La lecture en ligne est gratuite
Le téléchargement nécessite un accès à la bibliothèque YouScribe
Tout savoir sur nos offres
Télécharger Lire

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Corrections State Correctional Institution at Graterford

37 pages
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Corrections State Correctional Institution at Graterford Performance Audit July 1, 2002, to December 10, 2004 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Corrections State Correctional Institution at Graterford Performance Audit July 1, 2002, to December 10, 2004 March 14, 2006 The Honorable Edward H. Rendell Governor Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 Dear Governor Rendell: This report contains the results of a performance audit of the State Correctional Institution at Graterford for the period July 1, 2002, through December 10, 2004. The audit was conducted under authority provided in Section 402 of The Fiscal Code and in accordance with Government Auditing Standards as issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. The report details our audit objectives, scope, methodology, findings, and recommendations. The contents of the report were discussed with the officials of the State Correctional Institution at Graterford and all appropriate comments are reflected in the report. We appreciate the cooperation extended to us by the management and staff of the State Correctional Institution at Graterford and by others who provided assistance during the audit. Sincerely, JACK WAGNER Auditor General ...
Voir plus Voir moins

Vous aimerez aussi

                      
   
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Corrections State Correctional Institution at Graterford
Performance Audit July 1, 2002, to December 10, 2004
      
                      
  
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Corrections State Correctional Institution at Graterford
Performance Audit July 1, 2002, to December 10, 2004
       
March 14, 2006
               The Honorable Edward H. Rendell Governor Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120  Dear Governor Rendell:  This report contains the results of a performance audit of the State Correctional Institution at Graterford for the period July 1, 2002, through December 10, 2004. The audit was conducted under authority provided in Section 402 of The Fiscal Code and in accordance withGovernment Auditing Standardsas issued by the Comptroller General of the United States.  The report details our audit objectives, scope, methodology, findings, and recommendations. The contents of the report were discussed with the officials of the State Correctional Institution at Graterford and all appropriate comments are reflected in the report.  We appreciate the cooperation extended to us by the management and staff of the State Correctional Institution at Graterford and by others who provided assistance during the audit.     
Sincerely,
JACK WAGNER Auditor General
     
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Background Information .................................................................................................. 1 Department of Corrections ........................................................................................ 1 State Correctional Institution at Graterford ............................................................... 1 Community Correction Centers ................................................................................. 2
Objectives, Scope, and Methodology ............................................................................... 4 
Chapter I - Community Correction Centers .................................................................. 5 Objective and Methodology.............................................................................................. 5 Audit Results..................................................................................................................... 6 Finding I-1 - Resident wage account discrepancies at Corrections-operated Centers continued. ................................................................................................... 6 Finding I-2 - The contracted Center complied with contract requirements............... 7
Chapter II - Employee Travel .......................................................................................... 9 Objective and Methodology.............................................................................................. 9 Audit Results..................................................................................................................... 9 Finding II-1 - Employees were reimbursed for excessive travel miles. .................... 9
Chapter III Inmate General Welfare Fund................................................................ 12 -Objectives and Methodology .......................................................................................... 12 Audit Results................................................................................................................... 13 Finding III-1 - The commissary complied with purchasing and inventory mark-up policies. ................................................................................................... 13 Finding III-2 – Inmate account operations did not comply with Inmates General Welfare Fund policies.............................................................................. 13
Chapter IV - Procurement ............................................................................................. 16 Objectives and Methodology .......................................................................................... 16 Audit Results................................................................................................................... 17 Finding IV-1 – Records were not available to support employee training.............. 17 Finding IV-2 - Certain SAP roles created a lack of a segregation of duties............ 18
i
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page Chapter V - Key and Tool Inventory Control .............................................................. 20 Objective and Methodology............................................................................................ 20 Audit Results................................................................................................................... 21 Finding V-1 - Tool and key inventories were maintained in accordance with Corrections and Graterford policies. ..................................................................... 21 Finding V-2 - Graterford did not have a written key control plan........................... 21
Chapter VI - Unresolved Prior Audit Issues................................................................. 22 Objectives and Methodology..........................................................................................22 Audit Results................................................................................................................... 23 Finding VI-1 - Deficiencies continued with conducting fire drills and monitoring the medical services contract. ............................................................. 23
Status of Prior Audit Findings and Recommendations ............................................... 25 Objectives and Methodology..........................................................................................25 Prior Audit Results.......................................................................................................... 25 Chapter 1 – Monitoring deficienciesat the Centers continued................................ 25 Chapter II - The fire safety program could be improved. ........................................ 26 Chapter III – Graterford employees were underbilled $35,200 for housing charges. .................................................................................................................. 26 Chapter IV - Medical service contract monitoring requires improvement. ............. 27 Chapter V - Graterford did not maintain control of its maintenance inventory................................................................................................................ 27
Audit Report Distribution List....................................................................................... 29   
ii
 
Background Information
      Department of Corrections The Pennsylvania Bureau of Corrections was established by Section I of Act 408 of 1953. In January 1981, the responsibility for bureau operations was removed from the authority of the Attorney General and transferred to the Office of General Counsel. On December 30, 1984, the Governor signed Act 245 of 1984,1which elevated the Bureau of Corrections to cabinet-level status as the Department of Corrections (Department).  The main purpose and goal of Corrections is to maintain a safe and secure environment for the incarcerated offenders and the staff responsible for them. In addition, Corrections is committed to providing opportunities for inmates to acquire the skills and values necessary to become law-abiding citizens.  Corrections is responsible for all adult offenders serving state sentences of two years or more. As of June 30, 2004, it operated 24 correctional institutions, one regional correctional facility, one motivational boot camp, a training academy, and 14 Community pre-release Centers throughout the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Commonwealth).    State Correctional Institution at Graterford The State Correctional Institution at Graterford (Graterford) is a walled, maximum-security institution for adult male offenders. Graterford is located in Skippack Township, Montgomery County, approximately 35 miles northwest of Philadelphia.  Graterford’s physical plant encompasses 1,714 acres of land. Nine permanent cellblocks, two modular cell units, an infirmary, two restricted housing units, and a mental health unit provide housing for inmates within the institution’s 62 acre walled complex. The administration building, warehouse, and outside service units are located outside the wall perimeter. Corrections Bureau of Correctional Industries operates a garment and shoe plant within the institution using inmate labor.  
                                                 171 P.S. § 310.1
- 1 -  
Background Information
The following schedule presents selected unaudited Graterford operating data compiled by Corrections for the years ended June 30, 2004, 2003, and 2002:    2004 2003 2002 Operating expenditures (rounded in millions)2 $91.9 $92.1 $96.7 Inmate population at year-end 3,220 3,095 3,048 Capacity at year-end 2,750 2,553 2,446 Percentage of capacity at year-end 117.1% 121.2% 124.6% Average monthly inmate population 3,217 3,097 3,130 Average cost per inmate3 $30,074 $29,696 $29,419
    Community Correction Centers Act 173 of 1968 established Community Correction Centers (Centers). The Act required the Bureau of Corrections at that time to establish, with the approval of the Governor, prisoner pre-release community correction centers at locations throughout the Commonwealth. Corrections Bureau of Community Corrections (Bureau) operates the Centers through regional offices located in Elkins Park (Philadelphia) (Region I), Harrisburg (Region II), and Pittsburgh (Region III). Corrections operates 14 Centers and contracts with private providers to operate 42 additional Centers.  The Centers are Corrections instruments for providing initial support to inmates in their first steps back to the community. Support services provided by the Centers include individual and family counseling service, employment counseling, vocational and educational guidance, aid from public agencies, participation in specialized programs dealing with drug or alcohol abuse, and a gradual reduction of custodial control as the inmate’s acceptance of personal responsibilities increases. For technical support, Corrections assigned the Centers to correctional facilities within the general locale.  To be eligible for admission into a Center, an inmate must have completed at least one-half of a minimum sentence but not more than one year of the sentence remaining, must secure an institutional recommendation, and obtain approval from both Corrections and the
                                                 2 Operating expenditures were recorded net of fixed asset costs, an amount that would normally be recovered as part of depreciation expense. 3Average cost was calculated by dividing the operating expenditures by the average monthly inmate population. 
- 2 -
Background Information
sentencing judge. Persons serving life sentences are, by law, ineligible to participate in this program.  Additionally, Corrections developed operating manuals for both the state-operated and the contracted Centers, and monitoring procedures for the regional offices.
- 3 -
Un pour Un
Permettre à tous d'accéder à la lecture
Pour chaque accès à la bibliothèque, YouScribe donne un accès à une personne dans le besoin