EXECUTIVE DIGEST

The Violent Offender Incarceration and Truth-in-Sentencing Incentive (VOI/TIS) Grant Program, created under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, assists the states in their efforts to remove violent offenders from the community and encourages states to implement TIS laws that require violent offenders to serve at least 85 percent of the sentence imposed. The Office of Justice Programs, Corrections Program Office, administers the grant program and awards funds to states as formula grants to build or expand correctional facilities and jails that will increase or free-up secure confinement space for persons convicted of violent crimes. Half of the funds are available for Violent Offender Incarceration Grants (VOI) and half for Truth-in-Sentencing Incentive Grants (TIS). The grants have various levels of eligibility primarily based on incarcerating violent offenders and implementing TIS laws. Certain other program and administrative requirements must also be met. The states must apply annually for the grant funds. From fiscal year 1996 through fiscal year 1999, approximately $1.9 billion has been available for awards to the states under the grant program. Fiscal year 2000 is the final year for awards. The states may spend the grant funds through 2004.

From May 4, 1997, through March 31, 1999, we conducted 25 on-site state reviews and issued 25 reports that evaluated the progress of each state in implementing and complying with the requirements of the VOI/TIS Grant Program. The specific objectives of our reviews were to determine whether the states were implementing TIS laws, planning to follow the TIS laws after the grant program ends, increasing bed space for violent offenders, and complying with other financial and programmatic requirements of the grant. To accomplish these objectives, we examined four areas: application information, TIS and state correctional strategies, grant construction projects, and administrative and financial controls.

Based on our reviews of 25 states, we found that the states have implemented and, in most cases, complied with the requirements of the VOI/TIS Grant Program.

• Application Information. Information provided by the states in their grant applications was reliable for grant decision-making by the Office of Justice Programs. The states used their automated inmate tracking systems to help generate the application information. However, the information from some states’ systems required extensive manual verification and correction, which increased the potential for error. To help states with less effective information systems, we recommended that the Office of Justice Programs provide technical assistance in automated data collection and management. The Office of Justice Programs has offered such assistance to the states. The states also adhered to the special conditions of the grant program, such as implementing programs, policies, and procedures for protecting the rights of crime victims, testing inmates for substance abuse, and reporting inmate deaths.
  
  
• Truth-in Sentencing. Truth-in-Sentencing Incentive Grants influenced some states to enact TIS laws. Three of the 18 TIS states we visited said that the federal grant funds were a key influence on their decisions to enact TIS laws. Seven other states said that the grant funds were a partial influence. Overall 15 of the 18 TIS states chose to increase the percentage of time served by violent offenders predominantly because of concern for public safety and public trust in the judicial system. States without TIS laws (that require violent offenders to serve at least 85 percent of the sentence imposed) said the cost of constructing new beds for violent offenders, even with the help of grant funds, was too high. The states also believed their current state laws provided adequate punishment for violent offenders.
  
  
• Correctional Strategies. The states were able to project their future inmate populations and prison capacities, although some states did not have the benefit of automated projection models or did not consider truth-in- sentencing. Based on the projections, the states could identify their prison capacity requirements and plan projects to meet those requirements. To help those states that had expressed difficulty with developing population projections, we recommended that the Office of Justice Programs provide technical assistance to create projection models. The Office of Justice Programs has offered the technical assistance to the states.
  
  
• Grant Construction Projects. The states varied in their progress to increase secure confinement space for violent offenders, which is the primary purpose of the VOI/TIS Grant Program. At the time of our reviews, the majority of projects to build new prisons or add beds to existing prisons were in the planning and design phase. Some projects had progressed to the construction phase, and a few had been completed. In many cases, projects had been delayed pending approval of the projects and appropriation of the grant funds and state matching funds by state legislatures. Also the high cost of projects required some states to stockpile grant funds from year to year until enough funds were available for the projects.
  
  
• Administrative and Financial Controls. With few exceptions, the states had expended grant funds for allowable purposes and had adequate administrative and financial controls to manage and account for the funds. The problems we identified primarily involved insufficient matching funds, unallowable costs, untimely disbursement of funds, and untimely and inaccurate reporting. In those cases, we recommended that the Office of Justice Programs ensure that the states (1) provide the appropriate matching funds for each VOI/TIS project, (2) amend their accounting records to remove any unallowable costs charged to grant funds, (3) develop procedures to ensure that federal cash on hand is the minimum needed for immediate disbursement, and (4) correct inaccuracies in past reports and submit accurate and timely reports in the future. The Office of Justice Programs and the states have been responsive to the recommendations. In the majority of cases, corrective actions have been taken. The Office of Justice Programs is working closely with the states to address the issues.

We also suggested that the Office of Justice Programs provide continued monitoring of the states’ correctional strategies, practice of leasing beds for offenders, and matching funds.

• Correctional Strategies. We suggested that the Office of Justice Programs ensure that states (especially TIS grant recipients) have the capability to monitor prison capacities and population growth to ensure that violent offenders serve a substantial portion of the sentences imposed after the grant programs ends.
  
  
• Leased Beds. Leasing of bed space from private facilities is an allowable use of VOI/TIS grant funds. However, leasing is a short-term and costly approach for adding capacity to a state’s correctional system. We suggested that the Office of Justice Programs encourage states to use VOI/TIS funds for long-term, cost efficient secure housing for violent offenders.
  
  
• Matching Funds. We suggested that the Office of Justice Programs ensure states provide the required matching funds for each VOI/TIS funded project. As part of the states’ budget processes, the states allocate matching funds to a project based on an estimated total project cost. However, the matching funds are not required until the project is completed and the total project cost can change over time. Therefore, we suggested that the Office of Justice Programs ensure matching funds have been provided based on the final total project cost.

#####