Service Performance: Output Class 8- Services to the New Zealand Parole Board

This output class involves the provision of funding for, and administrative, financial and secretariat services to, the New Zealand Parole Board. This assists the New Zealand Parole Board to meet its independent statutory responsibilities.

OUTPUT CLASS STATEMENT: SERVICES TO THE NEW ZEALAND PAROLE BOARD
For the Year Ended 30 June 2006

30/06/05
Actual
($000)

 

30/06/06
Actual
($000)

Main
Estimates
($000)

Supp.
Estimates*
($000)

 

REVENUE

 

 

 

5,434

Crown

5488

5537

5604

0

Other

0

0

0

5,434

Total Revenue

5488

5537

5604

5,356

Total Expenses

5594

5537

5604

78

Net Surplus

(106)

0

0



*These figures also include the following adjustment under Section 26A of the Public Finance Act 1989:

Supp.
Estimates
($000)

Section 26A
Transfer
($000)

Final
Appropriation
($000)

 

5,488

116

5,604



OUTPUT 8.1 Services to the New Zealand Parole Board

This output class involves the provision of administrative, financial and secretariat services to the New Zealand Parole Board.

2004/05

Performance Standard 2005/06

Performance Measure

Actual

Actual

Forecast

Variance

Quantity

 

 

 

 

The number of hearings by the New Zealand Parole Board to be:

8,971

8000

8,000

745

Quality

 

 

 

 

The percentage of offenders or victims notified of an impending hearing at least 10 working days before a hearing:

100%

n/a

95%

0%

The percentage of offenders or victims notified of a Board decision within 10 working days after a hearing:

95%

n/a

95%

0%

The percentage of papers for home detention (deferred sentences) hearings provided to the Board at least five working days before a hearing:

97%

n/a

95%

0%

The percentage of all other papers for each hearing provided to the Board at least 10 working days before a hearing:

95%

n/a

95%

0%

The scheduling of cases to be heard by the Board to be within the timeframe specified in the Parole Act 2002:

100%

n/a

100%

0%



Comment

The volume of home detention hearings reduced as expected due to the 2004 legislative changes relating to home detention. However, this was offset by an increase in parole hearings. There are many reasons for this increase, including the increased prison population.

The total number of hearings during the year was 9% above forecast but declined compared with the previous years.

With regard to the quality measures above, no verifiable recording systems are currently in place to accurately measure performance against these standards. A review of these measures will be undertaken in 2006/07 to determine whether these measures are appropriate and to ensure that systems are in place to accurately record performance against the revised measures resulting from this review.