Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
www.tbs-sct.gc.ca
Common menu bar links
Breadcrumb Trail
ARCHIVED - National Parole Board
This page has been archived.
Archived Content
Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.
Section I: Overview
Chairperson’s Message
Public safety is the National Parole Board’s (NPB) primary objective and public safety is the standard to which Canadians hold the Board to account. Canadians expect the Board to make conditional release and pardon decisions that support the safe reintegration of offenders in the community. This is not surprising, given the serious consequences of re-offending for victims and the community. For these reasons, the Board’s plans and priorities constantly focus on continuous improvement in all aspects of program delivery, particularly measures that strengthen its capacity for quality conditional release and pardon decision-making.
Continuous improvement is critical because the Board’s decision-making has become even more complex, more challenging in recent years, as we have had to deal with heavy workload demands and a more difficult offender population characterized by longer criminal histories, greater prevalence of violence, more frequent gang affiliations, more serious mental health issues and more serious substance abuse problems.
Information in our Departmental Performance Report (DPR) for 2007-08 demonstrates that we have made solid progress in addressing our plans for improvement. Performance data indicate that 95% of all releases on parole do not result in a new offence and 99% do not result in a new violent offence. In fact, over the last ten years, convictions for violent offences by parolees have declined by 65%. In the same manner, 96% of all pardons awarded remain in force, demonstrating that the vast majority of pardon applicants remain crime free in the community.
The Board’s pursuit of continuous improvement extends beyond its decision-making responsibilities to include measures to address the information needs of victims of crime. In this area in 2007-2008, the Board developed posters and brochures for victims and distributed these materials to victim service providers across the country; created a module on its website that gives victims a virtual tour of an NPB hearing; provided simultaneous translation for victims at hearings; and created a foundation for the use of video-conferencing technology to provide victims with access to our hearings.
At the most basic level, quality program delivery is dependent upon on quality people – quality Board members as decision-makers and quality staff members to support Board members in their decision-making responsibilities. The DPR for 2007-08 highlights the progress that the Board made in effective human resource planning to attract and retain quality employees.
Public safety is our primary objective. Contributing effectively to public safety is no easy task, given the significant challenges that we face in meeting our responsibilities each day. I am confident, however, that the Board is positioned to meet these challenges and to introduce improvements that will continue to result in the safe reintegration of offenders in the community.
Mario Dion
Chairperson, National Parole Board
1. Management Representation Statement
I submit, for tabling in Parliament, the 2007-08 Departmental Performance Report (DPR) for the National Parole Board (NPB). This document has been prepared based on the reporting principles contained in the Guide for the Preparation of Part III of the 2007-2008 Estimates: Reports on Plans and Priorities and Departmental Performance Reports:
- It adheres to the specific reporting requirements outlined in Treasury Board Secretariat guidance;
- It is based on the NPB’s Strategic Outcomes and Program Activity Architecture that were approved by Treasury Board;
- It presents consistent, comprehensive, balanced and reliable information;
- It provides a basis of accountability for the results achieved with the resources entrusted to NPB; and
- It reports finances based on approved numbers from the Estimates and the Public Accounts of Canada.
Mario Dion
Chairperson, National Parole Board
2. Reason for Existence
The National Parole Board is an independent administrative tribunal responsible for making decisions about the timing and conditions of release of offenders to the community on various forms of conditional release. The Board also makes pardon decisions, and recommendations respecting clemency through the Royal Prerogative of Mercy (RPM).
Legislation governing the Board includes the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (CCRA), the Criminal Records Act (CRA), and the Criminal Code. The CCRA empowers the Board to make conditional release decisions for federal offenders and offenders in provinces and territories without parole boards. In addition, the Board has extensive legislated responsibilities related to openness and accountability, including information for victims of crime, observers at hearings, access to NPB’s registry of decisions, public information and investigation of tragic incidents in the community. The CRA authorizes the Board to grant or revoke pardons for convictions under federal acts or regulations. The Governor General or the Governor in Council approves the use of the RPM for those convicted for a federal offence, following investigations by the Board, and recommendations from the Minister of Public Safety.
Mission and Values
The National Parole Board, as part of the criminal justice system, makes independent, quality conditional release and pardon decisions and clemency recommendations. The Board contributes to the protection of society by facilitating, as appropriate, the timely integration of offenders as law-abiding citizens.
The Mission establishes four core values:
- dedication to the attainment of a just, peaceful and safe society;
- respect for the dignity of individuals and the rights of all members of society;
- commitment to openness, integrity and accountability; and
- belief that qualified and motivated individuals are essential to achieving the Mission.
| Planned | Authorities | Actual |
|---|---|---|
| $ 45,346 | $ 46,278 | $ 43,430 |
| Planned | Actual | Difference |
|---|---|---|
| 478 | 426 | 52* |
* The difference is explained, in part, by the transfer of resources to the Correctional Service of Canada (23 FTE) for the provision of information technology services.
3. Overview of Priorities
| Priority | Type | Performance Status |
|---|---|---|
| A. Effective management of legislated responsibilities related to quality conditional release decision-making. | Ongoing | Successfully met. |
| B. Strategic planning to prepare NPB for response to government announcements to introduce amendments to the Corrections and Conditional Release Act. | Previously Committed | Successfully met. |
| C. Implementation of plans to enable NPB to assume parole decision-making responsibilities for provincial offenders in British Columbia. | New | Successfully met. |
| D. Improved information management in support of NPB’s conditional release responsibilities through development and implementation of an automated conditional release system. | Previously Committed | Successfully met. |
| E. Effective management of legislated responsibilities related to open and accountable conditional release processes. | Ongoing | Successfully met. |
| F. Introduction of measures to provide victims with a more effective voice in conditional release processes. | New | Successfully met. |
| G. Effective management of legislated responsibilities related to the processing of pardon applications. | Ongoing | Successfully met. |
| H. Implementation of a new information systems and technology partnership in which the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) provides NPB’s information technology services. | New | Successfully met. |
| I. Integrated human resource and business planning to sustain effective program delivery in the midst of anticipated retirement of significant numbers of senior staff. | Previously Committed | Successfully met. |
4. Performance Summary
| Results and Resources Structure | Spending 2007-08 ($000) |
|---|---|
| Strategic Outcome: Quality conditional release decisions which contribute to public protection through the safe reintegration of offenders in the community Program Activity: Quality Conditional Release Decisions (For details see pages 10 to 15.) |
Planned $ 34,485 Actual $ 34,330 Variance 155 FTE used 326 |
| Supporting Priorities | Results |
A. Effective management of legislated responsibilities related to conditional release decision-making. Key indicators include:
|
Completion of 17,581 conditional release reviews (federal and provincial offenders), as required by the CCRA.
|
| B. Strategic planning to prepare NPB for response to government announcements to introduce amendments to the CCRA. Performance Status: Successfully Met |
NPB continued to assess proposals for reform of the CCRA and sentencing practices, including potential impacts on workloads and costs. |
| C. Implementation of plans to enable NPB to assume parole decision-making responsibilities for provincial offenders in British Columbia. Performance Status: Successfully Met |
In 2007-08, NPB completed 449 conditional release reviews for provincial offenders and managed related workloads such as contacts with victims and observers at hearings. |
| D. Improved information management in support of NPB’s conditional release responsibilities thorough development and implementation of an automated conditional release system (CRS). Performance Status: Successfully Met |
Consistent with the project plan and timetable, NPB collected information on user needs for system components and developed plans for acceptance testing for various modules. |
| Results and Resources Structure | Spending 2007-08 ($000) |
| Strategic Outcome: Open and accountable conditional release processes that ensure active involvement and engagement of victims and the public before and after conditional release decisions are made. Program Activity: Conditional Release Openness and Accountability (For details see pages15 to 18.) |
Planned $ 8,917 Actual $ 6,208 Variance $ 2,709 FTE used 66 |
| Supporting Priorities | Results |
| E. Effective management of legislative responsibilities, related to open and accountable conditional release processes. Key indicators include: the timeliness and quality of information and assistance provided and client satisfaction as measured by surveys of clients and stakeholders. Performance status: Successfully met |
NPB had 20,457 contacts with victims, 1,974 observers at hearings, and distributed 6,098 decisions from the decision registry. Feedback from victims indicates that 90% are satisfied with the quality and timeliness of information and assistance provided by NPB. |
| F. Introduction of measures to provide victims with a more effective voice in conditional release processes. Performance status: Successfully met |
NPB enhanced victims’ access to the conditional release process by: distributing posters about victims’ rights and the CCRA; developing a virtual tour of an NPB hearing for NPB’s website; improving voice amplification equipment at hearings; providing simultaneous translation for victims at hearings; increasing outreach to victims, particularly in Aboriginal and northern communities; and implementing a training plan for staff involved with victims. |
| Results and Resources Structure | Spending 2007-08 ($000) |
| Strategic Outcome: Quality pardon decisions and clemency recommendations which contribute to public protection and support the process of rehabilitation. Program Activity: Pardon Decisions, Clemency Recommendations(For details see pages 19 to 21 ) |
Planned Spending $ 1,945 Actual Spending $ 2,892 Variance $ (947) FTE used 34 |
| Supporting Priorities | Results |
| G. Effective management of legislated responsibilities related to the processing of pardon applications. Key indicators include the average time required to process pardon applications and the numbers and rates of pardons revoked annually. Performance status: Successfully met |
|
| Results and Resources Structure | Spending 2007-08 |
| The following priorities support all three of NPB’s strategic outcomes and program activities | For priority H, NPB transferred $2.9 million annually to CSC for services to be provided. Costs for priority I have been included in spending for other priorities. |
| Supporting Priorities | Results |
| H. Implementation of a new information technology partnership in which the Correctional Service of Canada provides NPB’s information technology services. Performance Status – Successfully Met |
Governance structure created. Resource transfer to CSC completed. NPB integrated in CSC planning and service delivery processes. CSC provided good quality services for NPB. |
| I. Integrated human resource and business planning to sustain effective program delivery in the midst of anticipated retirement of significant numbers of senior staff. Performance Status – Successfully Met |
NPB continued to integrate business and human resource planning. Succession planning was addressed as a priority and knowledge transfer strategies were applied to facilitate transition to a new management cadre. The Board also implemented a contingency plan to address Board member shortages and heavy workloads. |
5. Overall Description of NPB Performance
Information on performance demonstrates that the National Parole Board achieved the priorities and commitments identified in its Plans and Priorities for 2007-08. Data in the report illustrate that parole continues to contribute to public safety. More than 95% of all parole releases do not result in a new offence, and 99% do not result in a new violent offence. In fact, the annual number of convictions for violent offences by parolees is 65% lower than a decade ago. Information on re-offending after completion of sentence illustrates that 9 in 10 offenders who reach the end of their sentence on full parole do not return to a federal penitentiary. (Rates of re-offending for these offenders would be higher if provincial sentences were also considered, but NPB does not have the capacity to track provincial re-offending after warrant expiry).
The Board also made progress on three important initiatives related to quality conditional release decision-making. Throughout 2007-08, the NPB participated in consultations on proposals for reform of sentencing, corrections and conditional release. Key areas included mandatory minimum sentences for various offence categories, reduced use of credit for pre-sentencing custody, and introduction of “earned parole”. The Board also took the action necessary to assume parole decision-making responsibilities for provincial offenders in the province of British Columbia, following the province’s decision to discontinue operation of its parole board. In addition, the Board continued work on the development of a new automated system for managing and sharing conditional release information within the Board and with CSC. Progress was made, as planned, in identifying user needs for system modules dealing with file management, case management and victims of crime. NPB also worked with CSC to develop a prototype for the file management module.
Victims, observers at hearings and those who seek access to the Board’s registry of decisions continue to indicate that they are very satisfied with the timeliness and quality of information and assistance that NPB provides (e.g., over 90% of victims). The Board continued to make progress in this area in 2007-08, by, for example, increasing victims’ access to information through distribution of a poster and brochure to victim service providers across the country, and developing a module for its website that provides victims with a virtual tour of an NPB hearing.
In the area of pardons, the Board continued to respond to sharp increases in the annual volumes of applications received. The Board developed a detailed business plan to eliminate a backlog of applications and create long-term sustainability for the pardon program. The planned called for the elimination of the backlog by June 30, 2008. The pardons program continued to contribute to public safety, as 96% of all pardons granted remained in force, demonstrating that the vast majority of pardon recipients remain crime free in the community.
6. Operating Environment and Context
NPB works in a complex environment, demanding effective support for government priorities, careful assessment of criminal justice issues and community concerns and constant attention to quality decision-making to support public safety.
The Board delivers two legislatively based programs – conditional release and pardons and clemency. NPB also manages a range of internal services that provide critical support for program delivery. The conditional release area is, by far, the most complex and resource intensive, accounting for more than 90% of annual program expenditures. The high proportion of resources devoted to legislative responsibilities seriously constrains resource flexibility and challenges the Board to seek constant improvement in program delivery.
Conditional Release
NPB’s workloads are shaped by factors beyond its control. Legislation governing the Board (CCRA) is prescriptive, specifying when and how the Board conducts its business (e.g. when to use hearings). Workloads are driven by the actions of offenders, victims and the community. In concrete terms, this means that NPB must deal with high workload volumes, involving critical issues of public safety, in tight timeframes, amid intense public scrutiny. For example, over the past five years, NPB completed an average of 19,000 conditional release reviews per year for federal offenders. CSC indicates that the federal offender population is increasing. The Board’s workloads and resource needs are expected to increase accordingly. Parole reviews for provincial offenders rose from 694 in 2006-07 to 1,059, as the Board assumed responsibility for parole decision-making for provincial offenders in British Columbia.
The Board must also deal with growing complexity in conditional release decision-making, as reflected in three important trends. The first is a more difficult offender population characterized by longer criminal histories, greater prevalence of violence, more gang affiliations, and more serious substance abuse problems. The second involves the shift toward shorter federal prison sentences, primarily as a result of credit given for pre-sentencing custody. A more difficult offender population with shorter sentences (and less time to benefit from programs/treatment) challenges NPB’s work to assess factors related to risk and safe reintegration in the community. The third trend involves the need for effective decision processes such as elder-assisted and community-assisted hearings which recognize the needs of Aboriginal offenders.
The openness and accountability provisions of the CCRA continue to present important challenges. Workloads in these areas have grown steadily since introduction of the CCRA in 1992. In 2007-08, the Board had over 20,000 contacts with victims, almost 2,000 observers at hearings and more than 6,000 requests for decisions from the decision registry. Growth is expected to continue as measures such as enhanced information on the Board’s website and increased community outreach make victims of crime more aware of their ability to obtain information about the offender who harmed them and to observe NPB hearings. As with conditional release decision-making, quality program delivery in this area is critical, given its implications for public safety and public confidence.
The government has announced extensive plans to tackle crime and strengthen community safety, including measures for reform of sentencing, corrections and conditional release. Effective support for these measures continues to be a focal point for the Board. The Board must manage the workload and cost implications of government proposals to introduce mandatory minimum penalties for gun crimes (Bill C-2), and for drug offences (National Anti-Drug Strategy). Introduction of these penalties will lengthen periods of incarceration and therefore increase NPB workloads and costs for conditional release reviews, contacts with victims of crime, etc. Mandatory minimum sentences will, in fact, result in the need for NPB to absorb almost
$1 million in annual cost increases.
Pardons
Workload growth has created a serious situation for the pardon program. Historically, the Board received 15,000 to 20,000 pardon applications annually. In the past three years, however, application volumes rose sharply, reaching 30,398 in 2007-08. The projected volume of applications for 2008-09 is 37,000. Factors contributing to growth in annual volumes of pardon applications include:
- greater scrutiny by government, private and voluntary sectors of potential employees;
- perceptions by Canadians of the increased value of a pardon for employment, and travel;
- active advertising campaigns by private sector organizations involved in pardons; and
- the increasing number of people eligible to apply for a pardon - the current estimate is 1.5 million people which grows by 60,000 annually.
Growth in applications resulted in a backlog of pardon applications. The Board worked to clear this backlog and put in place measures to create long-term sustainability for the pardon program. These measures are critical, given the expectation that pardon applications will continue to grow, and possibly reach 50,000 in coming years.
Human Resource Management
The Board’s human resource challenge has two dimensions. The first involves Board members who are Governor-in-Council appointments. The CCRA specifies that the Board shall comprise no more than 45 full-time members who are usually appointed for five years. The Act also provides for the appointment of part-time members to help manage conditional release decision-making workloads. Part-time members are usually appointed for three years. Each year, decision-making workloads require the use of significant numbers of part-time Board members (20 to 30 full-time equivalents). Maintaining sufficient numbers of experienced Board members is a challenge because of the specified terms of appointments (frequent turnover). The NPB must also deal with the reality that following an initial orientation period of five weeks, newly appointed Board members still require three to six months of training and mentoring before they can manage the full scope of their decision-making responsibilities.
The Board faces an equally challenging situation with respect to its staff. Over the next five years, increasing numbers of senior and experienced staff at the Board will be able to retire with no penalty to their pension. 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 essential for quality program delivery. For this reason, development of an effective human resource plan for dealing with staff turnover is essential.
