USPC NEWS United States Parole Commission March 20, 2004

Edward F. Reilly

Shown below is a list of questions that arose during the Commission's public forum held on March 20, 2004. These public forums are held twice each year to provide the citizens of the District of Columbia the chance to ask questions or raise concerns about the policies of the Commission. The questions were addressed by a panel of speakers, which consisted of representatives from the United States Parole Commission, the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons. This summary includes only those questions directed at the Commission.

Question: What behaviors, besides criminal conduct and substance abuse, can lead to a revocation of supervision? Can unemployment result in a revocation?

Answer: Any behavior that shows that a parolee is willfully refusing to abide by the conditions of supervision (for example, failure to meet with the Supervision Officer as directed or leaving the District of Columbia metropolitan area without permission) may result in supervision being revoked. If the parolee is making a good faith effort to find employment and is participating in employment readiness programs suggested by CSOSA, parole would not be revoked based solely on failure to maintain employment.

Question: How is the level of supervision determined if clear conduct is otherwise maintained?

Answer: The Commission has the authority to place a parolee on inactive supervision. The Community Supervision Officer makes a yearly report to the Commission summarizing the parolee's compliance with the conditions of supervision. Normally, two years after release to supervision, and annually thereafter, the Commission reviews the case on the record to determine if the parolee should be placed on inactive supervision. The Commission considers the recommendation of the Community Supervision Officer, the record of the parolee's compliance with the conditions of supervision, and makes the decision using guidelines published in the U.S. Parole Commission Rules and Procedures Manual, which can be found at the Commission's website.

Question: Will employment be approved if it requires working with other offenders on supervision?

Answer: The decision will be made by CSOSA on a case-by-case basis. Generally, working with other offenders if they are still on supervision is prohibited, but there are special circumstances that will be considered. For example, working for a large construction firm may make it inevitable that a parolee will be working with other offenders from time to time. Neither the Commission nor CSOSA has any interest in creating unnecessary impediments to employment. Contact that occurs in an extended setting, such as a large construction site, may be allowed.

Question: Information has been presented showing that the parole rate is approximately 90 percent overall. What is the parole rate for the most serious offenders, such as murderers?

Answer: The parole rate for violent offenders is eighty-four percent.

Question: How is the seriousness of the conviction offense considered if the parole applicant has done well in prison? What part does positive adjustment in prison play in the final decision?

Answer: The decision to parole is based, in part, on a determination of the probability that a parole applicant will remain at liberty without violating the law. This determination is based on the salient factor score used to predict recidivism in conjunction with the level of violence shown by the nature and circumstances of the current offense and prior convictions. An inmate cannot change the nature of the current offense or the prior record, but these are the best predictors of future recidivism, including the probability of future violence. In order to protect the public and responsibly carry out the statutory mission of the Commission, it is necessary for the Commission to use the best information at its disposal, which includes the extensiveness of the prior record and the history of violence in the current and past offenses. However, credit is given for superior program achievement during the time spent in custody prior to the hearing. If superior program achievement is found, the award for superior program achievement is one-third the number of months during which the parole applicant demonstrated superior program achievement. For example, if an inmate demonstrated 24 months of superior program achievement, eight months is subtracted from both the minimum and the maximum of the guideline range.

Question: When is a decision made, after review by the examiners or by the Commissioners? Answer: Examiners can only make a recommendation to grant or deny parole. The final decision always rests with the Parole Commissioners.

Question: If an individual is on inactive supervision, can supervision be revoked?

Answer: A parolee on inactive supervision can be revoked for new criminal conduct on supervision. In addition, a parolee may be returned to active supervision if the parolee's conduct indicated that he or she may present a greater risk to the public.

Question: Is a high revocation rate a sign that supervision is failing? Are steps being taken to reduce the revocation rate?

Answer: Public protection remains the primary goal of supervision. If a parolee is judged to present a risk to the public as evidenced by a failure to abide by the conditions of supervision, supervision will be revoked. In itself, this does not indicate that supervision has failed, but it does indicate that other avenues should be explored to assist offenders. The Commission and CSOSA are dedicated to improving the reentry process by enlisting the efforts of faith organizations to provide support for those offenders that need assistance. The program holds great promise, and the District of Columbia is a leader in this regard. Ultimately, however, every parolee is responsible for their conduct on supervision and can expect to be sanctioned for failure to abide by the conditions of supervision.

Question: Why are there different sets of guidelines for different offenders and which guidelines apply to a particular case?

Answer: For an inmate whose initial hearing was held prior to August 5, 1998, the Commission continues to use the guidelines of the former District of Columbia Board of Parole. For hearings held after that date, the Commission uses the guidelines contained in the United States Parole Commission Rules and Procedures Manual which can be found on the Commission's website (www.USDOJ.GOV/USPC). The new guidelines were adopted in 1998 because decisions rendered by the previous District of Columbia Board of Parole frequently departed above the old guidelines due to factors that indicated an increased risk of violent recidivism. Therefore, the Commission promulgated new guidelines that used the basic format of the D.C. Board of Parole guidelines, but included in the guidelines factors on the risk of violent recidivism. The Commission's 1998 guidelines are intended to better reflect actual practice and to give a more realistic understanding of the parole process.

Question: Section 2.48-05 of the Commission's Manual states that in the case of administrative violation, a community corrections center or similar placement is generally preferred to returning a parolee to prison. How is this provision being applied to District of Columbia offenders? Does the Commission consider alternatives to incarceration?

Answer: In the case of District of Columbia offenders, authority has been delegated by the Commission to CSOSA giving that agency the option of placing an offender in a halfway house without an order from the Commission. By the time a warrant has been requested by CSOSA, it is expected that appropriate alternative sanctions, which may include halfway house placement, will already have been exhausted.

Question: If an individual is paroled on a life sentence, how long will this individual remain on supervision? What does life mean in this case?

Answer: An individual paroled on a life sentence will remain on parole for the remainder of the parolee's natural life. The Commission does not have the authority to terminate supervision, although the supervision can be made inactive after a period of time.

Question: When did the law change to require that the Commission be harsher on District of Columbia offenders?

Answer: There has been no change in the law that requires the Commission to render harsher decisions for District of Columbia offenders eligible for parole. As noted above, the Commission adopted new parole guidelines for crimes committed on or after August 5, 1998 to better reflect the previous practice of the D.C. Board of Parole and to give a more realistic understanding of the parole process.

Question: Why are two Parole Commissioners required to make a decision for District of Columbia inmates when only one Commissioner is required for federal inmates?

Answer: Two Commissioners are required to make a final decision for District of Columbia inmates to reflect the previous practice of the D.C. Board of Parole. Thought is being given to allowing one Commissioner to make the final determination and to allowing the decision to be appealed, as is the case for federal inmates. Individuals with an opinion on this topic should contact the Parole Commission.

Question: Will the Commission give jail credit for time spent in custody on a charge leading to a revocation?

Answer: The Commission gives credit towards the guidelines for all time spent in custody for all charges resulting in the revocation of parole.

Question: Will the Commission terminate supervision if an individual has done well on supervision?

Answer: District of Columbia law does not give the Commission the authority to terminate supervision and the offender's sentence before the full-term expiration date. The Commission, however, may release a parolee from active supervision before this date.

Question: What happens if the Commission requires completion of a specific program prior to parole and that program is not available in the institution housing the offender?

Answer: The Hearing Examiners have been instructed to refrain from formally recommending in the Notice of Action completion of specific institution programs in order to be paroled except in exceptional circumstances, such as for offenders sentenced under the Youth Rehabilitation Act (YRA). If a program is recommended, the Commission will take into consideration the circumstance that an inmate is unable to complete a program due to no fault on the part of the inmate. However, parole is not guaranteed if a program is successfully completed.

Any comments concerning this Forum or suggestions for future Forums should be directed to James Beck at the U. S. Parole Commission (JAMES.BECK@USDOJ.GOV).