building and provide incentives: As indicated above, team 

cohesion is a dynamic process and we found that teams reporting the greatest level of 

satisfaction tended to reach out for support (e.g., participate as a unit in cross-training, 

advanced training, clinical supervision, access to client resources such as the ability to subsidize

specialized treatment, allocate bus tokens, etc.). A tangible incentive for most teams was the 

ability to monitor individual client progress. This can be achieved by reviewing dynamic changes 

on the risk assessment, reviewing client satisfaction questionnaires, and providing the team with 

access to any process or outcome reports. Finally, an incentive that appealed to all team 

members included formal and informal recognition from senior management.

Tip #8:

Formalize roles and responsibilities for each member of the team and 

provide opportunities for team building.
32

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

5. Training, Supervision and Coaching

One of most exciting aspects of this pilot was the development of gender-responsive training 

materials that would support the delivery of CCW-W. This entailed a commitment by the 

designers to develop a curriculum and learning process that intentionally integrated the best 

available knowledge (experience and research) relating to justice-involved women and 

evidence-based practices. It also required a close look at the attitudes, knowledge and skills 

that we felt each team member would require to facilitate the model with fidelity. Finally, a 

training procedure was essential to ensure the transfer of learning from a classroom setting to 

day-to-day practice. This procedure included pre-training, during-training and post-training 

activities that are described below:

Pre-Training Activities:

1: Implementation Meetings: A series of meetings are organized with host and partner 

agencies to develop an implementation protocol and to outline the procedure for cross-training 

and team building. The implementation protocol that was developed for the CCW-W (formerly 

WOCMM) pilot is presented in Appendix D.

2: Staff and Agency Survey: Individual team members are routinely asked to complete a 

confidential survey in order to assess attitudes, general knowledge, and core competencies 

essential to the delivery of CCW-W. The host agency and all identified partner agencies are also 

asked to describe recent training initiatives and their capacity to support coaching, supervision 

and quality assurance activities.

3: Orientation Workshop: Members of the executive team, managers, and representatives across 

agency and community providers are invited to participate in a four hour orientation to CCW-W

where they are introduced to the model and core team members. 

4: Commitment to Cross-Training: All team members (assigned and prospective) are invited to 

participate in formal and informal training activities. 

Training Activities:

1: The Curriculum: A total of 10 introductory modules were developed to support the delivery of 

CCW-W. The training topics and estimated time to deliver each component are presented in Table 

4.1. A more detailed description of the training content is available in Appendix E.
33

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Table 4.1: CCW-W – Menu of Training Topics

Module

Number

Topic Estimated 

Time 

1 Introduction to CCW-W 2 hours

2 What We Know About Justice-Involved Women 4 hours

3

Gender Responsive Practices (Relationship-Focused, StrengthsBased, Culturally Competent and Trauma Informed) 6 hours

4 Administering a Gender-Responsive Assessment 12 hours

5 Stage 1: Engage and Assess 6 hours

6 Stage 2: Enhance Motivation 8 hours

7 Stage 3: Develop the Case Plan 4 hours

8 Stage 4: Review and Support 6 hours

9 Team Building 6 hours

10 Implementing CCW-W 6 hours

An additional 24 hours of curriculum were developed over-time in response to requests from 

team members. These advanced trainings are not mandatory and typically offered as booster 

sessions after the teams have been working together for several months. 

▪ Working in a Trauma-Informed Way

▪ Staff Self-Care and Resiliency

▪ Moving from “Fixing” to “Guiding”: Formalizing Strengths-Based and Relational Practices

Finally an 8-hour workshop called – Building Agency Partnerships was developed by Becki Ney 

with the Center for Effective Public Policy. During this training agencies in the community who 

provide services to justice involved women are invited to attend. Participants are introduced to 

the CCW-W model, discuss service resources and work with the teams to develop action plans.

2: Formal Training, Coaching and Ongoing Clinical Supervision: All team members are cross 

trained to ensure consistency in approach and to build functioning, flexible and adaptive teams. 

During the initial pilot, the teams participated in two weeks of consecutive training. However, 

this approach was subsequently modified to ensure that smaller segments of classroom learning 

were followed by opportunities for skill practice, supervision and coaching. A list of supervision 

and coaching activities developed during the pilot of WOCMM is presented in Appendix F.

The training rollout is typically modified in accordance with the needs of the host agency. A 

sample schedule is presented in Table 4.2 below.
34

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Table 4.2: Sample Training and Coaching Schedule

Delivery Formal 

Training

Coaching Activities Skill Practice

Initial Module 1 Review available literature on CCWW (e.g., description, research and 

process reports)

Module 2 Review supplemental readings 

Complete e-training module 

developed by NIC

https://nic.learn.com.

Courses include 1) who are 

justice-involved women 2) 

Interpersonal violence 3) 

Effects of Trauma 4) Effective 

Gender-Responsive Practices 

5) Building Individual and 

Organizational Resilience. 

Module 3 Review supplemental readings 

Complete e-training module 

developed by NIC

Module 4 Review administration guidelines for 

the assessment.

Conduct a minimum of 3 

assessments using a 

relational and strengthsbased approach, score 

assessments and prepare a 

case formulation for each.

Second 

Training

Module 5 Review supplemental readings. Practice using motivational 

strategies: feedback, 

focusing, evoking change talk 

and setting personal goals.

Module 6 Review supplemental readings. Practice working in a 

collaborative way to set goals 

and action steps with 

(personal strategies; natural 

supports; formal resources)

Module 7 Review supplemental readings. Complete the CCW-W

sequence activity for 3 

clients.

Module 8 Review team mission and vision. 

Explore roles and functions of each 

team member. Establish team 

leadership and the logistics for team 

meetings. 

Set up team meetings and 

begin team conferencing 

using the standardized 

session.

A participant evaluation, knowledge quiz and skill practice worksheets were developed for each 

module to encourage the transfer of learning (Van Dieten, 2012).
35

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Post Training Activities: Building Agency Capacity

1: Supervision and Coaching: Supervisors participated in additional training to promote program 

integrity. This support included formal training for supervisors to coaching staff in using the 

model. Supervisors were provided with a Coaching Kit to be used during staff supervision. 

Activities were recommended to create opportunities for skill practice during team meetings, to 

assist individual staff to assess skills and to set professional goals, and provide strengths-based 

feedback. 

2: Training Trainers: Building internal capacity to sustain the model is essential to the 

implementation process. In some sites, we were able to develop internal agency trainers through 

a cascading training approach to guided skill practice. This involved assisting the lead agency with 

the recruitment and application process for volunteer trainers. Trainer candidates were selected 

and trained by CCW-W trainers in the model. Then, they attended a 4 day training for trainers, 

where they received a fully scripted curriculum and trainer manual and engaged in additional 

professional development to develop platform skills, content knowledge, attitudes and gender 

responsive skills to model the approach to their peers. Finally, each trainer candidate modeled 

and co-trained with a National CCW-W trainer (see below) before completing the certification 

process. In some sites, this process also included tape review of their actual practice with women, 

knowledge tests and additional methods to assess competency. While it was not possible to 

certify trainers in every site due to fiscal constraints, it is an essential investment in developing 

model stability.

3: National Trainers: One of the deliverables associated with the initial implementation of the 

model was the development of training materials for trainers (described above) and the 

certification of a cadre of national trainers who worked with Orbis Partners to co-facilitate the 

implementation of CCW-W in various sites. The national trainers included representatives from 

across the US. 

▪ Lisa Cato (Connecticut)

▪ Shannon Cox (Utah)

▪ Gina Gomez (Texas)

▪ Rena Goldwasser (Connecticut)

▪ Thomas Hogan (Connecticut)

▪ Erica King (Maine)

▪ Patti McDonald (Colorado)

▪ Kim McIrvin (Iowa)

▪ Felesia Otis (Oregon)

▪ Yolanda Peterkin-Johnson (New York)

▪ Mary Skully-Whitaker (Minnesota)

Though a number of the individuals identified above have since retired, members of the initial 

team and several others recently prepared a paper describing their experiences implementing 

CCW-W at the 2013 Adult and Juvenile Female Offender Conference. A summary of this 

presentation is available (Van Dieten et al., 2013). 
36

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

C: Agency Partnerships

Our belief is that collaborative agency partnerships are a powerful way to improve the lives of 

women and the communities in which they live in. Partnerships bring the needs of justiceinvolved women to the forefront and therefore have the potential to expand access to available 

resources, to mobilize communities to build those that do not exist, and to contribute to more 

successful outcomes. 

Who should be involved?

When developing agency partnerships we encouraged sites to be as inclusive as possible and to 

invite agencies that provide any the following services: 

• Grant-makers and governmental agencies

• Department of Corrections or Community Corrections

• Department of Human Services

• Department of Children and Family Services

• Juvenile Justice

• Legislative analysts

• Substance abuse treatment

• Mental health

• Health care

• Housing

• Education/life skills

• Employment/vocational

• Ethnic diversity

• Support systems

• Family reunification

• Transportation

• Youth organizations

• Local government

• Health organizations

• The faith community

• Financial institutions

Tip #9:

Invest in multiple methods of staff development including coaching training 

for supervisors to strengthen fidelity and model stability over the long term.
37

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

We also encouraged sites to build community partnership with other groups who do not provide 

direct services to justice-involved women but can help to increase public awareness, provide 

actual resources (e.g., donate supplies, food, clothes, etc.), and/or have competencies that can 

be engaged to facilitate some of the action steps (e.g., university research centers may assist 

with collecting and analyzing outcome data).

• Media

• Business community

• Civic and community organizations

• Educational centers

Mobilizing Partner Agencies

Once sites have a list of partner agencies we encourage them to complete the following 

activities: 

Host an orientation workshop: During the initial implementation of the model in Connecticut 

partner agencies were invited to a one-day workshop developed by Becki Ney at the Center for 

Effective Public Policy. The ultimate goal of this session was to highlight the major challenges 

faced by justice-involved women and begin to explore how agencies could work in a 

collaborative way to overcome them. Before leaving such sessions participants are asked to: 

1. Develop a clear vision and mission: Agency partners are asked to develop a vision and 

mission statement that reflects a continuum of outcomes, including: 

• Specific agency-related outcomes (e.g., reductions in measures of recidivism; 

substance use; mental health issues; stable housing; etc.)

• Broader interrelated outcomes (e.g., increased contact with formal resources 

available to justice-involved women), and/or increase in use of adaptive coping 

skills; etc.

2. Create an action plan: Agencies are asked to operationalize the mission statement and 

to clearly specify how outcomes will be achieved (e.g., with whom, by whom, how and 

by when each action step will be carried out).

Subsequent to the initial workshop we encourage agencies to:

Formalize partnerships – Changes in agency leadership, funding, and staff resources can have a 

dramatic impact on agency partnerships. Some sites find it extremely helpful for agency 

partners to formalize their relationships in a contractual way through the use of memoranda of 

understanding. In Salt Lake City Utah, over 40 agencies have committed their participation and 

involvement with the Women’s Summit20. The Summit began with the mission – “Shared 

responsibility for shared clients” and has expanded the target population to include not only 

justice-involved women but women and families in need. 

 

20 For additional information contact Shannon Cox with the Utah Department of Corrections.
38

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Seek technical assistance - Outside help with specific actions, such as securing resources for staff 

training is encouraged. Specifically, agencies are introduced to the resources available through 

the National Institute of Corrections and the National Resource Center on Justice-involved

Women (see Appendix A).

Make outcome matter - The initial pilot of the model included a research evaluation component. 

We strongly encourage each additional site to continue this practice in order to monitor 

outcomes as evidence of progress and to provide a record of accomplishments by the partner 

agencies. In several sites this helped to secure additional funding and became a strong incentive 

for other partner agencies to join the collaborative effort.

Forming agency partnerships requires time and financial resources (conference rooms, food and 

drinks, print materials, etc.) that can be taxing for the host agency. We encourage agencies to 

seek technical assistance, local or community grants, and/or to off-set costs by hosting an 

annual conference with registration fees. Despite the challenges associated with coordinating 

this process, we consistently hear about the benefits. Overwhelmingly, women and team 

members report more immediate access to services and an increase in available options. 

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, we hear about the impact of collaboration (e.g., shared 

responsibility, shared concern, decreased isolation, and increased understanding of this 

marginalized population).

D: Monitoring Fidelity and Outcomes

Critical to the success of this project is the need to ensure that team members adhere to the

principles and practices of the model and that it have the intended impact. In this section we

provide a snapshot of the quality assurance activities and evaluation methods used to support

the model.

Quality Assurance:

The pilot nature of this project necessitated a clearly articulated method to ensure that the model 

was delivered with fidelity. We began with a clear statement of the work that had to be done 

(e.g., tasks to be performed at each stage of the model) and then we defined the skill and 

competencies that staff need to be successful. 

A series of tools to support continuous quality improvement efforts are listed in Table 4.4 and 

then described in more detail below.
39

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Table 4.4: CCW-W Fidelity Measures for Trainers, Supervisors and Staff

Measure Frequency of 

Administration

Administrator

1 CCW-W Process Evaluation 

Tool

Annually Quality Assurance Specialist 

or External Evaluators

2 Team Conferencing 

Feedback Form

Biannually or as needed Team Leader

3 Team Conferencing 

Observation Tool

Annually Quality Assurance Specialist 

or External Evaluators

4 CCW-W Integrity 

Observation Tool

Continue until core 

competency ratings are 

high and then continue 

on a bi-annual basis

Supervisor, Quality 

Assurance Specialist or 

External Evaluators

5

CCW-W Self-Assessment and 

Personal Goals: 

Staff are encouraged to 

complete the form and 

to set personal goals 

that are reviewed on a 

quarterly basis. 

Supervisor

6 Client Satisfaction Form

(Facility Version)

Each woman to 

complete as they 

transfer to the 

community

Team Leader/Case Manger 

submits completed forms to

Quality Assurance Specialist

7 Client Satisfaction Form

(Community Version)

Each woman to 

complete every three 

months and at case 

closure

Team Leader submits 

completed forms to Quality 

Assurance Specialist

Description of Measures

CCW-W Process Evaluation Tool: This is a fairly comprehensive survey, which provides a 

general indication of how closely the agency adheres to the guiding practices and principles of 

CCW-W. Ideally this should be completed by a team (minimum of two people) who are external 

to the agency and have been trained in CCW-W. However, professionals involved with CCW-W

to ensure fidelity to the model could also complete it on an annual basis. The various areas 

explored include:

A. Organizational Support

B. Assessment

C. Team Approach

D. Individualized Case Plan

E. Use of Gender-Responsive Practices

F. Quality Assurance and Model Integrity 

G. CCW-W Evaluation

H. Agency Partnerships
40

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Team Conferencing Feedback Form: This is a one-page paper and pencil form that should be 

completed in confidence by each member of the team at designated intervals throughout the 

year. The form is designed to determine if all members of the team feel safe and respected and 

can help to ensure that the team is functioning well. Participants should insert the name of the 

Team Facilitator and the date. Once the forms are completed they should be gathered and 

placed into an envelope for review by the quality assurance specialist for the district. The 

specialist will then summarize and provide feedback to the facilitator and the team and assist 

them to develop goals to enhance team cohesion and functioning. Each team is encouraged to 

complete a feedback form at least twice per year.

Team Conferencing Observation Tool: This is a two-page paper and pencil form. Ideally the 

checklist should be completed by quality assurance specialists identified by the agency and/or 

supervisors who have been trained in CCW-W. The form provides a general indication of team 

process (activities completed before, during and after the team meeting) as well as adherence 

by team members to a gender-responsive/relational approach. We strongly recommend that 

the observation checklist be completed twice per year for each professional responsible for 

facilitating the CCW-W teams. A sample questionnaire used to assess the efficacy of team 

conferencing during the WOCMM pilot is presented in Appendix G. 

CCW-W Integrity Rating Form: This form is used to code 1:1 interactions between staff and 

clients. Ratings are provided with respect to: (1) approach used; (2) skills demonstrated; (3) 

tasks completed; and, (4) a global rating indicating overall adherence to the CCW-W model.

During the pilot stages of WOCMM, staff were reluctant to provide audio tapes of their work. 

We were able to overcome this reaction by ensuring that all feedback was strengths-based and 

by providing staff with access to supervision and opportunities for professional development.

CCW-W Self-Assessment and Personal Goals: One month after completing the formal training, 

individual team members are asked to complete a self-assessment checklist. This provides them 

with the opportunity to review each of the core competencies and skills essential to the delivery 

of CCW-W and to rate their personal strengths. After completing the form they are encouraged 

to develop professional goals that are reviewed and updated with a supervisor on a quarterly 

basis. For the most part, supervisors working with team members assume responsibility for 

facilitating this process however, in settings where clinical supervision is not available a team 

member may be identified by the individual staff to provide peer support. 

Client Satisfaction Form (Facility Version): This is a two-page paper and pencil questionnaire 

that is completed by all women as they transition from the facility to the community. This form 

is designed to elicit feedback regarding the case work process, the various resources accessed 

and the client’s perception of the quality of intervention received from each team member. 

Client Satisfaction Form (Community Version): This is a two-page paper and pencil 

questionnaire that is given to all women at case closure. This form is designed to elicit feedback 

regarding the case work process, the various resources accessed and the client’s perception of 

the quality of intervention received from each team member.
41

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Process and Outcome Evaluation

One of the most powerful activities conducted during the pilot of the model was a process 

evaluation. Women and agency staff involved with CCW-W (WOCMM) and a cadre of staff who

had not participated in the project were invited to participate in focus groups and interviews 

(Millson et al., 2009). The information gathered during this evaluation helped us to identify 

situational and more enduring challenges faced by staff implementing the model and helped to 

generate many of the solutions to overcome them. It also provided us with narrative feedback 

in support of individual staff efforts and more global practices. 

The process evaluation suggested that CCW-W was a promising practice. However, the formal 

evaluation of the model established who benefitted most and the relative impact of using this 

model. A quasi-experimental design was used in the initial pilot to compare the effectiveness of 

CCW-W against probation delivered as usual. Objective outcomes included measurable 

improvements in client progress (e.g., fewer new offenses, arrests, probation/parole violations, 

institutional misconducts; reductions in dynamic risk; increases in protective factors, quality of 

supports, use of adaptive personal strategies, client satisfaction, etc.), staff attitudes and 

performance (e.g., completion of individualized case plans reflective of client needs; use of 

gender-responsive interventions and practices; increase in professional satisfaction, etc.) and 

agency partnerships (e.g., increase in formal relationships with other agencies serving women ). 

We also included a subjective outcome to assess team effectiveness (e.g., each member’s 

perceptions of their team’s effectiveness). A logic model developed for CCW-W is presented in 

Appendix H. 
42

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Chapter 5: Preliminary Findings of the CCW-W model

Study #1: 

Robinson, D., Van Dieten, M., Millson, B., (Spring, 2012). Women Offender Case Management 

Model in the State of Connecticut. Journal of Community Corrections. Civic Research Institute.

This was a four-year pilot project involving medium and high-risk women as determined by the 

Level of Service Inventory-Revised. It involved women on probation who were supervised in four 

large urban settings in the state of Connecticut. Training was provided to teams delivering 

WOCMM in gender-responsive strategies (strengths-based, relational, trauma-informed) and 

complementary evidence-based practices (motivational interviewing, cognitive-behavioral 

skills). WOCMM group matched with non-WOCMM control group on LSI-R results, legal history, 

and other demographics. The WOCMM group was found to be significantly less likely to 

reoffend or to receive technical violations than women receiving probation as usual. Within a 

12-month period, while 42.5% of matched control group members were arrested for a new 

offense, only 31.5% of WOCMM participants were arrested for a new offense.

Study #2:

WOCMM (State of Connecticut Judicial Branch/Court Services Division Unpublished Report 

(2013)

As of 2013, recidivism rates of WOCMM participants compared with recidivism rates of women 

who received treatment-as-usual, are displayed in the graph below. 

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

6 months

12 months

24 months

Recidivism Rates: State of Connecticut 2013

Comparison Group CCW-W (WOCMM) participants
43

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Study #3:

WOCMM (Iowa Department of Human Rights Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning 

Statistical Analysis Center (2013). Short-Term Outcome Evaluation of the Women Offender Case 

Management Model – WOCMM. 

At one- and two-year intervals, women who successfully completed WOCMM (aka CCW-W) 

were “significantly less likely to be admitted to prison that the comparison group.” At two years, 

women who successfully completed WOCMM (CCW-W) had lower conviction rates and lower 

new indictable conviction rates than those in the comparison group demonstrated. Detailed 

findings are provided in the graphs below.

31.5

23.9

4.7

20.8

16.7

2.1

NEW CONVICTIONS NEW INDICTABLE 

CONVICTIONS

NEW FELONY 

CONVICTIONS

Conviction Rate (in %)

One-Year Recidivism Conviction Rates (in %)

Treatment-as-Usual participants CCW-W (WOCMM) Participants

45.2

37.5

28.1 28.1

NEW CONVICTIONS NEW INDICTABLE 

CONVICTIONS

Recidivism Rates (in %)

Two-Year Recidivism Rates

Treatment-as-Usual Participants CCW-W (WOCMM) participants
44

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Chapter 6: Lessons Learned and Revisited

Despite the excitement and promise of the initial outcome results, the successful 

implementation of CCW-W requires a strong commitment to deliver gender-responsive 

interventions and services. In this segment we would like to revisit some of the invaluable 

lessons learned throughout this process. 

‘Fixer’ versus ‘Guide’

One of the greatest challenges we faced in implementing CCW-W was to move staff from the 

role of “fixer” to “guide”.

Picture a woman entering your office in crisis. She has just informed you that she has been 

locked out of her apartment and that she and her children (aged 4, 6, and 9) will be forced to 

spend the night on the street unless she can find shelter. It would be difficult to imagine anyone 

unwilling to help remedy this situation. How that help is delivered lies at the essence of a 

gender-responsive approach. Some staff are tempted to jump in and rescue” her and this might 

look like making phone calls, looking up services, and calling in favors from agency partners. In 

contrast another staff might talk with her in order to elicit information about available social 

supports; services she has used in the past to address a similar crisis; and how she wants to 

handle this situation.

The latter response can be difficult to assume when we are reacting to a crisis. However, it 

honors the woman as the “expert” in her own life and it gives her the opportunity to solve the 

problem without being rescued. Staff are there to support her and remind her that she has the 

competence and the resources to address the crisis and to assist her in deciding the best course 

of action.

To shift staff away from being a “fixer” requires considerable training and coaching, however, 

once they see that they are taking away her opportunity to succeed we usually find more 

mindful interactions.

Boundaries

We were consistently inspired by the compassion and dedication displayed by the staff who were 

responsible for bringing CCW-W to fruition. Some of the professionals we met had been formally 

trained to manage risk and hold women accountable. They were concerned that the 

implementation of a gender-responsive approach that emphasized strengths and relationshipbuilding would compromise their ability to work effectively and misconstrued by others as 

inappropriate or over-familiar. 

Other staff worked tirelessly to address the needs of women and some had difficulty holding 

clients accountable for noncompliant behavior. For example, some staff indicated that the 

investment in working with the women is considerable and filing a violation for non-compliance 

(or even committing a new offense) often felt like ‘giving-up’ and seemed inconsistent with a 

gender-responsive approach. 
45

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

In order for women to feel safe and to fully benefit from CCW-W we believe that an integrated 

approach which supports the need for both accountability and support is essential. This practice 

is introduced during training and must be consistently reinforced during coaching and 

supervision activities. 

On Being Nice...

One of the fallacies that surrounds the “gender-responsive movement” is the misbelief that if 

you are nice then you are gender-responsive. We take no great issue with being nice. In fact, it 

is our experience that individuals who are nice are far more likely to have friends and to be 

invited to social events. However, nice is not enough to impact the lives of justice-involved

women and unfortunately staff who are too nice can struggle with maintaining professional 

boundaries. This became evident with staff who felt that they should never hold women 

accountable for fear that they would jeopardize the professional relationship. Additionally, 

some staff had strong relationship skills but did not have the ability to direct and structure the 

work in a way that supported the women in moving forward (i.e., they were likable, but not 

necessarily helpful). 

King (2014) created an innovative method to train staff in the intricacies of adhering to a 

gender-responsive approach by differentiating between three different interaction styles: (1) 

apathy (i.e., “I don’t care if she’s been through trauma, a violation is a violation”); (2) sympathy 

(i.e.,” I feel so bad about her past trauma, I am going to let this one slip because I know she was 

just self-medicating”), (3) empathy (i.e., “I can see how using felt like a compelling option to her 

when she was triggered and I am going to explore the best way to hold her accountable while 

also building her capacity to make a different choice in the future”). Most staff engage in all 

three of these behaviors but tend to rely on one approach more than others. With training they 

become more mindful of monitoring their own behavior and the importance once again of using 

the integrated approach described above. 

Transitioning from CCW-W

An unanticipated challenge that emerged during the pilot of the model occurred with respect to 

applying the risk principle. Recall from previous discussions that the risk principle states that 

intensive services should be reserved for higher risk cases. During the pilot stages of the project 

we were careful to select only women assessed as moderate to high risk and approximately 95% 

of the sample met these criteria. Consistent with the risk principle, we discovered that women 

at greatest risk benefited most from CCW-W (Millson, Robinson & Van Dieten, 2011). However, 

screening for entry into the program was not the problem. The dilemma emerged when 

attempts were made to reduce the frequency of contacts and intensity of interventions with 

women who had stabilized and were doing well (i.e., as evidenced by reductions in dynamic risk 

and need). We assumed the women would be eager to move on and away from participating in 

CCW-W. Given the quality of the professional relationships made with the team (e.g., safe, 

trusting, supportive), we should not have been surprised when a significant number of women 

were eager to maintain contact and continue to report-in on a regular basis. 
46

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

In the late 90’s Rebecca Maniglia (1996) wrote about the powerful role of relationships in the 

lives of justice-involved girls. She posed the question “why would a relational individual want to 

move toward independent living?” (p.98). So we reframed this question slightly and asked 

ourselves – “why would a woman who had made real change through these non-exploitative 

relationships with healthy, caring, supportive and competent individuals wish to sever all ties.”

When we started to answer this question we realized three things: (1) for many women, moving 

away from the team toward independence and self-sufficiency is not desirable. In fact, unless 

women are moving toward other safe and healthy connections then we have effectively 

negated the value of establishing networks and support systems; (2) before women are able to 

transition from CCW-W we need to ensure that the quality of connections with mainstream 

services, and natural supports is strong, that she can maintain them on her own and/or that she 

is comfortable accessing new services as needed; and (3) a promising strategy that can be put 

into place at warrant expiry or the end of supervision is a mentoring program for women. We 

have found this particularly helpful for women who are isolated from family and friends, who 

have limited interpersonal skills, and require support as they stabilize in the community.

Resources

A concern voiced by many professionals during the early stages of implementation emerged in 

response to the availability of program options and services. More than one participant 

suggested that the lack of available resources called into question the validity and usefulness of 

starting CCW-W. To dispel this myth quickly, it was critical to demonstrate that formal 

resources are only one possible option among many and that the availability of services can be 

cultivated over time. 

A second challenge concerned the persistent lack of necessary services. These included housing, 

childcare, employment and financial resources, which were most often noted as continually in 

need. Moreover, when services were available, required paperwork and limited funding rules 

could still hamper access to some services. 

Staff Resilience

Throughout the CCW-W process, team members are exposed to the lives and personal histories 

of the women on their caseload which entailed bearing witnessing to moments of tremendous 

pain. For a number of staff, reports of fatigue, nightmares, increased stress and irritability 

became common and we were fortunate that the implementation team in Connecticut was 

insightful enough to identify the signs of vicarious trauma and to respond accordingly. The 

impact of vicarious or secondary trauma has been studied for decades however, it is only 

recently that intervention practices have been made available to staff working in high-risk 

settings. NIC has recently developed a series of training tools designed to increase awareness 

across settings and to provide staff with tools to cope more effectively with vicarious trauma 

(See for example, NIC e-learning training: Building Individual and Organizational Resilience 

https://nic.learn.com).
47

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Some Final Comments

The implementation of CCW-W with justice-involved women and the individuals and agencies 

who serve them was an exciting opportunity for us. In many ways this project served to 

replicate lessons learned from evidence-based research:

• Provide services that are attentive to risk level (reserve intensive interventions like 

CCW-W for higher risk cases) and address individual needs to mobilize and build 

strengths.

• Work collaboratively within a multidisciplinary and cohesive team that shares a similar 

mission and vision.

• Ensure continuity in services as much as possible to preserve the integrity of 

intervention and to establish the context for healthy, supportive, connections.

• Work intentionally to build agency partnerships that share responsibility for enhancing 

the lives of women and their families.

• Provide services that are holistic and comprehensive.

• Monitor how the services are delivered by staff and how each woman is responding to 

them.

• Evaluate outcomes to determine if the services you are providing are having the 

intended impact.

We also feel confident that the guiding principles and practices that evolved through the 

implementation of this approach provided a promising alternative to traditional gender-neutral 

practices:

• We demonstrated that the use of a gender-responsive assessment contributed to 

enhanced predictive accuracy and more importantly guided our case work efforts to 

focus on needs that are relevant to women.

• The use of a gender-responsive approach (e.g., trauma-informed, relational, strengthsbased and culturally competent) helped us to develop a language and framework for 

professionals to work intentionally to achieve the desired outcomes. 

• The use of a gender-responsive approach shifts the culture of the organization from an 

emphasis on risk management to a more integrated practice that values accountability 

and support.

• The use of a gender-responsive approach inspired the development of innovative 

practices (e.g., staff resiliency training, mentoring, peer support, and other desirable 

outcomes for staff.).
48

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

The implementation of CCW-W provided new options and opportunities for agencies which are 

interested in enhancing outcomes with women, building staff competencies, and expanding 

connections with partner agencies:

• The development of resources to train, coach and supervise staff working with justiceinvolved women.

• The development of quality assurance methods and an evaluation framework.

• The development of a train-the-trainer model and national training initiative.

In conclusion, the implementation of CCW-W demonstrated a significant impact on reducing 

recidivism and we are hopeful that it will continue to impact the lives of the women and staff 

who are involved in this process.
49

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

References

Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). Rehabilitating criminal justice policy and practice. 

Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 16, 39-55. doi:10.1037/a0018362

Benedict, A. (2006). Gender-specific programming for females: Translating research into 

action. Unpublished training curriculum. Available from http://coreassociates.net.

Blanchette, K., & Brown, S. L. (2006). The assessment and treatment of women 

offenders: An integrated perspective. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley.

Bloom, B., Owen, B., & Covington, S. (2003). Gender-responsive strategies: Research 

practice and guiding principles for women offenders. Washington, DC. National Institute 

of Corrections, U.S. Department of Justice. (NIC Publication No. 018017). 

Blow, A., Timm, T., & Cox, R. (2008). The role of the therapist in therapeutic change: 

Does therapist gender matter? Journal of Feminist Family Therapy, 20(1). doi: 

10.1080/0895280801907150.

Bonta, J., Bourgon, G., Rugge, T., Scott, T., Yessine, A., Gutierrez, L., & Li, J. (2011). An 

experimental demonstration of training probation officers in evidence-based 

community supervision. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38(11), 1127-1148. doi: 

10.117/0093854811420678.

Cernkovich, S. A., Lanctot, N., & Giordano, P. C. (2008). Predicting adolescent and adult 

antisocial behavior among adjudicated delinquent females. Crime & Delinquency, 54, 3-

33. doi:10.1177/0011128706294395.

Coldwell, C. M., & Bender, W. S. (2007). The effectiveness of assertive community 

treatment for homeless populations with severe mental illness: A meta-analysis. 

American Journal of Psychiatry, 164, 393-399.

De Shazer, S., & Dolan, Y. (2007). More than miracles: The state of the art of solutionfocused brief therapy paperback. Binghampton, NY: Haworth Press

Farsimadan, F., Draghi-Lorenz, R., & Ellis, J. (2007). Process and outcome of therapy in 

ethnically similar and dissimilar therapeutic dyads. Psychotherapy Research, September, 

17(5), 567-575
50

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Gurung, R. A. R. (2006). "Coping and Social Support". Health psychology: A cultural 

approach. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth. pp. 131–171.

Hardyman, P. L., & Van Voorhis, P. (2004). Developing gender-specific classification 

systems for women offenders. Washington, DC: National Institute of Corrections.

Hartman, A. (1995). Diagrammatic assessment of family relationships. Families in 

Society, 76(2), 111-122.

Jones, N. J. (2011). Merging theoretical frameworks to inform risk assessment for the 

young female offender (Doctoral dissertation, Carleton University).

Johnson, L., & Caldwell, J. (2011). Race, gender, and therapist confidence: Effects on 

satisfaction with the therapeutic relationship in MFT. The American Journal of Family 

Therapy, 39, 307–324. doi:10.1080/01926187.2010.532012.

King, E. (2014). Maintaining professional boundaries. In Alyssa Benedict, Erica King and 

Marilyn Van Dieten: Creating regulation and resiliency in your work with justice involved 

women. Ottawa, Canada: Orbis Partners.

Kirshner, L. (1978). Effects of gender on psychotherapy. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 

19(1), 79-82.

Lakey, B., & Cronin, A. (2008). "Low social support and major depression: Research, 

theory, and methodological issues". In Dobson, K.S., & D. Dozois. Risk factors for 

depression. Academic Press. pp. 385–408.

Lemieux-Charles, L., & McGuire, W. L. (2006). What do we know about health care team 

effectiveness? A review of the literature. Medical Care Research and Review, 63(3), 263-

300.

Longres, J. F. (1990). Toward a status model of ethnic sensitive practice. Journal of 

Multicultural Social Work, 1(1), 41-56.

Maniglia, R. (1996). New directions for young women in the juvenile justice system. 

Reclaiming Children and Youth, 5(2), 96-101.

Maruna, S. (2001). Making Good: How ex-convicts reform and rebuild their lives. 

Washington: DC, American Psychological Association.

McNeill, F., & Maruna, S. (2007). Giving up and giving back: Desistance, generavity and 

social work with offenders. Research Highlights in Social Work, 48, 224-239. 
51

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Miller, W. R., & Rollnick, S. (2012). Motivational interviewing, (3rd ed.). Helping people 

change. New York: Guilford Press.

Miller, J. B., & Stiver, I. P. (1997). The healing connection: How women form 

relationships in therapy and in life. Boston: Beacon Press.

Millson, B., Robinson, D., & Van Dieten, M. (2010). The Women Offender Case 

Management Model: Outcome Evaluation of the Connecticut Project. National Institute 

of Corrections. Accession Number 018017

Millson, B., Robinson, D., Rubin, M., & Van Dieten, M. (2009). A Process Evaluation of 

The Women Offender Case Management Model, Implemented By The State of 

Connecticut Judicial Branch/ Court Support Services Division. Unpublished report 

available through the National Institute of Corrections.

Center for Effective Public Policy (2010). Gender-Informed Practice Assessment (GIPA).

Washington, DC: National Institute of Corrections, U.S. Department of

Justice.

Najavits, L. M. (2000). Training clinicians to conduct the Seeking Safety treatment for 

PTSD and substance abuse. Alcoholism Treatment Quarterly, 18, 83-98.

Ney, B., Ramirez, R., & Van Dieten, M. (2012). The 10 truths that matter when working 

with justice involved women. National Resource Center on Justice Involved Women.

Olson, D. E., Alderden, M., & Lurigio, A. (2003). Men are from Mars, women are from 

Venus, but what role does gender play in probation recidivism? Justice Research and 

Policy, 5(2), 33-54. 

Partridge, S. (2004). Examining case management models for community sentences. 

Home Office.

Presnell, A., Harris, G., & Scogin, F. (2012). Therapist and client race/ethnicity match: An 

examination of treatment outcome and process with rural older adults in the deep 

south. Psychotherapy Research, 22(4), 458-463.

Millson, B., Robinson, D., & Van Dieten, M. (2010). Women Offender Case Management 

Model outcome evaluation. Washington DC: NIC, Accession Number 018017. 

Rabey, S. & Stageberg, P. (2013). Short-Term Outcome Evaluation of the Women 

Offender Case Management Model – WOCMM. Unpublished Document. Iowa 
52

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Department of Human Rights Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning 

Statistical Analysis Center.

Robinson, D., Van Dieten, M., & Millson, B. (2012). The women offender case 

management model in the state of Connecticut. Journal of Community Corrections: Civic 

Research Institute, Spring Edition, 7-25.

Salisbury, E. J., & Van Voorhis, P. (2009). Gendered pathways: A quantitative 

investigation of women probationers’ paths to incarceration. Criminal Justice and 

Behavior, 36, 541-566. doi:10.1177/0093854809334076.

Sherer, M., & Maddux, J. E. (1982). The Self-Efficacy Scale: Construction and validation. 

Psychological Reports, 51(2), 663-671.

Sorbello, L., Eccleston, L., Ward, T., & Jones, R. (2002). Treatment needs of female 

offenders: A review. Australian Psychologist, 37(3), 198-205.

Stein, L. I., & Test, M. A. (1980). Alternative to mental hospital treatment, 1: conceptual 

model, treatment program, and clinical evaluation. Archive of General Psychiatry, 37, 

392-397.

Tamres, L., Janicki, D., & Helgeson, V. S. (2002). "Sex differences in coping behavior: A 

meta-analytic review". Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 2–30. 

doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0601.

Taylor, S. E. (2011). "Social support: A review". In M.S. Friedman. The Handbook of 

Health Psychology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. pp. 189–214.

Taylor, S. E., Klein, L. C., Lewis, B. P., Gruenewald, T. L., Gurung, R. A. R., & Updegraff, J.

A. (2000). Biobehavioral responses to stress in females: Tend-and-befriend, not fight-orflight. Psychological Review, 107, 411–429. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.107.3.41

Trotter, C. (2006). Working with involuntary clients: A guide to practice (2nd ed.). Crows 

Nest, Australia: Allen and Unwin.

Uchino, B. (2009). "Understanding the links between social support and physical health: 

A life-span perspective with emphasis on the separability of perceived and received 

support”. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 236–255. doi:10.1111/j.1745-

6924.2009.01122.
53

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Uchino, B. (2006). "Social support and health: A review of physiological processes 

potentially underlying links to disease outcomes". Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 29, 

377–387. doi:10.1007/s10865-006-9056-5

Van Dieten, M. (2012). Training and coaching resources to support the effective 

implementation of collaborative case work. Ottawa: Orbis Partners Inc.

Van Dieten, M., Cox, S., Nowakowski, E., McIrvin, K., King, E., & Mc Donald, P. (2013). 

Not just reducing recidivism...Gender-responsive practices contribute to system-wide 

transformation. Paper presented at the Adult and Juvenile Female Offender Conference. 

Available from Orbis Partners Inc.

Van Voorhis, P. (2012). On behalf of women offenders: Women’s place in the science of 

evidence-based practice. Vollmer Award Address. Criminology and Public Policy 11 (2), 

p.111-145. doi:10.1111/j.1745-9133.2012.00793.x.

Van Voorhis, P., Wright, E. M., Salisbury, E. J., & Bauman, A. (2010). Women’s risk 

factors and their contributions to existing risk/needs assessment: The current status of a 

gender responsive supplement. Criminal Justice & Behavior, 37(3), 261-288.

Werner, E., & Smith, R. (1992). Overcoming the Odds: High-risk children from birth to 

adulthood. New York: Cornell University Press.

Wintersteen, M., Mensinger, G., & Diamond, G. (2005). Do gender and racial differences 

between patient and therapist affect therapeutic alliance and treatment retention in 

adolescents? Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 36(4), 400–408. doi: 

10.1037/0735-7028.36.4.400

Ziguras, S. J., & Lyle Stewart, G. W. (2000). A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of 

mental health case management over 20 years. Psychiatric Services, 51, 1410-1421.
54

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Appendix A: Supplemental Information and Resources

Technical Assistance:

National Resource Center on Justice Involved Women

http://www.cjinvolvedwomen.org/

National Institute of Corrections

http://nicic.gov/

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

http://www.samhsa.gov/ 

Other Websites for Information:

Correctional Service of Canada (publications and resources with respect to women 

offenders)

http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/index-eng.shtml

Orbis Partners Inc. 

http://orbispartners.com/assessment/gender-responsive-spin-w/

http://orbispartners.com/programs/cr2/

University of Cincinnati- Women’s Research

http://www.uc.edu/womenoffenders.html
55

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Appendix B: Standardized Assessment Tools

Women’s Risk Need Assessment – WRNA and WRNA-T

In 2008, the National Institute of Corrections in cooperation with the University of Cincinnati 

announced the availability of a series of new risk/need assessments for adult, women offenders. 

The assessments include: 1) a full instrument, The Women’s Risk/Needs Assessment (WRNA), 

which assesses both gender-neutral and gender-responsive factors and affords separate forms 

for probation, prison, and pre-release; and 2) the Women’s Risk/Needs Assessment - Trailer 

(WRNA-T) which is designed to supplement existing risk/needs assessments such as the Level of 

Service Inventory - Revised or the Northpointe COMPAS. The WRNA-T is also available in 

separate forms for probation, prison, and pre-release populations.

The NIC/UC project built from two perspectives on offender rehabilitation: 1) research by 

Canadian scholars Donald Andrews, James Bonta, Paul Gendreau and others, which stresses the 

importance of treating dynamic risk factors; and 2) work by feminist criminologists (for example, 

Kathleen Daly, Meda Chesney-Lind, Barbara Bloom, Barbara Owen, and Stephanie Covington, 

stressing the importance of women’s unique “pathways to crime.”) Both paradigms stress the 

importance of programming for dynamic risk factors. However, the pathways model asserts that 

women’s unique needs are not adequately tapped by currently used risk/needs assessments. In 

response, the new women’s assessments identify such needs as: 1) trauma and abuse; 2) 

unhealthy relationships; 3) parental stress; 4) depression; 5) self-efficacy, and 6) current mental 

health symptoms.

The instruments were developed following extensive literature searches and focus groups with 

correctional administrators, treatment practitioners, line staff, and female offenders. The full, 

Women’s Risk/Needs Assessment and many of the questions now included in the WRNA-T 

(trailer) assessment, were developed by members of a women’s task force in the Missouri 

Department of Corrections in collaboration with researchers at the University of Cincinnati.

In 2009, UC and NIC entered into another cooperative agreement. Since the earlier assessments 

were created through construction validation, a key goal of this study was to revalidate the 

original versions on new samples of offenders to determine the level of shrinkage in predictive 

validity from the construction to revalidation studies. Additionally, this new study sought to 

refine several of the dynamic risk/needs scales in order to further improve predictive validity. In 

doing so, this research tested a number of new items that allowed for the exploration of their 

potential contributions to a revised assessment. In 2014, this research project was completed 

and new versions of the standalone and trailer assessments were released for use.

Service Planning Instrument for Women: SPIn-W

The Service Planning Instrument for Women (SPIn-W) is a 100-item tool for assessing risk, need 

and strengths in women offender populations. SPIn-W is suitable for use in probation, parole, 

custody and other correctional settings where there is a requirement to assess risk of recidivism 

and identify service needs. The SPIn-W includes an abbreviated 35-item “Pre-Screening” version 

used for making initial decisions about supervision levels. The longer “full assessment” version 

is used for case planning purposes. Based on a variety of assessment sources, SPIn-W provides a 
56

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

template for entering assessment information that has been collected by parole and probation 

officers, classification officers, case managers or other service practitioners. SPIn-W is designed 

to address need and responsivity issues that are particularly relevant for developing case plans 

for women. 

While the content of the tool overlaps with traditional risk/need assessment protocols for 

general populations of male and female offenders, the SPIn-W includes content that is essential 

to work effectively with justice-involved women. For example, there are a number of items 

related to child custody and parenting issues, domestic violence, childhood abuse and neglect, 

mental health, social support, and community living. Items in assessment domains related to 

attitudes, aggression, emotional regulation, interpersonal skills, and cognitive skills have been 

tailored to take into account how these areas of risk are manifested in female offender 

populations.

The full assessment SPIn-W is comprised of the following domains:

▪ Criminal History (previous offenses and dispositions)

▪ Response to Supervision (performance under criminal justice supervision in the past, 

e.g., violations)

▪ Family and Children (marital problems/satisfaction, relationships with children, 

parenting, custody, family of origin)

▪ Social Network (positive and negative social influences, community participation)

▪ Substance Use (frequency of use, severity of problems)

▪ Vocational/Employment (employment/vocational service needs, employment stability)

▪ Attitudes (anti- and pro-social attitudes)

▪ Social/Cognitive Skills (interpersonal, problem-solving skills)

▪ Mental Health (mental health conditions, previous abuse)

▪ Violence (history of violence, anger/hostility)

▪ Community Living (accommodation, finances, access to resources)

In addition to the gender responsive content of SPIn-W domains, the inclusion of protective 

factors or strengths is a key element of innovation in this assessment model. Most dynamic 

domains (e.g., family and children, social networks, etc.) includes strength or protective factor 

content. Strengths are measured at the item level using behavioral or attitudinal referents. Both 

domain and overall level scoring is available for strengths. Hence, on reassessment,

practitioners monitor for decreases/increases in both risk and strengths. Highly intuitive for 

case managers, the assessment of protective factors focuses case plans to capitalize on 

strengths and helps develop resources for success. The incorporation of strengths grounds the 

model in a case planning process that is mobilizing for both the women offenders and the 

professionals who must develop and monitor case plans. As such, the assessment tool helps 

move the practitioner toward a strength-based model of case planning and supervision that 

blends well with motivational interviewing methods. 

Motivational components have also been included in the assessment model. At the domain 

level, assessment users are invited to consider the level of motivation indicated by a woman to 

address a specific need. The inclusion of motivational content in each domain (which is not 

scored as risk) keeps the case manager focused on the case planning intent of the instrument. 
57

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

By focusing on motivational factors (e.g., personal incentives for change) within the assessment, 

the case manager prepares for the work of debriefing with the woman and fully engaging her in 

the case planning process. In addition to motivational items, the domains also include items 

that help users review the resources (natural supports and professional services) that the 

woman can draw upon to reduce risk and increase or maintain strengths.

The SPIn-W is conducted using web-based software (CaseWorks) whereby the users enter 

information and generate results through a browser. The software is easy to use and includes 

both assessment and case planning components. The results are shown in a graphic format that 

displays both risk and protective factor scores on a wheel diagram. The interactive wheel 

diagram is then used as the starting point for the case planning process. The software provides 

a step-by-step guided process to prioritize the targets of intervention and to set goals and action 

steps. 

Training in SPIn-W and case management is offered through a formal training process or 

through an e-training course. Coaching and refresher training is also available to support 

competency and skill development.

The assessment, case planning, e-training and software application used with SPIn-W is available 

from Orbis Partners Inc. (www.orbispartners.com).
58

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Appendix C: Menu of Adaptive Strategies

A series of skill-building worksheets were developed to assist team members to introduce and

help women develop a series of adaptive strategies to address the impact of trauma and 

prevent criminal justice-involvement. 

Skills to Build Social Competence:

▪ Empathy

▪ Active Listening

▪ Assertiveness Skill Steps

▪ Saying No

▪ Defusing Anger

▪ Receiving Criticism

▪ Giving Feedback

▪ Problem Solving

▪ Decision Making

Skills for Emotional Regulation:

▪ Identify and Label Feelings 

▪ Identifying Harmful Self-Talk

▪ Stress Reduction Activities

▪ Mindfulness Techniques

o Abdominal Breathing

o Emotional SOS

o Peaceful Scene Visualization

o Passive Muscle Relaxation

o 8 Self-Soothing Activities

Building Healthy Relationships:

▪ Exploring the nature and dynamics of intimate partner relationships

▪ Relationship patterns and goals

▪ Safety planning

▪ Resources
59

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

Appendix D: The Implementation Process

Step 1: Establish an Implementation Committee

As we introduced the first pilot of WOCMM in Connecticut we quickly realized that successful 

implementation would require a strong commitment from an executive team and the professionals 

who work directly with women.

Identify members of the committee. Include executive staff members with formal authority and a 

diagonal slice of staff with project management, development, research, and operational experience. 

Begin to draft an implementation plan that addresses the structural components of CCW-W: Plan 

logistics, deliverables, time frames and training dates.

Staffing and Collaborative Teams 

▪ Determine the number of CCW-W staff positions

▪ Establish caseload sizes for CCW-W staff

▪ Begin to identify core team members

▪ Review performance outcomes 

Agency Partnerships

▪ List anticipated service needs and resources

▪ Identify community agencies and potential partners

Client Selection

▪ Formalize Eligibility Criteria for Participation in CCW-W

o Include women who are considered moderate or high risk for future justice 

involvement

o Facility setting: Begin to introduce CCW-W at intake and then continue through the 

re-entry process.

o Community setting: Continue with women re-integrating from the community or 

women who have a probation/parole term that exceeds one year or more.

▪ Select a gender-responsive assessment

▪ Outline the referral process

▪ Establish exit criteria

Outcome Evaluation

▪ Identify intermediate and long-term outcomes

▪ Establish data collection methods

Step 2: Build Inter-Agency Support

Following the initial planning meetings, the implementation team is encouraged to introduce 

managers and supervisors to CCW-W. 
60

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

▪ Review national and statewide data related to justice-involved women (e.g., demographic 

information, current recidivism and status outcomes (e.g., violations; arrests; etc.).

▪ Provide an orientation to CCW-W and review draft implementation plan.

▪ Enlist support from the management team to deliver CCW-W.

▪ Address the implications of delivering CCW-W (e.g., need to redistribute clients to an allfemale case load; reduce caseload sizes, etc.)

▪ Begin to consolidate the Implementation Plan

Step 3: Prepare for Training

Prior to selecting the training modules, conduct a gap analysis. The gap analysis can help to determine 

training needs, existing strengths and to establish the length and intensity of specific modules. At the 

core of this analysis are two questions: "Where are staff now?" and "Where do we want them to be?" 

Begin by assessing21:

▪ Current State: Identify strengths (e.g., previous training, current experience, professional 

credentials) and any resources that the agency will need to be successful in implementing 

CCW-W.

▪ Review the desired outcomes for CCW-W and the tasks that need to be completed to 

address those outcomes. 

▪ Determine what staff skills and proficiencies are necessary to bridge the gap between 

current and desired states. 

▪ Develop the training schedule.

Step 4: Build Agency Capacity 

A critical outcome of the initial model pilot was to help agencies mobilize and build sufficient capacity 

within so that they can assume responsibility for ongoing training, coaching and continuous quality 

improvement activities.

Recommendations for Selecting Trainers

▪ Voluntary participation

▪ Past experience as a trainer/facilitator or a strong interest in developing platform skills

▪ Strong belief and interest in working with line staff to apply gender-responsive practices

▪ Interest in enhancing proficiencies as a trainer, supervisor, correctional professional 

▪ Willingness to complete the certification process

Certification Process [Modified in accordance with the competencies of the trainer 

candidates]

 

21 A series of tools were developed to assist with the gap analysis including: (1) A survey of staff 

motivation, knowledge and skills that is completed on-line and, (2) Readiness Checklist and Strengths 

Assessment completed by members of the implementation team.
61

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN July 2015

▪ Participation in the training 

▪ One or more observations of the training

▪ Participation in a training-of-trainers session to prepare and practice

▪ Co-facilitation of training for line-staff

▪ Submission of knowledge tests and audio/video reports (optional)

▪ Participation in booster training as required

▪ Participation in coaching sessions offered off-site 

▪ Participation in training to be a coach

Step 5: Training and Supervision 

The CCW-W curriculum was developed to enhance core competencies necessary to implement the 

model with fidelity. Consistent with adult learning principles, each training session was designed to 

be highly interactive. Video, skill modeling, behavioral rehearsal, and case studies were used to 

maximize opportunities for skill practice. 

Formal training plays a critical role in exposing staff to CCW-W theory and practice. However, to ensure 

the transition of learning from classroom to work setting, staff need ongoing support and 

encouragement. To achieve this goal we strongly recommend the development of a coaching protocol 

that includes:

▪ Off-site coaching for CCW-W teams to enhance performance and build competence in 

applying strategies and techniques.

▪ On-site training for supervisors and trainers to introduce a coaching model in order to 

enhance their coaching skills. A coaching manual for supervisors and a series of tool kits to 

support work with CCW-W teams and clients will be distributed.

▪ Work with supervisors and trainers to develop “Communities of Practice”

Step 6: Quality Assurance

Introduce a range of methods to assess adherence to the model and operate from a strengths-based 

perspective. We suggest the following tools:

▪ Direct observation (audio/video recordings or in vivo) followed by coaching and supervision

▪ Self-assessments

▪ Knowledge tests

▪ Case staffings/reviews

Step 7: Process and Outcome Evaluation

Teach staff to monitor outcomes (e.g., explore dynamics changes in needs and strengths at intake 

and compare results during each reassessment).

Explore results of using the model using aggregate data to show change across intermediate and 

ultimate outcomes.
62

Appendix E: Training Content

Module 1: Introduction 

to CCW-W

▪ Philosophy and Guiding Principles

▪ Core Practices

▪ Evaluation outcomes

Module 2: What we 

Know About JusticeInvolved Women

▪ Gender neutral and gender salient factors

▪ Pathways research 

▪ Risk factors, needs and strengths

▪ Integrating evidence-based and gender-responsive practices

Module 3: Gender 

Responsive Practices

▪ Trauma-informed

▪ Relational 

▪ Strengths-based

▪ Culturally competent

Module 4: Gender 

Responsive Assessment 

(Optional)

▪ Introduction to gender-responsive assessment 

▪ Administration

▪ Scoring activities

▪ Interpreting the results

Module 5: Stage 1 -

Engage and Assess

▪ This module draws upon relational and strengths-based strategies 

to build staff competencies in the following areas:

o Engagement strategies

o Advanced interviewing skills (e.g., exploring the context and 

circumstances surrounding problem behavior)

o Integrating and interpreting file information and assessment 

results 

o Case formulation to identify the priority target

Module 6: Stage 2 -

Enhance Motivation

▪ This module draws upon motivational interviewing and other 

strengths-based interventions to help staff build the woman’s 

motivation and increase commitment to change. Staff are 

introduced to three strategies:

o Feedback

o Focusing

o Evoking change talk 

o Goal setting

Module 7: Stage 3 -

Develop the Case Plan

▪ Goals and Action Steps

o Identify strategies 

o Natural supports

o Services 

Module 8: Stage 4 –

Review Progress and 

Support Success

▪ This module introduces a standardized session format to provide 

staff with the following core competencies:

o Re-engaging with clients 

o Reviewing and reinforcing successes

o Dealing with clients who are non-compliant

o Updating and monitoring the case plan

o Introducing adaptive skills using a guided approach
63

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN JULY 2015

Module 9: Team Building Working in Teams

▪ Exploring roles and responsibilities

▪ Developing a mission statement

▪ The Team Conference

Module 10: 

Implementing CCW-W

▪ Review and refine the implementation protocol

▪ Timelines and tasks

▪ Quality assurance measures (review and practice)

▪ Coding the CCW-W interview

▪ Coding the Team Conference

Workshop:

Building Agency 

Partnerships

▪ Identifying stakeholders

▪ Exploring collaborative partnerships

▪ Creating a collaborative action plan

Advanced Training: 

Working a TraumaInformed Way

▪ Creating a trauma-informed practice

▪ Understanding the impact of trauma

▪ Identify triggers

▪ Preventing reactions to trauma

▪ Strategies that facilitate regulation

Advanced Training: Staff 

Self-Care and Resiliency

▪ Understanding the impact of secondary and vicarious trauma

▪ Identifying signs and reactions

▪ Creating safety and resiliency

▪ Mobilizing personal strategies and creating agency-wide rituals to 

reduce workplace stress

Advanced Training: 

Moving from ’Fixing‘ to 

’Guiding‘ the 

Intervention Process

▪ Revisiting theory and research underlying a strengths-based 

approach

▪ Brief intervention strategies to enhance motivation

▪ Building self-efficacy 

▪ Personal strategies (regulation, social competence, problemsolving, etc.)

▪ Mobilizing natural supports and social connections
64

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN JULY 2015

Appendix F: Supervision and Coaching Activities

Sample Coaching Sheet from the CCW-W Supervisory Training (King & Van Dieten, 2012)

Stage 1 : Engage and Assess

1. What high-risk situations (internal and external triggers) does she experience before the 

behavior?

2. What is the intent/motivation behind the behavior?

3. What incentives (potential reasons for change) has she reported?

4. What do you feel are the priority targets? (consider stabilization needs; risk to re-offend; and 

what she values)

5. How are they linked to the problem behavior?

6. What strengths did you identify that could buffer or mediate risk?

Stage 2 : Enhance Motivation

1. What priority target did she choose?

2. What reasons does she want to change?

3. How important is it to her to change the behavior?

4. How confident is she that she can change her behavior?

5. What strengths does she have to support the change?

6. What will be different when the change has occurred? What is the goal?

7. What other areas are you focusing on?

Stage 3: Implement the Case Plan

1. What strengths does she have that will move her toward goal completion?

2. What obstacles and barriers might get in the way?

3. Who is available to support her as she works to achieve this goal?

4. What professional services or formal support would she benefit from?

5. What progress has she made to date with respect to the completion of goals and/or action 

steps?

Stage 4: Reviewing and Supporting

1. What progress has she made to date with respect to the priority targets and/or legal 

requirements? What is going well?

2. Describe one of the goals you are working on?

3. What actions steps have been achieved? 

4. How have you reinforced progress to date?

5. What are the greatest barriers to her success?

6. What strategies have you modeled or taught her?

7. What else can you do to encourage her to be successful?

8. How will you respond should the she fail to comply with the case plan?
65

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN JULY 2015

Appendix G: Quality Assurance Tools

Team Conferencing Materials

Facilitator: _______________________________________________ Date: ___________________

Please circle your role on the team: 

Community Agency 

Service Provider

Corrections Department Individual/Family Member Other

Please use the back of this page to provide any additional comments about the team meeting. Thank you for 

completing this questionnaire. Your responses are strictly confidential.

How much do you agree with these statements?

Does Not 

Apply

Not

At All

 Very

 Much

1. Individual strengths were identified, shared with the 

team, and used to create/review the case plan.

     

2. My own or my agency’s priorities and needs were 

addressed.

     

3. I felt safe during the team meeting.

     



4. The agenda and purpose of the meeting were 

clearly explained.

     

5. I felt respected by all team members in attendance.      

6. People listened to me.      

7. The plan was reviewed and updated.      

8. Challenges, barriers, and limitations specific to me 

or my agency were identified.

     

9. Challenges, barriers, and limitations specific to me 

or my agency if identified, were resolved.

     

10. The time and location of the meeting(s) were 

convenient for me.

     

11. The facilitation of the team was effective.      

12. I know who to contact for follow up to the plan.      
66

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN SEPTEMBER 2014

Appendix H: CCW-W Logic Model

Guiding Practices Four-Stage Process Intermediate Tasks and Outcomes Long Term 

Outcomes

GenderResponsive

Team Approach

Individualized 

Service

Continuity of Care

Holistic and 

Comprehensive

Program Integrity

Program 

Evaluation

Engage and Assess

• Build rapport

• Conduct assessment (Identify needs and 

strengths)

• Map priority targets

• Coordinate professional team

Organizational Support

• Implementation committee is established

• CCW-W staff are provided with training, resources and support including reduced 

case load sizes

• Efforts are made to provide stable and ongoing funding to sustain CCW-W

• Efforts are made to build community and agency partnerships

• Performance outcomes for staff are altered to reflect guiding practices of CCW-W

CLIENT

Reduce Recidivism

Decrease in 6, 12, 

24 month 

recidivism rates -

new crimes, new 

arrests, technical 

violations 

Reduce Risk Factors

Decrease in 

dynamic risk

factors, increase in 

dynamic protective

factors across 

targeted domains

Increase use of 

adaptive strategies; 

use of formal and 

informal supports 

and self-efficacy

STAFF/AGENCY

Increase agency 

and community 

partnerships

Increase staff 

satisfaction

Enhance core 

competencies of 

staff

Enhance Motivation

• Provide feedback 

• Target behavior is identified by woman

• Build commitment to alter behavior

• Identify incentives and obstacles

• Set personal goal

Team Approach

• Efforts are made to ensure continuity of care by developing a core team

• Core team members are cross-trained in CCW-W model

• Team leader (case manager is identified)

• Each woman is a member of the team

• Team meets on a regular basis to review progress, provide intervention and/or 

advocacy

• Team roles and responsibilities clarified

• Team adheres to protocol for team meeting 

• Women are introduced to service providers

• Woman reports positive relationship with team members

Implement the Case Plan

• Formalize action steps

• Specify adaptive skills

• Specify natural resources to support plan

• Explore service and treatment options

Assessment

• Gender-responsive assessment completed within 30 days, every 3-months and then 

at case closure 

• Supplemental assessments completed at intake and case closure

• Assessment data is entered into data base

• Client Satisfaction questionnaires are completed every three months; at case 

closure and entered into data base

• Timely completion of assessments and reassessments is monitored

• Inter-rater reliability assessed

Review Progress

• Review/update progress

• Reinforce success

• Introduce and/or rehearse the use of 

adaptive strategies 

• Mobilize natural supports and services

• Update case plan

Individualized Case Plan

• Collaboration with woman to create case plan

• Gender-responsive assessment is used to target needs, guide service delivery, 

develop the case plan, identify services and options

• Woman demonstrates progress with case plan

• Team leader and team members consistently reviews progress (each session) 

• Team leader records outcome in data base

• Intensity and dosage of supervision and intervention is reduced in accordance with 

dynamic need.
67

COLLABORATIVE CASE WORK FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED WOMEN SEPTEMBER 2014

Quality Assurance

• Individual staff and team conferences are observed

• Quality assurance reports are generated and reviewed with individual staff and 

team members

• Adherence to guiding practices is supported

Increase 

community 

awareness of 

justice-involved 

women

Program Evaluation

• Process evaluations are conducted on an annual basis

• The CCW-W Review is completed on an annual basis

• Individual progress is monitored and reviewed on a 3-month or more frequent basis

• Aggregate data is generated and outcomes monitored across outcome measures