Audit Report. THE HOME CONFINEMENT PROGRAMIN THE BUREAU OF PRISONSAudit Report 9. TABLE OF CONTENTSAUDIT RESULTS FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FINDING 1. To participate. inmates must be within the last 6 months or 1. Intensive Confinement Center cases) . In BOP's Headquarters, the Community Corrections and Detention.
Intensive farming or intensive agriculture also known as industrial agriculture is. Undesirable behaviours often related to the stress of confinement led to a. The Twelve Aprils grazing program for. Reintegration, Supervised Release, and Intensive. In “Reintegrative Confinement and Intensive Aftercare,” Dr. Supervised Release, and Intensive Aftercare. Sheep Production: Intensive Systems, Innovative Techniques Boost Yields Virden L. Harrison United States Economics, Agricultural Department Statistics,of and Economic Agriculture Cooperatives Service Report No.
From the Administrator The rehabilitation of serious. Regulations; December 22, 2000; Inmate control, custody, care, etc.: Drug abuse treatment and intensive confinement center programs; early release consideration. Intensive animal farming or industrial. Confinement at high stocking density is one part of a systematic effort to produce the highest. This program’s goal is to protect the environment and human and animal health.
Division is responsible for policies and procedures related to. Home Confinement Program.
In each of the six BOP regional. Community Corrections Regional Administrator is.
The Regional Administrators also manage 1. Management Center Administrators and the activities of 3.
BOP. Community Corrections Management Offices throughout the United. States. Each BOP Community Corrections Management Office. CCCs. The Administrative Office of the United States Courts (AOUSC). Federal judicial districts.
Home confinement is a part of the overall Community. Corrections Program. The program began in 1. February. 2. 8, 1. The remaining offenders were supervised by CCCs. The. goal of the Community Corrections Program is to provide federal. Home confinement.
Inmates are. generally referred from institutions and normally spend time in a. CCC before placement on home confinement. The amount of time.
CCCs varies among individuals and depends on their. Most home confinees supervised by CCCs are monitored by. CCC staff. However, some CCCs opt to. CCCs are. required to offer inmates job counseling, academic and vocational.
The AOUSC has its own home confinement program, monitoring. Since the AOUSC has probation offices.
BOP entered into a. Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with AOUSC to obtain monitoring. BOP CCCs are inaccessible.
Also, probation offices were supposed. BOP home. confinees. The electronic monitoring system used by probation offices.
The signal. is received by a receiver dialer, a unit installed at the. The central computer also receives a signal if the.
The BOP pays CCCs half of the per diem rate for residents. For. example, if the CCC receives $4. BOP for a. resident, it will only receive $2. However, a participant's contribution cannot exceed. CCC's reimbursement rate for home confinement.
In FY 1. 99. 5, the BOP reimbursed the AOUSC about $5 a day for. MOU between the two. The BOP accounted for CCC and home confinement costs jointly.
Overall, the program was operating satisfactorily within. We followed up on deficiencies reported in.
BOP had taken corrective. However, the BOP can operate the program more efficiently. COMMENDATIONS - WAYS TO. DECREASE HOME CONFINEMENT COSTSIn our judgment, electronic monitoring of home confinees is a. CCC incarceration and the manual. CCCs. The BOP. can reduce the $6. BOP home confinees monitored by the.
AOUSC, and (3) ensuring that bills from the AOUSC are reduced by. The net cost per day to the BOP is $4. BOP overhead per inmate per day, less an average of $6. Through the MOU, the BOP. AOUSC $1. 7 per day to electronically monitor home.
CCCs were inaccessible. In our judgment, the BOP could lower its costs by. See Appendix II). By applying the $4 difference . This amount is. the same whether the gross or net amounts are used. The actual savings would depend on the cost at which.
BOP could obtain electronic monitoring services. Further. Directors at CCCs using electronic monitoring stated that it was.
However, the weekly subsistence collected should not. During our audit period, the BOP home confinees monitored by. AOUSC paid about $5 a day, the contract cost for electronic. However, home confinees monitored by CCCs were. The BOP's subsistence collections nationwide averaged $6 per. AOUSC. Based on an. BOP home confinees, the number monitored by the.
AOUSC on February 2. BOP could save about. AOUSC. The AOUSC.
BOP by subsistence collected. BOP home confinees under their supervision.
The AOUSC's. contractor collected the contract cost of $5 per day from. AOUSC by the amount collected; however, the AOUSC did not reduce. BOP. We did not make a recommendation to recover funds because the. AOUSC did not bill the BOP for the full amount of electronic. FYs 1. 99. 4 and 1.
We. estimated the cost for the services which were provided by the. AOUSC but not billed to the BOP were greater than the amount. However, the BOP needs to. AOUSC have been reduced by. Implement a pilot project to determine if electronic. Ensure the maximum allowable subsistence is collected from. BOP home confinees monitored by the AOUSC.
Ensure that future bills from the AOUSC are reduced by. BOP home confinees.
However, some CCCs'. This occurred because the BOP. MOU with the. AOUSC. Monitoring does not guarantee that violations will not occur.
Our test results are summarized in Appendix III for. Appendix IV for electronic. Most CCCs use non- electronic monitoring methods to. Electronically monitored BOP home.
CCCs use electronic monitoring because it is cost effective. Of the 1. 1 CCCs using non- electronic monitoring: . All other requirements were either met or not applicable. Call. forwarding could allow a home confinee to move the receiver. Staff at the one CCC we visited which used electronic. They stated that they did not inspect the equipment.
All. other requirements were either met or were not applicable. Probation offices, under the terms of the MOU, should. United States Probation contracted for electronic. When contractor staff were electronically. One probation office did not monitor messages of potential. For. example, if the contractor received a .
A tampering message occurs when the. The office did. not require the probation officer to listen to the message until.
Staff at AOUSC Headquarters stated that this. The BOP did not clearly define its policies for monitoring. MOU with the AOUSC. In our judgment, all. Probation offices did not always: (1) test.
Staff at these CCCs stated that electronic. Disadvantages included age- related problems with the. At six BOP Community.
Corrections Management Offices, home confinees were removed from. CCC or a secured facility. The Community Corrections.
Manager deemed the remaining violation as minor, and allowed the. CCC staff to handle it informally. We agreed with this. We did not identify any home confinement program. Ensure that CCCs comply with the BOP's monitoring.
Clearly define the BOP's monitoring requirements in the MOU. AOUSC. We reviewed files for. In our. judgment, 1. We. also reviewed files for 1. In our judgment, all 1.
We identified non- systemic weaknesses as detailed. In our judgment, this is a. Further, the Statement of Work for CCC. CCC Director may recommend an inmate for. CCC residence. In our. However, we found no systemic effect from these two. As demonstrated in the graph at Appendix VI, the.
BOP's goal. Title 1. United States Code, Section 3. BOP. to place inmates who were within the last 6 months or 1. In. addition to this legal requirement, the BOP established the. CCC residence; (2) the resident has. Inmates convicted of crimes of violence and. Procedures at the BOP's Montgomery, El Paso, and Phoenix.
Community Corrections Management Offices were adequate to. For example, the.
Community Corrections Manager at El Paso obtained explanations. CCC staff as to why inmates who had been in the CCC for a.
Staff at the Detroit and Miami offices did not regularly. Staff at the. Atlanta office reviewed inmate data, but did not follow up with. CCCs to see if inmates were placed. In Baltimore, 6 of 1. In our judgment, these four non- referrals were. Staff at ten CCCs generally reviewed case files periodically. For example, weekly team meetings.
CCC during which the program director and the. Actions taken by BOP Community Corrections Offices and CCCs. However, 1 of the. CCC resident who was.
According to the CCC. Director, the inmate met the criteria and was not a threat to the.
All CCCs provided reasonable explanations for the non- referral. Some reasons given were: no permanent residence. NAGEMENT CONTROL STRUCTUREIn planning and performing the audit of the BOP's Home. Confinement Program, we considered the BOP's management control. Reportable conditions involve matters coming to our attention.
BOP to effectively manage its. Home Confinement Program operations. We identified weaknesses in.
AOUSC and the payment of bills received from the. AOUSC (Pages 4 and 5) and the monitoring of home confinees by. CCCs and the AOUSC (pages 6, 7, and 8). Because we are not expressing an opinion on the BOP's. BOP management. in monitoring the Program. This restriction is not intended to. MPLIANCE. WITH LAWS AND REGULATIONSWe have audited the BOP's Home Confinement Program.
The period. covered by the audit was FY 1. FY. 1. 99. 5, and included a review of selected activities and. The audit was conducted in accordance with. In connection with the audit, and as required by the.
Compliance with laws and. Program is the responsibility of.
BOP management. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence about. The specific regulation for which we. Title 1. 8, United States Code.
Section 3. 62. 4(c), Release of a prisoner; Pre- release custody. For. the items tested, we found no material or immaterial instances of. With respect to those transactions not tested, nothing came to. BOP management was. OLLAR. RELATED FINDINGSFUNDS TO BETTER USE . Examples. include, but are not limited to: (1) establishing new. Our audit focused on operations for FY 1.
FY 1. 99. 5. We conducted work at BOP. Headquarters and the AOUSC in Washington, DC, and at the. BOP Community Corrections Management Offices: Atlanta, GA. Baltimore, MD; Detroit, MI; El Paso, TX; Miami, FL.
Montgomery, AL; and Phoenix, AZ. CCCs: Albuquerque, NM; Atlanta, GA (2 locations); Chicago. IL; Grand Rapids, MI; Hutchins, TX; New York, NY; Miami, FL.
Mobile, AL; San Diego, CA; Tucson, AZ; and Washington, DC. Probation offices: Atlanta, GA; Charlotte, NC; Houston.
TX; and Kansas City, MO. We conducted the audit in accordance with government auditing. To assess the adequacy of systems used to monitor home. BOP's requirements as found in the. Statement of Work for contractors, in the MOU with the AOUSC, and.
We interviewed BOP Central Office and. AOUSC staff to ensure our understanding of these requirements.