Performance Monitoring Report 2008-2009

PDF version

Prepared by: Performance Measurement Division, National Parole Board

Table of Contents

• Acronyms Used In This Report
• Note To The Reader
• HIGHLIGHTS
• SUMMARY
• 1. INTRODUCTION
• 2. THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BOARD
  • Government Priorities
  • Crime Rates and Trends
  • Criminal Court Rates and Trends
  • Fear of Crime and Public Confidence in Criminal Justice
  • Victims of Crime
  • Legislative and Policy Context
  • Diversity
  • Ageing
  • Offender Profile
  • Organized Crime and Public Views on Organized Crime
  • Women and the Criminal Justice System
  • Aboriginal Peoples
  • Restorative Justice
  • Workload Demands
  • Public Safety Interoperability
  • Human Resource management
• 3. STRATEGIC OUTCOME AND PROGRAM ACTIVITIES - RESULTS for 2008-2009
• 4. INITIATIVES RESULTS FOR 2008-2009
• 5. CONDITIONAL RELEASE
  • 5.1 PROGRAM DELIVERY CONTEXT
    • Offender Population Trend
    • Federal Offender Profiles
    • Federal Admissions
    • Federal Releases
    • Reviews for Workload Purposes
    • Number of Reviews
  • 5.2 PERFORMANCE INFORMATION
    • 5.2.1 DECISION TRENDS
      • Temporary Absence
      • Day Parole
      • Full Parole
      • Statutory Release
      • Detention
      • Long-Term Supervision
      • Appeal Decisions
    • 5.2.2 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
      • Time Under Supervision
      • Convictions for Violent Offences while on Conditional Release
      • Outcome Rates for Conditional Release
      • Post-Warrant Expiry Readmission on a Federal Sentence
  • 5.3 INFORMATION AND SERVICE TO VICTIMS AND THE PUBLIC
    • Information to Victims
    • Observers at Hearings
    • Victims Speaking at Hearings Initiative
    • Access to the decision registry
  • 5.4 PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
  • 5.5 AUDITS AND INVESTIGATIONS
  • 5.6 ACCESS TO INFORMATION AND PRIVACY
• 6. CLEMENCY AND PARDONS
  • 6.1 PARDON PROGRAM
  • 6.2 CLEMENCY PROGRAM
• 7. POLICY, PLANNING AND OPERATIONS
• 8. CORPORATE MANAGEMENT
  • 8.1 INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT SERVICES
  • 8.2 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

Acronyms Used In This Report

ACCS

Adult Criminal Court Survey

DPR

Accelerated Day Parole Review

AFPR

Accelerated Full Parole Review

APAI

Association of Paroling Authorities International

APR

Accelerated Parole Review

APRF

Accelerated Parole Review – Final

APRI

Accelerated Parole Review – Initial

CCRA

Corrections and Conditional Release Act

CPSA

Canada Public Service Agency

CRA

Criminal Records Act

CRIMS

Conditional Release Information Management System

CRS

Conditional Release System

CSC

Correctional Service of Canada

DP

Day Parole

ETA

Escorted Temporary Absence

FP

Full Parole

GSS

General Social Survey

IM

Information Management

IMS

Information Management Services

IT

Information Technology

MAF

Management Accountability Framework

NO

National Office

NPB

National Parole Board

OC

Organized Crime

OMG

Outlaw Motorcycle Gang

OMS

Offender Management System

PADS-R

Pardon Application Decision System Renewal

PSEA

Public Service Employment Act

PSLRA

Public Service Labour Relations Act

PSMA

Public Service Modernization Act

PWGSC

Public Works and Government Services Canada

RCMP

Royal Canadian Mounted Police

SR

Statutory Release

TA

Temporary Absence

TBS

Treasury Board Secretariat

UAL

Unlawfully-at-Large

UTA

Unescorted Temporary Absence

WED

Warrant Expiry Date

Note to the Reader:

Data and information for this report came from numerous sources:

• Conditional release data was extracted from CRIMS and OMS.
• The Clemency and Pardons Division provided pardon and clemency information.
• Financial information was provided by Financial Services.
• The Human Resources Division provided human resources information on staff and the Chairman's Office provided information on Board members.

Minor variances may occur when presenting percentage statistics as a result of rounding.

 

HIGHLIGHTS

The following are highlights from the National Parole Board's 2008-2009 Performance Monitoring Report.

CONDITIONAL RELEASE

PROGRAM DELIVERY CONTEXT in 2008/09:

• The federal incarcerated population decreased 2.2% in 2008/09 to 13,289 ( ↓ 293) while the conditional release population increased 3.3% to 8,716 ( ↑ 282);
• Federal admissions to institutions decreased ( ↓ 3.9% to 8,226). Warrant of committal admissions decreased ( ↓ 3.7%), as did the number of revocation admissions ( ↓ 4.3%).
• Federal releases from institutions increased 2.3% to 8,464;
• The Board's workload remained relatively stable at 34,472 reviews. A comparison of the reviews for workload revealed that, between 2007/08 and 2008/09, the Board's workload remained stable at the federal level ( ↑ 34), while it decreased 8.3% at the provincial level.
• The number of panel reviews with an Aboriginal Cultural Advisor decreased 9.6% to 481.

DECISION TRENDS in 2008/09:

• The approval rate for escorted temporary absences decreased ( ↓ 6% to 85%);
• The authorization rate for unescorted temporary absences also decreased ( ↓ 1% to 78%);

• The federal day parole grant rate decreased ( ↓ 2% to 69%);
• The provincial day parole grant rate also decreased ( ↓ 18% to 54%);

• The federal full parole grant rate increased ( ↑ 1% to 44%);
• The provincial full parole grant rate decreased ( ↓ 20% to 44%);

• The number of referrals for detention remained relatively stable ( ↑ 1 to 267), and the detention referral rate decreased slightly ( ↓ 0.2% to 4.3%);
• The detention rate increased ( ↑ 2.7% to 95.9%);

• The initial decision was affirmed in 97% of federal appeal cases;
• The initial decision was affirmed in all 37 provincial appeal cases.

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS IN 2008/09

• Between 1996/97 and 2007/08, violent offences committed by offenders on conditional release dropped 36%;

• Between 1996/97 and 2007/08, offenders on statutory release accounted for 70% of all violent offences committed by offenders on conditional release, while offenders on full parole accounted for 15% and offenders on day parole accounted for 14%;

• The federal day parole successful completion rate increased ( ↑ 3.3% to 84.8%);
• The provincial day parole successful completion rate decreased ( ↓ 2.5% to 74.5%);

• The federal full parole successful completion rate increased ( ↑ 1.9% to 74.9%);
• The provincial full parole successful completion rate also increased ( ↑ 5.4% to 78.1%);

• The statutory release successful completion rate increased ( ↑ 1.7% to 60.3%).

INFORMATION AND SERVICE TO VICTIMS AND THE PUBLIC

VICTIMS AND OBSERVERS IN 2008/09

• Contacts with victims decreased ( ↓ 2% to 20,039);
• Victims made 192 presentations at 112 hearings;
• The number of observers at hearings decreased ( ↓ 4% to 1,904);
• The number of decisions sent from the decision registry remained relatively stable ( ↑ 42 to 6,140).

CLEMENCY AND PARDONS

PARDONS IN 2008/09

• The number of pardon applications received increased ( ↑ 17.7% to 35,784), the highest number of applications received since the inception of the pardon program;
• The pardons' grant/issue rate remained stable at 98%.

CLEMENCY IN 2008/09

• 21 clemency applications were received and in no cases was clemency granted.

SUMMARY

This section provides an overview of the National Parole Board's 2008-2009 Performance Monitoring Report with a focus on the program delivery context, decision trends and performance indicators for the conditional release and clemency and pardons business lines.

CONDITIONAL RELEASE

PROGRAM DELIVERY CONTEXT

Offender Population Trends:

Source: CSC and NPB

 

Over the last eighteen years, the federal offender population has steadily increased, then steadily decreased and has again been on an upward trend over the last several years, though the population remained stable in 2008/09.

While the number of warrant of committal admissions has varied since 1994/95, there was a downward trend between 1999/00 and 2003/04 with a slight increase in 2002/03. The number of warrant of committal admissions increased between 2004/05 and 2006/07 and has decreased slightly in each of the last two years, totalling 4,825 in 2008/09. The number of offenders who reached warrant expiry has varied over the last five years and was 5,118 in 2008/09. In recent years, the number of offenders who reached warrant expiry has been less than the number of warrant of committal admissions so the total federal offender population had increased in each of the four years previous to 2008/09. However, since the number of warrant of committal admissions decreased in 2008/09, while the number who reached warrant expiry increased, the total population remained stable in 2008/09.

The trends in the federal offender population usually mirror the trends in the crime rate and the crime severity index in Canada, with the effect being seen in the federal offender population two years later, after the offender has had his/her case heard in court. As the crime rate, as well as the crime severity index, in Canada have decreased in the last several years, it was expected that the federal offender population would either stabilize or decrease slightly in 2008/09. The federal offender population did indeed remain stable in 2008/09 at 22,005.

Aboriginal over-representation in the federal offender population has steadily increased since 1998/99. In 2008/09, the number of Aboriginal offenders in the federal offender population increased 3.5%. Aboriginal offenders represented 17.2% of the total federal offender population in 2008/09 compared to the 3.8% of the Canadian population who identified themselves as Aboriginal in the 2006 census.

Black offenders represented 7.4% of the total federal offender population in 2008/09 compared to their 2.5% proportion of the Canadian population in 2006, while Asian offenders represented 3.5% of the federal offender population compared to 9.4% of the Canadian population.

Female offenders remained under-represented in the federal offender population, however, their proportion of the federal offender population has increased over the last five years from 4.1% to 4.9%.

Federal Admissions:

Source: CSC and NPB

 

*Total admissions includes the category "Other". This includes transfers from foreign countries, supervision terminated, exchange of services, etc.

Federal admissions to institutions decreased 3.9% ( ↓ 335) in 2008/09. During the same period, warrant of committal admissions decreased 3.7%, while the number of revocation admissions decreased 4.3%.

Federal Releases:

Federal releases from institutions increased 2.3% in 2008/09 ( ↑ 194). The number of offenders released on full parole and statutory release increased, while the number of offenders released on day parole and at warrant expiry decreased.

While only 220 offenders were released on full parole directly from institutions during 2008/09, a total of 1,488 full parole supervision periods actually started during the year because 1,268 full parole supervision periods started after the offender had completed day parole. This is an example of how the Board uses gradual release to reintegrate offenders back into the community slowly and safely.

Reviews:

In 2008/09, the number of reviews (both pre and post release and detention) conducted by the Board remained relatively stable ( ↓ 15). Reviews at the federal level remained stable ( ↑ 68), while reviews at the provincial level decreased 7.8% in 2008/09. While the number of reviews at the federal level remained stable, the number of federal reviews is at it's second lowest level in at least the last five years.

DECISION TRENDS

Release Decisions:

Source: NPB CRIMS

In 2008/09, the number of temporary absence decisions made by the Board decreased 5.3% compared to the previous year (642 compared to 678).

The number of federal day parole release decisions remained relatively stable in 2008/09 ( ↓ 23), while the number of federal full parole release decisions increased 1.9% ( ↑ 70).

Timing of First Parole Release in Sentence:

The average proportion of sentence served before first federal day parole release remained unchanged at 32% in 2008/09, as did the average proportion of sentence served prior to first federal full parole release, for those serving determinate sentences (at 38%).

Over the last five years, Aboriginal offenders served more of their sentences prior to first federal day and full parole release than either Asian, Black or White offenders. This is probably, at least partially, due to the fact that Aboriginal offenders tend to have more violent offence histories.

Over the last five years, female offenders served an average of 4% less of their sentences before first federal day parole release than male offenders (29% to 33%) and 2% less of their sentences prior to first federal full parole release (37% compared to 39%).

Grant Rates:

The approval rate for escorted temporary absences decreased 6% in 2008/09 to 85%, while the authorization rate for unescorted temporary absences decreased 1% to 78%.

Source: NPB CRIMS

The federal day parole grant rate decreased 2% in 2008/09 (to 69%). The federal grant rate decreased by 1% for accelerated day parole review cases (to 65%), while it decreased 2% for regular day parole cases (to 71%).

The federal full parole grant rate increased 1% in 2008/09 (to 44%). The federal grant rate for accelerated full parole review increased 1% to 100% in 2008/09. This high grant rate is because offenders who are directed to day parole are almost always automatically directed to full parole. The grant rate for regular full parole increased 1% in 2008/09 (to 21%).

The provincial day parole grant rate decreased 18% in 2008/09 (to 54%), while the provincial full parole grant rate decreased 20% (to 44%).

Comparison between Aboriginal, Asian, Black and White offenders over the last five years shows that:

• Black offenders were the most likely to be approved for an escorted temporary absence and Asian offenders were the least likely;
• White offenders were the most likely to be authorized for an unescorted temporary absence and Black offenders were the least likely;
• Asian offenders were the most likely to be granted both federal and provincial day parole while Black offenders were the least likely to be granted either federal or provincial day parole, and
• Asian offenders were the most likely to be granted federal full parole, while White offenders were the most likely to be granted provincial full parole and Aboriginal offenders were the least likely to be granted federal full parole, while Black offenders were the least likely to be granted provincial full parole.

Comparison between male and female offenders over the last five years shows that female offenders were:

• more likely to be approved for escorted temporary absences and less likely to be authorized for unescorted temporary absences, and
• more likely to be granted any kind of parole.

Residency Conditions:

The number of pre-release residency conditions imposed on full parole cases decreased by 6.4% in 2008/09 to 249.

Ninety-two percent (92%) of all residency conditions imposed on full parole pre-release decisions during the last five years were on accelerated parole review cases ( APR ), while APR cases accounted for just 64% of all federal full parole grant decisions. This would seem to indicate that Board members often feel that offenders released on full parole based on the APR criterion are not ready for a full return to the community.

The number of residency conditions imposed on statutory release at the pre-release level increased 19.5% in 2008/09 to 1,726. Of the 6,219 releases and graduations to statutory release in 2008/09, 28% had a residency condition imposed, which is an increase of 4% from the previous year.

Aboriginal offenders accounted for 23.2% of all pre-release decisions to impose residency conditions on statutory release in 2008/09 (400 of 1,726) compared to their 19.9% proportion of the total incarcerated population serving determinate sentences. White offenders also had a slightly larger proportion of pre-release residency conditions imposed on statutory release than their proportion of the incarcerated population (65.2% to 63.9% of the incarcerated population serving determinate sentences).

Detention:

In 2008/09, the number of referrals for detention remained relatively stable at 267 ( ↑ 1), while the detention referral rate decreased slightly to 4.3%. The detention rate increased (to 95.9%) as did the number of offenders detained ( ↑ 3.2% to 256).

Aboriginal offenders continue to be over-represented as a proportion of offenders referred for detention and detained. Aboriginal offenders accounted for 40.1% of all offenders referred for detention and 39.8% of offenders detained in 2008/09, compared to their 19.9% proportion of the federal incarcerated population serving determinate sentences.

Appeal Decisions:

The Board received 577 federal applications for appeal and 40 provincial applications in 2008/09, and the Appeal Division rendered 689 decisions (652 federal and 37 provincial). The initial decision was affirmed in 97% of federal appeal cases processed in 2008/09 (an increase of 5% from the previous year), while the decision was altered in one case, a new review was ordered in 3% of the federal cases processed (17) and the special conditions were changed in one of the federal cases processed. The decision was affirmed in all 37 of the provincial cases processed in 2008/09.

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

Time Under Supervision

Source: NPB CRIMS

The average supervision period for all federal full parole completions over the last five years was almost 4 times longer than the average for offenders on statutory release and 5½ times longer than the average for offenders on day parole.

 

Compared to the average supervision period length over the last five years, the full parole average was 23.9 months in 2008/09, while statutory release averaged 6.4 months and day parole averaged 4.6 months.

Convictions for Violent Offences While On Conditional Release

Source: NPB CRIMS

Note : The year 2008/09 is shown but not used in calculations or the text because the number of convictions for violent offences will often fluctuate higher during the 12 to 18 months after a fiscal year ends because charges for violent offences often take that long to proceed through the courts.

The chart above demonstrates that between 1996/97 and 2007/08:

• Violent offences by offenders on conditional release dropped 36% (from 255 to 164); and
• Offenders were far more likely to be convicted of violent offences while on statutory release than on day or full parole.

However, looking at the number of violent offences alone does not provide a full appreciation of how offenders are doing on conditional release and how often they are convicted of violent offences. To provide a relevant comparison across supervision types the Board calculates a rate per 1000 offenders on day parole, full parole and statutory release. The chart below shows that, in the period between 1996/97 and 2007/08, offenders on statutory release were:

• Six and a half times more likely to be convicted of a violent offence than offenders on full parole; and
• Over two times more likely to be convicted of a violent offence than offenders on day parole.

*Note: Supervised offenders include those offenders on parole or statutory release, temporarily detained in a federal penitentiary and unlawfully at large.

Source: NPB CRIMS and CSC

Note : The year 2008/09 is shown but not used in calculations or text because the number of convictions for violent offences will often fluctuate higher during the 12 to 18 months after a fiscal year ends because charges for violent offences often take that long to proceed through the courts.

Outcome Rates for Conditional Release

Outcome Rates for Federal Conditional Release:

Source: NPB CRIMS

Federal offenders released on day parole had significantly higher successful completion rates than offenders released on full parole or statutory release during each of the last five years.

Offenders serving sentences for non-scheduled offences continue to be far less likely to successfully complete their day and full parole supervision periods than any other offence type in 2008/09. However, offenders serving sentences for schedule I-non sex offences were less likely to successfully complete their statutory release than any other offence type in 2008/09. The successful completion rate for non-scheduled offenders on day parole was 75.1%, compared to the 86.8% average for all the other offence types, while their rate on full parole was 62.5%, compared to the 78.6% average for all the other offence types. The rate for offenders on statutory release, who were serving sentences for schedule I-non-sex offences, was 55.9% compared to 65.4% for all other offence types.

Comparison between the outcome rates for Aboriginal, Asian, Black and White offenders on federal conditional release, in 2008/09, shows that Asian offenders were most likely to successfully complete day and full parole, while Black offenders were the most likely to successfully complete statutory release. In 2008/09, Aboriginal offenders were the least likely to successfully complete day or full parole or statutory release.

Comparison between the outcome rates for female and male offenders on conditional release, in 2008/09, shows that female offenders were less likely to successfully complete federal day parole but more likely to successfully complete full parole and statutory release.

Source: NPB CRIMS

Offenders released on statutory release were far more likely to have had their releases revoked because of a breach of condition than federal offenders on day parole or full parole during each of the last five years.

Source: NPB CRIMS

The total revocation with offence rate (revocation with violent and non-violent offences) for full parole and statutory release has been two to three times the revocation with offence rate for day parolees during each of the last five years.

Source: NPB CRIMS

The revocation with violent offence rate was significantly higher for offenders on statutory release than for offenders on day or full parole during each of the last five years.

Outcome Rates for Provincial Parole:

Source: NPB CRIMS

The successful completion rate was higher for provincial offenders on day parole for three of the past five years. The opposite was true in the other two years when the successful completion rate was slightly higher for provincial offenders on full parole.

Source: NPB CRIMS

Provincial offenders on full parole were more likely to have had their paroles revoked because of a breach of condition in three of the past five years. The rate was slightly higher for provincial offenders on day parole in the other two years.

Source: NPB CRIMS

The total revocation with offence rate (revocation with violent and non-violent offences) for provincial offenders on day parole ranged from 2.3% to 4.7% over the last five years, while the full parole rate ranged from 1.9% to 3.6%.

Source: NPB CRIMS

 

This chart demonstrates that very few provincial offenders' paroles were revoked because of violent offences. The revocation with violent offence rate for provincial day and full parole was below 1.0% during each of the last five years. Only 2 provincial day parolees and 2 provincial full parolees were convicted of violent offences during the last five years.

Outcomes of Full Parole for Offenders Serving Indeterminate Sentences:

Source: NPB and NPB CRIMS

The chart above shows that over the last fifteen years offenders serving indeterminate sentences on full parole were:

• 25% less likely to have had their supervision periods revoked because of a breach of condition than federal full parolees with determinate sentences;
• 21% less likely to have had their supervision periods revoked because of an offence; and,
• 74% more likely to have had their supervision periods revoked because of a violent offence than federal full parolees with determinate sentences.

In making these comparisons it is important to remember that offenders serving indeterminate sentences have been on full parole for an average of 11.3 years compared to the average supervision period length of 24.8 months for federal offenders serving determinate sentences on full parole.

Post-Warrant Expiry Readmission on a Federal Sentence

Source: NPB

Note : The numbers for full parole and statutory release, prior to 1994/95, may be understated as a data conversion completed in 1993/94 did not convert the type of release in all cases. If the type of release is not indicated, it is assumed that the release was at WED.

The chart above shows that over the long-term (10 to 15 years after sentence completion):

• Offenders released at warrant expiry are between 3 and 5 times more likely to be re-admitted on a federal sentence than offenders that completed their sentences on full parole; and,
• Offenders that completed their sentences on statutory release are between almost 2½ to 5 times more likely to be re-admitted on a federal sentence than offenders that completed their sentences on full parole.
• Schedule I-sex offenders who completed their sentences on full parole or statutory release or were released at WED were the least likely to be re-admitted on a federal sentence, followed by schedule II offenders.
• Offenders in the Ontario region who completed their sentences on full parole or were released at WED were the least likely to be re-admitted on a federal sentence. Offenders in the Pacific region, who completed their sentences on statutory release, were the least likely to be readmitted on a federal sentence.

As of March 31, 2009 , 6% to 14% of federal offenders who completed their sentences on full parole between 1993/94 and 1998/99 have been re-admitted on a federal sentence. In comparison, between 30% and 33% of offenders who completed their sentences on statutory release during the same period have been re-admitted and between 28% and 40% of offenders who were released at warrant expiry have returned.

INFORMATION AND SERVICE TO VICTIMS AND THE PUBLIC

The National Parole Board recorded 20,039 contacts with victims in 2008/09 ( ↓ 2%). The number of observers at hearings decreased 4% (to 1,904), while the number of hearings with observers increased 4% (to 803).

In 2008/09, victims made 192 presentations at 112 hearings. Of these presentations, 94% were in person, 3% were on audiotape and 2% were by video conference.

The number of decisions sent from the decision registry remained relatively stable in 2008/09 ( ↑ 42 to 6,140).

CLEMENCY AND PARDONS

Pardon Program

The number of pardon applications received increased by 17.7% in 2008/09, to 35,784, the highest number of applications received since the inception of the pardon program.

All applications that were received in 2008/09 were reviewed for eligibility and completeness. In addition, the backlog of applications remaining from the previous fiscal year was cleared.

As a result of the clearance in the backlog of applications, there was an increase of 61.6% in the number of pardon decisions recorded in 2008/09 (to 40,428). The grant/issue rate for pardons was 98% in 2008/09.

The Board revoked 123 pardons in 2008/09, an increase of 262% from 2007/08, while the number that ceased to exist also increased ( ↑ 6.8% to 584). In previous years, while the pardons had ceased to exist and the files had been reopened by the RCMP, the NPB had experienced a delay in notifying the agencies it contacted at the time of the grant of the pardon. This backlog was eliminated in 2006/07 and notifications of cessations (RCMP Authority), since that time, have been processed as soon as they were received from the RCMP.

The average processing time for pardon applications decreased to 3.5 months in 2008/09 from 10 months in 2007/08. Additional streamlining measures implemented in 2008/09, 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 0.7 months. Furthermore, measures were implemented to treat the applications with 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 10 months) for those applications containing indictable offences, the delay in processing time was greatly reduced in the latter half of the fiscal year (to 8.5 months or less).

The collaborative and sustained efforts of the Division provided net improvement in the processing of pardon applications.

Clemency Program

The clemency program received 21 requests in 2008 and in no cases was clemency granted.

1. INTRODUCTION

This report provides multi-year performance information, with an emphasis on fiscal year 2008-2009, for the National Parole Board's two legislatively based programs - conditional release and clemency and pardons, as well as for the corporate service function of the Board.

The Government of Canada operates on a fiscal year basis, which runs from April 1 to March 31, and, unless otherwise stated, the information in this document is reported on this basis. As well, in cases where offender populations are reported by fiscal year, they present figures at fiscal year-end March 31.

2. THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE BOARD

Public safety and security are fundamental to Canada 's economic and social well-being. However, a changing global and domestic environment, as well as the worsening global financial crisis, are placing significant pressures on the continued effectiveness of our law enforcement, security, corrections and parole agencies. These pressures require periodic adjustments to Canada 's system of corrections and conditional release to be reflective of initiatives for legislative revision, demographic changes, shifting crime patterns, the changing composition of Canada 's federal offender population and evolving public attitudes towards criminal justice issues. As the federal government is responsible for a significant portion of correctional and conditional release services in Canada , it has an integral role to play in developing effective strategies to deal with these trends.

The Board works in a complex environment which demands effective support for government priorities, careful assessment of pressures within the justice system, thoughtful consideration of public issues and concerns in a dynamic and challenging community context and rigorous pursuit of innovation and improvement to meet workload pressures. A number of trends in both the Board's external and internal environments are discussed below.

Government Priorities 1

In the Speech from the Throne of November 2008^†, the Government of Canada shared its renewed vision with Canadians on how it plans to continue building a better Canada . In addition to the economic priorities outlined in the January 2009 Speech from the Throne, the Government identified seven long-term priorities that it will focus on in 2009: developing a clean energy economy; expanding international trade; rebuilding the Canadian Forces; improving food and product safety regulations; cracking down on gun, gang and drug crime; asserting our sovereignty in the Arctic and strengthening Canada's economic union.

In the area of criminal justice, the Government is committed to the right of all Canadians to feel safe and secure in their neighbourhoods, and the Government has introduced measures to protect Canadians and their communities from violent criminals and predators. These measures include provisions which came into effect on May 1, 2008, for stricter bail conditions and mandatory prison sentences for those who commit gun crimes and additional protection for young people from sexual exploitation, as well as provisions which came into effect on July 2, 2008, directed at fighting impaired driving and providing tougher sentencing and management of sexual and violent offenders . In addition, the Government has introduced new legislation in order to better fight organized crime and gang violence, to establish mandatory minimum prison sentences for serious drug crimes, to limit the amount of credit that courts may grant to convicted criminals for time spent in pre-trial custody and to provide stiffer penalties for identity theft.

In addition to tougher laws, the Government has provided targeted support to communities, victims and law enforcement. It has established funding to help families and local communities in steering vulnerable youth away from a life of drugs and crime. The National Anti-Drug strategy provides a multi-faceted approach for combating illicit drug use by focusing on prevention for those most vulnerable to drugs, treatment for those suffering from drug addiction and enforcement activities directed at investigating and prosecuting drug crimes. The Government has also sought to ensure an effective voice for victims in the corrections and justice systems by giving victims greater access to services. Funding has also been identified to hire an additional 1,000 RCMP officers, to expand Canada 's correctional facilities, to increase the capacity of the National DNA Data Bank and to provide Border Services Officers with the resources they need to manage, control and secure Canada 's borders.

The federal agenda of tackling crime and strengthening the security of Canadians has important implications for the NPB. The Government's proposals for toughening laws as well as sentences will have a significant impact on the NPB as longer sentences, as well as mandatory minimum sentences, will increase the offender population, which will, in turn, add to the high workload volumes that the Board already deals with.

The Board must also deal with important challenges such as the information needs of victims, the broad impacts of diversity, the over-representation of Aboriginal people in the justice system and low levels of public confidence in parole and parole boards. All of these issues are considered in the context of the NPB's enduring commitment to public safety.

The challenge for the Board, given its small size and very limited resources, both human and financial, will be to respond to new government initiatives, in addition to its key priorities of enhancing risk assessment instruments and training, developing innovative parole decision models and working in partnership with the public to develop effective strategies for conditional release.

Crime Rates And Trends 2

Not only was there less crime in Canada in 2008 than the previous year, police-reported crime was also less serious. Canada 's police-reported crime rate (PRCR), which measures the overall volume of crime reported to and by the police, dropped 5% in 2008 to its lowest level in over 30 years. The severity of crime, as measured by the new police-reported Crime Severity Index (PRCSI), also dropped in 2008 from 95.2 to 90.0. The 5% drop in overall crime severity represented the fifth consecutive annual decrease.

When looking only at violent crime, both the volume and severity also decreased in 2008. The Violent Crime Severity Index was down 3%, to 94.6, while the violent crime rate fell slightly less (-2%).

Table 1 Source: Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Juristat: Police Reported Crime Statistics in Canada, 2008

POLICE-REPORTRED CRIME RATES and CRIME SEVERITY INDEX

	Total				Violent
Year	Crime Severity Index	% change in index	Crime Rate	% change in rate	Crime Severity Index	% change in index	Crime Rate	% change in rate
1998	118.8		8092		97.8		1345
1999	111.2	-6	7694	-5	99.4	2	1440	7
2000	106.7	-4	7607	-1	97.8	-2	1494	4
2001	105.3	-1	7587	0	97.2	-1	1473	-1
2002	104.1	-1	7512	-1	96.2	-1	1440	-2
2003	106.8	3	7770	3	97.6	1	1435	0
2004	104.1	-3	7600	-2	96.0	-2	1404	-2
2005	101.3	-3	7325	-4	98.5	3	1389	-1
2006	100.0	-1	7244	-1	100	2	1386	0
2007	95.2	-5	6899	-5	97.7	-2	1352	-2
2008	90.0	-5	6588	-5	94.6	-3	1326	-2

Note: Information in this table is provided on a calendar year basis.

Rates are calculated on the basis of 100,000 population.

The police reported crime rate, which measures the changes in volume of crime, counts each criminal incident equally.

The police reported crime severity index measures changes in the severity of crime from year to year. Each type of crime is assigned a weight derived from actual sentences handed down by courts in all provinces and territories. More serious crimes are assigned higher weights.

Canadian police services reported approximately 2.2 million Criminal Code incidents (excluding traffic) in 2008, of which one in five was violent. Virtually all Criminal Code and Federal Statutes offences declined in 2008, with the exception of increases in some offences including homicide, aggravated assault, fraud, counterfeiting, impaired driving and cannabis possession.

Together, seven offences accounted for about 80% of the volume of all crime in Canada: theft under $5,000 (25%), mischief (17%), break and enter (10%), common assault (8%), administration of justice offences (8%), motor vehicle theft (6%), and disturb the peace (5%).

The drop in the police-reported crime rate in 2008 was driven by decreases in virtually all of these high-volume offences. In total, there were about 77,000 fewer reported offences in 2008. Most notably, there were about 28,000 fewer thefts under $5,000, 22,000 fewer break and enters and 20,000 fewer motor vehicle thefts in 2008.

Changes in more serious crimes, because they are assigned higher weights, have a greater impact on the police-reported Crime Severity Index than on the rate. About half of the drop in the severity of police-reported crime in Canada in 2008 was the result of a 10% decline in break and enters.

The severity of police-reported crime dropped across the country in 2008, with the exception of Prince Edward Island (+7%) and New Brunswick (+1%), as well as two of the three territories. The province with the largest drop in its police-reported Crime Severity Index, was Manitoba (-14%), followed by Nova Scotia (-9%). The drops in both these provinces were primarily due to large decreases in break and enter, motor vehicle theft and robbery.

Despite large drops, the highest provincial police-reported Crime Severity Index values continue to be reported in the west. In 2008, Saskatchewan reported the highest overall Index value, followed by Manitoba, British Columbia and Alberta . Index values in the territories continued to be much higher than in the rest of Canada . Even with a 7% increase, Prince Edward Island again recorded the lowest police-reported Crime Severity Index value in 2008, followed by Ontario, Newfoundland and Labrador and New Brunswick .

One out of every five crimes reported to police in Canada is violent. Violent crimes include only crimes against the person, such as homicide, robbery and sexual assault. Both the volume and severity of these violent crimes declined in 2008, indicating that there were fewer incidents of reported violent crime than the year before and that the incidents were of a less serious nature.

In total there were about 3,500 fewer reported violent incidents in 2008. The rate of common assault, the most frequent violent crime fell by 2%, and was largely responsible for the drop in the police-reported violent crime rate.

The severity of police-reported violent crime was also down (-3%) in 2008, primarily due to a 7% drop in the rate of robbery, as well as a 10% decline in the attempted murder rate.

Nearly every type of violent crime declined in 2008, with the most notable exceptions being small increases in homicide, aggravated assault, and other assaults. The rate of criminal harassment remained unchanged.

The police-reported violent crime rate has been declining since 2000 due primarily to drops in high-volume crimes such as common assault and uttering threats. The police-reported Violent Crime Severity Index, in contrast, was relatively stable throughout the late 1990s and early 2000s. Increases in serious violent crimes such as robbery and serious assaults led to increases in the Violent Index in both 2005 and 2006. The decreases in the severity of violent crime in Canada in both 2007 and 2008 were largely the result of drops in the rate of robbery.

Like the violent crime rate in Canada, the proportion of federal warrant of committal admissions which was for violent offences has been declining, from 56% in 2000/01 to 53% in 2008/09. However, the number of federal warrant of committal admissions for violent offences increased in 2005/06 and 2006/07 and has since decreased mirroring the declines noted in the police-reported Violent Crime Severity Index.

Trends in crime have important implications for Board policy, training and operations as the Board must continually enhance its risk assessment tools and training to adapt to changes in the offender profile.

Criminal Court Rates and Trends 3

Courts are responsible for making a number of critical decisions about a criminal case. These decisions include the determination of whether the Crown has established the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, and for those offenders found guilty (or who plead guilty), the court must determine the nature of the sentence that will be imposed.

Trends in crime and incarceration have important implications for NPB policy, training and operations. The changing nature of the incarcerated population demands that the Board continue to enhance risk assessment tools and training related to various groups, including sex offenders, armed robbers, etc. The annual number of admissions to custody and average sentence lengths determine the Board's workloads as offenders become eligible for parole. The challenge for the Board is to ensure that it has sufficient resources to respond to these workloads and that these resources are allocated in a manner which addresses regional variations and needs.

The Adult Criminal Court Survey (ACCS) for 2006/07 revealed that the number of cases heard in adult criminal court was virtually unchanged from the previous year. The longer-term trend (over the past decade) has been downward. In fact, the number of cases disposed in 2006/07 represents a 7% decrease over the number of cases completed in 2002/03.

This downward trend generally corresponds to the pattern in police-recorded crime statistics reported to the Uniform Crime Reporting Survey. From 2002 to 2006 there was a 3% drop in the rate of adults charged. More evident is the 16% decline in the rate of adults charged from 1996 to 2005.

Of the provinces and territories which reported to the ACCS in 2006/07, Ontario was responsible for 40% of the cases heard, followed by Quebec at 18%, Alberta at 14% and British Columbia at 12%.

Cases are also becoming more complex. Cases involving multiple charges represented 60% of the adult caseload in 2006/07 compared with 57% of the caseload in 2002/03.

In 2006/07, crimes against the person accounted for 25% of the total number of cases completed, crimes against property accounted for 24%, administration of justice cases accounted for 17% and Criminal Code traffic accounted for 14%. Other Criminal Code offences (which included weapons offences and disturbing the peace offences) represented 8% of all cases. The remaining 12% of cases dealt with other federal statutes, which included drug-related offences, Customs Act offences and Income Tax Act offences.

In 2006/07, the most frequently occurring cases were impaired driving (11%) and common assault (11%), followed by theft offences (10%), failure to comply with a court order (7%), breach of probation (7%) and major assault (5%). Taken together, all forms of sexual assault and other sexual offences accounted for less than 2% of the caseload in adult criminal courts in 2006/07. Homicide and attempted murder together accounted for approximately 0.2% of total cases.

A conviction was recorded in 65% of the 372,084 4 cases completed in 2006/07.

Probation was the most frequently imposed sanction in 2006/07 (43%) of all guilty cases. A prison term was imposed in 34% of cases and a fine in 31%. The proportions for both probation and prison terms have remained stable since 2002/03, while the imposition of fine sentences has been decreasing (down from 35%).

The proportion of cases sentenced to prison varies across the country. In 2006/07, the highest incarceration rate was in Prince Edward Island, where 55% of guilty cases resulted in a term of imprisonment, while the lowest rates of incarceration were in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Saskatchewan where prison was imposed in about one-quarter of cases. The variation in the use of incarceration reflects the influence of several factors. First, the mix of offences being sentenced can vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. If a particular jurisdiction has a higher than average percentage of more serious crimes, it may also have a higher than average overall percentage of cases being sent to prison. Second, courts in different parts of the country may use incarceration in different ways.

In Prince Edward Island, for example, offenders are frequently sent to prison for impaired driving convictions (85% in 2006/07). This was by far the highest incarceration rate for impaired driving convictions in Canada . The next highest incarceration rate for impaired driving convictions was recorded in Newfoundland and Labrador (32%). The lowest rate of incarceration for guilty cases of impaired driving occurred in British Columbia where 4% were incarcerated.

For convicted cases with sentences of two years or more, the average aggregate sentence length of warrant of committal admissions (excluding indeterminate sentences) has declined since 1994/95. The average sentence length has declined from 3.9 years in 1994/95 to 3.1 years in 2008/09. During the same period, the number of warrant of committal admissions with indeterminate sentences (which includes lifers and dangerous offenders) has varied between a high of 199 in 1996/97 and a low of 141 in 2003/04.

Fear of Crime and Public Confidence in Criminal Justice 5

Fear of Crime

Canadians' perceptions of crime in their community can be shaped by a number of factors, including their own personal and household victimization, experiences of those close to them and media reports of criminal incidents.

The latest administration of the General Social Survey (GSS), in 2004, showed that most Canadians believe that crime is lower in their neighbourhood than elsewhere in Canada . About six in ten Canadians (59%) had this opinion, while a further three in ten (29%) thought neighbourhood crime levels were about the same as in other neighbourhoods.

Results from the 2004 GSS revealed that almost six in ten Canadians (58%) believed that their neighbourhood crime rate has remained unchanged over the past five years. Another 30% of the population were of the opinion that crime had worsened in their community, while 6% expressed the belief that crime had dropped. In general, opinions have improved since 1993, when Canadians were more likely to say that crime in their neighbourhood was on the rise (46%) than they were to say that crime was unchanged from five years earlier.

Fear of crime can be measured by feelings of satisfaction with personal safety from crime and an individual's anticipated fear of or worry about becoming a victim. The 2004 GSS asked respondents about their overall satisfaction with their own personal safety from crime, as well as their level of fear of crime in three situations: being home alone at night, taking public transportation at night and walking alone after dark.

In 2004, the overwhelming majority of Canadians were satisfied with their safety from being a victim. Fully 94% of Canadians indicated that they were somewhat or very satisfied with their safety from crime, up from 91% in 1999 and 86% in 1993.

The figure remains high but is slightly lower when considering specific situations. For example, nine in ten Canadians (90%) who walked alone in their neighbourhood at night felt safe doing so, 46% felt reasonably safe and 44% felt very safe. This represents a continuing positive trend, up from 88% in 1999 and 86% in 1993. Of those individuals who stayed at home alone in the evening or at night, 80% believed that being in this situation was not at all worrisome, the same proportion as in 1999. Waiting for or using public transportation alone after dark remains the most fear-inducing among the three situations. In 2004, fewer than six in ten (57%) were not at all worried about being the victim of a crime when using public transportation at night, up from 54% in 1999.

Public Confidence in Criminal Justice

A wealth of research has recently been conducted on public attitudes towards the criminal justice system. A comprehensive literature review on public opinion and corrections in Canada was conducted by Julian V. Roberts in 2005 for Correctional Service Canada. The following themes were addressed (among others): public knowledge of corrections, confidence in the correctional system, public opinion on the purpose of corrections, and the effect of information on attitudes.

Several studies have revealed the same finding: most people know little about the nature and functioning of the correctional system. A self-reported level of knowledge survey conducted in 2004 indicated that 7% of the respondents rated themselves as very informed, while 40% responded with “somewhat informed”. The other respondents (53%) rated themselves as not very or not at all informed. Other findings on public knowledge of corrections indicated that people know little about the use of imprisonment in Canada or about life in prison, but assume that it is too easy. Moreover, the general public attitude is that the justice system is generally too lenient. Furthermore, most Canadians cited the news media as their principal source of information about corrections. As corrections in the news generally means bad news, this may explain most of the misperceptions or stereotypes held by the public.

Public trust, confidence and respect for the justice system are essential to ensure continued public participation and support. One measure of this is public satisfaction with the work of the police, courts, correctional and parole systems and the public's perception of personal safety from crime. A 2002 survey revealed that the public had most confidence in the police, and the least in the prison system. There was a positive balance for all branches of the justice system – except for the prison and parole systems, with the greatest confidence deficit emerging for the parole system. Fully 88% of respondents stated that they were very or somewhat confident in the police; less than half the sample expressed this level of confidence in the prison system and approximately one third of respondents expressed this level of confidence with respect to the parole system.

This hierarchy of confidence has been stable for many years, however there is some limited evidence that Canadians' confidence in corrections has increased. Several explanations present themselves to account for this universal hierarchy of confidence in the justice system. The different mandates of the organizations are clearly relevant and the public is more sympathetic to crime control than due process.

A number of surveys demonstrated that Canadians continue to support reintegration. A nationwide poll conducted in 2002 found that more than four out of five respondents agreed that: “a significant number of offenders can become law-abiding citizens through programs, education and other support”. The same results were found in a 2004 survey. However, the pattern of responses reverses itself when respondents are asked about the rehabilitation potential of violent and/or sexual offenders.

Parole remains one of the most controversial elements of the correctional system in Canada . Representative surveys of the Canadian public have revealed that most Canadians: over-estimated the parole grant rate; assumed that all inmates apply for parole, and that they all receive parole at the first application; over-estimated the revocation rate, and assumed that revocation occurs most often in response to a new offence; and over-estimated the recidivism rate of offenders released on parole (a proportion of 75% of the respondents over-estimated this rate).

Although members of the public may frequently be critical of the parole system, they do not support abolishing it. A number of explorations of public attitudes towards parole have been conducted over the past few years and they revealed that the public supported a parole system over the “no-parole” option by a margin of 3 to 1. Moreover, in a 2002 survey, respondents were asked to agree or to disagree with the statement that: “It is safer to gradually release offenders into society under supervision and control than to release them without conditions at the end of the sentence”. 84% agreed and 14% disagreed with the statement. These findings were confirmed by focus groups conducted in 2004. It should however be noted that the public remained opposed to parole for violent offenders, particularly offenders serving life for murder.

The ageing of Canadian society, which is expected to heighten public sensitivity to issues of crime and safety, coupled with the public's limited understanding of the effectiveness of conditional release in contributing to public safety and its expectations for meaningful debate on key public safety issues, create urgent pressures for the Board to disseminate information that demonstrates the effectiveness of parole and engages Canadians in discussion of measures for the safe reintegration of offenders in the community.

Victims of Crime 6

Victims' involvement in federal corrections and conditional release has grown extensively since the tabling in Parliament of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights Report Victim's Rights – A Voice Not a Veto in October 1998.

Although federal, provincial and territorial governments, advocacy groups, service providers and community members have done a great deal to assist victims of crime, there are more discussions to have, more experiences to hear and more issues to understand.

To fulfil a promise to better meet the needs of victims of crime in matters of federal jurisdiction, the Government committed $52 million for a package ($13 million over four years starting April 1, 2007) of programs, services and funding to help the federal government and the provinces and territories respond to a variety of needs facing victims of crime across the continuum of the justice system and federal corrections.

Establishing the office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime in April 2007 marked another step by the Canadian Government to help better meet the needs of victims of crime in matters of federal jurisdiction. The establishment of the office was in response to victim and victim advocates' calls for an increased voice in the criminal justice system and federal corrections. The Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime is tasked with ensuring that the federal government meets its commitments. The Ombudsman's mandate includes facilitating access of victims to existing federal programs and services; addressing complaints of victims about compliance with the provisions of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act; enhancing awareness among criminal justice personnel and policy makers of the needs and concerns of victims; and, identifying emerging issues and exploring systemic issues that impact negatively on victims of crime. The Ombudsman operates at arm's length from the federal departments responsible for victims' issues, namely the Department of Justice and the Department of Public Safety. It should be noted that the provinces and territories continue to be the primary providers of victim services and funding.

The Board has a longstanding and positive relationship with victims of crime. Victims have not always agreed with the Board's decisions, but they have consistently expressed a very high degree of satisfaction with the timeliness and quality of the information and assistance provided by NPB staff. They have also indicated that they were impressed with the rigour and professionalism the Board members bring to parole decision-making. While victims have expressed satisfaction with current practice, they have also identified the need for further change, including access to the recordings of NPB hearings, access to NPB hearings through video-conferencing, greater NPB involvement in decisions to grant temporary absences for offenders serving life sentences for murder and less frequent parole hearings for lifers.

Issues related to victims of crime will remain a priority for the Board. Moving forward, the Board must respond effectively to heavy workloads under current law and policy (e.g. contacts with victims). Effective response to these demands will require careful planning and collaborative efforts with CSC to ensure that victims receive the information to which they are entitled under the CCRA. The Board must also give careful consideration to proposals for expanding information sharing and access to NPB hearings for victims. In particular, proposals to share the recordings of NPB hearings with victims, and to provide access to hearings via video-conferencing will require review of legislation and policy, training, resources and operations to ensure that new approaches, if implemented, will support quality decision-making by the Board, meet the needs of victims, and respect the privacy and safety of all those involved.

Legislative and Policy Context 7

As part of its commitment to tackle crime and make Canada 's communities safer, the Government introduced, in the fall of 2007, the Tackling Violent Crime Act to better protect Canadians from those who commit serious and violent crimes. The reforms came into force in two stages.

Three sections of the Act came into force on May 1, 2008, strengthening the Criminal Code in the following areas:

• Tougher mandatory prison sentences for serious gun crimes;
• Bail reverse onus provisions so that those accused of serious gun crimes will have to show why they shouldn't be kept in jail while awaiting trial; and
• Better protection for young persons from adult sexual predators.

On July 2, 2008, two other sections of the Act came into force, providing for:

• New ways to detect and investigate drug-impaired driving and stronger penalties for impaired driving; and
• More effective sentencing and monitoring to prevent dangerous, high-risk offenders from offending again.

Over the next two years, the Government will also tackle crime by increasing the number of RCMP officers and it will help communities prevent criminal behaviour among youth before it takes root. In addition, the Government will work to ensure the integrity of all components of the federal justice system, including providing victims of crime with a greater voice and greater access to victims' services.

Also as part of the Government's commitment to protecting Canadian families and communities, the Government commissioned, in April 2007, a Corrections Review Panel to examine a wide range of issues related to CSC, including strategic and operational planning, human resource management, institutional safety and security, institutional infrastructure, program interventions for offenders, and community supervision. The Panel was also asked to examine issues related to victims of crime, the abolition of statutory release, and a shift to earned parole. The Panel reported in December 2007, tabling 109 recommendations designed to transform federal corrections. Key elements of the transformation agenda include:

• legislated emphasis on offender accountability and responsibility;.
• elimination of drugs from prison;
• greater emphasis on offender employment and employability;
• a new approach to institutional infrastructure modernization; and
• replacement of statutory release and accelerated parole review (presumptive release schemes) with earned parole.

Effective support for the Government's plans to tackle crime and strengthen community safety, including the transformation of federal corrections, and measures for reform of sentencing practices and correctional law, must be a focal point for the Board. For example, the Board must be prepared to support the implementation of mandatory minimum penalties for gun crime and for serious drug offences. These penalties will lengthen periods of incarceration for certain groups of offenders. Longer sentences will increase NPB workloads related to conditional release reviews and contacts with victims of crime.

Proposals to repeal the “Faint Hope” clause and toughen young offender legislation could also increase the length of time offenders spend incarcerated and, therefore, generate workload and cost increases for the Board. Proposals to abolish accelerated parole review and statutory release and shift to “earned parole” present the most significant challenge, with the potential for a profound impact on the Board's public accountability, workloads, resource needs, and operations. To address these challenges, the Board must ensure that risk assessment tools and training reflect current knowledge and information; develop effective decision policies; and engage in partnerships that support the safe reintegration of offenders in the community.

Diversity: 8

Canada is a multicultural society whose ethno-cultural composition has been shaped over time by different waves of immigrants and their descendents, as well as by the Aboriginal peoples of the country. Each new wave of immigrants has added to its diversity.

As of July 1, 2008, Canada 's population was estimated at 33,311,400, an increase of 384,000 compared to the same date the previous year. Over the 12 month period leading up to July 1, 2008, Canada 's population rose by 1.2%. This was the strongest growth observed since 1991/92. Canada 's population growth rate was up for a fifth consecutive year.

The rise in the rate of Canada 's population growth in 2007/08 is mainly attributed to a strong increase in international net migration. During that period, Canada 's gains from its population exchanges with the rest of the world came to 257,100, a level that had only been surpassed once (in 1988/89).

The number of foreign-born in Canada has nearly tripled during the past 75 years and their share is inching towards the levels observed from 1911 to 1931. This is a result of the sustained number of immigrants admitted annually to the country, and the slow population growth from natural increase. Between 2001 and 2006, Canada 's foreign-born population grew by 14%. This was almost five times faster that the Canadian-born population, which increased by 3%.

Among the Western countries that were also major immigrant-receiving nations, the proportion of the foreign-born population in Canada was exceeded by only one other country: Australia (at 22% in 2006). The proportion of Canada 's foreign-born population was much higher than that of the United States (at 13% in 2006).

The nearly 6.2 million foreign-born people in Canada reported more than 200 countries of origin on the 2006 Census.

Among the more than 1.1 million recent immigrants who arrived between 2001 and 2006, almost 6 in 10 were born in Asian countries, including the Middle East. The share of recent immigrants born in Asia (including the Middle East) has increased steadily since the late 1970s. However, in 2006, the share (58%) was virtually unchanged from 2001 (59%).

Immigrants from Asia did not come in large numbers until a few decades ago. In 1971, 62% of newcomers to Canada were from Europe. Only 12% of newcomers who arrived in the late 1960s were Asian-born. The proportion of Asian-born new immigrants increased to 39% in the late 1970s. By the late 1980s, one-half of the newcomers were born in Asia.

This shift in the source of immigration to Canada since the 1970s was due to a number of factors, such as changes in Canada 's immigration programs to build on social, humanitarian and economic goals and international events affecting the movements of migrants and refugees.

The diversity of the federal offender population mirrors the increased diversity of the Canadian population. In 1993/94, 7% of the offender population had self-identified as a part of an ethno- racial group, whereas in 2008/09, the proportion had risen to 14%.

In response to the increasing diversity in Canadian communities and in the culture and ethnicity of offenders and victims of crime, the Board must ensure that, consistent with section 105 of the CCRA, it is representative of the community. Further, policies, training and decision tools must respect issues of diversity and gender and build understanding of the factors associated with risk and public safety for special groups of offenders and the communities to which they will return. The Board will also experience growing cultural diversity in the workplace, requiring the development of culturally respectful policies and training and new management skills and approaches.

Ageing: 9

Throughout most of the twentieth century, a fairly small proportion of the Canadian population was comprised of persons aged 65 or older. In the 1920s and 1930s, seniors accounted for about 5% of the population, while in the 1950s and 1960s they accounted for less than 8%. High fertility rates, low life expectancy and a small population base comprised of many non-elderly immigrants contributed to this profile.

The situation is very different today. Low fertility rates, longer life expectancy and the effects of the baby boom generation are among the factors contributing to the ageing of the population. Between 1981 and 2006, the number of seniors in Canada increased from 2.4 million to 4.3 million and their share of the total population increased from 9.6% to 13.7%. Consequently, older age groups are more and more represented in the total Canadian population.

The ageing of the population will accelerate over the next three decades, particularly as individuals from the Baby Boom years of 1946 to 1965 begin turning age 65. According to the most recent population projections, the proportion of seniors in the Canadian population could nearly double in the next 25 years. If this demographic change occurs, it will have a major impact on the labour force, on public pension and health insurance plans and, in general, on the Canadian economy and society.

Consistent with Canada 's demographics, there has been an increase in the number of older offenders within the offender population in recent years and this trend is expected to continue.

An older offender is defined as anyone 50 years of age and older. Research indicates that the ageing process for offenders is accelerated by approximately 10 years due to factors including socio-economic status, access to medical care and the lifestyle of most offenders. The older offender population on March 31, 2009, represented 23% of the total offender population. This proportion has increased from 11% in 1993/94.

Older offenders have needs that set them apart from the rest of the adult offender population. Their needs are in the areas of medical care, accessibility/mobility, adjustment to imprisonment, peer relationships, family relationships and conditional release. Failure, on the part of the correctional system, to address these specific needs and problems may impede the safe and timely reintegration of older offenders. As such, the Board must ensure that its policies, training and decision tools respect the issue of age and build greater understanding of the factors associated with the risk that older offenders pose to the community.

Offender Profile: 10

While the federal offender population is reflective of Canadian society in its ageing and ethno-cultural portrait, the profile has become much more diverse and complex than it was in the past.

In recent years, the offender population has been increasingly characterized by offenders with extensive histories of violence and violent crimes, previous youth and adult convictions, affiliations with gangs and organized crime, serious substance abuse histories and problems, serious mental health disorders, higher rates of infection with Hepatitis C and HIV and a disproportionate representation of Aboriginal people. For example:

• the proportion of men homicide offenders has increased from 22% in 1997 to 25% in 2006;
• more than one out of ten new male offender admissions are initially rated as requiring maximum security (13%), while more than one out of four are rated as minimum security (30%). There is an increasing trend for maximum designations since 1996/97 (6% to 13% or +117%);
• more than one out of six men offenders in federal custody have gang affiliations and this phenomenon has been dramatically increasing since 1997 (12% to 16%, or +33%);
• more than one out of ten men offenders in federal custody have been identified at admission as presenting mental health problems and this proportion has risen since 1997 (7% to 12%, +71%);
• one out of five women offenders in federal custody were identified at admission as presenting mental health problem and this proportion has risen since 1997 (13% to 21%, +61%);

While the profile of the offender population is becoming more diverse and complex, there is limited time to prepare an increasing proportion of offenders for release to the community because 54% of all new male offender admissions (the proportions are higher for new women (67%) and Aboriginal male offender admissions (at 58%)) are receiving sentences of less than three years. This is a 57% increase since 1997.

These trends, which have resulted in a more difficult offender population with less time to benefit from programs and treatment, have added greater complexity to conditional release decision-making and demand that:

• the Board has sufficient numbers of professional and experienced members available to deal with decision-making workloads in an effective manner;
• Board members have sufficient time to prepare for and complete conditional release reviews, either in hearings or by way of review of an offender's file;
• Board members are provided with the training necessary to enable them to carry-out a rigorous review of cases in terms of public safety and the key factors associated with risk of re-offending; and
• there are sufficient numbers of NPB staff to support Board members in the full range of their decision-making responsibilities.

Organized Crime and Public views on Organized Crime: 11

Organized Crime

Organized crime is identified by the criminal law enforcement community as one of the most significant threats to the safety, security and economic well being of Canadians.

In the 1990s, organized crime was characterized primarily, but not exclusively, by outlaw motorcycle gangs (OMGs), the illicit drug trade and associated turf wars. Today organized crime activities have expanded beyond these "traditional" activities to include migrant smuggling, trafficking in humans and firearms, marihuana grow operations, identity theft, sexual exploitation of children on the Internet, the production and smuggling of counterfeit goods and money, motor vehicle theft and more.

Until recently, globalization and technological sophistication were considered emerging trends in organized crime–today they are the norm. Due to the advanced capabilities of these groups, they can be found virtually anywhere where there is a profit to be made through criminal ventures. According to the 2008 annual Criminal Intelligence Service Canada report, there were approximately 900 organized crime groups operating in Canada in 2008. These groups can be found to operate in all communities, from major urban centres to rural areas. Wherever there is a profit to be made, organized crime can be found.

Another notable characteristic of today's organized crime groups is the shift from mainly ethnic based groups to multicultural criminal organizations. Although ethnic and cultural heritage remains an influencing principle within the organized crime environment, the growing number of multi-ethnic groups is based on criminal capabilities rather than ethnicity.

Similarly, the structure of organized crime groups is much more flexible today than in the past. Hierarchical groups continue to exist, most notably through OMGs. Law enforcement however, is identifying groups that are based on temporary alliances requiring particular skills to complete a specific criminal enterprise. Once the criminal venture is completed, these individuals may or may not continue to work together.

In recent years, organized crime groups have become more complex and sophisticated, as have the new types of crime. These groups are increasingly using new and evolving technology to commit crime and to communicate with other criminal groups. For example, communications devices are frequently used to target sensitive personal and financial information in order to conduct identity theft and mass marketing fraud. Organized crime groups are also expanding into legitimate business activities, as well as branching out into new markets in Canada.

Since the early 2000's, the Government of Canada has taken a number of measures on the domestic and international fronts to strengthen the ability of law enforcement to pursue criminal organizations and to strengthen border security. These efforts have resulted in more offenders associated with gangs and organized crime being incarcerated in federal institutions (an increase from 12% to 16% of the incarcerated population). As of March 31, 2009, there were 54 separate gangs or gang types in the institutions and in the community. Aboriginal, Street and Biker Gangs were the most prevalent in institutions with Bikers, Traditional Organized Crime and Street Gangs being the largest groups in the community.

The presence of offenders, who are associates or members of criminal organizations, poses a challenge for the correctional system including: intimidation, extortion, and violence within the incarcerated and supervised community populations; drug distribution within the institutions; recruitment of new members; and intimidation and corruption of staff.

Public Views on Organized Crime

There are a limited number of recent studies which assess Canadians' views about the phenomenon of organized crime (OC); however there is a high degree of consistency in terms of the results of these studies. The following are some of the findings of public opinion research:

• Drug trafficking and biker gangs constitute the overriding image or impression that most members of the public associate with OC.
• Canadians' believe that OC is serious and recognize that it is present in their community. They are familiar with news stories about OC groups.
• While OC is viewed as a serious issue and growing, there is a dichotomy between the perceived seriousness of OC and the likelihood of being victimized. Participants tend to believe that it does not affect them personally because they aren't involved in any illegal activities. Moreover, the public does not necessarily think that they should be involved in the fight against organized crime.

The fight against OC has been a national priority since September 2000 when the federal, provincial and territorial Ministers responsible for justice agreed that all levels of government must address OC on a number of fronts. In this context, the views of the public about organized crime are essential to government, law enforcement officials and agencies as well as policy makers as they facilitate the development of strategies to better inform the general public about the dangers of OC and what is being done to respond to these problems.

The Board, for its part, must ensure that training and decision tools build understanding of the factors associated with the risk that offenders associated to or members of criminal organizations pose to the community at large. The Board must also provide the community with clear and accurate information about the effectiveness of conditional release and the processes which monitor the performance of offenders associated with organized crime.

Women and the Criminal Justice System: 12

Women are much less likely than men to be perpetrators of crime. This difference is notable when comparing the relative sizes of the male and female federal offender populations. Women accounted for just fewer than 5% of all federal offenders on March 31, 2009 and proportionally more were newcomers to the federal correctional system.

On March 31, 2009, 88% of federally sentenced women were serving their first federal sentence compared with 71% of federally sentenced men. In addition, as a result of the nature of their offences, women offenders tend to receive shorter sentences than their male counterparts. On March 31, 2009, 39% of federally sentenced women were serving sentences of less than three years on their first federal sentence compared with 26% of federally sentenced men. While 15% of federally sentenced women were serving a first sentence for murder compared to 22% of male offenders, 33% were serving a first federal sentence for a drug offence compared to 18% of male offenders.

Some of the characteristics of the female population are shared with men, while others are not. For example, two thirds of federally sentenced women are mothers and they are more likely than male offenders to have primary childcare responsibilities. Both male and female offenders tend to have histories of childhood trauma and abuse. In addition, federally sentenced women and men tend to have lower educational attainment than the Canadian adult population as a whole.

Female offenders, however, have much lower employment rates than male offenders. In 1996, 80% of the women serving time in a federal facility were unemployed at the time of admissions compared to 54% of male offenders.

Drug and alcohol addictions are widespread among federally sentenced offenders. Almost 70% of male and female offenders have problems with alcohol or drug abuse.

However, drugs and alcohol tend to figure more prominently in the lives and criminal offences of federally sentenced women, for whom income-generating crimes such as fraud, shoplifting, prostitution and robbery are often perpetrated to support their addictions.

Some of the most significant differences between female and male federal offenders are the prevalence of diagnosed mental illness, self-abuse and suicide attempts. Federally sentenced women are more likely than men to take part in self-destructive behaviours such as slashing and cutting.

In addition, the federal female offender population is very heterogeneous in terms of ethno-racial background. On March 31, 2009, 56% of the federal female offender population were White, 25% Aboriginal, 7% Black and 4% Asian compared to the male population which was 67% White, 17% Aboriginal, 7% Black and 3% Asian.

Given the differences between female and male offenders, the challenge for the correctional system is to ensure that women's needs and risks are met through supportive environments and a wide variety of educational, vocational and personal development programs that are gender appropriate. The Board, in particular, must ensure that its policies, training and decision tools are respectful of gender and build understanding of the factors associated with the risk that female offenders pose to the communities to which they will return.

Aboriginal Peoples: 13

According to the 2006 census, 1,172,790 people, 3.8% of the population of Canada identified themselves as an Aboriginal person or reported being a Registered Indian and/or Band member without reporting an Aboriginal identity. North American Indian (60%) constituted the largest group of Aboriginal people, followed by Métis (33%) and Inuit (4%). The remaining 3% were either persons who identified with more than one Aboriginal group or Registered Indians or members of an Indian band or First Nation who did not report an Aboriginal identity.

The Aboriginal population in Canada is much younger than the non-Aboriginal population. According to the 2006 census, the median age of Aboriginal people was 27 years compared to 40 years for the non-Aboriginal population.

More specifically, according to the 2006 census:

• Children and youth aged 24 and under made up almost one-half (48%) of all Aboriginal people, compared with 31% of the non-Aboriginal population;
• About 9% of the Aboriginal population was aged 4 and under, nearly twice the proportion of 5% of the non-Aboriginal population; and
• 10% of the Aboriginal population was aged 5 to 9, compared with only 6% of the non-Aboriginal population.

Nevertheless, like the total population, the Aboriginal population is slowly getting older. This ageing is due to declining fertility rates and to gradual improvements in life expectancy. However, fertility rates remain higher for the Aboriginal population and life expectancy still lags behind that of the total population of Canada.

Given the number of young children in the Aboriginal population and the higher birth rate, large increases in the Aboriginal population among those 15 to 24 years of age are predicted to occur within the next decade. Since persons up to 35 years of age are seen to be the most "at risk" for criminal activity, the large numbers of Aboriginal youth may have implications for the criminal justice system for many years.

Not only is the Aboriginal population younger and increasing at a higher rate than the population as a whole, there appears to be a growing concentration of this population in the core of larger cities. This urban movement may increase the likelihood of contact with the criminal justice system because of the social, political, economical, educational and racist implications of urban living. This may, in part, account for the high crime rate of urban Aboriginal people and the formation of Aboriginal gangs.

Although Aboriginal people make up only 3.8% of the Canadian population, they accounted for 17.2% of the federal offender population on March 31, 2009. At that time, 69% of federal Aboriginal offenders were North American Indian, 26% were Métis and 4% were Inuit.

As a group, Aboriginal offenders tend to be younger, are more likely to be incarcerated for sexual offences and other violent crimes than non-Aboriginal offenders, have much higher needs (relating to employment and education, for example) and have had more extensive involvement with the criminal justice system as youths.

Research on male Aboriginal offenders suggests that childhood deprivation is commonplace among this group, including early drug and alcohol use, physical and sexual abuse and severe poverty. Many Aboriginal communities are marked by violence, family instability, alcohol abuse and low levels of education. The marginal socio-economical positions of many of Canada 's Aboriginal peoples, coupled with their loss of culture and community, have contributed to their criminal behaviour and to their difficulty in making a fresh start.

While the Board cannot resolve the overrepresentation of Aboriginal people in the justice system, it can, however, make sure that Aboriginal offenders, victims and communities are aware of their rights with respect to parole and that there are no systemic barriers to Aboriginal involvement in this area. In this context, the Board must continue to provide policies and training that recognize the unique societal and cultural factors related to Aboriginal offenders and their communities, and continue to assess alternate models for parole hearings, including the use of Elders and community assistance. The Board must strive to maintain a workforce that includes appropriate Aboriginal representation and work with CSC and Aboriginal communities to support the reintegration of Aboriginal offenders in the community and address the needs of Aboriginal offenders.

Restorative Justice: 14

Restorative justice can be described as a way of dealing with the harm caused by an offence by involving the victim(s), the offender and the community that has been affected. It is a balanced community based approach that deals with criminal activity as an offence against human relationships and secondarily as a violation of the law. It recognizes that once an offence has occurred, there is an opportunity to acknowledge the injustice it caused and to restore equity so that participants feel safer, more respected and more empowered.

Restorative justice is characterized by principles of inclusiveness, reparation, accountability, community involvement, holism, equality and sensitivity. In addition, the idea that crime creates obligations is central to the restorative approach to justice.

Restorative justice sees the offender as having an obligation to provide reparation to the victim and the community and the community has an obligation to define the standards of acceptable conduct and to determine the best ways to repair the damage caused by crime.

The restorative justice approach appears to be gaining acceptance not only among criminal justice practitioners but also among the general public. Public opinion research revealed increased acceptance of reparation, restitution and mediation approaches for certain offenders provided that victims agree to the use of such approaches. In addition, evaluations of restorative justice programs typically find high levels of satisfaction from victims and offenders with the process.

To date, the majority of restorative justice programs involve low-risk offenders, who have committed relatively minor crimes. Few programs target adult offenders, especially offenders who have committed serious offences. Given that the application of restorative justice is still relatively new, practitioners and program designers are actively exploring how the various restorative justice models can be applied with different types of offenders, varying types of crimes and at various stages of the criminal justice process.

There may be potential to incorporate a restorative approach into the parole process through a marriage of restorative justice with offender rehabilitation in order to maximize public safety.

Workload Demands: 15

The Government stated in its Economic Statement of 2007 that Canadians expect their Government to set clear goals, deliver results, be accountable and put Canadians and their families first. The current economic crisis has only strengthened the Government's resolve to ensure that taxpayers receive value for money for all government spending.

The Government is, therefore, committed to the continuous examination of its expenditures to ensure responsible spending in terms of results for the taxpayer's dollar.

Source: NPB Main Estimates

 

Note: Figures include contributions to employee benefit plans

As well as ensuring that its programs are managed effectively and efficiently, the Board must also respond to the challenges of greater complexity in conditional release decision-making which is made more difficult by heavy workloads that are beyond the Board's control. The CCRA is prescriptive, specifying when and how the Board conducts its business. Workloads are driven by the actions of offenders, victims and the community.

In concrete terms, this means that the Board must deal with 18,000 to 20,000 conditional release reviews per year, involving critical issues of public safety, in tight timeframes, amid intense public scrutiny.

Workload demands also generate serious challenges for the pardon program. Historically, the Board received 15,000 to 20,000 pardon applications per year, levels that have seriously taxed NPB resources. In recent years, however, application levels rose sharply, reaching almost 36,000 in 2008/09. The annual volume of applications is expected to continue to increase and could reach 50,000 in the near future.

At the same time, the Board must also respond to numerous management improvement initiatives such as modernization of human resource management, Program Activity Architecture and the Management Accountability Framework. Collectively, these pressures create significant challenges demanding careful planning and priority setting.

Workload pressures demand that the Board plan and allocate resources effectively, based on rigorous analysis of key trends, a clear understanding of organizational priorities, and broader government priorities. Innovation and improvement must continue to characterize program delivery, but the Board must also take action to develop business cases for additional resources when existing budgets are insufficient to manage workload growth and public safety is at risk.

Table 2 Source : NPB Financial Services Division

EXPENDITURES by PROGRAM ACTIVITY 16 ($ Millions)

Year	Conditional Release Decisions		Conditional Release Openness and Accountability		Pardon Decisions and Clemency Recommendations		NPB Total
2004/05	$30.9	75%	$5.3	13%	$4.9	12%	$41.1
2005/06	$32.7	76%	$5.8	14%	$4.3	10%	$42.8
2006/07	$33.9	78%	$6.7	15%	$2.8	6%	$43.4
2007/08	$34.3	79%	$6.2	14%	$2.9	7%	$43.4
2008/09	$38.4	79%	$7.1	15%	$3.1	6%	$48.6

For 2008/09, the total funds available for the NPB amounted to $53.4 million. Against this total, the Board expended $48.6 million or almost 91% of the funds available.

The Board has one strategic outcome-conditional release and pardon decisions and decision processes that safeguard Canadian communities. The Board applies its resources to three program activities–conditional release decisions, conditional release openness and accountability and pardon decisions and clemency recommendations. The NPB also uses its resources for essential corporate management activities. Conditional release decision-making is the most resource intensive area, accounting for almost eight of every ten dollars expended by the Board.

The Board also receives revenues as a result of the $50 user fee for the processing of pardon applications. For every fee received, the split is as follows: $15 to the RCMP and $35 to the Board. In 2008/09, the user fee generated total revenues of $1,335,483. The NPB portion was $934,838.

The Board's total expenditures increased by $5.2 million in 2008/09 compared to 2007/08. The expenditures for the conditional release decisions program activity increased by $4,100,000, those for the conditional release openness and accountability program activity increased by $900,000, while those for the pardon decisions and clemency recommendations program activity increased by $200,000.

Public Safety Interoperability: 17

Interoperability means people, processes and systems working in a collaborative fashion to share information. Within the public safety and security community, it means ensuring that agencies and government organizations can share the right information at the right time to keep Canadians safe.

Integrating justice information in Canada 's criminal justice system is not a simple undertaking. It involves many partners (each with its own mandate to fulfill), new issues that emerge regularly and a range of services that cover every component of the justice system. Therefore, it requires a sophisticated approach that is in keeping with the complexity of its subject matter.

The Government of Canada, through the Department of Public Safety, helped to implement in recent years, the Canada Public Safety Information Network (CPSIN). This established a modern, national information network for Canada 's justice system and law enforcement agencies, linking various sources of data related to crime and offenders. Public Safety is currently building on the CPSIN experience, expanding the interoperable environment to include other departments involved in dossiers related to health, safety, crime and national security.

Recognizing that the public safety environment includes a broader set of partners and stakeholder groups than law enforcement, the new initiative extends the scope of Public Safety's involvement on interoperability to address all information sharing relevant to public safety and security.

The project will focus initially on federal government activities in areas related to national security, law enforcement, criminal justice, public health and first responders. Further links will then be made with the provinces, territories and municipalities.

The successful application of risk assessment and risk management tools in corrections is considered to be fundamentally dependent on the creation of an effective infrastructure for information exchange among all criminal justice agencies that deal with offenders. With better information on offenders at their disposal, the police, CSC and the Board will be more equipped to make informed decisions. In turn, this may increase the level of public confidence in the criminal justice system.

Human Resource Management: 18

The Public Service of Canada, with 263,000 employees in 200 departments and agencies is the largest and most complex enterprise in Canada. Federal public servants work in diverse areas where they develop policies, provide advice to government and deliver programs and services directly to Canadians. The non-partisan and competent federal Public Service contributes to the future of Canada.

The world in which the federal Public Service operates has become more complex and in many ways more unpredictable over the last 15 years and it has been made even more challenging by the current global recession. This new environment is characterized by an ageing population, a globalized economic landscape, ever-changing information and communications technologies, the emergence of new "horizontal" issues and changing public attitudes towards government.

The Public Service today must address a significant demographic challenge. For the first time, it has more employees over 45 than under, and it is facing the imminent retirement of a generation of valued employees. It must renew its workforce in the strongest labour market in over 35 years with many public and private sector competitors for top-quality graduates from universities and colleges.

If the Public Service is to advise Ministers and deliver programs and services to the highest standards of excellence, it must be creative in its thinking, efficient in its work processes, effective in risk management and fully accountable for its performance. These are the characteristics of a "high" performance Public Service.

To achieve these goals, the federal Public Service will require:

• active and transparent recruitment practices based on sound planning;
• strong leadership and a commitment to developing talent;
• a clear regime for Human Resources governance and accountability; and
• rigorous performance management practices.

The same challenges that are facing the Public Service are also facing the Board. Over the next five years, increasing numbers of senior and experienced staff at the Board will be able to retire without penalty to their pensions. Anticipated departures will erode corporate memory and diminish critical knowledge of the law, policy, and training. For the Board, whose members are appointed for specified periods, staff provide the continuity of knowledge and information necessary for quality program delivery. To counter the anticipated impacts of these departures, while at the same time addressing issues related to diversity, language and gender, the Board has implemented a business plan that addresses human resource and program needs in an integrated manner. The issue of corporate memory loss is being addressed through sound knowledge management practices, training and development. As a first step in this process, the Board has identified a number of critical positions for which "bridging" approaches are necessary to ensure that departing employees can provide coaching for new employees.

The following section provides information on the Board's composition of staff and Board members.

Table 3 Source: NPB Human Resources Division

NATIONAL PAROLE BOARD STAFF COMPLEMENT (As of May 14, 2009 )

Region	Females	Males	Total Staff	Abor.	Visible Minority	Disabled	Official Language Profile		Bilingual
							English	French	#	%
National Office	95	44	139	8	7	3	62	77	123	88
Atlantic	35	2	37	-	-	-	23	14	19	51
Quebec	52	9	61	4	7	-	1	60	53	87
Ontario	49	3	52	-	-	3	49	3	5	10
Prairies	54	16	70	2	2	-	69	1	7	10
Pacific	40	7	47	-	5	2	45	2	5	11
Canada	325	81	406	14	21	8	249	157	212	52
Percent	80%	20%	100%	3%	5%	2%	61%	39%

As of May 14, 2009, 80% of National Parole Board staff were female and 20% were male. The highest proportion of female to male staff was in the Atlantic region where females accounted for 95% of all staff, while the lowest proportion was 68% in the National Office. The first official language of 61% of Board staff was English and 39% was French. As well, 52% of the Board's staff were bilingual (staff able to work in both French and English).

The Board's visible minority staff complement increased by 2 to 21 last year and accounts for 5% of the work force. During the same period, the Aboriginal staff complement decreased by 6, to 14, while the number of staff with disabilities decreased by 4 to 8. As of May 14, 2009, 3% of Board staff were Aboriginal and 2% had a disability.

The National Parole Board has sound human resource strategies in place in an effort to meet government objectives with regards to the issues related to diversity, language and gender as well as to ensure that the Board provides effective and efficient service to Canadians.

Table 4 Source: NPB Chairman's Office and Regional Offices

NATIONALPAROLE BOARD MEMBER COMPLEMENT (As of May 19, 2009 )

Region	Females	Males	Total Staff	Abor.	Visible Minority	Official Language Profile		Bilingual
						English	French	#	%
National Office	1	4	5	0	0	1	4	5	100
Atlantic	3	6	9	0	0	5	4	5	56
Quebec	6	8	14	0	1	0	14	11	79
Ontario	8	9	17	1	0	14	3	4	24
Prairies	7	13	20	2	0	20	0	1	5
Pacific	5	8	13	1	0	13	0	1	8
Canada	30	48	78	4	1	53	25	27	35
Percent	38%	62%	100%	5%	1%	68%	32%

As of May 19, 2009, the National Parole Board had a total of 78 members (41 full-time and 37 part-time), with 62% being male and 38% being female. The Board had 4 Aboriginal members (5%), with two members working in the Prairie region and one in the Pacific (the regions with the largest Aboriginal populations) and one in the Ontario region. The Board also had one member from a visible minority community in the Quebec region.

The Board also tracks language, education and experience of Board members to ensure that it has the range of skills needed to make quality conditional release decisions. As of May 19, 2009, the first official language of 68% of Board members was English and 32% was French, while 35% of Board members were bilingual.

Ninety-one (91%) of Board members have a university education, 6% have a college education and 3% have a secondary school education. As well, 52% of Board members have experience in corrections and 82% have criminal justice experience.

Board members come from different professional backgrounds. They have backgrounds as criminologists, lawyers, parole officers, members of police services, probation officers, members of provincial parole boards, psychologists, social workers, teachers, wardens, counsellors, therapists, health professionals and as members of private industry, Parliament, the Canadian Forces and the clergy.

Table of Contents | Next