The audit also revealed that the DOC did not formally monitor the progress of some inmates toward achieving goals established for them and that the DOC's Computer Assisted Classification Program (CACP) was not generally used by classification staff to facilitate the program placement of inmates. Failure to use the CACP had three adverse effects: (1) incorrect information on the progress review report regarding rehabilitative program recommendations and participation; (2) rehabilitative assignments that were not based on priorities identified by the CACP; and (3) lack of statewide information on the rehabilitative needs and program participation for planning and evaluation purposes. Factors affecting progress reviews included shorter incarceration periods, priority of inmate classification functions, and limited staff resources. Recommendations to improve the inmate classification process are presented that focus on scheduled progress reviews based on goals for individual inmates and on the importance of input from institutional classification staff to determine if the CACP is capable of providing the information needed. The DOC's response to the audit is appended. 6 footnotes and 3 exhibits