Giving Hope and Support to America's ChildrenChild Support Enforcement FY 2003 Preliminary Data Report
June 2004
Department of Health and Human Services
Administration for Children and Families
Office of Child Support Enforcement
Division of Planning, Research, and Evaluation
Table of Contents
Child Support Enforcement (CSE) Program Background, Results, and Summary Tables
Program Background
Program Results for FY 2003
Table 1: Financial Overview, FY 2003
Table 2: Statistical Overview, FY 2003
Table 3: Program Trends For Fiscal Years 1999, 2002, and 2003
Table 4: Total Distributed Collections, FY 2003
Table 5: Total Collections Made by Method of Collection, FY 2003
Table 6: Statistical Program Status, FY 2003
Table 7: Paternity Statistics, FY 2003
Table 8: Total Distributed Collections Per Full-Time Equivalent Staff, FY2003
Table 9: Total Amount of Current Support Due, FY 2003
Table 10: Total Amount of Support Collected and Distributed as Current Support, FY 2003
Table 11: Total Amount of Arrearages Due, FY 2003
Table 12: Total Amount of Support Collected and Distributed as Arrears, FY 2003
Table 13: Cases With Arrears Due and Paying Towards Arrears, FY 2003
Table 14: Collections and Expenditures, FY2003
Table 15: Paternity Establishment, FY 2003
Table 16: Interstate - Collections Forwarded to Other States, FY 2003
Table 17: Undistributed Collections, FY 2002 and 2003
Table 18: Unaudited Performance Incentive Scores, FY 2003
Table 19: TANF Closed Cases With Child Support Payment and TANF Closed Cases, FY 2003
CSE Nationwide, Regional, and State Box Scores[5]
Regional Scores
State Scores
CSE Program Charts and Graphs
Figure 1 - Total Caseload, FY 2003
Figure 2 - Total Distributed Collections, FY 2003
Figure 3 - Total Expenditures, FY 1999 - 2003
Figure 4 - Total Collections by Method of Collection, FY 2003
Figure 5 - IV-D and State In-Hospital and Other Paternities Acknowledged, FY 1999 - 2003
Figure 6 - Support Orders Established, FY 2003
Figure 7 - Interstate Collections, FY 1999 - 2003
Figure 8 - Interstate Cases - Cases Sent and Received from Another State, FY 1999 - 2003
Figure 9 - Number of Children in the IV-D Program, FY 1999-2003
Figure 10 - IV-D Tribal Program, FY 2003
Appendix
Incentive Formulas
Incentive Payment Determination
OCSE-34A Report
OCSE-396A Report
OCSE Data Report forms are available on the OCSE web site at: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cse/forms/
Preface: The Story Behind the Numbers
Introduction
We're used to using the numbers in this report as a kind of "report card." We ask "How are we doing (compared to others)?" I have often encouraged child support enforcement professionals around the country to dig deeper and discover the "story behind the numbers," to use the statistics to figure out what our work priorities should be and why our performance has improved or failed to improve.
This year the number that jumped out at me - that really made me pay attention - is partly an indicator of improved "performance" in the traditional sense, and it's partly an indicator of an amazing change in the very nature of the work we do and the families we serve. It represents a cultural turning point in our understanding of the purpose of the Federal/state partnership that is the national child support enforcement program.
90 Percent of Distributed Collections Go To Families
Child support collections continued to increase and reached an all-time high of $21.2 billion in fiscal year 2003. That's a 5% increase over last year, even as the caseload declined. And it's a 33% increase over 1999.
But the real story behind these numbers is that 90% of the collections were distributed to families. Only 10% went to reimburse state and Federal governments for TANF payments or foster care costs. Payments to families increased 6% over last year and 41% from 1999. This is true across the country. The percent of payments going to families was 86% or more in 47 states. In 7 states, the percentage going to families exceeded 95%.
That's pretty startling, considering that this program started out as a means of recovering the costs of public assistance payments, a sort of reimbursement to the taxpayers for "welfare" expenditures on children.
Of course, much of the change is attributable to the change in our caseload: now, only 17% of our cases are families currently receiving TANF or foster care, and only 9% of our collections are for these cases. Former assistance cases make up 46% of our caseload and 40% of our collections; in other words, the biggest category of families we are helping is former public assistance recipients: we're ensuring that these are two-income households, financially secure, where parents won't have to return to the welfare rolls.
But this change also represents a real turn-around in our conception of what our program is for. We now view child support as primarily a means of getting reliable income to families, not as a means of recovering the taxes spent on public assistance. We take it as a given that the money parents earn should support their children directly, especially when those parents have worked their way off of dependence on public assistance.
Once the TANF reauthorization legislation becomes law, states will have new decisions to make about how far to take this view of the program. There will be more Federal money available for states where policymakers decide to "pass through" more child support collections to families even while they are receiving public assistance payments. And there will be new options for states to distribute more child support collections to families who are former TANF recipients. I think these decisions can have enormous impact on these families, especially in cases in which non-custodial parents are reluctant to make child support payments knowing that the funds go to the government, and not to their families. I can't help wondering how much of the unpaid child support arrears owed in the country is a result of this perceived injustice.
Arrears Increase to $96 Billion
The other number that drew my attention immediately when I reviewed this report is the increasing unpaid child support debt, which is approaching $100 billion, according to states' reports of the accumulated arrears over all the years since the program began.
In 1999, 53% of the child support cases had arrearages owed. In 2003, the proportion was up to 68%. We obtained collections in 60% of these cases, so we know that child support professionals are working hard on them and that obligors are trying to work on their debts. But we collected an average of $600 per arrearage case, while the average amount of arrears per arrearage case is $9,000. So, even though we're collecting significant amounts of arrears, we don't seem to be making a dent in the problem, and the overall debt continues to grow.
Clearly, we need to design and implement more effective strategies to collect arrears from those who have the ability to pay and refuse to do so. And, we need to do more to help low-income parents who want to meet their obligations and are struggling to do so.
We know that about half of the debt is owed to the government, and not to the families. And we know what we collected about 58% of current support due in 2003. We need to be more aggressive about leveraging older debt owed to the government as an incentive to obtain more reliable payments of current support to families. If we do, I suggest that state and Federal governments will do better as families become more self-sufficient and less dependent on Medicaid and other public benefits than they have been doing in collecting old child support debt owed to those governments for long-ago welfare payments.
And, I think we need to be much more creative about avoiding the accumulation of arrears in the first place, using data to set affordable orders, modifying orders simply and promptly when family circumstances change, initiating contact when a payment is missed the first time, providing exceptional customer service in the very early months after an order is entered to establish consistent voluntary compliance - instead of waiting until huge debt thresholds are reached before we take drastic enforcement action.
Acting on the Story Behind Your Numbers
I encourage you to really use this report actively. Compare your data with those of comparable states. Then call, visit, and find out what helped them achieve a high level of performance on a measure with which you're struggling. And use the data to talk to legislators, cabinet officials, judges, and others to show them how changes in administrative, court, funding, and other practices affect performance. Let us know how we can help you.
Sherri Z. Heller, Ed.D.
Commissioner
U.S. Office of Child Support Enforcement
Child Support Enforcement Program Background, Results, and Summary Tables
Program Background
The Child Support Enforcement (CSE) program is a Federal/state/tribal partnership, to help strengthen families and reduce welfare dependency by ensuring that parents live up to the responsibility of supporting their children. Many families have been able to remain self-sufficient and off public assistance due to the services received from the Child Support Enforcement program. State, local and tribal child support agencies locate non-custodial parents, establish paternity when necessary, establish orders for support and collect child support payments for families.
All states and some tribes run a child support enforcement program, either in the Human Services Department or Department of Revenue, often with the help of prosecuting attorneys, district attorneys, other law enforcement agencies and officials of family or domestic relations courts.
The Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement provides funding and services to the states, some tribes, and other jurisdictions to ensure their success in serving families who need financial support from a non-custodial parent. Child support enforcement services are available automatically for families receiving assistance under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program. In addition, child support services are available to families not receiving TANF who apply for such services, as well as, families who were formerly on TANF. Current child support payments collected on behalf of former TANF families are distributed to the families. Child support payments collected on behalf of non-TANF families are also forwarded to the families.
Program Results for FY 2003
The following Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) preliminary data report[1] highlights financial and statistical achievements of the Child Support Enforcement program for fiscal year 2003. This report is a first look at fiscal year 2003 data and shows advancements made in the Child Support program over the previous year. The information is taken from state-submitted reports on program status sent to OCSE quarterly for financial data and annually for statistical data. The data show $21.2 billion in child support payments were collected, total caseload was 15.9 million, 1.5 million paternities established or acknowledged, and 1.2 million new child support orders were established in fiscal year 2003.
Preliminary Data. The Child Support Performance and Incentive Act of 1998 (CSPIA)[2] requires that states have complete and reliable data for purposes of computing incentives. Federal auditors begin their review of state data after the mandatory December 31st deadline for data submissions. However, readers should note that no assumption has been made in this report regarding data reliability for each state for fiscal year 2003 as a result of these audits. The numbers are presented as submitted to OCSE.
Caseload. OCSE defines a child support case as a parent (mother, father, or putative father) who is now or eventually may be obligated under law for the support of a child or children receiving services under the title IV-D program.
A current assistance case is one in which the children are: (1) recipients of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) under title IV-A of the Social Security Act or (2) entitled to Foster Care maintenance payments under title IV-E of the Social Security Act. In addition, the children's support rights have been assigned by a caretaker to the state and a referral to the state IV-D agency has been made. A former assistance case is a case in which the children were formerly receiving title IV-A (AFDC or TANF) or title IV-E Foster Care services. A never assistance case is a case in which the children are receiving services under the title IV-D program, but are not currently eligible for and have not previously received assistance under titles IV-A or IV-E of the Social Security Act. This includes cases in which the family is receiving IV-D services as a result of a written application for IV-D services (including cases in which children are receiving state, not title IV-E, foster care services) or a case in which they are Medicaid recipients not receiving additional assistance.
In the Child Support Enforcement program there were 15.9 million cases reported during fiscal year 2003. This represents a 0.9 percent decrease in caseload since fiscal year 2002. In FY 2003, there were 2.8 million current assistance cases, 7.4 million former assistance cases, and 5.8 million never assistance cases reported (table 2).
Paternities Established. When children are born out of wedlock, establishing paternity is a first step for obtaining a child support order. Paternity establishment involves the legal establishment of fatherhood for a child. Paternity can be established by a voluntary acknowledgement signed by both parents as part of an in-hospital or other acknowledgement program. States must have procedures that allow paternity to be established or acknowledged at least up to the child's eighteenth birthday.
There were over 662,000 IV-D legal paternity establishments and almost 862,000 in-hospital and other paternities acknowledged for fiscal year 2003 (tables 2 and 3). Paternity was established or acknowledged for over 1.5 million children, a 0.2 percent decrease from fiscal year 2002 which is likely due to the decreased caseload.
Orders Established. State administrators must use standard guidelines to determine how much a parent should pay for child support. CSE staff can take child support cases to court or to an administrative hearing process to establish the order.
There were 1.2 million orders for child support established in fiscal year 2003. Never assistance orders made up 44 percent of the support orders established for fiscal year 2003, current assistance orders accounted for 20 percent, and former assistance accounted for 36 percent (table 2).
Collections. Collection data are shown under the following reporting categories: current IV-A and IV-E assistance ($1.8 billion), former assistance ($8.5 billion), and never assistance ($10.9 billion) in tables 1 and 3: and TANF and non-TANF in table 3 to allow comparisons with previous years. Total child support collections were $21.2 billion for fiscal year 2003 (tables 1 and 3). This was a 5.2 percent increase in collections from the previous fiscal year.
Child support payments are collected through various methods, such as income withholding, unemployment compensation interception, and state or Federal income tax refund offsets. Income withholding accounts for 66 percent of total collections received (almost $16.7 billion) in FY 2003. Money collected and sent to families totaled almost $19.0 billion in FY 2003, an increase of 6 percent since FY 2002.
Collections per Full-Time Equivalent Staff. There were over 61,000 FTE staff working in the child support program in the states and jurisdictions in fiscal year 2003. Child support collected nationally per full-time equivalent staff (FTE) was over $346,000 (table 8).
Expenditures and Incentives. In fiscal year 2003, total administrative expenditures were $5.2 billion, a 0.6 percent increase from fiscal year 2002 (table 3). The Federal share of expenditures was $3.4 billion and the state share was $1.8 billion. The Federal government reimburses states for 66 percent of the majority of allowable expenditures and 90 percent for laboratory paternity costs.[3]
For FY 2003, the majority of states (26) showed increases in total expenditures from the previous fiscal year. However, most of those states (17) showed an increase of less than 10 percent.
Estimated incentive payments for fiscal year 2003 are $356 million. Actual incentives to be earned for fiscal year 2003 is $461,000,000. Individual state incentive levels will be determined after data reliability audits are completed. (See the appendix for an example of how an incentive payment is determined.)
Collections Due and Distributed. The total amount of current support due for fiscal year 2003 was over $27.1 billion (table 8). About $15.7 billion, or 58 percent, of that amount was collected and distributed (table 9). The total amount of arrearages reported for all previous fiscal years was $95.8 billion (table 10), and over $6.5 billion was collected and distributed (table 11). There were 10.8 million cases with arrears due in fiscal year 2003 and 6.4 million of these cases had collections (table 12). Hence, 60 percent of obligors owing arrears made some payment toward their arrears in fiscal year 2003. In addition, there were $1.2 billion in interstate collections forwarded to other states in that year (table 16).
Other Statistics. In fiscal year 2003, program increases were noted for total cases in which a collection was made. At 8.0 million cases, this is a 2.1 percent increase over the number of paying cases for fiscal year 2002.
There were 11.5 million cases with an order established in fiscal year 2003. This is a 2 percent increase over the number of cases with orders reported in the previous fiscal year.
The total number of children in CSE cases totaled almost 17.6 million in fiscal year 2003. This represents a slight decrease from the 17.9 million reported for fiscal year 2002.
Cost-effectiveness represents the amount of child support collected for every $1.00 expended on the program. The CSPIA cost-effectiveness ratio was $4.33[4] for fiscal year 2003 (table 14).
Child Support Enforcement Program Charts & Graphs
Figure 1: Total Caseload, FY 2003
The Child Support Enforcement (CSE) caseload dropped due to a decline in welfare and non-welfare cases. Former assistance cases continue to be the largest portion of the total caseload.
The total CSE caseload for FY 2003 was over 15.9 million. The 7,371,641 former assistance cases reported in FY 2003 accounted for nearly 47 percent of total cases. Never assistance cases (5,792,421) accounted for 36 percent of the caseload, while the remaining 17 percent were current assistance cases (2,759,291).
Source: Form OCSE-157 lines 1+ 3
Figure 2: Total Distributed Collections, FY 2003
Child support collections continue to grow. About half is for families never on assistance and half for families currently or formerly on assistance.
Collections continue to increase with a reported $21.2 billion in FY 2003, a 5.2 percent increase from the previous fiscal year. Never assistance cases, with $10,908,823,026, accounted for 52 percent of total collections distributed. Current ($1,815,261,394) and former assistance cases ($8,452,305,462), contributed to the remaining 48 percent of collections.
Source: Form OCSE-34A line 8
Figure 3: Total Expenditures, FY 1999 - FY 2003
The growth in expenditures is slowing down.
The Federal government reimburses states for 66 percent of the majority of allowable expenditures, and 90 percent for laboratory paternity cost. The $5.21 billion in total administrative expenditures reported in FY 2003 is a 0.6 percent increase from the $5.18 billion reported in FY 2002.
Source: Form OCSE-396A line 9A+C
Figure 4: Total Collections by Method of Collection, FY 2003
Wage withholding continues to be the most effective way of collecting child support.
Income withholding is the most effective method of collecting child support. Over $16.7 billion (66 percent of total collections) was collected using this method in FY 2003. In addition to payments received in IV-D cases, income withholding also includes amounts received from non-IV-D child support cases for processing through the state disbursement unit. Federal income tax refund offsets amounted to almost 6 percent of the total collected in FY 2003 ($1.5 billion). Together, state tax and unemployment offsets ($887 million) were over 3 percent of total collections received. The remaining $6.1 billion (24 percent of collections for FY 2003) were payments received through other enforcement techniques and collections received from other states.
Source: Form OCSE-34A lines 2a thru 2g
Wage withholding includes IV-D and non-IV-D collections.
Figure 5: IV-D and State In-Hospital and Other Paternities Acknowledged, FY 1999 - FY 2003
In-hospital and other paternities acknowledged are increasing, while IV-D paternities continue to decrease due to a decreasing caseload.
The combined total number of IV-D and state in-hospital and other paternities acknowledged was 1,524,569 in FY 2003. This is comprised of 662,526 in IV-D paternity and 862,043 in in-hospital and other paternities for FY 2003. The total number of IV-D paternities established or acknowledged decreased less than 1 percent from FY 2002. The combined paternities totals showed nearly a 5 percent decrease from FY 1999 to FY 2003.
Source: Form OCSE-157 lines 10 and 16
State paternity acknowledgements include an unknown number of acknowledgements for children in the IV-D caseload.
Figure 6: Support Orders Established, FY 2003
The number of support orders established remains about 1.2 milliion.
The total number of support orders established in FY 2003 was 1,161,206, a decrease of 4.8 percent from FY 2002. Current assistance cases (235,284) represented 20 percent of all support orders established, former assistance cases (409,378) were 35 percent of all support orders established, and never assistance cases (516,544) accounted for 45 percent.
Source: Form OCSE-157 line 17
Figure 7: Interstate Collections, FY 1999 - FY 2003
Interstate collections have reached record levels.
Collections made on behalf of families in other states totaled almost $1.3 billion in FY 2003. This was nearly an 18 percent increase over the $1.1 billion collected in FY 1999.
Source: Form OCSE-34A line 5E
Figure 8: Interstate Cases - Cases Sent to and Received From Another State, FY 1999 - FY 2003
The interstate caseload continues to rise.
There were 1,083,336 cases sent to another state in FY 2003, this is an increase of 8 percent since FY 1999. Total cases received from other states in FY 2003 were 948,581, over a 3 percent increase over the last five years.
Source: Form OCSE-157 lines 1a and 1b
Figure 9: Number of Children in the IV-D Program, FY 2003
The number of children has only shown a slight decline each year.
State officials reported that the total number of children in the IV-D program for FY 2003 was 17,595,222. Since the number of cases open was nearly 16.0 million, the average number of children per case is 1.11.
Source: Form OCSE-157 line 4
Figure 10: IV-D Tribal Program, FY 2003
|
Tribes |
Caseload |
Paternities Established |
Support Orders Established |
Total Collections |
Outlays |
|
CHICKASAW |
12,511 |
681 |
NA |
2,190,660 |
1,978,415 |
|
FLAMBEAU |
NA |
NA |
NA |
512,118 |
218,737 |
|
LUMMI |
41 |
7 |
22 |
NA |
69,828 |
|
MENOMINEE |
1,321 |
822 |
NA |
579,962 |
26,433 |
|
NAVAJO |
NA |
NA |
NA |
3,065,944 |
3,412,403 |
|
POTAWATOMI |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
|
PUYALLUP |
350 |
5 |
6 |
83,067 |
768,020 |
|
SISSETON |
62 |
16 |
16 |
71,705 |
400,157 |
|
S'KLALLAM |
91 |
6 |
3 |
6,564 |
706,901 |
|
TOTAL |
14,376 |
1,537 |
47 |
$6,510,020 |
$7,580,894 |
Nine tribes currently have IV-D programs.
The tribal IV-D caseload in FY 2003 was 14,376 for tribes that report the information. Tribes established paternities for 1,537 children, and collected about $6.5 million in child support.
NA - Not available.
Source: Reports submitted by Tribes.
Appendix
| CSPIA Incentive Measure Formulas | |
INCENTIVE MEASURE |
FORM AND LINE NUMBERS |
IV-D PEP | |
|
(Number of Children in the Caseload in the FY or as of
the end of the FY Who Were Born Out-of-Wedlock with Paternity Established or Acknowledged) divided by (Number of Children in the Caseload as of the End of the Preceding FY Who were Born Out-of-Wedlock) |
(OCSE-157 Line 6) |
|
STATEWIDE PEP | |
|
(Number of Minor Children in the State
Born Out-of-Wedlock with Paternity Established or Acknowledged During the FY) divided by (Number of Children in the State Born Out-of Wedlock During the Preceding FY) |
(OCSE-157 Line 9) |
|
SUPPORT ORDER ESTABLISHMENT | |
|
(Number of IV-D Cases with Support Orders) |
(OCSE-157 Line 2) |
|
CURRENT COLLECTIONS | |
|
(Amount Collected for Current Support in IV-D Cases) |
(OCSE-157 Line 25 |
|
ARREARAGE COLLECTIONS | |
|
(Number of IV-D Cases Paying Toward Arrears) |
(OCSE-157 Line 29) |
|
COST EFFECTIVENESS | |
|
(Total IV-D Dollars Collected) |
(OCSE-34A Lines 8 + 5 + 13 of column (e) ) |
|
STATE COLLECTIONS BASE | |
|
2(Current Assistance + Former Assistance Collections + Medicaid) + Never Assistance Collections |
OCSE-34A: 2((Line 8 columns a+b+c) + (Line 5 columns a+b+c)) + Line 8 column d + Line 5 column d + Line 13 column e |
How an Incentive Payment is Determined
Because of the complexity of the incentives formula set forth in section 458 of the Social Security Act, we have included an example of how the system would work in a particular year for State A. Let's make the following assumptions regarding State A (See table A):
- State A's paternity performance level is 54 percent, making its applicable percent 64 percent (see table C)
- State A's order establishment performance level is 79 percent, making its applicable percent 98 percent (see table C)
- State A's current support collections performance level is 41 percent, making its applicable percent 51 percent (see table D)
- State A's arrearage support collections performance level is 40 percent, making its applicable percent 50 percent (see table D)
- State A's cost-effectiveness ratio is 3.00, making its applicable percent 60 percent (see table E)
- State A's collections base is $50 million (determined by 2 times the collections for Current Assistance, Former Assistance, and Medicaid casesplus collections for other cases)
The maximum incentive for State A is:
- $32 million collections base for paternity ($50 mil. times 0.64), plus
- $49 million collections base for orders ($50 mil. times 0.98), plus
- $25.5 million collections base for current collections ($50 mil. times 0.51), plus
- $18.8 million collections base for arrearage collections ($50 million times 0.75[6] times 0.50) plus
- $22.5 million collections base for cost-effectiveness ($50 million times 0.75[7] times 0.60) equals
- Resulting in a maximum incentive base amount of $147.8 million for State A.
Table A
|
Measure |
State A's Performance Level |
Applicable Percent based on Performance |
Weight |
State A's Collection Base (assumed to be $50.0 million) |
|
Paternity Establishment |
54% |
64% |
1.00 |
$32.0 million |
|
Order Establishment |
79% |
98% |
1.00 |
$49.0 million |
|
Current Collections |
41% |
51% |
1.00 |
$25.5 million |
|
Arrearage Collections |
40% |
50% |
0.75 |
$18.8 million |
|
Cost-Effectiveness |
$3.00 |
60% |
0.75 |
$22.5 million |
|
State A's Maximum Incentive Base Amount |
$147.8 million |
- We must now make some assumptions regarding the other States. Let's assume that there are only two other States in our country--and the maximum incentive base amount is $84 million for State B and $50 million for State C, making the total maximum incentive base amount $281.8 million for all three States (See table B).
- We must now determine what State A's share of the $281.8 million is. It is 52 percent ($147.8 divided by $281.8).
Table B
|
State |
Maximum Incentive Base Amounts |
State's Share of $281.8 million |
Incentive Payment Pool $422 million |
|
A |
$147.8 |
0.52 |
$219.4 mil. |
|
B |
$ 84.0 |
0.30 |
$126.6 mil. |
|
C |
$ 50.0 |
0.18 |
$ 76.01 mil. |
|
Totals |
$281.8 |
1.00 |
$422.0 mil. |
- Let us assume it is FY 2000, so the incentive payment pool for the FY is $422 million (see table F).
- Since State A's share is 0.52, this State has earned 52 percent of the $422 million incentive payment pool that Congress is allowing, or $219.4 ($422 mil. times 0.52) million incentive payment for this particular fiscal year.
Table C[8]
If the Paternity Establishment or Support Order Performance Level Is:
|
At Least: |
But Less Than: |
The Applicable Percentage Is: |
At Least: |
But Less Than: |
The Applicable Percentage Is: |
|
80% |
100% |
64% |
65% |
74% | |
|
79% |
80% |
98% |
63% |
64% |
73% |
|
78% |
79% |
96% |
62% |
63% |
72% |
|
77% |
78% |
94% |
61% |
62% |
71% |
|
76% |
77% |
92% |
60% |
61% |
70% |
|
75% |
76% |
90% |
59% |
60% |
69% |
|
74% |
75% |
88% |
58% |
59% |
68% |
|
73% |
74% |
86% |
57% |
58% |
67% |
|
72% |
73% |
84% |
56% |
57% |
66% |
|
71% |
72% |
82% |
55% |
56% |
65% |
|
70% |
71% |
80% |
54% |
55% |
64% |
|
69% |
70% |
79% |
53% |
54% |
63% |
|
68% |
69% |
78% |
52% |
53% |
62% |
|
67% |
68% |
77% |
51% |
52% |
61% |
|
66% |
67% |
76% |
50% |
51% |
60% |
|
65% |
66% |
75% |
0% |
50% |
0% |
Table D[9]
If the Current Collections or Arrearage Collections Performance Level Is:
|
At Least: |
But Less Than: |
The Applicable Percentage Is: |
At Least: |
But Less Than: |
The Applicable Percentage Is: |
|
80% |
100% |
59% |
60% |
69% | |
|
79% |
80% |
98% |
58% |
59% |
68% |
|
78% |
79% |
96% |
57% |
58% |
67% |
|
77% |
78% |
94% |
56% |
57% |
66% |
|
76% |
77% |
92% |
55% |
56% |
65% |
|
75% |
76% |
90% |
54% |
55% |
64% |
|
74% |
75% |
88% |
53% |
54% |
63% |
|
73% |
74% |
86% |
52% |
53% |
62% |
|
72% |
73% |
84% |
51% |
52% |
61% |
|
71% |
72% |
82% |
50% |
51% |
60% |
|
70% |
71% |
80% |
49% |
50% |
59% |
|
69% |
70% |
79% |
48% |
49% |
58% |
|
68% |
69% |
78% |
47% |
48% |
57% |
|
67% |
68% |
77% |
46% |
47% |
56% |
|
66% |
67% |
76% |
45% |
46% |
55% |
|
65% |
66% |
75% |
44% |
45% |
54% |
|
64% |
65% |
74% |
43% |
55% |
53% |
|
63% |
64% |
73% |
42% |
43% |
52% |
|
62% |
63% |
72% |
41% |
42% |
51% |
|
61% |
62% |
71% |
40% |
41% |
50% |
|
60% |
61% |
70% |
0 |
40% |
0 |
Table E[10]
If the Cost-Effectiveness Performance Level Is:
|
At Least: |
But Less Than: |
The Applicable Percentage Is: |
|
5.00 |
100% | |
|
4.50 |
4.99 |
90% |
|
4.00 |
4.50 |
80% |
|
3.50 |
4.00 |
70% |
|
3.00 |
3.50 |
60% |
|
2.50 |
3.00 |
50% |
|
2.00 |
2.50 |
40% |
|
0.00 |
2.00 |
0 |
Table F
|
The incentive payment pool is:
|
For each fiscal year following fiscal year 2008, the incentive payment pool will be multiplied by the percentage increase in the CPI between the two preceding years. For example for fiscal year 2009, if the CPI increases by 1 percent between fiscal years 2007 and 2008, then the incentive pool for fiscal year 2009 would be a 1 percent increase over the $483,000,000 incentive payment pool for fiscal year 2008, or $487,830,000.
OCSE Data Report forms are available on the OCSE web site at: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cse/forms/
[1]This report was prepared by Renée Jackson-Hebron, Adrienna Johnson, Delores Johnson, Nina Campbell and Ken Dittmar under the leadership and direction of Joyce Mathews Pitts. Please direct comments to jpitts@acf.hhs.gov.
[2]The Child Support Performance and Incentive Act of 1998 (CSPIA) provided for an alternative penalty procedure for states that fail to meet federal child support data processing requirements. In addition, CSPIA reformed federal incentive payments for an effective child support program by requiring a performance-based incentive system.
[3]OCSE charges an assortment of fees to states in return for services provided to state agencies administering the child support program. These fees reduce the total amount of expenditures that are eligible for FFP. Total expenditures (including state and federal shares) reported are net of these fees.
[4]See appendix for all the CSPIA performance measurement formulas.
[5]The box scores give an overall summary of statistical and financial data by state and region taken from the OCSE-157, OCSE-34A, and the OCSE-396A reports and gives the percentage change over the previous fiscal year. Please note that no assumption has been made regarding data reliability for individual states.
[6]Because the measure has less weight.
[7]Because the measure has less weight.
[8]Use this table to determine the maximum incentive levels for the paternity establishment and support order performance measures.
[9]Use this table to determine the maximum incentive levels for the current and arrearage support collections performance measures.
[10]Use this table to determine the maximum incentive level for the cost-effectiveness performance measure.
