Audits of State Compliance Monitoring Systems Presented by Thomas Murphy, State Representative, OJJDP

1
Audits of State Compliance Monitoring
SystemsPresented by Thomas Murphy, State
Representative, OJJDP
2
Session Overview

• Why must OJJDP conduct audits?
• What is a compliance audit?
• The audit process planning, execution, and
  follow-up.
• Common audit findings.

3
Pursuant to Section 204(b)(6) of the JJDP Act of
2002, OJJDP shall

• Provide for the auditing of monitoring
  systems required under this title to review the
  adequacy of such systems.

4
Pursuant to Section 223(a)(14) of the JJDP Act of
2002, States shall Provide for an adequate
system of monitoring jails, detention facilities,
correctional facilities, and nonsecure facilities
to ensure that the requirements of paragraph
(11), paragraph (12), and paragraph (13) are met,
and for annual reporting of the results of such
monitoring to the OJJDP Administrator.
5
What Is a Compliance Audit?

• An in-depth, on-site review and evaluation of a
  States system for compliance monitoring.
• Audits occur a minimum of once every five years.
• OJJDP determines whether a States system is
  adequate.

6
What Is a Compliance Audit? (contd)

• Findings and recommendations are provided.
• Formula Grants funds can be frozen if a States
  compliance monitoring system is determined to be
  inadequate. Future eligibility as a
  Participating State is also jeopardized.

7
Pre-Audit Planning

• OJJDP provides State written notification 60 days
  before the audit requesting written materials.
• The JJ Specialist, Compliance Monitor and State
  Rep. identify facilities to visit.
• Facilities should represent a mix of urban,
  rural, and suburban communities and include
  geographic areas beyond the capital region.

8
Pre-Audit Planning (contd)

• Types of facilities to be visited
• Lockup
• Jail
• Juvenile Detention Center
• Juvenile Correctional Facility

9
Pre-Audit Planning (contd)

• Types of Facilities to be visited
• Court holding facility
• Group home
• Prison

10
Pre-Audit Planning (contd)

• State Compliance Monitor contacts facilities to
  arrange a visit, emphasizing that it is the
  Statenot the facilities themselvesthat is being
  audited.
• State develops a tentative agenda.

11
Pre-Audit Planning (contd)

• The State ensures that each facility will have
  original admissions data available onsite.
• The State agency has all required data available
  for review and ready to carry into the field.

12
Audit Execution1) Entrance interview.2)
Discussion of the State system. Clarification of
any issues that arose in OJJDPs review of
audit materials. 3) Facility visits include
verification of compliance monitoring data
and tour to ensure classification is accurate and
that Separation is adequate.4) Exit
conference.
13
Audit Follow-Up

• OJJDP provides the audited State an official
  findings letter and audit report.
• Findings can be positive or negative.
• Findings ? must be addressed or the State risks
  having its Formula Grants funds frozen.
• Recommendations ? OJJDP strongly recommends that
  the State take action, such that the issue does
  not rise to the level of a finding.

14
Audit Follow-Up (contd)

• State prepares official response, delineating how
  it will address audit findings an
  recommendations.
• OJJDP provides a response to the response,
  designating audit as officially closed or
  indicating the need for further action.

15
Common Audit Findings

• State Compliance Monitors are knowledgeable and
  conscientious about implementing the core
  requirements.
• The State is not performing onsite data
  verification prior to submission of Compliance
  Monitoring report to OJJDP.
• The State has classified a facility, (e.g. a
  Lockup) as nonsecure yet during the OJJDP Audit
  the onsite inspection reveals a cell, cuffing
  bench or cuffing rail.
• The State is not inspecting facilities believed
  to be nonsecure (e.g., lockups, group homes) to
  verify nonsecure status.

16
Common Audit Findings (contd)

• The State is not inspecting secure facilities
  annually.
• The State is not inspecting juvenile correctional
  facilities/training schools to ensure compliance
  with DSO and Separation requirements.
• Facilities are self-reporting violations and the
  State is not adequately verifying self-reports
  for accuracy (e.g. comparing self-reported
  violations against admissions logs).

17
Common Audit Findings (contd)

• The State does not provide adequate documentation
  that VCO requirements have been met.
• The State is not including law enforcement
  facilities that exist in airports, shopping
  malls, and sports stadiums in its monitoring
  universe.

18
Audits of State Compliance Monitoring Systems1.
Questions?2. Thank you!