Archived Content Contenu archivé · Note: (HL)* denotes a hyperlink to NPB's web-site . Section I: Overview 1. Chairperson’s Message In May 2006, I returned to the National Parole

ARCHIVED - Archiving Content ARCHIVÉE - Contenu archivé

Archived Content

Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.

Contenu archivé

L’information dont il est indiqué qu’elle est archivée est fournie à des fins de référence, de recherche ou de tenue de documents. Elle n’est pas assujettie aux normes Web du gouvernement du Canada et elle n’a pas été modifiée ou mise à jour depuis son archivage. Pour obtenir cette information dans un autre format, veuillez communiquer avec nous.

This document is archival in nature and is intended for those who wish to consult archival documents made available from the collection of Public Safety Canada. Some of these documents are available in only one official language. Translation, to be provided by Public Safety Canada, is available upon request.

Le présent document a une valeur archivistique et fait partie des documents d’archives rendus disponibles par Sécurité publique Canada à ceux qui souhaitent consulter ces documents issus de sa collection. Certains de ces documents ne sont disponibles que dans une langue officielle. Sécurité publique Canada fournira une traduction sur demande.

National Parole Board

Performance Report

For the period ending March 31, 2006 Hon. Stockwell Day, P.C., M.P. Minister of Public Safety

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION I: OVERVIEW............................................................................................................ 3 1. Chairperson’s Message ..................................................................................... 3 2. Management Representation Statement............................................................ 4 3. Summary Information....................................................................................... 5

SECTION II: ANALYSIS BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME.......................................................... 9 1. Challenges and Risks........................................................................................ 9 2. Performance by Strategic Outcome ................................................................ 10 2.1 Quality Conditional Release Decisions .......................................................... 10 2.2 Open and Accountable Conditional Release Processes.................................. 15 2.3 Quality Pardon Decisions ............................................................................... 19

SECTION III: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION ............................................................. 22 1. Structure for Program Delivery ...................................................................... 22 2. Partnership for Program Delivery................................................................... 22 3. Financial Performance Overview ................................................................... 23

SECTION IV: OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST ........................................................................ 42 1. Legislation Administered by the National Parole Board ................................ 42 2. Contacts .......................................................................................................... 42 3. Horizontal Initiatives ...................................................................................... 43 4. Comparison to the Treasury Board Secretariat Special Travel Authorities 44

Note: (HL)* denotes a hyperlink to NPB's web-site

Section I: Overview

1. Chairperson’s Message

In May 2006, I returned to the National Parole Board after working many years in other sectors of the justice system. On my return, I was struck by two basic facts – much had changed, but much had remained the same. The Board, its members and staff, remain committed to public safety and the principle of quality conditional release and pardons decisions as a means for supporting the safe return of offenders to the community as law-abiding citizens. In this context, all aspects of NPB policy development, training, operations and resource allocation focus on measures to enhance public safety. Of course, issues of public safety, as reflected in reoffending in the community, remain the primary yardstick against which NPB performance is measured. Heavy workloads with tight and legislated timeframes for completion continue to characterize NPB operations. Managing these workloads, consistent with the law and the duty to act fairly, in a dynamic public environment, presents a constant challenge for the Board. Effective partnership with the Correctional Service of Canada, the police, other justice sector organizations and the community remains a fundamental aspect of NPB operations. Working partnerships must focus on a mutual understanding of organizational responsibilities and timely exchange of information in support of a shared commitment to public safety. What has changed? For me, the following are the most significant factors. The Board is far more open and accountable than it was a decade ago. Victims, the public and the media are more aware of, and involved in, NPB decision processes. This shift has been accompanied by a greater capacity within NPB to monitor performance and report on effectiveness. Conditional release risk assessment and decision-making have become far more complex. Greater openness has been accompanied by a “hardening” of the offender population (e.g. longer, more violent criminal histories, more gang affiliations) and a trend toward shorter sentences due in part to the credit for time spent by offenders in remand. Growing diversity within the offender population and the community adds another dimension to complexity. Against this backdrop, productive use of technology to support information sharing and quality decision-making has become absolutely essential and must be a continuing priority. The Board’s Performance Report for 2005/06 demonstrates the manner in which NPB has adapted to a changing environment while enhancing its contribution to public safety. For example, over 90% of parole releases do not result in a new offence and 99 in 100 releases do not result in a new violent offence. In fact, over the past ten years the annual number of convictions for violent offences by day and full parolees declined by 75%, from 179 to 45. In addition, 97% of all pardons granted remain in force, illustrating that the vast majority of pardon recipients remain crime free in the community. The Board’s annual involvement with victims of crime, observers at hearings and response to requests for access to our registry of decisions continues to grow. Interestingly, while victims do

Section 1 - Overview Page. -3-

not always agree with NPB decisions, over 90% express satisfaction with the quality and timeliness of information provided by the Board. They also acknowledge the thorough and professional approach used by the Board in carrying-out conditional release hearings. Public safety remains the Board’s most important priority as it continues to address the challenges of a difficult and shifting environment. This report and future performance reports will document progress in this area.

___________________________ Mario Dion Chairperson, National Parole Board 2. Management Representation Statement

I submit, for tabling in Parliament, the 2005/06 Departmental Performance Report (DPR) for the National Parole Board. This document has been prepared based on the reporting principles and requirements contained in the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat’s guidance for the preparation of Departmental Performance Reports:

• It addresses the specific reporting requirements; • It uses the Board’s approved Program Activity Architecture; • It presents consistent, comprehensive, balanced and accurate information; • It provides a basis of accountability for the results pursued and achieved with the resources entrusted to NPB; and • It reports finances based on approved numbers from the Estimates and Public Accounts of Canada.

___________________________ Mario Dion

Chairperson, National Parole Board

Page. -4- National Parole Board

3. Summary Information

Mandate

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. There are provincial boards in Quebec, Ontario, and British Columbia. 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.

Total Financial Resources 2005/06

Planned Authorities Actual

$41,880,000 $43,752,785 $42,840,717

Total Human Resources 2005/06

Planned Actual Difference

459 404 (55) * * The significant variance is a result of the approval of new funding late in the fiscal year and the time required to complete staffing (now underway).

Section 1 - Overview Page. -5 -

Whole of Government Framework

The National Parole Board allocates resources and produces results for three strategic outcomes that contribute to the Government of Canada’s commitment to safe, secure communities.

Policy Area Economic Affairs Social Affairs International Affairs

Government Outcomes

An innovative and knowledge-based economy

Healthy Canadians with access to quality health care

A strong, mutually beneficial North American partnership

Income security and employment for Canadians

Diverse society that promotes linguistic duality and social inclusion

A prosperous Canada through global commerce

A fair and secure market place

A vibrant culture and heritage

A secure world through international cooperation

A clean and healthy environment

Safe and secure communities

Global poverty reduction through sustainable development

NPB Strategic Outcomes

Conditional release decisions which contribute to public protection through the safe reintegration of offenders in the community.

Open, accountable conditional release processes that assure active involvement of victims and the public before and after conditional release decisions are made.

Pardon decisions and clemency recommendations which contribute to public protection and support the process of rehabilitation.


Performance Summary

Strategic Outcome Spending 2005/06

Quality conditional release decisions which contribute to public protection through the safe reintegration of offenders in the community. (see pages10 to 14 for details)

Planned Spending $ 33,079,000 Actual Spending $ 32,703,889 Variance $ 375,111 FTE used 308

2005/06 Priorities / Commitments Results

• Effective management of legislative responsibilities: Key indicators include:

Outcomes of release on parole;

• Completion of 21,767 conditional release reviews (federal and provincial offenders):

94% of parole releases – no new offence. 99% - no new violent offence;

Numbers/rates of convictions for violent offences for offenders on parole;

Annual convictions for violent offences by parolees down 75% since 94/95;

Post-warrant expiry reoffending and return to a federal penitentiary.

9 in 10 offenders who reach warrant expiry on full parole do not return to a federal penitentiary.

• Plans implemented to continue to enhance quality decision-making based on:

more time for Board members to prepare for and complete conditional release reviews;

revitalized orientation and training for Board members; and

strengthened staff support for Board member decision-making.

• Improve information management in support of NPB’s conditional release responsibilities through development of a new automated system for information management and sharing.

• Plans called for introduction of the new system in 2006/07; however, the project has been delayed while the Board considers options for the most effective approach to systems development, and implementation.


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 (see pages 15 to 19 for details).

Planned Spending $ 5,961,000 Actual Spending $ 5,818,143 Variance $ 142,857 FTE used 62

Section 1 - Overview Page. -7 -

2005/06 Priorities / Commitments Results

• Effective management of legislative responsibilities, related to victims of crime, observers at hearings and the Board’s registry of decisions

• 16,711 contacts with victims, 1,618 observers at hearings, and 5,123 decisions distributed from the decision registry.

• Measures implemented to support the Department of Justice initiative to pay the travel costs for victims who attend NPB hearings. The impact of this fund on victims’ involvement in hearings will be reported in future performance reports.

• A review of NPB practices was completed related to contacts with victims, observers at hearings and the Board’s decision registry. Results from this review will be used to enhance NPB training, policies and operations.


Quality pardon decisions and clemency recommendations which contribute to public protection and support the process of rehabilitation (see pages 19 to 21 for details).

Planned Spending $ 2,840,000 Actual Spending $ 4,318,685 * Variance $ 1,478,685 FTE used 34

2005/06 Priorities Commitments Results

• Effective management of legislative responsibilities.

• 8,549 pardon applications processed. Average process time 11 months, (cases involving summary convictions - 5 months).

• Development of long-term plan to enhance service quality and productivity.

• A new automated system for processing pardon applications was implemented in December 2005.

• 97% of all pardons granted remain in force.

* The variance in actual spending compared with planned spending is due to an investment decision for renewal of the Pardons Application Decision System (PADSR).


Section II: Analysis By Strategic Outcome Section II provides information on NPB performance for the strategic outcomes established in the Board’s Program Activity Architecture. The section begins with a brief discussion of the key factors in the Board’s working environment, and the manner in which they influence program delivery and performance. It then details performance in 2005/06, emphasizing progress made toward plans and commitments in Plans and Priorities.

1. Challenges and Risks

NPB works in a complex environment, demanding effective support for government priorities, including proposals for legislative change which contribute to safe and secure communities, careful assessment of pressures within the justice system, thoughtful consideration of public issues and concerns in a dynamic community context, and rigorous pursuit of innovation and improvement to meet workload pressures.

The Board delivers two legislatively based programs – conditional release and pardons and clemency. The Board also has a corporate service function which provides critical support for program delivery. The conditional release area is, by far, the most complex and resource intensive, accounting for more than 80% of annual program expenditures. Program delivery is labour-intense. Salary costs amount to about 80% of program expenditures each year. Most of the remaining expenditures cover essential operating costs such as Board member travel to parole hearings. The high proportion of resources devoted to legislative responsibilities (and to salary costs) seriously constrains resource flexibility. In this context, managing heavy and increasingly complex workloads presents a constant challenge.

NPB’s workloads are driven by factors beyond its control. Legislation governing the Board (Corrections and Conditional Release Act, Criminal Records Act) is prescriptive, specifying when and how the Board must conduct its business (e.g. when to conduct parole hearings). In addition, workloads are driven by the actions of offenders, victims, pardon applicants, and the community. In concrete terms, this means that NPB must deal with high workload volumes in tight timeframes, amid intense public scrutiny. For example, each year, the Board must complete 20,000 to 25,000 conditional release reviews, respond to 15,000 contacts from victims, arrange for more than 1,000 observers at its hearing, and send out 5,000 decisions from its registry of decisions in response to requests from victims, the media, and interested citizens. The Board has also managed about 20,000 pardon applications per year, in recent years. In 2005/06, however, application volumes rose sharply to over 27,000. This trend is expected to continue.

In addition to high workload volumes, the Board must continue to deal with the growing complexity of conditional release decision-making, as reflected in three important trends. The first is the “hardening” of the federal offender population characterized by longer criminal histories, greater prevalence of violence, more gang affiliations, and more serious substance abuse and physical and mental health problems. The second trend involves the shift to shorter federal prison sentences. In fact, sentences of less than three years have grown by more than 60% in recent years. A more difficult offender population with shorter sentences (and less time to benefit from programs, treatment) challenges NPB work to assess factors related to safe

Section II –Analysis by Strategic Outcome Page. -9-

reintegration in the community. The third trend is the need for innovative decision processes such as elder-assisted and community-assisted hearings which recognize the needs of Aboriginal offenders, and the increasing numbers of offenders from ethnoracial communities. Complexity is also influenced by the greater involvement of victims and observers at hearings, media and community involvement and the involvement of lawyers as offenders’ assistants in the hearing process.

From a policy perspective, the Board must continue to address important challenges such as the information needs of victims of crime, the broad impacts of diversity, the over-representation of Aboriginal people in the justice system, and the low levels of public confidence in parole and parole boards. All of these issues must be considered in the context of the Board’s legislative responsibilities, including its enduring commitment to public safety.

In terms of corporate management and accountability, the Board must address the demands of a modern management agenda comprising sound financial processes and systems, effective human resource planning, strategic information management and thorough program monitoring (management review, audit, evaluation). The critical challenge in this area involves the Board’s limited capacity to identify the resources necessary to support important government-wide initiatives, given its extensive funding needs for conditional release and pardons.

2. Performance by Strategic Outcome

The Program Activity Architecture for the National Parole Board reflects the key aspects of its legislative framework (Corrections and Conditional Release Act, Criminal Records Act) and the areas of performance in which Parliament and the public most frequently express interest. The Board’s strategic outcomes are, therefore, the cornerstones of its public accountability. Data Sources and Reliability: Information for this report was extracted from NPB files and reports, a survey of victims of crime, and two major automated systems - the Offender Management System (OMS), and the Pardons Application Decision System (PADS). Data from OMS and PADS, as well as data entry and data collection activities are subject to rigorous review. If data errors are detected, they are corrected. Through these monitoring processes, the Board strives to produce information which is as timely and accurate as possible.

2.1 Quality Conditional Release Decisions

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

Program Activity Description: Case review and quality decision-making by Board members; provision of staff support for decision-making; provision of appropriate training to ensure professionalism in all aspects of decision-making; and policy development and advice to guide decision-making.


Effectiveness for this activity is assessed through the monitoring of the outcomes of offenders on parole. Outcomes of release provide balanced information on performance. For example, completion of a period of release by an offender without return to an institution is an indicator of success. Revocation of release for a breach of the conditions of release is not a positive result for the offender, but from a community perspective it is a positive intervention to reduce risk. Finally, releases which result in a new offence are clearly a negative result.

Total Financial Resources 2005/06

Planned Spending Authorities Actual Spending

$ 33,079,000 $ 33,663,393 $ 32,703,889

Human Resources 2005/06


360 308 (52)*

* The variance is a result of the approval of new funding late in the fiscal year and the time required to complete staffing (now underway).

Each year, the Board conducts 20,000 to 25,000 conditional release reviews. Work to prepare for and conduct these reviews, accounted for $ 32.7 million in expenditures in 2005-06 or 76% of all NPB expenditures for the year. The average direct cost for a parole hearing is estimated at $850. The estimated cost for an elder-assisted hearing is $1450.

Quality Conditional Release Decisions Progress Towards Commitments Made in Report on Plans and Priorities 2005/06

Program Area Commitments Made Recent Progress

• Legislative responsibilities (CCRA)

• Effective management of legislative responsibilities.

• 21,767 conditional release reviews completed:

• 20,861 for federal offenders

• 906 for provincial offenders

• Additional resources provided to deal with heavy and increasingly complex workloads.

• Conditional Release System (CRS)

• Strengthen information sharing through development of CRS.

• Implementation delayed pending identification of most effective approach to system development, implementation.


Effective Management of Legislative Responsibilities (HL)* The Board uses three indicators related to the performance of parolees in the community:

• outcomes of conditional release; • convictions for violent offences; and • post-warrant expiry recidivism. Information is also provided on the performance of offenders on statutory release (SR), although these offenders are released by law, and not at the discretion of the Board.

Outcomes of Conditional Release for Federal Offenders (HL)* Long-term information on outcomes for federal offenders indicates that:

• 80% of releases on parole (day and full) are completed successfully.

• 13% of releases on parole are revoked for a breach of condition, compared with about 30% of releases on SR that end with a revocation for a breach of conditions.

• 5% or 6% of releases on parole end in a new offence, and about 1% ends in a new violent offence.

• Just under 60% of releases on SR are completed successfully, 10% to 12% end in a new offence and 3% end in a new violent offence.

Recent information on the outcomes of release (Table 1) is consistent with long-term trends. Care should be taken, however, with information for 2005/06, as numbers could change, as cases make their way through the court process.

TABLE 1 - OUTCOMES OF FEDERAL CONDITIONAL RELEASE

RECIDIVISM (Revocation with Offence)

RELEASE TYPE/YR.

SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION

REVOCATION For Breach

Of Condition

TOTAL NO RECIDIVISM

Non Violent Violent

TOTAL RECIDIVISM

Day Parole 2003-04 2004-05

# 2506 2548

% 83.3 82.2

# 365 398

% 12.1 12.9

# 2871 2947

% 95.4 95.1

# 119 132

% 4.0 4.3

# 20 20

% 0.7 0.6

# 139 152

% 4.6 4.9

2005-06 2464 83.5 366 12.4 2830 95.9 106 3.6 14 0.5 120 4.1 Full Parole 2003-04 2004-05

# 1049 1050

% 73.0 72.8

# 261 254

% 18.2 17.6

# 1308 1304

% 91.2 90.4

# 109 117

% 7.6 8.1

# 17 21

% 1.2 1.5

# 125 130

% 8.8 9.6

2005-06 978 70.8 269 19.5 1247 90.3 120 8.7 14 1.0 134 9.7 SR 2003-04 2004-05

# 3120 3037

% 57.9 58.0

# 1596 1608

% 29.6 29.7

# 4716 4745

% 87.6 85.7

# 523 528

% 9.7 9.8

# 148 133

% 2.7 2.5

# 671 661

% 12.5 12.2

2005-06 3201 59.0 1639 30.2 4840 89.2 476 8.8 108 2.0 584 10.8


Information on the outcomes of release for provincial offenders in the Atlantic and Prairies regions where NPB exercises parole decision-making authority for these offenders also shows positive results. Over the past five years, for example, 1.9% of parole releases involving provincial offenders resulted in a new offence, and 0.2% resulted in a new violent offence. In real numbers, four of 2,070 parole releases for provincial offenders in the last five years, resulted in a new violent offence. Offenders with Life Sentences for Murder (HL)* "Lifers" represent a visible and growing segment of the federal offender population. Offenders with life sentences are not entitled to statutory release. Successful completion rates for day parole for offenders with life sentences are as high as, or higher than rates for other groups of offenders, and rates of reoffending are lower. The group most likely to reoffend is the property offence group (non-scheduled), followed by offenders incarcerated for a violent but non-sexual offence (e.g., armed robbery, assault).

TABLE 2 - OUTCOME for FEDERAL DAY PAROLE by OFFENCE of CONVICTION (%) Murder Schedule I

Sex Offence Schedule I Non-Sex

Schedule II Non-Schedule Total

Outcome 04/05 05/06 04/05 05/06 04/05 05/06 04/05 05/06 04/05 05/06 04/05 05/06

Successful Completions

90.8 93.7 95.7 93.5 78.2 78.4 87.2 90.6 73.2 73.0 82.2 83.5

Revoked for breach of conditions

7.7 6.3 3.1 6.0 17.0 17.7 9.0 7.9 17.0 15.6 12.9 12.4

Revocations with offence Non-violent 1.1 0.0 1.2 0.5 3.9 2.9 3.6 1.5 8.8 10.8 4.3 3.6 Violent 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 1.0 0.2 0.0 1.0 0.7 0.7 0.5 Total 1.5 0.0 1.2 0.5 4.8 3.9 3.8 1.5 9.8 11.5 4.9 4.1

Offenders serving life sentences for murder and released on full parole, remain on parole for life. Long-term follow-up for this group indicates that about 8% reoffend. Since 1994/95, offenders with Life Minimum sentences have had 1,917 full parole supervision periods. By March 31, 2006 1,304 (68%) of these supervision periods were still active. The outcomes of the remaining cases were as follows:

• 230 (12%) offenders had died while on full parole.

• 237 (12%) were revoked for a breach of conditions.

• 96 (5%) were revoked for a non-violent offence.

• 57 (3%) were revoked as a result of a violent offence.

Convictions for Violent Offences (HL)*

• From 1994/95 to 2004/05, the annual number of convictions for violent offences by day and full parolees declined by 75%.


• Rates of conviction per 1,000 offenders under supervision also indicate a sharp decline (from 59 to 16 for day parole and from 20 to 6 for full parole).

• Comparison of violent conviction rates and violent crime rates in Uniform Crime Reports show that full parolees are no more likely than the general public to commit a violent crime.

TABLE 3 - CONVICTIONS FOR VIOLENT OFFENCES BY RELEASE TYPE AND THE RATES OF CONVICTION

PER 1000 OFFENDERS UNDER SUPERVISION

YEAR DAY PAROLE (convictions)

RATES PER 1,000

FULL PAROLE (convictions)

RATES PER 1,000

STATUTORY RELEASE

(convictions)

RATES PER 1,000

TOTAL CONVICTIONS

1994/95 79 59 100 20 165 83 344 1995/96 63 53 64 14 184 82 311 1996/97 38 37 53 12 159 67 250 1997/98 37 30 48 12 156 62 241 1998/99 35 23 37 9 138 55 210 1999/00 57 36 44 10 159 57 260 2000/01 35 25 37 8 167 60 239 2001/02 32 25 33 8 149 52 214 2002/03 22 17 26 6 148 51 196 2003/04 20 15 21 5 148 50 189 2004/05 20 16 25 6 133 44 178 2005/06* 14 10 17 4 108 35 139

* Figures for violent convictions may fluctuate during the 12 to 18 months following fiscal year end as offenders proceed through the courts.

Post Warrant Expiry Reoffending (HL)* Post-warrant expiry reoffending information is based on readmissions to a federal institution for offenders who completed their sentence on full parole or SR or were incarcerated to the end of their sentence, between 1990/91 and 1995/96. Long-term follow-up indicates that about 26% of these offenders have returned to a federal penitentiary. There are, however, differing rates of reoffending for offenders within this group:

• 1 in 10 offenders who reached warrant expiry on full parole have returned to a federal institution;

• for offenders who reached warrant expiry on SR, 3 in 10 have returned to a federal institution; and

• for offenders who remain incarcerated to warrant expiry (e.g. detained), 5 in 10 have returned to a federal institution.

Conditional release is founded on the principle that gradual release to the community, based on effective programs and treatment, quality risk assessment, and effective community supervision enhances community safety. Information on post-warrant expiry reoffending reinforces this theory, suggesting that the detailed process of case preparation and risk assessment used by NPB and CSC for parole decision-making is effective in identifying those offenders most likely to remain free from violent crime in the community. Post-warrant expiry reoffending, as reported, deals only with federal reoffending (i.e. a new sentence of two years or more). If all new offences (e.g. fines, sentences of less than two years) are considered, the rate of reoffending would increase. NPB does not have access to this information; however, work continues to develop a more comprehensive picture of post-warrant expiry reoffending.


2.2 Open and Accountable Conditional Release Processes

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.

Program Activity Description: Provision of information for victims of crime; assistance for observers at hearings and those who seek access to NPB’s decision registry; public information; and investigation of tragic incidents in the community. This program activity is designed to ensure that the Board operates in an open and accountable manner, consistent with the provisions of the CCRA, and that it shares information effectively in support of public safety and effective conditional release. Work in this area recognizes that NPB operates in a difficult environment in which timely sharing of accurate information is fundamental to effective partnership and public trust. Results for this area are assessed by monitoring the timeliness of information shared, by conducting surveys of those who receive information and assistance from the Board (e.g. victims), and by conducting relevant management reviews and investigations.

Financial Resources 2005/06


$ 5,961,000 $ 7,429,223 $ 5,818,143



65 62 (3)


Open and Accountable Conditional Release Processes Progress Toward Commitments Made in Report on Plans and Priorities 2005/06


• Open and accountable decision processes

• Effective management of legislative responsibilities

• 16,711 contacts with victims, 1,618 observers at hearings, distribution of 5,123 decisions from the decision registry.

• Additional resources provided to manage heavy workloads in this area.

• Review completed to identify issues and improvements in NPB policies and operations related to victims, observers and the decision registry.

• Victims of Crime • Develop more inclusive process for victims of crime.

• Support for implementation of a fund (Justice lead) to pay the travel costs for victims to attend NPB hearings.

• Boards of investigation.

• Investigate tragic incidents in

the community. Report on findings.

• No investigations completed.

Effective Management of Legislative Responsibilities

The CCRA requires the Board to provide information for victims of crime, allow observers at its hearings and provide access to its decisions through a registry of decisions. Performance assessment in this area has two components:

• the volume of NPB activity in response to demands for information/assistance; and

• the satisfaction of those who receive information and assistance from the Board.

Contacts with Victims: In 2005/06, the Board had over 16,700 contacts with victims. Most were victims of violence, such as sexual assault, or the family of murder victims. Victims do not always agree with NPB decisions, but the vast majority (95%) of those surveyed express satisfaction with the quality and timeliness of information provided by NPB staff.


Figure 1 NPB Contacts with Victims

16711154791526314270140131271811177

98838043

652559305588

31700

5000

10000

15000

20000

93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06Year

# of

Con

tact

s

Observers at Hearings: The Board had 1,618 observers at its hearings in 2005/06.

Figure 2Observers at NPB Hearings

1618

1173108011401089

11631300

986909

705

1094

523

1880

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06Year

# of

Obs

erve

rs

Victims Reading Statements: In 2005/06, 169 victims made presentations at hearings. Most were family members of murder or manslaughter victims (58%) or victims of sexual assault (17%). Most presentations, (78%) were in person. The remainder came in the form of audio or video tapes. There has been an increase in the number of victims as observers at hearings and victims making presentations at hearings. This increase appears to be linked to the introduction of the fund to pay travel costs for victims to attend NPB hearings. As the fund was only in place for five months in 2005/06, the full impact cannot yet be determined. NPB will continue to monitor and report on this issue. Decision Registry: The CCRA permits access to specific decisions and to decisions for research purposes through NPB's decision registry. For specific cases, any person who demonstrates an interest may, on written application to NPB, have access to the contents of the registry relating to a specific case. Information that would jeopardize the safety of a person, reveal the source of


information obtained in confidence, or adversely influence the reintegration of the offender is deleted. For research purposes, people may apply to the Board for access to decisions and receive information after the decisions have been screened to remove all personal identifiers. The legislation does not define the contents of the "registry of decisions", or what would constitute demonstrating interest in a case; however, in keeping with the concepts of openness and accountability, the Board makes available the complete risk assessment and decision-making documentation of Board members. Individuals demonstrate an interest in the case by writing to the Board to ask for access to the decision registry. In 2005/06, the Board released 5,123 decisions from the registry. Victims access the registry most frequently (about 36%), followed by media (30%).

Figure 3Decision Registry Requests and Decisions Sent

17761668150014081200150811221144970673769579

512352304701

40093334

4225

32192994

21861849

12801855

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06

Year Requests Decision Sent

Review of issues related to victims, observers and the decision registry: This review, along with other NPB efforts, produced an action plan for innovation and improvement that will focus on:

• better information for victims, the public and the media on the Board’s website and in print form;

• assessment of the use of video conferencing as a means to allow victims to observe hearings;

• provision of interpretation services for victims at NPB hearings under certain circumstances; and

• enhanced training for NPB staff.

Investigations/Case Audits: In 2005/06, NPB did not complete any joint investigations with CSC. The Board did, however, complete several “case audits” to examine incidents in which offenders on conditional release committed a serious offence and continued to implement recommendations from previous investigations. Key areas for action included:


• provision of more time for Board members to prepare for and complete conditional release reviews;

• use of a variety of assessment tools to evaluate dangerousness and risk to reoffend; • quality control for psychiatric and psychological reports presented to the Board; • use of a case chronology for long-term offenders, and offenders with lengthy criminal

histories; and • the need to improve the quality of hearing tapes.

Concrete action has been taken to address these issues. For example, NPB introduced measures to provide Board members with more time to prepare for, and complete conditional release reviews. The Board also converted to digital technology for recording the proceeds of its hearings. This change has made noteworthy improvements in the quality of the recordings. The findings and recommendations of case audits have been communicated to Board members and staff and will be addressed in NPB policies and training, as required. 2.3 Quality Pardon Decisions

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.

Program Activity Description: The review of pardon applications and the making of quality decisions to grant, deny or revoke pardons; provision of support for pardon decision-making; development of pardons policy; the collection of pardon revenues; and development of recommendations for clemency.

A pardon is a formal attempt to remove the stigma of a criminal record for people found guilty of a federal offence who, after satisfying their sentence and a specific waiting period, have shown themselves to be responsible citizens. A pardon is, therefore, a means to facilitate safe reintegration in the community. Results are assessed in terms of the average time required to process pardon applications and the rates of revocation of pardons.



Financial Resources 2005/06


$ 2,840,000 $ 2,660,169 $ 4,318,685 *

* The variance in actual and planned spending is due to an investment decision for renewal of Pardons Application Decision System (PADSR).



34 34 -

Historically, the Board has received about 20,000 pardon applications per year on average. In 2005/06, however, the Board received over 27,000 applications. NPB is monitoring application volumes closely, given the impact of increases for resource needs, and revenues. NPB charges a $50.00 user fee for the processing of pardon applications. The Board may access 70% of revenues collected, to an annual maximum of $ 410,000. The RCMP has access to 30% of user fees collected. Fees, however, do not reflect the full cost of the program for NPB or the RCMP. The fee is set at $ 50.00 so as not to serve as an impediment for Canadians who wish to benefit from a pardon.

Quality Pardon Decisions and Clemency Recommendations Progress Toward Commitments Made in Report on Plans And Priorities 2005/06


• Pardons • Effective management of legislative responsibilities.

• 8,549 applications processed – average process time, 11 months.

• Renewal of the automated system used to support application processing.

• System implemented in Dec/05.

• Development of a long-term plan to enhance service quality.

• Plan being developed. Process improvements being examined. Options for revenue use under consideration. Legislative/policy framework being reviewed.

Effective Management of Legislative Responsibilities (HL)* The Criminal Records Act (CRA) authorizes the Board to grant pardons for offences prosecuted by indictment if it is satisfied the applicant is of good conduct, and is conviction-free for five


years, and to issue pardons for summary convictions, following a conviction free period of three years. The grant/issue rate for pardons is 98%. In 2005/06, the average processing time for pardons was 11 months; however, for cases involving summary convictions only, the average process time was three months. Work continues to improve the pardon process. Through these measures, the Board expects to generate significant improvements in service delivery. For example, the target average process time for cases involving summary convictions is two weeks. For cases involving indictable offences, the target is 5 months. In 2005/06, the Board had reduced capacity to process pardon applications because significant amounts of staff time had to be applied to work to develop and test the new automated system to support application processing. This reality, combined with a sharp spike in applications received during the second half of the fiscal year, created a backlog of applications which the Board must address in fiscal year 2006/07.

TABLE 4 – PARDONS GRANTED/ISSUED and DENIED by YEAR

Decision 2000/01 # %

2001/02 # %

2002/03 # %

2003/04 # %

2004/05 # %

2005/06 # %

Granted 7,495 52 10,725 63 7,204 49 8,761 55 17,800 78 3,951 46 Issued 6,700 47 5,920 35 7,232 49 6,832 43 4,745 21 4,402 51 Sub-Total 14,195 99 16,645 98 14,436 98 15,593 98 22,545 98 8,353 98 Denied 84 1 409 2 286 2 265 2 375 2 196 2

Total 14,279 100 17,054 100 14,722 100 15,858 100 22,920 100 8,549 100 Average Process Time

18 months 20 months 17 months 17 months 12 months 11 months

The cumulative pardon revocation/cessation rate remains low (3%), demonstrating that most people remain crime free after receipt of a pardon. The CRA includes two categories of revocation. The first is for offences after receipt of a pardon that the court dealt with summarily, or which could have been dealt with summarily. The Board reviews these cases and assesses the need to revoke. The second involves automatic revocation for an indictable offence. For this category, the RCMP notifies the Board of the offence, and the pardon ceases to exist.

TABLE 5 - PARDON REVOCATIONS

Cumulative Pardons Granted/Issued

to Date

Pardons Revoked / Ceased during the Year

Cumulative Pardons

Revoked/Ceased

Cumulative Revocation/Cessation

Rate (%) 2001/02 276,956 463 8,378 3.03 2002/03 291,392 902 9,280 3.18 2003/04 306,985 1,314 10,594 3.45 2004/05 329,530 557 11,151 3.38 2005/06 337,883 456 11,607 3.43


Section III: Supplementary Information

1. Structure for Program Delivery

The Board carries-out its work through six offices across the country and the national office in Ottawa. The national office makes clemency recommendations and pardon decisions and develops related policies. It is also responsible for a range of activities related to conditional release, including investigations, appeal decisions, policy development, and Board member training. As well, the national office provides leadership for planning, resource management, communications, performance reporting and corporate services.

Conditional release decisions are made by Board members in the regions. Board members are supported by staff who schedule hearings, ensure that information for decision-making is received and shared with the offender, provide policy advice, and communicate conditional release decisions to the offender, CSC and others, as required. Staff in regions also provide information for victims, make arrangements for observers at hearings, and manage requests for access to the Board’s decision registry. 2. Partnership for Program Delivery Partnership is integral to effective NPB operations. As the Board's key partner, CSC provides information for NPB decision-making (from external sources, and internally generated). If the Board grants release, CSC supervises offenders in the community. Clearly, the Board shares accountability for "outcomes". When parolees succeed, “success” is the result of many players in the system, as well as the offender.

CSC and NPB Working Relationship - Conditional Release CSC Responsibilities for Offenders NPB Decision-Making Responsibilities

• Care and custody. • Programs and treatment. • Work release, temporary absences (TA) (TA authority delegated by NPB in many cases).

• Information for NPB decisions: external (e.g. police, courts); produced by CSC (e.g. programs/treatment, recommendations).

• Review of cases and decisions for: - TAs for specific groups (e.g. lifers); - the timing and conditions of release of offenders on day and full parole.

• Statutory release (SR) occurs by law at 2/3rds of sentence. Recommendations to NPB on the need for special conditions for SR

• Decisions to impose special conditions on SR.

• Supervision of offenders released on TAs, parole and SR. Information for NPB post-release decisions.

• Post-release decisions (revoke or maintain release, revise conditions).

• Recommendations to NPB for detention of offenders past SR to warrant expiry.

• Detention decisions.

• Supervision of long-term supervision offenders (LTSO).

• Imposition of special conditions on LTSO.

Section III –Supplementary Information Page. -23-

The RCMP also works with the Board in the processing of pardon applications. The RCMP provides NPB with information on criminal histories, and periods of crime-free behaviour for pardon applicants. When the Board issues or grants a pardon, it notifies the RCMP which seals the pardoned record. In the case of pardon revocation, the Board and the RCMP share information to support NPB decision-making, and RCMP responsibilities for management of information within the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC).

3. Financial Performance Overview

The National Parole Board’s total authorities, consisting of Main Estimates, subsequent Supplementary Estimates and funding received from Governor General Special Warrants and Treasury Board (TB) Vote 10 were $43,752,785. This consisted of $38,545,367 of operating resources, $5,196,264 for the Employee Benefit Plan.

Actual expenditures were $42,840,717 and resulted in a reported Public Accounts lapse of $911,419. This is a total lapse of approximately 2.1% of total authorities, indicating that the Board was able to manage its resources successfully for 2005/06.

The Board applied its resources to the three following program areas - quality conditional release decisions; open, accountable conditional release processes; and quality pardon decisions, clemency recommendations.

Financial Summary Tables

The financial tables presented in this section provide the following information on NPB:

Total Main Estimates as reported in the 2005/06 Estimates.

Total planned spending at the beginning of the year as reported in the 2005/06 Estimates: Report on Plans and Priorities . This includes Main Estimates plus anticipated approvals planned through Supplementary Estimates exercises and funding received from Governor General Special Warrants and TB Vote 10.

Total authorities as approved by Parliament (Public Accounts of Canada for 2005/06).

Total actual spending (Public Accounts of Canada for 2005/06).

Please note that the figures in the following tables have been rounded to the nearest thousand. Because of rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Table 1: Comparison of Planned to Actual Spending (including FTEs)

This table offers a comparison of the Main Estimates, Planned Spending, Total Authorities and Actual Spending for the most recently completed fiscal year, as well as historical figures for Actual Spending.

The $10.1 million increase from Main Estimates to Planned Spending is due to anticipated funding for such initiatives as: Strategic Investment to Sustain Program Integrity, Strengthening Community Safety, Effective Corrections and Citizen Engagement and the National Accommodation Plan.


1) from the 2005/06 Report on Plans and Priorities

2) from the 2005/06 Public Accounts

* Services received without charge usually include accommodation provided by PWGSC, the employer's share of employees' insurance premiums, Workers' Compensation coverage provided by Social Development Canada, and services received from the Department of Justice Canada.

2005/06 ($ thousands)

2003/04 Actual

2004/05 Actual

Main Estimates

Planned Spending

(1)

Total Authorities

(2)

Total Actuals (2)

Quality conditional release decisions

27,898 30,897 25,501 33,079 33,663 32,704

Open, accountable conditional release processes

4,987 5,295 4,314 5,961 7,429 5,818

Quality pardon decisions, clemency recommendations

2,759 4,934 1,952 2,840 2,660 4,319

Total 35,644 41,127 31,767 41,880 43,753 42,841 Less: Non-respendable revenue

704 539 N/A 700 N/A 714

Plus: Cost of services received without charge *

4,039 4,207 N/A 5,504 N/A 4,966

Total Departmental Spending

38,979 44,795 N/A 46,684 N/A 47,093

Full-time Equivalents 366 385 N/A 459 N/A 404

Table 2: Resources by Program Activity

This table reflects how resources are used within National Parole Board by Program Activity.

$ thousands

Budgetary Program Activity Operating Total

Quality conditional release decisions

Main Estimates 25,501 25,501

Planned Spending 33,079 33,079

Total Authorities 33,663 33,663

Actual Spending 32,704 32,704

Open, accountable conditional release processes












Table 3: Voted and Statutory Items

This table basically replicates the summary table listed in the Main Estimates. Resources are presented to Parliament in this format. Parliament approves the voted funding and the statutory information is provided for information purposes.

$ thousands

2005/06 Vote or Statutory Item

Truncated Vote or Statutory Wording

Main Estimates

Planned Spending (1)

Total Authorities (2)

Total Actuals (2)

50 Operating expenditures

27,506 37,619 38,545 37,634

(S)

Contributions to employee benefit plans

4,261 4,261 5,196 5,196

(S)

Refunds of amounts credited to revenues in previous years

- - 1 1

(S)

Spending of proceeds from the disposal of surplus Crown assets

- - 10 10

Total 31,767 41,880 43,753 42,841

1) from the 2005/06 Report on Plans and Priorities 2) from the 2005/06 Public Accounts (S) indicates expenditures the Department is required to make that do not require an appropriation act.

Table 4: Services Received Without Charge

($ thousands) Total Actuals

2005/06

Accommodation provided by Public Works and Government Services Canada 2,369

Contributions covering employer’s share of employees’ insurance premiums and expenditures paid by Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (excluding revolving funds). Employer’s contribution to employees’ insured benefits plans and associated expenditures paid by TBS

2,279

Salary and associated expenditures of legal services provided by the Department of Justice Canada

317

Worker’s Compensation coverage provided by Social Development Canada 2

Total 2005/06 Services received without charge 4,966

Table 5: Sources of Respendable and Non-respendable Revenue Respendable Revenue The Board does not have any Respendable Revenue. Non-respendable Revenue The Board is not allowed to respend these revenues. The Board has the authority to recover costs related to pardons. There is a $50.00 user fee for the processing of pardon applications which generated revenues of $713,765 in 2005/06. Of the $50.00, the Board can only access $35.00 of every fee, to a maximum of $410,000 per year. The Board also collects user fees for Access to Information Requests. The total user fees collected during the year was $140.00.

2005/06

($ thousands) Actual 2003/04

Actual 2004/05

Main Estimates

PlannedRevenue

Total Authorities

Actual


Pardon user fees 704 539 N/A 700 N/A 714Total Non-respendable Revenue

704 539 N/A 700 N/A 714



Table 6: User Fees Act

2005/06 Planning Years

A. User Fee Fee Type Fee-setting Authority

Date Last Modified

Forecast Revenue ($000)

Actual Revenue ($000)

Full Cost ($000)

Performance Standard

Performance Results Fiscal Year

Forecast Revenue ($000)

Estimated Full Cost ($000)

Pardons User fee ($50.00)

Other Products and Services

Treasury Board Policy For User

Fees T.B. # 826954

Fee introduced 1999, never

modified

410 410 To be determined

(TBD)

Under Development

In 2005/06 the average

processing time for a pardon

application was 11 months, (3

months for cases involving summary

convictions and 17 months for

cases involving indictable offences).

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

410

410

410

TBD

TBD

TBD

Subtotal (O)

Total

Subtotal (O)

Total

Subtotal (O)

Total

Total 2006-07

Total 2007-08

Total 2008-09

410

410

410

TBD

TBD

TBD

B. Date Last Modified N/A

C. Other Information

The Board also collects user fees for Access to Information Requests. The total user fees collected during the year was $140.00.

Table 7: Financial Statements of Departments and Agencies (including Agents of Parliament) National Parole Board Statement of Management Responsibility

Responsibility for the integrity and objectivity of the accompanying financial statements for the year ended March 31, 2006 and all information contained in this report rests with the National Parole Board management. These financial statements have been prepared by management in accordance with Treasury Board accounting policies which are consistent with Canadian generally accepted accounting principles for the public sector.

Management is responsible for the integrity and objectivity of the information in these financial statements. Some of the information in the financial statements is based on management’s best estimates and judgment and gives due consideration to materiality. To fulfil its accounting and reporting responsibilities, management maintains a set of accounts that provides a centralized record of the Board’s financial transactions. Financial information submitted to the Public Accounts of Canada and included in the Board’s Departmental Performance Report is consistent with these financial statements.

Management maintains a system of financial management and internal control designed to provide reasonable assurance that financial information is reliable, that assets are safeguarded and that transactions are in accordance with the Financial Administration Act, are executed in accordance with prescribed regulations, within Parliamentary authorities, and are properly recorded to maintain accountability of Government funds. Management also seeks to ensure the objectivity and integrity of data in its financial statements by careful selection, training and development of qualified staff, by organizational arrangements that provide appropriate divisions of responsibility, and by communication programs aimed at ensuring that regulations, policies, standards and managerial authorities are understood throughout the Board.

The financial statements of the Board have not been audited.

_

Mario Dion Serge Gascon Chairperson Senior Financial Officer Ottawa, Canada August 14, 2006




Statement of Operations (Unaudited) For the Year Ended March 31 (in thousands of dollars)

2006 2005 Expenses (Note 4)

Conditional release decisions 42,956 33,405 Conditional release openness and accountability 6,713 6,079 Pardons decisions and clemency recommendations 3,619 4,022

Total Expenses 53,288 43,506 Revenues (Note 5)

Conditional release decisions 3 10 Conditional release openness and accountability 1 2 Pardons decisions and clemency recommendations 713 537

Total Revenues 717 549 Net Cost of Operations 52,571 42,957

The accompanying notes form an integral part of these financial statements.



Statement of Financial Position (Unaudited) At March 31

(in thousands of dollars)

2006 2005ASSETS Financial Assets

Deposit-in-transit 5 - Accounts receivable and advances (Note 6) 143 428

Total financial assets 148 428

Non-financial assets

Prepaid expenses 139 268Tangible capital assets (Note 7) 4,218 7,809

Total non-financial assets 4,357 8,077

TOTAL 4,505 8,505

LIABILITIES

Accounts payable and accrued liabilities 3,606 4,505Vacation pay and compensatory leave 1,419 1,245Deferred revenue (Note 8) 346 - Employee severance benefits (Note 9) 5,581 4,637

10,952 10,387

Equity of Canada (6,447) (1,882)

TOTAL 4,505 8,505

Contingent liabilities (Note 10)




Statement of Equity of Canada (Unaudited) At March 31

(in thousands of dollars) 2006 2005

Equity of Canada, beginning of year (1,882) (844)

Net Cost of operations (52,571) (42,957)Current year appropriations used (Note 3) 42,841 41,162Services received without charge from other government departments (Note 11) 5,500 4,200Revenue not available for spending (Note 3) (730) (585)Change in net position in the Consolidated Revenue Fund (Note 3) 395 (2,858)

Equity of Canada, end of year (6,447) (1,882)


National Parole Board Statement of Cash Flow (Unaudited) For the Year Ended March 31 (in thousands of dollars)

2006 2005Operating activities

Net cost of operations 52,571 42,957Non cash items:

Amortization of tangible capital assets (870) (538)Services received without charge from other departments (5,500) (4,200)Loss on disposal and write-off of tangible capital assets (4,928) (10)

Variations in Statement of Financial Position: Increase in liabilities (564) (2,857)Decrease in financial assets (280) (104)Increase (decrease) in prepaid expenses (130) 128

Cash used by operating activities 40,299 35,376

Capital investment activities Acquisitions of tangible capital assets 2,211 2,370Proceeds from disposal of tangible capital assets (4) (27)

Cash used by capital investment activities 2,207 2,343

Financing activities

Net Cash Provided by Government 42,506 37,719


National Parole Board Notes to the Financial Statements (Unaudited)

1. Authority and Objectives Although the National Parole Board (NPB) is a federal government department, it 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 pardons decisions, and recommendations for clemency through the Royal Prerogative of Mercy.

Legislation governing the Board includes the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (CCRA), the Criminal Records Act (CRA), and the provisions of the Criminal Code. The CCRA empowers the Board to make conditional release decisions for federal offenders and offenders in provinces and territories without their own parole boards. Provincial Boards currently exist in Quebec, Ontario and British Columbia. The CRA entitles the Board to issue, grant, deny or revoke pardons for convictions under federal acts or regulations. The Governor General or the Governor in Council exercises authority regarding the use of the Royal Prerogative of Mercy for those convicted of a federal offence in all jurisdictions based on investigations by the Board and recommendations provided to the Solicitor General of Canada. The work of the Board is carried out by a network of regional offices and the national office in Ottawa. The Board has offices in five regions: Atlantic (Moncton, NB); Quebec (Montreal, QC); Ontario (Kingston, ON); Prairies (Saskatoon, SK) including a separate Edmonton office (AB); and Pacific (Abbotsford, BC). The Board has three strategic outcomes which are the cornerstones of its public accountability and reporting of results. They are:

1) Conditional release decisions which contribute to public protection through safe reintegration of offenders in the community;

2) Open and accountable conditional release processes that ensure active involvement and engagement of victims of crime and the public, before and after conditional release decisions are made; and,

3) Pardon decisions and clemency recommendations, which contribute to public protection and support the process of rehabilitation.

2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

The financial statements have been prepared in accordance with Treasury Board accounting policies, which are consistent with Canadian generally accepted accounting principles for the public sector.

Significant accounting policies are as follows: (a) Parliamentary appropriations – the Board is financed by the Government of Canada

through Parliamentary appropriations. Appropriations provided to the Board do not parallel financial reporting according to generally accepted accounting principles since appropriations are primarily based on cash flow requirements. Consequently, items recognized in the statement of operations and the statement of financial position are not necessarily the same as those provided through appropriations from Parliament. Note 3 provides a high-level reconciliation between the two bases of reporting.

(b) Net Cash Provided by Government – The Board operates within the Consolidated Revenue Section III –Supplementary Information Page. -33-


Fund (CRF), which is administered by the Receiver General for Canada. All cash received by the Board is deposited to the CRF and all cash disbursements made by the Board are paid from the CRF. The net cash provided by Government is the difference between all cash receipts and all cash disbursements including transactions with other departments of the federal government.

(c) Change in net position in the Consolidated Revenue Fund is the difference between the net cash provided by Government and appropriations used in a year, excluding the amount of non respendable revenue recorded by the Board. It results from timing differences between when a transaction affects appropriations and when it is processed through the CRF.

(d) Revenues:

o Revenues are accounted for in the period in which the underlying transaction or event occurred that gave rise to the revenues.

o Revenues that have been received but not yet earned are presented as deferred revenues. These revenues are recognized in the period in which the related expenses are incurred.

(e) Expenses — Expenses are recorded on the accrual basis:

o Vacation pay and compensatory leave are expensed as the benefits accrue to employees under their respective terms of employment.

o Services provided without charge by other government departments for accommodation, the employer's contribution to the health and dental insurance plans, worker's compensation and legal services are recorded as operating expenses at their estimated cost.

(f) Employee future benefits:

o Pension benefits: Eligible employees participate in the Public Service Superannuation Plan, administered by the Government of Canada. The Board's contributions to the Plan are charged to expenses in the year incurred and represent the total departmental obligation to the Plan. Current legislation does not require the Board to make contributions for any actuarial deficiencies of the Plan.

o Severance benefits: Employees are entitled to severance benefits under labour contracts or conditions of employment. These benefits are accrued as employees render the services necessary to earn them. The obligation relating to the benefits earned by employees is calculated using information derived from the results of the actuarially determined liability for employee severance benefits for the Government as a whole.

(g) Accounts receivable are stated at amounts expected to be ultimately realized; a provision is made for receivables where recovery is considered uncertain.

(h) Contingent liabilities — Contingent liabilities are potential liabilities, which may become actual liabilities when one or more future events occur or fail to occur. To the extent that the future event is likely to occur of fail to occur, and a reasonable estimate of the loss can be made, an estimated liability is accrued and an expense recorded. If the likelihood is not determinable or an amount cannot be reasonably estimated, the contingency is disclosed in the notes to the financial statements.


(i) Tangible capital assets – All tangible capital assets and leasehold improvements having an initial cost of $1,000 or more are recorded at their acquisition cost.

Amortization of tangible capital assets is done on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful life of the asset as follows:

Asset Class Machinery and equipment Informatics hardware Informatics software Other equipment Motor vehicles Leasehold Improvements Assets under construction

Amortization period 3 to 5 years 3 years 3 to 5 years 15 years 7 years Term of lease Once in service, in accordance with asset type

(j) Measurement uncertainty — The preparation of these financial statements in accordance with Treasury Board accounting policies which are consistent with Canadian generally accepted accounting principles for the public sector requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses reported in the financial statements. At the time of preparation of these statements, management believes the estimates and assumptions to be reasonable. The most significant items where estimates are used are the liability for employee severance benefits and the useful life of tangible capital assets. Actual results could differ from those estimated. Management's estimates are reviewed periodically and, as adjustments become necessary, they are recorded in the financial statements in the year they become known.

3. Parliamentary Appropriations The National Parole Board receives all of its funding through annual Parliamentary appropriations. Items recognized in the statement of operations and the statement of financial position in one year may be funded through Parliamentary appropriations in a prior year, current or a future year. Accordingly, the Board has different net results of operations for the year on a government funding basis than on an accrual accounting basis. The differences are reconciled in the following tables:




Notes to the Financial Statements (Unaudited)

a) Reconciliation of net cost of operations to current year appropriations used:

2006 2005

(in thousands of dollars) Net cost of operations 52,571 42,957Adjustments for Items affecting net cost of operations but not affecting appropriations: Add (Less)

Services received without charge

(5,500) (4,200)Write-down of capital assets (4,932) -Employee severance benefits (943) 81Amortization of tangible capital assets (870) (538)Justice legal fees (218) (130)Prepaid expenses previously charged to appropriation (182) (116)Vacation pay and compensatory leave (173) (65)Revenue not available for spending 719 553Refunds of prior years' expenditures 11 32Other 94 (14)

40,577 38,560Adjustments for items not affecting net cost of operations but affecting appropriations Add: Acquisitions of capital assets 2,211 2,355

Prepayments 53 247Current year appropriations used 42,841 41,162 b) Appropriations provided and used

Vote 50 - Program expenditures 38,546 36,874Statutory amounts 5,207 4,523Total appropriations provided 43,753 41,397Less: Appropriations available for future years 1 6Lapsed appropriations: Program expenditures 911 229Current year appropriations used 42,841 41,162 c) Reconciliation of net cash provided by Government to current year appropriations used

Net cash provided by Government 42,506 37,719Revenue not available for spending 730 585Change in net position in the Consolidated Revenue Fund

Variation in financial assets 280 104Variation in accounts payable and accrued liabilities (900) 2,858Variation in deferred revenue 346 -Other (121) (104)

(395) 2,858Current year appropriations used 42,841 41,162




4. Expenses

The following table presents details of expenses by category:

2006 2005(in thousands of dollars)

Personnel 37,063 33,568Loss on write-off of tangible capital assets (Note 7) 4,932 Professional services 3,065 2,964Accommodation 2,700 2,000Travel and relocation 2,413 2,198Amortization expense 870 538Materials and supplies 776 833Other services 572 433Telecommunication services 359 295Postage, freight, express, and cartage 212 198Rentals 174 138Information services 114 101Miscellaneous expenditures 38 240Total 53,288 43,506 4. Revenues

The following table presents details of revenue by category:


Pardon service fees 713 535Other 4 14Total 717 549 6. Accounts Receivable and Advances The following table presents details of accounts receivable and advances:


Receivables from other government departments 58 398Receivables from External parties 80 25Employee advances 5 5Total 143 428




7. Tangible Capital Assets (in thousands of dollars)

Machinery & equipment

Informatics hardware

Informatics software

Other equipment

Motor vehicles

Leasehold improvements

Assets under construction

Total

Cost Opening Balance 330 2,009 98 801 541 - 6,296 10,075Acquisitions & Transfers 42 446 2,845 114 46 88 (1,370) 2,211Disposals & Write-offs 15 53 - 18 54 - 4,926 5,066Closing Balance

357 2,402 2,943 897 533 88 - 7,220Accumulated amortization

Opening Balance 217 1,397 46 366 240 - - 2,266

Amortization 41 425 262 50 66 26 - 870Disposals & Write-offs 15 53 - 11 54 - - 133

Closing Balance 243 1,769 308 404 252 26 - 3,0022006 Net Book Value 114 633 2,635 493 281 62 - 4,2182005 Net Book Value 113 612 52 435 301 - 6,296 7,809

Amortization expense for the year ended March 31, 2006 is $870 (2005 - $538)

Of the amount of $5,066 in Disposals and Write-offs $4,884 relates to the write-off of the Conditional Release system.

The National Parole Board's delivery of the conditional release program is supported by the automated Offender Management System (OMS), which has been operated by the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) on behalf of both organizations for over ten years. The technology supporting the system became inadequate and obsolete over the years and in 2000, the government approved $47 million to renew this system. Of this $47 million, $4.6 million was provided to NPB to renew its component of the OMS.

The NPB initiated the renewal project for its component of the OMS but problems were later encountered relating to quality, maintainability and performance of the code used to convert the functionality into a new language. Late in 2005/06 it was ascertained that this development work would not result in an asset being put into use nor would it serve as the basis for a new asset. Thus the asset, valued at $4,884 was written off the books.



8. Deferred Revenue

Deferred revenue represents the balance at year-end of unearned revenue stemming from the collection of pardon fees upon receipt of the application. While the fees are received with the application, revenue is recognized only once the screening for eligibility and completeness is carried out.

2006 2005 (in thousands of Opening balance - - Pardon fees received 372 - Fees returned (10) - Revenue recognized (16) - Closing balance 346 -

9. Employee Benefits

(a) Pension benefits: The Board's employees participate in the Public Service Pension Plan,

which is sponsored and administered by the Government of Canada. Pension benefits accrue up to a maximum period of 35 years at a rate of 2 percent per year of pensionable service, times the average of the best five consecutive years of earnings. The benefits are integrated with Canada/Quebec Pension Plans benefits and they are indexed to inflation.

Both the employee and the Board contribute to the cost of the Plan. The 2005/06 expense for the Board amounts to $3,845,235 ($3,285,113 in 2004/05), which represents approximately 2.6 time the contributions by employees.

The Board's responsibility with regard to the Plan is limited to its contributions. Actuarial surpluses or deficiencies are recognized in the financial statements of the Government of Canada, as the Plan's sponsor.

(b) Severance benefits: The Board provides severance benefits to its employees based on eligibility, years of service and final salary. These severance benefits are not pre-funded. Benefits will be paid from future appropriations. Information about the severance benefits measured as at March 31, is as follows:

2006 2005 (in thousands of dollars) Accrued benefit obligation, beginning of year 4,637 4,718 Expense for the year 1,269 339 Benefits paid during the year (325) (420) Accrued benefit obligation, end of year 5,581 4,637





10. Contingent liabilities Claims have been made against the Board in the normal course of operations (conditional release decisions). Legal proceedings for 22 claims in relation to victims, victims' families and offenders totalling approximately $82,000,000 were still pending as at March 31, 2006 ($82,000,000 in 2005). The potential liabilities arising from the cases pending at March 31, 2006 are considered to be minimal by management as the Board is an independent administrative tribunal and is provided with an immunity clause (Section 154) in the Corrections and Conditional Release Act making the likelihood of future loss negligible. Some of these potential liabilities may become actual liabilities when one or more future events occur or fail to occur. The existence and amount of liability depend upon the future outcome of these claims, which are not currently determinable. No accrual for this contingency has been made in the financial statements.

11. Related party transactions

The Board is related as a result of common ownership to all Government of Canada departments, agencies and Crown corporations. The Board enters into transactions with these entities in the normal course of business and on normal trade terms. Also during the year, the Board received services, which were obtained without charge from other Government departments as presented in part (a).

(a) Services provided without charge:

During the year the Board received without charge from other departments, accommodation, legal fees and the employer's contribution to the health and dental insurance plans and worker's compensation. These services without charge have been recognized in the Board's Statement of Operations as follows:

2006 2005 (in thousands of dollars) Accommodation 2,700 2,000 Employer’s contribution to the health insurance plan, dental insurance plan and worker’s compensation

2,300 1,869

Legal services 500 331Total 5,500 4,200

The Government has structured some of its administrative activities for efficiency and cost-effectiveness purposes so that one department performs these on behalf of all without charge. The cost of these services, which include payroll and cheque issuance services provided by Public Works and Government Services Canada are not included as an expense in the Board's Statement of Operations.

Section 111 – Supplementary Information Page. -41-


(b) Payables and receivables outstanding at year-end with related parties:

2006 2005 (in thousands of dollars) Accounts receivable with other government departments and agencies

58 398

Accounts payable to other government departments and agencies 1,214 249


Section IV: Other Items of Interest

1. Legislation Administered by the National Parole Board The Minister has sole responsibility to Parliament for the following Acts: Corrections and Conditional Release Act S.C. 1992, c.20, as amended by S.C. 1995, c.42, S.C.

1997, c.17 and its Regulations Criminal Records Act R.S. 1985, c.C-47 The Minister shares responsibility to Parliament for the following Acts: Criminal Code R.S. 1985, c. C-46 Prisons and Reformatories Act R.S. 1985, c. P-20 Letters Patent constituting the Office of Governor General of Canada (1947)

Canada Gazette, 1947, Part I, Vol. 81, p. 3104, reprinted in R.S. 1985, Appendix II, No. 31

2. Contacts

Office Address

National Office Director, Communications 410 Laurier Avenue West Ottawa, ON Phone: (613) 954-6547 K1A 0R1 Fax: (613) 957-3241

Atlantic Region Regional Director 1045 Main Street Unit 101 Moncton, NB Phone: (506) 851-6345 E1C 1H1 Fax: (506) 851-6926

Quebec Region Regional Director 200 René-Lévesque Blvd. W. 10th Floor, Suite 1001 - West Tower Montreal, QC Phone: (514) 283-4584 H2Z 1X4 Fax: (514) 283-5484

Ontario Region Regional Director 516 O’Connor Drive Kingston, ON Phone: (613) 634-3857 K7P 1N3 Fax: (613) 634-3861

Prairies Region Regional Director 101 – 22nd Street East 6th Floor Saskatoon, SK Phone: (306) 975-4228 S7K 0E1 Fax: (306) 975-5892

Pacific Region Regional Director 32315 South Fraser Way Room 305 Abbotsford, BC Phone: (604) 870-2468 V2T 1W6 Fax: (604) 870-2498

The National Parole Board’s internet site address is: http://www.npb-cnlc.gc.ca/

http://www.npb-cnlc.gc.ca/

Section IV –Supplementary Information Page. -43-

3. Horizontal Initiatives

Horizontal Initiative

1. Name of Horizontal Initiative: Firearms 2. Name of Lead Department(s): Canada Firearms Center

3. Start Date of the Horizontal Initiative: 1995

4. End Date of the Horizontal Initiative Ongoing

5. NPB Funding: $858,000 per year.

6. Description of the Horizontal Initiative: Reduce firearms tragedies, including accidental injuries or death and the criminal use of firearms. 7. Shared Outcome(s): Safer communities

8. Governance Structure(s): Roles/responsibilities set out in legislation (e.g. Firearms Act.)

9. Federal Partners Involved in each Program

10. Names of Programs

11. Total Allocation

12. Forecasted Spending for 2005-06

13. Actual Spending in 2005-06

14. Planned Results for 2005-06

15. Achieved Results in 2005-06

Canada Firearms Centre, RCMP, Public safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada, Justice Department for International Trade, Canada Border Services, Correctional Service Canada, Office of the Privacy Commissioner, Office of Information Commissioner, Treasury Board Secretariat.

(a) Quality conditional release decisions.

N/A

$ 858,000

$ 858,000

Planned spending in 2005/06 was intended to provide NPB with the capacity to manage workloads related to changes in the Criminal Code which support the Firearms initiative. These changes provided longer sentences for firearms convictions and created the need for more conditional release reviews.

In 2005/06, NPB completed over 1400 reviews for offenders with firearms convictions.

Since 1999/00, the Board has completed over 12,100 reviews involving offenders with firearms convictions.


4. Comparison to the Treasury Board Secretariat Special Travel Authorities

Treasury Board Travel Policy: National Parole Board The National Parole Board follows the TBS Special Travel Authorities policy.

Authority:

Coverage:

Principal difference(s) in policy provisions:

Principal financial implications of the difference(s):

Comparison to the Treasury Board Secretariat Special Travel Directive, Rates and Allowances Travel Policy Name: National Parole Board The National Parole Board follows the TBS Special Travel Directives, Rates and Allowances.

Authority:

Coverage:

Principal difference(s) in policy provisions:

Principal financial implications of the difference(s):

Documents

Archived Content Contenu archivé · Note: (HL)* denotes a hyperlink to NPB's web-site . Section I: Overview 1. Chairperson’s Message In May 2006, I returned to the National Parole