Turnover at WSP appears to be reaching a critical level. 

Chapter Summary

Turnover among DOC correctional officers at the Wyoming State Penitentiary (WSP) in Rawlins appears to be reaching a critical level because the state has incurred significant financial and intangible costs related to turnover.  Staff dissatisfaction with wages and working conditions is strongly influencing correctional officers’ decisions to leave employment at DOC, and especially the WSP.  Because the volume and percentage of turnover are higher at WSP than at DOC’s other institutions, we focused analysis of the causes of turnover primarily on WSP. 

Since we found that there are high financial and public-safety costs associated with correctional officer turnover, we suggest strategies that DOC and the Legislature may wish to implement to increase retention.  We also recommend that both the executive and legislative branches monitor turnover to determine if retention strategies are working.     

DOC Has Difficulty Retaining
Correctional Officers

DOC has experienced

great difficulty in retaining WSP staff.

Correctional officer turnover has historically been high, and is currently higher than the overall turnover for the agency, executive branch, and other states.  Additionally, DOC has not been able to recruit enough staff to fill all its positions at WSP, requiring staff to work overtime to cover vacancies.  Furthermore, the agency is facing the need to hire additional staff to operate a new facility.  Overall, DOC has experienced great difficulty in retaining correctional staff at WSP, and because of these problems, many of the correctional staff on the job are relatively inexperienced. 

Correctional Staff Turnover
is a Perennial Issue for DOC

We examined the turnover rate of correctional officers and corporals for the past five years and found the turnover rate to average about 27

 percent.  DOC officials report that turnover has been a constant problem for the agency, especially at WSP, for the past two decades.  Since the current WSP facilities opened in 1981, DOC officials report that turnover rates have been as high as 68 percent.  Consequently, the level of turnover DOC is experiencing, primarily at WSP, is not a new phenomenon for the agency. 

Turnover has occurred mainly among line workers.

Correctional Officer Turnover Higher

than Agency and State Averages

We found that turnover among DOC’s uniformed-security staff has occurred mainly among line workers in the four institutions.  In 1999, 88 percent of the uniformed-security staff who left the agency were correctional officers. 

Over the past five years, the combined correctional officer turnover in DOC’s four institutions has been higher than either the overall turnover rate for the Department or for the executive branch as a whole.  In 1999, 29.6 percent of DOC’s officers and corporals left their jobs.  The same year, DOC experienced 21.7[1] percent turnover, while the average turnover for all executive-branch agencies was 13.7 percent.  As noted in Chapter 1, being above average is not in itself an indication of a turnover problem.

Correctional officers are in demand because of turnover and rising prison populations.

Correctional Staff Turnover
is a National Problem

During our research, we found ample evidence that correctional staff turnover is a widespread issue nationally, with many states struggling with staff-retention issues.  According to BLS, correctional officers will be the fastest-growing protective-service occupation in the next decade because of turnover and rising prison populations.  Additionally, turnover is currently an issue in many law enforcement agencies, and not just corrections.

However, there are indications that Wyoming’s current turnover rate may be above the average of other states.  According to the Criminal Justice Institute, only four states reported higher correctional officer turnover than Wyoming in 1997[2].  The average turnover reported by all 50 states in 1997 was 15 percent, while Wyoming reported a 25 percent[3] turnover rate during that year.  Again, this information must be weighed against the costs of turnover, to determine whether or not the level of turnover is acceptable.

In 1999, almost half of the correctional officers had less than one year of experience.

Most staff that terminated with DOC, left within their first year.

Brief Tenure of Correctional Staff
Demonstrates Instability

The low average tenure of correctional staff in the four institutions is an indication of the instability of this workforce, especially at WSP.  Based on our review of SAO’s payroll data, we found that almost 70 percent of the uniformed-security staff have less than five years of experience.  This is in direct contrast to the tenure of the executive branch as a whole, where 71 percent of all executive-branch employees have more than five years of experience.

We specifically examined the tenure of the “line workers,” who comprise a majority of the security staff in the four institutions.  We found that almost half of the 280 correctional officers employed by DOC in 1999 had less than one year of experience.  Most of these inexperienced staff worked at WSP.

Turnover is Highest
Among New Staff

Most staff that terminated employment with DOC left within their first year.  Although DOC did not lose institutional knowledge when these staff terminated employment, the agency did not receive a return on its recruitment and training investment. 

Conversely, turnover was considerably lower among correctional staff with longer tenure.  A majority of the staff that remained with the agency in 1999 had more than one year of experience, with 37 percent having been employed by DOC for more than five years.  We believe this trend has likely cushioned the impact turnover would otherwise have had on the agency, since those who remain have critical institutional knowledge and provide stability.

Overtime paid to correctional staff has dramatically increased in the

last five years.

Vacancy Rate Illustrates
Turnover Issues

Ongoing vacancies during the past five years have required that DOC pay overtime to officers to staff additional shifts, primarily at WSP.  Overtime has been necessary to maintain minimum staffing requirements.  DOC estimated that an average of 242 of its 280 authorized correctional officer and corporal positions in the four institutions were filled in FY99, which left an average of 38 positions vacant.  DOC officials report that they have had difficulty filling 30 positions the Legislature authorized and 5 positions the Governor transferred in 1998.  During the past five years, overtime paid to correctional staff has steadily increased from about $309,000 in 1995 to more than $872,000 in 1999, according to SAO payroll data. 

Additional Staff Needed
to Operate New Facility

DOC has been authorized an additional 195 uniformed-security staff to operate a new maximum-security unit being built on the grounds of the WSP, and scheduled to open in April 2001.  Given the difficulties DOC has experienced in recruiting and retaining correctional staff at its existing facilities, this additional demand will only further intensify the recruitment and retention problems the agency is experiencing.

Magnitude of Correctional
Officer Turnover Drives Costs

DOC experienced the second highest turnover costs

of the occupations we reviewed.

The level of turnover is a concern both because of the corresponding inexperience in staff, and also because the costs associated with this turnover are significant.  Of the four occupations we reviewed for 1999, DOC incurred the second highest turnover costs, but at the same time, it experienced the lowest cost per turnover.  Even with large numbers of staff leaving, this occurs because of DOC’s low replacement and training costs per individual.  In addition, the qualitative costs of turnover in this occupation are substantial, due to the public-safety nature of correctional work.

Based on the data DOC provided, we estimate that it cost the agency approximately $591,000 for 83 officer and corporal terminations in its four institutions in 1999, or $7,000 per terminating employee.  Vacancy and training costs represented 85 percent of the total.  See Appendices A and B for information about this methodology and costs.

DOC Sustained
High Vacancy Costs

DOC’s vacancy costs were substantially higher than the other three occupations we studied.  We estimated DOC’s vacancy costs in 1999 to be about $271,000, or more than three times higher than the next highest vacancy costs.  Overtime expenditures accounted for almost all of these vacancy costs, mostly incurred at WSP.  DOC’s overtime expenditures related to vacancies are likely higher than the other occupations we studied because of the need for 24 hour a day staffing at DOC’s facilities.

DOC does not

test applicants to ensure suitability for the occupation.

DOC Spends Less to Replace and Train
Correctional Officers Than Other Occupations

Although DOC had the second highest costs to replace correctional officers, it had the lowest cost per replacement among the four occupations.  In 1999, DOC’s replacement costs of $66,000, or about $800 per individual, were substantially lower than DOT’s replacement costs of $465,000, or about $31,000 per individual. 

DOC requires a background check on each applicant, conducted by the local sheriff’s department, and it reported no expenditures associated with pre-employment tests.  DOC, in contrast to DOT, does not require correctional officer applicants to take physical, psychological, drug, or aptitude tests to ensure applicant suitability.

DOC invested only $2,800 in the training of each correctional officer who left in 1999, compared to $10,000 invested in each DFS caseworker who terminated in 1999, $13,000 for each technology worker, and $22,000 for each highway patrol officer.  DOC has increased its correctional officer formal training from a two-week to a three-week pre-service training plus a four-week field-training program, but is still substantially less than the 20-week formal training provided to highway patrol officers.  DOC officials report they would like to provide additional training, but lack the funds.

Turnover creates many hard-to-quantify costs.

DOC relies on inexperienced staff at WSP to perform critical correctional functions.

Ongoing vacancies create staffing challenges for DOC.

Turnover Affects the Safety of Officers
and Security of the Institutions

In addition to the financial turnover costs, there are a number of qualitative effects related to turnover.  We did not attempt to assign a dollar value to these.  Besides diminished morale and increased stress, three themes emerged from our interviews with DOC managers and correctional officers at WSP about the qualitative impacts of turnover:  lack of institutional knowledge; inadequate staffing; and opportunity costs. 

First, with turnover, a lack of institutional knowledge can affect the safety of officers and the security of the institutions.  The agency is increasingly relying on inexperienced staff at WSP to perform critical correctional functions.  Many officers at WSP reported a decreased sense of safety, given the number of inexperienced staff and the quality of some new staff.  As one officer said, “You have to trust and rely on new workers with your life.” 

Second, without appropriate staffing levels because of vacancies, the institutions face challenges in operating in a safe and secure manner.  Staff must work overtime to cover vacancies and maintain a minimum complement on each shift at WSP.  Furthermore, current and former officers we contacted believed there are not always enough staff to monitor inmates and their activities at WSP, so searches and security checks are conducted less frequently. 

Third, turnover has created opportunity costs for DOC, since the funds spent on turnover are not available for other purposes.  Attrition requires DOC to allocate a disproportionate share of its training budget to pre-service training, when funds could otherwise be directed toward additional training for experienced staff. 

Dissatisfaction With Wages and Working Conditions Cause Turnover

Individuals make employment decisions based on their personal perceptions.

Several themes emerged from our review about the reasons for turnover.

We found indications that dissatisfaction with wages and working conditions are interdependent factors contributing to correctional staff decisions to leave DOC.  For example, current and former officers we contacted believe staff leave because they are dissatisfied with the wages and working conditions, and DOC experience has shown it is difficult to recruit new staff at the starting wage level.  Consequently, vacancies and the quality of some new employees impact the working conditions for the staff that remain.  The limited pool of qualified candidates and minimal  screening of applicants appear to be contributing to turnover problems for DOC. 

The literature on turnover we reviewed stressed that individuals make employment decisions based on their personal perceptions about the adequacy of their wages, work environment, and personal needs.  We did not look at the ability of the local labor pool to support the WSP, or how that may contribute to the level of turnover DOC is experiencing.  We also did not review how the level of WSP’s wages may impact the availability of qualified applicants for correctional officer positions, nor did we evaluate day-to-day operations at WSP.  Since individual perceptions form the basis for employment decisions, we focused our research efforts on determining possible causes of turnover by seeking to understand the views of current and former correctional staff. 

To gain insights from former staff about why they terminated employment with DOC, we mailed surveys to 197 former employees who left DOC between 1995 and 1999.  Forty-seven staff responded to our survey.  (See Appendix G for survey methodology.)  We reviewed the 42 exit interviews departing staff completed from July 1998 through February 2000.  In addition, we held three focus groups with current correctional officers at the WSP to gain their opinions about the reasons for turnover at WSP.  We randomly selected employees from each of the three shifts and each of the three compounds at WSP, with 25 total attendees.  Since WSP staff accounts for about 80 percent of DOC correctional officer positions, we did not conduct interviews with officers at DOC’s other institutions.

The themes raised in these three sources were overwhelmingly consistent.  Current and former staff indicated that correctional officers leave in part because of dissatisfaction with wages and benefits.  However, concerns about the day-to-day work environment at WSP appear to be an equally if not more significant reason staff are leaving.  Although these research methods do not provide comprehensive information from all current and former staff, they can provide DOC with some preliminary indicators about potential causes of turnover. 

We reviewed wages earned by correctional staff subsequent to leaving DOC and analyzed comparator wage information.  From this, we learned that many former correctional officers earned lower wages after leaving DOC, indicating the significance that dissatisfaction with working conditions has as a cause of turnover. The sections below convey this analysis as well as the opinions of current and former officers about their perceptions of what causes turnover. 

Although pay has increased, officers still tend to earn less than other law enforcement personnel.

About 20 percent of officers who left DOC held more than one job before they left DOC.

We found that DOC correctional officer salaries are lower than comparable positions locally and in other states.

Nevertheless, former officers who left DOC,  but remained in Wyoming, earned 26 percent less.

Dissatisfaction With Wages and
Benefits Contributes to Turnover

Our review of SAO payroll data shows that correctional officer salaries have increased by 15 percent in the past five years.  Nevertheless, Wyoming correctional officers tend to earn less than other law enforcement personnel in Wyoming and those in other states.  Many current and former correctional staff we contacted reported needing to augment their primary wages through overtime, second jobs, or public assistance. 

According to the analysis conducted by R&P, about 20 percent of the correctional officers who left DOC from 1995 to 1998 held more than one job during the year they left.  In 1998, 16 percent of all correctional officers held more than one job.  According to R&P, multiple-job holders have an increased likelihood of terminating employment. (See Appendix E-6, E-10.)

We also compared DOC correctional officer salaries to law enforcement salaries paid by local and other state correction agencies.  We reviewed the Wyoming Wage Survey and found that the average starting wage in the corrections and jailer category[4] in 1998 was 13 percent above DOC’s hiring rate for entry-level correctional officers.  This suggests that many local law enforcement agencies pay more than DOC, although the analysis conducted by R&P found 26 individuals left DOC to work for local government for a corresponding decrease in wages.  However, we do not know if these individuals went to work for local agencies in some other capacity. 

We found that Wyoming correctional officer salaries were lower than 19 of the 25 states that participated in the 1999 Central States Survey, including five of the six surrounding states.  The starting monthly salary of $1,535 for Wyoming correctional officers was 18 percent less than the average minimum salary of $1,870 in comparator states.  See Appendix C for more detail about comparator wages. 

R&P found that only half of the 204 correctional officers who left DOC from 1995 to 1998 reappeared in Wyoming wage records after they left DOC, leading R&P to conclude many of these individuals left the state.  See Appendix E-3 for additional information.  We do not have additional information about the earnings of individuals who left the state, but they may have increased their earnings if they left to work for another state’s  correctional agency.

Current and former correctional staff we contacted indicated that dissatisfaction with wages and benefits, especially the rising cost of health insurance for dependents, contributes to turnover at DOC.  Correctional officer salaries likely compound dissatisfaction with the State’s health insurance because individuals in lower wage brackets are strongly impacted by fixed health insurance costs, such as premiums and deductibles. 

Nevertheless, R&P’s analysis shows that the 93 individuals who left DOC but remained in Wyoming during the four-year period earned 26 percent less on average after leaving DOC.  R&P concluded that these individuals may have left DOC for reasons other than wage, as will be discussed in the next section.  See Appendix E-3 for additional information.

Increased communication may improve retention.

Additional support and recognition may also help retain staff.

Increased screening of applicants and additional training may increase staff’s sense of safety.

The number of vacancies have contributed to a decreased sense of safety among staff.

Diminished Sense of Safety and Security
Appears to Contribute to High Level of Turnover

Since R&P’s analysis of wage records show that correctional officers who left DOC from 1995 to 1998 earned less on average after leaving, we believe that discontent with working conditions in DOC institutions, primarily at WSP, may be contributing to turnover as much or more than dissatisfaction with wages and benefits.  Our surveys of former correctional staff, exit interviews, and correctional officer focus groups at WSP indicate the need to improve morale and staff perceptions of working conditions.   

The current and former correctional officers we contacted indicated that dissatisfaction with working conditions at WSP centered around four main issues:  communication, management support, professionalism, and staffing.  They said these issues have contributed to an environment of low morale and a diminished sense of safety and security at WSP. 

Both current and former correctional officers we contacted believe there is a need for increased communication between officers, shifts, and all levels of management.  Many believe that communication of policies needs to be more consistent.  Individuals we surveyed and interviewed indicated that they would like additional feedback mechanisms between officers and management at WSP and the central office in Cheyenne.  Further, they said they would like additional opportunities to talk to administrators at WSP and in Cheyenne about their concerns, although some said they feared reprisal.     

Many current and former officers we contacted believed additional support and recognition from management regarding their performance in conducting difficult and dangerous work would increase retention.  There was also a theme among current and former officers we contacted that an increased sense of support from WSP administrators during disputes between officers and inmates to ensure security would help to retain staff.   

Current officers we interviewed believe that more stringent hiring standards and increased training would promote a sense of professionalism and increase retention.  As noted earlier, the minimum qualifications and screening are significantly less stringent than those for highway patrol officers.  Current and former correctional staff we contacted indicated that their sense of personal safety would increase if DOC enhanced its screening of applicants and provided additional training to correctional staff.

Finally, many current and former officers we contacted believe the WSP is inadequately staffed because of the number of vacancies.  They believe that vacancies have contributed to less coverage of posts, increased overtime, and reduced security checks of inmates.  These factors have contributed to a decreased sense of safety among the current and former officers we contacted.

One-third of the officers who terminated, left in the first 12 weeks.

DOC dismissed a larger percentage of staff than the other occupations.

Some Turnover Caused by Poor Job Fit

Some correctional officer staff leave because they are not well suited to work in a corrections environment.  DOC does not track the number of individuals who left DOC voluntarily, due to their unsuitability for the occupation, but in 1999, 24 correctional officers left within 12 weeks of being hired.  This represents one-third of the correctional officers who terminated during that period and may indicate they did not have realistic expectations about the profession. 

The number of dismissals may be another indication of poor job fit.  Over the five-year period of SAO payroll data we reviewed, we found that DOC dismissed 17 percent of correctional staff.  This contrasts with the percentage of dismissals in the other occupations we reviewed, which ranged from two to seven percent.

Corrections is not a profession for everyone, and DOC officials mentioned “poor job fit” as a frequent reason staff leave or are dismissed.  Since applicants undergo very little pre-screening to ensure they are physically and psychologically suited for corrections work, it is not surprising that DOC is losing many new employees. 

Improved Retention Strategies
May Reduce Turnover Costs

There are a number of steps that DOC and the Legislature can take to improve retention.  Although it is not realistic to assume all turnover can be eliminated, funds spent to improve retention can reduce turnover and offset associated costs.

DOC officials and the Legislature have been working to improve wages over the past several years and the Legislature provided additional funding to increase correctional staff salaries in each of the past five years.  Nevertheless, it appears that local law enforcement agencies and surrounding states have also continued to increase their wages and are still paying more than DOC. 

Staff satisfaction depends on employees’ perceptions of management.

DOC officials have developed plans to improve recruitment and retention.

Additionally, DOC officials report ongoing efforts to work with correctional staff to improve working conditions at the WSP.  We believe DOC may need to redouble it efforts to address dissatisfaction with working conditions that appear to be influencing individual decisions to leave.  Additional feedback mechanisms may help DOC better understand the perceptions of remaining staff and why they believe their coworkers leave. 

According to a 1996 National Institute of Corrections study, Managing Staff:  Corrections’ Most Valuable Resource, which provides suggestions to increase staff retention in state correctional agencies, staff satisfaction is dependent on the employees’ perceptions of the quality of management.  DOJ provides a number of recommendations to improve staff perceptions of management, such as:  providing clear and consistent policies so employees understand what is expected of them; creating genuine two-way communication processes; implementing staff recognition and award programs; and increasing screening of applicants to ensure suitability.

DOC officials have recognized the need to improve recruitment and retention strategies.  DOC officials recently met to develop a plan to improve recruitment and retention, including:  streamlining the application process; using an aptitude test to screen applicants; implementing a recognition and awards program, and providing supervisory training to first-time managers.  DOC has also been working with the Peace Officers’ Standards and Training Commission (POST) to obtain certification for courses and instructors.

Next Steps to Decrease Turnover Costs

We concluded using our costing methodology that DOC turnover is a problem.  Due to the critical nature of the correctional officer function and the financial costs associated with turnover, we believe that this occupation warrants monitoring by DOC, A&I, and the Legislature.

Approaches we suggest include improving staff’s perception of management through increased communication, providing consistent policies, and improving management support and recognition.  Other retention strategies that depend on additional funding, such as increasing recruitment efforts, implementing more rigorous screening, and addressing wage and benefit issues, may require legislative action.