Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Probation Staffing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears Dept. of Corrections report: 54 probation vacancies, statewide caseload average 107 per officer; pay plan being drafted
Summary
Department of Corrections Community Corrections told the committee it currently has about 54 vacancies in probation officer positions, an average statewide caseload of roughly 107 per officer, and that low starting pay is a factor; the governor’s pay plan is "currently being drafted," a governor's office representative said.
Committee members pressed the Department of Corrections’ Community Corrections staff about probation officer vacancies and caseloads, and received an update on the status of the governor’s pay plan.
A Department of Corrections representative told the committee, “Yes, sir. We're still having trouble filling some of the positions. I think we're currently, was it 54 positions down?” and later confirmed, “Yes, sir. We're currently 54 positions down.” The representative said the agency is budgeted for 503 positions and reported a statewide average caseload of about 107 probationers per officer.
Why it matters: high vacancy levels and elevated caseloads can affect supervision of people on probation; committee members asked about barriers to recruitment and retention and the status of a statewide pay plan intended to address compensation issues.
Committee members and agency staff discussed pay levels as a recruitment barrier. The Corrections representative said starting pay for probation officers is low and cited a starting salary of $32,405, adding that the agency is working on pay‑plan adjustments: “They're working on getting a salary up.”
Committee leadership asked Miss Barnhill from the governor’s office for the status of the pay plan. Miss Barnhill said, “It is currently being drafted. I think the finishing touches are going on it probably today or tomorrow and then we'll wait for it to be filed at that point in time.” Committee members noted prior delays in receiving the pay plan and requested timely filing and notification to the committee when it is submitted.
No formal action was taken; the exchange was part of the committee’s review of departmental reports.
