Improve establishment and enforcement of Interstate child support orders.

When was the last time you met with your interstate caseworker counterparts in neighboring states to discuss ways to improve interstate case processing?

In FY 2001, three meetings were hosted by Region III states to improve the establishment and collection of child support orders involving interstate cases. Improvement is needed since problems persist in the interstate arena where more than 30% of all child support cases involve more than one State and interstate cases account for less than 10% of all collections. The first conference hosted by York, Pennsylvania included state and local child support professionals from Pennsylvania, Delaware and Maryland. The second conference hosted by Allentown, Pennsylvania, addressed concerns of New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania. The third conference hosted by Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, addressed interstate issues of New York, West Virginia, Ohio and Pennsylvania. Each conference benefited from the lessons learned in the previous interstate meetings. Three more interstate meetings are planned for FY 2002.

Present during these meetings were federal staff from Regions II, III and V (regions which contain states that border each other), central registry directors, policy specialists and systems experts from state central offices. Also present were local office directors and interstate specialists. All collaborated to address the resolution of interstate cases.

Participating state and local staffs agreed that successful interstate processing:

These conferences addressed the following interstate protocols and processes:

There are both quantitative and qualitative indicators of the interstate conferences' success. For example, in Pennsylvania, during the period 4/1/01 through 10/31/01, interstate collections were up over $700,000 compared to the same period in 2000. The active participation of over 60 Pennsylvania counties and the Bureau of Child Support Enforcement in the series of interstate conferences is credited with much of the improvement.

Participants gave high ratings to the conferences. For example, in answer to the question, "How would you rate the conference?" the highest number of participants gave the York Conference an "excellent" rating. Additionally, some participants returned to have the conference experience with other states and counties. The Pittsburgh conference drew four participants from two different New York counties and four participants from two different Pennsylvania counties who had attended the Allentown, Pennsylvania conference. They each traveled more than six hours to attend these conferences.

As a result of these interstate meetings, local contact lists containing direct telephone and e-mail addresses were established for many of the participating states. Contact information expedites the order establishment and enforcement of interstate cases. Pennsylvania posted local contact lists on the state system Intranet so workers have easy access.

These meetings have helped to resolve some of the biggest hurdles to CSENet case reconciliation. For example, utilizing the contacts established through the interstate meetings, local offices in neighboring states have worked diligently to resolve discrepancies such as arrears balances. In turn, this has helped participating states establish CSENet relationships with their neighbors.

The interstate units in various local offices have become more cohesive. Interstate Specialists take more pride and find greater satisfaction in their work knowing other child support professionals in neighboring states face similar challenges in their daily work.

Conference costs are minimal. The host county graciously provided space for the conference so that registration costs could be used for other conference expenses. The registration cost is between $25 and $40 per participant.

It is essential that representatives from all participating states help to set the agenda. This is accomplished through a lively exchange of ideas in a series of conference calls. This exchange helps to identify particular local issues that must be addressed.

It is also critical to secure the support of the IV-D director in each of the participating states. This support helped conference organizers and participants to overcome such hurdles as travel limitations. Finally, the hard work and hospitality of the local conference hosts were a very important reason for the success of these meetings.