BOP Lacked Written Policies and Procedures for Processing Requests for Lateral Transfers

BOP has no written policies for lateral transfers and provides no guidance  to facilities on how to process requests for lateral transfers or criteria for  granting such requests. Requests for lateral transfers are generally handled  on a case-by-case basis, and the processes and criteria used for granting  those requests varied across facilities in our review. We have previously reported that agencywide policies  and procedures help ensure consistent treatment when agencies are  geographically dispersed. Without such documentation, BOP was  not able to determine BOP-wide the number of staff who requested lateral  transfers, the number of times an employee requested a transfer, the  number of requests approved or denied, or the reasons for denial. At the facility level, if the warden at the employee’s current  facility decided not to forward the request or the warden at the desired  facility denied the request, BOP had no formal process for  reconsideration. The  absence of BOP-wide policies and procedures for lateral transfers  diminishes BOP’s ability to ensure consistent treatment of staff across  BOP’s 114 facilities in 6 regions. As part of a cost-reduction  strategy involving temporary assignments that began in 2004, in 2005 BOP  designated certain posts as “mission critical,” that is, assignments that  were deemed essential for the safe and secure operations of its facilities  and would be vacated only in rare circumstances. The mission critical post  initiative was intended to reduce facilities’ reliance on overtime and non- correctional services staff, both of which had typically been used for  temporary assignments. BOP generally does not review data on  temporary assignments at any level. Such an evaluation would have been consistent with  both the Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government,  which provide that federal agencies are to employ internal control  activities, such as top-level review, to help ensure that management’s  directives are carried out and resources are effectively and efficiently  used, and BOP’s Management Control and Program Review Manual,  which lays out the basic components of its system of management  controls, which include assessing program performance regularly. Manual Review of Temporary Assignments Shows That BOP Facilities Left Mission Critical Posts Unassigned and Relied on Overtime and Non- Correctional Services Staff to Varying Degrees

Our review of BOP’s management of temporary assignments included  determining how BOP temporarily assigned staff, specifically the extent to  which the facilities in our review left mission critical posts unassigned and  relied on overtime and non-correctional services staff for temporary  assignments. Conclusions

BOP does not have written policies and procedures for managing lateral  transfers. Without such assessments, BOP is not employing internal  control activities specified in federal standards and BOP policy and,  therefore, cannot determine whether it is achieving the desired cost  savings or determine the effect, if any, of unassigned mission critical posts  on the safety and security of its facilities. Recommendations for Executive Action

We recommend that the Attorney General direct the Director of BOP to    develop and implement specific policies and procedures for administering  employee requests for lateral transfers, including the collection of data on  such requests and their outcomes and the development of a system of  oversight to ensure the consistent treatment of BOP staff and    systematically assess temporary assignments to ensure that BOP is  meeting the objectives of the mission critical post initiative and effectively  and efficiently using resources. Staff who made major contributions are listed in  appendix V.

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Our objectives were to identify whether BOP had policies and procedures  and how it assessed the management of those policies and procedures for  (1) permanent reassignments of BOP employees between correctional  facilities and (2) temporary assignments of BOP employees within a  correctional facility. We interviewed the relevant officials at BOP’s central and regional offices,  and at each of the selected facilities.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Department of Justice's Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) is responsible for the custody and care of more than 202,000 federal offenders with approximately 35,000 employees, almost half of whom are correctional officers, dispersed across BOP's 114 correctional facilities in 6 regions. In response to a request, GAO identified whether BOP had policies and procedures and how it assessed the management of those policies and procedures for (1) employee-requested lateral transfers of BOP employees between correctional facilities and (2) day-to-day changes in correctional services or temporary assignments of BOP employees within a correctional facility. GAO reviewed available documentation on BOP's policies and procedures on lateral transfers and temporary assignments. GAO also interviewed officials from BOP's central and regional offices and seven facilities selected on the basis of the number of staff; at least one facility was selected from within each of BOP's six regions.

What GAO Found

BOP does not have written policies and procedures on lateral transfers of staff. Each correctional facility evaluates requests for lateral transfers on a case-by-case basis. Typically, when an employee requests a lateral transfer to another facility, the warden at the employee's current facility determines whether to forward the request to the desired facility's warden. The processes for requesting a lateral transfer and the criteria for forwarding, granting, or denying such requests varied across the facilities GAO reviewed, and generally no documentation on decisions reached or actions taken was maintained. Further, BOP does not systematically review decisions concerning these requests at any level. As a result, BOP cannot determine the number of requests for lateral transfers, the outcome of these requests, or whether requests were handled consistently within or among facilities. GAO has previously reported that agencywide policies and procedures help ensure consistent treatment of staff when agencies have geographically dispersed locations. Other Department of Justice law-enforcement components have written policies, procedures, and a review process concerning requests for lateral transfers. Unlike lateral transfers, BOP has written policies and procedures on how facilities are to temporarily assign staff to fill in for absences or to meet other needs that arise in a facility. However, BOP has not systematically assessed how facilities are managing temporary assignments. As part of a costreduction strategy affecting temporary assignments, in 2005, BOP designated mission critical posts, that is, assignments that were deemed essential for the safe and secure operations of its facilities and that would be vacated only in rare circumstances. The mission critical post initiative was intended to reduce facilities' reliance on overtime and non-correctional services staff, who had typically been used for temporary assignments. A memorandum from the Assistant Director of Correctional Programs described how each facility was to gather information for 6 months on overtime and staffing under the mission critical post initiative and how BOP would evaluate the effectiveness of the initiative. However, BOP conducted no such evaluation. BOP officials also generally do not review temporary assignments at any level, including the effect of leaving mission critical posts unassigned. According to the Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, federal agencies are to employ internal control activities, such as top-level review, to help ensure that management's directives are carried out and to determine if agencies are effectively and efficiently using resources. Without assessing its mission critical post initiative and data on temporary assignments, BOP does not know whether it is efficiently and effectively using staff for temporary assignments or achieving the desired cost savings. Also, without reviewing the effect of leaving mission critical posts unassigned, BOP cannot assess the effect, if any, of unassigned posts on the safety and security of its facilities.