BOP report on staff recruitment, relocation, and retention incentives, FY2017–FY2021

EFTA00141354¶

Summary of BOP Incentives¶

BOP offers Recruitment, Relocation, and Retention incentives to its staff. Below is a high-level overview of BOP incentive spending from FY17 – FY21.¶

• BOP spent a minimum of $3.6K and a maximum of $42.7K per employee for recruitment incentives

• BOP spent $19.9M on a total of 2,612 recruitment incentives

• BOP spent a minimum of $4.5K and a maximum of $43K per employee for relocation incentives

• The top positions receiving recruitment incentives include GS 5/6 Correctional Officers ($9.5M), GS 7 Senior Officers ($3.4 M), and RNs ($2.1M)

• BOP spent $7.3M on a total of 544 relocation incentives

• The top positions receiving relocation incentives include Lieutenants ($2.6M), Health Services Administrators ($199K), and GS-8 Senior Officer Specialists ($231K)

• BOP spent $166.6M on a total of 21,744 retention incentives

• BOP spent a minimum of $826 and a maximum of $43K for retention incentives

• The top positions receiving retention incentives include GS8 Senior Officer Specialists ($17.7M), GS7 Senior Officers ($14.6M), and RNs ($16.8M)

*Relocation incentives are separate from relocation reimbursement. A relocation incentive is compensation offered in addition to relocation reimbursement. This analysis did not examine relocation reimbursements.¶

23¶

EFTA00141355¶

Overview of Insights¶

BOP’s investment in staff incentives has increased from 2017, but this investment does not appear to have strong correlations to reducing staff separations.¶

Staff separations are not associated with incentive spending¶

There is no strong correlation between incentive spending and staff separations ($R^2=0.004$)¶

Overall, incentive spending has increased since FY17¶

Across all types of incentives, payments have increased from $22.5M in FY17 to nearly $62M in FY21¶

Recruitment spending has increased and has primarily targeted entry level Correctional Officers¶

Recruitment spending has remained at $6.9M and has focused on bringing in new Correctional Officers¶

Relocation incentives are seldomly used¶

Relocation incentives only account for $7.3M and account for only 3.5% of all incentive spending¶

Most incentive money is spent on retention incentives¶

Out of the total $193M on all incentives, $166.6M was spent on retention incentive, representing 85% of total spent¶

Retention incentive compensation can fluctuate for the same position at the same institution¶

Some positions at the same institution can range as much as 19% in retention incentives¶

24¶

EFTA00141356¶

Recruitment & Relocation Incentive Usage¶

BOP has increased spending for recruitment and relocation incentives since FY17. Summary below reflects the years of FY17 – FY21.¶

Recruitment 600%¶

increase in total spending for recruitment incentives (from $980K in FY17 to $6.9M in FY21).¶

700%¶

increase in recruitment incentive payments to GS 5/6 Correctional Officers since FY17.¶

2. 8%

of staff received recruitment incentives across all regions. The Western Region distributes the greatest number of recruitment incentives (5% of all staff receive a recruitment incentive).¶

2X¶

more total incentive spending from FY17 to FY21.¶

Total spending across all incentives has more than doubled in the last five years, from $21M to $51M.¶

Relocation

4%

¶

of total incentive spending was spent on relocation incentives.¶

$$2.4\text{M}$$¶

in relocation incentives for Lieutenants. Lieutenants received more in relocation incentives than any other position in corrections.¶

544¶

total relocation incentives distributed. USP Thomson distributed the greatest number of relocation incentives (67 total).¶

25¶

EFTA00141357¶

Retention Incentive Usage – Findings and Insights¶

Retention incentives offer compensation to entice existing staff to continue employment with BOP and delay separation or retirement.¶

Key Findings¶

Retention incentives are used frequently, especially in the Western region and focus on Senior Officer Specialists¶

• Retention incentives are used frequently

• Retention incentives were used 21K times from FY17-FY21

• The Western region uses the most retention incentives

• About half of all retention incentives used in FY17-FY21 focused on the Western region

• The position that receives the largest amount of retention spending is GS-8 Senior Officer Specialists

$17.7M was spent for GS-8 Senior Officer Specialists from FY17-FY21¶

26¶

EFTA00141358¶

Connection: Retention Incentives Not Associated with Staff Separations¶

Retention incentive spending does not appear to correlate to trends of staff separations.¶

Separation Rate vs. Retention Incentive Spending¶

Key Findings¶

Each dot represents per year per region¶

Retention incentives do not appear to reduce staff separations¶

• Average per staff spending is highest in the Mid-Atlantic and lowest in the Western Region

However, the Western region spends the most in total on retention incentives. The Mid-Atlantic region spends almost double on retention incentives per staff compared to the Western region¶

Retention incentives do not appear to be effective at reducing staff separations¶

There is no strong correlation between incentive spending and staff separations—the $ R^{2} $ value is.004- Meaning it is not significant enough to conclude that there is a strong relationship¶

27¶

EFTA00141359¶

Connection: Unclear if Current Retention Incentives Are Cost Effective¶

It is unclear what level of retention incentive are cost effective relative to the cost of hiring.¶

Key Findings¶

BOP may be using retention incentives when it may be more cost-effective to hire new staff¶

• BOP uses retention incentives when it may be cheaper just to hire new staff. However, BOP should further investigate its own per capita cost of hiring

External research indicated that the cost to hire new employee was $4.1K. However, a deeper analysis of BOP’s cost of hiring is required to understand at what cost point incentives make sense to retain staff.¶

Nearly half of non-retirement staff separations exit survey respondents cite their inability to receive a retention incentives as their reason for leaving¶

However, survey response rate was limited with only 433 respondents from FY17-FY20¶

*Source: Automatic Data Processing (ADP)¶

28¶

EFTA00141360¶

Connection: Retention Incentives Vary Across Institutions¶

The percentage of retention incentives offered for specialized positions vary, but retention incentives remain relatively consistent for Correctional Officers.¶

Key Findings¶

Retention incentives vary within BOP positions¶

• Assistant Food Service Administrators retention incentives have the largest retention incentive variance

• 124 retention incentives given to Food Service Administrators ranged from 1% to 32%, but most were between 5-15%

• Most Correctional Officers who receive retention incentives are awarded between 10-15% of their salary

674 Correctional Officers were awarded retention incentives from FY17-FY21¶

Connection¶

For your awareness, retention incentives vary for the same position across institutions, but they also vary for the same position at the same institution.¶

29¶

EFTA00141361¶

Connection: Retention Incentives Vary Within Institutions¶

Retention incentives can vary for the same position, even within the same institution.¶

Drug Abuse Prog Coord. At Memphis FCI¶

Registered Nurse at FCI Tucson¶

*The Associate Warden at FCI Jesup was only temporarily assigned and was soon thereafter appointed to Chief Psychologist¶

Key Findings¶

Retention incentives can vary up to almost 20% for the same position for the same institution¶

Variation in retention incentives indicates that BOP may benefit from incentive policy standardization¶

Although most positions at each institution have similar retention incentives, there still exists variation for the same position at the same institution. Without clear guidance on why such variation exists, it is recommended that the bureau further investigate why this is the case.¶

Ranges were observed across all disciplines within various institutions¶

There are nearly 60 positions at BOP that have a range of retention incentives for the same position at the same institution¶

30¶

EFTA00141362¶

Case Study: North Central Region (NCR) Psychology Services¶

The North Central Region recently evaluated its own incentive structure for positions in its Psychology Services division. NCR created a transparent, standardized retention incentive scheme to better retain staff that may offer a path forward for the rest of BOP.¶

$$168\text{K}$$¶

Amount of money saved applying model to current staff¶

96¶

NCR psychologists eligible for incentive award after licensure¶

Challenge¶

$$1.13\text{M}$$¶

Incentives at BOP have been distributed at the Warden’s discretion and as a result, has caused a lack of standardization of retention incentives across BOP. The Psychology Services Administrator for the North Central Region (NCR) was tasked with analyzing the incentive structure for the entire region. The evaluation found that the current incentives model resulted in a wide range of incentive payments offered for similar positions across the region.¶

Estimated costs for NCR psychology services applied to current staff¶

Solution¶

The goal of this model is to create a system of retention that retains highly qualified staff and motivates entry level staff to gain the knowledge, skills, and abilities to promote into positions of increasing levels of difficulty and responsibility in the agency. The model applies retention incentives through a standardized and transparent incentive scheme for all staff. The model relies on both specific “institutional factors” and specific individual factors (location, difficulty filling positions, security level, level of specialization, department head) to determine incentive amount. It also requires that staff be licensed to receive an incentive.¶

Impact¶

Anecdotally, some retention incentive recipients reported that they will delay their retirement as a result of the new incentive structure. Although the number of staff receiving incentives increased from 66 to 132 out of 137 staff, the new structure saves $168K. Additionally, it also promotes psychology licensure by requiring licenses to be eligible to receive a retention incentive.¶

31¶

EFTA00141363¶

Appendix¶

33¶

EFTA00141364¶

Summary of Analysis & Findings¶

Below is summary of all findings informed by the analysis conducted.¶

OVERTIME¶

• Overtime usage (hours) has increased significantly from 2017 to 2020

• In 2019, standard custody surpassed outside hospital by 37% for the reasons for working overtime

• It cannot be concluded that incidents $ _{1} $ are a direct affect of overtime

• Institutions with increased usage of overtime could be an indicator of increased sick and AWOL leave usage

AUGMENTATION¶

• The 2021 average augmentation usage is approximately 86% higher from the 2017 average

• Incidents are not associated with augmentation hours

• Sick and AWOL leave usage is not associated with augmentation hours

• Vacancies are not directly associated with augmentation hours

Recruitment¶

$$\text{1 Inmate incident data is a consolidated report of allegations, verified assaults, and minor incidents for inmate-on-inmate and inmate-on-staff incidents.}$$¶

• GS-5/6¶

Correctional Officers¶

receive the most recruitment incentives¶

INCENTIVES¶

Relocation¶

• Lieutenants received $2.4M more in relocation incentives than the next position from FY17-FY21

Retention¶

• 85% of incentive payments are focused on retention incentives

34¶

EFTA00141365¶

Summary of Incentives¶

BOP has increased spending for all types of incentives since FY17.¶

Key Findings¶

Incentive spending has grown over time since 2017¶

• The western region gives out more retention incentives than other regions

• More staff in the Western region receive more incentives, however, the middle Atlantic region spends the most on average ($11.25K) per staff since 2017

• BOP staff have increasingly been awarded incentives

• From FY17-FY21, more and more BOP staff have been given some form of staffing incentives across all regions

• BOP has steadily increased incentive payments since FY17

From FY17-FY21, total spending across all incentives has more than doubled from $21M to $51M¶

35¶

EFTA00141366¶

Recruitment Incentive Usage-Findings and Insights¶

Recruitment incentives are used to attract new staff for employment with BOP.¶

Key Findings¶

Recruitment spending has increased and has primarily targeted entry level Correctional Officers¶

• BOP has steadily increased recruitment incentive payments since FY17

• More incoming staff have received recruitment incentive payments from FY17-FY21. Total spending for recruitment incentives has increased from $980K in FY17 to $6.9M in FY21

• BOP staff have increasingly been awarded recruitment incentives

• From FY17-FY21, more and more BOP staff have been given some form of staffing incentives across all regions

• GS-5/6 Correctional Officers receive the most recruitment incentives

New Correctional Officers have seen the sharpest increase in recruitment incentives with incentive payments totaling $9M¶

36¶

EFTA00141367¶

Relocation Incentive Usage-Findings and Insights¶

Relocation incentives offer compensation to existing staff who are encouraged to relocate to other BOP institutions.¶

Key Findings¶

Relocation incentives* are rarely used and focus on Lieutenants¶

• The number of BOP staff receiving relocation incentives has remained relatively low

• BOP seldomly uses relocation incentives to attract new Correctional Officers or other non-custody staff

• Lieutenants receive the lion share of relocation incentives

Lieutenants received $2.4M more in relocation incentives than the next position from FY17-FY21¶

*Relocation incentives are separate from relocation reimbursement. A relocation incentive is compensation offered in addition to relocation reimbursement. This analysis did not examine relocation reimbursements.¶

37¶