Skip to main content
Intoxicated Driver Program Best Practices Guide

Section 6: Fees

Fees assessed under the Intoxicated Driver Program (IDP) must be authorized by statute or administrative code, reasonable, and directly tied to allowable program functions.

The purpose of this section is to clarify which fees are explicitly authorized under Wis. Admin. Code ch. DHS 62, how those fees relate to client compliance, and how other fees, if imposed, must be handled to remain consistent with broader DHS requirements.

This guidance is intended to promote uniformity, transparency, and equity, while avoiding unnecessary financial barriers that may interfere with successful program completion.

IDP fees are limited to the IDP assessment fee and the driver safety plan (DSP) program fee.

The IDP assessment fee is the fee charged for completion of the operating while intoxicated (OWI) assessment required under Wis. Admin. Code § DHS 62.07(3). The assessment fee is authorized under Wis. Admin. Code § DHS 62.11 and represents the minimum required financial obligation associated with the assessment phase of IDP.

The DSP program fee is the fee charged for participation in services identified in the DSP, including treatment, traffic safety school, or alternative education programs. The DSP program fee is authorized under Wis. Admin. Code § DHS 62.11 and represents the minimum required financial obligation associated with completing the DSP.

IDP fees are reasonable when the fees:

  • Are directly tied to required IDP services.
  • Reflect the actual and necessary cost of service delivery.
  • Are applied uniformly to similarly situated clients.
  • Are clearly disclosed to clients at the time of assessment.
  • Are supported by written policies and procedures.
  • Do not create an unnecessary financial barrier to participation or completion.

Fees not identified as an IDP assessment fee or DSP program fee under Wis. Admin. Code § DHS 62.11, including administrative, amendment, extension, or close-out fees, are not IDP fees and may not be used as a condition of program participation, compliance, or completion.

Counties may have separate authority to assess certain fees under Wis. Stat. § 46.10 and Wis. Admin. Code ch. DHS 1, including fees related to the cost of care, services, or administrative activities. When such authority is exercised, these fees:

  • Are established and approved annually by the county board through a fee schedule.
  • Comply with all applicable requirements of Wis. Admin. Code ch. DHS 1, including ability-to-pay determinations and billing and collection safeguards.
  • Are clearly distinguished from IDP fees.
  • Are not treated as a condition of IDP participation or completion.

Client compliance

Only IDP fees authorized under Wis. Admin. Code § DHS 62.11 may be used as a basis for noncompliance under Wis. Admin. Code ch. DHS 62. During the assessment phase, a client may be found noncompliant for failure to pay the IDP assessment fee, and during the DSP phase, a client may be found noncompliant for failure to pay the DSP program fee.

Failure to pay fees outside of Wis. Admin. Code § DHS 62.11, including fees assessed under other statutory authority such as Wis. Stat. § 46.10, may not be used as a basis for noncompliance, extension, delayed reporting, or prevention of program completion.

Only IDP program fees authorized under Wis. Admin. Code § DHS 62.11 may be treated as fees associated with IDP participation, compliance, or completion.

DSP program fees may be reduced or waived if the client is unable to pay. Assessment fees, traffic safety school fees, and alternative education program fees may not be reduced or waived.

Considerations

To promote consistent implementation, DHS recommends assessment agencies:

  • Maintain clear, written fee policies aligned with IDP requirements.
  • Periodically review fees to ensure continued alignment with documented costs.
  • Clearly separate IDP fees from any other county-imposed fees.
  • Avoid fee structures that create unnecessary barriers to timely program completion.

Go back - Section 5: Driver Safety Plans
Next - Section 7: Jurisdictional Considerations

Glossary