The Classification of Federally Sentenced Women in Canada: Addition of Gender-Informed Variables to the Custody Rating Scale Contributes Incremental Predictive Validity

• Published date: 01 December 2023
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/00938548231202799
• Author: Theresia E. M. Bedard,Kelley Blanchette,Shelley L. Brown
• Date: 01 December 2023
• Subject Matter: Articles

CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2023, Vol. 50, No. 12, December 2023, 1759 –1782.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548231202799

Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions

© 2023 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology

1759

THE CLASSIFICATION OF FEDERALLY

SENTENCED WOMEN IN CANADA

Addition of Gender-Informed Variables to the

Custody Rating Scale Contributes Incremental

Predictive Validity

THERESIA E. M. BEDARD

Carleton University

KELLEY BLANCHETTE

Correctional Service of Canada

Indigenous Services Canada

SHELLEY L. BROWN

Carleton University

The Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) uses the Custody Rating Scale (CRS) for initial security classification; it is gen-

der-neutral. Gender-informed scholars contend that gender-neutral assessments are problematic for use with justice-impacted

women, as they exclude factors (e.g., victimization) deemed more relevant for women. Using an archival database with 1,555

federally sentenced women in Canada, we examined the extent that gender-informed indicators could yield incremental

predictive validity (predicting institutional misconduct) beyond the CRS. Specifically, gender-informed variables from these

domains were tested: mental health, substance misuse, relationship dysfunction, personal/emotional difficulties, parental/

family issues, and victimization. Results revealed at least one gender-informed variable from each domain significantly

predicted institutional misconducts. Composite gender-informed scales were created from the set of significant gender-

informed predictors. Area under the curve (AUC) and hierarchical Cox regression analyses revealed the composite gender-

informed scales contributed incremental predictive validity above and beyond the CRS. Although the CRS was predictive, it

can be improved by including gender-informed variables.

Keywords: gender-informed; classification; justice-impacted women; Custody Rating Scale; corrections

According to Correctional Service of Canada (CSC)—the governmental agency that

administers sentences of 2 years or more—women represent 6% of federally sen-

tenced individuals in Canada (CSC, 2019b). When individuals are brought into CSC

AUTHORS’ NOTE: We have no known conflict of interest to disclose. We acknowledge and thank

Correctional Service of Canada for providing the data used in this study. The views presented in this study are

our own and are not those of Correctional Service of Canada. Correspondence concerning this article should

be addressed to Theresia E. M. Bedard, Carleton University, Loeb B550, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON

K1S 5B6, Canada; e-mail: theresiabedard@cmail.carleton.ca.

1202799CJBXXX10.1177/00938548231202799Criminal Justice and BehaviorBedard et al. / Gender-Informed CRS

research-article2023

1760 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR

custody, they must undergo initial security placement (CSC, 2021). The Custody Rating

Scale (CRS; Solicitor General of Canada, 1987) is used to assist in making initial security

classification decisions by designating federally sentenced men and women as minimum,

medium, or maximum security. Although the CRS was developed with federally sentenced

men (Auditor General of Canada, 2017), it is considered gender-neutral, meaning it is

hypothesized to perform equally well in both genders in a nonbiased fashion. Gender-

informed proponents—scholars who primarily study justice-impacted girls and women—

argue that the assessment and classification of women in a correctional setting should be

based on research that has used women-only samples (Van Voorhis, 2022). Gender-

informed proponents further argue that given that most assessment and classification

research has focused on men, we cannot conclude that women have similar risk and need

factors (Chesney-Lind & Pasko, 2013).

It should be noted that CSC uses a gender-informed assessment for the reclassification of

federally sentenced women, the Security Reclassification Scale for Women (SRSW;

Blanchette, 2005). Reclassification is a formal review that occurs after initial classification

that must be completed within 2 years of an individual’s sentence for those initially classi-

fied as medium or maximum security; it is essential for community reintegration (CSC,

2018). It allows incarcerated individuals to move into lower security-level designations,

which in turn accelerates community reintegration (Blanchette, 2005). However, CSC’s

continued use of the gender-neutral CRS for initial classification decisions for women

remains a concern (Senate Canada, 2019); the scale was not only developed using an all-

male sample, but factors hypothesized to be more relevant for women were not tested dur-

ing the original development and validation phase.

Also, using a gender-neutral CRS for initial classification for justice-impacted women

may present additional concerns. CSC policy dictates that reclassification should only occur

minimally, every 2 years (CSC, 2018), potentially placing women in an improper security

placement for up to 2 years. This is concerning as prior research has found institutional fac-

tors such as conditions of confinement, violence exposure in prison, and prison routine

predict institutional misconduct (Dâmboeanu & Nieuwbeerta, 2016). Relatedly, Leigey

(2019) found for a sample of 1,821 justice-impacted women that greater custody levels

predicted engaging in any form of misconduct. Thus, prison environments can drive the

occurrence of misconducts.

One important objective of security classification is to reduce institutional misconducts.

When a person violates the rules, they may undergo a formal disciplinary process that may

result in a charge (CSC, 2015). Although some discretion in determining a charge exists,

CSC has policies in place to help ensure consistency in applying misconduct charges. Minor

offenses include negative acts that violate institutional rules. In contrast, serious offenses

include committing, attempting, or inciting acts considered serious security breaches such

as engaging in violence, repetitively breaking the rules, or causing harm to others (CSC,

2015). One avenue to assess the validity of a classification tool is to examine its ability to

predict institutional misconducts. Thus, the main objective of the study is to explore whether

risk factors hypothesized to be more relevant for incarcerated women than their male coun-

terparts can incrementally enhance the ability of the CRS to predict prison misconducts

among federally sentenced women in Canada.

It has been well established that justice-impacted women are different from their male

counterparts in important ways. Not only do they engage in less serious forms of crime, but