PROGRAM EVALUATION
Prepared for the Budgetary Responsibility Oversight Committee
Crime Victim Services Part I: Notification Services November 2002

Russell W. Hinton, State Auditor Performance Audit Operations Division Department of Audits and Accounts

254 Washington St., S.W. Atlanta, GA 30334

Additional information on Crime Victim Services is available in the companion report Crime Victim Services Part II: Compensation and Assistance Services.

In 1982, Congress passed the Victim and Witness Protection Act and

Table of Contents

stated in its observation that without the cooperation of victims and

witnesses, the criminal justice system would cease to function; yet General Background.....p.1-7

with few exceptions these individuals are either ignored by the Notification Services
criminal justice system or simply used as tools to punish offenders. Background..............p. 8-11 The Victim and Witness Protection Act provided for protections and Recommendations......p.12-18

assistance to victims and witnesses in federal cases. In addition, it Appendices.................p.19-20 provided for the development of federal guidelines for fair treatment

of crime victims and witnesses, which was intended to serve as a

model for state and local legislation. The guidelines were designed to address victims' receipt of

emergency social and medical services, including information on the availability of victim

compensation, community-based victim assistance programs, the role of the victim in the

criminal justice process, and the stages in the criminal justice process. The guidelines were also

intended to address the need to notify victims of changes in the custody status of the offender,

and allow victims to express their views regarding the disposition of the case.

In 1984, Congress established a funding mechanism for programs at the state and local level with the passage of the Victims of Crime Act (VOCA). Through VOCA, monies are collected on criminal fines, forfeited bail bonds, penalties, and special assessments collected by the U.S. Attorney's Offices, federal courts, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons; a portion of these collections is distributed to the states to fund victim compensation and assistance programs.

In 1988, Georgia citizens approved a Constitutional Amendment authorizing the payment of funds to innocent victims of crime. The amendment provided that the General Assembly would define the types of victims eligible and could vary the amounts awarded based on need. In the same year, the General Assembly passed legislation establishing the Crime Victims Emergency

Crime Victim Services Part I: Notification Services

Page 1

Georgia Law
1981 - Law passed establishing the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (CJCC) to coordinate major components of the criminal justice system
1985 - Established the crime victim impact statement
1985 - Required the Board of Pardons and Paroles to provide 72-hour notice of the planned parole of an offender to the victim and others
1988 - Constitutional amendment authorized the creation of a law to compensate innocent victims of crimes
1988 - Legislation passed creating the Crime Victims Emergency Fund (CVEF) and authorizing payments to victims
1992 - Legislation passed establishing a 10% (up to $25) court fee assessed on DUI fines as a funding source for the CVEF
1995 - Crime Victims Bill of Rights passed detailing information to be provided to victims; CJCC is identified as responsible for creating and disseminating information on the CVBR to law enforcement
1995 - Local Victim Assistance Program law passed establishing an add-on fee of 5% to all criminal offense fines; monies to be used to fund Local Victim Assistance Programs; in 1997 the law was amended to apply the fee in all criminal fines in all Georgia courts
1995 - Required 20 days advance notice to a victim when the Board of Pardons and Paroles considers granting parole; victim is allowed opportunity to file written objection
Federal Law
1982 - Victim and Witness Protection Act established guidelines for basic crime victims' rights at the federal level
1984 - Designated victims' rights in federal cases, including rights to: restitution, notification of court proceedings, and information on conviction and custody status of offender
1984 - Victims of Crime Act provided for grants to states and territories for victims assistance and compensation; recipients must comply with established guidelines
1994 - Violence Against Women Act created funding for grants to improve services, training, prosecution, and law enforcement efforts regarding violent crimes committed against women

Fund (CVEF), to provide compensation to those victims determined to have suffered physical injury, financial hardship or death as a result of a crime committed against them. In 1992, the General Assembly established funding for the CVEF with the passage of a 10% (up to $25) fee assessed on all DUI fines imposed by the courts. Courts remit these fee collections to the CVEF monthly.
The state took additional steps to address victims' needs in 1995 with the passage of the Crime Victims Bill of Rights (CVBR), which ensures that victims of crime are accorded certain basic rights and specifies that authorities notify victims of these rights. Additionally, it provides that all victims receive written notification of the possibility of the pre-trial release of the accused; his or her rights and roles in the criminal justice process; the availability of victim compensation; and, the availability of community-based victim assistance programs. The CVBR also states that, once a suspect is apprehended, victims should be notified of their right to have information regarding:
the suspect's custody status; court proceedings; the availability of compensation; the availability of services and assistance; the availability of temporary restraining or
protective orders for those experiencing harassment; and, their right to participate in the offender's sentencing and parole process by filing a victim impact statement expressing the impact the crime has had on their life.
Funding for local victim assistance programs was secured with the 1995 Local Victim Assistance Program statute, which established a 5% court fee to be assessed on all fines imposed

Crime Victim Services Part I: Notification Services

Page 2

Exhibit 1
Once a crime is committed and a victim identified, two independent processes begin...

Crime Victim Services Part I: Notification Services

Page 3

on a criminal offense. Courts are required to remit the fees directly to local victim assistance programs. As of the 1997 revision to the law, the fee is applied in all courts and on all criminal offenses or criminal ordinance violations, i.e., traffic violations.

As shown in the flowchart on page 3, once a crime is committed, processes begin to provide the

victim with notifications regarding rights and offender status. At the same time, a process for

providing assistance services (such as counseling, shelter, etc.) and compensation also begins.

These two processes operate independently of one another and victims are eligible for different

services or compensation depending on the crime they suffered and the needs they demonstrate. It should be noted that all victims have the right to notification as described above, regardless of the crime committed or the apprehension of an offender. However, only victims

Agencies Providing Services to Victims of Crime
Local Level Police Departments
Sheriffs' Offices

who have suffered a physical injury as a result of violent crimes, or individuals assuming the debts of the victims, are eligible for compensation under current state law. As described below, responsibility for the various processes rests with state and local agencies, as well as the victim.

County Jails Prosecuting Attorneys' Offices Local Victim Assistance Programs
State Level Criminal Justice Coordinating Council
Office of Victim Services (DOC)

Responsibilities of State and Local Agencies

Office of Victim Advocacy (PAP)

Local as well as state level programs are responsible for ensuring that victims are aware of their

rights, providing them with proper information, and directing them to, or providing them with,

services and compensation. It should be noted that, according to Georgia statute, failure by local

or state agencies to provide any of the notifications noted above, or failure to allow a victim to

submit a victim impact statement, does not render the actions taken by the courts invalid. In

addition, current statutes do not provide for penalties should authorities fail to make these

notifications. As shown in the flowchart on the previous page, local level agencies, such as

police departments or sheriffs' offices, are responsible for the initial notifications to victims of

crime. Once an offender is apprehended, responsibility shifts to the prosecuting attorney's

office to keep the victim informed of the activities of the case and the victim's role in the case

proceedings (including submission of a victim impact statement). The county jail staff is

responsible for notifying the victim when the offender is released from custody. Additionally,

local victim assistance programs, such as battered women's shelters, rape crisis centers, or

counseling facilities, provide services to victims.

State agencies also have responsibilities for notification, assistance, and compensation services. Once an offender is convicted and placed in state custody, the Office of Victim Services (OVS)

Crime Victim Services Part I: Notification Services

Page 4

within the Department of Corrections (DOC) is responsible for handling notifications regarding the offender's custody status. In addition, the Office of Victim Advocacy (OVA) within the Board of Pardons and Paroles (PAP) notifies victims of parole hearings and parole decisions. OVA also accepts victim impact statements to be used in making parole decisions.
Also at the state level, the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (CJCC) is responsible for developing and disseminating information on the Crime Victims Bill of Rights to local authorities for further distribution to victims of crime. In addition, the CJCC receives federal grants that it uses to make grants to local victim assistance programs as well as state level initiatives aimed at addressing victim needs. CJCC also has responsibility for managing the Crime Victims Emergency Fund (CVEF) from which victims may receive monetary compensation. CJCC receives and evaluates applications for compensation and disburses the funds as appropriate. These activities are discussed in greater detail in the Crime Victims Services Part II: Compensation and Assistance Services Program Evaluation Report released as a companion to this report.
Victim Responsibilities In order to exercise their rights to notification, victims must provide local law enforcement and prosecuting attorney personnel with contact information (telephone and address) and keep them advised of any changes to this information. Once an offender is incarcerated in prison, victims must submit notification request forms to the Office of Victim Services (DOC) and the Office of Victim Advocacy (Board of Pardons and Paroles) if they wish to be notified of an offender's custody status. Additionally, victims have the option of completing a victim impact statement to be used by the Board of Pardons and Paroles when reviewing an offender's case. Victims may decide to register for notification regarding an offender's custody status at any time during the offender's incarceration; there is no requirement to make the request within a specified timeframe relative to the crime.
In order to be considered for compensation, victims must submit a Crime Victims Emergency Fund (CVEF) application to the CJCC. The application must be submitted within one year of the date of the crime, and the crime must have been reported to police within 72 hours of the incident. It should be noted that the crime may be reported by someone other than the actual victim. Additionally, victims agree to reimburse the CVEF (for the amount of compensation received) if they receive restitution from the offender. Victims sign a statement to this effect on the application for compensation.

Crime Victim Services Part I: Notification Services

Page 5

Our review focused on the state's efforts to notify crime victims of their rights and its efforts to provide compensation and assistance to victims. We examined internal controls over data systems to determine if the appropriate controls exist over fee collections and expenditures. The review included an examination of accepted best practices used by crime victims programs in other states and by local programs located throughout Georgia. The methodology included reviews of literature regarding crime victim assistance and compensation, file reviews of victim compensation claims paid and denied, interviews with program staff at the DOC, Board of Pardons and Paroles, the CJCC, and the Administrative Office of the Courts. The review also included surveys of local victim assistance programs, interviews with victims' advocacy groups, and interviews with personnel from other states. In addition, the evaluation team visited 17 judicial circuits to determine how the Crime Victims Bill of Rights (CVBR) was being implemented. The team contacted personnel from the Victim Witness Assistance Programs (VWAP) in the District Attorney's Offices and personnel from local law enforcement agencies.
To assess the confidentiality and reliability of the data obtained from the Offender Tracking Information System (OTIS), the Department of Audits and Accounts' Information Systems Audit and Assurance Services Division (ISAAS) conducted an assessment of its security and software change controls. The assessment included discussions with the Georgia Technology Authority technical support personnel responsible for maintaining the Unisys operating system on which the OTIS application is run. The VINE (Victim Information and Notification Everyday) System was not included in the review because it was purchased from an outside vendor.
Our evaluation review did not include the following components: verification of amounts collected for restitution; a review of civil restitution collections and distributions; the appropriateness of the amount provided in individual compensation claim awards; a determination of the appropriateness of the services offered by local victims assistance
programs or whether all funds collected are distributed to the appropriate programs (Note: This subject will be covered in a subsequent Performance Audit.); a review of the sex offender registry-- Victims are notified of the custody status of sex offenders in the same manner as any other offender. However, all sex offenders are additionally required to register with a local sheriff's office and with the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI). GBI maintains the offender's criminal information and address in an online database, which is searchable by anyone with Internet access. Those without access can call the GBI, DOC, or Pardons and Paroles for offender status. Effectiveness of this registry was deemed outside the scope of this evaluation; or five additional grants received by the state that can be used to provide crime victim services (see Appendix B). These grants were not included in this review because they are focused on particular types of victims or service providers.

Crime Victim Services Part I: Notification Services

Page 6

This program evaluation was conducted at the request of the Budgetary Responsibility Oversight Committee (BROC). The evaluation was conducted in compliance with O.C.G.A. 45-12-178 and in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards for performance audits. This report has been discussed with appropriate personnel representing the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council, Department of Corrections, and Board of Pardons and Paroles. A draft copy was also provided for their review and comment. Pertinent responses have been incorporated as appropriate.

Crime Victim Services Part I: Notification Services

Page 7

Local Agencies

Once a crime has been committed, local law enforcement agencies are required to notify victims of their rights and roles in the criminal justice process. In addition, victims receive written notification of the possibility of pre-trial release of the offender; the availability of compensation; and the availability of community-based assistance programs. Individual law enforcement agencies develop their own

At the time a crime is committed, victims are to be notified of their rights regarding notification, assistance, and the availability of compensation.

policies and procedures for dealing with victims and distributing

information. However, the Crime Victims Bill of Rights (CVBR) makes the Criminal Justice

Coordinating Council (CJCC) responsible for developing and distributing written information

upon which law enforcement personnel can rely when disseminating the required information to

victims.

Once a suspect is caught, the investigating law enforcement agency is responsible for notifying the victim of the suspect's arrest. The prosecuting attorney's office usually notifies the victim of court proceedings, such as bond hearings, trial dates, or sentencing. This office is also responsible for notifying the victim of his or her right, under certain circumstances, to submit a victim impact statement (VIS). The VIS allows victims to personalize the crime and express the emotional, as well as economic, impact it has had on them and their families. The VIS is used in the local court, prior to sentencing, to aid the judge in determining an appropriate sentence and determination of restitution. The jail housing the suspect is responsible for notifying the victim of the suspect's release; this is usually done via a telephone call.

Notifications from the Office of Victim Services

Once an offender is convicted and sentenced to a state correctional institution, a victim has the

option of continuing to receive information on the offender. By registering with the Department

of Corrections' (DOC) Office of Victim Services (OVS), victims receive notification when the

offender's custody status has changed. As required by law, they are notified when the offender:

is released after the maximum sentence is served; has been

The Victim Information Notification Everyday (VINE) System is an enhancement to OTIS that makes automated telephone calls to registered victims in the event of an offender's release, escape or other change in custody status.

released due to parole; escapes; is recaptured; dies while incarcerated; transfers to another state's custody or to federal custody; is transferred to a work release transition center or removed from a transition center and returned to prison; and is released from prison with court-ordered probation to follow. (Note: Victims are not notified when offenders are moved from one state prison to another.) Victims complete a registration form, which OVS uses to enter the victim's name and contact

information. A confirmation letter, containing a personal identification number (PIN), is sent to

the victim to complete the process. The victim's request for notification is electronically linked

to the offender's information within the DOC's Offender Tracking Information System (OTIS)

Crime Victim Services Part I: Notification Services

Page 8

so that any changes to the offender's status are flagged to ensure the victim receives the appropriate information. When the offender's status changes in one of the ways described above, the change is entered into OTIS and a computer generated letter is sent to the victim detailing the status change. As an enhancement to OTIS, OVS has implemented the Victim Information and Notification Everyday (VINE) System. This automated computer system interfaces with OTIS and provides the same release information about the offender to the victim via telephone. The VINE System automatically initiates a computer-generated phone call to the victim when the offender is released from custody, and calls once every two hours for 24-hours or until the PIN is entered to confirm that the victim has received the notification. With each call, VINE provides the information; however, the calls do not stop until the PIN is entered or the victim calls OVS and requests that the calls be stopped (if they have forgotten their PIN, for example). Additionally, victims may call the VINE toll- free at any time to access information on the offender's status. VINE is accessible to any user, and information on the offender's custody status can be accessed using the offender's inmate number.

Notifications from the Office of Victim Advocacy

Victims may also choose to register with the Board of Pardons and Paroles' (PAP) Office of

Victim Advocacy (OVA) to receive notifications regarding an offender's parole reviews and

release from custody. Victims register one of the following ways: by submitting a registration

form to OVA; by submitting a victim impact statement (VIS); or by writing a letter and

requesting such. Once a registration form or a VIS is received, staff make a notation in the

offender's file that the victim has requested notification.

When the case comes up for parole review, OVA is required by statute to contact the victim via a letter to

Victim Impact Statement

explain that parole is being considered and to offer the Local Level--Judge may use during victim an opportunity to make their position regarding sentencing and in determining restitution;
NOT CONFIDENTIAL
release known. The victim is given 20 days to respond

to OVA and any information received from the victim State Level--PAP uses in making parole is provided to the Board for consideration in making decisions; Remains CONFIDENTIAL

their decision.

The Board uses the VIS during the pre-parole investigative and decision- making process to assist them in deciding whether to grant parole. The VIS allows victims to express their views on the crime committed against them and their position regarding release of the offender. While PAP has developed a standardized form, victims may choose to write their own statement. In fiscal year 2001, the Board reported 61 cases in which a VIS influenced the Board's decision to either deny or postpone parole. It should be noted that when victims submit the VIS to the Board, it is regarded as strictly confidential and, according to statute, not subject to the Open Records Act. However, when they submit it to the prosecuting attorney at the local level, it can be reviewed by the offender prior to the hearing to allow them to rebut the victim's written statements.

Crime Victim Services Part I: Notification Services

Page 9

As required by law, within 72 hours of reaching a final decision to parole an offender, a letter is sent to the victim with the exact release date. Notifications are also sent to the presiding judge, district attorney, and local law enforcement involved in the case. The offender's case may come up for review by the board several times during the incarceration period which may initiate notifications to the victim. In addition to the 72-hour and final review notifications required by statute, OVA provides notification to the victim when the board: conducts its first review of a life sentence case; makes a decision regarding clemency on a life sentence case; revokes or denies parole; conducts its 3- and 5-year reviews on cases previously denied parole; considers recommending work release to the Department of Corrections; and schedules a clemency hearing on a death penalty case. OVA also notifies the victim if the offender's sentence is reduced by the sentence review panel.
To ensure they will be notified, the victim is required by law to provide a current address and phone number to notifying agencies. Both PAP and DOC have made their notification forms available to the victims at the local level. VISs are also made available at the local level and through the Board's website. No data was available on the number of victims who have filed victim impact statements.
It should be noted that PAP also has a call- in notification system which can be used by anyone with an inmate number (which is available via the DOC's Web site), including victims, to check the parole status of their offender. This call- in system draws from OTIS and is updated daily. PAP noted that offenders' families are the largest users of this service.

Crime Victim Services Part I: Notification Services

Page 10

Activity Data OVS currently has 4,754 victims registered to receive notification. In fiscal year 2001, the OVS mailed 348 release notices and seven death notices to victims from OTIS. VINE placed 5,767 telephone calls to victims regarding offender status and 10,276 calls came into VINE from registered users. Information on the number of victims registered with PAP was not available.
Financial Information As shown in Exhibit 2 below, notification services from the state level are limited to the Office of Victim Services within the Department of Corrections and the Office of Victim Advocacy within the Board of Pardons and Paroles. The cost to the state to fund these two offices in fiscal year 2001 totaled $530,006. The cost associated with the notification services provided at the local level could not be determined as they varied by locality and the types of services provided.

Exhibit 2 Cost to Provide Notification Services at the State Level
Fiscal Year 2001

Office of Victim Office of Victim

Services

Advocacy

Personal Services Regular Operating Expenses Travel Real Estate Telecommunications Per Diem and Fees
Total Cost
Source: DOC and PAP files

$174,207

$232,090

7,400

4,000

5,992

5,394

0

14,044

11,463

3,756

71,060

600

$270,122

$259,884

$530,006

Crime Victim Services Part I: Notification Services

Page 11

RECOMMENDATION #1
Agencies responsible for ensuring that victims are aware of their rights and available services as described in the Crime Victims Bill of Rights should consider establishing benchmarks for measuring their effectiveness on an ongoing basis. Currently, the extent to which victims are aware of their rights and are, as a result, making use of the crime victim services available could not be determined. As discussed below, no benchmarks for measuring success in making victims aware of available services have been established by the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (CJCC), the Department of Corrections (DOC), or the Board of Pardons and Paroles (PAP):
Although CJCC collects data on the number of compensation claims it receives from victims, it has not established benchmarks for measuring the number of claims it should be receiving relative to the number of violent crimes reported. The audit team compared the total number of assaults, murders, and rapes reported in each judicial circuit to the number of applications submitted to CJCC by victims in the circuit. We found variations in the ratio of claim applications to violent crimes ranging from 3% to 27%. Based on the comparison, it appears there is no correlation between crimes reported and applications submitted.
No benchmarks have been established by the (DOC) to measure whether usage of

notification systems is appropriate. Although program staff indicated that site visits were made to local victim assistance programs in all circuits in fiscal year 2002, these visits were made in response to an observed decrease in the number of registrants in the circuit for that year. No benchmarks had been established for expected levels of usage and no analysis was conducted before the site visits to compare actual to expected levels to determine if rates of usage for the notification system was appropriate in these circuits.
PAP has not established any benchmarks for determining its effectiveness in ensuring victims are aware of their rights regarding notification of offender parole status. In addition, our review found that because the Board does not have an effective system for tracking registrants, it could not determine if usage of the system is at an acceptable level. Absent reviewing files, electronic mail, and counting registration forms, there is no way to obtain an accurate count of victims requiring notification. It should be noted that the Board is in the process of developing a database to facilitate tracking victim requests.
By establishing benchmarks for expected levels of usage and comparing them to actual usage on an ongoing basis, agencies involved in providing victim services could more accurately measure their impact in making crime victims aware of available services.
In its response, CJCC stated that it has employed benchmarking at a higher level

Crime Victim Services Part I: Notification Services

Page 12

during the Results Based Budgeting process and will consider using it to measure victims' awareness of compensation.

the 19 law enforcement agencies revealed 13 obtained the information they distributed from sources other than the CJCC.

DOC stated in its response that state level agencies may have a difficult time establishing benchmarks because they do not have immediate contact with crime victims at the time of victimization. They rely heavily on local law enforcement and prosecution-based victim witness assistance programs to inform victims of their rights and services offered by state agencies. However, DOC indicated that it plans to survey other states to determine if national benchmarks exist, and if it is feasible to use them for victim notification services.
RECOMMENDATION #2 CJCC should take action to ensure law enforcement personnel have accurate and complete information regarding the Crime Victims Bill of Rights for dissemination to crime victims. The Crime Victims Bill of Rights (CVBR) designated the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (CJCC) as the agency responsible for developing and disseminating written information upon which law enforcement personnel may rely in disseminating the information required by the Bill of Rights. Currently, information is provided upon request and to trainers conducting sessions with law enforcement personnel; however, it is not systematically distributed to law enforcement officials. Additionally, the information provided does not include the requirement to notify victims of the possibility of pre-trial release or of community-based services, as required by the Crime Victims Bill of Rights. Site visits at

In addition, four (21%) of the 19 law enforcement agencies visited during the evaluation do not give materials to crime victims. Of the remaining 15, only six (40%) gave out materials that addressed all areas noted in the Crime Victims Bill of Rights. Our site visits indicated a concern at the local level that, particularly in those cases where an offender is not caught, victims may not receive the necessary information to seek help or information.
While individual law enforcement officers receive training on victims' rights as part of their initial certification training, there is currently no process in place to ensure that individual law enforcement agencies have either policies or procedures for providing victims with the information they are entitled to receive according to the CVBR. Those law enforcement agencies that choose to be accredited through the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies (CALEA) or certified through the Georgia Association of Chiefs of Police, are required to establish a policy for giving information to victims; however, the standard does not fully encompass the information the CVBR states will be provided to victims. For example, the standards for accreditation and certification do not require that victims be notified of the possibility of pre-trial release. Of the 616 law enforcement agencies in the state likely to have direct contact with victims, a total of 90 are accredited and/or certified.
Because law enforcement agencies are

Crime Victim Services Part I: Notification Services

Page 13

potentially the first point of contact for victims of crime, it is critical that they convey complete and accurate information so that victims can make full use of the rights afforded them. As a result, it is important that CJCC, as required by state statute, develop and disseminate information to law enforcement upon which these agencies can rely. Additionally, law enforcement agencies should consider establishing policies and developing procedures for ensuring the information is distributed to victims appropriately. Accreditation or certification may be one mechanism to help ensure a policy exists; however, agencies will have to ensure that their policies incorporate all components of the CVBR, not just those required for accreditation or certification.
In its response to the report, CJCC indicated that it will mail informational updates to all law enforcement agencies on the Crime Victims Bill of Rights along with a copy of the Victim Assistance Resource Guide annually. In addition, it noted that the Resource Guide is available on CJCC's website.
RECOMMENDATION #3 The Board of Pardons and Paroles should continue its efforts to improve its system for tracking victim information and notifications. The Board of Pardons and Paroles (PAP) is in the process of developing a system using Lotus Notes that will allow them to determine which victims have requested to be notified. Staff indicate that the new system will also allow them to indicate in the "comments" field whether the victim has been notified. Currently, it is not planned for the database to

include fields for information such as the dates letters are sent to victims.
Currently, PAP's system focuses primarily on tracking offenders and does not include a component for handling victim information. As a result, the Program's success in ensuring all victims who request notification are registered could not be accurately measured. Notification requests or victim impact statements (VIS) submitted by the victim serve as the victim's request to be notified about the offender's status. To record the request, the victim's name and contact information is written on the inside cover of the offender's file. Once the offender's case comes up for review and is identified as containing a request for notification, the file is routed to the Office of Victim Advocacy (OVA) where the appropriate letter is sent to inform the victim of the offender's status. OVA does not currently have a listing of all victims who have submitted notification requests or victim impact statements. According to Program staff, the only way to determine if a victim was notified is to refer to the inmate file. It should be noted that PAP has approximately 1,000 inmate releases per month. These files are among the other 47,000 inmate files.
A review of 51 inmate files sent to OVA when parole was being considered found that 47 (92%) were documented with victim notification letters. Although the review showed that most victims in the sample were being notified, there is no assurance that the victims will be notified in the future with the current system in place. Developing this new system, the Program will be able to better track victim notifications. The Program

Crime Victim Services Part I: Notification Services

Page 14

should ensure that the system includes a mechanism for management to determine that all victims who have requested notification actually receive it. By tracking information, such as actual dates letters were sent to victims, instead of simply including anecdotal information on activities, management can analyze the information to ensure notifications are going out as intended and in the proper timeframes.
RECOMMENDATION #4 Pardons and Paroles' Office of Victim Advocacy (OVA) and the Department of Corrections' Office of Victim Services (OVS) should expedite their efforts to establish a single point of contact to simplify and improve notification services to victims. Currently, OVA and OVS do not have a formal policy for sharing information on victims who have requested to be notified of an offender's status. However, it is possible that both offices are servicing the same victims or that victims only know of the one service, and would request the other if aware of its existence. Additionally, victims must register for each notification service separately. As discussed below, developing a policy for sharing information and coordinating registration would simplify and improve the process for victims.
OVA staff does not currently have access to the victim information portion of OTIS (Department of Corrections' Offender Tracking Information System). However, the two agencies do share the database for other information, such as anticipated parole dates. A review of 62 OVA files identified 12 victims; however, a review

of the same offenders in OVS' records indicated that only seven of the victims had requested notification through OVS. It is not clear whether this was an intentional action on the part of the victim, or whether the victim was simply unaware of OVS' service. By sharing information, the two offices could identify victims making use of only one service and contact them to determine if they are aware of, or would like to participate in, the other program.
While victims are required to complete two separate registration forms to receive notifications from OVA and OVS, the two forms are virtually identical. Both require victim information, including name and address; as well as offender information, including name, inmate number, county of conviction, and crime (see Appendix A for a copy of the two forms).
Developing a formal policy to share victim information between the two agencies would reduce the amount of paperwork victims have to complete, as well as provide a mechanism to ensure victims are aware of all the notification systems the state has developed to assist them. Staff from OVA and OVS indicated that they agree coordination would be beneficial and note they have shared information on an informal basis in the past. According to Pardons and Paroles and the Department of Corrections, discussions are currently underway to determine how information could be shared effectively.
In its response, OVS stated that there have been ongoing discussions between the two agencies regarding the feasibility of establishing a single point of contact for

Crime Victim Services Part I: Notification Services

Page 15

crime victims.

to monitor and evaluate the system on a monthly or quarterly basis.

RECOMMENDATION #5 Action should be taken by OVS to ensure the VINE system is notifying victims as expected. Currently, the Victim Information and Notification Everyday (VINE) system serves as an enhancement to the Offender Tracking Information System (OTIS) by placing an automated phone call to registered victims when an offender's status changes; however, there are currently no assurances that VINE is operating appropriately because no ongoing management review is conducted of its operation.
Our review of 50 victim notifications found that VINE successfully contacted 49 (98%) of the victims upon the offender's release. Additionally, it appears that OTIS is sending notification letters as appropriate. A review of the same 50 victims indicated that letters were successfully sent to 47; the letters were returned in three cases because victims had failed to keep the Office of Victim Services (OVS) informed of an address change.
By evaluating VINE's effectiveness at notifying victims on an ongoing basis, OVS can ensure that victims continue to receive information as intended. Without such monitoring and evaluation, problems with the system could go unchecked and victims may not be aware of changes in the inmate's custody status.
OVS stated in its response, that to ensure VINE's effectiveness at notifying victims of the release of an offender, it would take steps

RECOMMENDATION #6
Although OTIS has sound software and security controls, additional steps need to be taken to eliminate the opportunity for unauthorized users to gain access to the system. Currently, it appears that the security over the Offender Tracking Information System (OTIS) application is adequate and the system has sound software change control procedures. A review of the computer system controls found that the procedures in place provide adequate controls over the monitoring, tracking, testing and implementation of changes to the OTIS application. In addition, software standards are documented and adequate user and program documentation is available. Extensive audit tracking and reporting is also available. Although controls appear to be adequate, the following areas of concern were noted:
The OTIS security module permits restrictions that are available to limit user access to various modules and privileges. However, the team observed that software development and technical support personnel were also permitted access to the production security module. These permissions allow technical staff the opportunity to assign security levels to any users within the OTIS production application. This enhanced capability for technical staff members prevents the use of separation of duties. Technical personnel should not be permitted access to sensitive production functionality. It

Crime Victim Services Part I: Notification Services

Page 16

should be noted that the Department of Corrections (DOC) is developing a security program and has personnel assigned to perform the security management role.
The team also found that Georgia Technology Authority (GTA) system administrators use modems to remotely connect to the Unisys system to perform administrative duties. In so doing, administrators transmit clear text administrative passwords over insecure links, thereby exposing the system and its applications to unauthorized persons. DOC should work with personnel at GTA to determine what measures could be implemented to reduce this vulnerability.
It should be noted that DOC has planned development and implementation of a new application, scheduled to replace OTIS in 2004. The new application is called SCRIBE and is expected to use more modern, updated technology, such as Oracle DBMS to maintain its data. Pardons and Paroles also has plans to switch to a new application.
In its response, DOC stated that the issue of development and technical staff having access to the production security module has been corrected and the functions are now separated. DOC also stated that it plans to work with GTA to ensure that dial-up access to the OTIS system is secure.
RECOMMENDATION #7 CJCC should take action to increase awareness of victims' assistance programs, as well as facilitate coordination and sharing of information between assistance

programs to improve services provided to victims. Currently, it appears that there is a lack of systematic coordination and communication between groups designed to assist victims. Interviews conducted with law enforcement and victim assistance staff at the local level indicated a lack of coordination and communication between these groups. For example, one victim assistance program staff member indicated that the local police department distributed brochures containing information on their assistance program to victims. However, the Chief of Police indicated that no materials were given to victims and they were not aware that such a brochure existed. Ensuring that law enforcement is aware of victim assistance programs in the county or judicial district is necessary to facilitate referrals to specific programs that could assist victims. The Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (CJCC) currently produces a directory of victim assistance agencies by judicial circuit, which is distributed at the annual Victim's Conference and is available on its website. However it is not provided directly to law enforcement agencies, and there is no assurance that they would receive a copy.
Additionally, victim assistance staff expressed a need for information to be shared among programs on the types of services provided in other counties, as well as information on "best practices" used by other programs to help identify improvements to their own programs. Currently, 188 victim assistance programs receive either VOCA or VAWA grants through the CJCC. As a condition of the grant, these programs are required to provide evidence of coordination

Crime Victim Services Part I: Notification Services

Page 17

with other service providers in its area. Additionally, they are required to provide information on the types of services offered and the success the program has attained. CJCC could compile this type of information to disseminate to victim assistance programs, via the web or by enhancing the directory mentioned above to include information on the services offered or programs deemed to be working particularly well.
By improving local law enforcement's awareness of the victim assistance programs available in their areas, and improving communication and sharing of ideas between programs, victims could receive better information on what is available and services could be better targeted to meet their needs. Given that CJCC currently collects information on which assistance programs service the various judicial districts, and through its grant awards, collects information on services offered, action could be taken to compile the information in a useful format for distribution to those who can use it.
CJCC indicated that it will mail copies of its Victim Assistance Resource Guide to all law enforcement agencies annually. In addition, to the extent allowed by federal cost principles and guidelines, CJCC will list by agency the services available.
More information on certified local programs can be found in our follow-up audit of Local Victim Assistance Programs.
Crime Victim Services Part I: Notification Services

Page 18

For additional information, please contact Paul E. Bernard, Director, Performance Audit Operations Division, at 404.657.5220.

Crime Victim Services Part I: Notification Services

Page 21