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

Letter

Background

Overview of Federal Budget Process and BOP Budget Development

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.

Prior GAO work on BOP Costs and Budget Justification Reviews

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.

Institution Security and Inmate Care Constitute the Majority of BOP’s Salaries and Expenses Account Costs as Presented in Its Budget Justifications

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.

BOP Could Enhance the Transparency of Its Budget Justification by Providing Additional Data on Cost Components within the Program, Project, and Activity Levels

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.

Conclusions

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.

Recommendation for Executive Action

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.

Agency Comments

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.

Appendix I: Dollar Amounts Associated with Bureau of Prisons’ Budget Request Financial Management Information System (FMIS) Data Fields for Inmate Care and Programs

FMIS data field Medical program

BOP officials stated that they maintain funding data for laundry services using the Inmate Services FMIS data field.

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

Institution security and administration Funding categories Sentry Information System

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.

Institution security and administration Funding categories Physical Plant

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.

Institution security and administration Funding categories Food Service

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.

Institution security and administration Funding categories Religious Services

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.

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments

GAO Contact

David C. Maurer, (202) 512-9627 or MaurerD@gao.gov.

Staff Acknowledgments

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.