NCJ Number
85098
Date Published
1982
Length
292 pages
Annotation
Legislative changes and better information and communication could improve the quality of Federal parole decisions, and major changes are also needed to improve parole supervision.
Abstract
There are inconsistencies in parole decisions both within and among the Federal Parole Commission's five regional offices, in part because guidelines used by hearing examiners to make parole recommendations were subject to varying interpretation, and hearing examiners had not received adequate training in their use. Further, hearing examiners have been making erroneous decisions, because they have not been sufficiently analyzing the material in offenders' files. The National Appeals Board is reversing a high percentage of the parole decisions of regional commissioners without a finding that the initial decision materially deviated from the guidelines, suggesting that the role of the Board needs to be clarified. Also, important policy issues are not being addressed in a timely fashion, because the decentralized structure of the Commission does not permit sufficient time for this. Moreover, the Commission is required by legislation to conduct certain activities, such as regional appeals and statutory interim hearings, that are not productive. There has been a poor exchange of information and communication between the Parole Commission and other parts of the Federal criminal justice system, and in the area of parole supervision, (1) special conditions of parole should be better administered; (2) better procedures are needed for reporting parole violations; and (3) better administration of the parole termination process is required. Recommendations are offered for addressing the deficiencies identified. Correspondence related to this study is appended, and relevant tabular data are provided.