Articles & News

March 2, 2009

Nevada officials say probation deficiencies corrected

By MARTHA BELLISLE, mbellisle@rgj.com

After a scathing legislative audit that found the Division of Parole and Probation had failed to assess high-risk offenders and collect DNA samples, division officials say they have fixed the problems but will seek extra personnel.

The division is short 102 positions statewide, including 53 officers, and will be asking lawmakers for more, Mark Woods, a deputy chief of the division, said.

But a change in the law since the last legislative session and a leveling off of criminal convictions in Nevada has allowed the division to adequately oversee offenders who are not incarcerated, Woods said.

Assemblywoman Sheila Leslie, D-Reno and on the subcommittee that oversees the budget for public safety, said she has had concerns about the division’s past record and will meet with officials in the coming weeks.

“I will definitely be reviewing the staffing situation,” she said. “I know they don’t have enough staff.”

But she said the agency has made progress.

“I do like the new director, though, and some of the promotions they’ve made since the audit,” she said. “It seems like they are taking the audit seriously and make a sincere effort to address the concerns.”

Bernie Curtis, a former Douglas County undersheriff and county commissioner, became chief of the division last year after John Gonska, resigned following release of the audit.

The division is charged with keeping track of offenders who are sentenced to probation or released on parole, and of sex offenders on lifetime supervision. Officials must meet with offenders when they’re first turned over to the division, so an assessment can be made to determine their risk level, Woods said.

Then the offenders are reviewed every six months to see if a change to their supervision should be made, he said. They also submit to monthly inspections.

Officers oversee high-risk offenders at a ratio of 30 to one and sex offenders at a 45-to-one ratio, Woods said.

But a review by the Legislative Audit Division released last year found that the agency had fallen behind in a variety of areas.

“Almost one out of every three high-risk offenders we examined did not have a timely initial assessment and three out of four did not have timely reassessments,” the report said. “The risk and needs assessment helps determine the supervision level, therefore timely and proper classification is critical to offender supervision, caseload management and public safety.”

A study of the division’s caseload from July 2005 to March 31, 2007, found 41 of 49 sex offenders and 33 of 49 high-risk offenders had not received timely reassessments, the report said.

Six of the offenders, two high-risk and four sex offenders, had gone 11 months without a reassessment, said Paul Townsend, legislative auditor. One had gone from June 2006 to May 2007 without a review, and once assessed, he was found to be dangerous enough to be put on house arrest, Townsend said.

The division also fell behind on monthly personal contacts with high-risk offenders, the report said. The auditors reviewed 100 cases over a six-month period, and found that 379 of the 1,228 required contacts, 31 percent, were not made, the report said.

Another problem the audit found was in the agency’s collection of DNA samples.

Of the 30 offenders reviewed in the audit, 13 had DNA samples taken, but the officer did not enter the information into the system; 11 offenders had no DNA taken, one was not taken in a timely manner, and five did not have samples taken for various reasons, including being out of state, the report said.

The audit made 21 recommendations, 17 of which have been addressed, Woods said.
The division changed its system so sergeants now follow-up on reviews on a monthly basis to ensure officers are keeping up with the caseload, Woods said.

The division also lowered its supervision of low-risk offenders in Las Vegas so that it would have enough officers to track high-risk people, he said. At present, officers oversee low risk offenders in Clark County at a ration of 300 to one, he said.

Woods said the DNA issue was addressed within a month of the release of the audit, and said the agency has a monthly report to prove its compliance.

“We’re now 100 percent of where we are supposed to be,” he said.