The Nebraska Supreme Court oversees probation in the state. (Getty Images)
LINCOLN — The Nebraska State Auditor is taking aim at the state office that manages probation services for lawbreakers — alleging that an “extraordinary” spike in state costs was at least partly spurred by scant oversight.
Released Monday, a 41-page report by Auditor Mike Foley examined the Nebraska Administrative Office of Probation. A division of the Nebraska Supreme Court, the probation office supervises roughly 16,000 Nebraskans who broke the law, including about 5,500 youths and adults who receive specific court-ordered services.
According to Foley, expenses of probation services jumped to roughly $62 million last calendar year — an increase of about $19.5 million from two years earlier.
The “cost explosion,” he said, was driven by programming for juveniles convicted of crimes. Such services include psychiatric and substance abuse treatment, family support, transportation and community youth coaching.
While juveniles comprise about 20% of all those on probation, Foley said, they account for about 88% of the cost of all probation services provided in Nebraska.
Potentially ‘millions’ at stake
Based on his team’s findings, Foley believes that potentially “millions of dollars” were paid by the AOP for services he contends could have been covered by other sources, such as family, private insurance, Medicaid or another federal pot.
“It is the intent of state law to promote parental responsibility and to provide for the most equitable use and availability of public money,” the report said.
To help fulfill that intent, it said, sentencing courts are supposed to consider the earnings of a household and availability of other income sources and, when appropriate, direct them to contribute.
My office’s latest audit work shows much room for improvement, as there has been for many years, when it comes to efficient fiscal management.
– Mike Foley, Nebraska State Auditor
Foley contends that the AOP provided inadequate oversight and did not provide necessary financial information to judges.
He said running the probation program for juvenile, county and district courts is “unquestionably a difficult and often thankless task.” He noted that many findings remained unfixed since a similar state audit a decade ago.
“My office’s latest audit work shows much room for improvement, as there has been for many years, when it comes to efficient fiscal management,” Foley said.
Foley told the Nebraska Examiner that he can’t direct the hand of the AOP or Supreme Court, but can draw attention to what he sees as inefficiencies. He said part of the solution is educating judges.
“When you order all these fancy services, stop for a moment and say, ‘Who’s gonna pay for that?’” said Foley. He said the “irritating” part to him is that “victims” of crime often end up paying for services via tax dollars.
Probation responds
The report included a response from the AOP, saying it will work to improve internal policies and procedures.
The AOP did point out, however, that in determining a household’s ability to pay, its staff does not have access to the same financial information used by the auditing team from the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services.
Its leadership said it will contact DHHS and other state entities to determine the feasibility of reviewing such data and also to address potential payment issues.
Foley said shortcomings went beyond access to DHHS records and alleged a lack of adequate policies and procedures.
Gene Cotter, state probation administrator, on Monday added that his staff was appreciative of the auditor’s work and said that through the process, his office was able to fix an automated process that led to duplicate payments.
Cotter, who was appointed to the office earlier this year, said his team has made strides in addressing flaws highlighted in previous audits, including redesigning a voucher processing system.
“Be assured, all financial resources received from the Legislature have been used to increase community safety,” he told the Nebraska Examiner.
Cotter said that while juveniles represent a smaller fraction of the overall probation population, state statutes require funding a“full continuum” of programming which has led to financial aid for pricey services including out-of-home placements, detention and community-based treatments.
Additionally, he said, the Legislature increased juvenile service provider rates by 20% over the past three fiscal years and the number of youths receiving probation services rose by about 25% in fiscal year 2023.
Be assured, all financial resources received from the Legislature have been used to increase community safety.
– Gene Cotter, Nebraska probation administrator
When performing the review, the audit team looked at a sample of 48 payment vouchers totaling about $523,000 for services.
Foley said the sample pool showed that probationers were not required to pay “a single dollar, despite evidence that many of them or their families had the monetary means to cover some, if not all, of those expenses.”
Other highlights
Among other findings alleged:
State statute authorizes the probation office to collect fees from adults on probation for electronic surveillance, drug tests and a monthly programming fee. According to the audit, 38% of $2.6 million in such charges were collected last year. It said the courts waived about $968,000, and another $650,000 remains outstanding.
Four vouchers reviewed showed a total of $10,494 in services provided that allegedly weren’t court-ordered and lacked documentation to show need by the individual.
The probation office allegedly made seven duplicate payments totaling $9,370 during 2024.
In one case, the AOP authorized nearly $800 for a juvenile offender’s care in a group home during a period in which the home said the youth had run away.
In four instances, services for probationers who were wards of the state totaled nearly $225,000 and might have been required to be paid by federal funds through DHHS.
One court-ordered probation service that could last 45 days was paid for 118 days without authorization.
In about half the cases reviewed, the probation office allegedly did not update the financial needs of probationers, as regulations require.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Comments