Performance Monitoring Report 2007-2008

3. STRATEGIC OUTCOMES – RESULTS FOR 2007-200820

The Program Activity Architecture of the NPB reflects the key aspects of its legislative framework (the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, the Criminal Records Act, and the Criminal Code ) and the areas of performance in which Parliament and the public most frequently express interest. In this context, the Board's strategic outcomes are the cornerstones of its public accountability.

For the year 2007-2008, The Board's three strategic outcomes were:

1. conditional release decisions which contribute to public protection through the safe reintegration of offenders in the community;
2. open and accountable conditional release processes that ensure active involvement and engagement of victims of crime and the public, before and after conditional release decisions are made; and
3. pardon decisions and clemency recommendations which contribute to public protection and support the process of rehabilitation.

Progress in 2007/08 with regard to outcome 1:

Conditional release decisions which contribute to public protection through the safe reintegration of offenders in the community.

 

Expenditures ($ Millions)	Full Time Equivalents Used
$34.3	288

Program Activity Name: Conditional Release Decisions

Program Activity Description: Case review and quality decision-making; provision of support for decision-making; provision of appropriate training to ensure professionalism in all aspects of decision-making and policy development to guide decision-making and operations.

The effectiveness of this activity is assessed by monitoring of the outcomes of offenders on parole. Outcomes of release provide a complete picture of performance. Completion of a release by an offender without a return to an institution is an indicator of success.

Revocation of a release for a breach of the conditions of release is not a positive result for the offender, but from a community perspective, it is a positive intervention to reduce risk. Releases which result in a new offence are a negative result. Additional information is provided on violent re-offending by parolees as these incidents have the most serious consequences for the community. Further, the section reports on post-warrant expiry re-offending to provide information on the long-term effectiveness of parole in contributing to public safety.

Over the past ten years, the Board has conducted an average of 23,000 conditional release reviews annually and made an average of 6,100 decisions to release offenders on either day or full parole

The Board uses three indicators related to the performance of parolees in the community:

• outcomes of conditional release;
• convictions for violent offences; and
• post-warrant expiry readmission on a federal sentence.

Outcomes of conditional release for federal offenders

Over the last ten years, performance information indicates that:

• Over 78% of releases on day and full parole were completed successfully.
• About 14% of releases on day and full parole were revoked for a breach of conditions.
• Less than eight percent of releases on parole ended in a new offence and about 1.1% ended in a new violent offence. In fact, the number of violent offences by offenders on day and full parole declined by 65% between 1996/97 and 2006/07. The numbers for fiscal year 2007/08 are not included as the number of convictions could increase during the next 12 to 18 months as cases make their way through the courts.
• Over 58% of releases on statutory release were completed successfully, about 29% were revoked for a breach of conditions, about 13% ended in a new offence and 3% ended in a new violent offence. It must be remembered that offenders on statutory release are released by law and not at the discretion of the Board.

Recent information on the outcomes of conditional release is consistent with long-term trends. Care should be taken, however, when reviewing the outcome rate information for 2007/08, as the number of revocations with offence will often fluctuate higher during the 12 to 18 months after a fiscal year ends because outstanding charges often take that long to be resolved by the courts.

Outcomes of Federal Conditional Release

Release Type/Yr.	Successful Completion		Revocation for Breach of Condition		Total Without Re-offending		Revocation with Offence				Total Revocations with Offence
							Non-violent		Violent
Day Parole	#	%	#	%	#	%	#	%	#	%	#	%
2005-06	2483	81.6	397	13.1	2880	94.7	141	4.6	21	0.7	162	5.3
2006-07	2547	81.9	378	12.2	2925	94.0	164	5.3	22	0.7	186	6.0
2007/08	2511	83.5	391	13.0	2902	96.4	96	3.2	11	0.4	107	3.6
Full Parole*
2005-06	985	70.8	262	18.8	1247	89.6	128	9.2	17	1.2	145	10.4
2006-07	972	71.0	255	18.6	1227	89.6	133	9.7	9	0.7	142	10.4
2007/08	990	72.9	262	19.3	1252	92.2	94	6.9	12	0.9	106	7.8
Statutory Release
2005-06	3244	58.5	1652	29.8	4896	88.3	519	9.4	131	2.4	650	11.7
2006-07	3266	58.4	1648	29.5	4914	87.9	540	9.7	136	2.4	676	12.1
2007/08	3348	58.8	1739	30.6	5087	89.4	496	8.7	110	1.9	606	10.6

*Full parole includes only those offenders serving determinate sentences as offenders serving indeterminate sentences can only successfully complete full parole by dying.

Outcomes of conditional release for provincial offenders in the Atlantic, Prairie and Pacific regions

Information on the outcomes of release for provincial offenders in the Atlantic, Prairie and Pacific regions where the NPB exercises parole decision-making authority also shows positive results. It should be noted that the NPB only assumed parole responsibility for provincial offenders in British Columbia on April 1, 2007 when the British Columbia Board of Parole was disbanded. Over the past ten years, 78% of releases of provincial offenders on day and full parole were completed successfully. Three percent (3%) of releases were revoked because of a new offence, while 0.3% were revoked because of a new violent offence. In real numbers, over the past ten years, 16 of the 5,344 parole releases for provincial offenders resulted in a new violent offence.

Outcomes of conditional release for offenders serving life sentences for murder

Offenders serving life sentences for murder represent a visible and growing component of the federal offender population. In 1994/95, they represented 14% (2,024) of the federally incarcerated population and about 16% (998) of day and full parolees. By 2007/08, the proportions had grown to 19% (2,531) of the federally incarcerated population and 32% (1,661) of day and full parolees. Offenders serving life sentences are not entitled to statutory release.

Day parole for offenders serving life sentences for murder has yielded positive results. Over the last ten years, 92% of day paroles, for offenders serving life sentences for murder, have been successfully completed compared to 81% for offenders serving determinate sentences.

The rate of re-offending was also lower for offenders serving life sentences for murder at 1% compared to 7% for offenders serving determinate sentences. In fact, offenders serving sentences for non-scheduled offences (property offences) were most likely to reoffend, followed by offenders serving sentences for schedule I-non-sex offences (offences such as armed robbery, assault).

Outcome Rates for Federal Day Parole by Offence of Conviction (%)

Outcome	Murder		Schedule I-sex		Schedule I-non-sex		Schedule II		Non-scheduled		Total
	06/07	07/08	06/07	07/08	06/07	07/08	06/07	07/08	06/07	07/08	06/07	07/08
Successful Completions	91.5	92.6	94.4	93.0	77.7	78.2	87.1	87.2	71.3	75.4	81.9	83.5
Revoked for Breach of Conditions	7.0	6.9	4.5	7.0	16.1	17.4	8.9	10.1	15.9	17.4	12.2	13.0
Revocations with Offence - Non-violent Offences	1.1	0.6	1.1	0.0	4.6	3.5	4.1	2.7	12.5	6.8	5.3	3.2
Revocations with Offence - Violent Offences	0.4	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.7	1.0	0.0	0.0	0.3	0.3	0.7	0.4
Total Revocation with Offence	1.5	0.6	1.1	0.0	6.3	4.4	4.1	2.7	12.8	7.2	6.0	3.6

Offenders, serving life sentences for murder, who are released on full parole, remain on parole for life. Since 1994/95, 1,886 offenders serving life sentences for murder have had 2,120 full parole supervision periods. As of March 31, 2008, 65% of the full parole supervision periods were still active, the offender had died in 13% of cases, while 13% of the full parole supervision periods had been revoked for a breach of conditions and 9% had ended as the result of a new offence with 3% ending as the result of a new violent offence.

Convictions for violent offences:

• Annual numbers of convictions for violent offences dropped 65% for offenders on day and full parole between 1996/97 and 2006/07. (The numbers for fiscal year 2007/08 were not included as the number of convictions could increase during the next 12 to 18 months as cases make their way through the courts.)
• The rate per 1,000 offenders on day and full parole has also revealed a downward trend since 1996/97 (from 38 to 16 for day parole and from 13 to 3 for full parole).
• Comparisons of rates of conviction for violent offences and violent crime rates based on the Uniform Crime Reports suggest that offenders on full parole are no more likely than the general public to commit a violent crime.

Convictions for Violent Offences by Supervision Type and the Rates of Conviction for Violent Offences per 1000 Supervised Offenders

Year	Day Parole (convictions)	Rates per 1000	Full Parole (convictions)	Rates per 1000	Statutory release (convictions)	Rates per 1000	Total Convictions
1996/97	39	38	55	13	160	67	254
1997/98	38	30	49	12	157	63	244
1998/99	36	24	38	9	138	55	212
1999/00	58	37	47	10	160	57	265
2000/01	35	25	40	9	167	60	242
2001/02	33	25	33	8	149	52	215
2002/03	23	18	27	7	148	51	198
2003/04	20	15	21	5	149	50	190
2004/05	22	18	28	7	137	46	187
2005/06	21	15	21	5	131	43	173
2006/07	22	16	11	3	137	43	170
2007/08	13	10	15	4	110	35	138

Note: The number of convictions for violent offences for 2007/08 will likely fluctuate higher during the 12 to 18 months after the fiscal year ends because outstanding charges often take that long to be resolved by the courts.

Post-warrant readmission on a federal sentence

Post-warrant expiry re-offending is based on readmissions on a federal sentence for offenders who completed their sentences on full parole, statutory release as well as for offenders that were released at warrant expiry (at the end of their sentence).

Long-term follow-up for federal offenders who completed their sentences on full parole, statutory release or were released at warrant expiry between 1992/93 and 1997/98 indicates that about 26% had been re-admitted on a federal sentence by March 31, 2008. There are, however, significant differences in re-offending for offenders within this group:

• about 11% of offenders who completed their sentences on full parole had been re-admitted on a federal sentence;
• about 32% of offenders who completed their sentences on statutory release had been re-admitted on a federal sentence; and
• about 36% of offenders who were released at warrant expiry had been re-admitted on a federal sentence.

Conditional release is founded on the principle that gradual release to the community, based on effective programs and treatment, quality assessments of the risk of re-offending and effective community supervision enhances community safety. Information on post-warrant readmission on a federal sentence reinforces this theory, suggesting that the detailed process of case preparation and assessment used by the Board and CSC for parole decision-making is effective in identifying those offenders most likely to remain free from crime in the community.

Post-warrant expiry re-offending, as reported, deals only with federal re-offending (i.e. a new sentence of two years or more). If all new sentences (e.g. fines or sentences of less than two years) were considered, the rate of re-offending would increase. The NPB does not have access to this information.

Progress in 2007/08 with regard to outcome 2:

Open and accountable conditional release processes that ensure active involvement and engagement of victims of crime and the public, before and after conditional release decisions are made.

 

Expenditures ($ Millions)	Full Time Equivalents Used
$6.2	53

Program Activity Name: Conditional Release Openness and Accountability

Program Activity Description: Provision of information for victims and assistance for observers at NPB hearings and those who seek access to the NPB's decision registry; public information strategies; and investigation of tragic incidents in the community.

This program activity is designed to ensure that the Board operates in an open and accountable manner, consistent with the provisions of the CCRA and that it shares information effectively in support of public safety and effective conditional release. Work in this area recognizes that the NPB operates in a difficult environment in which timely sharing of accurate information is fundamental for effective partnership and public trust. Results for this program are assessed by monitoring the timeliness of information shared and selected surveys of those who receive information and assistance from the Board (e.g.victims).

The CCRA requires the Board to provide information for victims of crime, allow observers at its hearings and provide access to its decisions through a registry of decisions. Performance reporting in this area has two components dealing with outputs and outcomes:

• the volume of NPB activity in response to demands for information/assistance (outputs); and
• the satisfaction of those who receive information and assistance from the Board (outcomes).

Contacts with victims

In 2007/08, the Board had about 20,500 contacts with victims. While the number of contacts with victims decreased in 2007/08, the number has increased 34% in the last five years. Most were victims of violence, such as sexual assault or the family of murder victims. Victims do not always agree with NPB decisions, but the majority of those surveyed in 2003 expressed satisfaction with the quality and timeliness of the information provided by NPB staff.

Observers at hearings

The Board had 1,974 observers at its hearings in 2007/08, a 4% decrease from the previous year.

Victims presentations at hearings

In 2007/08, victims made 244 presentations at 139 hearings. Of this group, most had been family members of victims of murder (38%) or manslaughter (24%). Eighty-eight percent (88%) of the presentations were made by the victims in person, and the rest were on either audio or video tape.

Decision Registry

The CCRA permits access to specific decisions and to decisions for research purposes through the NPB's registry of decisions. For specific cases, any person who demonstrates an interest may, on written application to the Board, have access to the contents of the registry relating to a specific case. Information that would jeopardize the safety of a person, reveal the source of information obtained in confidence or adversely influence the reintegration of the offender is deleted. For research purposes, people may apply to the Board for access to decisions and receive information after the decisions have been screened to remove all personal identifiers.

The legislation does not define the contents of the "registry of decisions" or what would constitute demonstrating interest in a case. However, in keeping with the concepts of openness and accountability, the Board makes available the complete case assessment and decision-making documentation of Board members.

In 2007/08, the Board released over 6,000 decisions from the registry. Victims were the most frequent requestors of decisions (about 58%), followed by the media (about 41%).

Investigations

The Board participates in Boards of Investigation into incidents where offenders on conditional release have committed a serious offence in the community. Boards of Investigation are conducted in co-operation with CSC and usually have three members: a Chairperson, who is a representative from the community, a representative from CSC and a representative from NPB. If warranted, other community members are appointed who have expertise in the issue under review. The Board of Investigation conducts an in-depth review of file documentation and hearing tapes and carries out on-site interviews with those involved in the release and supervision of the offender. There were no new Boards of Investigation conducted in 2007/08.

Progress in 2007/08 with regard to outcome 3:

Pardon decisions and clemency recommendations which contribute to public protection and support the process of rehabilitation.

Expenditures ($ Millions)	Full Time Equivalents Used
$2.9	36

Program Activity Name: Pardon Decisions and Clemency Recommendations

Program Activity Description: The review of pardon applications and the making of quality decisions to grant or deny pardons; provision of support for pardon decision-making; development of pardon and clemency policy; the collection of pardon revenues; and development of recommendations for clemency.

A pardon is a formal attempt to remove the stigma of a criminal record for people found guilty of a federal offence who, having satisfied the sentence imposed and a specific waiting period, have shown themselves to be responsible citizens. A pardon is, therefore, a means to facilitate and demonstrate safe community reintegration. Assessment of results in this area considers efficiency (the average time required to process pardon applications) and effectiveness (rates of revocation of pardons).

In Canada, over 3 million people have criminal records. This group represents the potential clientele for the pardon program. Over the last five years, the Board has received, on average about 24,000 pardon applications per year, which generate about $1,200,000 in revenues as a result of a $50.00 user fee. The Board may access 70% of all revenues collected. Since 2007/08, the limited maximum of $410,000 has been removed. The RCMP has access to 30% of the user fees collected. The fee, which does not reflect the full cost of the program for the NPB or the RCMP, is set at $50.00 so as not to serve as an impediment for Canadians who wish to benefit from a pardon.

The Criminal Records Act empowers the Board to grant pardons for offences prosecuted by indictment if it is satisfied the applicant is of good conduct and has been conviction-free for at least the last five years. It also requires the Board to issue pardons for summary convictions, following a conviction-free period of three years. The grant/issue rate for pardons has been 98% or 99% for the last five years.

Additional streamlining measures implemented in 2007/08, combined with enhancements to the PADS-R system, and additional resources obtained by the removal of the cap on revenues allowed the Division to greatly reduce processing times. In the case of summary offences, applications were processed on average within 1.5 months. Furthermore, measures were implemented to treat the applications for indictable offences which made up the bulk of the backlog. Although processing times remained high in the first half of the fiscal year (up to 18 months) for those applications containing indictable offences, the delay in processing time was greatly reduced in the latter half of the fiscal year (to 9 months or less).

The sustained efforts of the Division, as well as enhancements to the PADS-R system provided net improvement in the processing of pardon applications.

Pardons Granted/Issued and Denied by Year

Decision	2003/04		2004/05		2005/06		2006/07		2007/08
	#	%	#	%	#	%	#	%	#	%
Granted	8,761	55	17,800	78	3,951	46	7,076	48	14,514	58
Issued	6,832	43	4,745	21	4,402	51	7,672	52	10,332	41
Sub-Total	15,593	98	22,545	98	8,353	98	14,748	99	24,846	99
Denied	265	2	375	2	196	2	103	1	175	1
Total	15,858	100	22,920	100	8,549	100	14,851	100	25,021	100
Average Processing Time	17 months		12 months		11 months		13 months		10 mths*

*Does not include the processing time for cases in which the pardon was denied. For those cases the average processing time was 20 months.

The CRA gives the NPB the authority to revoke a pardon if the person to whom the pardon was issued or granted is subsequently convicted of an offence punishable on summary conviction, on evidence establishing to the NPB's satisfaction that the person is no longer of good conduct or because of evidence that the person made a false or deceptive statement or concealed information relative to the application.

The CRA also states that a pardon ceases to exist if the person to whom it was granted or issued is subsequently convicted of an indictable offence, an offence that is punishable either as an indictable offence or on summary conviction (a hybrid offence), except for driving while ability impaired, driving with more than 80 mg of alcohol in 100ml of blood or failing to provide a breath sample. The NPB has the authority in these cases. A pardon also ceases to exist if the NPB is convinced by new information that the person was not eligible for a pardon at the time it was granted or issued.

The cumulative pardon revocation/cessation rate remains low (4%) demonstrating that most people remain crime free after receipt of a pardon.

Pardon Revocations and Cessations

Year	Cumulative Pardons Granted/Issued to Date	Pardons Revoked/Ceased during the Year	Cumulative Pardons Revoked/Ceased	Cumulative Revocation/Cessations Rate (%)
2003/04	306,985	1,314	10,594	3.45
2004/05	329,530	557	11,151	3.38
2005/06	337,883	456	11,607	3.44
2006/07	352,631	2,397	14,004	3.97
2007/08	377,477	581	14,585	3.86

Previous | Table of Contents | Next