Attleboro District Court

This is a state audit of the Attleboro Division of the District Court Department, focused on how it handled certain court fees and bail money from July 1, 2009 through October 31, 2010.

“The purpose of our audit was to review ADC's internal controls and compliance with state laws and regulations regarding certain fees and bail funds for the period July 1, 2009 through October 31, 2010.”

The auditor looked at this court because district courts collect major fee revenue, and the office selected Attleboro for a closer review of probation, indigent counsel, victim-witness fees, and bail activity.

“Of the 62 district courts throughout the Commonwealth, ADC is one that we selected for further review of the above fees.”

Court fees and bail money are public funds. If courts do not track what is owed, prioritize required payments, or handle old bail properly, money can be delayed, misdirected, or left unused.

“Without an accounts receivable system, courts lack control over a significant source of revenue.”

For an ordinary resident, this matters because court money can affect state funds, local governments, victims’ assessments, and people who posted bail but may not know the money can be released.

“As a result, the Commonwealth has been denied timely access and use of these funds and defendants or sureties that posted bail may not know it is available to be released.”

The court was mostly following the rules in the areas tested, but the audit found four practical fixes: better receivable tracking, victim-witness fees paid first, streamlined cashiering, and better bail follow-up.

“Our recommendations are intended to assist ADC in developing, implementing, or improving its internal controls and overall financial and administrative operations to ensure that ADC’s systems covering certain fees and bail funds operate in an economical, efficient, and effective manner and in compliance with applicable laws, rules, and regulations.”

The report says the court and Trial Court offices should keep implementing and using MassCourts, keep prioritizing victim-witness payments, and keep reviewing bail records so old or forfeited bail is handled properly.

“ADC should continue to perform periodic reviews of bail records to ensure future compliance with the state law and AOTC regulations governing bail.”

The findings were significant because district courts collected about $78 million in fiscal year 2010, and more than $35 million in fees could have been tracked through a stronger receivables system.

“Of the total revenues of approximately $78 million collected by all district courts during fiscal year 2010, over $35 million in fees collected for all 62 district court locations in that year could have been processed through an accounts receivable system if the courts had one.”

An accounts receivable system is basically a formal way to track money owed to the court, what has been paid, and what still needs follow-up.

“An accounts receivable system would also be an important management tool to help age and analyze outstanding balances for further follow-up action and would provide an extra control feature to minimize risk of misstatement of court assets.”