Bureau of Prisons: Opportunities Exist to Enhance the Transparency of Annual Budget Justifications
Published: 2013-12-06T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: BOP, a component of DOJ, is responsible for the custody and care of over 219,000 federal inmates--a population that has grown by 27 percent over the past decade. BOP had a fiscal year 2013 operating budget of about $6.5 billion, and BOP projects that its costs will increase as the federal prison population grows. According to officials, BOP's biggest challenge is managing the increasing federal inmate population, and related responsibilities, within budgeted levels. Generally, BOP is appropriated funds through two accounts: S&E and B&F. To prepare its annual congressional budget justification for DOJ, BOP estimates its costs and resource requirements and sends its requested amounts to DOJ. GAO was asked to review BOP's budget justifications.
This report (1) identifies the types of costs that compose BOP's budget accounts as presented in its budget justifications, and (2) assesses the extent to which opportunities exist to enhance the transparency of information in BOP's budget justifications for congressional stakeholders and decision makers. GAO analyzed DOJ and BOP budget justification documents for fiscal years 2008 through 2014 and interviewed officials to determine how they develop budget justifications.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: The largest account in the Department of Justice's (DOJ) Bureau of Prisons (BOP) budget justification--its Salaries and Expenses (S&E) account-- is composed mainly of costs associated with Inmate Care and Programs and Institution Security and Administration, both of which have grown steadily since 2008. This growth is due predominantly to increases in prison populations, which are the primary cost driver of BOP's budget. The other two program, project and activity (PPA) elements in the S&E account are associated with the care and custody of federal offenders in contract facilities and maintenance and administration. BOP's Buildings and Facilities (B&F) account, which makes up on average less than 3 percent of its budget, pays for costs associated with site planning; acquisition; and construction of new facilities and costs of remodeling and renovating existing facilities, and related costs. In fiscal year 2014, the budget justification reflected a total of $6.9 billion; of which over 95 percent ($6.8 billion) was for BOP's S&E account.
GAO found that BOP is collecting more detailed quantitative cost data on the components that constitute each PPA, which could be useful to congressional decision makers when reviewing BOP's budget justification. In accordance with departmental and Office of Management and Budget guidance, BOP's budget justifications summarize amounts by PPA, so BOP is not required to provide additional funding data below the PPA level in its budget justification. Providing this information to Congress could help clarify what BOP proposes to spend on specific categories and subcategories reflected in its budget justification. For example, BOP's budget justification for fiscal year 2014 included $2.5 billion for the Inmate Care and Programs PPA element and included narrative information for categories such as Medical Services, Food Service, Education and Vocational Training, Psychology Services, and Religious Services, as well as narrative summaries for various subcategories. However the budget justification did not include proposed funding amounts for each of these categories. GAO's analysis shows that this additional information can be useful in identifying trends and cost drivers that may affect future costs. For example, GAO's analysis identified variations in the dollar amounts associated with the cost components that constitute the PPA, such as drug abuse treatment and education, which could affect decision making for that PPA. However, BOP's current budget justification does not include this detail. Congressional decision makers have previously requested additional information about BOP's budget presentations and data below the PPA level. BOP's budget requests for its S&E account have increased 33 percent since fiscal year 2008, which makes transparency in its budget justifications even more crucial. Consulting with congressional decision makers to determine if it would be helpful to include in its budget justifications the additional cost information that DOJ already collects would help provide reasonable assurance that BOP is fully meeting congressional decision makers' needs and would enhance the transparency of its budget justifications. BOP also provides narrative summaries of its initiatives, services, and organizational units in categories and subcategories under each PPA. BOP officials said that they include these narrative descriptions to provide additional information to congressional decision makers.
section_title: What GAO Recommends
paragraphs: GAO recommends that the Attorney General consult with congressional decision makers on providing additional BOP funding detail in future budget justifications, and in conjunction with BOP, take action as appropriate. DOJ concurred.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: The Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) is  responsible for the custody and care of over 219,000 federal inmates—a  population that has grown by 27 percent over the past decade. BOP is  composed of 119 institutions, 6 regional offices, 2 staff training centers,  22 residential reentry management offices (previously called community  corrections offices), and a central office in Washington, D.C. With a fiscal  year 2013 operating budget of about $6.5 billion—the second-largest  budget within DOJ—BOP projects that its costs will increase as the  federal prison population grows through 2018. According to BOP  officials, BOP’s biggest challenge is managing the continually increasing  federal inmate population, and providing for inmates’ care and safety, as  well as the safety of BOP staff and surrounding communities, within  budgeted levels. A variety of factors contribute to the size of BOP’s  population. These include national crime levels, law enforcement policies,  and federal sentencing laws, all of which are beyond BOP’s control.
The federal budget process provides the means for the President and  Congress to decide how much money to spend and what to spend it on.  The process begins when federal agencies develop budget requests to  be considered in the development of the President’s budget request to  Congress and, as applicable, provide the budget requests through their  respective departments to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).  In support of the President’s budget request, departments also submit  congressional budget justifications to the appropriate appropriations  committees, typically to provide additional information regarding the  changes between the current appropriation and the amounts requested  for the next fiscal year. OMB provides general guidance to federal  agencies and ensures that budget requests are consistent with relevant  statutes and presidential objectives.department-specific guidance to its component agencies for submitting  budget justifications.
We previously evaluated the budget justifications of other agencies to  assess, for example, whether the budget justifications are presented so  that agency priorities are clear and the proposed use of funds is  transparent.  In conducting these evaluations, we identified opportunities  for federal agencies to improve information on program costs and results  that could aid congressional stakeholders in resource decision making  and program oversight. In addition, we reported on various aspects of  BOP’s budget and operations. For example, in November 2009, we found  that BOP faced funding gaps in its operations account that left it with  limited management flexibility. We also found that while BOP had sound  cost estimation practices, the agency could improve the transparency and  documentation of its budget development process.recommended that BOP (1) analyze the extent to which operations costs  could vary because of changes in key cost assumptions and (2) improve  documentation of calculations used to estimate its costs. BOP concurred  with the recommendations and procured the services of a consulting   Specifically, we  company to conduct the analysis. In September 2011, and subsequently  in March and July 2012, BOP transmitted the results of the analysis to  DOJ and OMB to support preparation of the 2013 and 2014 budget  justifications, which fully addressed our recommendation. BOP also took  action to improve the documentation of its budget cost estimation  methods. In August 2010, we met with BOP budget officials to review  their fiscal year 2011 budget justification documentation and found BOP’s  calculations and results to be well documented.
Growth in the federal inmate population and its effect on BOP’s budget is  a matter of continuing congressional interest. For example, in the  conference report for the Consolidated and Further Continuing  Appropriations Act, 2012, concern that the current upward trend in the prison inmate population was  unsustainable. You asked us to review BOP’s budget justifications. This  report (1) identifies the types of costs that compose BOP’s budget  accounts as presented in its budget justifications, and (2) assesses the  extent to which opportunities exist to enhance the transparency of  information in BOP’s budget justifications for congressional stakeholders  and decision makers.
GAO-10-94. GAO closed these recommendations as implemented.
Pub. L. No. 112-55, 125 Stat. 552 (2011).
Salaries and Expenses (S&E) and Buildings and Facilities (B&F).Because BOP’s S&E account generally represents over 95 percent of  BOP’s budget, we focused our review on the S&E account. Moreover, we  selected 2008 as the starting point for our analysis because BOP began  using a consistent format for presenting information on its programs,  projects, and activities (PPA) in its 2008 budget justification.
According to BOP officials, they use the cost data they maintain in DOJ’s Financial  Management Information System to develop estimated dollar amounts for the cost  components that compose BOP’s PPAs. reliable for the purposes of this review. We also interviewed officials in  DOJ’s Justice Management Division (JMD) and budget officials in BOP’s  Administration Division and Budget Development and Execution branches  to discuss their approach for developing and presenting information in the  budget justification. Specifically, we discussed with DOJ officials the  guidance they provided to components for developing budget  justifications. We discussed with BOP officials the type of funding  information and financial management systems used to develop their  budget justifications.
We conducted this performance audit from February 2013 to December  2013 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing  standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to  obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for  our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe  that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings  and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
subsections: section_title: Background
subsections: section_title: Overview of Federal Budget Process and BOP Budget Development
paragraphs: Through the budget system, the President and Congress determine the  allocation of resources among the agencies of the federal government.  OMB, as part of the Executive Office of the President, guides the annual  budget process, makes decisions on executive agencies’ budgets,  aggregates submissions for departmental components, and submits the  consolidated document for the executive branch as the President’s  Budget Request to Congress. OMB issues guidance to federal agencies  through OMB Circular A-11, which provides instructions for submitting  budget data and materials, as well as criteria for developing budget  justifications. Within DOJ, the Justice Management Division issues  additional annual budget development guidance to DOJ’s components,  including BOP, usually about 1.5 years before the fiscal year begins for  the budget cycle. JMD budget staff (1) collect and analyze all of the  components’ budget requests, taking into consideration department-wide  policy priorities and OMB guidance; (2) coordinate with DOJ policy  offices; and (3) secure approval and submit the Attorney General’s  budget submission to OMB. Key steps in this process are shown in   figure 1.
When developing its budget justification, BOP estimates costs for budget  accounts using three steps, as described below.
First, BOP estimates cost increases for maintaining the current level  of services for operations as provided in the prior year’s enacted  budget. These include costs to address mandatory staff pay raises  and benefit increases, inmate medical care, and utilities. BOP  analyzes historical obligations from the past 5 years to identify  average annual operating cost increases. BOP records its obligations  in FMIS—one of DOJ’s financial accounting and reporting systems.  According to BOP officials, FMIS is BOP’s primary tool for cost  reporting and budget execution. BOP also considers economic  indicator information to estimate general inflationary cost increases  using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Consumer Price Index,  among other sources.
Second, BOP projects inmate population changes for the budget year   For example, for the fiscal year 2014  and for 9 years into the future. budget justification, BOP projected a net growth in its inmate  population of 5,400 (2.4 percent) for fiscal years 2013 and 2014.
Third, BOP estimates costs to house the projected number of new  inmates, including building and facility requirements. According to  BOP, the increasing inmate population is the primary driver of new  service costs. BOP also identifies and estimates costs for new  initiatives, such as the opening of a new BOP facility, by reviewing the  proposals submitted by its divisions and regional offices, as well as  historical data on costs for implementing such initiatives.
section_title: Prior GAO work on BOP Costs and Budget Justification Reviews
paragraphs: In November 2009, we found that BOP’s methods for cost estimation  largely reflected best practices outlined in the GAO Cost Estimating and  Assessment Guide. We concluded that for fiscal year 2008, BOP  followed a well-defined process for developing a mostly comprehensive,  well-documented, accurate, and credible cost estimate, and we made  recommendations to further improve BOP’s process. Specifically, we  recommended that BOP (1) analyze the extent to which operations costs  could vary because of changes in key cost assumptions and (2) improve  documentation of calculations used to estimate its costs. BOP concurred  with the recommendations and took appropriate actions to address them  as noted above. In November 2009, we also reported on various  challenges that BOP faced, including prison crowding levels. For  example, we found that from fiscal years 2000 through 2009, BOP’s total  inmate population level increased by 44 percent—from 145,125 to  209,027. In November 2009, we also reported that BOP estimated its  total inmate population would continue to increase by about 4,500  inmates per year over the next decade. In September 2012, we  reviewed the growth in BOP’s population and found that the 9.5 percent  population growth from fiscal years 2006 through 2011 exceeded the 7  percent increase in its inmate capacity, and reported that BOP projects  continued population growth.
In our work related to budget reviews across the federal government, we  have reported that an agency’s budget justification may be the single  most important policy document because it depicts and reconciles policy  objectives, and we have identified the potential to enhance the  transparency of agencies’ budget justifications by providing additional  details and information.  the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs’ (VA) health care budget, we  concluded that federal agencies’ congressional budget justifications  should be transparent—that is, they should be clear and easy to  understand—in part because Congress relies on this information to make  resource allocation decisions and conduct oversight.
GAO-10-687R. concluded that in order to facilitate decision making, information needs to  be clear and organized in a way that is meaningful to decision makers.  We recommended, among other things, that VA further consult with  congressional decision makers to determine what detailed information  related to its appropriations accounts should be included—and how—in  its congressional budget justification. VA concurred with the  recommendations and has begun taking actions to address them.
section_title: Institution Security and Inmate Care Constitute the Majority of BOP’s Salaries and Expenses Account Costs as Presented in Its Budget Justifications
paragraphs: BOP’s largest account—its S&E account— is composed mainly of costs  associated with Inmate Care and Programs and Institution Security and  Administration, both of which have grown steadily since 2008,  predominantly because of increases in prison populations, which are the  primary cost driver of BOP’s budget. The other two PPAs in the S&E  account are associated with the care and custody of federal offenders in  contract facilities and maintenance and administration. BOP’s budget  justification for fiscal year 2014 reflected the President’s budget request  of a total of $6.9 billion, including $6.8 billion for its S&E account. Figure  2 shows that the President’s budget request for BOP’s S&E account has  increased from fiscal years 2008 through 2014.
BOP’s budget justification includes its proposed use of funds for each  account by PPA. BOP’s budget for S&E costs consists of four PPAs,  and as shown in figure 3, the Inmate Care and Programs PPA, and  Institution Security and Administration PPA, and Contract Confinement  PPA accounted for about 97 percent of the President’s 2014 budget  request for BOP’s S&E account, according to BOP’s budget justification.
Below is a description of the four PPAs that compose BOP’s S&E  account.
The Inmate Care and Programs PPA covers the operational costs of  functions directly related to providing inmate care, including inmate  food, medical care, drug treatment, and psychological services;  education and vocational training; institutional and release clothing;  welfare service; and transportation. For example, the budget  justification for fiscal year 2014 proposes the use of funds to help  address increases in chronic medical care for inmates. Additionally,  the budget justification for fiscal year 2014 proposes the use of funds  to expand evidence-based treatment practices to treat drug offenders  and reduce recidivism.
The Institution Security and Administration PPA covers costs  associated with institution security, administration, maintenance, and  staff training. These costs include salaries for correctional officers  assigned to every BOP institution and expenses for facility  maintenance and utilities.
The Contract Confinement PPA covers costs associated with BOP  inmates in contract care and costs associated with management and  oversight of contract facilities and residential reentry centers as well  as the National Institute of Corrections.
The Management and Administration PPA covers costs associated  with general administration and provides funding for the executive  staff as well as headquarters and regional office program managers in  the areas of budget development and execution, financial  management, procurement and property management, human  resource management, inmate systems management, safety, legal  counsel, research and evaluation, and systems support.
As shown in figure 4, while the amounts reflected for BOP’s Management  and Administration PPA have remained relatively constant, the Inmate  Care and Programs and Institution Security and Administration PPAs, and  to a lesser extent the Contract Confinement PPA, have grown steadily  since 2008, predominantly because of increases in prison populations  which are the primary cost driver of BOP’s budget.
In addition to the budget justification broken down by PPA dollar amounts,  the budget justification provides a summary of increases (i.e.,  improvements) and decreases (i.e., offsets) to the current year’s  appropriation.2014, BOP described the $35.1 million net increase (1.2 percent) in the  Institution Security and Administration PPA from fiscal year 2013 in terms  of three increases and two decreases, as shown in table 1. Further, BOP  described the dollar amounts associated with the $1.7 million (0.07  percent) net increase in the Inmate Care and Programs PPA from fiscal  year 2013 in terms of five increases and two decreases.
section_title: BOP Could Enhance the Transparency of Its Budget Justification by Providing Additional Data on Cost Components within the Program, Project, and Activity Levels
paragraphs: We found that BOP is collecting more detailed quantitative cost data on  the components that constitute each PPA, which could be useful to  congressional decision makers when reviewing BOP’s budget  justification. In accordance with departmental and OMB guidance, BOP’s  budget justifications summarize amounts by PPA, so BOP is not required  to provide additional funding data below the PPA level in its budget  justification. Providing more comprehensive information could help clarify  BOP’s proposed spending on specific categories and subcategories  reflected in its budget justification. For example, BOP’s budget  justification for fiscal year 2014 included $2.5 billion for the Inmate Care  and Programs PPA element and included narrative information for  categories such as Medical Services, Food Service, Education and  Occupational Training, Psychology Services, and Religious Services, as  well as narrative summaries for various subcategories, but did not include  proposed funding amounts for these categories. Our analysis shows that  this additional information can be useful in identifying trends and cost  drivers that may affect future costs, which could be particularly helpful  given the 33 percent growth in BOP’s budget request from fiscal years  2008 through 2014.
Our prior work has identified factors driving BOP’s cost increases in  specific categories that constitute each PPA. For example, in July 2013,  we found that per capita mental health services costs have increased in  BOP-operated institutions since fiscal year 2008 and are expected to  continue to increase. Further, we found that these increases were  generally due to three factors—inmate population increases, general  inflationary increases, and increased inmate participation rates in  psychology treatment programs. As we reported in July 2013, BOP’s  expanded inmate participation in its Residential Drug Abuse Program,  which helped reduce waiting lists for the program, had increased overall  program costs. In addition, the Congressional Research Service (CRS)  reported in January 2013 that BOP’s expenditures on utilities, food, and  medical care have generally increased each fiscal year since 2000,  although the per capita increase in the cost of food and utilities has not  been as pronounced as the increase in the per capita cost of inmate  medical care.diabetes, hypertension, and infectious diseases have a slightly higher rate  of incidence in the incarcerated population. Thus, understanding the  differences in costs for medical care, food services, and drug programs— three of the cost components within the Inmate Care PPA—could help  congressional decision makers evaluate how these trends may affect  future costs.
Pub. L. No. 111-117, 123 Stat. 3034 (2009).
FMIS to inform their budget development process, the FMIS cost  component data fields are not always directly linked to specific narrative  categories in the budget justification for BOP because they use their  judgment to identify categories that they consider to be of specific interest  to congressional decision makers (e.g., dollar amounts, trends, or policy  concerns) rather than standardized cost components. For example, BOP  includes narrative in the budget justification to describe costs related to  categories such as Medical Services and Food Service, among others. As  figure 6 shows, there are similarities in the FMIS data fields for which  BOP captures detailed cost information and those categories BOP uses  to describe its budget justifications. This additional information could  provide congressional decision makers with additional insights into factors  driving BOP’s budget.
While BOP does not provide in its budget justifications information on the  cost components composing each PPA, BOP officials already capture this  information, using data from FMIS, as part of their annual budget  development process. We requested specific, quantitative information  below the PPA level and BOP provided us with dollar amounts associated  with the data fields in FMIS that constitute Inmate Care and Programs,  Institution Security and Administration, and Contract Confinement PPAs  for fiscal years 2008 through 2014. Using the additional detailed  information from DOJ’s FMIS provided by BOP budget officials, we were  able to identify changes over time in the cost components composing  each PPA, which is information congressional decision makers could use  when reviewing BOP’s budget justification. For example, we analyzed  changes in the dollar amounts associated with FMIS cost component data  fields that make up the Inmate Care and Programs PPA element over  time. The results of our analysis show that BOP’s proposed spending for  the Inmate Care and Programs PPA has continually increased from fiscal  years 2008 through 2013; however, BOP’s FMIS data showed variations  in the dollar amounts associated with the cost components that constitute  the PPA. For example, changes in dollar amounts for medical services  have increased by about 50 percent from fiscal years 2008 to 2014, and  decreased slightly for the 2 most recent fiscal years—2013 and 2014.  According to officials, the changes in dollar amounts reflect changes in  the prison population and implementation of policy initiatives intended to  lower costs. The results of our analysis are presented in figure 7. The  specific dollar amounts by fiscal year for the cost components composing  the Inmate Care and Program PPA element are provided in appendix I.
In addition, using the additional cost component information, our analysis  of BOP’s FMIS data fields showed that changes in dollars associated with  the budget justification for drug abuse treatment have increased by over  70 percent from fiscal years 2008 to 2014, and from fiscal years 2010  through 2012 increased by more than 15 percent each year—which  reflects BOP’s efforts to expand its drug treatment services. While trends  in the dollar amounts associated with medical care and drug treatment  reflect a relatively significant increase from fiscal years 2008 to 2014,  changes in the dollar amounts associated with food and religious services  remained relatively constant for this same time frame.
Our analysis of BOP’s FMIS data also showed the proportion of dollars  associated with the FMIS data fields that compose each PPA element.  For example, we found that for fiscal year 2014, institution security  constituted over 50 percent of the funding based on cost components that  compose the Institution Security and Administration PPA element. (See  fig. 8.) In addition, we found that for this same time frame, medical  program composed 40 percent of the funding for the Inmate Care and  Programs PPA element, and private prison contracts made up over 60  percent of funding for the Contract Confinement PPA element. (See figs.  9 and 10) For additional details on each of the narrative categories, see  appendix II. In an era of scarce federal resources and given BOP’s  projected growth in inmate population and substantial increased costs in  recent years, this additional detail could be helpful to congressional  decision makers when reviewing BOP’s budget justification and making  determinations about where to increase or decrease BOP funding.
According to DOJ’s Fiscal Years 2012-2016 Strategic Plan, one of the  department’s guiding principles is to promote transparency, performance,  and accountability, including budget transparency. According to the  plan, the department and its components will continue to promote budget  transparency, performance, and accessibility by coordinating with  leadership and regularly reporting accomplishments, among other  actions. Further, according to federal financial accounting standards, cost  information can be used by Congress in making policy decisions about  allocating federal resources among programs, authorizing and modifying  programs, evaluating program performance, and making program  authorization decisions by assessing costs and benefits.
BOP officials stated that they use historical cost information that BOP  maintains in DOJ’s FMIS for budget execution and monitoring as an input  to inform the annual budget development process. Specifically, budget  development staff use data from the previous 3-year period for cost  components in FMIS and adjust the funding levels based on projected  changes in prison population and other factors to help them estimate the  total funding needs for the future fiscal year by PPA. BOP officials further  stated that they regularly provide additional information upon request on  the budget justification to staff from congressional appropriations and  congressional authorizing committees. For example, they said that JMD  officials provide appropriators with funding information in response to  requests for various congressional reports and hearings, as well as  written responses to congressional inquiries related to the budget  justification. To further clarify their budget justification to Congress and  OMB, they said they have taken other steps, such as conducting tours of  prison facilities with congressional and OMB stakeholders to demonstrate  conditions and the basis for the President’s budget request.
BOP’s efforts to provide information upon request may meet some  congressional committee needs; however, the additional information on  projected costs would provide more detail on the cost drivers affecting the  President’s request for BOP and therefore facilitate congressional  decision making. BOP officials reported spending a total of 40 staff hours  to compile and analyze the quantitative information below the PPA level  in order to recreate the historical quantitative information for the prior  fiscal years. Thus, given that BOP already captures and has readily  available this quantitative information below the PPA level as part of its  annual budget development process, providing this more detailed  information to congressional decision makers could facilitate  congressional decision making by providing a more comprehensive  understanding of the factors affecting BOP’s budget and driving budget  increases below the PPA elements. Consulting with congressional  decision makers to determine if it would be helpful to include this  information in its annual budget justification would help provide  reasonable assurance that BOP is fully meeting congressional  stakeholders’ needs.
section_title: Conclusions
paragraphs: According to BOP officials, BOP’s biggest challenges are managing the  continually increasing federal inmate population while providing for  inmates’ care and safety, as well as the safety of BOP staff and  surrounding communities, within budgeted levels. BOP officials project  continuing inmate population growth and estimate increases in funding  needs for the foreseeable future. Consultation with congressional  decision makers could help BOP identify what additional information, if  any, is needed, such as providing more comprehensive detailed  information on projected costs using data already gathered by BOP. This  could enhance the transparency of BOP’s budget justification and the  President’s budget request and better inform congressional decision  making.
section_title: Recommendation for Executive Action
paragraphs: To enhance the transparency of BOP’s cost information as presented in  DOJ’s annual congressional budget justifications, we recommend that the  Attorney General consult with congressional decision makers on  providing additional BOP funding detail below the PPA level in future  budget justifications, and in conjunction with BOP, provide the data as  appropriate.
section_title: Agency Comments
paragraphs: We provided a draft of the report to DOJ for comment. The department  did not provide official written comments to include in our report.   However, in an e-mail on November 21, the DOJ liaison stated that DOJ  concurred with our recommendation. DOJ and BOP also provided  technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate.
We are sending copies of this report to the selected congressional  committees, the Attorney General, and the Director of BOP, and other  interested parties. In addition, this report is available at no charge on the  GAO website at http://www.gao.gov.
If you or your staff have any further questions about this report, please  contact me at (202) 512-9627 or MaurerD@gao.gov. Contact points for  our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found  on the last page of this report. Key contributors to this report are listed in  appendix III.
section_title: Appendix I: Dollar Amounts Associated with Bureau of Prisons’ Budget Request Financial Management Information System (FMIS) Data Fields for Inmate Care and Programs
subsections: section_title: FMIS data field Medical program
paragraphs: BOP officials stated that they maintain funding data for laundry services using the Inmate Services  FMIS data field.
section_title: Appendix II: Narrative Summaries for Institution Security and Administration, Inmate Care and Programs, and Contract Confinement in the Bureau of Prisons’ Fiscal Year 2014 Budget Justification
subsections: section_title: Institution security and administration Funding categories Sentry Information System
paragraphs: Narrative summaries  Each inmate is tracked through BOP’s Sentry Information System. Offenders are assigned a  security and custody status, which relates to the degree of supervision needed and ensures that  offenders are placed in the least restrictive and least costly correctional environment appropriate to  their custody and security-level needs. The result is a grouping of offenders with similar custodial  needs in an institution, and a relative reduction in the mixing of aggressive and nonaggressive  offenders.
Within each institution, correctional officers are assigned to security posts that are primarily  established on the basis of structural/visual considerations. The two basic categories of security are  external security and internal security. External security consists of a walled or fenced perimeter  supplemented by staffed security towers and armed mobile perimeter patrols. There is also razor  wire strung between a double fence with high mast lighting to illuminate the perimeter and highly  technical equipment such as alarm systems and video surveillance. Entrances through the  perimeter are controlled by a series of gates, both electrical and manual, supplemented by metal  detection systems and search procedures for weapon and contraband control. BOP has fully  incorporated closed circuit television technology in its higher-security facilities, which has enhanced  supervision and provides valuable intelligence in the management of federal inmates. For practical  purposes, all other security measures, processes, and activities can be called internal security,  commencing when an inmate is admitted and terminating upon his or her release.  Staff supervise inmates in living units, work areas, visiting areas, dining halls, and any other area  where inmates may be located or have access. Regularly scheduled counts are conducted several  times a day (five on weekdays, six on weekends) in all institutions to monitor the whereabouts of  inmates. Work supervisors and program personnel are held strictly accountable for all inmates  under their supervision.
Violations of institution regulations are dealt with through the Inmate Disciplinary Process.  Correctional staff members conduct investigations of the alleged misconduct and forward the  findings to the Unit Discipline Committee. Depending on the seriousness of the charge, the Unit  Discipline Committee will make a finding, or refer the report to the Discipline Hearing Officer for  disposition. When practical, inmates are afforded the opportunity to participate in, and present  evidence at a due process hearing before findings are made. Inmates may appeal these decisions  utilizing the administrative remedy process.
The Administrative Segregation program provides for the separation of inmates who require closer  supervision and monitoring from those in the general population. Such cases include, but are not  limited to, protective custody, serious escape risks, threats to the security and orderly running of the  institution. The Disciplinary Segregation program provides for segregation of offenders who have  been found guilty of violations of rules through the Inmate Disciplinary Process.
The Facility Maintenance program is designed to adequately maintain and continue to safely  operate the physical plants of BOP institutions. Facilities vary in age from those recently  constructed to those 100 or more years old. Thirty-four of the BOP facilities are over 50 years old.  As of January 2013, BOP facilities are situated on 46,030 acres of land and contain approximately  63.4 million square feet of floor area, all of which must be maintained and furnished with utility  services. Each institution maintains communication systems including complete private automatic  branch exchange telephone systems, radio systems including base station and mobile units, and  several electronic detection and control systems.  Complex heating and air conditioning systems, high-pressure steam power plants, sophisticated  hospital equipment, emergency electrical power systems and fire protection, and life safety systems  all require regular maintenance. Despite energy-saving initiatives, discussed earlier in the budget,  the growing inmate population and inflationary factors have significantly increased utility costs.
section_title: Institution security and administration Funding categories Physical Plant
paragraphs: Narrative summaries  Physical plant requirements are identified through regular inspections conducted in the ongoing  preventive maintenance program, formal semiannual inspections, and requests for specific needs  identified by institution staff members. This program finances maintenance and minor improvement  projects that normally cost $10,000 or less. However, there are policy guidelines that allow funding  of maintenance projects (work requests) costing more than $10,000 in certain circumstances. Some  exceptions would include emergencies or security threats such as hurricanes or disturbances.  Maintenance and repair requirements in excess of $10,000 are normally included in the  Modernization and Repair program of the Buildings and Facilities budget.  The work within the maintenance program is accomplished almost entirely by inmate crews under  staff supervision. Each work crew consists of a staff foreman and 10 to 20 inmates. Each institution  must have highly skilled staff with experience and training in every phase of construction and  maintenance work including steam fitting, air conditioning, mechanics, or electronics repair. A few  specific jobs are contracted out because special skills or equipment items are required, or because  the work may be extremely dangerous. Examples of these jobs include elevator inspection and  repair, radio frequency alignment, and water tower painting.
The Staff Training Academy (STA) at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) in  Glynco, Georgia, provides introductory and advanced correctional training for BOP law enforcement  staff. The Introduction to Correctional Techniques (ICT) program is a 5-week program for a total of  159 hours of instruction that is taught in two phases. Phase I consists of 2-weeks of training at the  institution, and Phase II consists of a 3-week training program at the STA. The STA oversees the  curriculum development and administration of the 2-week (56-hour) ICT Phase I course provided at  all institutions for new employees prior to attending the ICT Phase II course at the STA. The ICT  Phase II is a 3-week (103-hour) program of instruction that covers hostage situations, ethics,  interpersonal communication skills, special offenders, diversity, inmate discipline, legal procedures,  and so forth. Successful completion of this program (academics, firearms, and the Physical Ability  Test) is required for continued employment of newly hired staff entering into law enforcement  positions. In fiscal year 2012, 2,279 new employees participated in 60 classes of the ICT program.  The STA provided advanced correctional skills training for trainers in disturbance control, firearms,  bus operations, self-defense, and side-handle baton in fiscal year 2012. The STA also provides  advanced correctional training for Marksman/Observer and Witness Security Escort. The majority of  the advanced training programs are conducted at BOP institutions, resulting in substantial cost  avoidance in training costs.
All BOP institutions operate outpatient ambulatory care clinics. These clinics provide a range of  outpatient services to inmates similar to those provided by ambulatory clinics found in most  communities, that is, primary health care. The clinics serve as the first level of diagnostic and  treatment services to sentenced and presentenced inmates. New institutions are typically given 2  years after activation to obtain accreditation from the Joint Commission. Care Level I institutions are  not required to achieve or maintain this accreditation because they predominantly house healthy  inmate populations. All Health Services programs and operations are subject to internal review  (Program Review) and must maintain accreditation by the American Correctional Association. Each  institution is also required to provide data to the Health Services Division (HSD) in the form of  outcome measures for a variety of clinical conditions (HIV, hypertension, diabetes, and so forth).  These evaluative and accreditation activities provide HSD with valuable data regarding the quality  and appropriateness of health care in BOP. The majority of BOP medical staff are civil service  clinical and support professionals, and the remaining staff are U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS)  Commissions Corps Officers serving in a wide variety of clinical and specialty professions. USPHS  provides these clinicians and administrators via an interagency agreement.
section_title: Institution security and administration Funding categories Food Service
paragraphs: Narrative summaries  BOP provides daily meals with consideration to the Dietary Reference Intakes (DRI) for groups  published by the Food and Nutrition Board of the National Academy of Sciences, for identified  macro- and micronutrients. Meal preparation is accomplished primarily by inmate workers (about 12  percent of the population) under the supervision of staff. Food preparation and recipe and menu  management are maintained by the use of a standardized national menu and a computerized Food  Service management software system. United States Penitentiary Lompoc, California, and Federal  Correction Institution El Reno, Oklahoma, utilize available land resources in limited production of  beef and milk. Farm products are consumed at the producing institutions and are also shipped to  nearby institutions to offset their need to purchase some products on the open market.  During fiscal year 2014, BOP estimates serving over 206 million meals, which is nearly 566,000  meals per day and over 3.9 million meals per week. Despite cost containment measures, the annual  costs have risen because of the growing inmate population and inflationary factors.
Inmate education programs include literacy, English as a Second Language (ESL), occupational  education, advanced occupational education (AOE), parenting, release preparation courses, and a  wide range of adult continuing, wellness, and structured and unstructured leisure time activities.  Education programming provides inmates with an opportunity to learn the functional skills that  support their reintegration into the community. At the end of fiscal year 2012, 35 percent of the  designated inmate population was enrolled in one of more education/recreation program. BOP’s  Office of Research has found that participation in education programs leads to a 16 percent  reduction in recidivism by inmates who participate in these programs.
Psychology Services staff are an integral part of correctional treatment, as they administer programs  of group and individual psychotherapy, crisis intervention, prosocial skill building, and staff  consultation and training. BOP policy requires that every inmate admitted to a BOP facility be given  an initial psychological screening, which consists of psychological interviews, social history reviews,  and behavioral observation. The purposes of the screening are to identify special treatment or  referral needs, provide information useful in future crisis counseling situations, identify strengths as  well as potential adjustment problems to imprisonment, and discuss possible program needs with  the inmates and provide information about these programs. In addition, BOP psychologists have  traditionally provided the courts, parole officials, and prison administrators with comprehensive  psychological evaluations of offenders.  Inmates with mental health needs are offered a range of services, including crisis counseling,  individual and group psychotherapy, clinical case management, psychiatric treatment, and  specialized residential treatment programs. Acutely mentally ill inmates may receive these services  within BOP’s Psychiatric Referral Centers. However, most mental health treatment is provided in  regular institutions. In addition to the treatment of mental illnesses, Psychology Services provides  specialized drug abuse treatment and sex offender treatment programs.   BOP psychologists also offer treatment services designed to develop inmates’ life skills, such as  anger management, problem solving, social skills training, and stress management.
In response to the rapid growth of federal inmates with a diagnosis of a drug disorder (40 percent of  inmates entering BOP), BOP continues to develop evidence-based treatment practices to manage  and treat drug-using offenders. BOP’s strategy includes early identification through a psychology  screening, drug education, nonresidential drug abuse treatment, intensive residential drug abuse  treatment, and community transition treatment.  The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act (VCCLEA) of 1994 requires BOP, subject to  the availability of appropriations, to provide appropriate substance abuse treatment for 100 percent  of inmates who have a diagnosis of substance abuse or dependence and who volunteer for  treatment. In fiscal year 2012, BOP was able to provide appropriate substance abuse treatment for  100 percent of eligible inmates.
section_title: Institution security and administration Funding categories Religious Services
paragraphs: Narrative summaries  BOP employs full-time chaplains in all institutions to accommodate the constitutional right to the free  exercise of religion, manage religious programs, and provide pastoral care to inmates. Chaplains  routinely evaluate the needs of inmates in the institution and facilitate programs that address those  needs. Religious Services departments offer programs directly related to spiritual development,  community reentry, family relationships, personal responsibility, and basic religious instruction.  Chaplains provide spiritual programs across the spectrum of faiths represented in the inmate  population. Chaplains also train and familiarize staff regarding diverse religious beliefs and practices  of inmates while providing guidance for institution compliance with the First Amendment and legal  standard established by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the Second Chance Act of  2007. The passage of the Second Chance Act of 2007 ushered in the opportunity to utilize mentors  in the delivery of pastoral care. Policy is being developed to expand the use of mentors; 23 mentor  coordinator positions have been approved at Life Connections and Threshold Program sites.
Responsible for the general program and policy development for BOP’s network of approximately  250 contract residential reentry centers. Community Corrections and Detention (CCD) also works  with community corrections contracting (CCC) to offer technical assistance in the acquisition  process for Residential Reentry Centers services. CCD provides technical assistance to BOP’s 22  community corrections offices in the areas of contract oversight, case management, inmate systems  management, and financial management. Responsibility for BOP’s network of contract confinement  facilities for federal juvenile offenders and short-term detention facilities also rests with CCD.
Responsible for coordinating BOP’s efforts in managing a growing population of nearly 29,000  inmates located in contractor-operated secure correctional facilities. Staff from this branch oversee  the management and operation of facilities,  develop new requirements, establish policy and procedures, develop and manage contract budgets,  and serve as liaisons among the contractors and BOP and other members of the federal family.
National Institute of Corrections  Also included in this decision unit is the National Institute of Corrections (NIC), a federal entity that is  authorized by statute 18 U.S.C. §4351 to provide training, technical assistance, and information  services to federal, state, and local correctional agencies, including BOP. NIC provides technical  assistance by sending a technical resource provider or staff to the requesting agency, or an  individual or team of individuals from the requesting system visits another agency to gain expertise  and experience in the specific area of concern. In fiscal year 2012, NIC delivered 244 technical  assistance training events to federal, state, and local justice agencies.  NIC is also responsible for the National Corrections Academy (NCA), which serves as the training  division that provides training and related services for federal, state, and local correctional  practitioners. By developing and delivering training to prisons, jails and community corrections  practitioners, the academy enhances interaction among correctional agencies, other components of  the criminal justice system, public policymakers, and public and private stakeholder organizations,  thus improving correctional programming throughout the country.
section_title: Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contact
paragraphs: David C. Maurer, (202) 512-9627 or MaurerD@gao.gov.
section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to the contact named above, Chris Keisling (Assistant  Director), Carol Henn (Assistant Director), Melissa Wolfe (Assistant  Director), Kristen Kociolek (Assistant Director), Vanessa D. Dillard, John  Vocino, Billy Commons, Pedro Almoguera, Lara Miklozek, Linda Miller,  Mary Catherine Hult, and Eric Hauswirth made key contributions to this  report.