An Audit Report on Parole Division Operations at the Department of Criminal Justice
October 2010
Report Number 11-008
Overall Conclusion
The Department of Criminal Justice (Department) used the tools available to it to monitor parole officer caseloads, track drug tests and offender contacts, and ensure that parole offices had sufficient coverage for parole officers on leave. The Department tracked 93 percent of the required drug tests and 96 percent of the required offender contacts in its Offender Information Management System (OIMS) for fiscal year 2009 and the first half of fiscal year 2010.
In addition, the Department reported its caseload ratios to the Office of the Governor and the Legislative Budget Board as required by the Texas Government Code and General Appropriations Act (81st Legislature). However, the Department exceeded the caseload guidelines established in the Texas Government Code and the General Appropriations Act. Also, the methodology used to calculate the caseload ratios in these reports understates the caseloads when compared to the methodology established in the Department's policies and procedures to calculate caseload ratios. For example, in its April 2010 report to the Legislative Budget Board, the Department reported that it had an overall caseload ratio of 63.5 offenders per parole officer. However, using the methodology for calculating caseload ratios in the Department's policies, auditors determined that the Department's overall caseload ratio was 78.8 offenders per parole officer, which more accurately reflects the resources needed to manage caseloads with offenders requiring differing levels of supervision.
The Department also should ensure that quality reviews used to monitor parole officers' caseloads are conducted within required time frames and tracked appropriately.
Survey of Parole Officers and Supervisors
Auditors surveyed 1,234 parole officers and received responses from 537 (44 percent response rate) related to parole officer training, caseloads, job duties, and the use of OIMS. Auditors also surveyed 243 unit supervisors and parole supervisors (supervisors) and received responses from 168 (69 percent response rate) related to supervisor training, caseload management, and the use of OIMS. Survey responses generally aligned with the audit findings in this report. While Parole Division supervisors generally reported that they had the necessary tools to monitor parole officer caseloads, the parole officers expressed concerns about the size of their caseloads and the overtime required to manage them.
Parole Officer Training
Generally, the Department ensured that parole officers completed required training. Specifically:
- All new parole officers hired between July 2004 and January 2010 attended the required six-week Parole Officer Training Academy.
- The majority of supervisors promoted since January 2004 and parole officers who oversee specialized caseloads attended training as required.
However, the Department should improve the training it provides to parole officers by:
- Updating its curriculum to ensure that it matches the requirements in the Department's policies and procedures.
- Providing training for supervisors and parole officers who oversee specialized caseloads on a regular basis.
- Reviewing its policy and determining whether resources are available to provide 40 hours of in-service training biennially. None of the 883 parole officers completed the required 40 hours of in-service training for the 2008-2009 biennium because the Department did not offer a sufficient amount of in-service training during that time period. However, 91 percent of the parole officers who were required to take in-service training in fiscal year 2009 completed at least 20 hours.
Prior Recommendations
The Department had fully or substantially implemented most of the prior State Auditor's Office recommendations in An Audit Report on Selected Parole Functions at the Department of Criminal Justice and the Board of Pardons and Paroles (State Auditor's Office Report No. 08-036, June 2008) regarding offender contacts, drug testing, and information technology improvements.
Contact the SAO about this report.
Download the Acrobat version of this report. (.pdf)
If you prefer an HTML version, follow this link to an Adobe site which converts PDF files to HTML.