A Follow-up Audit Report on the Department of Criminal Justice's Complaint Resolution and Investigation Functions
April 2012
Report Number 12-027
Overall Conclusion
The Department of Criminal Justice (Department) fully or substantially implemented 22 (96 percent) of 23 recommendations that auditors selected for follow up from An Audit Report on the Department of Criminal Justice's Complaint Resolution and Investigation Functions (State Auditor's Office Report No. 09-004, September 2008). Specifically, of the 23 recommendations selected for follow-up audit work:
- The Department fully or substantially implemented six recommendations regarding its offender grievance process, and its implementation of one recommendation regarding user access controls for its Offender Grievance Case Tracking System is incomplete/ongoing.
- The Department fully implemented six recommendations regarding its medical grievance process and its Health Services Division's Patient Liaison Program.
- The Department fully or substantially implemented five recommendations regarding its Ombudsman Program.
- The Department fully implemented five recommendations regarding its Office of the Inspector General investigative processes and its Safe Prisons Program.
While the Department has made significant progress in implementing most of the prior audit recommendations, it should continue its efforts to improve offender grievance and Ombudsman Program processes. Specifically:
- The Department does not have a sufficient process to review users' access to its Offender Grievance Case Tracking System on a regular basis. Auditors determined that at least 16 users who were no longer employed by the Department still had active user IDs for that system. (During this follow-up audit, after auditors brought it to the Department's attention, the Department removed the access rights to its Offender Grievance Case Tracking System for another 18 individuals who no longer required access.)
- The Department did not consistently maintain documentation of training for selected grievance staff.
- The Department did not consistently notify the appropriate personnel about emergency grievances.
- The Department did not have a documented assessment of staffing and workload for the Parole Division Ombudsman Office.