Orrice oF THE GOVERNOR State Carmo MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA 36130 Kay Ivey (334) 242-7100 GOVERNOR or Fax: (334) 242-3282 STATE OF ALABAMA November 29, 2018 Via e-mail Lyn Head, Chair Clifford Walker, Associate Member Dwayne Spurlock, Associate Member Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles P.O. Box 302405 Montgomery, AL 36130 Dear Board Members: We write in response to the corrective action plan you submitted in response to Executive Order No. 716. The plan, to be sure, contains several positive features. Among these are its stated “commit{ment] to fulfilling [the Board’s] publie safety role”; its expectation that Board employees will “perform their duties with the highest professionalism”; and its expectation that Board employees will be “responsive to crime victims, law enforcement, inmate families, and all stakeholders.” The plan also forthrightly acknowledges “concerns regarding public trust in Board operations, procedures, and performance.” These statements—along with several of the plan’s specific components, such as the plan to increase the minintum experience required of institutional parole officers—represent an expression of good faith that we acknowledge and appreciate. Overall, however, the plan leaves us with too many unanswered questions about whether ‘and how the Board will make good on these worthy promises. Many of our questions relate to the adequacy and specificity of the proposals included in yout plan. Others relate to issues or proposals not mentioned in your plan—including many that Executive Order No. 716 specifically asked you to address, But there is one question that demands an answer above all others: Which external stakeholders, if any, did you consult in developing your plan? The plan as written does not speak to this issue. And that omission by itself raises questions about the plan's ability to restore public confidence in our parole system as contemplated by the executive order. Our letter proceeds as follows. First, it identifies unanswered questions pertaining to each of the four areas of concern identified in the executive order—(1) ensuring excellence in executive leadership, (2) cultivating a culture of respect towards victims and law enforcement, (3) ensuring adequate preparation for parole hearings, and (4) maintaining supervision of parolees. Then, it identifies the next steps—including four specific modifications we call on the Board to make to its pplan and a request for answers, as soon as possible, to our many questions. As you will see, there is a lot of work to be done to restore public confidence in the Board’s work.Parole Board Members November 29, 2018 Page 2 1. Unanswered Questions A. Ensuring excellence in executive leadership 1. The executive order directed the Board to “address what changes should be made, if any, to the Board’s senior executive leadership.” The Boards plan, however, does not address this issue. a. Why does the Board’s plan not address this issue? And to reiterate: What changes should be made, if any, to the Board’s senior executive leadership? If no changes need to be made, why? Regardless, how did the Board reach its conclusion on this issue? b. The Board’s plan does say that the Board’s senior executive leadership professionals “collectively[] have over 100 years of service” to the agency. In the Boards view, is longevity itself evidence of satisfactory performance? 2. The executive order directed the Board to “address what changes should be made, if any, to the Board’s . . . organizational structure.” The Board's plan, however, does not address this issue. a. Why does the Board’s plan not address this issue? And to reiterate: What changes should be made, if any, to the Board’s organizational structure? If no changes need to be made, why? Regardless, how did the Board reach its conclusion on this issue? b. Beyond merely addressing this issue, has the Board considered asking the State Personne! Department to conduct « position audit to ensure that the agency has the right number of employees and that those employees are most efficiently organized? If the Board has not considered requesting such an audit, why not? 3. The executive order directed the Board to “address what changes should be made, if any, to the Board’s . ..employee-morale programs.” The Board’s plan, however, does not address this issue. Why not? And to reiterate: What changes should be made, ifany, to the Board’s employee-morale programs? If no changes need to be made, why? Regardless, how did the Board reach its conclusions on this issue? Has the Board conducted a survey or study to evaluate employee morale? Should it? 4. The executive order directed the Board to “address what changes should be made, if any, to the Board’s . Board’s plan, however, does not address this issue. processes for ongoing self-evaluation and improvement.” TheParole Board Members November 29, 2018 Page 3 ‘a. Why does the Board's plan not address this issue? And to reiterate: What changes should be made, if any, to the Board’s self-evaluation processes? If no changes need to be made, why? Regardless, how did the Board reach its conclusion on this issue? b. Beyond merely addressing this issue, has the Board considered setting specific, annual goals for the agency that can be publicly measured and evaluated? What about for the Board members themselves? What about for the Executive Director? If the Board has not considered such a goal-setting process, why not? ¢. Beyond merely addressing this issue, has the Board considered instituting an evaluation process for the Board members? What about for the Executive Director? By what criteria should the Board members and/or Executive Director be evaluated? And who should be involved in conducting any evaluations? What should happen if the evaluations report less-than-satisfactory performance? If the Board has not considered establishing such an evaluation process, why not? 4d. The Boatd’s plan, dated November 14, 2018, says that the Board's executive leadership team’s next meeting would not occur until November 28, 2018— ‘two weeks following the submission of the plan. How often does the executive leadership team meet? Is it meeting frequently enough to address the pressing issues that confront the Board? 5. Although strictly speaking the Board’s plan does discuss the issue of leadership development and continuing education, that discussion, by and large, simply describes the Board’s current leadership-development and continuing-education programs. And even then, it does not evaluate how the Board’s current approach to training will address the specific problems that led to the issuance of the executive order. So, to reiterate: What changes should be made, if any, to the Boards leadership-development ‘and continuing-education programs? If no changes need to be made, why? Regardless, how did the Board reach its conclusion on this issue? 6. Are there leadership consulting resources outside your agency—such as the State Personnel Department or former Board members—whose help you could enlist to improve the Board's executive leadership?