Audit Division
Audit Summary
Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety
Division of Parole and Probation
Report LA00-07
Because of significant management control weak-nesses, the Division of Parole and Probation is having difficulty meeting its responsibility to protect the public. The Division supervises more than 10,000 criminal offenders in the State. However, offenders have not been supervised according to Division standards. In addition, the Division has many problems in its classification process used to place offenders at the appropriate supervision level. As a result, the Division has little assurance that offenders are supervised according to the risks they pose to the public.
The Division’s process to collect monthly supervision fees from offenders needs significant improvement. During fiscal year 1998, about $900,000 in supervision fees went uncollected because of poor collection practices, inaccurate records, and weak controls over granting fee exemptions. In addition, the Division has not established adequate internal controls to safeguard more than $2 million in fees paid annually by offenders. While we did not identify instances of fraud, the Division’s controls are so weak that fraud and abuse could go undetected. Because the Division’s process is both ineffective and inefficient, it can improve collections and internal controls while reducing the amount of resources spent on this function.
Management is ultimately responsible for ensuring the agency
achieves its goals and efficiently uses public resources. Although the Division has received
sufficient funding to perform supervision activities, it does not have an
effective management system to ensure resources are used efficiently. For
instance, the Division needs to improve its performance measurement system, and
oversight and monitoring of district operations. Moreover, we identified numerous inefficiencies throughout the
Division’s operations. These
inefficiencies contribute to Nevada having the highest cost of offender
supervision among western states. By
eliminating or revising practices that cause unnecessary costs, the Division
could make millions of dollars available each year for other priorities. Although management has made recent efforts
to improve the Division’s operations, sustained
commitment to establishing an effective system of management controls is
necessary to correct long-standing weaknesses.
·
To ensure adequate
offender supervision, the Division has established minimum monthly contacts
that officers have to make for each supervision level. However, officers did not make many required
supervision contacts during the period covered by our sample, fiscal years 1993
to 1998. For the 62 offender files we
reviewed, the Division made only 60% of required contacts. Because many contacts were not made, the
Division rarely met its monthly supervision standards. Furthermore, some offenders received no
supervision. (page 12)
· The Division did not make most required home visits. For the offender files reviewed, the Division made only 36% of required home visits. Furthermore, in those cases where home visits were not made, the Division did not attempt a visit 73% of the time. (page 15)
·
The Division did not conduct a majority of required
supervision level reassessments. For
the offender files we reviewed, only 45% of reassessments were done. Furthermore, some offenders went long
periods without a supervision level review.
In 30% of the offender files reviewed, the Division had not reassessed
the offender’s supervision level in 18 months or more. Additionally, in July 1997, the Legislature enacted a law requiring the Division
to reassess offender supervision levels at least once every 6 months. Yet, the Division did not conduct 50% of
statutorily required reassessments between July 1997 and June 1998. (page 18)
·
The Division has a
poor process for collecting supervision fees.
For fiscal year 1998, the Division collected about 55% of the fees
owed. Several factors contribute to low
or inconsistent collection rates among districts. These factors include: (1) inadequate emphasis on collections,
(2) inaccurate records for the amounts owed by offenders, (3) an inefficient
billing process, (4) a lack of information to monitor collections, (5)
inconsistent granting of fee exemptions, and (6) the failure to charge some
supervision fees. (page 26)
·
The Division has not
established an adequate system of internal controls to safeguard more than $2
million in fees paid annually by offenders.
Internal control weaknesses include: (1) payments not recorded when received,
(2) poor controls over cash receipt forms, (3) total payments received not
compared to deposits, (4) offenders paying their fees to officers instead of
accounting staff, (5) inadequate separation of duties, (6) untimely deposits,
and (7) poor controls over payments received by mail. (page 30)
·
The Division can
improve collections and internal controls while reducing the amount of
resources spent on the supervision fee collection process. Duplication of efforts, redundant
information systems, and unnecessary work contribute to a collection process
that is both inefficient and ineffective.
By ensuring supervision fee payments are recorded accurately in one
information system, the Division could eliminate much of the work it does in
this area while improving the information it needs for effective
collections. (page 33)
·
The Legislature has
provided the Division with sufficient parole and probation officer positions to
supervise offender caseloads at formula-funded levels. However, control weaknesses in the hiring
process hampered the agency’s ability to fill vacancies timely. The Division lacked policies and procedures,
management information on vacancies, and consistent management oversight of
hiring. These weaknesses resulted in
the Division not testing or recruiting applicants from April 1996 to March
1997. Consequently, by July 1997, the
Division had 41 parole and probation officer positions vacant. (page 37)
·
The Division lacks
management controls to ensure effective performance. While the Division has a central management office, the office
has not provided strong oversight of district operations. Without controls in place to guide district
operations and monitor performance, the Division has no assurance it can meet
its mission of public safety. (page
37)
·
Inefficient operations contribute to Nevada having the
highest cost of offender supervision among western states. Nevada’s daily cost per offender of $5.20
far exceeds other western states and the national average of $3.13. Although we did not audit all functions of
the Division, we identified numerous inefficiencies in the areas we
examined. If the Division reduced its
cost of supervision 10% by eliminating inefficiencies, it could make $2.7
million available each year for other priorities. Because the Division is in the process of implementing a new
management information system, the increase in automation should help create
efficiencies by allowing more work to be done with existing resources. (page 41)
·
High turnover in key
management positions has made it difficult for the Division to carry out its
responsibilities efficiently and effectively.
Since 1993, the Division has had three Chiefs and each District
Administrator position has turned over at least twice. In addition, the Division has implemented
several new programs. These factors
have made it harder for the Division to successfully manage its operations,
increasing the need for effective management controls to ensure goals are
met. (page 45)
·
Management of the
Division has recognized it needs to make significant changes to improve
performance. During the audit,
management began taking steps to strengthen management controls. However, sustained top management attention
and commitment to continuously improve performance will be needed to ensure
long-term implementation of management controls. (page 45)
Division of Parole and Probation
Agency
Response
to Audit
Recommendations
Recommendation Number |
|
Accepted |
Rejected |
1 |
Monitor officer performance to ensure supervision contact guidelines are followed |
x |
|
2 |
Establish policies and procedures for the assignment of offenders to open caseloads |
x |
|
3 |
Consider alternative strategies to ensure home visits are made as required |
|
x |
4 |
Ensure mandated drug tests are conducted and policies and procedures for the frequency of testing are followed |
x |
|
5 |
Perform timely classification of offender supervision levels |
x |
|
6 |
Consider using case objective plans in conjunction with minimum contact standards to supervise offenders |
|
x |
7 |
Establish a review process for supervision level reassessments and classification overrides |
x |
|
8 |
Ensure complete and accurate documentation is maintained for offender supervision activities and assigned supervision levels |
|
x |
9 |
Monitor parole and probation officers’ efforts in motivating offenders to pay supervision fees |
x |
|
10 |
Develop written procedures to ensure supervision fees are recorded accurately |
x |
|
11 |
Establish an efficient billing process and accurate accounts receivable system for supervision fees |
x |
|
12 |
Grant supervision fee exemptions in accordance with Division policy |
x |
|
13 |
Ensure changes in supervision fee requirements are clearly communicated to all districts |
x |
|
14 |
Record
supervision fee payments when received |
x |
|
15 |
Develop written procedures to ensure the total amount of payments received is established each day and deposited intact |
x |
|
16 |
Comply with state requirements for the use of cash receipt forms |
x |
|
17 |
Limit the collection of money to accounting personnel |
|
x |
18 |
Separate key duties over the revenue
collection, recording, and deposit process |
x |
|
19 |
Deposit cash receipts in accordance with statutory time requirements |
x |
|
20 |
Establish written procedures for using mail logs |
x |
|
21 |
Ensure internal control policies and procedures are implemented at the district level |
x |
|
22 |
Maintain one set of accounting
records for each offender |
x |
|
23 |
Review internal accounting control procedures and eliminate those procedures that create unnecessary costs without benefit |
x |
|
24 |
Develop performance measures that demonstrate the results achieved with the resources provided |
x |
|
25 |
Clearly assign duties and a responsibilities for management oversight of offender supervision and supervision fee collections |
x |
|
26 |
Monitor district performance and compliance with policies and procedures |
x |
|
27 |
Establish a process to ensure the timely review of policies and procedures |
x |
|
28 |
Review the Division’s processes for offender supervision and eliminate those processes that create unnecessary costs without benefit |
x |
|
TOTALS |
|
24 |
4 |
Auditor’s
Comments on Agency Response
The
Division of Parole and Probation, in its response beginning on page 52,
rejected 4 of our 28 recommendations.
Those recommendations are as follows:
Recommendation
Page Number
61 3 Consider alternative strategies to ensure home visits are made
as required.
61 6 Consider using case objective plans in conjunction with
minimum contact standards to supervise offenders.
61 8 Ensure complete and accurate documentation is maintained
for offender supervision activities and assigned supervision levels.
62 17 Limit the collection of money to accounting personnel.
Upon
evaluating the agency’s response to our audit report, we noted they were
generally in agreement with the intent of the audit recommendations. The agency’s response further indicates that
they have begun taking corrective action on the four recommendations that were
initially rejected. Therefore, we
believe our recommendations are appropriate to address the issues raised in the
audit report.