Audit Reveals Disconnect in Concord District Court's Community Service Enforcement

CONCORD, MA—An audit of Concord District Court (CDC) found disparities in its handling of community service among probationers.

An audit by State Auditor Suzanne Bump based on information collected from Jul. 1, 2012 to Dec. 31, 2103 found that some CDC judges allowed probation officers to choose whether probationers payed probation service fees (PSFs) or performed community service, contrary to General Law. The audit also found that CDC’s probation office does not have an effective method of tracking performed community service hours.

According to a Jan. 13 statement by Bump, courts across the Commonwealth have faced these issues.

“The audit found that the law guiding the courts about probation fees and/or community service was interpreted and implemented differently across the 16 courts at which we conducted our review,” said State Auditor Suzanne M. Bump. “Fair and equitable treatment under the law is at the heart of our criminal justice system but our audit found that rather than justice being impartial, the fate of many residents has instead been a matter of geography and dependent on which court supervised them during their probation period.”

CDC, which serves the towns of Concord, Carlisle, Lincoln, Lexington, Bedford, Acton, Maynard and Stow, had only transmitted 55 percent of its estimated potential PSF revenue, according to the audit.

“The difference between this percentage and 100% could be the result of probationers performing community service instead of paying PSFs, subsequent court-ordered remittals of PSFs (either the full amount or any remaining unpaid PSF balance), and/or probationers defaulting on their payment obligations,” according to the audit.

In addition, judges were also not properly documenting such sentencing information.

“Of the 44 probationers selected, we identified 4 for whom the judge had added “or community service” to the probation sentence, allowing the probation officer to decide which penalty—a fee or community service—was appropriate and an additional 5 for whom the judge waived the fee without requiring the probationer to perform monthly community service instead of paying the fee. The sentencing judge did not sufficiently document that the PSF would be an undue hardship for any of these 9 probationers,” the audit reads.

The court also found that none of the 14 criminal cases reviewed by the auditors, no community service hours were updated as they were performed, and were being entered at the end of the probation term.

“Inconsistency in assessing or documenting waivers of the required fees means the Trial Court, through its district court locations, may not be collecting the revenue it should,” said Bump in the Jan. 13 release.

To view the full audit, click here.