This module provides guidance for acting on the results of the WCSS. This step is critical to improving safety in response to the WCSS data. There are two basic options for this final step. The first reunites the Facility Team and the Survey Team Leader. In situations where the Survey Team Leader continues to work with the Facility Team, the Facility Team will decide on the role of the Survey Team Leader in each of these final steps. Alternatively, the Facility Team may decide to run the report and conduct action planning without any involvement of the Survey Team Leader.
Each facility may also develop its own approach in working with the process, involving the Survey Team Leader at various stages. These decisions should be made in the planning stage. In all cases, the Facility Team will assume ultimate responsibility for an action plan that responds to problem areas and other concerns identified in the report.
In either case, the Facility Team will appoint a Lead to coordinate this process with or without the aid of the Survey Team Leader. The Facility Team Leader will present findings to the Facility Team, lead the discussion of the results, and monitor the Action Planning Process through implementation. Because the Facility Liaison has already worked closely with the Survey Team, he or she might be a good ????
Acting on the Results
The report produced by the Analysis and Reporting Tool provides facility staff with a solid foundation of evidence for improving practice in the facility. The "heat map" of problem areas in Figure 1 of the report is especially helpful in identifying broad patterns, while the quantitative results in Table 1 provide greater specificity where needed. The Facility Team should review the findings for each scale and each housing unit by using the step-by-step guide on the following screens.
Step 1: Review the Report
As a group, review the WCSS results provided in the report. The examples below are drawn from Table 1 and Figure 1 of the fictional report introduced in the Results/Reports Module.
What are the key problem areas identified by the WCSS? For this initial review we suggest using Figure 1 instead of Table 1 as overall problem areas are more readily apparent here. List the biggest overall problems. In our example, staff verbal harassment was the biggest problem faced at this fictional facility, as seen in Figure 1.
- Highest Problem Areas (Dark Blue: Scale means 3.00 or greater)
- Staff Verbal Harassment
- Moderate to High Problem Areas (Medium Blue: 2.00- 2.99)
- Staff Harass Inmates who Report
- Inmates Harass Inmates who Report
- Inmate Reporting Climate
- Low to Moderate Problem Areas (Light Blue: 1.00-1.99)
- Inmate Economic Conflict
- Inmate Physical Violence
- Likelihood of Inmate Violence
- Staff Sexual Harassment
- Staff Concern for Sexual Safety
- Facility Procedures Protect Inmates
- Staff Physical Violence
- Likelihood of Staff Violence
- Least Problem Areas (White: Scale means less than 1.00)
- Inmate Sexual Violence
- Staff Sexual Misconduct
Figure 1: Visual Summary of WCSS Survey Results for each Scale and Housing Unit
Note that the original red/green color scheme was revised to a single color "heat map" design to make the image more meaningful to persons with color vision deficiency.
*The survey items that compose these scales were phrased in negative terms and thus were reverse coded so the scale scores would be in the same direction and comparable to the scales composed of positively phrased items.
Table 1: Summary of WCSS Survey Results (Mean Scale Ratings for each Housing Unit)
*The survey items that compose these scales were phrased in negative terms and thus were reverse coded so the scale scores would be in the same direction and comparable to the scales composed of positively phrased items.
While it is important to identify the biggest problems areas by scale (the rows of Figure 1) it is also important to identify the biggest problem areas by housing unit (the columns of Figure 1).
- Highest Problem Areas (Dark Blue: Scale means 3.00 or greater)
- Unit B
- Unit E
- Moderate to High Problem Areas (Medium Blue: 2.00 - 2.99)
- Unit C
- Low to Moderate Problem Areas (light Blue: 1.00-1.99)
- Unit A
- Unit F
- Unit H
- Least Problem Areas (White: Scale means less than 1.00)
- Unit D
- Unit G
By shifting emphasis from rows to columns it becomes apparent that Units B, E, and Care perceiving numerous areas of serious concern beyond staff verbal harassment and reporting climate. likewise, it is also important to examine Figure 1 cell by cell to identify any isolated (but potentially serious) issues that may not appear as part of a row based (scale) or column based (housing unit) pattern.
The Facility Team will then work through all the findings to develop a solid understanding of overall patterns and any more isolated areas of concern.
Step 2: Identify Contributing Factors
In this step, the Facility Team will discuss the factors that contribute to women's perceptions of problems and begin to prioritize the problem areas for Action Planning. The Facility Team will review all findings from the WCSS and meet in several sessions to fully understand the data and begin the Action Planning Process.
Taken together, the WCSS results reveal areas of operational practice, policy, programs, facility culture and women's concerns that require review. We suggest the Facility Team begin by prioritizing those areas with the highest problem scores.
In the fictional example we have been using, women in this facility indicate that the highest level of problems is in areas related to staff interactions (staff verbal harassment) and reporting culture; both staff and inmates were said to "harass others who report" various forms of inmate or staff misconduct. With high problem scores in these overlapping areas, "harassment" is a common theme and should therefore be prioritized during the planning process.
- Staff verbal harassment.
- Staff harassment of those who report.
- Inmates harassment of those who report.
The Facility Team should then discuss and explore the range of factors or conditions that contribute to or address problems in harassment. One way to structure this discussion would be to informally rate the impact of these suggested factors of operational policy and practice with a simple "Yes/No" rating system. To use this system, team members would carefully consider the impact of each aspect of operational practice on the WCSS findings by rating them as Yes (has an impact on the problem) or No (no impact on the problem).
When using this rating method, the team would then discuss the factors that have "Yes" ratings (whether positive or negative). After such a discussion, the team would identify the top three operational issues from the Factor List that will address women's concerns and improve operational practice through Action Planning.
Other sites may choose a more informal way of identifying factors that contribute to women's negative perceptions across the safety scales and operational responses to improving women's safety within the facility. One approach might be to review the Factor List and determine three to five areas of operational practice from the list to begin the Action Plan. Using the more informal approach, the team would discuss (with the option of referring to the factor list) their views on the sources and factors influencing these ratings. In discussion, team members would draw on their knowledge and experience to identify the operational factors that would improve these problem areas.
Facility Team discussion of the WCSS findings is a necessary element of both the rating approach and the discussion approach. Regardless of the approach, the Facility Team should spend significant time examining the findings so all members can contribute to the next and final step, Developing an Action Plan.
Note: A printable/editable version of the Action Plan Factor Sheet to the right is available under the Resources menu above.
Step 3: Developing an Action Plan
After selecting the priorities, team members will begin to develop an Action Plan. For each priority, team members will identify the following information:
- Priority Area
- Goals and Outcomes
- Tasks
- Time Frame
- Staff Assigned
Continuing the example from the fictional institution above, an action plan could look something like this:
Priority Area(s): List topic area(s) in terms of the applicable areas of concern and problems.
- Harassment from staff and inmates
- Reporting climate
Goals and Outcomes: List, in simple terms, the goal and outcome of this action.
- Harassment from staff and inmates: Decrease harassment from staff and inmates by implementing changes in policy, practice and other factors identified in Factor Rating/Discussion process.
- Reporting climate: Increase women's trust in reporting and investigation systems by developing a gender-responsive and trauma-informed reporting and investigation procedure.
Tasks: Define the tasks necessary to accomplish the goals and outcomes for each priority area
- Harassment from staff and inmates
- Contact the National Resource Center for Justice-Involved Women for examples of best practices in these areas.
- Develop a mission statement that stresses the gender-responsive principle of "dignity and respect."
- Review and revise staff training that emphasizes respectful speech.
- Review and revise staff disciplinary procedures related to harassment and disrespect.
- Reporting climate
- Contact PREA Resource Center and the NIC information Center for examples of "best practices" policies.
- Assess current facility compliance with PREA standards in this area.
- Revise facility policy.
Time Frame: Estimate the length of time to be devoted to implementation goals.
Approximately 90 days
Staff Assigned: List the type and number of staff to be involved.
Facility Teams may find it helpful to organize their action plan in a grid highlighting priority areas, goals and outcomes, tasks, time frame, and the staff assigned. We call this the Action Plan Worksheet.
This concludes the Action Planning Module, the sixth and final "instructional" module of the Toolkit. The seventh module (Tools and Utilities) provides a series of software-based tools to automate some of the more complex tasks associated with the WCSS process.
By partnering with a Survey Team and using this Toolkit, correctional administrators can collect valid and reliable data on female inmates' perceptions of sexual and other forms of safety. By acting on the results, facilities can squarely address problems documented by the WCSS and gauge outcomes associated with any changes to policy and practice.