If you live in NorCo and are separated or divorced with children, you likely have come into contact with Domestic Relations, an arm of the Courts. It establishes support orders and paternity, locates absent parents and enforces. This is required by federal regulations and state law in order to ensure that non-custodial parents contribute toward the support of their dependents, allowing them to stay off the welfare rolls and therefore save taxpayer dollars. Some of my readers have complained and even sued over the way Domestic Relations handles support. But it collects and pays out a lot of money, $41.5 million support in 2018. It also received $85,000 in fees. That's just 0.0002 in administrative costs. This important part of the courts, which helps our children was recently audited by Stacy Duke and Controller Tara Zrinski for compliance with internal controls, policies and procedures. Here's what they found:
"Our audit of the Domestic Relations Section (Domestic Relations) revealed that internal controls over cash, receipts and disbursements are functioning as intended. The three financial analysts and their support staff are able to properly segregate duties and retain complete and proper documentation for the financial transactions. Receipts for support payments and other fees are collected and accounted for by DRS financial staff and then properly recorded in the statewide PA Child Support Enforcement System (PACSES). Support payments are deposited the following business day in the PACSES support bank account which is swept daily by the State Collection and Disbursement Unit (SCDU) for distribution to plaintiffs. Payments collected by DRS for certain other fees are deposited in the County’s common bank account via the Revenue Division."
The following items were tested:
Determine if receipts (support) are deposited intact daily and into the proper bank account.
Determine if SCDU funds sweeps from the support account were for the correct amount and if the detailed support payments entered into PACSES by DRS were accurate.
Determine if there were any withdrawals from the bail account during the period being audited.
Determine if there were any withdrawals from the support account that were not initiated by SCDU during the period being audited.
Determine if bank accounts are being reconciled monthly by an accountant and then reviewed by the director of DRS.
Determine if there is $100 in “change” in the cash drawers before any transactions are taken into account.
Determine if the activity posted to the DRS Agency fund is accurate.
6 comments:
This audit seems to have missed the fact that the Northampton County Domestic Relations System routinely abuses the wage garnishment system to take money from parents without engaging in the due process specified by the legislature. There is a requirement when attaching wages to notify the garnishee of when and how they may challenge the amount of garnishment. In Northampton County, a parent having their wages garnished never gets such a notice, and often times becomes aware of garnishment only when up to 50 percent of their wages are absent from their paycheck. When conference officer Jeanine Orlando was cross examined in a record proceeding in front of Judge Kassis last year regarding this glaring ommission of due process, she admitted on the record that these legislative procedures are not followed, and excused the lapse by stating that the system is automated. Functionally, this means that every dollar brought in by wage garnishment in Northampton County has been collected illegally and without proper due process. Neither Judge Kassis nor Director McGrogan-Rush seemed to care. This should not be at all surprising as the general attitude of the bureacracy in norco is "we are right, the law be damned, there's nothing to see here, just do what we say". If Zrinksi wants to conduct a real audit of this lawless section, she can contact me and I would be pleased to tell her exactly where to look and exactly what statutes are being violated, as the example above is just one of many statutory violations. Northampton DRS is a lawless organization that needs to be held accountable.
Here are some other common violations that DRS has been caught red handed in:
1)failure to provide proper and tinely notice of hearings
2)violations of the self support reserve that punish those in the county with the lowest incomes
3)Brian Lawser, DRS Solicitor, took it upon himself to attempt to bar access to the courtroom and prevent members of the public from viewing the drs proceedings. Solicitors have no such power, especially given that Judge Morganelli was presiding and took no issue with observers in the courtroom
4)failure to use financial determinations provided by the department of human services
5) incarceration of individuals while failing to adhere to purge provisions set in place by the Supreme Court of the United states
There is ample material for a motivated auditor to work with.
One might say that the audit was conducted by the Controller's office personnel. That would be more accurate.
7:55, Yes, let's not give any credit to the people who signed off on and took responsibility for the audit. Heaven forbid that the Controller can be credited for doing her job.
Matt, Flower, Ordinarily, a controller conducts financial audits and checks that internal controls are in place and that laws regarding the money are being followed. A controller rarely performs a performance audit and usually only does so under very specific guidelines at the request of county council.
Some of the statutes I refer do absolutely qualify as "laws regarding the money".
It's ALL about the money.
Post a Comment