Rethinking Evidence-based Practice for Women and Girls

1. Rethinking Evidence-based Practice for Women and Girls Suggested Readings Andrews, D. & Bonta, J. (2003). Psychology of criminal conduct, 3rd edition. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson. Belknap, J. & Holsinger, K. (2006). The gendered nature of risk factors for delinquency. Feminist Criminology, 1:48-71. Bloom, B. (2000). Beyond recidivism: Perspectives on evaluation of programs for female offenders in community corrections. In M. McMahon, ed., Assessment to assistance: Programs for women in community corrections. Arlington, VA: American Correctional Association. Bloom, B., Owen, B. & Covington, S. (2003). Gender-responsive strategies: Research, practice and guiding principles for women offenders. Washington, DC: National Institute of Corrections. Blanchette, K. & Brown, S. (2006). The assessment and treatment of women offenders: An integrative perspective. New York: Wiley. Covington, S. & Bloom, B. (1999, November). Gender-responsive programming and evaluation for women in the criminal justice system: A shift from what works to what is the work? Paper presented at the 51st Annual Meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Toronto, Ontario. Fisher, J. & O’Donohue, W. (eds.). (2006). Practitioner’s guide to evidence-based psychotherapy. New York, NY: Springer. Goodheart, C., Kazdun, A. & Sternberg, R. (eds.). (2006). Evidence-based psychotherapy: Where practice and research meet. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Hannah-Moffat, K., (2006). Pandora’s box: Risk/need and gender-responsive corrections. Criminology and Public Policy, 5:183-192. Holtfreter, K., Reisig, M., & Morash, M. (2004). Poverty, state capital and recidivism among women offenders. Criminology and Public Policy, 3:185-208. Hubbard, D. & Matthews, B. (2008). Reconciling differences between the “gender-responsive” and “what works” literatures to improve services for girls. Crime and Delinquency, 54:225-258.

2. Reisig, M., Holtfreter, K. & Morash, M. (2006). Assessing recidivism risk across female pathways to crime. Justice Quarterly, 23:384-405 Smyth, K.F. & Schorr, L.B. (2009). A lot to lose: A call to rethink what constitutes “evidence” in finding social interventions that work. Malcolm Wiener Center for Social Policy: Harvard (Boston). Taylor, K., & Blanchettte, K. (2009). Policy Essay: The women are not wrong: It is the approach that is debatable. Criminology and Public Policy, Volume 8, Issue 1, pp. 221-229. The National Institute of Corrections and Crime and Justice Institute. Implementing Evidence-Based Practice in Community Corrections: The Principles of Effective Intervention. Washington, D.C. Van Voorhis, P. (2007). The National Institute of Corrections Gender-Responsive Assessment Project. Paper presented at the International Community Corrections annual conference, San Diego, CA. Van Voorhis, P., Salisbury, E. & Bauman, A. (2008). Achieving accurate pictures of risk and identifying gender-responsive needs: Two new achievements for women offenders. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice. Barbara E. Bloom, Ph.D. Stephanie S. Covington, Ph.D. Center for Gender and Justice 7946 Ivanhoe Av, Ste 201B, La Jolla, CA P: 858-454-8528 / F: 858-454-8598 www.centerforgenderandjustice.org