This article provides a brief overview of CASAWORKS for Families(CWF), an innovative intervention designed to help substance-abusing parentingwomen on welfare. CWFwas developed in response to the passage of welfare reform legislation in 1996. Factors that provided a background and context for the development ofCWFare considered. The rationale, key elements, and the conduct of a pilot demonstration of CWFar e described. Evaluation findings that serve to guide the next steps to improve the intervention are reviewed. Finally, new welfare policy priorities emerging around the importance of addressing behavioral health problems among welfare recipients are highlighted.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allen, K. A. 1995. Barriers to treatment for addicted African-American women. Journal of the National Medical Association87:751-756.
2.
Beckman, L. J., and K. M. Kocel. 1982. The treatment delivery system and alcohol abuse in women: Social policy implications. Journal of Social Issues38:139-151.
3.
Berlin, G. 2001. The 30-year tug-of-war: Can reform resolve welfare policy’s thorniest conundrum? Brookings Review19 (3): 34-38.
4.
Brindis, C. D., G. Berkowitz,Z. Clayson, and B. Lamb. 1997. California’s approach to perinatal substance abuse: Toward a model of comprehensive care. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs29:113-122.
5.
Brown, A. 2001. Beyond work first: How to help hard-to-employ individuals get jobs and succeed in the workforce. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
6.
Center for Substance Abuse Treatment. 1996. Alcohol and other drug treatment: Policy choices in welfare reform. Report in collaboration with NASADAD. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
7.
Chandler, D., and J. Meisel. 2000. The prevalence of mental health, alcohol and other drug, & domestic violence issues among CalWORKs participants in Kern and Stanislaus Counties. Sacramento: California Institute for Mental Health.
8.
Danziger, S., M. Cocoran, C. Heflin, C. Kalil, A. Levine, D. Rosen, K. Seefeldt, K. Siefert, and R. Tolman. 2000. Barriers to employment of welfare recipients. Unpublished manuscript, Ann Arbor, University of Michigan, Poverty Research and Training Center.
9.
Grella, C. E. 1997. Services for perinatal women with substance abuse and mental health disorders: The unmet need. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs29:67-78.
10.
Grella, C. E., and V. Joshi. 1999. Gender differences in drug treatment careers among clients in the National Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse25 (3): 385-406.
11.
Gustavson, N. S., and J. R. Rycraft. 1993. The multiple service needs of drug dependent mothers. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal10 (2): 141-151.
12.
Jayakody, R., S. Danziger, and H. Pollack. 2000. Welfare reform, substance use, and mental health. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law7:421-433.
13.
Klein, D., D. Crim, and E. Zahnd. 1997. Perspectives of pregnant substance-abusing women: Findings from the California prenatal needs assessment. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs29:55-66.
14.
Legal Action Center. 1997. Making welfare reform work: Tools for confronting alcohol and drug problems among welfare recipients. New York: Author.
15.
Nakashian, M., and E. Moore. 2001. Identifying substance abuse among TANFeligible families(Technical Assistance Publication No. 26). Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Substance Abuse Treatment.
16.
National Center of Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University. 1999. Building bridges: States response to substance abuse and welfare reform. New York: Author.
17.
Nelson-Zlupko, L., E. Kauffman, and M. M. Dore. 1995. Gender differences in drug addiction and treatment: Implications for social work interventions with substance-abusing women. Social Work40:45-54.
18.
Pavetti, L., K. Olson, N. Pindus, and M. Pernas. 1997. Designing welfare to work programs for families facing personal or family challenges: Lessons from the field. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
19.
Reed, B. G. 1985. Drug misuse and dependency in women: The meaning and implications of being considered a special population or minority group. International Journal of the Addictions20:13-62.
20.
Sawhill, I. 2001. From welfare to work. Brookings Review19 (3): 4-8.
21.
Sisco, C. B., and C. L. Pearson. 1994. Prevalence of alcoholism and drug abuse among female AFDC recipients. Health and Social Work19:75-77.
22.
Thompson, T. G. 2001. Welfare reform’s next step. Brookings Review19 (3): 2-3.
23.
Wellisch, J., B. Perrochet, and M. D. Anglin. 1997. Afterwood: Future directions for perinatal alcohol and drug treatment services. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs29:123-125.
24.
Woolis, D. D. 1998. Family works: Substance abuse treatment and welfare reform. Public Welfare3:23-29.
25.
Zlotnick, C., K. Franchino, N. St. Claire, K. Cox, and M. St. John. 1996. The impact of outpatient drug services on abstinence among pregnant and parenting women. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment13 (3): 195-202.
