dcl9237.htm

Giving Hope and Support to America's Children

Statewide Automated Systems

DC-9237

September 10, 1992

TO ALL STATE IV-D DIRECTORS

RE: Statewide Automated Systems

Dear Colleague,

As you know, one of the major mandates of the Family Support Act is for every State to have a statewide automated system operational by October 1, 1995. One of the most difficult and costly aspects of this requirement is the conversion process.

Converting a manual or partially automated child support program that uses multiple data sources to one that utilizes a single comprehensive automated system presents any number of problems which States have attacked in a variety of ways. The one aspect of the process that seems consistent is that a lot of resources, both human and financial, are being eaten up in our effort to reconcile data bases and determine correct court order information, especially the arrearage amount.

I am writing to you to share an idea and solicit your impressions of an approach to financial reconciliation that in some ways mirrors the tax offset process and reconciliation of arrearage amounts. In its most simple form, this approach would consist of determining,for each jurisdiction, which agency's records to accept, based on reliability; sending notice to both parties giving them the opportunity to correct the information or request a review; and finally, entering into the system the information that is accepted by both parties either by virtue of their nonresponse to notice or by an administrative procedure.

For example, if a State decided to take this approach, one of the first things they would have to do is examine each jurisdiction individually to determine which agency's records are the most reliable. Perhaps in County A, the Clerk of the court's records are the most reliable. Perhaps in Count A, the clerk of the court's records are the most accurate, while in County B, the State's records are more correct. Therefore, each county would use a different source that may vary from county to county depending on an evaluation of each. After choosing the source agency, each party would be sent notice and given a defined period of time in e\which to respond or request a review. the data that would be input into the automated system would be that which was on the notice or data that was corrected due to the receipt of additional information or resolution through an administrative hearing process.

Obviously there may be a time-limited need to redirect resources to conduct reviews, but ultimately, this process may save significant amounts of resources.

Please give some thought to this idea, and let me know if anyone is using or contemplating using this approach, and if you think it is worth exploring. We are also interested in hearing about other successful approaches for case conversion. As always, I thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

Allie Page Matthews

Deputy Director

Office of Child Support

Enforcement

Download FREE Adobe Acrobat® Reader™ to view PDF files located on this site.