In the past, the parole board typically granted release on the minimum unless there was poor institutional conduct or an objective reason for finding a current

risk to the public.  Sentencing judges relied on this practice, as did prosecutors and defense attorneys when they negotiated guilty pleas. Prisoners were encouraged to believe they could earn their release. At parole interviews, board members looked for positive signs of growth and change.

Today, the board effectively places the burden on the prisoner to prove that he or she is not a risk and should not be required to serve the maximum sentence.  The board places the most emphasis on the crime and on prior record, which the prisoner cannot change. These are also the two factors they used to determine the sentence in the first place. Prisoners have very few ways to prove they are not risks. 

• The board gives little weight to a good institutional record because, it says, good conduct is expected. 
   
• There are very few opportunities for achievement available, as prisoner programs (like college) have been reduced or eliminated.
   
• Prisoners often can’t complete required programs because the programs aren’t available or they keep getting transferred or are told they don’t qualify.
   
• Even when prisoners do complete every requirement, the board often dismisses the significance.

The parole board also departs regularly from the MDOC's own parole guidelines.  These guidelines assign points based on the prisoner’s offense, prior record, age, years served, in-prison conduct, program participation, statistical risk for re-offending and mental health history.  Prisoners who score “high probability for release” are supposed to be paroled unless the board gives substantial and compelling reasons for departing from the guidelines recommendation.  However, nothing prohibits the board from relying on factors already counted.  For instance, the board frequently cites aspects of the offense or the prisoner’s prior record as reasons for denying release.  It also often cites its own subjective assessment that the prisoner is not remorseful or is minimizing his or her conduct.  These assessments sometimes run counter to those expressly made by MDOC treatment personnel.  Since prisoners have no right to appeal parole board decisions, there is no way to enforce the parole guidelines or hold the board accountable for its reasoning.