It’s a program designed to contain the worst of the worst, sexually violent predators who, once released from prison, are likely to strike again. And it costs Virginia taxpayers more than $90,000 per inmate.
But the methods used to identify and restrain predators under the Civil Commitment of Sexually Violent Prisoners program are flawed, according to a state audit released Monday.
The commitment program, one of just 20 nationwide, has provided housing and psychological treatment for sex offenders released from prison since 2003.
State auditors say that the system used to evaluate civil commitment candidates — an actuarial method that evaluates prisoners based on 10 questions, including whether offenders’ victims were young boys and whether they’ve been convicted of prior crimes — can accurately predict the behavior of a large group of offenders, but falls short when it comes to predicting the behavior of individual offenders.
That makes it easier for some to slip through the cracks, auditors say.
One prisoner who molested a 13-year-old girl told a counselor he “would not be able to control his compulsion to have sex with children,” the audit stated. The evaluation process, however, determined the man didn’t qualify for commitment and he was released after completing his sentence, the audit said.
State Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services officials agreed with the audit’s findings and will look for alternate methods to evaluate prisoners.
“We believe the outcomes from implementing the report’s recommendations would have a positive impact,” said department spokeswoman Meghan McGuire.
Auditors say the civil commitment program has grown more quickly than expected — there were about 270 prisoners in the 300-bed program as of August SEmD and their investigation into its inner workings was prompted by Gov. Bob McDonnell’s request to create a second facility just like it. Instead of setting aside funds for that project, the state legislature opted to first take a closer look at the program itself.
Still, auditors say it’s hard to judge the effectiveness of a program that relies almost entirely on preventive measures.
“There clearly are offenders who are sufficiently dangerous that civil commitment is appropriate,” said Justin Brown, a division chief at the commission that conducted the investigation. “There are offenders who it’s difficult to tell whether they’ll re-offend or not SEmD one judge called it an ‘educated guess about future behavior.'”
