AUTHORITY TO CONTRACT FOR SUPERVISORY AFTERCARE OF DRUG DEPENDENT OFFENDERS - HEARING BEFORE THE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATIVE LAW ..., HR 12290, 95TH CONGRESS, 2ND SESSION, JUNE 8, 1978

• NCJ Number: 61045
• Author(s): ANON
• Date Published: 1978
• Length: 30 pages
• Corporate Author: US Congress
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

OFFICIALS FROM THE BUREAU OF PRISONS AND THE DIVISION OF PROBATION, U.S. COURTS, TESTIFIED ON HR 12290 WHICH WOULD TRANSFER RESPONSIBILITY FOR AFTERCARE PROGRAMS FOR DRUG OFFENDERS FROM THE FORMER TO THE LATTER AGENCY.

Abstract

NOTING THAT 30 PERCENT OF FEDERAL PRISONERS WERE NARCOTIC ADDICTS, A BUREAU OFFICIAL IMPROVED SERVICES AND SUPERVISION OF PAROLEES WITH DRUG PROBLEMS WERE NECESSARY IN COMBATTING DRUG ABUSE. SUCH SERVICES EMPHASIZE URINE SURVEILLANCE TO DETECT DRUG ABUSE AND COUNSELING, BUT MIGHT INCLUDE VOCATIONAL GUIDANCE, DETOXIFICATION, AND THERAPY. THE BUREAU OF PRISONS NOW HAS CONTRACTING AND SUPERVISORY AUTHORITY FOR AFTERCARE PROGRAMS, BUT OFFENDERS ARE SUPERVISED BY PROBATIONS OFFICERS OF THE U.S. COURTS, RESULTING IN DUPLICATION OF EFFORTS AND INEFFICIENCY. THE CHIEF OF THE DIVISION OF PROBATION, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF U.S. COURTS, EXPRESSED RESERVATIONS ABOUT THE BILL AND STATED SUCH PROGRAMS WERE LOGICALLY A FUNCTION OF THE EXECUTIVE, NOT THE JUDICIAL BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT. BECAUSE DRUG OFFENDERS REQUIRE MORE SUPERVISION THAN OTHER PAROLEES, THIS WITNESS WAS CONCERNED THAT TRANSFER OF THE AFTERCARE PROGRAM TO HIS AGENCY WOULD OVERBURDEN PAROLE OFFICERS' WORKLOADS AND INCREASE EXPENSES. HE RECOMMENDED MODIFICATIONS IN THE BILL TO ELIMINATE REQUIREMENTS OF COMPETITIVE BIDDING AND TO APPROPRIATE ADDITIONAL FUNDS. QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PRESENT AFTERCARE PROGRAM ELICITED THE INFORMATION THAT WHILE THE BUREAU OF PRISONS HAD ONLY ONE OFFICER IN THE LOS ANGELES AREA CHARGED WITH SUPERVISING THESE CONTRACTS, THE U.S. COURTS HAD 115 OFFICERS ASSIGNED TO THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. BOTH WITNESSES SAID THAT THE CREATION OF A THIRD AGENCY WOULD ONLY INCREASE PROBLEMS. MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE EXPRESSED CONCERN THAT NO AGENCY REALLY WANTED THE BURDENSOME RESPONSIBILITY FOR SUPERVISING DRUG AFTERCARE PROGRAMS, AND MAINTAINED THAT EFFORTS HAD TO BE CONSOLIDATED AND IMPROVED IN ORDER TO SERVE A LARGE NUMBER PAROLEES. ONE REPRESENTATIVE EMPHASIZED THAT THE BILL WOULD IMPROVE DELIVERY OF AN EXISTING PROGRAM BUT MIGHT DUPLICATE SERVICES OF LOCAL AGENCIES; HE REQUESTED A COST ESTIMATE FOR ADMINISTERING THE PROGRAM FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE U.S. COURTS WHICH THIS IS APPENDED TO THE TESTIMONY. (MJM)