Correction Pillar of the Criminal Justice System

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
It cannot be denied that the advent of additional laws leads to the increase of law violators, and with the
intensive campaign of law enforcements against criminality, prison congestion came into existence. This
dreadful congestion of the prison cells may also be attributed to the delays in the resolution of prisoners’
pending cases and the inaccurate manual monitoring of qualified prisoners due for early release from the
jails to the Board of Pardons and Parole (BPP). Because of this, prisoners are deprived of their early
liberty. Moreover, their continuous confinement adds burden to the expenses of the government.
Evidently, the overcrowding situation in the different prison institutions gives extra burden on the part of
the government. In food allowance alone, the allotted budget per inmate is PhP40.00. The present
population of the New Bilibid Prison (NBP) in Muntinlupa City and all major penal institutions in the
country reaches approximately 30,000 inmates which needs a daily budget of one million two hundred
pesos (PhP1,200,000.00) or an annual budget of four hundred thirty eight million pesos
(PhP438,000,000.00) more or less to feed them excluding the budgetary requirements for their other basic
needs such as medicines, uniform, 32 beddings and other personal needs such as soap, toothpaste,
slippers, etc. Congestion or prison overcrowding is not just a national issue but a worldwide issue as well.
Prisons, in most parts of the world, are overcrowded where the prison cells accommodate prisoners more
than its ideal capacity. This seeming condition does not contribute to the effective rehabilitation of
convicted persons. The Philippine Criminal Justice System (PCJS) enforces the rules of conduct needed
to protect life and uphold peace and order. It is composed mainly of five pillars namely: (1) Law
Enforcement Pillar; (2) Prosecution Pillar; (3) Courts Pillar; (4) Corrections Pillar; and the (5)
Community Pillar. These pillars work hand in hand in the administration of the justice system. Of the five
pillars of the PCJS, the Corrections Pillar performs its task as the safe keeper and undertakes the
rehabilitation of offenders and convicted felons. It is composed of the different agencies in the
government that play vital role in administering the corrections system. It aims to rehabilitate and ensure
humane treatment of prisoners. However, jail congestion hinders them in their core functions. For several
years, overcrowding of prison facilities aggravated the miserable conditions of prisoners in the country.
Considering how complex the manual procedures of the nation’s Corrections System, the need for
automating the large amount of highly viable documents is apparent. The problem of congestion may be
lessened not in the form of infrastructure expansion, which is very costly, but through good and
innovative solutions like electronic connection of databases across different prisons or penal colonies to
monitor prisoner’s qualifications, facilitate fast and on-time release of 33 prisoners and monitor aging
cases which needs prompt and immediate action from the court. This study is intended to establish a
centralized database connecting via a wide area network covering the seven institutions, namely: (1) New
Bilibid Prison (NBP) in Muntinlupa City; (2) Correctional Institution for Women (CIW) in Mandaluyong
City; (3) Iwahig Prison and Penal Farm (IPPF) in Palawan; (4) Davao Penal Colony (DAPECOL) in
Davao City; (5) San Ramon Prison and Penal Farm (SRPPF) in Zamboanga City; (6) Sablayan Prison and
Penal Farm (SPPF) in Occidental Mindoro; and (7) Leyte Regional Prison (LRP) in Abuyog, Leyte. It
aims to improve the existing manual records management of the Bureau of Corrections (BuCor) that
facilitate accurate monitoring and fast transmittal of inmates’ records to the Board of Pardons and Parole
for review. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY General Objective: To develop an Integrated Jail
Management System (IJMS) for the Bureau of Corrections that would aid in decongesting the National
Penitentiary and its Penal Institutions. Specific Objectives: 1. To design a system that provides effective
jail management that can efficiently monitor inmates to grant them the needed rehabilitation program as
well as determine the inmates’ eligibility for early releases. 2. To create the system, as designed. 3. To
evaluate the performance of the developed system.34 SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
This study involves the development of an Integrated Jail Management System covering the seven major
penal institutions in the Philippines, which are being administered by the Bureau of Corrections (BuCor).
It includes the entire process of storing, retrieving and maintaining data of the inmates that includes their
personal profile, case information, jail location history and the status of their cases. It focuses on the
accurate computation of the expiration of the minimum and maximum sentences of the inmates to
determine the prompt monitoring of their releases. Although this study is limited to the major penal
institutions for pilot testing, future studies may consider the interconnectivity of the pilot phase to the
other agencies involved in the administration of justice such as the Bureau of Jail Management and
Penology which administers the local jails. CHAPTER II CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK This chapter
presents the review of related literature and studies underlying the framework of the study. It includes the
conceptual model of the study and the operational definition of terms. REVIEW OF RELATED
LITERATURE AND STUDIES Crime is generally defined as an offense against morality on the public
welfare or simply the violation of the law. Foon, et al. (1988) stated that it is a product of the society and
its social circumstances. Due to the ever-35 changing world, new forms of crimes such as computer fraud,
band and insurance fraud in international trading, terrorist movements, etc. progress in many countries
which resulted to the great increase in the number of prisoners. Evolvement of additional laws mean
additional violations and additional violations mean additional crimes. With this concept, Kushairy et al.
(1988) stressed that “crime cannot be entirely eradicated. This is a reality which the civilized world has
invariably accepted.” Kushairy et al. (1988) affirmed that the law of corrections and rehabilitation had a
graceful transition from the primitive law of retribution. Presently, there are rarely cases of strong support
for vengeance as the sole principle of incarcerating offenders. Admittedly, in order to provide public
safety, there have been circumstances wherein the use of difficult and at times harsh actions were being
implemented to discourage convicted felons and prospective criminals, however, the fact remains that the
principle of correction and rehabilitation has taken center stage. With this new idea of rehabilitating
offenders, Kushairy et al. (1988) further disclosed how the United Nations Congress in 1955 came up
with the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Offenders. However, it was clearly observed that
due to the countries’ differences in terms of legal, social, economic and geographical aspects, not all the
rules are applicable in all places and at all times. Nevertheless, by setting acceptable minimum conditions
as adapted by the United Nations, these rules will encourage a continuous effort that will surely improve
the rehabilitation of prisoners. The primary considerations of these rules are those relating to personal
hygiene, clothing and bedding, food, recreation, exercise and sport and medical services. In response to
this campaign, Alvor (2005) imparted that the Philippines constantly adopted not only the provisions of
the UN Standard Minimum Rules for 36 the Treatment of Prisoners but also the UN Standard Minimum
Rules for Non-Custodial Measures (the Tokyo Rules) and other international human rights instruments
which emphasizes the welfare of prisoners. In the Philippine setting, Alvor (2005) further stated that the
Philippine Corrections System is composed of the government institutions, civil society and the business
sector that undertakes the confinement and rehabilitation of convicted persons. Institutional Framework
According to Aspiras (2002), the Philippine Corrections System is fragmented where the supervision and
control over the convicted felon is handled by three (3) departments in the executive branch of the
government, namely the Department of Justice (DOJ), Department of Interior and Local Government
(DILG), and the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD). The Bureau of Corrections is
an agency under the Department of Justice, which acts as the institutional base of rehabilitating prisoners.
It manages and operates all the major prison institutions in the Philippines. Aside from the New Bilibid
Prison (NBP) in Muntinlupa City, it also manages the only institution made exclusive for women, the
Correctional Institution for Women (CIW) in Mandaluyong City and the five (5) penal institutions
nationwide namely: Iwahig Prison and Penal Farm (IPPF), Palawan; San Ramon Prison and Penal Farm
(SRPPF), Zamboanga City; Davao Penal Colony (Dapecol), Davao City; Sablayan Prison and Penal Farm
(SPPF), Occidental Mindoro; and in the Leyte Regional Prison (LRP), Leyte. Another institutional base is
the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP) under the 37 Department of Interior and Local
Government. It supervises all provincial, sub-provincial and city jails all throughout the Philippines. It
houses prisoners whose sentences range from one day to three years and detainees awaiting disposition of
their cases. The Board of Pardons and Parole is another agency under the umbrella of the Department of
Justice that undertakes the non-institutional treatment of offenders. It is tasked to uplift and redeem
valuable human material to economic usefulness and to prevent unnecessary and excessive deprivation of
personal liberty. It grants early releases through parole or recommend to the President the grant of
executive clemency, either conditional pardon or commutation of sentence to qualified prisoners. Another
non-institutional treatment of offenders is the Parole and Probation Administration (PPA). It was
mandated to allow convicted prisoners to serve their sentence in the community subject to certain
conditions. The Department of Social Welfare and Development supervises the youthful offenders
confined in the Regional Rehabilitation Centers whose sentences are suspended until the convict reaches
the right age. Highlights of the Philippine Corrections System The whole process of the Corrections Pillar
is mobilized once the court finds the accused guilty of the crime charged. The convicting court will order
the law enforcers to commit the body of the offender to the custody of the prison or corrections official.
As stated in the Bureau of Corrections Operating Manual (2000), a national prisoner committed to the
National Penitentiary will be received in their own Reception and Diagnostic Center (RDC) upon
presentation of the required documents namely: (1) 38 Mittimus or Commitment Order of the court; (2)
Information and Court decision in the case; (3) if the prisoner was detained or confined in a local jail, a
certificate of detention is needed; and (4) a certificate that the case of the prisoner is not on appeal.
Thereafter, the prisoner will be placed in a quarantine period for not less than five (5) days within which
he shall be given physical examination to check his health condition. If the prisoner is found having an
infectious or contagious disease, he shall be segregated from the other prisoners and if a prompt and
immediate need for confinement in the hospital is determined, the prisoner will be handed over to the
hospital inside the prison perimeter of the NBP. The prisoner shall likewise be oriented with prison rules,
and a counselor, social worker or other program staff officers will conduct private interview. After the
quarantine period, the prisoner will remain in the RDC for another period not exceeding fifty-five (55)
days where he will undergo series of examinations such as psychiatric, psychological, sociological,
vocational, educational, religious and other examinations. The results of these tests shall be the basis for
the prisoner’s individualized rehabilitation program and the basis of the Chief of the RDC in determining
the prison facility suited for the prisoner. The National Penitentiary keeps a bound registration book
wherein all commitments are recorded manually and chronologically. The register contains vital
information such as inmates’ personal circumstances, reason for commitment; sentence, date and hour of
admission to the prison, as well as the date and hour of discharge or transfer to another prison
confinement and its basis. After registration, the prisoner is photographed, front and side view,
fingerprinted and assigned a permanent and unique prison or file number. The male 39 inmates shall
undergo regulation haircut with no beard/mustache. The sentence of the prisoner commences upon
conviction and upon serving his sentence in the national penitentiary. The Bureau of Corrections
Operations Manual further stated that the Director of Corrections may grant Good Conduct Time
Allowance (GCTA) to a prisoner who displays good or excellent behavior while inside prison. As such,
he is entitled to sentence deductions. It is an incentive given to prisoners to motivate them to cooperate in
their rehabilitation programs. More so, another form of motivation for prisoner to behave accordingly is
the grant of early release subject to the qualifications set forth by the Revised Rules on Parole or Pardon
(2003) of the BPP. The grant, however, depends on his behavior while inside prison and the period of
time the prisoner has served with the corresponding GCTA. Prisoners with indeterminate sentence are
entitled to the grant of parole after serving the minimum of their sentence. Prisoners sentenced with
definite sentence, life sentence or reclusion perpetua are disqualified from parole. However, the BPP may
recommend them to the President for the grant of executive clemency in the form of commutation or
reduction of his sentence or other form of early release called conditional pardon with parole conditions.
It may be noted that the BPP can grant parole but can never grant executive clemency. They can only
recommend to the President, who has the sole power to grant executive clemency. As for the death
convicts, the existence of new law automatically reduced their sentence to life but without parole. After
meeting the specified qualifications for an early release, the Director of Corrections shall forward the
carpeta and prison record of the prisoner to the BPP 40 for appropriate action. The BPP will then
deliberate on the cases of qualified prisoners and determine if the prisoner is now ready to be reintegrated
back to society. Thereafter, the BPP will transmit to the BuCor the results of review for proper
implementation. Issues on Corrections System Like many other countries, the Philippines is also
experiencing one of the biggest problem of managing prison institutions – congestion. Asia News (April
2006) disclosed that prisons in the Philippines are indeed overcrowded. Manila City Jail was built to hold
800 detainees but accommodating more than 5,000 prisoners whereas Quezon City Jail that is meant to
cater 815 people has reached its population into nearly 3,500 inmates. Analyzing the amount of space as
against the number of detainees, it clearly shows that a detainee has less than 0.3 square meters of space
compared to threesquare meters per detainee stipulated by the United Nations. Detainees die of
contagious diseases like tuberculosis, chickenpox and other simple diseases that spread quickly. The
majority of them even die before their trial. Howard (2000) cited how miserable the conditions of the
early prisons and that of its inmates. Even if the present corrections systems have greatly improved, it is
still struggling to find ways on how to improve the prison management. Admittedly, Canada and the
United States are also experiencing prison overcrowding and sited great intensity of correctional services.
The increases in inmate populations with declines in correctional expenditures have resulted in
congestion. Jail institutions exceed its maximum capacity. Many believed that overcrowding causes
undignified conditions for prisoners and does not conform to the present rehabilitation programs intended
for the prisoners.41 Haney (1996) related that the dawn of prison congestion started in 1980s and believed
that prisons everywhere are undeniably congested. Specifically, it was clearly identified that
overcrowding brought about several negative effects on individuals like depression, high blood pressure,
poor health, and poor rehabilitation. Regardless of some differences, it was observed that overcrowding
notably worsens the meaning of life in prison and that the majority of the prisoners intensify the negative
output of imprisonment. Thus, with the increased level of uncertainties the prisoners must handle,
overcrowding directly affects the mental and physical health of prisoners. Likewise, with the decrease in
the ratio of resources intended for the prisoners, frustration levels inside prison raises thereby creating
additional barriers between inmates and the goals of corrections. Howard (2000) disclosed that prison
overcrowding carries out many depressing effects on inmates. Research shows that jail congestion
produces struggle for inadequate resources, violence, diseases and increased probability of recidivism and
suicide rates. Komu, et al. (1988) cited that overcrowding causes various effects such as unhealthy
climate that forbids the correctional officers to perform effectively the programs intended for the
rehabilitation of inmates. In addition, because of the large number of prisoners, security measures are
mostly taken into consideration rather than concentrate on correctional reforms. Indeed, overcrowding
gives burden and too much pressure on the workload of correctional officers primarily because of
insufficient personnel thus giving mental torture and disappointments. Also, it produces disturbances and
frustrations among inmates that may cause breakouts, riots and other conflicts. It also tends to produce
infectious diseases that may possibly lead to pandemic.42 According to Howard (2000), the prison
environment has several factors that could produce negative outcomes on inmates. Congested prison
conditions seem to be never-ending, individuals inclined to disruptive behavior meet and with the lack of
personal control, idleness and boredom prevails. Nigerian Newsday (February 2006) revealed that
Nigerian prisons are certainly affected by congestion too. The country’s 277 prison facilities
accommodate about 45,000 inmates that cause largely dreadful conditions, which seem unhealthy for
human beings. Certainly, Nigerian Newsday admitted that prison reform is way behind in Nigeria. Their
prison system is afflicted by excessive dilemma like congestion, long delays on case trials which
sometimes lasted up to ten years, poor feeding, unhealthy conditions and widespread diseases that kill a
lot of inmates on a regular basis. Likewise, they are also facing a big problem on social misconduct like
dealing in drug cases and jailbreaks. Similarly, Alvor (2005) cited that the Philippines is also facing
problems on jail institutions such as congestion, disorganized corrections system, lack of information
technology systems and inadequate training. Aspiras (2002) agreed that congestion stands out as the most
severe dilemma afflicting the Philippine Corrections pillar today. More likely, it will worsen the prison
system and cause rehabilitation strenuous. Prison facilities are in fact overcrowded that forces the inmates
to sleep in turns. The Philippine Corrections Pillar undertakes the effective rehabilitation of the offenders
and convicted prisoners. One of its key agencies, the Bureau of Corrections, attests to the fact that our
national penitentiary is indeed over populated. 43 As included in the Department of Justice 2005
Accomplishment Report, the Bureau of Corrections’ population shows a total of 29,818 inmates in its
seven operating institutions nationwide. Table 1 shows a 2005 percentage distribution of inmate
population among the prison facilities. Table 1 Prison Population for 2005 PRISON FACILITIES
CAPACITY POPULATION % SHARE RATE OF CONGESTION New Bilibid Prison 8,700 18,638
62% 114% Correctional Institution for Women 1,000 1,306 4% 30% Iwahig Prison and Penal Farm 3,500
2,301 8% --- Davao Prison and Penal Farm 3,100 3,945 13% 27% San Ramon Prison and Penal Farm
1,300 1,110 4% --- Sablayan Prison and Penal Farm 1,500 1,420 5% --- Leyte Regional Prison 1,000
1,098 4% 9% TOTAL 20,100 29,818 100% 48% Source: DOJ 2005 Annual Report Action Programs of
the DOJ in Motion FY 2005 for the Bureau of Corrections include the strengthening security
measures/programs; expansion of the record computerization; improvement of the decongestion program;
and the enhancement of the rehabilitation / treatment program. In the 2006 Accomplishment Report of the
Department of Justice, the Bureau of Corrections maintained 30,798 inmates, an increased by 3.27% from
the 2005 level of 28,818 in its institutions nationwide, as shown in Table 2.44 Table 2 Prison Population
for 2006 PRISON FACILITIES CAPACITY POPULATION % SHARE RATE OF CONGESTION New
Bilibid Prison 8,700 18,670 61% 115% Correctional Institution for Women 1,000 1,401 5% 40% Iwahig
Prison and Penal Farm 3,500 2,968 10% --- Davao Prison and Penal Farm 3,100 4,091 13% 32% San
Ramon Prison and Penal Farm 1,300 1,071 3% --- Sablayan Prison and Penal Farm 1,500 1,563 5% 4%
Leyte Regional Prison 1,000 1,034 3% 3% TOTAL 20,100 30,798 100% 53% Source: DOJ 2006 Annual
Report Comparison of the two tables given, as shown in Figure 1, disclosed that majority of penal
colonies have increased its population. This is a clear indication that the Bureau of Corrections still lacks
the much needed jail management system that could clearly identify prisoners already qualified for an
early release to help decongest the prison cells.45 Figure 1. Population Comparison for 2005 and 2006
Hence, Aspiras (2002) noted that the releases made by the Board of Pardons and Parole is hampered by
the delay in the transmission of records. Figures show that there is an immediate and regular need to
review the petitions and deliberate the cases of prisoners qualified for parole or conditional pardon.
Presently, the Bureau of Corrections has an xbase program running in a very primitive dos-base program
that can compute for the expiration of minimum and maximum sentence of the prisoners. The
computation is based on the commencing date of the sentence, depends mainly on the sentence imposed
upon by the judge and the addition of the Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA). The system can also
generate prison records; however, it does not have the capability of determining who among the prisoners
are already eligible for an early release or whose maximum sentences will expire. Determining the
expiration of the minimum sentence is very important because it is when the prisoner becomes eligible for
parole and one-half of 46 which qualifies the prisoner for executive clemency. More so, the Bureau of
Corrections lacks the electronic monitoring scheme in determining qualified inmates for early release.
Expiration of sentences is written manually in a logbook and is being checked daily to determine whom
among the prisoners whose minimum or even maximum sentence will expire. According to Aspiras
(2002), records management in prison is not good enough which contributed to the unreasonable delay in
the release of qualified prisoners. Most of the time, prisoners were not reviewed by the BPP on time.
There are several cases wherein prisoners, whose minimum sentences have long expired, were not given
the opportunity to avail of an early release. This is simply because their records were not properly
monitored. There are occasions wherein the BPP grants parole to prisoners who were at large or have
escaped. Or worse, there are instances wherein the BPP grants parole to prisoners who died several years
ago. This is so because the records being transmitted by the Bucor to the BPP seem inaccurate which do
not reflect any escape reports or death reports. Jail Population Management The Gallatin County, State of
Montana, USA believed that the issues on overcrowding could be handled effectively through an
excellent jail management system. In their Corrections Master Plan, it was stated therein that the effective
management of their jails depends not only upon the number of available beds, but also upon the efficient
administration of the larger system in which the prisoners reside. Jail management covers the timely
processing of cases; access to a range of pre-trial release options; and the availability of a variety of
sanctions intended to transform criminal behavior. Taking these things into consideration, a 47 thorough
assessment of the Gallatin County criminal justice system was made. The analysis includes an
examination of jail “snapshot” data; sample of cases tracked from the jail booking to sentencing; review
of a sample of drunk-driving cases; examination of operational policies and procedures; and a review of
system resources. After realizing the absence of an electronic access of the law enforcements to warrant
information from the jail, the courts, or probation and parole, the Gallatin County believed that the
different systems involved in corrections should be integrated. Laboring in an obsolete information
system that cannot satisfy their operational and planning needs, the Gallatin County decided to design a
more effective system. They believed that the improvement of the criminal justice system must begin
with the investment of an efficient information system. Similarly, the Michigan Department of
Corrections, USA also believed in a systematic jail management system. With this, they have developed
the Offender Tracking Information System (OTIS) intended to offer information to the public that can
then be verified through the Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC), Michigan Courts, the
Michigan State Police or other law enforcement agencies. The OTIS provides information about
offenders previously or currently confined and being managed or supervised by the MDOC. A search
result will provide information about any offender who is, or was, in a Michigan prison, on parole or
probation under the supervision of the MDOC, has transferred in or out of Michigan under the Michigan
Interstate Compact, or who has escaped or absconded from their sentence. The Virginia Department of
Corrections, USA provides a web-based Inmate Status Information System. This is an inmate locator
developed to help locate an 48 inmate who is currently incarcerated in their system. Likewise, the Florida
Department of Corrections, USA also provides a comprehensive search of all databases on all
absconder/fugitive, inmate escapes, inmate population, inmate releases and supervised population.
Similarly, the Sungard-Ossi in the United States maintains easily accessible data on inmates from booking
to release through their Jail Management System (JMS). It is fully integrated with the OSSI Records
Management System (RMS) to remove and/or avoid duplication of data entries, ensure integrity of data,
and be able to produce a reliable and a more comprehensive management reporting. With the utilization
of these and other features, the JMS can enhance the effectiveness and the security of jails. Philadelphia
Commissioner Leon A. King II, Esq. (2002) imparted that the Philadelphia Prison System (PPS)
undertakes to produce a reliable correctional atmosphere that confines effectively an accused or convicted
persons. They made every effort to provide a more humane environment through efficient programs and
services; and the initiative to prepare incarcerated persons into society. Meanwhile, all Philadelphia
Prison System services operate on a concept management. It is a prison management technique that
lessens the need for inmate movement daily services such as dining, medication, and sick call, on the
housing unit, in an effort to the security and inmate programming. Alternative Measures to Overcrowding
Managing over populated jails is not an easy task. An effective Jail Management System could be a
substantial element in reducing the workload of the corrections system, however, many are still analyzing
on 49 how to decongest the prisons. Howard (2000) believed that there are various methods to reduce
prison overcrowding. Among the most significant are prison designs and reducing the prison population
by developing community-based alternatives to imprisonment. Correspondingly, Komu, et al. (1988)
considered three possible solutions to the overcrowding problem. First, is the development of alternative
diversion measures; secondly, development of earlier release systems from prison and, lastly,
establishment of new institutional facilities. Opposing to the third possible solutions being considered by
Komu, Howard (2000) disclosed that many corrections officials and researchers agree that it is not
practical to anticipate solving overcrowding problems by merely constructing additional and newer prison
facilities. As Rosenfled & Kempf stated “the financial realities of trying to build our way out of the
correctional crisis makes today’s fiscal conservatives sound like yesterday’s rehabilitationists. The Parole
System The parole system is a cost-effective alternative to imprisonment. It is a reward for prisoners who
show excellent behavior while in prison. It motivates prisoners to behave well, thus making it safer for
prisoners, visitors, staff, and administrators. Parole provides prisoners an access to the community-based
treatment programs allowing them to serve the remainder of their sentence outside of prison. It helps the
offender to return into the community as a law-abiding member. In the US, the parole system is intended
to lighten the State’s burden of supporting the needs of the prisoners. It also intends to extend
rehabilitative 50 services to the convicted person and to facilitate their reintegration back to the
community. D’ Amico (2005) further averred that statistics from the U.S. Bureau of Justice show that in
the year 2001, its annual budget reaches to approximately $1 billion and the annual cost of housing a state
prisoner reaches about $33,000 or $90 a day. Similarly, Aspiras (2002) stressed the expeditious release of
offenders in our country, either through the form of parole or conditional pardon, could play a part in
decongesting our jails. This could well be attained through the joint efforts of the Corrections Pillar.
Realizing the present situation of our prison system, President Gloria Arroyo’s ten-point agenda of the
Medium Term Philippine Development Plan (2004- 2010) clearly states that one of the strategies needed
for our own Corrections and Rehabilitation Pillar is the strict monitoring of prisoners’ carpetas/prison
records through a systematic and improve records system to avoid any delay in the release of prisoners.
Thus, this study was conceived. Operating System An operating system (OS) is generally described as the
program that, after being initially loaded into the computer, manages all the other programs and perform
basic tasks, such as recognizing input from the keyboard, sending output to the display screen, keeping
track of files and directories on the disk, and controlling peripheral devices such as disk drives and
printers. A lot of operating systems are proliferating in the market nowadays. According to Microsoft, one
of the most stable OS is the Microsoft Windows Server 2003 that was built on the core strengths of the
Windows 51 family of operating systems, i.e. security, manageability, reliability, availability, and
saleability. It is the most productive infrastructure platform used in servers for powering connected
applications, networks, and Web services from the workgroup to the data center. Additionally, advances
in Windows Server 2003 provides many benefits for developing applications, resulting in lower total cost
of ownership, enhanced security, and better performance. For the workstations, Windows XP Professional
provides comprehensive security features to protect sensitive and confidential business data both locally
on a user’s desktop computer and as it is transmitted over network, phone lines, or the Internet. With
support for the latest security standards and enhanced protection from viruses, you can rest assured that
they are protected from some of the more common types of Internet attacks. Visual Basic 6.0 The
Microsoft Developer Network (MSDN) illustrates Visual Basic 6.0 as a language rapid application
development environment that gives fast, easy, and intuitive tools to quickly develop Windows
applications. Visual Basic can develop simple utilities or sophisticated applications. It has data access
features that allow the creation of databases, front-end applications, and scalable server-side components
for most popular database formats. Crystal Report Wright (2008) cited that Crystal Reports is a popular
third party package that is included with Visual Basic, which allow to create reports for an application. It
52 is a business intelligence application used to design and generate reports from a wide range of data
sources. Relational Database Management System (Microsoft Access) A Database Management System
(DBMS) is a program or set of programs that stores and organizes data. When a DBMS is organized by
means of related tables using common fields, it becomes Relational Database Management System
(RDBMS). MS Access is an example of an RDBMS. Like all database systems MS Access stores
database information in a database file store information about the database objects such as tables,
queries, forms, macros, reports, access web pages, and modules. An RDBMS is used to store, retrieve and
update data via facilities and mechanisms that are supported from within the database system. In a related
study conducted by Maneja (2005) in the development of a “Computerized Disc Jockey”, he utilizes
Microsoft Access as the system’s back-end database due to its efficiency. Software Evaluation Kaner
(2006) defined software evaluation as the process used to assess the quality of computer software.
Software testing is an empirical technical investigation conducted to provide stakeholders with
information about the quality of the product or service under test. On the other hand, beta test is the
second phase of software testing in which a sampling of the intended end-users tries the product out. Beta
testing can be considered "pre-release testing." Beta test versions of 53 software are now distributed to the
end-users to give the program a "real-world" test and partly to provide a preview of the next release.
Client-Server Architecture Mitchell (2008) defined the term client-server as a popular model for computer
networking that utilizes client and server devices each designed for specific purposes. This model can be
used on the Internet as well as local area networks (LANs). Examples of clientserver systems on the
Internet include Web browsers and Web servers, FTP clients and servers, and DNS. A client computer
and a server computer are usually two separate devices, each customized for their designed purpose. A
server device typically stores files and databases including more complex applications like Web sites.
Server devices often feature high-powered central processors, more memory, and larger disk drives than
clients. Client devices are typically PCs with network software applications installed that request and
receive information over the network. Mobile devices as well as desktop computers can both function as
clients. Network clients make requests to a server by sending messages, and servers respond to their
clients by acting on each request and returning results. One server generally supports numerous clients,
and multiple servers can be networked together in a pool to handle the increased processing load as the
number of clients grows. CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF THE STUDY On the basis of the foregoing
concepts, theories, and findings of related literature, studies presented, and insights taken from them, a
conceptual model is developed as shown below.54 In order to develop the output which is an Integrated
Jail Management System, this study follows the input-process-output model. The input block is
categorized into three, such as the knowledge requirements, software requirements and the hardware
requirements. The knowledge requirements include Crime and Corrections System, Jail Congestion
Problem, Jail Management, and Parole System. The software requirements include Operating System,
Relational Database Management System and Microsoft Development Tools such as Visual Basic and
Crystal Report. The hardware requirements consist of server and workstations and the network
requirements comprise of switch, Local Area Network (LAN) cable, modem, firewall and an internet
connection. The process block includes system analysis, system design, system development and system
testing for the whole system. System analysis consists of 55 system requirement and definitions. The
system design includes context diagram and system data flow diagram. The system development
comprises of screen layout and program coding. Finally, system testing undergoes alpha and beta testing.
OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS OF TERMS Integrated System refers to the combination of the system
components of the Bureau of Corrections that perform separate functions in order to establish a
centralized database for monitoring the individual status of inmates aimed to reduce jail congestion. Jail
Management refers to the administration and supervision of prison facilities. Jail Management System is
the effective method of managing prison facilities specifically the congested ones. Jail congestion refers
to the overcrowding in prisons/jails which indicates that a jail institution accommodates more prisoners
than its ideal capacity. Corrections Pillar refers to the component of the criminal justice system that serves
to rehabilitate criminal offenders. Corrections System is the process entered by the criminal offender who
was charged and convicted by the court and was confined in a rehabilitation center such as the jails or
prison, juvenile centers, etc. Carpeta refers to the prison jacket or an envelope containing all pertinent
documents on the case of an inmate. Jail Decongestion Program refers to the strategy being undertaken on
how to effectively reduce overcrowding in prison facilities. Community-based treatment refers to the 56
rehabilitation program for convicted felons who are serving their sentences outside of prison cells. Parole
system refers to the conditional release of an offender from a prison institution after meeting the specified
requirements declared by law. Parolee refers to the prisoner released from jail by virtue of parole.
Conditional Pardon refers to the conditional liberty granted by the Constitutional power of the head of the
State. Pardonee refers to any prisoner released on conditional pardon. Good Conduct Time Allowance
(GCTA) refers to the deduction of days from the sentence granted to prisoners for each month of good
behavior while inside the National Penitentiary. Active inmates refer to the inmates presently confined in
jails. Inactive inmates refer to inmates already released from prison whether in the form of parole,
finished sentence, death, acquittal, etc. Local Area Network (LAN) refers to the connection of
information processing devices within a limited physical area such as office, building or other work site.
It allows end-users in a work group to communicate electronically, share hardware, software and data
resources. Wide Area Network (WAN) refers to the data communication network covering large
geographic area such as large city, provinces or regional area. Protocol is the set of rules and procedures
for the control of communications in a communications network.57 TCP/IP (Transmission Control
Protocol / Internet Protocol) refers to the most common protocol in a network environment. Database
Management System refers to the set of computer programs that controls the creation, maintenance, and
utilization of the databases. Database Administrator is the specialist responsible for maintaining standards
for the development, maintenance, and security of an organization’s databases. SQL (Structured Query
Language) refers to the query language that has become a standard for advanced database management
systems packages. Client-server network is the computing environment where end user workstations
(clients) are connected to LAN servers. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY This chapter presents the
project design, the project development, the operational and testing procedure, and the evaluation
procedure. PROJECT DESIGN The Integrated Jail Management System maintains records of persons
convicted of any crime and is presently detained in any National Penitentiary or Penal Institutions in the
Philippines. It monitors their statuses, movements and dates when these persons are eligible for any form
of release. Prompt action on inmates’ release is made to ease the burden of congestion in jails.58 Figure 3
shows that case information from the Courts, the detention information if ever the prisoner was confined
in the local jail and basic personal information from the prisoner itself is vital in the operation of the
Integrated Jail Management System. If a person is charged and convicted of a certain crime, he will
automatically enter the corrections system. Certain steps and processes took place until the prisoner come
out and be released from the system upon the expiration of his sentence; or by order of the Court or
competent authority acquitting him of the offense charged; or after being granted parole or conditional
pardon. Figure 4. Logical Data Flow Diagram (Level 0) Figure 4 shows that upon input of data, the
system captures and stores inmate information in the 59 inmate profile database. The system also
monitors the inmate status, filters and produces qualified inmates for review by the BPP. Qualified
inmates are processed and updates on the results of the review are stored in the actions database. Figure 5.
Capture Inmate Data (Level 1 of Process 1.0) When exploded, process 1 is responsible for the data entry
of the required information. The inmate data is validated and checked if the person has an existing record.
If no record exists, the system allows the creation and thereby accepts the inmate data, else, the system
opens the existing record and enables the users to make the necessary modifications. Figure 6. Monitor
Inmate Status (Level 1 of Process 2.0) Upon acceptance of inmate record, the system automatically
computes for the expiration of the 60 minimum and maximum sentence to determine the exact date when
the prisoner will be eligible for parole or when will the prisoner serve his sentence in full. The system
provides a list of inmates for review and then check if the prisoner filed an appeal. If so, the prisoner will
no longer qualify for the review. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT The diagram below shows the conceptual
process of the system. It includes six steps namely: (1) research and information gathering; (2) study and
analysis of the gathered data; (3) design layout; (4) prototyping of the system; (5) system evaluation; and
(6) final design and implementation Figure 7. The Conceptual Process of the System Research and
Information Gathering To obtain adequate knowledge of the proposed system, a comprehensive study
was made by gathering available documents such as Operation Manuals, Accomplishment Reports and
other relevant issues and studies, etc. Likewise, interviews from concerned 61 officials and employees
were also conducted to support the information gathered from the published issues and concerns. Study
and Analysis of the Design After gathering sufficient knowledge on present situation of the national
penitentiary and penal colonies, a study was conducted to determine whether a new and/or innovative
information system can be a reasonable solution to the problem. After which, a thorough analysis of the
existing system as well as the organization environment was carried out. The information needs of the
end-users were likewise analyzed. Design Layout Subsequently, the functional requirements of the
Integrated Jail Management System that answers the needs of the end-users was determined. Likewise,
the specifications for the hardware, software and networking needs that would be most appropriate for the
functional requirements of the system was identified. Prototyping of the system A prototype of the system
was made to enable the end-users appreciate the solution to the present problem of the Corrections Pillar.
It is a developed program using powerful tools such as Visual Basic 6.0 and RDBMS software like MS
Access that can handle database records efficiently. System Evaluation In order to gather suggestions and
recommendations from the end-users, the researcher 62 conducted interviews and surveys during the
development stage of the project. Final Design and Implementation After gathering all the information
needed in the project, the system was developed using Visual Basic 6.0, an easy to use application
development tools. It is believed that this software could be the best alternative to expensive development
proprietary software because of its capability to handle business operations across multiple platforms. It
could independently support jail management systems having large databases across the country. In order
to minimize the cost of the project, MS Access was used as its back-end. It could, however, be upgraded
to a more powerful back-end database management software in the future like Microsoft SQL. Since both
databases are proprietary software of Microsoft, there will be no compatibility issues in case the Bureau
of Corrections migrated the database MS Access to a more sophisticated MS SQL. For implementation,
end-users are trained on its functionalities to ensure smooth operation of the system. A post-
implementation review was conducted to monitor, evaluate and modify the system, as needed.
OPERATION AND TESTING PROCEDURE Operation Procedure 1. Verify the system authorization of
the end-user/s to get access to the Integrated Jail Management System. 2. Update static data in the
Libraries module and synchronize with the different penal institutions. 3. Input or update personal
information, case 63 information and case status of the inmates. 4. Generate reports such as prison record,
synopsis, statistical reports, demographic reports, status report and facts sheet and inmates due for review.
5. Back-up and restore data to enable transfer of information in the different penal institutions. Testing
Procedure 1. Create a login password for the users who will be granted access to the system. Different
levels of security must be addressed. 2. Encode the information in the file maintenance module and test
the functionality of the command buttons such as add, edit, delete. 3. Generate desired reports and
validate the output. 4. Compute the expiration of minimum and maximum sentences. 5. Validate using
manual computations until proven free of errors. EVALUATION PROCEDURE To determine the
acceptability and usability of the project, a survey was conducted and the system was tested to determine
the reliability and functionality of the program. 1. Preliminary Evaluation – Initial evaluation was
conducted personally by the researcher through alpha testing and inspection on how the system operates.
The results of queries and computation became the basis in improving the system. 2. System Presentation
– The system was 64 presented to the evaluator-respondents consisting of IT professionals and probable
end-users. Suggestions and recommendations were properly noted such as additional queries and report
formats. 3. Final Evaluation - Survey questionnaires were distributed to at least thirty (30) evaluators
consisting of ten (10) officials and concerned employees of the Bureau of Corrections specifically those
involved in records management and the day to day transactions of the prisoners, ten (10) IT experts who
evaluated and contributed to the project and ten (10) officials and employees from the Board of Pardons
and Parole. The comments, suggestions and recommendations were used and noted in the improvement of
the system. This study adopted the Technological University of the Philippines (TUP) formulated
evaluation instrument for hardware and software components, with the following criteria: functionality,
content, reliability, availability, maintainability and scalability. Please refer to Appendix A , for sample
copy. 4. Statistical Treatment of Data. The scale of the evaluation ranges from 1 to 5, with 5 being the
highest and 1 is the lowest. The scores were tallied and computed by the Mean Range Formula for the
interpretation of the result in meeting the Software Quality Factors Standard for Acceptance.65 Table 3
System Evaluation Sheet of the Numerical Scale and Interpretation Numerical Scale Interpretation 4.51 –
5.00 Excellent 3.51 – 4.50 Very Good 2.51 – 3.50 Good 1.51 – 2.50 Fair 1.00 – 1.50 Poor CHAPTER IV
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS This chapter presents the project description, structure, capabilities and
limitations, and the results and interpretation of project evaluation. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The
project deals mainly on the Integrated Jail Management System, which handles voluminous records
and/or transactions related to the national prisoners confined in the National Penitentiary and all penal
colonies in the country. It has an accurate monitoring scheme that could simply ease the burden of jail
congestion. It gives prompt and precise information in an instant thus giving satisfaction not only to the
prisoners or to their relatives but also to the jail officials and employees as well. 66 PROJECT
STRUCTURE The developed application system was designed in a client-server architecture comprises
of the following components: A. Hardware Components Server The system requires a powerful server
where data from the penal colonies are stored. It acts as the central repository of data for the entire
Integrated Jail Management System. Workstations Together with the powerful server, the system also
requires workstations, where the penal colonies enter and process their data to generate the necessary
output. To obtain the ideal response time for each transaction in the system, workstations must have
minimum requirements of Pentium 4 or higher with at least 256 MB of RAM, Local Area Connection
(LAN) card, universal serial bus (USB) slots and Windows XP with Service Pack 2. Switch To be able to
establish a Local Area Network (LAN) connection, a core switch was required to facilitate
interconnectivity between the server and the workstations. Router It was used to establish a Wide Area
Network (WAN) among the penal colonies in the country. Firewall To enable a much more secured
network infrastructure, a firewall system must be setup to block unauthorized users of the system and to
prevent viruses from coming in to the system. 67 To sum up everything, the network infrastructure, as
shown in Figure 8, is detailed hereunder: Figure 8. Network Infrastructure Diagram The central server is
housed at the Administrative Building (Building 1) of the Bureau of Corrections located at the New
Bilibid Prison in Muntinlupa City. Workstations are distributed in the different offices located in each jail
dormitory, i.e. Reception and Diagnostic Center, Maximum Security Compound, Medium Security
Compound and the Minimum Security Compound, all of which are located in the New Bilibid Prison in
Muntinlupa City. A local server and workstations are also distributed to the penal colonies. Software
Components The Integrated Jail Management System (IJMS) is an application system written in Visual
Basic 6.0 that facilitates accurate monitoring of prisoners confined in the National Penitentiary and Penal
Colonies in the Philippines.68 LOG-IN INTEGRATED CORRECTIONS SYSTEM QUERIES /
REPORTS LIBRARIES BACKUP FILE MAINTENANCE Program Modules Hierarchical Chart
Integrated Corrections System B C D E RESTORE A F PROCESS HEARING SCHEDULE G Figure 9.
Hierarchical Chart The IJMS Program Hierarchical Chart, as shown in Figure 9, indicates how the entire
system performs. The Log-in Screen, which is very vital to the security of the system, is placed on top of
everything. Successful attempts are then followed by the Main Screen of the IJMS. The IJMS is broken
down into seven (7) functionalities namely, File Maintenance, Libraries, Hearing Schedule,
Queries/Reports, Backup, Restore and Process.69 A INMATE PROFILE LOCATION HISTORY
WATCH DATE PENDING CASE/S HEARING SCHEDULE Carpeta Page 1 Carpeta Page 2
IMPRISONMENT HISTORY Figure 10. File Maintenance File Maintenance, as shown in Figure 10, is
where the end-users enter the data needed for each prisoner. It is subdivided into six (6) modules namely,
Inmate Profile, Location History, Watch Date, Imprisonment History, Hearing Schedule and Pending
Case/s. a. Inmate Profile (Carpeta Page 1 and Carpeta Page 2) is where the end-users input basic personal
information about the prisoner. b. Location History is where the end-users input jail location of the
prisoner from the time of incarceration up to the time of discharge from prison. This tracks the history of
all the jails where the prisoner has been committed. c. The Watch Date module is where the computation
of the sentence is shown. It displays the watch dates vital in monitoring prisoners. d. Imprisonment
History is where the details of the Offense/s are entered, Court information and sentence information. It
also shows previous offense/s, if any. It automatically computes for the expiration of minimum 70 and
maximum sentence as the end-user inputs the sentence details. e. The Hearing Schedule module is where
the day, place and time of hearing for the pending case/s of the prisoner is displayed and viewed. f.
Pending Case module is where the endusers input the case details committed by the prisoner, prior or
during his conviction, which remains pending in court. B NATIONALITY PRISON LOCATION GCTA
TABLE EDUCATION OCCUPATION RELIGION SIGNATORIES Figure 11. Libraries The Libraries
Module, as shown in Figure 11, is where the standard codes needed in the system are entered. Entry and
maintenance of these codes are limited only to the central office of the Bureau of Corrections located in
Muntinlupa City. Penal colonies are not allowed to create or edit entries in this module to maintain
standardization and data integrity.71 C ALL HEARING SCHEDULE UPCOMING HEARING
SCHEDULE Figure 12. Hearing Schedule The Hearing Schedule module, as shown in Figure 12, is vital
in monitoring who among the prisoners are required to attend hearings outside the prison premises. This
entails jail guards to escort the prisoners to the court and safely bring them back to the penitentiary. This
is necessary in determining the schedule to maximize the limited number of jail guards needed for escorts.
D INMATES DUE FOR REVIEW STATUS REPORT FACTS SHEET INMATE PROFILE INQUIRY
BY CRITERIA HISTORY Expiration of Maximum Sentence ½ of the Minimum Expiration of Minimum
Sentence ½ of the Maximum 10 years 12 years By Jail Location Religion Nationality Occupation
Education Crime Active Prisoners Escape Releases Death Location History Case History Pending Cases
Hearing Schedules Type of Sentence Reclusion Perpetua Life Definite Death Indeterminate Figure 13.
Queries/Reports72 Figure 13 shows the Queries/Reports module. This is where the system provides
facility to view on screen and optionally on the printer the different queries needed by the end-users.
Some of the information that could be queried are the Inmate Profile including the case details, inmates
due for review, inmate inventory, fact sheets on nationality, age, offense, education, etc. E Backup
Database Figure 14. Back-up Figure 14 shows the Back-up utility Module. This is the functionality where
the System Administrator backups the data. The backup data in the Penal Colonies are transferred to the
Central Penitentiary in Muntinlupa. This functionality is disabled if an ordinary or limited user logs-on to
the system. F Restore Database Figure 15. Restore The Restore utility module as shown in Figure 15 is
where the System Administrator restores the data. The backup data from the Penal Colonies are then
transferred to the Central Penitentiary in Muntinlupa through the restore procedure. Just like in the
backup module, this feature is disabled for ordinary or limited users.73 Realizing the different
hierarchical charts shown above, the program specifications with detailed screen designs are shown in the
succeeding pages of this study. Just like any other secured application system, the IJMS has its own Log-
in Security Screen, as shown in Figure 16, which validates all attempts to use the system. The Log-in the
Security screen gives access to authorized users and block all unauthorized users of the system. In this
module, levels of security are applied. Upon supplying the username and encrypted password, the system
validates the access rights granted to the user who attempted to log in. Not all authorized users have the
same access rights upon entering the system. Aside from the Systems Administrator, who has the full
access in all modules of the system, all other users of the system has limited access depending on the
access rights granted by the Systems Administrator. Upon supplying the username and password,
successful attempt to use the system brings the end-user to a simple splash screen for the IJMS, as shown
in Figure 17. This screen, which is presented before proceeding to the main screen, is used as an
introductory part to show copyrights and licenses. 74 Figure 17. Splash Screen Pressing any key will
bring the user to the main screen of the system. PROJECT CAPABILITIES AND LIMITATIONS The
IJMS was developed primarily to address major problems being encountered in monitoring national
prisoners. The system is capable of adding, updating and maintaining inmates’ personal information,
crime and sentence information and results of review and recommendation. It has the capability to
compute for the expiration of the prisoner’s minimum and maximum sentences. Based on the computed
expiration, the system has the capacity to monitor watch dates to determine the prisoners’ eligibility for
early releases. It also has the facility to generate needed reports. In addition, the developed system has the
ability to transfer pertinent information among the penal colonies by uploading and downloading the data
through the use of a computer network. However, because of the broad coverage of the entire Corrections
Pillar, this study focused only on the seven major penal institutions of the country basically due to
financial and time constraints. The developed system does not include maintenance of inmates’ records
confined under the jurisdiction of local jails i.e. city jails, 75 municipal jails, provincial jails and/or any
other rehabilitation centers across the country. Nonetheless, future enhancements of the developed system
could take into consideration integrating the above-mentioned jails as well as rehabilitation centers.
PROJECT EVALUATION Based on the system presentation done before the IT professionals and
probable end-users, the project was assessed in terms of system functionalities. It was evaluated to be
user-friendly with ease of operation and functions but was able to cater to the needs of accurately
monitoring the prisoners. As for the conduct of final evaluation, the project has an overall average rating
of 4.66, which corresponds to a descriptive rating of excellent accessibility rate. The technical evaluator-
respondents primarily focused on the functionalities and capabilities of the program, the entity
relationship and the database structure. In addition, prison officials as well as the employee-respondents
were concerned about the data integrity and the accurate monitoring of prisoners in all jails. They were
assured that the data of the prisoners confined in the penal colonies are transferred electronically to the
main National penitentiary located at the New Bilibid Prison in Muntinlupa City. More so, the system
was evaluated as to the consistency of the generated reports. Realizing the over-all results of the
evaluation, the researcher could provide favorable conclusions in terms of the general level of
acceptability of the project. To assess the software components of the project, the same sets of evaluation
criteria were used in terms of (a) Functionality; (b) Content; (c) Reliability; (d) Availability; (e)
Maintainability; and (f) Saleability. 76 Table 4. Evaluation Results of the Prison Officials and Employees
CRITERIA MEAN DESCRIPTIVE RATING A. Functionality 4.67 Excellent B. Content 4.73 Excellent
C. Reliability 4.60 Excellent D. Availability 4.47 Excellent E. Maintainability 4.40 Very Good F.
Saleability 4.47 Excellent Table 4 illustrates the overall mean score of each decisive factor and the
acquired descriptive rating as perceived by the prison officials and employees. With a very good overall
mean score of 4.56, the project was concluded to perform the expected operations and generate the
necessary output. The prison officials and employee respondents found the program interface to be user
friendly and very effective especially in monitoring prisoners. Table 5. Evaluation Results of the Board of
Pardons and Parole Officials and Employees CRITERIA MEAN DESCRIPTIVE RATING A.
Functionality 4.67 Excellent B. Content 4.63 Excellent C. Reliability 4.73 Excellent D. Availability 4.80
Excellent E. Maintainability 4.85 Excellent F. Saleability 4.60 Excellent Table 5 reveals that an excellent
rating was given to all software criteria by the officials and employees from the Board of Pardons and
Parole. This shows that the program performed as expected by the end-users. It generated accurate results
with optimum ease and user friendliness. These ratings show a complete, functioning program was
developed with functionality, content and easy maintenance facilities.77 On the other hand, Table 6
shows the evaluation given by technical people and have given an Excellent rating of 4.93 for
functionality, 4.63 for content, 4.60 for reliability, 4.80 for availability and another 4.80 for
maintainability and a Very Good rating of 4.43 for saleability. Table 6. Evaluation Results of the
Technical Experts CRITERIA MEAN DESCRIPTIVE RATING A. Functionality 4.93 Excellent B.
Content 4.63 Excellent C. Reliability 4.60 Excellent D. Availability 4.80 Excellent E. Maintainability
4.80 Excellent F. Saleability 4.43 Very Good Finally, Table 7 confirms that all respondents i.e. the Prison
Officials and employees, BPP Officials and employees and Technical Experts found that the project
acceptability with the highest potential of being implemented to the major penal institutions in the
Philippines. An overall mean of 4.66 was given, which is considered to be excellent and was computed to
prove the respondents affirmative perception on the project. Table 7. Overall Evaluation Results
CRITERIA MEAN SCORE DESCRIPTIVE RATING Prison Officials and Employees BPP Officials and
Employees Technical Experts Overall A. Functionality 4.67 4.67 4.93 4.76 Excellent B. Content 4.73
4.63 4.63 4.67 Excellent C. Reliability 4.60 4.73 4.60 4.64 Excellent D. Availability 4.47 4.80 4.80 4.69
Excellent E. Maintainability 4.40 4.85 4.80 4.68 Excellent F. Saleability 4.47 4.60 4.43 4.50 Very Good
Overall Mean 4.66 Excellent78 Chapter V SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter presents the Summary of Findings, Conclusions and
Recommendations of the study. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Based on the results of the study, the
following are the summary of findings: 1. Functionality. The respondents rated the system excellently
because it provides ease of operation. Provision for comfort and convenience and user friendliness. 2.
Content. The respondents rated the system to be excellent since the system produces accurate reports,
updatedness and presentation of information. 3. Reliability. The respondents rated the system to be
excellent in terms of conformance to a desired result, the absence of failures and accuracy in
performance. 4. Availability. The respondents rated the system to be excellent on its performance
according to specification, the provisions for security requirements and the completeness of the system. 5.
Maintainability. The respondents rated the system to be excellent in terms of ease of performance,
provision of diagnostic tools and provision for enhancement and modifications. 6. Saleability. The
respondents rated the system to be very good because of presence of market demands, competitiveness of
price and the attractiveness of the design.79 CONCLUSIONS In consideration of the objectives of the
study and the results of the evaluation, the following conclusions were drawn: 1. That the designed
system meets the need of providing an organized jail management system that integrates the National
Penitentiary and all penal colonies thus establishing a centralized database. It can generate accurate
reports for the rehabilitation of the prisoners such as monitoring of inmates according to their educational
attainment, occupation, religion, etc. 2. That the system is capable of adding, editing, maintaining and
searching records of inmates. It can also monitor inmates due for review or due for release to help
decongest the prison cells. 3. That the system was rated to be excellent based on the results of evaluation
conducted. RECOMMENDATIONS For the improvement of the study, it is recommended that: 1. The
system is implemented not only in the major penal institutions in the country but also in the local,
provincial and municipal jails. 2. For the government, ponder on the Medium Term Philippine
Development Plan (2004-2010) intended for the Corrections and Rehabilitation Pillar i.e. strict
monitoring of prisoners’ carpetas/prison records through a systematic and improve records system to
avoid any delay in the release of prisoners.80 3. Future researches may include the migration of data from
MS Access to MS SQL. BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Abadinsky, Howard. 1994. “Probation and Parole :
Theory and Practice”. 5th ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ : Prentice Hall. Alvor, Mildred Bernadette. 2005.
“The Philippine Corrections System: Current Situation and Issues.” Resource Material, UNAFEI. Tokyo,
Japan. Champion, Dean J. 1996. “Probation, Parole, and Community Corrections”. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle
River, N.J. : Prentice Hall. Courtless, Thomas F. 1998. “Corrections and the Criminal Justice System :
Law, Policies, and Practices”. Belmont, CA : West/Wadsworth Foon, Christopher Chin Nuyk, et al. 1988.
“Progress of International Cooperation in the Administration of Corrections and Rehabilation.” Resource
Material, UNAFEI. Tokyo, Japan. Jose, Isaias Alma. 1986. “Notes on Criminal Justice System: A Study
in the Philippine Setting.” Manila : PCCr. Miguel, Ernesto A. and Argoso, Levi Mallari. 1998.
“Compilation on Probation and Parole Systems in the Philippines.” Naga City : Superprint Lithographics
(Bicol) O’Brien, James A. 1995. “Management Information Systems – A Managerial End-User
Perspective”. 2nd Ed., Illinois, USA : Irwin Theses and Dissertations Alonzo, Domingo III.
“Development of an Asset Management System using Radio Frequency Identification Tag (AMSRFID)”.
200781 Guarino, Flordeliz C. “Comparative analysis of the personality characteristics of paranoia and
nonparanoia inmates in the National Bilibid Prison,Muntinlupa, Metro Manila”. 1991. Guico, Vanessa Q.
“Development of an On-Line Provincial Civil Registry”. 2005 Mapa, Criselda C. “An Appraisal of the
management practices in the Quezon City Jail”. 1993 Maneja, Ryan E. “Development of a Computerized
Disc Jockey”. 2005 Saet, Rosie V. “An appraisal of the literacy education in the four subcolonies of
Iwahig Prison and Penal Farm (IPPF): basis for instructional program improvement”. 1992 Sandoval,
Resurrection D. “An Assessment of the Effects of Group Counseling Training Program for the Newly
Admitted Inmates of the National Penitentiary”. 1985 Serafin O. Cea. “An Analysis of the Role of
Corrections in Our Criminal Justice System”. 1990. Journals and Other Publications Asia News. “Filipino
Bishops Aim to Improve Prisons.” Baguio City. 2006. Aspiras, Artemio. “Corrections Pillar: Problems,
Policies and Recommendations.” Seminar on the Integration of the Criminal Justice System Concepts.
Development Academy of the Philippines. 2002. Bureau of Corrections Operations Manual. Muntinlupa
City. 2000. Department of Justice 2005 Accomplishment Report. Manila. 2005 Department of Justice
2006 Accomplishment Report. Manila. 2006 Exploratory Testing, Florida Institute of Technology, 82
Quality Assurance Institute Worldwide Annual Software Testing Conference, Orlando, F. November
2006 Kaner, Cem. “Exploratory Testing” Florida Institute of Technology, Quality Assurance Institute
Worldwide Annual Software Testing Conference.Orlando, FL, November 2006 Komu, Julius Mailu, et al.
“Solutions to Overcrowding in Correctional Institutions.” Resource Material, UNAFEI. Tokyo,
Japan.1988. Kouhashi, Hiroshi, et al. “Selection of Offenders for Community-Based Corrections.”
Resource Material, UNAFEI. Tokyo, Japan. 1995. Kushairy, Mohd Nadzri bin, et al. “Improvement of
Living Conditions in the Process of Correction and Rehabilitation.” Resource Material, UNAFEI. Tokyo,
Japan. 1988. Neri, Romulo. “Medium Term Philippine Development Plan 2004-2010.” The Government
of the Philippine Republic. 2004. Nigerian Newsday. “Prison Congestion in Nigeria.” Nasarawa
Publishing Company Limited. 2006. Schmitz, Joe. “Jail Management System Saves Staff Time and
Serves Many.” Large Jail Network Bulletin. 2001. Valai, Ngali, et al. “Community-Based Corrections.”
Resource Material, UNAFEI. Tokyo, Japan. 1995. Yangco, Celia. “Philippine Community-Based
Treatment of Offenders: Old Concepts, New Approaches, Best Practices.” Criminal Justice Journal.
National Police Commission. 1998. Electronic Sources Crystal Reports. Retrieved 22 April 2008. 83
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Crystal_Reports D’ Amico, John. “Why Parole?” (2005). New Jersey State
Parole Board. Retrieved 3 May 2006. http://www.state.nj.us/parole Florida Department of Corrections,
USA. “Corrections Offender Network” (2006).Retrieved 5 May
2006.http://www.dc/state.fl.us/inmateinfo/inmateinfo menu.asp Gallatin County Corrections Master Plan.
“Jail Population Management” (2006). Retrieved 5 May 2006.
http://www.montana.edu/jasonmiller/bennett% 20Report/Chapter%20six.pdf Haney. “Overcrowding: The
Emergence of a Destructive Correctional Norm” (1996). Retrieved 8 May 2006.
http://www.home1.gte.net/cjhawk/Haney Overcrowding.htm Howard, John. “Prison Overcrowding. John
Howard Society of Albert” (1996). Retrieved 8 May 2006. http://www.johnhoward.ab.ca/PUB/C42.htm
King II, Leon A. Esq. “Philadelphia Prison System” (2002). Retrieved 5 May 2006.
http://www.phila.gov/prisons McVey, Catherine. “Board of Probation and Parole” (2006). Retrieved 3
May 2006. http://pbpp.state.pa.us//pbppinfo/cwp/view.asp Michigan Department of Corrections.
“Offender Tracking Information System” (2006). Retrieved 5 May 2006.
http://www.state.mi.us/mdoc/asp/ otis2.html Microsoft Visual Basic 6.0. Retrieved 18 April 2008.
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/ enus/library/ms950408.aspx 84 Mitchell, Bradley. “Introduction to Client
Server Networks”. Retrieved 29 April 2008. http://compnetworking.about.com/od/basicnetw
orkingfaqs/a/ client-server.htm Software Evaluation. Alpha and Beta Testing. Retrieved 18 April 2008.
http://www4.nau.edu/azregions/Testing/beta.htm Smith, Nathan. “American Parole System” (2005).
Retrieved 8 May 2006. http://www.computer-forensictechnician.com/wordpress/american-parolesystem.
Sungard-Ossi. “Jail Management System” (2006). Retrieved 5 May 2006
http://hteinc.com/products/ossi/jms.pdf Syscon Justice Systems Ltd. “The Business Benefits of
Introducing Syscon’s TAG Offender Management System” (2003). Retrieved 5 May 2006.
http://syscon.net/products/whitepapers/business/ %20benefits%20vi.3.pdf Virginia Department of
Corrections, USA. “Inmate Status Information System” (2006). Retrieved 5 May 2006.
http://secure01.virginiainteractive.org/cgibin/vadoc/doc.cgi Volusia County, Florida, USA. “Jail
Management System” (2006). Retrieved 3 May 2006. http://volusia.org/IT/jms.htm Whatis.com
“Definition of Operating System” (2008). Retrieved 18 April 2008.
http://searchciomidmarket.techtarget.com/ Wright, Anne-Marie “Using Crystal Reports” (2008).
Retrieved 18 April 2008.http://www.vbexplorer.com/VBExplorer/vb_featur e/august2000/
using_crystal_reports.as