Then, fix it

The state has asked an outside agency to study its probation and parole operation -- again. It will take leadership to fix the mess

It's no surprise that Theodis Beck, secretary of the N.C. Department of Correction, turned to the National Institute of Corrections for help in assessing problems in the probation and parole offices that are under his department's purview.

The institute, an arm of the U.S. Department of Justice, knows North Carolina's system well. In fact, it conducted a similar study, for the General Assembly, just four years ago, and found a series of deficiencies needing attention.

It will hardly be a surprise if the institute, in a follow-up study, finds many of the same problems. Unfortunately, the legislature has taken few steps to improve the division of community corrections (which handles probation, parole, community service and other post-conviction programs) since the previous study was wrapped up.

It won't take much work to discover that the state has problems to solve or even to pinpoint some of the specific ones. The challenge is to provide leadership on the issue, leadership that must come both from the legislature and Governor Easley.

Beck is forced to seek help because an investigation by division Director Robert Guy found shoddy oversight of ex-inmates by the Wake and Durham offices.

The investigation was made after two young men, under the supervision of the offices, were charged with killing UNC-Chapel Hill student Eve Carson. One had had no contact with his probation officer for a year. The other man's probation officer had been on the job seven months without receiving basic training to make home visits. One of the suspects also is charged in the death of Duke graduate student Abhijit Mahato.

Beck has asked the institute to study urban offices, but it's reasonable to think that low pay, high rates of turnover and a lack of training affects probation offices covering rural areas as well. In other words, a good look at these operations throughout the state is called for.

Regardless of the findings, state leaders will need to follow through, which didn't happen after the 2004 study. The legislature must make sure that the division gets the money and oversight it needs to protect the public and give lawbreakers support in turning their lives around. Spending huge sums on new prisons may be easier politically, but money invested in post-release supervision (or in some cases supervision in lieu of confinement) also can have a big impact on public safety.

For his part, Easley so far hasn't brought his legitimate power as chief executive sufficiently to bear on the problems. He can do more by way of insisting that fixing those problems becomes one of state government's top priorities. He and his administration must turn up the heat as legislators prepare to return to Raleigh next month. Supervising offenders on probation and parole is too important a function to be saddled with obsolete technology, low staff pay and overwhelming case loads.