On Friday, December 22, state Auditor Doug Hoffer did something almost routine — but did it in an unusual way.

The routine: Hoffer issued a memo pointing out that there’s no evidence that a state workforce incentive program has any beneficial effect. The unusual: He sent it out at 2:26 p.m. on the Friday afternoon of the Christmas holiday weekend. As you might expect, there was no immediate coverage from any Vermont news outlet, all of whose members had their eyes fixed on the nearest exit when the auditor’s missive hit their inboxes.

It’s almost as though Hoffer realizes that when it comes to state incentive programs, he’s a lonely voice howling into the void. So why not simply launch his note directly into the void?

Perhaps that’s just my inner cynic talking. But really, does it make any difference whether he shoves this thing over the transom on a holiday weekend or calls a press conference in a prime spot? It’s probably going to have the same effect.

Which is to say, no effect whatsoever.

The subject this time around is the suite of incentive programs launched by the Scott administration to try to address Vermont’s severe shortage of nurses. It’s a critical need, and if the programs aren’t doing what they promise, then it’s a huge swing and a miss with significant consequences. (The memo is downloadable here.)

But it seems like everybody loves them some incentive programs because the up-front cost is precisely zero. Which doesn’t mean they’re free, not at all; every incentive program means the state is foregoing tax revenue it would otherwise collect. That’s why people like Hoffer refer to them as “tax expenditures,” and why we should all think of them in those terms.

Hoffer’s critique of the nursing incentives is devastating. Or it would be to anyone paying attention, which usually doesn’t include the administration or even, sadly, the Legislature. He outlines four big problems with the incentives, to wit:

— Performance measures have not been developed to determine if the incentive programs are working.

— Gaps in data collection limit the ability to measure success of these programs.

— There is a lack of internal controls in the monitoring of service obligations for recipientsof incentive programs administered by the Agency for Human Services Central Office(AHS CO) and the Vermont Department of Health (VDH).

— State-funded incentive programs do not appear to be coordinated with hospitals’ own recruitment and retention strategies, risking inequitable award amounts and inequitable geographic distribution of program benefits.

Ouch. Besides that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?

Recapping here: Incentive programs, generally speaking, are built on shifting sands. Beyond that, these incentives include “gaps in data collection,” no effort to ensure that recipients live up to their obligations, and a lack of coordination with the health care institutions that are bleeding red ink due to their heavy dependence on expensive traveling nurses. In short, my words not his, the programs were shoddily constructed and are poorly managed.

Hoffer’s memo includes a hopeful note: not all the incentives have been awarded, so there’s time to reform the programs and improve their effectiveness. This would seem to be a high priority, given our continuing shortage of nurses. But this administration customarily resorts to ass-covering when confronted with Hoffer’s work.

The memo is cc’d to the chairs of several House and Senate committees. One might hope for more attention in those quarters, but we shall see. Many lawmakers seem to wear blinders when it comes to workforce incentive programs because of the zero up-front cost. It’s free, right?

No, it’s not. It costs us tax revenue that could be more effectively spent elsewhere, and it allows us to believe that we’ve addressed a critical shortage when, in fact, there’s no evidence that we’ve done anything of the sort.