Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Youth Development Claims Administration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee questions private contractor fees and staffing for youth development claims process
Summary
Committee members asked why the attorney general's office uses a private contractor to process youth-development claims and sought details on administrative staffing and pay structures for the YDC claims administrator office.
Legislators pressed the youth development claims administrator's office and auditors on June 20 over the use of an outside contractor and the size and pay of the office's staff.
Representative Leishman asked why the attorney general's office engages a contractor identified in committee materials as Beryl Dina LLP (referred to elsewhere in the record as Veral Dana) and why the contractor’s fees totaled roughly $2.3 million in 2024 and more than $2 million in 2025. Auditor Paige Lorenz, who worked on the report, said the contractor conducts intake and initial review of every claim sent by the YDCCA; after intake, the contractor may recommend whether a claim should proceed to the attorney general’s designee and may remain involved in resolution proceedings. Lorenz said the Department of Justice sets flat rates for each step of that process.
Jennifer Foley, administrator for the YDCCA, told the committee the office currently has four full-time staff members under the judicial branch (administrator, senior paralegal and two administrative assistants), two full-time hearing-team staff and two part-time employees who assist the hearing teams. Foley said one position (administrator Broderick) is tied by statute to a judge’s salary; other salaries align with judicial-branch labor grades and steps.
Committee members asked whether the attorney general's office could perform the intake work instead of paying a private contractor. Audit staff said the contractor was involved in related litigation before the YDCCA existed and was part of designing the claims-administration process; that history influenced continued use of the contractor, auditors said.
Committee members requested additional clarity on the contractor’s role and cautioned that proposed structural changes in pending budget legislation could change reporting lines and responsibilities for the office.
The items addressing the YDCCA appeared in the informational section of the agenda; committee members cited the contract costs and administrative overhead during the discussion. The transcript shows committee questioning and agency responses but no committee vote was required for the informational briefing.
