Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Mandatory release in Canada : a cost and manpower analysis of mandatory release in Canada Devine, S. Antoinette 1967

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1967_A5 D48.pdf [ 3.13MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0302494.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0302494-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0302494-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0302494-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0302494-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0302494-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0302494-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0302494-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0302494.ris

Full Text

MANDATORY RELEASE I N CANADA:  A COST AND  MANPOWER A N A L Y S I S OF MANDATORY RELEASE I N CANADA  by S. A n t o i n e t t e D e v i n e Charles I . Maclnnes Kenneth Matsune George J . P o u l o s M a r i a L . Raymond  A T H E S I S SUBMITTED I N P A R T I A L FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SOCIAL WORK  We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s a s c o n f o r m i n g required standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF B R I T I S H COLUMBIA 1967  tothe  In p r e s e n t i n g  t h i s thesis in p a r t i a l  f u l f i l m e n t of the  requirements  f o r an.advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree t h a t the Study.  L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e  I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g of t h i s  t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may  be g r a n t e d by the Head o f  Department or by hlis r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s .  w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n  Depa^-ment of  permission.  .3 C C \  ' VwQ^K  The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Vancouver 8, Canada 'Ve.C  . I>  y  (^7  Columbia  my  It i s understood t h a t  or p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n  Date  and  s h a l l not  be  copying' allowed  ABSTRACT The present ment h a s  field  of c o r r e c t i o n s i s a n t i c i p a t i n g  system of r e l e a s i n g inmates from p r i s o n . been d e s c r i b e d  of t h i s study,  i n a v a r i e t y of terms.  i t w i l l be  r e f e r r e d t o as  " The  a change i n T h i s new  the  develop-  However, f o r purposes Mandatory Release  System". T h i s c o n c e p t i s d e f i n e d as " a s y s t e m w h e r e b y t h o s e who  are not  granted  r e g u l a r p a r o l e , have the o p p o r t u n i t y  release, after serving three-quarters they  accept  sentence." this  of t h e i r sentence,  The  most l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e t o accommodate and Since  provided  to i d e n t i f y  have chosen t o focus  implement  research  the i m p l i c a t i o n s of such a p r o p o s a l . u p o n t h e c o s t and  their  there i s presently  a g e n e r a l l a c k of knowledge i n t h i s a r e a , c o n s i d e r a b l e  in  accept  s u p e r v i s i o n f o r the s t a t u t o r y r e m i s s i o n p e r i o d of  change i s t h e N a t i o n a l P a r o l e Board.  required  to  inmates  The  is authors  manpower r e q u i r e m e n t s e s s e n t i a l  p r o v i d i n g a s u p e r v i s i o n program. The  study  i s b a s e d on  the premise that s u p e r v i s i o n i s a  major f a c t o r i n the r e h a b i l i t a t i o n of the offender. o f f e r s a d d i t i o n a l p r o t e c t i o n t o t h e c o m m u n i t y by  Furthermore, i t  the r e d u c t i o n  of  recidivism. By e s t i m a t e was this and  change.  utilizing  present  data  and  k n o w l e d g e a v a i l a b l e , an  made o f t h e number o f i n m a t e s who  w i l l be  affected  by  T h e s e c a l c u l a t i o n s w e r e u s e d t o d e t e r m i n e t h e manpower  c o s t r e q u i r e d f o r d i f f e r e n t i a l m o d e l s o f s u p e r v i s i o n b a s e d on  number o f h o u r s s p e n t w i t h t h e  releasee.  the  i i i Recommendations w e r e many a n d v a r i e d .  arising  out of the findings o f the study  The p r i n c i p l e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n b e i n g I  i n order  t o make b e t t e r u s e o f s i m i l a r p r o g r a m s i n e x i s t e n c e a more  effective  g a t h e r i n g and c o - o r d i n a t i o n o f s t a t i s t i c a l This study intends to f u l f i l filling  the requirements  of the Master  data i s necessary.  a dual purpose:  o f S o c i a l Work t h e s i s a s w e l l  as i n t e n d i n g t o p r o v i d e u s e f u l i n f o r m a t i o n t o t h o s e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s who w i l l b e c o n c e r n e d new  legislation.  that of f u l -  government  w i t h the implementation  of this  TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I.  PAGE INTRODUCTION Rationale  1 and J u s t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e S t u d y  P r i n c i p a l Aspects o f the Proposed  . .  Mandatory  R e l e a s e System  II.  2  Purpose o f t h e Study  3  Focus o f t h e Study  3  STUDY DESIGN  5  A s s u m p t i o n s , V a l u e s and V a r i a b l e s .  . . . . .  5  D e f i n i t i o n o f Terms  6  Basic  9  Sources o f Data  Data A n a l y s i s  . . . . . .  L i m i t a t i o n s o f Data Used III.  . . . .  9  .  10  A S T A T I S T I C A L A N A L Y S I S OF THE EFFECT OF  THE  MANDATORY SYSTEM  13  E s t i m a t e o f Number o f I n m a t e s  Affected  Time and C o s t A n a l y s i s o f a P a r o l e  . . .  13  Officer's  Services  16  Manpower a n d C o s t A n a l y s i s  f o r Assessments  Manpower a n d C o s t A n a l y s i s IV.  1  SUPERVISION  .  18 19 22  Introduction  22  Goals of Supervision  23  Concept  of Supervision  . . .  24  CHAPTER  PAGE Formula f o r S u p e r v i s i o n  26  Example Model o f S u p e r v i s i o n . Other Factors A f f e c t i n g Supervision Model  . . . . .  27  a Given  . . . .  29  J u s t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e C o n c e p t and Formula f o r S u p e r v i s i o n V.  . . . . . . .  CONCLUSIONS  31  Summary . Evaluation. Recommendations BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . .  30  31 .. . . . . . . . . .  32 34 37 41  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  We w o u l d l i k e Mr.  Bob G i l l i l a n d ,  suggestions in  t o express  our sincere appreciation t o  Student Supervisor, School  and c o n s t a n t  availability  the organization of this  provided  o f S o c i a l Work. t h e needed  Office Staff  direction  study.  We a r e a l s o g r a t e f u l t o M r . K y l e S t e v e n s o n , Representative  His  Regional  o f t h e N a t i o n a l P a r o l e S e r v i c e and h i s Vancouver  f o r t h e i r generous a s s i s t a n c e throughout t h e prepara-  t i o n o f the study.  To M r . L a r r y B e l l ,  Research Advisor, School of  S o c i a l Work, o u r s i n c e r e t h a n k s f o r h i s s u g g e s t i o n s  regarding our  statistical analysis.  The  stenographic  staff  of t h e Vancouver O f f i c e o ft h e  N a t i o n a l Parole Service deserve s p e c i a l mention f o r t h e i r kind eration.  co-op-  CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION  The  concept o f mandatory r e l e a s e  ( a l s o r e f e r r e d t o as  mandatory p a r o l e , and c o n d i t i o n a l r e l e a s e ) i s a system whereby t h e m a j o r i t y o f inmates a r e r e l e a s e d under s u p e r v i s i o n from p r i s o n to  the expiration of their The  19th  prior  sentence.  idea of parole i t s e l f  i s f a r f r o m new.  and 2 0 t h c e n t u r i e s i n E n g l a n d , I r e l a n d , S p a i n ,  Throughout t h e the United  States  o f A m e r i c a a n d C a n a d a some f o r m o f p a r o l e h a s b e e n i n t r o d u c e d a t various  times  a n d u n d e r d i f f e r e n t names.  r e l e a s e as s u c h , and t h e j u s t i f i c a t i o n c a l l y advanced e l e v e n years Fauteux Report  RATIONALE AND J U S T I F I C A T I O N OF THE STUDY  mandatory r e l e a s e system w i l l  be  contain a provisionf o r  following the release  I t i s expected that t h i s system o f r e l e a s e w i l l  rate of revocations after  the-offender  discharged  specifi-  ago i n r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s made i n t h e  s u p e r v i s i o n o f the releasee immediately prison.  o f i t i n C a n a d a , was  ( 1 5 , p. 6 1 ) .  I.  The  The c o n c e p t o f m a n d a t o r y  and r e c i d i v i s m . has served  The p r e s e n t  hisfull  from,  reduce the  situation i s that  s e n t e n c e i n p r i s o n he w i l l  t o t h e community w i t h i n s u f f i c i e n t p r e p a r a t i o n and  minimal supervision. t h a t an i n c r e a s e d  Studies  frequency  conducted i n C a l i f o r n i a  (5,24) i n d i c a t e  o f c o n t a c t w i t h t h e r e l e a s e e had a  n i f i c a n t decrease i n the percentage returning to p r i s o n .  sig-  The r e s u l t  2 of and  s u p e r v i s i o n then, i s of considerable b e n e f i t to both the offender society.  The range  o f such b e n e f i t s , b o t h s o c i a l and monetary,  extends beyond those c o n s i d e r e d i n t h i s  II.  1.  Individuals  study.  P R I N C I P A L ASPECTS OF THE PROPOSED MANDATORY RELEASE SYSTEM  t o be i n c l u d e d  i n t h e proposed  r e l e a s e system are: a l l inmates i.e.,  i n federal  sentences  and t h o s e  a term o f p r e v e n t i v e detention-Dangerous and H a b i t u a l C r i m i n a l s .  groups ing 2.  o f i n d i v i d u a l s would  4.  latter  be through p r e s e n t l y  exist-  arrangements.  T h i s p e r i o d under s u p e r v i s i o n w i l l  be t h e l a s t onesentence.  P a r o l e through t h e N a t i o n a l P a r o l e Board would to  serving  Sexual Offend-  Release t o r these  quarter of the i n d i v i d u a l ' s t o t a l 3.  institutions,  s e n t e n c e s o f two y e a r s o r o v e r , w i t h t h e e x c e p -  t i o n of those serving l i f e  ers  mandatory  function i n i t s existing  continue  form.  G e n e r a l l y , f o r t h e purpose  of this study, the conditions  of  be s i m i l a r t o t h o s e  mandatory r e l e a s e would  the present p a r o l e system  (i.e.,  some t e r m s  o f agreement  s i m i l a r t o t h e p r e s e n t l y p r e v a i l i n g ones w i l l by t h e inmate upon r e l e a s e under t h e mandatory system).  under  be s i g n e d release  3 5.  Releases under t h e mandatory r e l e a s e  s y s t e m may b e  r e v o k e d t h r o u g h t h e c o m m i s s i o n o f a new o f f e n c e o r through serious v i o l a t i o n s o f the conditions datory  release.  III. This  o f man-  PURPOSE OF THE STUDY  s t u d y w i l l be c o n c e r n e d w i t h  implications i n introducing  some o f t h e p r a c t i c a l  t h e proposed mandatory r e l e a s e  s y s t e m and  p o s s i b l e areas f o rfuture i n v e s t i g a t i o n .  IV. The estimate release  FOCUS OF THE STUDY  a u t h o r s have employed s t a t i s t i c a l d a t a a v a i l a b l e t o  t h e number o f i n m a t e s who w i l l b e a f f e c t e d b y t h e m a n d a t o r y system i n t h e y e a r 1972. T h i s  study discusses  manpower a n a l y s i s w i t h v a r i a b l e r e v o c a t i o n tion of various  tables  (seethe Appendix).  model f o rd i f f e r e n t i a l s u p e r v i s i o n  t h e c o s t and  r a t e s , through the u t i l i z a Furthermore, a suggested  and i n s t i t u t i o n a l a s s e s s m e n t s i s  presented. In a d d i t i o n , the study o f f e r s a formula which can r e a d i l y be  applied  t o a d i f f e r e n t i a l model o f s u p e r v i s i o n .  formula i s the importance of the c r u c i a l re-entry community and t h e d e c r e a s i n g entry  period  period  intensity of supervision  to the expiration of the supervision  I n c o n c l u s i o n , we r e c o g n i z e t h i s l i m i t e d s t u d y does n o t p r o v i d e the  Underlying  this  into the  from t h e r e -  period.  and acknowledge t h e f a c t  that  an all-emcompassing s o l u t i o n t o  a n t i c i p a t e d and u n e x p e c t e d e f f e c t s o f t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e  4 mandatory r e l e a s e system i n Canada. s e v e r a l recommendations t o be  However, t h i s study does r a i s e  considered.  CHAPTER I I  STUDY DESIGN  As m e n t i o n e d i n C h a p t e r I t h e c o n c e p t o f a m a n d a t o r y system has tions. has  received considerable  This  i n t e r e s t has  b e e n t a k e n by  a t t e n t i o n from the  field  of  correc-  expanded t o t h e p o i n t where d e f i n i t e  action  t h e Government of Canada t o implement s u c h a  system  in  the near f u t u r e .  is  t h e c o s t , manpower and  One  of the  issues i n r e l a t i o n to  implementation  type of s u p e r v i s i o n r e q u i r e d .  Research  comes h e l p f u l t h e n t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h i s d e s i r e d p l a n i n o r d e r its  release  to  beachieve  optimum e f f e c t i v e n e s s .  I.  ASSUMPTIONS, VALUES AND  In advocating  a mandatory r e l e a s e program, c e r t a i n b a s i c  a s s u m p t i o n s h a v e b e e n made. an o p p o r t u n i t y  a l i z a t i o n and  It is felt  f o r the offender  n a t u r a l community. the  VARIABLES  During the  that the  r e l e a s e system o f f e r s  to b e n e f i t from s u p e r v i s i o n i n a t r a n s i t i o n p e r i o d between  institution-  e x p i r a t i o n of the sentence, s u p e r v i s i o n  o f s o c i a l c a s e w o r k and  c o u n s e l l i n g ) a s s i s t s the offender  ( i n the. f o r m by  acting  as  a control. Since mandatory r e l e a s e i s o n l y p r o c e s s i t m u s t be process—i.e.,  seen i n context  court  with  p r o c e e d i n g s and  a part of the c o r r e c t i o n a l  the previous  institutionalization.  have a d i f f e r e n t e f f e c t upon each o f f e n d e r tation. partially  We  are  and  assuming t h a t h i s experiences  p r e p a r e d him  s e c t i o n s of  f o r r e t u r n to the  These  h i s subsequent p r i o r to release  community.  the will  rehabilihave  6 The offender  value  o f s u p e r v i s i o n i s seen as a r e h a b i l i t a t i o n o f t h e  i n d i c a t e d by a lower r e c i d i v i s m r a t e .  Further  i t i s assumed  that intensive supervision results i n generally  improved h e h a v i o u r on  the p a r t  r a t i o n a l e , the study  will  of the offender.  estimate  release  the costs  On t h e b a s i s o f t h i s  a n d manpower r e q u i r e d  system w h i c h , i t i s hoped, w i l l  t o develop a mandatory  be e f f e c t i v e by l e s s e n i n g t h e  c o s t o f c r i m e t o t h e community. The  major v a r i a b l e s considered  i n the study a r e :  1.  The number o f men who w i l l  be a f f e c t e d b y t h e proposed  plan. 2.  T h e h o u r s a n d manpower n e c e s s a r y t o c a r r y o u t t h e s u p e r v i s i o n o f such a  3.  The c o s t  4.  The f r e q u e n c y o f s u p e r v i s o r y for  5.  of such a p l a n .  Regular Parole  t h i r d of h i s sentence.  the Parole  o f a pre-mandatory r e l e a s e  summary o f  D E F I N I T I O N OF TERMS  ( i n operation  inmate has t h e r i g h t t o apply  by  which i s provided  offender.  II.  (proper  contact  the r e h a b i l i t a t i o n of the offender.  The e x t e n s i v e n e s s the  visions  plan.  presently)—a  f o r release  p r o c e s s whereby an  a f t e r t h e completion o f one-  I t i s granted on t h e c o n d i t i o n t h a t c e r t a i n  s h e l t e r , employment and a d e q u a t e s u p e r v i s i o n )  B o a r d a r e met ( u n t i l e x p i r a t i o n o f  sentence).  pro-  outlined  7 Mandatory Release ( t h eproposed p l a n ) — a when a n i n m a t e i s n o t g r a n t e d to  which  operates  r e g u l a r p a r o l e , b u t i s g i v e n an o p p o r t u n i t y  be r e l e a s e d under s u p e r v i s i o n f o r t h e s t a t u t o r y r e m i s s i o n p a r t o f h i s  sentence. his  process  This  acceptance f o r release w i l l  be a v o l u n t a r y d e c i s i o n on  part. Minimum P a r o l e  ( i n operation p r e s e n t l y ) — a process  wherein  i n m a t e s n o t s e l e c t e d f o r r e g u l a r p a r o l e may b e r e l e a s e d p r i o r t o t h e e x p i r a t i o n d a t e on t h e c o n d i t i o n t h a t t h e y  accept  supervision f o r the r e -  mainder o f t h e i r s e n t e n c e s as w e l l as t h e s t a t u t o r y r e m i s s i o n The  i n m a t e s may b e r e l e a s e d o n e m o n t h e a r l i e r  f o r every  year  period. of their  s e n t e n c e up t o a t o t a l o f s i x m o n t h s . Statutory Remission—this  refers to that part of the t o t a l  tence w h i c h by s t a t u t e a l l o w s t h e inmate t o s e r v e  the l a s t quarter  sen-  of h i s  sentence outside the i n s t i t u t i o n . Revocation—of release w i l l  occur  a parole  ( r e g u l a r o r minimum) a n d m a n d a t o r y  on t h e grounds o f a s e r i o u s v i o l a t i o n o f t h e terms o f  p a r o l e o r r e l e a s e a g r e e m e n t s u c h a s c o m m i s s i o n o f a new o f f e n s e in  a return to the Penitentiary. Recidivism—the  completion  of the parole  c o m m i s s i o n o f a new o f f e n s e d u r i n g o r a f t e r t h e ( o r mandatory r e l e a s e ) s u p e r v i s i o n p e r i o d .  Assessment—a procedure c a r r i e d  o u t by t h e P a r o l e O f f i c e r on  the r e c e i p t of the r e g u l a r p a r o l e a p p l i c a t i o n t o gather and  resulting  present  such t o the P a r o l e Board.  the inmate's s u i t a b i l i t y  f o rparole.  essential material  T h i s m a t e r i a l i s used t o determine I t i n c l u d e s community i n v e s t i g a t i o n ,  i n s t i t u t i o n a l assessments and a t t i t u d e s d i s p l a y e d by t h e inmate.  8  Pre-Release assigned  to prepare the o f f e n d e r  knowledge gained  by  carried  f o r the purposes of t h i s  the  study  the  application  diagnostic  to the  In  assessment  parole.  Supervision—the l e e o r r e l e a s e e and offender.  f o r r e - e n t r y by  out by  the supervisor through i n s t i t u t i o n a l contact.  i t i s similar  of a r e g u l a r  the  w h i c h w i l l be  s u p e r v i s o r a f t e r the r e c e i p t of a mandatory r e l e a s e  which serves  content,  Plan—procedure  process  of r e g u l a r c o n t a c t s between the  paro-  the s u p e r v i s o r w i t h the purpose of r e h a b i l i t a t i o n  of  9 III. The  BASIC SOURCES OF DATA  d a t a employed i n t h i s study was  gathered from the f o l l o w i n g  sources: 1.  The  Annual Report of the Commissioner of P e n e t e n t i a f i e s  y e a r ending March 31, 2.  to March 31, 1964)  (35).  The Annual Report o f the N a t i o n a l P a r o l e Board (years December 31,  3.  1958  The  1963  and December 31,  Vancouver R e g i o n a l  1965)  (fiscal  ending  (36).  O f f i c e o f the N a t i o n a l P a r o l e  Service  s t a t i s t i c s which i n c l u d e d breakdown i n the o f f i c e r s working time and number o f p a r o l e e s  supervised  per o f f i c e r .  t h i s study i s the average s a l a r i e s i n g December 31, 4.  1966,  Also included i n  o f o f f i c e r s f o r the y e a r end-  (38).  S t u d i e s of p a r o l e systems i n the S t a t e s o f C a l i f o r n i a and ton  (23-29) .  IV.  1.  Washing-  The  DATA ANALYSIS  P e n i t e n t i a r y s t a t i s t i c s (3.;) and 1  the P a r o l e s t a t i s t i c s  (36) were used as a c r i t e r i a i n e s t i m a t i n g  the p o s s i b l e number of persons  e l i g i b l e f o r mandatory r e l e a s e at a f u t u r e  date.  2. in setting 3.  The up  Vancouver R e g i o n a l  the estimated P r a c t i c e s and  O f f i c e ' s s t a t i s t i c s (38) were i n v o l v e d  c o s t and manpower o f the f u t u r e p l a n . r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t s o f C a l i f o r n i a and  (24, 25) were seen as r e f e r e n c e p o i n t s i n terms of p r o p o s i n g s i o n concept f o r Canada. p a r o l e ; Washington has  C a l i f o r n i a at p r e s e n t  97%.  has  89%  Washington  a supervi-  o f a l l inmates  on  With the i n c o r p o r a t i o n o f a mandatory r e l e a s e  10 system i n Canada ( i n c l u d i n g r e g u l a r p a r o l e e s ) under some form of  an e s t i m a t e d 98% w i l l  be  supervision.  Thus i n u s i n g  the above s t a t i s t i c s and  information  available,  the p l a n i s to p r o j e c t an e s t i m a t e of the c o s t and manpower r e q u i r e d  to  develop a mandatory r e l e a s e system i n Canada.  V.  Generally r e l i a b i l i t y and  LIMITATIONS OF DATA USED  the v a l u e  validity.  of the d a t a used depends upon i t s c o n s i s t e n c y ,  With r e g a r d s to v a l i d i t y , i t should  ed t h a t the f i n d i n g s of the study are based upon recorded  be  remember-  Penitentiary  ' I•  admissions, I.e., of  a sample of known admissions from an unknown  population  offenders. Secondly, the f i g u r e s p r e s e n t e d i n the Dominion Bureau o f  t i c s can be m i s r e p r e s e n t e d because of such f a c t o r s as m u l t i - s t e p s in reporting to Ottawa and tration  Statisinvolved  ( p o l i c e , c o u r t s , e t c . ) , i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s i n areas r e p o r t i n g each P r o v i n c e  maintaining  a d i f f e r e n t c r i t e r i a and  adminis-  ( d e s p i t e n a t i o n a l a p p l i c a t i o n , of the C r i m i n a l Code). Specific limitations include:  1.  The  d i f f e r e n c e s i n the base y e a r o f S t a t i s t i c s o b t a i n e d  Report o f The  Commissioner of P e n i t e n t i a r i e s (35) and  o f the N a t i o n a l P a r o l e Board  (36) were due  1966  standardize  a l l three resource  bility.  P a r o l e Board r e p o r t . to one  the Annual Report  to the u n a v a i l a b i l i t y o f  c e r t a i n governmental p u b l i c a t i o n s , i . e . , 1965 r e p o r t s and  from the Annual  and  1966  Penitentiaries  Thus i t became n e c e s s a r y to y e a r i n order  to develop compara-  11  2.  The  Vancouver R e g i o n a l  O f f i c e parole s t a t i s t i c s  i n f o r m a l r e f e r e n c e to the c u r r e n t time a l l o t m e n t supervisory  f u n c t i o n s of the p a r o l e o f f i c e r .  (38) were used as f o r assessment  o f the N a t i o n a l P a r o l e  be mentioned t h a t o t h e r a g e n c i e s ,  Probation  and  remainder  such as, John Howard S o c i e t y ,  S o c i a l W e l f a r e Departments c a r r y p a r o l e s u p e r v i s i o n .  of the s e r v i c e s of these agencies v a r i e s c o n s i d e r a b l y  Canada and  the  Service.  I t should  extent  is  I t should be noted t h a t the work l o a d d i v i s i o n of  Vancouver o f f i c e i s not n e c e s s a r i l y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f the  3.  and  These f i g u r e s were the  r e s u l t of an i n f o r m a l study and as such the degree of accuracy questionable.  ah  they w i l l no doubt c o n t i n u e  The  across  to c a r r y some r e s p o n s i b i l i t y  f o r d i r e c t s u p e r v i s i o n both i n Regular P a r o l e and Mandatory R e l e a s e . However f o r ease o f c a l c u l a t i o n i t has P a r o l e S e r v i c e w i l l be h a n d l i n g 4.  The  and  a l l direct  C a l i f o r n i a and Washington s t u d i e s  l i m i t e d use,  been assumed t h a t the  National  supervision.  (23-29) were n e c e s s a r y , but  owing to the l a c k of c o m p a r a b i l i t y between t h e i r  those of Canada.  T h i s was  seen i n p a r t i c u l a r w i t h  of  statistics  the p r e d i c t i o n  of mandatory r e l e a s e performance from c e r t a i n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s d i s p l a y e d by  the o f f e n d e r a t the time o f r e l e a s e , e.g.,  previous  as a c o n s t e l l a t i o n w h i c h was  (24)  these c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s were  Canadian d a t a  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c i n d i v i d u a l l y thus making i t d i f f i c u l t  risk  accuracy  categories.  presented  i n t u r n used to p r e d i c t whether the inmate  a h i g h , low or medium r i s k p a r o l e e .  model o f any  l e n g t h o f sentence,  incarcerations, etc.  In the C a l i f o r n i a d a t a  was  age,  (35) presented  to p r e s e n t  comparable to the C a l i f o r n i a e x p e r i e n c e  each  a predictive  i n terms of  12. In s p i t e of the above d i f f i c u l t i e s should  not  a l t e r appreciably  In c o n c l u s i o n , that c e r t a i n trends w i l l  i t i s f e l t t h a t the d i f f e r e n c e s  the r e s u l t s o f the  study.  t h i s p r e d i c t i v e study i s based on the remain r e l a t i v e l y c o n s t a n t .  time f a c t o r i s a p r o j e c t i v e one, concepts developed i n the study.  However, s i n c e  c o n s i d e r a t i o n must be g i v e n These may  vary  assumption  i n applying  i n accordance to a v a r i e t y  o f f a c t o r s s u c h as i n c r e a s i n g c r i m e , more e f f e c t i v e law enforcement i  changing economic c o n d i t i o n s .  the  and  13  CHAPTER I I I  A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF THE EFFECT OF THE MANDATORY SYSTEM  T h i s chapter w i l l attempt t o analyze t i o n o f a mandatory system o f r e l e a s e .  t h e e f f e c t o f the i n t r o d u c -  Itw i l l  i n c l u d e an e s t i m a t e  o f the  number o f inmates a f f e c t e d , an a n a l y s i s o f time a v a i l a b l e t o a P a r o l e and  Officer  an e s t i m a t i o n o f t o t a l manpower needs and c o s t based on d i f f e r e n t i a l  models o f s u p e r v i s i o n and assessment.  I. The cides with  ESTIMATE OF NUMBER OF INMATES AFFECTED  sample y e a r s e l e c t e d i s 1972.  T h i s was done because i t c o i n -  t h e end o f a f i v e y e a r p l a n on the p a r t o f t h e P a r o l e  Service,  d e s i g n e d t o meet t h e growing manpower requirement o f t h i s S e r v i c e . hypothesized now  t h a t t h e p l a n would go i n t o e f f e c t on January 1, 1968. T h i s  seems u n l i k e l y .  Any p r o j e c t e d  account changes o r d e l a y s The  I t was  t o t a l would t h e r e f o r e have t o take i n t o  i n passing  such  legislation.  o n l y f e a s i b l e method f o r making a p r o j e c t i o n o f t h e number o f  inmates who w i l l be a f f e c t e d was t o a n a l y z e  t h e l a s t a v a i l a b l e admission  totals to federal penitentiaries.  t o make t h i s p r o j e c t i o n u s e f u l  In order  f o r f u t u r e r e l e a s e these s t a t i s t i c s must c o n t a i n a breakdown o f admissions according  t o l e n g t h o f sentence.  The l a s t y e a r such s t a t i s t i c s were a v a i l -  a b l e was f o r t h e f i s c a l y e a r 1963-64. The  breakdown o f admissions i n t o time i n t e r v a l s f o r t h e f i s c a l y e a r  1963-64 i s as f o l l o w s : 2-3 y e a r s , 15-20  years  and 20-25 y e a r s  3-4 y e a r s , 4-5 y e a r s , 5-6 y e a r s , 10-15 y e a r s ,  (see Appendix, T a b l e I ) .  I t i s assumed f o r t h e  14  purpose o f t h i s a n a l y s i s t h a t the mean l e n g t h o f a sentence corresponds t o the m i d - p o i n t o f the time i n t e r v a l s e l e c t e d , t h a t i s 2.5, 8 years, etc.  3.5,  4.5,  5.5,  T h i s mean d a t e o f the commencement o f the sentence w i l l  be assumed t o occur a t the m i d - p o i n t o f the y e a r .  For example, one  r e c e i v i n g 2.5 y e a r s i s assumed to be sentenced June 30, 1968. date o f r e l e a s e i s s e t at December 31, 1970. c u l a t e d a t one-quarter of the t o t a l sentence. the s t a t u t o r y r e m i s s i o n i s 7.5 months. o f the mandatory s u p e r v i s i o n .  also  group  The mean  S t a t u t o r y Remission i s c a l I f the sentence i s 30 months,  This w i l l ,  as w e l l , be the p e r i o d  Earned r e m i s s i o n i s not b e i n g taken i n t o  c o n s i d e r a t i o n as t h e r e i s no s t a t i s t i c a l means o f measuring  the percentage  of inmates t h a t a c t u a l l y r e c e i v e t h e i r f u l l earned r e m i s s i o n .  A p a r t from  t h a t , the maximum earned r e m i s s i o n on a two and one h a l f y e a r sentence s t a t u t o r y r e m i s s i o n i s o n l y s l i g h t l y i n excess o f two months. comparatively i n s i g n i f i c a n t  less  This i s a  amount.  The c u m u l a t i v e t o t a l o f a l l r e l e a s e s i n a g i v e n y e a r i s c a l c u l a t e d by h o l d i n g the admission f i g u r e s from the y e a r 1963-64 c o n s t a n t from 1975  (see Appendix,  Table I I I ) .  As can be seen from t h i s t a b l e , t h e r e  would be a sudden impact of t o t a l r e l e a s e o f 2,160 would s h a r p l y i n c r e a s e i n 1971  t o 3,153.  g r a d u a l i n c r e a s e t o 3,525 by 1974, the sample y e a r , 1972,  1968-  i n 1970.  The number  From t h i s p o i n t t h e r e would be  then a l e v e l l i n g o f f would o c c u r .  the t o t a l r e l e a s e s would be 3,402.  A  In  significant  number of these would be r e l e a s e d under the r e g u l a r p a r o l e system. The graph on T a b l e IV i l l u s t r a t e s the v a l i d i t y o f the c h o i c e o f the f i s c a l year 1963-1964 as a t y p i c a l y e a r i n r e g a r d s to admissions to federal penitentiaries.  T h i s t a b l e i n d i c a t e s t h a t the d i s t r i b u t i o n of  sentences and the t o t a l of those sentenced has remained  relatively  15  constant  f r o m 1960 t o 1 9 6 4 .  consistency periods  80% of those  of four years  I t I s important  admitted  and t h r e e y e a r s It  alter  or l e s s (see Appendix, Table V ) .  With regard  to t h i s ,  reason the  b e t w e e n one and  This  i s equivalent  In contrast, i ti s interesting  one-half  system.  w i l l not appreciably  f o r each group sentenced  t h e c r i m e s t a t i s t i c s f o r 1965 r e v e a l  convicted of a l l offences  813 ( 3 7 p . 1 1 , 1 9 6 5 ) .  rate.  For this  a f t e r t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f t h e mandatory  i s assumed t h a t t h e p a t t e r n o f s e n t e n c i n g  t h e number o f t h o s e 41,  be e x p e r i e n c e d  over the short term but that the t o t a l s  change.  remarkable  t o p e n i t e n t i a r i e s were sentenced t o  main impact o f mandatory r e l e a s e w i l l years  to note that with  may  that  h a s d e c r e a s e d f r o m 4 2 , 194 t o t o a 2.5% d e c l i n e i n t h e c r i m e  t o n o t e t h a t t h e t o t a l number o f  i n m a t e s i n F e d e r a l P e n i t e n t i a r i e s b e t w e e n M a r c h 3 1 , 1964 t o M a r c h 3 1 , 1966 d e c l i n e d 2.7%.  T h i s was a c c o m p l i s h e d b o t h b y a r e d u c t i o n i n a d m i s s i o n s  7% a n d a n i n c r e a s e o f d i s c h a r g e s  o f 7%.  We u n d e r s t a n d f r o m  of  informal  contacts with, the P e n i t e n t i a r y S e r v i c e that the p r i s o n p o p u l a t i o n has experienced in  a further slight  admissions  also reflect in  d e c l i n e since the l a s t report date.  The d e c l i n e  i s i n a g r e e m e n t w i t h t h e d e c l i n e i n t h e c r i m e r a t e a n d may a d i f f e r e n t sentencing  releases i s l i k e l y In order  p o l i c y by m a g i s t r a t e s .  The  increase  due t o t h e more e f f e c t i v e u s e o f p a r o l e .  t o d e t e r m i n e t h e a c t u a l number o f i n m a t e s a f f e c t e d b y  m a n d a t o r y r e l e a s e , t h e t o t a l number o f r e l e a s e e s  on p a r o l e i s d e d u c t e d  t h e t o t a l number o f r e l e a s e s i n t h e s a m p l e y e a r  o f 1972 ( s e e A p p e n d i x ,  i  Tables  X I and X I I ) .  The l a s t  fiscal  year  1965.  Since  -  a v a i l a b l e s t a t i s t i c s from t h e P a r o l e  showing a breakdown o f p a r o l e s g r a n t e d  from  Service  b y l e n g t h o f s e n t e n c e was f o r t h e  1 9 6 5 , t h e number o f p a r o l e s g r a n t e d  has i n c r e a s e d  16  s i g n i f i c a n t l y and i n c r e a s e has  t h i s t r e n d i s l i k e l y to c o n t i n u e .  occurred  However, much o f  i n the c a t e g o r y o f minimum p a r o l e , and  the  presumably,  when the mandatory system i s i n e f f e c t , minimum p a r o l e w i l l be e l i m i n a t e d . Thus, w h i l e t h e r e may  be an i n c r e a s e i n numbers o f p a r o l e s  granted,  many o f these w i l l f a l l i n t o the mandatory r e l e a s e c a t e g o r y .  I f there  i s a change i n the p o l i c y i n g r a n t i n g r e g u l a r p a r o l e s , t h i s w i l l a f f e c t the numbers coming under the mandatory system.  directly  I t s h o u l d be  noted  t h a t the p a r o l e s t a t i s t i c s are f o r the c a l e n d a r y e a r , whereas the p e n i t e n t i a r y s t a t i s t i c s a r e f o r the f i s c a l y e a r .  T h i s s h o u l d not have any  effect  on the v a l i d i t y o f combining these s t a t i s t i c s as the crime r a t e does not v a r y s i g n i f i c a n t l y from one  II.  TIME AND  The  p e r i o d o f the y e a r t o another  (37).  COST ANALYSIS OF A PAROLE OFFICER'S SERVICES  f o l l o w i n g i s an a n a l y s i s o f the time a v a i l a b l e per month t o  a P a r o l e O f f i c e r based on a survey done w i t h the c o - o p e r a t i o n of the Vancouver R e g i o n a l O f f i c e .  T h i s i n f o r m a t i o n was  compiled  through a s e r i e s  of i n f o r m a l c o n t a c t s w i t h a a c h o f the f i e l d o f f i c e r s i n the Vancouver R e g i o n a l P a r o l e O f f i c e , the s t a f f S u p e r v i s o r , Mr. R e p r e s e n t a t i v e , Mr.  K. Stevenson.  A. Byman and  the  Regional  The g r o s s t o t a l i s 154 hours a month  (7 hours a d a y — 2 2 d a y s a month) which i s b a s i c a l l y employed i n two  functions:  the i n s t i t u t i o n a l and community i n v e s t i g a t i o n s o f p a r o l e a p p l i c a t i o n s , and s u p e r v i s i o n of p a r o l e e s . hours.  The  These f i g u r e s exclude  c o f f e e breaks and  f o l l o w i n g a r e the normal k i n d of d e d u c t i o n s  Deductions p e r month:  3h hours - S i c k l e a v e 9 hours -  Holidays  of t i n e  lunch  available.  17  6  hours - Statutory holidays  4  hours - Staff meetings  1  hour  4  hours — Duty day work  - Supervision  _1_ hours -Conferences 29 154  - Gross Total  29  - Deductions  125  - Balance remaining f o r s u p e r v i s i o n and assessments.  A means o f documenting  t h i s a p p r o x i m a t i o n o f a v a i l a b l e time  i s t o c a l c u l a t e the a c t u a l time spent on s u p e r v i s i o n and assessments i n t h e Vancouver R e g i o n a l P a r o l e o f f i c e f o r y e a r 1966.  Table VIII  i n d i c a t e s t h a t 108 hours p e r o f f i c e r p e r month were spent on p r e r e l e a s e assessments and a t o t a l o f 17 hours p e r month p e r o f f i c e r were spent on s u p e r v i s i o n (see Appendix, T a b l e I X ) .  The t o t a l amount  of time a v a i l a b l e f o r b o t h assessment and s u p e r v i s i o n i s 125  hours  per month.  125).  T h i s i s e q u i v a l e n t t o 1,500  hours p e r y e a r (12 x  T h e r e f o r e , f o r each 1500 man hours o f assessment and s u p e r v i s i o n one additional Parole O f f i c e r i s required. The c o s t f a c t o r was determined by e s t i m a t i n g the average s a l a r y o f each P a r o l e O f f i c e r a t  $8,500 p e r y e a r (40). The r e s e a r c h e r s  were unable t o o b t a i n any d a t a from t h e Dominion Bureau o f S t a t i s t i c s with respect to s a l a r i e s of Parole O f f i c e r s .  There was a l s o no d a t a  18  available  from w h i c h an e s t i m a t e  trative costs.  The U n i t e d  a number o f s t u d i e s  c o u l d b e made o f a d d i t i o n a l a d m i n i s -  Community S e r v i c e s  into administrative costs  i n V a n c o u v e r h a s done o f community  agencies.  I t was f o u n d t h a t t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o s t s h a v e b e e n w i t h i n a f e w points  o f 55% o f s a l a r i e s r e g a r d l e s s  o f t h e s i z e and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e  o r g a n i z a t i o n o f t h e a g e n c i e s ( 3 9 ) . I t w o u l d n o t be s u r p r i s i n g i f the  administrative costs of the Parole  S e r v i c e w e r e somewhat i  higher  owing t o c e n t r a l i z e d a d m i n i s t r a t i o n i n Ottawa and i f t h e expenses f o r t h e members o f t h e N a t i o n a l P a r o l e salaries paid  B o a r d and t h e c o m p a r a t i v e l y  t o a d m i n i s t r a t i o n were i n c l u d e d .  d e c i d e d t o use the 55% f i g u r e as a b a s i s  III.  However, t h e  higher researchers  f o r the c a l c u l a t i o n of cost.  MANPOWER AND COST A N A L Y S I S FOR ASSESSMENTS  The manpower r e q u i r e m e n t f o r a s s e s s m e n t s i s d e t e r m i n e d b y multiplying  t h e t o t a l number o f a s s e s s m e n t s b y t h e m a n - h o u r s  f o r each assessment.  A rough estimate  of the present  required  requirements  f o r i n s t i t u t i o n a l a s s e s s m e n t s b a s e d on an i n f o r m a l s t u d y o f t h e Vancouver O f f i c e i n d i c a t e d t h a t a p p r o x i m a t e l y 70% o f an o f f i c e r ' s was s p e n t i n t h i s a r e a .  By o b t a i n i n g  d o n e i n 1966 a n d t h e t o t a l s t a f f estimated  that  Table V I I I ) . i t was f e l t  time  t h e t o t a l number o f a s s e s s m e n t s  complement f o r t h a t y e a r ,  7.7 h o u r s w e r e s p e n t o n e a c h a s s e s s m e n t  i t was  (see Appendix,  A f t e r a n i n f o r m a l s u r v e y c o n d u c t e d among s t a f f members that  this  f i g u r e was a l i t t l e  be t h e c a s e as t h e R e g i o n a l  Representative,  or. t h e h i g h Supervisor  side.  This  may  a n d S o c i a l Work  19  students each d i d a s m a l l number o f assessments i n the y e a r 1966.  Thus,  the a c t u a l time spent on an assessment may o n l y average 7.0 hours o r perhaps s l i g h t l y l e s s than t h i s .  P r e s e n t l y , the assessment i s used  to determine a man's s u i t a b i l i t y f o r p a r o l e . o f t h e mandatory  With the i n t r o d u c t i o n  system the d e t a i l e d assessment p r e s e n t l y u t i l i z e d  should not be r e q u i r e d f o r obvious r e a s o n s . summary would seem t o be more a p p r o p r i a t e .  A shorter  pre-release  S i n c e , under the mandatory  system t h e focus w i l l be d i f f e r e n t , the purpose o f t h e assessment 1  should be r e d e f i n e d , T a b l e XVII g i v e s a breakdown o f manpower and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o s t s based on a d i f f e r e n t i a l c a l c u l a t i o n o f t h e hours r e q u i r e d t o complete the i n s t i t u t i o n a l mandatory  release.  assessment  F o r example,  f o r inmates e l i g i b l e f o r  i f s i x hours were r e q u i r e d , a t o t a l  s t a f f a d d i t i o n o f 10.1 p a r o l e o f f i c e r s would be r e q u i r e d a t a c o s t o f $133,331.  On t h e o t h e r hand, i f o n l y f o u r hours were r e q u i r e d  o n l y 6.7 p a r o l e o f f i c e r s would be needed a t a c o s t o f $88,800.  IV.  MANPOWER AND COST ANALYSIS  The man-month requirement f o r s u p e r v i s i o n i s e s t i m a t e d by analyzing  the f o l l o w i n g v a r i a b l e s :  number o f p a r o l e e s  affected,  r e v o c a t i o n r a t e s and hours o f s u p e r v i s i o n per month, r e q u i r e d . T a b l e X I I i l l u s t r a t e s t h a t 2,770 inmates t o be s u p e r v i s e d w i l l r e q u i r e 21,840 months o f s u p e r v i s i o n .  The manpower requirements  and c o s t i n v o l v e d i n s u p e r v i s i o n w i l l be dependent hours p e r month o f s u p e r v i s i o n  allotted.  i n 1972  on the number o f  20  P o t e n t i a l r e v o c a t i o n s w i l l have a b e a r i n g requirements f o r s u p e r v i s i o n .  In order  on the manpower  to estimate the e f f e c t o f t h i s  v a r i a b l e , two f a c t o r s must be c o n s i d e r e d .  The f i r s t  i s that of the  inmate's average l e n g t h o f time on s u p e r v i s i o n p r i o r t o r e v o c a t i o n and  the second, the a c t u a l r e v o c a t i o n  time on s u p e r v i s i o n i s deducted.  r a t e a f t e r the average l e n g t h o f  The r e s e a r c h e r s  estimated that  revo-  c a t i o n s w i l l o c c u r a f t e r an average p e r i o d of f i v e months o f s u p e r v i s i o n . T h i s i s based on t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f C a l i f o r n i a where the average was months on p a r o l e b e f o r e required  revocation  t o p r o c e s s the r e v o c a t i o n  took p l a c e  five  ( 2 4 ) . The amount o f time  (writing l e t t e r s , interview of  revokee i n p r i s o n , c o u r t appearance) w i l l c o n s t i t u t e the e q u i v a l e n t of a f u r t h e r month o f s u p e r v i s i o n .  An e s t i m a t e o f t h e man-months o f  s u p e r v i s i o n a f f e c t e d by r e v o c a t i o n appears on T a b l e X I I I . groups r e c e i v i n g l e s s than s i x months s u p e r v i s i o n i n i t i a t e d  F o r those i n 1972,  there i s no t h e o r e t i c number o f man-months o f s u p e r v i s i o n a f f e c t e d by revocation.  F o r t h e other  by r e v o c a t i o n The  t h r e e groups, the number o f months a f f e c t e d  i s 1.5, 4.5 and 7.5 months r e s p e c t i v e l y . expected range of the r e v o c a t i o n  system i s i n e f f e c t i s between 20-50%.  r a t e once t h e mandatory  A t the p r e s e n t  c a t i o n r a t e on o r d i n a r y p a r o l e i s a p p r o x i m a t e l y 10%.  time, the r e v o This rate  will  most c e r t a i n l y be exceeded as the r i s k p o p u l a t i o n w i l l be h i g h e r . The'actual portant  r a t e w i l l depend on a number o f v a r i a b l e s , the most im-  o f which w i l l be the q u a l i t y and q u a n t i t y o f s u p e r v i s i o n .  T a b l e XV i l l u s t r a t e s how r e v o c a t i o n months o f s u p e r v i s i o n r e q u i r e d .  a f f e c t s t h e r e d u c t i o n o f man-  The t o t a l d e d u c t i o n ranges from  21  1,300-3,250 man-months o r from 6%-15% o f the man-month r e q u i r e m e n t s .  Based  on a one hour a month model o f s u p e r v i s i o n / t h i s would mean a r e d u c t i o n o f between .9 and 2.2 o f f i c e r s r e q u i r e d .  I f a f i v e hour a month s u p e r v i s i o n  model i s used, t h i s would imply a r e d u c t i o n o f between 4.3 and 10.8  officers.  I t should be p o i n t e d out t h a t r e - r e l e a s e s o f revokees a r e n o t being  con-  sidered.  Despite  the f a c t t h a t a s u b s t a n t i a l p r o p o r t i o n o f revokees w i l l  r e s u l t because o f the committal o f new o f f e n c e s , t h e r e may s t i l l be a s u b s t a n t i a l number r e t u r n e d  to the p e n i t e n t i a r y f o r t e c h n i c a l v i o l a t i o n s .  T h i s c o u l d i n c r e a s e the manpower requirement f o r s u p e r v i s i o n depending on how t h i s group i s handled. T a b l e XVI i l l u s t r a t e s the manpower needs and c o s t s o f d i f f e r e n t i a l models o f s u p e r v i s i o n v a r y i n g  from one t o e i g h t hours a month.  t i o n r a t e i s h e l d as a constant  at 30%.  The r e v o c a -  I f two hours p e r month i s used as  a model, the manpower need w i l l be 26.5 P a r o l e O f f i c e r s and t o t a l $349,138.  cost  I f a model o f f i v e hours p e r month o f s u p e r v i s i o n i s used, the  number o f O f f i c e r s r e q u i r e d i n c r e a s e s t o 66.3 O f f i c e r s and the c o s t s to $ 8 7 3 , 5 0 3 . and  The f o l l o w i n g chapter w i l l d e a l w i t h the q u e s t i o n  i t s manpower needs and c o s t s i n g r e a t e r  detail.  increase  o f a model  22  CHAPTER V SUPERVISION I.  INTRODUCTION  P a r o l e and Mandatory Release have a d u a l purpose, namely, the reformation  and  r e h a b i l i t a t i o n o f the inmate and  the p r o t e c t i o n of s o c i e t y .  In t h i s c h a p t e r ,  ' P a r o l e ' and  ably.  the term s u p e r v i s i o n w i l l be a p p l i e d s i m i l a r l y to the terms  Therefore  p a r o l e e and  'Mandatory Release' w i l l be used  releasee unless otherwise s p e c i f i e d .  the term ' P a r o l e ' was  interchange-  In the f o r e g o i n g  chapter  used f o r the purpose of a n a l y s i s .  S i n c e n e a r l y a l l those sentenced t o the F e d e r a l P e n i t e n t i a r i e s will  r e t u r n to the community, i t i s incumbent upon the N a t i o n a l  S e r v i c e as one to a c h i e v e  Parole  agency i n the community to a s s i s t those inmates b e i n g  a s u c c e s s f u l r e - e n t r y i n t o the community.  With the i n c r e a s i n g  use of p r e - s e n t e n c e r e p o r t s which o f t e n r e s u l t s i n i n c r e a s e d use b a t i o n , o n l y the more s e r i o u s and Therefore  the method o f h a n d l i n g  p e r s i s t e n t offenders  i s through a v a r i e d s u p e r v i s i o n Optimally, he  One  way  of  pro-  incarcerated. the  of d e a l i n g w i t h t h i s problem  technique.  s u p e r v i s i o n o f f e r s the r e l e a s e e the s e t t i n g and  r e q u i r e s to h e l p him work out h i s problems.  a l and  are  these people when they r e t u r n to  community must be c a r e f u l l y examined.  paroled  p r o t e c t i v e treatment aspect  Supervision  guidance  i s the c o r r e c t i o n -  o f the Mandatory R e l e a s e program and i t  i s the u l t i m a t e o b j e c t i v e of the i n v e s t i g a t i v e and  s e l e c t i v e process  which  or what t h i s study  will  precedes i t . The  i n v e s t i g a t i v e and  s e l e c t i v e process,  r e f e r to as the i n s t i t u t i o n a l assessment of the inmate, i s an i n t e g r a l p a r t  23  of the t o t a l c o r r e c t i o n a l p r o c e s s .  The  assessment p r o c e s s  can  to some de-  gree p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y prepare the inmate f o r r e - e n t r y i n t o the community w e l l as to p r o v i d e  the p a r o l e o f f i c e r  (who  w i l l eventually supervise  r e l e a s e e ) w i t h ah i n t i m a t e understanding and developmental h i s t o r y and  the  releasee's  past b e h a v i o u r p a t t e r n s .  II. The  knowledge o f the  as  GOALS OF  SUPERVISION  g o a l s of s u p e r v i s i o n are to p r o v i d e  the k i n d of i n d i v i d u a l i z e d  r e h a b i l i t a t i v e program, based on the problems, c a p a c i t i e s and l i m i t a t i o n s of the r e l e a s e e , t h a t w i l l enable the r e l e a s e e to become a s e l f - s u s t a i n i n g , law-abiding The  and  c o n t r i b u t i n g member o f s o c i e t y .  p a r o l e o f f i c e r ' s f u n c t i o n , then i s t o :  to the degree t h a t the r e l e a s e e can grow and counsel  the r e l e a s e e about how  manner t h a t w i l l be s a n c t i o n e d  he may  (1) f o s t e r and  develop i n c h a r a c t e r ;  l e a r n to c a r r y h i s own  behaviour i s r e l a t e d i n a great p a r t to p e r s o n a l  and  burden i n a  revocation rate  shown i n some s t u d i e s which w i l l be r e f e r r e d to l a t e r .  which can be  (2)  by h i s s o c i e t y .  Inadequate s u p e r v i s i o n can r e s u l t i n a h i g h e r was  direct  and  social  as  Criminal pathologies  t r e a t e d to some degree by the i m p o s i t i o n of e x t e r n a l c o n t r o l s  i n f l u e n c e , through s u r v e i l l a n c e and  guidance.  Many c r i m i n a l s have some  form o f c h a r a c t e r o l o g i c a l d i s o r d e r s , d e f e c t s i n p e r s o n a l i t y development or s i t u a t i o n a l maladjustments. officer  Lake of s u p e r v i s i o n may  a l s o prevent the  from moving i n on a p r e v e n t a t i v e b a s i s , j u s t because he was  of the r e l e a s e e ' s  current  situation.  parole  not  aware  24  III. A f t e r perusing  CONCEPT OF  various  SUPERVISION  l i t e r a t u r e on the s u p e r v i s i o n of  i t became s i g n i f i c a n t l y e v i d e n t  t h a t t h e r e was  no  releasees,  c o n s i s t e n t or  d e f i n e d p a t t e r n on what c o n s t i t u t e s minimum adequate  clearly  supervision.  There are v a r i o u s ways of d e t e r m i n i n g what i s adequate s u p e r v i s i o n . It  can be based upon r e l e a s e e ' s  needs, the p r o t e c t i o n of s o c i e t y or even  upon the funds and manpower a v a i l a b l e f o r the Mandatory B e l e a s e program. In view o f the f a c t t h a t i t i s d i f f i c u l t  to d e f i n e minimum adequate  s u p e r v i s i o n , a model f o r s u p e r v i s i o n cannot be proposed. P a r o l e Work U n i t Program (23) v i s i o n c l a s s i f i c a t i o n but  The  California  u t i l i z e s a maximum, r e g u l a r , minimum s u p e r -  t h i s model cannot be a p p l i e d i n Canada because  of the d i f f e r e n t method of s t a t i s t i c a l c o m p i l a t i o n .  Parole-outcome p r e d i c t i v e  f a c t o r s as used by b o t h C a l i f o r n i a and Washington to determine  parolees'  need f o r the degree of s u p e r v i s i o n cannot be used, once a g a i n , because  the  a v a i l a b l e Canadian s t a t i s t i c a l d a t a cannot be c o r r e l a t e d to the C a l i f o r n i a  or  Washington s t u d i e s . We  can, however, propose a concept o f s u p e r v i s i o n based upon  t i c a l knowledge a v a i l a b l e .  B a s i c a l l y two  importance of the r e - e n t r y  of the r e l e a s e e  the g r a d u a l  p r o c e s s of d e c r e a s i n g  First,  i n t o the community and  the i n t e n s i t y of s u p e r v i s i o n .  e n t r y i n t o the community, the r e l e a s e e subserviant  concepts w i l l be used.  the  second, Upon r e -  f a c e s an abrupt change from a  r o l e , to one which expects him  theore-  very  to assume f u l l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y ; and  from a h i g h l y s t r u c t u r e d s e t t i n g of a p r i s o n where regimented l i f e p r e v a i l s to a l e s s s t r u c t u r e d s e t t i n g o f the community where a r e a s o n a b l e degree of m o b i l i t y i s allowed.  The  p a r o l e p r o c e s s allows  assume r e s p o n s i b i l i t y u n t i l he  the r e l e a s e e  to  gradually  can a c h i e v e t o t a l independence from the  super-  25  v i s i o n of a parole Elliot offender  officer.  Studt  (33,  p.  3),  speaking  about the r e - e n t r y of  i n t o t h e community s t a t e s t h a t the  first  t h r e e months i n t h e  m u n i t y i s t h e m o s t c r u c i a l p e r i o d : a p e r i o d when t h e est assistance. not  The  r e l e a s e e may  the com-  releasee requires  great-  h a v e t o make a d e c i s i o n as t o w h e t h e r  t o make t h e a d j u s t m e n t o r r e t u r n t o h i s f o r m e r c r i m i n a l p a t t e r n o f  or be-  haviour . The  parole process can'also  be  s e e n as h a v i n g  f a c t o r s i n c e from the p o i n t of view of the r e l e a s e e the community g e t s h i g h e r this i n itself The  t h e l o n g e r he  a c t s as a d e t e r r e n t  r e m a i n s on  t h e l o n g e r he  a c t u a l number o f c o n t a c t s w i t h  another  the stake  positive to remain i n  supervision, therefore  i s on  supervision.  the r e l e a s e e plus  collateral  c o n t a c t s , i . e . , f a m i l y members, r e l a t i v e s , e m p l o y e r s , e t c . , h a v e shown i n some s t u d i e s t o h a v e a d i r e c t Y o u t h A u t h o r i t y (5,p. load which allowed  459)  i n f l u e n c e on p a r o l e - o u t c o m e .  f o r an a v e r a g e o f 5 c o n t a c t s p e r m o n t h p e r  a v i o l a t i o n r a t e o f 11%  P r o g r a m (24,  p.  where r e l e a s e e s  California  showed i n i t s p i l o t p r o j e c t t h a t a 36-man c a s e -  a 72-man c a s e l o a d , w h i c h a l l o w e d had  The  and  o n l y one 50%  contact  respectively.  releasee  per month per The  releasee  C a l i f o r n i a Work U n i t  i v ) showed a n 8 . 1 % r e t u r n t o p r i s o n w i t h a 36-man r e c e i v e d 1 t o 6 h o u r s o f s u p e r v i s i o n per month.  caseload Still  California,  the S.I.P.U.  ( S p e c i a l I n t e n s i v e P a r o l e U n i t ) p r o g r a m (5,  brought out  a s i g n i f i c a n t a s p e c t i n s h o w i n g t h a t w i t h t h e medium p o o r  in  p.  458)  risk  g r o u p o f r e l e a s e e s , 35%  returned  in  ( r e c e i v i n g % t o 1 h o u r o f s u p e r v i s i o n p e r month) r e -  the r e g u l a r caseload  turned  to p r i s o n .  t o p r i s o n w h e r e a s 45%  and  of the c o n t r o l group  26  IV.  As not is  be  SUPERVISION  mentioned e a r l i e r , previous  s t u d i e s of s u p e r v i s i o n models  d i r e c t l y a p p l i e d t o Canada f o r v a r i o u s  p r e s e n t e d w h i c h can  This  FORMULA FOR  formula w i l l  be  reasons, therefore  a  and  combination of s u p e r v i s i o n hours w i t h  one  f a c t o r remaining constant,  c a l c u l a t e d on 6-month i n t e r v a l s .  constants  the  as  formula are  t o t a l man-months o f  c a l c u l a t e d i n T a b l e X V T I I a ( s e e A p p e n d i x ) . X,  man-hours o f s u p e r v i s i o n p e r month p e r the  s e c o n d 6 m o n t h s and  'R'  i s the  revocation  15435x -  releasee  the balance of the  rate i n percentage.  (6633y - 6633yR) -  f o r the  Thus, the  (330z -  year per  parole  cost  the  6 months,  formula i s :  per  releasees  (see Appendix T a b l e X I I ) . year per  8,500 x manpower n e e d = c o s t o f  i s estimated  i n 1972.  are  1500  2,770  a t 55%  (see  Where t h e r e  parole  t o t a l cost  to  i s a d i f f e r e n c e from the  u s e d , i . e . w o r k i n g h o u r s , s a l a r y a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o s t s , an  officer  salaries.  Chapter I I I ) of the  t h e r e f o r e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o s t + s a l a r i e s = the 2,770 r e l e a s e e s  z,  supervision.  a v e r a g e s a l a r y o f $8,500.00 p e r  (see Chapter I I I ) , t h e r e f o r e Administrative  y,  officer)  t h e y e a r 1972  A s s u m i n g an  The  supervision  first  t o t a l working hours a v a i l a b l e  = manpower n e e d t o s u p e r v i s e during  i.e.,  330zR)  Man-hour r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r s u p e r v i s i o n Chapter I I I —  given  supervision period, respectively.  = man-hour r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r  See  models.  manpower r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r any  t h a t t h e d e g r e e o f s u p e r v i s i o n be  required  formula  r e a d i l y adapted to a v a r i e t y of s u p e r v i s i o n  produce the cost  used i n the  can-  salaries,  supervise assumed  figures  adjustment can  be  27  made a c c o r d i n g For that i s the when he  to the percentage i n c r e a s e  the  example, k e e p i n g i n mind the b a s i c concepts i n importance of  requires  releasee  or decrease of  the r e l e a s e e ' s  the g r e a t e s t  from the  help  and  re-entry  the  d e p e n d e n t p h a s e i n t o an  period  figures.  supervision,  i n t o the  community,  concept of g r a d u a l l y moving independent phase, the  e x a m p l e m o d e l o f s u p e r v i s i o n o f manpower r e q u i r e m e n t s and be  assumed  cost  the  following  analysis  can  shown.  V.  EXAMPLE MODEL OF  SUPERVISION  5 hours per  releasee  p e r month f o r t h e  first  3 hours per  releasee  per month f o r t h e  s e c o n d 6 m o n t h s on  1 hour per For  releasee  6 m o n t h s on  per month f o r the b a l a n c e o f the  e x a m p l e , a 40%  revocation  rate w i l l  be  supervision supervision  supervision  used, thus the  period.  formula  is: ( 1 5 4 3 5 x 5)  -  ( 6 6 3 3 x 3) (330  =  59.5 55%  of  r a t e and  q u i r e m e n t and  =59.5 parole  using  f o r m u l a and f o r the  .4)  x 1 x  .4)  (see  Table XVIIIb)  officers  salaries  $505,750 = $278,162.50 = a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r e q u i r e 59.5  $ 7 8 3 , 9 1 2 . 5 0 i n t h e y e a r 1972  hours required  (330  x 8500 = $505,750.00 =  Therefore i t w i l l  This  x 1 ) -  (6633 x 3 x  89,312.4 m a n - h o u r s o f s u p e r v i s i o n 89,312.4 - 1500  revocation  -  the  parole  to supervise  o f f i c e r s at a cost  2,770 r e l e a s e e s  of  considering  a  40%  suggested model.  s u g g e s t e d m o d e l does n o t  i n s t i t u t i o n a l assessment.  t o t a l cost  costs.  f o r t h i s , T a b l e X V I I may  take into consideration To  obtain  be  referred  the  t h e manpower r e to.  28  With t h i s suggested model then, a p a r o l e o f f i c e r who has 154 hours per month (see Chapter I I I ) e x c l u s i v e o f l u n c h and c o f f e e time can s u p e r v i s e a maximum c a s e l o a d  o f 25 r e l e a s e s r e q u i r i n g minimum s u p e r v i s i o n o f 5 hours  per month per p a r o l e e . to t h e s p e c i f i c case,  T h i s 5 hours p e r month would i n c l u d e any work r e l a t e d such as a c t u a l case c o n t a c t , i n p e r s o n , by t e l e p h o n i n g  or correspondence, c o l l a t e r a l c o n t a c t s , t r a v e l l i n g and  record keeping.  time, r e p o r t w r i t i n g  For t h i s study we a r e deducting  29 hours (see Chapter I I I ,  Time and Cost A n a l y s i s o f a P a r o l e O f f i c e r ' s S e r v i c e s ) per month f o r time n o t c h a r g e a b l e t o any s p e c i f i c c l o s e t o the time study done by Wahl and G l a s e r  from t h e 154 hours  case.  T h i s f i g u r e i s very  (12, p. 21) where they  found t h a t non-chargeable time to any s p e c i f i c case t o be 30.9 hours p e r month.  Of c o u r s e w i t h a mixed c a s e l o a d ,  i . e . , cases r e q u i r i n g d i f f e r i n g  time o f s u p e r v i s i o n , which seems more r e a l i s t i c i n most o f f i c e s  across  Canada,  the c a s e l o a d w i l l be g r e a t e r than 25. T h i s suggested model f o r s u p e r v i s i o n does n o t a l l o w t i o n a l assessment c a s e s .  for i n s t i t u -  I f the o f f i c e r has both s u p e r v i s i o n and i n s t i t u -  t i o n a l assessment cases i n h i s c a s e l o a d  an a p p r o p r i a t e  adjustment w i l l have  to be made by a s s i g n i n g a c e r t a i n weight t o the i n s t i t u t i o n a l case i n terms o f a s u p e r v i s i o n T h i s formula w i t h  assessment  case.  the suggested model o r o t h e r models using' l e s s e r  o r g r e a t e r number o f hours f o r s u p e r v i s i o n can be put t o a t e s t  for i t s '  v a l i d i t y , i n terms o f the r a t e o f r e v o c a t i o n , by implementing t h i s i n the different  regional offices.  29  VI.  In order penal  to a l l o w f o r the other  r e c o r d , age,  justment w i l l  OTHER FACTORS A F F E C T I N G A SUPERVISION MODEL  type  GIVEN  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s s u c h as  o f o f f e n c e , e t c . , i t i s a c k n o w l e d g e d t h a t some  h a v e t o b e made w i t h c e r t a i n g r o u p s o f r e l e a s e e s .  a l s o a c k n o w l e d g e d t h a t c e r t a i n n u m b e r s o f r e l e a s e e s may haviour  f r o m t i m e t o t i m e r e q u i r i n g an  v i s i o n given.  This  previous ad-  It is  change i n t h e i r  adjustment i n the degree of  be-  super-  c o n c e p t o f s u p e r v i s i o n can b e s t be d i r e c t e d t o  the  l a r g e s t g r o u p o f r e l e a s e e s who  are between the extremes, i . e . , those  t a b l e as g o o d p a r o l e r i s k s who  may  predic-  r e f o r m w i t h minimum s u p e r v i s i o n and  p r e d i c t a b l e as p o o r p a r o l e r i s k s who  probably  will  not  those  respond to i n t e n s i v e  supervision. With regard it  i s important  type  to the other  f a c t o r s which r e l a t e  to note here that previous  of o f f e n c e , e t c . , are important  o f manpower n e e d s .  I f we  a r e t o use  penal  the p r e v i o u s  p a r o l e - o u t c o m e , we  ( s e e A p p e n d i x , T a b l e V I I ) who  have had  no  can  previous  penal  o v e r 50 y e a r s  (Table VI)  27.5%  of those  admitted  Entering offence ( 3 5 , T a b l e V,  and  1963)  had  On  t o p r i s o n i n 1963 penal  i n m a t e s c h a r g e d on  years.  therefore should  r e q u i r e more s u p e r v i s i o n .  T h i s group i s c o n s i d e r e d The  that  23%  good  ( 3 5 , T a b l e V,  and  1963)  a Breaking  Entering offence  a poor p a r o l e r i s k  releasee's  are  therefore  I t i s a l s o noted that  the Breaking  s e n t e n c e d t o 2-4  ari i n d e -  of the admissions  w e r e c o m m i t t e d on  records.  admission,  record are  g r o u p i s a good p a r o l e r i s k  t h e o t h e r h a n d , 1,048  previous  r e c o r d as  r e a d i l y see  t h e r e f o r e r e q u i r e l e s s s u p e r v i s i o n , 4.2%  requiring less supervision.  on  i n f l u e n c e the a n a l y s i s  penal  parole risks,  t h i s age  parole-outcome,  r e c o r d , age  f a c t o r s w h i c h may  pendent f a c t o r i n determining  and  to  or  and 1,101 were  (29),  characteristics  and  30  m e n t i o n e d a b o v e and studied  i n the  t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p t o p a r o l e - o u t c o m e was  State  of Washington (29).  f i n d i n g s were c o n s i s t e n t w i t h p r e v i o u s and  Their  extensively  study stated that  their  s i m i l a r s t u d i e s done i n C a l i f o r n i a  Wisconsin. VII.  Previous c l o s e r and  The  value  the  initial  s t u d i e s r e f e r r e d to i n t h i s paper have i n d i c a t e d  each, r e l e a s e e ,  of the few  does r e s u l t  i n a lower parole  t h e o r e t i c a l concept of the m o n t h s on  o f s u p e r v i s i o n as  earlier in this  over a long  the  s u p e r v i s i o n and  a gradual  supervision period  population  period  costs  17,  1963)  $527.00 p e r  f i x e d s a l a r y and  of  have been  during inten-  delineated  a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and per  T h i s , of c o u r s e , i s based  time s i n c e i n s t i t u t i o n a l c o s t s  year to supervise  an a d d i t i o n a l c o s t  plan  ( b a s e d on 7 h o u r s p e r j u s t bare costs  l i n e d elsewhere i n t h i s  i n m a t e i n an  a parolee  paper.  not  signifi-  the p h y s i c a l I t costs  plant,  $2,000.00  i n s t i t u t i o n whereas i t  ( b a s e d on  25-man c a s e l o a d  inmate to prepare the  i n m a t e - s a l a r y and do  vary  (see Chapter I I I , S e c t i o n I I ) .  o f $60.00 p e r  and  s u c h as  operational costs.  administrative costs  be  do n o t  of time or a s m a l l decrease i n inmate  y e a r t o k e e p an  will  These are  rate.  decrease i n the  elapses  because of c e r t a i n l a r g e f i x e d costs  staff strengths,  failure  and  chapter.  c a n t l y when i t c o v e r s a s h o r t p e r i o d  p.  that  i n t e n s i t y of s u p e r v i s i o n  There i s a l s o a c t u a l monetary savings.  (36,  AND  more i n t e n s i v e s u p e r v i s i o n , i n t e r m s o f number o f c o n t a c t s  t i m e s p e n t on  sity  J U S T I F I C A T I O N OF THE CONCEPT FORMULA FOR S U P E R V I S I O N  other  There  pre-release  administrative costs  include various  and  savings  as as  above). out-  31  CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS I.  SUMMARY  Through t h e use o f s t a t i s t i c a l d a t a obtained  from t h e Annual Report  o f t h e Commissioner o f P e n i t e n t i a r i e s and t h e N a t i o n a l P a r o l e Board a p r o j e c t i o n ' o f t h e number o f i n m a t e s a f f e c t e d b y t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f a m a n d a t o r y r e l e a s e s y s t e m h a s b e e n made. mining  1972 was s e l e c t e d a s a s a m p l e y e a r  manpower a n d c o s t r e q u i r e m e n t s .  These e s t i m a t e s  i n deter-  o f c o s t and o f i n -  mates a f f e c t e d i s based on t h e premise t h a t t h e system would be i n e f f e c t by J a n u a r y  1, 1968.  A s t h i s now a p p e a r s u n l i k e l y , a n y e x t e n s i o n o r d e l a y  w i l l mean t h a t t h e s e p r o j e c t i o n s m u s t b e a d j u s t e d a c c o r d i n g l y . cost o f the system w i l l The  researchers  The f i n a l  depend p r i m a r i l y on t h e model o f s u p e r v i s i o n a d o p t e d .  a t t e m p t e d t o a p p l y p r e v i o u s p r o j e c t s and s t u d i e s from t h e  U n i t e d S t a t e s , w h e r e t h e m a n d a t o r y r e l e a s e system i s a l r e a d y i n e f f e c t . was n o t p o s s i b l e t o make u s e o f t h e s e  experiences  i nproposing  cause o f t h e l a c k o f any u n i f o r m method o f s t a t i s t i c a l  v a r i e t y o f p o s s i b l e models, t h e researchers needs and c o s t s through The it  a model b e -  r e p o r t i n g and o v e r a l l  d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f p e n a l and p a r o l e systems. the whole question o f s u p e r v i s i o n i s s t i l l  It  I n s o f a r as  open t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f a w i d e illustrated  t h e r a n g e o f manpower  a s e r i e s of tables which are placed  i n t h e Appendix.  r e s e a r c h e r s b e l i e v e t h a t i f any emphasis i s t o be p l a c e d on assessments, should  be w i t h t h e o b j e c t i v e o f a more e f f e c t i v e p r e - r e l e a s e p l a n i n m i n d .  I t would have t h e g o a l o f h e l p i n g t h e inmates t o accept behavior. world  The r e l e a s e e ' s a n t i c i p a t e d d i f f i c u l t i e s  s h o u l d be d i s c u s s e d .  l i m i t s on t h e i r  i n adjusting to the outside  F u r t h e r m o r e , i f t h e same o f f i c e r  the assessment f o r p a r o l e e l i g i b i l i t y  i s t o prepare  a s w e l l a s s u p e r v i s e t h e same i n m a t e  32  upon h i s r e l e a s e one o f the purposes o f the assessment inter/views should be towards e s t a b l i s h i n g a c o n t i n u i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h  the inmate.  S u p e r v i s i o n , on t h e o t h e r hand, i s the key t o any s u c c e s s f u l and w e l l administered  program.  Some c o n s i d e r a t i o n c o u l d be g i v e n t o the use o f  rough models such as the uniform On  t h e other hand, i t i s worthwhile t o attempt t o r e f i n e the model d e s p i t e  the d i f f i c u l t i e s  inherent  i n t h i s and t h i s should be done based on the  d i f f e r e n t i a l needs o f inmates. ual  o n e - t o - e i g h t - h o u r s - p e r month p e r inmate.  Thus t h e g o a l s o f s u p e r v i s i o n o f the i n d i v i d -  inmates have t o be kept c l e a r l y i n mind i f s u p e r v i s i o n i s t o be e f f e c t i v e .  There i s some c o n f u s i o n here i n s o f a r as many p a r o l e o f f i c e r s a r e i n c l i n e d t o view success prison. his  o n l y o r p r i m a r i l y i n terms o f keeping the s u p e r v i s e e  The g o a l s  difficulties  should  take i n t o account the o v e r a l l needs o f the inmate,  i n r e l a t i n g to others  a t home, a t work, e t c .  Thus the im-  provement o f the inmate's o v e r a l l b e h a v i o u r and f u n c t i o n i n g should prime o b j e c t i v e . occur  during  out o f  be t h e  I n r e l a t i o n t o t h i s , t h e c r i t i c a l p e r i o d s o f adjustment  t h e f i r s t s i x months a f t e r r e l e a s e , and r e a l i s t i c a l l y  i t would  be s e n s i b l e t o devote the most e f f o r t p o s s i b l y t o s u p e r v i s i o n d u r i n g time.  Thereafter,  this  the amount o f time devoted to s u p e r v i s i o n p e r month c o u l d  be g r a d u a l l y reduced.  As the p e r i o d o f mandatory s u p e r v i s i o n draws t o a  c l o s e , p r o v i s i o n should be made, i f the r e l e a s e e so w i s h e s , f o r the t r a n s f e r of s u p e r v i s i o n to another agency such as the. John Howard S o c i e t y .  II. It  EVALUATION  i s d i f f i c u l t to assess  t h e e f f e c t s o f the i n t r o d u c t i o n o f any  change as encompassing as the mandatory system b e f o r e  i t s i n t r o d u c t i o n , without  33  incurring  the r i s k of a high, margin o f e r r o r .  have been unable  As w e l l ,  the  researchers  to obtain current s t a t i s t i c a l data which further increases  the p o t e n t i a l margin of e r r o r s .  Thus t h i s s t u d y must be  i n t e r m s o f a n e x p l o r a t i o n i n t o a new  concept  e v a l u a t e d more  i n corrections.  As  t h i s p r o j e c t p o s e s more q u e s t i o n s t h a n i t c o u l d p o s s i b l y answer. this,  a r o u g h g u i d e l i n e has  been presented  f u t u r e c o s t s and manpower p r e d i c t i o n s . m a t i o n becomes a v a i l a b l e , a d j u s t m e n t s w i t h access  Despite  be u s e d i n m a k i n g  I f more r e c e n t s t a t i s t i c a l c o u l d be made a c c o r d i n g l y .  inforAs  t o a c c u r a t e and d e t a i l e d d a t a on a v e r a g e s a l a r i e s and  t r a t i v e costs a f u r t h e r refinement a parole officer w o u l d be  t h a t may  such,  should take p l a c e .  The  i s also subject to f u r t h e r refinement.  q u i t e advantageous i f an e f f i c i e n c y s t u d y  a r e a so t h a t a r e a l i s t i c  and  adminis-  time a n a l y s i s of  In this regard i t  c o u l d be  a c c u r a t e a n a l y s i s w o u l d be  well,  done i n t h i s  a v a i l a b l e to  facili-  t a t e m o r e e f f e c t i v e p l a n n i n g i n u s e o f manpower. Apart raised  f r o m t h e a b o v e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , some q u e s t i o n s  a r e as f o l l o w s :  What w i l l b e  s y s t e m on t h e p e n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s ? i n g o f o t h e r community a g e n c i e s concept  o f a s s e s s m e n t and  The  What w i l l be  is.  the e f f e c t  on t h e f u n c t i o n -  i n v o l v e d i n c o r r e c t i o n a l work?  supervision i s related  to success  The  entire  Theoretically, or  rehabili-  a c t u a l c o s t s , however, would r e a c h a p o i n t where  f u r t h e r i n c r e a s e s i n s t a f f c o u l d n o t be munity.  justified  by  savings to the  com-  A t p r e s e n t , t h e r e i s no means o f d e t e r m i n i n g w h a t t h i s p o i n t  T h i s c o u l d be d e t e r m i n e d  search, etc.  be  the e f f e c t of the mandatory r e l e a s e  s u p e r v i s i o n s h o u l d a l s o be r e v i e w e d .  t h e p u r p o s e o f a s s e s s m e n t and t a t i o n of the inmate.  that could  through  trial  and  actually  error, pilot projects, re-  i l l . Further  research  officer's the be  i s required  t o d e t e r m i n e how a  time i s used a t p r e s e n t ,  future. placed  RECOMMENDATIONS  The r e s e a r c h e r s  felt  supervision Despite the  and c o u l d be used i n t h a t t h e emphasis  on d i r e c t s u p e r v i s i o n w i t h  a v a r i e t y of techniques could  parole  should  t h e inmate and t h a t  be employed s u c h a s group  and day s u p e r v i s i o n  from t h e p e n i t e n t i a r i e s .  t h e recommendations o f t h e Fauteux Report  that  c e n t r a l i z e d a d m i n i s t r a t i o n from Ottawa be r e t a i n e d ,  the researchers  f e e l that this question  consideration.  I t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e s e t t i n g up o f  regional units could  expedite  merits  further  the process of d e c i s i o n  making w i t h o u t s e r i o u s l y endangering t h e u n i t y o f t h e system as a whole. This  research  project clearly  u s e f u l and current able.  illustrates  statistical  The r e s e a r c h e r s  that  data i s often not a v a i l -  recommend t h a t a m o r e u n i f o r m m e t h o d  of d a t a c o l l e c t i o n be employed. well,  the fact  I t would be h e l p f u l as  i f a more u n i v e r s a l a p p r o a c h w e r e t a k e n i n t h e  c o l l e c t i o n o f s t a t i s t i c a l m a t e r i a l , n o t o n l y between t h e provinces  and j u r i s d i c t i o n s b u t i n c o n j u n c t i o n  methods used i n o t h e r  countries.  study i n t o mandatory r e l e a s e of other be  Thus, i n t h e case o f a  such as t h i s ,  p i l o t projects or experimental  utilized.  with the  the results  programs  could  35  4.  Further  s t u d y i n t o t h e use o f community r e s o u r c e s  the r e h a b i l i t a t i o n o f inmates i s i n d i c a t e d . ment o f s p e c i a l i z e d r e s i d e n t i a l  facilities  way homes; t h e u s e o f n o n - p r o f e s s i o n a l  with by 5.  the objectives of a greater  such as h a l f greater  use  be k e p t i n mind,  degree o f involvement  t h e community i n t h e r e h a b i l i t a t i o n o f i n m a t e s .  T h e f u n c t i o n a n d p u r p o s e o f minimum p a r o l e w i l l n o d o u b t r e q u i r e reassessment w i t h release  6.  Establish-  help;  o f C a n a d a Manpower s e r v i c e s , e t c . s h o u l d  i n  t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f t h e mandatory  system.  I t i s recommended t h a t t h e f o r m u l a p r o p o s e d i n C h a p t e r I V be  considered  vision. can  w i t h a number o f p o s s i b l e m o d e l s o f s u p e r -  The j u s t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e m o d e l u l t i m a t e l y s e l e c t e d  be t e s t e d t h r o u g h t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f s e v e r a l  projects or experimental  programs i n v a r i o u s  pilot  regional  offices. 7.  As p r e v i o u s l y m e n t i o n e d , t h e c o n d i t i o n s  contained  i n the  M a n d a t o r y R e l e a s e agreement h a v e b e e n assumed t o be s i m i l a r to Regular Parole.  However, s i n c e t h e r e  between Mandatory R e l e a s e and P a r o l e tionally 8.  i s a difference  conceptually  and  func-  t h e s e c o n d i t i o n s may h a v e t o b e r e v i e w e d .  I f t h e mandatory r e l e a s e  s y s t e m i s t o be m a x i m a l l y e f f e c t i v e ,  then the e f f o r t s of the c o r r e c t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s a f t e r c a r e programs need t o be b e t t e r i n t e g r a t e d . the researchers  are suggesting  and t h e By  this,  t h a t i f a more e f f e c t i v e  36  rehabilitative  s e r v i c e was developed i n the i n s t i t u t i o n s ,  the s u p e r v i s i o n would s i m i l a r l y be more e f f e c t i v e .  I n add-  i t i o n , as t h e r e i s a r e l a t i v e l y s h o r t time p e r i o d on mandatory s u p e r v i s i o n , t h e r e w i l l be a g r e a t e r need t o p r o v i d e  follow-  up c o n t a c t s  or c o n t i n u a l c o u n s e l l i n g .  be p r o v i d e d  through a f t e r - c a r e a g e n c i e s such as t h e John  Howard S o c i e t y .  This s e r v i c e could  well  BIBLIOGRAPHY  37  1.  Canadian J o u r n a l of C o r r e c t i o n s . C o u n c i l , v o l . 2, i 9 6 0 .  The  Canadian Welfare  2.  Case, John D. "Doing Time i n the Community." Probation. (March, 1 9 6 7 ) , pp. 9-1?.  3.  Czaykoski, Eugene. "The Need f o r P h i l o s o p h i c a l D i r e c t i o n i n P r o b a t i o n and P a r o l e . " F e d e r a l P r o b a t i o n . (September, 1 9 6 5 ) , pp. 24-28.  4.  G i a r d i n i , G. The P a r o l e P r o c e s s . Charles' C. Thomas, 1959.  5.  G l a s e r , D a n i e l . The E f f e c t i v e n e s s of a P r i s o n and P a r o l e System. New York, The B o b b s ^ R e r r i l C o . , T 9 6 4 .  6.  M a r g o l i n , Reuben J . "Post-Institutional Rehabilitation of the Penal Offender: A Community E f f o r t . " Federal Probation. (March, 1 9 6 7 ) , pp. 46-50.  7.  M i l l e r , Frank. " P a r o l e . " Crime and I t s Treatment i n Canada. E d i t e d by W. McGrath. Toronto, MacMillan of Canada, 1965, pp. 326-383.  8.  Ohlin, Lloyd. S e l e c t i o n f o r Parole: A Manual of P a r o l e P r e d i c t i o n . New York, R u s s e l l Sage FouncTation,  9.  Polansky, Norman A. (ed.) S o c i a l Work Research. Chicago, U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago P r e s s , I960.  Springfield  New  Federal  Illinois,  10.  Richmond, Mark S. Prison Profiles . Oceana P u b l i c a t i o n s Inc., 1965.  York,  11.  Tappan, P a u l . Crime, J u s t i c e and C o r r e c t i o n . Toronto, McGraw H i l l , 190O.  12.  Wahl, A and G l a s e r , D a n i e l . " P i l o t Time Study of the F e d e r a l P r o b a t i o n Officer's Job." Federal Probation. V o l . 27, No. 3, (September, 1 9 6 3 ) .  13.  Young, P a u l i n e . S c i e n t i f i c S o c i a l Surveys and' Research. New J e r s e y , P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1966.  38  REPORTS AND PAMPHLETS 14.  B e l l , M a r j o r i e (ed.). P a r o l e i n P r i n c i p l e . N a t i o n a l Conference on Parole ,~T957.  New York,  15.  Department of J u s t i c e of Canada. Ottawa, Queens P r i n t e r , 1 9 5 6 .  16.  F r i e d l a n d , M. L. and Mohr, J . W. Canadian Crime Statistics. A Report on the T h i r d C r i m i n a l Law Conference. R e p r i n t e d from: C r i m i n a l Law Q u a r t e r l y , v o l . 7, No. 2, August, 1964.  17.  Glaser, D a n i e l , e t a l . P a r o l e Decision-Making: The Sentence and ParoTe~P~rocess. U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Washington, D.C., 1966.  18.  John Howard S o c i e t y of O n t a r i o . P a r o l e . A Report to the Chairman of the Canadian Committee on C o r r e c t i o n s dated March 1, 1967.  19.  M i l l e r , F. P. Paroles f o r R e c i d i v i s t s As An E f f e c t i v e S o c i a l Defence. Member, N a t i o n a l P a r o l e B o a r d , 1964.  Fauteux Report.  —  20.  N a t i o n a l C o u n c i l on Crime and Delinquency. Standard Probation.and Parole A c t . New York, Revised E d i t i o n , 19b4.  21.  N a t i o n a l P r o b a t i o n and Parole A s s o c i a t i o n . Parole i n P r a c t i c e and P r i n c i p l e . New York, The N a t i o n a l Conference on P a r o l e , 1957.  22.  Report by the President's. Commission' on Law Enforcement and A d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f J u s t i c e . The Challenge of Crime i n a Free S o c i e t y . Washington, D.C., •• U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1967. -  23.  State of C a l i f o r n i a . Parole Work U n i t Program. Sacramento, Department of C o r r e c t i o n s , June, 1965•  24.  State of C a l i f o r n i a . Parole Work U n i t Program. Sacramento, Department of C o r r e c t i o n s , December, 1966.  25.  State of Washington. A B r i e f A n a l y s i s of Washington State A d u l t C o r r e c t i o n a l I n s t i t u t i o n s , No. 20. Department of I n s t i t u t i o n s , October, I 9 6 6 . ;  26.  State of Washington. A d u l t Parole Study. S e c t i o n of Research and Program A n a l y s i s , Department of P r i s o n Terms and P a r o l e s , August, i 9 6 0 .  39  27.  State of Washington. An A n a l y s i s of the Academic E d u c a t i o n a l Program in~~W"ashington ?£ate . A d u l t ~ Correctional"~lnstituT7fons.. June, 1 9 5 5 .  28.  State of Washington. An A n a l y s i s of the V a r i o u s F a c t o r s A f f e c t i n g Washington StaTe A d u l t C o r r e c t i o n a l Programs"^ Department of I n s t i t u t i o n s , Bureau of Research and Program A n a l y s i s , September, 1 9 6 6 . .  29.  State of Washington. F a c t o r s R e l a t e d to Parole Outcome. The State Board of P r i s o n Terms and P a r o l e s and Department of I n s t i t u t i o n s , S e c t i o n of Research and Program A n a l y s i s , March, 1 9 6 4 .  30.  State of New York. Follow-Up From Date of Release i n 1959 to December 3 1 , 1903 of 4 , 5 9 1 Releases to O r i g i n a l P a r o l e S u p e r v i s o r . D i v i s i o n of ParoTe, Bureau of Research and S t a t i s t i c s . P u b l i s h e d 1 § 6 4 .  31.  State of New York. Who Absconds and Why. Executive Department, D i v i s i o n of P a r o l e , Bureau of Research and S t a t i s t i c s . Published 1965.  32.  S t r e e t , George T. Canada, s P a r o l e System. Ontario, K i n g s t o n P e n i t e n t i a r y . Revised E d i t i o n , 1 9 6 6 .  33.  Studt, E l l i o t . The Re-entry o f the Offender Into The Community. U.S. Department of H e a l t h , E d u c a t i o n and Welfare, 1 9 6 7 .  34.  U.S. Department of H e a l t h , E d u c a t i o n and W e l f a r e . P e r s o n a l C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and Parole Outcome. Washington,  1  D.C.,  I96S:  STATISTICAL REPORTS 35.  Annual Report of the Commissioner of P e n i t e n t i a r i e s . Ottawa, Queen " P r i n t e r , 1 9 5 » - 1 9 b 4 . 1  36.  Annual Report of the N a t i o n a l Parole Board. Ottawa, Que en's P r i n t e r . For the Calender Years Ended December 3 1 , 1 9 6 3 - I 9 6 5 .  37.  Crime S t a t i s t i c s . Dominion Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s , Ottawa, Queen's P r i n t e r , I 9 6 3 - I 9 6 5 .  38.  Vancouver R e g i o n a l O f f i c e S t a t i s t i c s , P e r s o n a l Communications.  1966.  40  39•  School of S o c i a l Work. P e r s o n a l C o n s u l t a t i o n s w i t h Mr. L a r r y B e l l , Research A d v i s o r . September November 30, 196?'.  40.  Informal i n t e r v i e w s w i t h Mr. Kyle Stevenson, R e g i o n a l R e p r e s e n t a t i v e , Mr. A. Byman, S t a f f Supervisor and eight parole o f f i c e r s .  APPENDIX  TABLE I ADMISSIONS TO PENITENTlARIES BASED ON LENGTH OF SENTENCE  Length of sentence  2 - 3 Years  3-4 Years  4 - 5 Years  5 - 6 Years  6-10 Years  10-15 Years  15-20 Years  20-25 Years  Assumed mean sentence  2.5 Years  3.5 Years  4.5 Years  5.5 Years  8 Years  12.5 Years  17.5 Years  22.5 Years  Number sentenced  2160  745  248  249  123  77  17  12  Date sentenced  J u n e 30, 1968  June 30, 1968  June 30, 1968  June 1968  30,  J u n e -30, 1968  June 30, 1968  June 30, 1968  Date of release  Dec. 1970  30  Dec. 1971  Date of r e l e a s e minus S t a t u t o r y Remiss i o n  Feb. 1970  15  May 15 1971  30  June 30, . 1968  Dec. 1972  30  Dec. 1973  30  Dec. 1976  30  Dec. 1980  30  Dec. 1985  30  Dec. 19S0  Nov. 1971  15  Aug. 1972  15.  June 1974  30  Nov. 1977  15  Aug. 1981  15  May 15 1984  * Annual R e p o r t of Commissioner of P e n i t e n t i a r i e s , e n d i n g M o n t h 3 1 / 6 4 , T a b l e I V , p. 5 3 .  Published  b y Queen's P r i n t e r s , O t t a w a , F i s c a l  Year  30  TABLE 2 Graph  Illustrating  Inmates  in  Terms  the of  Distribution  Length  of  of  Number  of  Sentence  number sentenced  '2,+00 2,200 2,000 1800 1600 1+00 1200' 1000 800 600 +00 200 Years  2-3  +-5  5-6  6-10  10-15  15-20  •Calculated from: Annual Report of Commissioner of Penitentiaries P u b l i s h e d by Queens P r i n t e r , Ottawa, F i s c a l y e a r e n d i n g , M a r c h 3-L» 196+, T a b l e I V , p . 53N  20-25  TABLE I I I  43  CUMULATIVE TOTALS OF EXPECTED RELEASES  Year Released  Year Sentenced  Year Released Deducting Statutory Remission  Total  Cumulative Total  Year  June 30/68 (2.5)  Dec.30/70  Apr.15/70  2160  2160  1970  June 30/69 (2.5) June 30/68 (3.5) June 30/68 (4.5)  Dec.30/71 Dec.30/71 Dec.30/72  Apr.15/71 Feb ,.15/71 Nov. 15/71 .  2160 745 248  3153  1971  June June June June  30/70 30/69 30/68 30/69  (2.5) (3.5) (5.5) (4.5)  Dec.30/72 Dec.30/72 Dec.30/73 Dec.30/73  Apr.15/72 Feb.15/72 Aug.15/72 Nov.15/72  2160 745 249 248  3402  1972  June June June June  30/71 30/7 0 30/69 30/70  (2.5) (3.5) (5.5) (4.5)  Dec.30/73 Dec.30/73 Dec.30/74 Dec.30/74  Apr.15/73 Feb. 15/73 Aug.15/73 Nov.15/73  2160 . 745 249 249  3402  1973  June June June June June  30/72 30/72 30/68 30/74 30/71  (2.5) (3.5) ( 8) (5.5) (4.5)  Dec.30/74 Dec.30/74 Dec.30/76 Dec.30/75 Dec.30/75  Apr. 15/74 Feb. 15/74 June 30/74 Aug.15/74 Nov.15/74  2160 745 123 249 248  3525  1974  June June June June June  30/73 30/72 30/69 30/71 30/72  (2.5) (3.5) ( 8 ) (5.5) (4.5)  Dec.30/75 Dec.30/75 June 30/77 Dec.30/76 Dec.30/76  Apr.15/75 Feb.15/75 June 30/75 Aug.15/75 Nov.15/74  2160 745 123 249 248  3525  1975  June June June June June  30/74 30/73 30/7 0 30/74 30/74  (2.5) (3.5) ( 8 ) (5.5) (4.5)  Dec.30/76 Dec.30/76 June 30/78 Dec.30/77 Dec.30/77  Apr.15/76 Feb.15/76 June 30/7 6 Aug.15/76 Nov.15/7 6  2160 745 123 249 248  3525  1976  June June June June June June  30/75 30/74 30/71 30/73 30/74 30/68  (2.5) (3.5) ( 8 ) (5.5) (4.5) (12.5)  Dec.30/77 Dec.30/77 June 30/7 9 Dec.30/78 Dec.30/78 Dec.30/80  Apr.15/77 Feb.15/77 June 30/77 Aug.15/77 Nov.15/77 Nov.15/77  2160 745 123 249 248 77  3602  1977  43 ( a )  EXPLANATORY NOTES ON TABLE NO. are fiscal  year  I l l  1.  Penitentiary admission figures constant.  1963-64 h e l d as  2.  Table arranged i n order of date of r e l e a s e a f t e r r e m i s s i o n deducted from t o t a l sentence.  3.  Assumption i s t h a t t h e mid p o i n t o f sentences from 2 - 3 years and 3 - 4 y e a r s e t c . - 2.5, 3.5 y e a r s e t c . , mean o f t h i s c l a s s .  4.  A f u r t h e r assumption i s that the sentence occurs a t the mid-point o f t h e y e a r on a n a v e r a g e , t h a t i s o n J u n e 30 o n a n y g i v e n y e a r .  5.  Some e x a m p l e s o f how t h e s e c a l c u l a t i o n s a t a r e as f o l l o w s :  statutory  f o r t h e t a b l e were  arrived  a)  a s e n t e n c e o f 4 - 5 y e a r s i s t r e a t e d as 4 - 5 y e a r s o c c u r r i n g a t t h e m i d p o i n t o f 1968 o r J u n e 3 0 . T h e o r e t i c a l l y h e w o u l d be d u e f o r r e l e a s e D e c . 3 0 / 7 2 . D e d u c t i o n 1/4 o f s e n t e n c e as s t a t u t o r y r e m i s s i o n , t h i s r e m o v e s one y e a r , one a n d one h a l f m o n t h s . T h i s r e l e a s e d a t e i s November 1 5 / 7 1 .  d)  S e n t e n c e o f 6 - 10 y e a r s t r e a t e d a s 8 y e a r s a g a i n a t m i d p o i n t o f y e a r 1 9 6 9 . R e l e a s e d a t e i s J u n e 30/77 1/4 o f r e m i s s i o n d e d u c t e d o r 2 y e a r s . Thus he i s r e l e a s e d J u n e 3 0 / 7 5 .  TABLE  GRAPH OF  ILLUSTRATING  THE  INMATES 'IN TERMS OF  IV  DISTRIBUTION L E N G T H OF  OF  NUMBER  SENTENCE.  Legend:  Number of  Year ending March Jl  Inmates  I960 1961  2000  1962 196 3  1500  fff/Of&fi&tttiar/irm —  196k  Scale:  11  1000  V e r t i c a l : - 1 ° - 5 0 0 inmates ^\  k  500  !  til  \> 1  f  1  Horizontal: 3/10" - lyear  $%  III  ' V  k  \\ \\  I  In:  '~ i - -  f  L  1  2.5  Length Source:  5.5  o f Sentence  Annual  Report  8  10  in years. o f -the C o mm  Queen* s " P r r n t e r , "  .12.5  dttavw,19o5^  •  22.5  17.5  •  1ssloner-of  ;  Penitentiaries  '  I960  -  19&fr  25  Life  TABLE V TERM OF SENTENCE OF INMATES FROM 1958-64  Year Ending March 31  *  Total Admissions  2 - 3 Years  No.  No.  3-4 7o  Years  4-5  Years  No.  7o  No.  5-6  Years  Over 6 Years  No.  7o  No.  1958  100  2906  62.0  1801  16.7  486  6.0  174  6.1  177  9.2  268  1959  100  2963  61.8  1831  17.9  529  6.1  180  6.1  182  8.1  241  1960  100  3289  61.2  2013  17.9  540 -  5.9  193  6.9  228  8.1  265  1961  100  3224  60.8  1960  18.1  584  6.0  192  6.5  210  8.6  278  1962  100  3215  63.3  2036  16.9  544  6.4  205  6.2  200  7.2  23C  1963  100  3537  56.7  2007  20.9  738  6.9  245  6.4  225  9-1  322  1964  100  3631  5:9.5  2160  20.5  745  6.8  248  6.9  249  6.3  229  Mean  100  3272  60.7  1972  18.4  602  6.3  205  6.4  210  8.1  262  Commissioner of P e n i t e n t i a r i e s i n c l u s i v e Table 4.  Report f o r year 1958 - 60 i n c l u s i v e , T a b l e 3; f o r y e a r s 1961 - 64  TABLE V I AGE ON ADMISSION TO PENITENTIARY  Year Ending March 31  Total Admiss i o n s  U n d e r 18 Y r s .  No.  No.  18 - 24 Y r s . No.  7„  1958-64  25 - 34 Y r s . 7.  No.  3 5 - 4 9 Yrs. 7o  Over 50 Y r s .  No.  7o  No.  1958  100  2974  6.9  204  37.1  1102  33.7  1002  18.4  548  4.0  118  1959  100  3045  6.0  183  36.9  1122  34.2  1040  19.1  582  3.9  118  1960  100  3403  6.1  209  38.7  1317  32.8  1116  18.1  615  4.3  146  1961  100  3334  6.2  205  39.4  1313  32.5  1085  17.9  598  4.0  133  1962  100  3395  5.5  188  37.7  1281  33.1  1122  •19.5  661  4.2  143  1963  100  3739  4.2  158  39.4  1474  32.4  1213  19.0  712  4.9  182  1964  100  3885  4.0  154  41.1  1597  31.6  1228  19.0  739  4.3  167  Mean  100  7796  5.6  186  38.6  1315  32.9  1115  18.7  636  4.2  144  Commissioner  of P e n i t e n t i a r y Reports * Table  6.  TABLE V I I CHARACTERISTIC  Year Ending M a r c h 31  Total  OF INMATE POPULATION BASED. ON PREVIOUS PENITENTIARY RECORDS  Admissions  No P r e v i o u s R e c o r d s  1 Previous Record  %  2 o r more P r e v i o u s Records No. %  1  No.  1958  100  2975  21.3  635  14.0  417  64.7  1923  1959  100  3041  23.0  699  16.5  503  60.5  1839  1960  100  3403  24.4  829  16.6  565  59.0  2009  1961  100  3338  22.8  761  16.9  563  60.3  2014  1962  100  3395  23.3  792  15.9  540  60.7  2063  1963  100  3742  23.3  873  17.0  637  59.6  2232  1964  100  3888  22.7  883  16.3  633  61.0  2372  Mean  100  3397  23.0  782  16.2  571  60.8  2065  No.  No.  C o m m i s s i o n e r o f P e n i t e n t i a r y R e p o r t , 1958 - 6 4 , f o r y e a r s 1 9 5 8 - 1 9 6 0 i n c l u s i v e T a b l e 34, f o r y e a r s 1 9 6 1 - 1 9 6 4 i n c l u s i v e T a b l e 5.  CALCULATION OF MAN-HOURS PES. ASSESSMENT TABLE NO. V I I I  Calculation  o f Man-Hours per p a r o l e o f f i c e r  * 1002  institutional  *  parole o f f i c e r s  6  f o r Assessments  assessment i n 1966 on s t a f f  i n 1966  * From a s t u d y o f time s h e e t s , i t i s e s t i m a t e d t h a t 70% o f t o t a l was spent on i n s t i t u t i o n a l assessments. Calculation  time  o f number o f assessments per o f f i c e r  - number o f assessments per o f f i c e r per year 1002 f 6 = 167 - number o f assessments per month 167 s. 12 = 14  Time spent on each assessment = 70% o f 154 hours per month.) or , (70 x 154) 108 hours per o f f i c e r  ( t o t a l working hours  per month on i n s t i t u t i o n a l  assessment.  S i n c e t h e r e a r e 14 assessments done per month, i t would take 7.7 hours per assessment based on 108 hours per month a l l o c a t e d t o d o i n g a s s e s s ments .  * Vancouver R e g i o n a l P a r o l e O f f i c e  Statistics  49  TABLE NO. IX  CALCULATION OF MAN-HOURS PER PAROLE OFFICER FOR SUPERVISION - 1222-man months o f s u p e r v i s i o n i n 1966 - One hour per month spent on d i r e c t s u p e r v i s i o n per p a r o l e e O f f i c e s t u d y shows t h i s as average) .". 1222 = t o t a l man hours - Man hours 102 hours  (Vancouver  o f s u p e r v i s i o n i n 1966  per m o n t h / o f f i c e i s 1222 «• 12 months = 102 hours/month per month * 6 O f f i c e r s  - 17 h o u r s / O f f i c e r / m o n t h  * Vancouver R e g i o n a l P a r o l e O f f i c e S t a t i s t i c s  50  T A B L E NO. X  Number o f P a r o l e s granted i n 1965 i n r e l a t i o n t o l e n g t h o f sentence  Number o f p a r o l e s  Length o f Sentence  2 - 3  Years  580  3-4  Years  91  4-5  Years  90  5 - 6  Years  29  6-10  10-15  Years  granted  65  Years  9  15 - 20 Years  7  20-25  0  Years  TOTAL  N a t i o n a l P a r o l e Board S t a t i s t i c s , E x t r a c t i o n from T a b l e 17.  871  1965, Queen's P r i n t e r of Ottawa, 1967,  51  TABLE NO. X I NUMBER OF INMATES AFFECTED BY MANDATORY RELEASE  Years o f Sentence  Number r e c e i v i n g t h i s term (Table 1)  Number o r d i n a r i l y receiving parole froin t h i s group (Table IX)  Balance t o be a f f e c t e d by mandatory system  2160  580  1580  3.5 Years  745  91  654  4.5 Years  248  90  158  5.5 Years  249  29  220  8 Years  123  65  58  77  9  68  2.5 Years  12.5 Years  17.5 Years  17  7  10  22.5 Years  12  0  12  52  T A B L E NO. X I I Man month requirements f o r sample year 1972  Total months supervised i n 1972  Number of Paroles Affected  Months Required  1580  11,850  Date of Sentence  Length o f Sentence  Date Released  Date of end of mandatory p a r o l e  June 30/70  2.5 Years  Apr.15/72  Dec.30/72  7.5  June 30/69  3.5 Years  Feb. 15/72  Dec.30/72  10.5  654  6,867  June 30/68  5.5 Years  Aug.15/72  Dec.30/73  4.5  220  990  June 30/69  4.5 Years  Nov.15/72  Dec.30/73  1.5  158  237  June 30/68  4.5 Years  Nov.15/71  Dec.30/72  12  158  1,896  2770  21,840  T O T A L  53  TABLE X I I I REVOCATION AS A FACTOR IN SUPERVISION REQUIREMENTS  Total Months Supervised 1971 and 1972  Man month requirements r e quired f o r process i n g revocation  Months o f Supervision a f f e c t e d by potential revocation **  Number of Parolees  Man months affected by revocations  2.5  1  1.5  1580  2370  5.5  1  4.5  654  2943  4.5  --  1  --  220  1.5  ' --  1  --  158  --  1  7.5 ;  158  1185  7.5  10.5  13%  *  Less f i v e month average on parole f o r revokees *  8.5  I t i s estimated f i v e months.  that revocation w i l l  ** T h e a d d i t i o n a l t i m e r e q u i r e d months .  occur a f t e r an average p e r i o d o f  t o process  i s c a l c u l a t e d i n t e r m s o f man-  TABLE NO. XIV ESTIMATE OF REDUCTION OF FMAN MONTH REQUIREMENT BASED ON REVOCATION RATE  Man Months of Supervision A f f e c t e d by possible revocation  20%  30%  40%  50%  2370  474  711  948  1185  2943  589  883  1177  1472  1185  737  356  474  593  1300  1950  2599  2350  Total 6498  * For the purposes of t h i s study r e - r e l e a s e upon r e v o c a t i o n o f mandat o r y r e l e a s e i s not b e i n g i n c l u d e d ;  TABLE NO.  XV  Man m o n t h s o f s u p e r v i s i o n l e s s m o n t h s d e d u c t e d b a s e d on 20 - 5 0 % r e v o c a t i o n r a t e  Recidivism Rate  Man m o n t h s o f supervision from Table V I I  L e s s man m o n t h s deducted from Table X  Man m o n t h s o f supervision less recidivism  20%  21,840  1,300  20,540  30%  21,840  1,950  19,890  40%  21,840  2,599  19,241  50%  21,840  3,250  18,590  56  TABLE XVI COST AND MANPOWER ANALYSIS OF SUPERVISION BASED ON A 30% REVOCATION RATE  Total Man Hours  Number o f parole officers required  1  19,890*  13.3  $113,050  $175,228  2  39,780  26.5  225,250  349,138  3  59,670  39.8  338,300  524,365  4  79,560  53.0  450,iJ00  698,275  5  99,450  66.3  563,550  873,503  6  119,340  79.6  676,600  1,048,730  7  139,230  92.8  788,800  1,222,640  8  159,120  106.1  901,850  1,397,868  * ** ***  T a b l e XV E s t i m a t e d a t $8500 E s t i m a t e d at 557« o f s a l a r i e s  Hours o f supervis ion per month  Cost of s a l a r i e s of parole o f f i c e r s **  Cost o f s a l a r i e s and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n costs  57  TABLE XVLL COST AND MANPOWER ANALYSIS BASED ON HOURS OF ASSESSMENT OF INMATES REQUIRED  Hours per Assessment  Number of Assessments  Man hours required  Manpower requirements  Cost of manpower r e quirements  Cost of Administration & manpower  8 hours  2531  20,248  13.4  $113,900  $177,600  7.5 hours  2531  18,982  12.6  107,440  166,533  7.0 hours  2531  17,718  11.8  100,300  155,465  6.5 h o u r s  2531  16,452  11.0  93,500  144,925  6.0 h o u r s  2531  15,186  10.1  86,020  133,331  5.5  hours  2531  13,921  9.3  78,880  122,264  5.0 h o u r s  2531  12,655  8.4  71,655  111,065  4.5  hours  2531  11,390  7.6  64,600  100,130  4.0 h o u r s  2531  10,124  6.7  57,290  88,800  3.5  2531  8,859  5.9  50,150  77,733  hours  '  TABLE XVIII (a) ESTIMATE OF SUPERVISION REQUIREMENTS FOR A POSSIBLE MODEL OF SUPERVISION Sroup r e leased Table 1  Date released  Date o f . end of parole  Number of parolees  Mon ths S u p e r v i sed Man Months S u p e r v i s i o n per month @ 5 hrs. @ 3 hrs. @ 1 h r . |3 h r s . j 1 hr. per month per month per month; 5 h r s . t  !  ;  Those sentenced 2.5 y r s . i n 197 0  Apr.15, 1972  Dec.30, 1972  3.5 y r s . i n 1969  Feb.15, 1972  Dec.30, 1972  5.5 y r s . i n 1968  Aug.15, 1972  Dec.30, 1972  1  1580  6  1.5  654  6  4.5  4.5  —  158  6 x 1580 !15 x 1580 = 9480 != 2,370  6 x 645 = 3924  |4.5 x 654 != 2,943 j • •  4.5 x 1581 = 711  —  1.5 x 220! = 330 j  --  --  — .. .—  i  i  4.5 y r s . i n 1969  Nov. 15., 1972  Dec.30, 1973  220  1-5  ! !  Nov.30, 1971  Dec.30, 1972  T o t a l f o r each catagory  220  of s u p e r v i s i o n  4.5  6  --  i  i  4.5 y r s . i n 1968  --  1.5  4.5 x 2201 6 x 220. 1.5 x 220 =990 | = 1320 = 330  15,435  6633  330  i * Sample c a l c u l a t i o n o f man month requirement f o r 5, 3 and one hour s u p e r v i s i o n f o r group s e n t e n c e d t o 4.5 years i n 1968, Date o f r e l e a s e i s Nov. 15/71. 1% months on p a r o l e served i n 1972. B a l a n c e o f 4.5 months t o be served @ 5 hours per month. There i s a f u r t h e r 6 months o f s u p e r v i s i o n @ 3 hours per month and 1% months @ 1 hour per month.  58  59  TABLE X V I I I (b) CALCULATION OF MAN  Man hours o f supervis ion on b a s i s o f supervision per month  HOURS OF SUPERVISION LESS DEDUCTION FOR REVOCATION  T o t a l Man Hours  Man hours o f s u p e r v i s i o n of group r e c e i v i n g 5 h r s . per month  77,175 *  Man hours o f supervision of group r e c e i v i n g 3 h r s . per month  19,899 **  Man hours o f supervision of group r e c e i v i n g 1 hour per month  Total  Less r e c i d i v i s m e s t i m a t e d a t 40%  0  Balance o f man hour requirements  77,175  7,960  11,939  330  132  198  97,404  8,092  89,312  * Obtained by m u l t i p l y i n g man months o f s u p e r v i s i o n month (5)  (15,435) by hours per  ** Obtained by m u l t i p l y i n g man months o f s u f p e r v i s i o n (6633) by hours per month ( 3 ) .  'TABLE X V I I I ( c ) TOTAL COST OF MODEL  Man hour requirements No. of parole officers required Cost of parole officer's salaries  Supervision  Assessment  89,312  12,655  59.5  8.4  $505,750  $71,400  costs  278,162  39,270  T o t a l costs o f s a l a r i e s and adminis t r a t i o n  783,913  110,670  Administration  T o t a l cost of model  $894,580  * S u p e r v i s i o n - 5 hours f o r f i r s t s i x months 3 hours f o r second s i x months 1 hour f o r b a l a n c e o f time on r e l e a s e ** R e v o c a t i o n r a t e s e t a t 40% * Hours r e q u i r e d  f o r assessment s e t a t 5 hours per assessment  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0302494/manifest

Comment

Related Items