Report 2011-129 Data Reliability Assessments

To identify the number of juvenile offenders within the adult prison population for fiscal years 2003-04 through 2010-11.

To determine the number of juvenile offenders tried as adults and sent to state prison for fiscal years 2003-04 through 2010-11.

Not Sufficiently Reliable—We performed data-set verification procedures and did not identify any issues.

We performed electronic testing of key data elements and identified an area of concern related to our audit objectives. Specifically, we identified a significant number of incomplete offense dates for offenders in the OBIS system. Without complete offense date information, we were unable to determine whether offenders were juveniles at the time they committed their offenses. As a result, we were not able to use OBIS to identify the number of juvenile offenders within the adult prison population or to identify the number of juveniles tried as adults and sent to state prison for fiscal years 2003-04 through 2010-11.

We conducted a separate review of selected Corrections' system controls, which included general and business process application controls. During this review, we identified significant deficiencies in Corrections' general controls over its information systems. General controls support the functioning of business process application controls; both are needed to ensure complete and accurate information processing. If the general controls are inadequate, the business process application controls are unlikely to function properly and could be overridden. Due to persuasive weaknesses in Corrections' general controls, we did not perform any testing of the business process application controls. Consequently, until Corrections implements adequate general controls over its information systems, the completeness, accuracy, validity, and confidentiality of its data will continue to be at risk.

To identify the number of juvenile offenders supervised by the Division of Juvenile Justice (Juvenile Justice) who committed certain serious, violent, or sexual offenses and the number of juvenile offenders who committed non-serious and nonviolent offenses for fiscal years 2003-04 through 2010-11.

To calculate the number of juvenile offenders within the adult prison population
for fiscal years 2003-04 through 2010-11.

To determine the number of juveniles tried as adults and sent to state prison for fiscal years 2003-04 through 2010-11.

Not Sufficiently Reliable—We performed data-set verification procedures and electronic testing of key data elements and did not identify any issues.

The OBITS data captures information on all juvenile offenders who have been supervised by Juvenile Justice. However, OBITS' data do not capture information on juvenile offenders who were tried as adults and sent directly to an adult prison without spending time in Juvenile Justice facilities. As a result, we were not able to use OBITS to identify the number of juvenile offenders within the adult prison population and categorize them by the type of crime committed, nor could we use OBITS to identify the number of juveniles tried as adults and sent to state prison for fiscal years 2003-04 through 2010-11.

We recently conducted a separate review of selected Corrections' system controls, which included general and business process application controls. During this review, we identified significant deficiencies in Corrections' general controls over its information systems. General controls support the functioning of business process application controls; both are needed to ensure complete and accurate information processing. If the general controls are inadequate, the business process application controls are unlikely to function properly and could be overridden. Due to persuasive weaknesses in Corrections' general controls, we did not perform any testing of the business process application controls. Consequently, until Corrections implements adequate general controls over its information systems, the completeness, accuracy, validity, and confidentiality of its data will be at risk.

To determine the dispositions for juveniles tried as adults for fiscal years 2003-04 through 2010-11.

Not Sufficiently Reliable—We experienced trouble in completing data-set verification procedures due to the fact that Justice counted the records in the criminal history system tables that it provided to us before it actually extracted the files from the system. Since the criminal history system is a live system, it is constantly updating. As a result, many of the record counts Justice provided to us do not match the number of records in the tables we used. They are, however, reasonably close.

We did not conduct accuracy and completeness testing on the data because Justice receives the data in the criminal history system from local law enforcement agencies, district attorney offices, and courts throughout California, making such testing impractical.

Many juvenile offenders in the criminal history system were erroneously categorized as having received adult dispositions. During our fieldwork, the assistant bureau chief in Justice's Bureau of Criminal Information and Analysis indicated that inconsistencies in training and procedural documentation, coupled with a heavy workload and high turnover, have led to Justice's technicians assigning adult disposition codes to juvenile records. In addition, Justice indicated that some local law enforcement agencies submit juvenile dispositions using adult disposition codes. However, Justice was unable to provide us with an example of an incorrect submission.

To determine the total number of first-time and repeat juvenile offenders in each county for fiscal years 2003-04 through 2010-11.

To determine the number of first-time and repeat juvenile offenders in each county who had their cases direct filed or remanded to adult court for fiscal years 2003-04 through 2010-11.

Undetermined Reliability—We performed data-set verification procedures and electronic testing of key data elements and did not identify any issues.

We did not conduct accuracy and completeness testing on the data because the Department of Justice receives the data in the JCPSS from 57 of 58 counties' probation departments located throughout California, making such testing impractical.