< Back to Search

FY2007 Annual Report to Congress

Office of Child Support Enforcement

Published: December 1, 2007
Information About:
State/Local Child Support Agencies, Tribal Child Support Agencies
Topics:
Federal Reporting, OCSE-157 Annual Data Report, OCSE-34A Quarterly Report of Collections, OCSE-396A Financial Report, OCSE-75 Tribal Annual Data Report
Types:
Research & Data, Annual Reports to Congress

Table of Contents

  1. Background
  2. Introduction
  3. Automation
    1. Federal Parent Locator Service Systems (FPLS)
    2. State and Tribal Automation
  4. Collaboration, Training, and Technical Assistance Initiatives
    1. National Judicial/Child Support Enforcement Task Force
    2. Military Collaboration
    3. National Training Workgroup
    4. National Electronic Child Support Resource System (NECSRS)
    5. Past-Due Child Support and the Project to Avoid Increasing Delinquencies (PAID)
  5. Program Improvements
    1. Cumulative Total Distributed Collections
    2. Undistributed Collections
    3. Medical Support
    4. Grants and Waivers
    5. Consumer Services
  6. Performance-Based Management
    1. The Strategic Plan
    2. Budget and Performance Integration
    3. Performance-Based Incentives and Penalties
    4. Audits and Data Reliability
    5. Cost Audits
    6. Self-Assessment
    7. Coordination Council
  7. Project Save Our Children
  8. The Tribal IV-D Program
  9. International Program

Foreword

I am pleased to present the 28th Annual Report to the Congress on the Child Support Enforcement (CSE) Program, which outlines the status of the program and highlights accomplishments made during fiscal year (FY) 2007.

FY 2007 marks the midpoint of the FY 2005-2009 National CSE Strategic Plan, which helps to direct the course of the Child Support Program and to focus work priorities and resources. As of this midpoint, considerable progress has been made toward ensuring that child support payments are collected and distributed promptly and that these payments are a reliable source of income for children and families. During FY 2007, almost $25 billion in child support was collected and distributed, which is a 3.8 percent increase over the amount collected and distributed during FY 2006. Progress was made in other program areas as well.

We are proud of our continuing efforts in partnership with States, jurisdictions, and Tribes to improve the lives and well-being of children in the Child Support caseload and remain committed to holding their parents responsible for the financial and emotional support they need to build successful lives.

Kathleen Sebelius

1 Background

The Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) is part of the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) within the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). The mission of ACF is to promote the economic and social well-being of children, families, youths, and communities.

The Child Support Enforcement (CSE) Program is a Federal/State/Tribal/local partnership that operates under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act. The program functions in all States and several territories and Tribes. These programs are operated primarily through State or county Social Services Departments, Attorneys General Offices, or Departments of Revenue. The Program‘s mission is to enhance the well-being of children by assuring that assistance in obtaining support, including financial and medical support, is available to children through: locating parents; establishing paternity and support obligations; and monitoring and enforcing those obligations. This mission has remained the same since the program‘s inception. However, in recent years the program has shifted its primary focus from reimbursing the government‘s welfare program to maximizing the amount of support passed on to families and pursuing new opportunities to improve the program‘s effectiveness.

Child support services are available to any parent or any other person with custody of a child who has a parent living outside of the home. These services are automatically available to families receiving assistance under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Program, the Medicaid Program, and the Title IV-E Foster Care Program. Families seeking government child support services who are not recipients of aid under the public assistance programs may apply for child support services through their State, local, or Tribal child support agency. Certain child support collected on behalf of families receiving TANF may be retained by the State to reimburse the State and Federal governments for TANF payments made to the families; excess collections are sent to the TANF and former-TANF families. Some States also pass-through some collections to TANF families. Child support collected on behalf of families who are not recipients of aid is forwarded to those families.

2 Introduction

In addition to our successful partnerships with States, Tribes, and local jurisdictions and a dedicated staff of child support workers, there were many other successful partnerships, programs, and activities conducted during FY 2007 which enabled the CSE Program to sustain its progress in achieving the goals and objectives of the FY 2005-2009 National Strategic Plan. Improved automation, an enhanced Federal Parent Locator Service, and effective implementation of special initiatives, such as the Project to Avoid Increasing Delinquencies (PAID), are among these programs and activities.

Further, between FY 2004 and FY 2007, the Cost Effectiveness Ratio for operating the CSE Program (Total Dollars Collected Per $1 of Expenditures) increased each fiscal year from $4.38 in FY 2004 to $4.73 in FY 2007. Thus, in addition to making continuous progress towards achieving plan goals and objectives, the CSE Program was managed in an increasingly cost-effective manner.

3 Automation

Automation is critical to the operation and success of the Child Support Enforcement Program. OCSE has developed an approach to automation that provides both a national and State-specific focus. At the national level, the Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS) plays a crucial role in helping OCSE fulfill its mission in assisting States to secure the financial support upon which millions of our nation‘s children depend and contributing to an increase in the overall effectiveness and performance of the child support program. At the State level, OCSE works closely with State and Tribal child support agencies in support of their automation efforts. Federal and State child support automated systems are interdependent and it is essential that they work in tandem.  Statewide child support systems receive valuable locate and enforcement information from the Federal databases, but the effective utilization of this information is dependent upon the level of automation in the statewide CSE systems. Without this technology and the technical assistance OCSE provides to support it, the Child Support Program would not be able to accomplish its mission.

3.1 Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS)

Since its inception, the child support program has utilized information available via the FPLS to locate parents in order to collect and distribute money on behalf of children who depend on parental financial support for food, shelter, education, medical care and other needs. Since that time, the FPLS has been continually refined and expanded to support congressional mandates and provide continuous service improvement to benefit both State and Federal partners. This effort, known as FPLS Continuous Service Improvement (CSI), is focused on improving the quality, consistency, and efficiency of data; improving interstate communication; and providing additional resources for the establishment and enforcement of child support.

The FPLS now includes several mission-critical systems supporting OCSE business processes, allowing OCSE to improve its performance and achieve its goals:

  • The National Directory of New Hires (NDNH) contains employment and unemployment information collected from 54 States and territories and from all Federal agencies. NDNH data is matched with child support case participant data contained in the Federal Case Registry of Child Support Orders (FCR).  This information is used to locate child support case participants; verify their employment; establish appropriate order amounts; and facilitate the collection of financial support through income withholding and medical support enforcement through enrollment of children in health care coverage. In FY 2007, approximately 713 million individual records were available for matching with the FCR. New Hire, Quarterly Wage, and Unemployment Insurance data for 4.9 million unique noncustodial parents and putative fathers was returned to States from the NDNH in FY 2007.

    To quantify the effectiveness of the FPLS and States‘ use of its data to collect interstate child support, in FY 2007 OCSE conducted studies of the benefits of NDNH new hire data in 17 States. These studies used a random sample of noncustodial parents‘ matches resulting from new hire information submitted to the NDNH that were returned to the States during the period of study. It is estimated that in FY 2007 these 17 States collected over $130 million because of these matches. By projecting these results nationally, we estimate that $475 million in child support is collected annually as a result of matching applicable databases.[1]

  • The Federal Case Registry of Child Support Orders (FCR) consists of child support case and participant information from 54 States and territories. At the end of FY 2007, the FCR contained nearly 19 million cases and included participant information on more than 43 million individuals.

    The FCR data is matched daily with the NDNH and periodically with Federal databases maintained by the Social Security Administration (SSA), Veterans Affairs (VA) and Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Additionally, a comparison of FCR data with information maintained by the Department of Defense‘s Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) provides States with information on medical support coverage and eligibility of children receiving IV-D services. As a result of matching with SSA, an average of $37 million per month was garnished from SSA benefit payments, including garnishments for IV-D and non-IV-D cases as well as alimony, and sent to State CSE agencies in FY 2007.

    In addition, authorized Federal and State agencies compare their data with those in the FCR and NDNH; these data matches assist in preventing and recouping erroneous payments in public assistance and benefit programs and in collecting debts owed to the Federal Government.

  • The Federal Offset System (FOS) contains data certified by States regarding the amount of past-due child support owed by noncustodial parents. The FOS interfaces with the Department of Treasury‘s Financial Management Service (FMS) to offset tax refunds and other Federal payments (up to the amount certified by State Child Support Enforcement (CSE) agencies); the Department of State to deny issuance of passports to delinquent obligors; and over 4,500 multi-state financial institutions to identify noncustodial parents‘ assets so that States can levy their accounts to collect past-due child support.

     

    In calendar year (CY) 2007 State CSE agencies certified for Federal offset a total of 7.9 million child support cases with arrearages of $99.4 billion. For these cases, in FY 2007:

    • $1.7 billion in delinquent child support was collected by offsetting tax refunds and other administrative payments to delinquent child support obligors. Of this total, approximately 41 percent was targeted for reimbursement of TANF payments; the remaining 59 percent collected was for payments of child support arrears to custodial parents.
    • Approximately 80 passports were denied daily and $38 million in lump sum payments were collected.
    • $140.2 million in child support collections were made as a result of account matches for approximately 1.4 million obligors per quarter identified through the Multi-state Financial Institution Data Match (MSFIDM) program.
  • The Intergovernmental Referral Guide (IRG) provides child support case processing procedures and information from each of the 54 States and territorial jurisdictions that is used to increase the efficiency of interstate case processing.
  • The Child Support Enforcement Network (CSENet) is an application that supports the electronic exchange of interstate case requests over a private, closed network, and the exchange of electronic Income Withholding Orders (IWOs) by States directly to the Department of Defense, the largest single employer in the United States. In FY 2007, CSENet facilitated over 11.3 million transactions between States.
  • The Query Interstate Cases for Kids (QUICK) application provides authorized child support personnel in one State with real-time access to financial and case information in another State for purposes of processing the case and providing customer service to parents receiving child support services. Facilitating State-to-State communication via CSENet and QUICK promotes parental responsibility and expedites the location of parents, establishment of paternity and collection and enforcement of child support.

For FY 2007, child support collections attributable to the FPLS (from Federal Offset, Passport Denial (PPD), MSFIDM and NDNH-FCR matching) were $2.35 billion. Clearly, States depend on the FPLS to facilitate standardized and centralized communication and data exchanges with employers, multi-state financial institutions and other Federal agencies so that they can collect the support upon which so many of our children and families depend.

Benefits to Other Federal and State Agencies

In addition to support of the child support program, OCSE and the FPLS provide authorized programs a centralized source of employment and location data that is used across Federal and State agencies to reduce erroneous payments and overall program costs in public assistance and benefit programs.

Comparisons between FPLS data and data maintained by Federal and State programs improved the FY 2007 financial performance of Federal agencies in the following manner:

  • Higher Education Loan and Grant Collections - NDNH data assisted the Department of Education in recovering $1.1 billion in defaulted student loans based on information it reported to OCSE.
  • Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) Collections - IRS used a combination of FCR and other data sources to recover over $376 million in additional taxes owed (based on information reported to OCSE by IRS‘ EITC Department).
  • Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) - OCSE and the ACF Office of Family Assistance worked with State TANF agencies participating in data matches with the NDNH. This nationwide match of TANF adult participants against the NDNH to determine eligibility for TANF benefits and to track work participation for TANF participants began in July 2005. Since that time, 40 State TANF agencies have participated, including 29 (54 percent) in FY 2007.
  • Rental Housing Assistance - Using NDNH data, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) estimated the subsidy error for HUD‘s rental housing assistance programs was $291 million in FY 2007.
  • Unemployment Insurance Benefit - The Department of Labor (DoL) estimated benefits of NDNH and State Directory of New Hire (SDNH) matching to be about $120 million in FY 2007, which included identification, recovery, and prevention of unemployment insurance benefit overpayments.

These results demonstrate that the FPLS eliminates traditional barriers between government agencies and businesses, and promotes data sharing to improve program efficiencies and customer service across government.

Management and Responsible Stewardship of Automation Resources

OCSE management is acutely aware of its responsibility to appropriately manage the FPLS in accordance with governmental guidance and requirements, and to provide responsible stewardship for the FPLS by setting and implementing a vision for the FPLS that is in accordance with and supportive of OCSE and other governmental goals, objectives and mandates, legislative or otherwise. To that end, OCSE adopted and implemented governmental requirements, guidance, and best practices related to capital planning and investment control (CPIC), earned value management (EVM) and enterprise architecture (EA) in its management of the FPLS, to:

  • Ensure FPLS budget requests are aligned with the strategies and goals of ACF and HHS.
  • Integrate performance review with budget decisions to produce a performance-based budget. To support this integration of budget and performance, FPLS had high quality system outcome measures that accurately aligned with, and supported, the performance of the program.
  • Develop and implement proactive processes and procedures to ensure that the FPLS remained in full compliance with all government requirements, including the Clinger-Cohen and Federal Information Security Management (FISMA) Acts.
  • Ensure compliance with all OMB and HHS requirements, including alignment of the FPLS with both the child support enterprise architecture and the Federal Enterprise Architecture and support of CPIC activities, including application of EVM and Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V).

These actions are supported by OCSE‘s submission in FY 2007 of its FPLS Capital Asset Plan and Business Case, or Exhibit 300, to OMB.

3.2 State and Tribal Automation

OCSE has dedicated resources to work closely with State program and Information Technology (IT) staff to recommend enhancements to their statewide system functionality that take full advantage of the proactive matching conducted at the Federal level. 

In FY 2007, OCSE continued to provide oversight, funding, and technical assistance to States related to the replacement or enhancement of their statewide automated child support enforcement systems. This technical assistance took the form of on-site technical assistance, IV&V services, teleconferences, and issuance of guidance documents. OCSE requires IV&V when a system project is determined to be high-risk. The additional validation and verification is required to be performed by an entity independent and not under the control of the agency developing the software. The most frequent trigger for requiring IV&V is a State that is developing an entirely new child support enforcement system or replacing their legacy system. OCSE gave on-site technical assistance and provided IV&V services to 17 States. OCSE also issued the following guidance documents related to statewide CSE systems:

  • Information Memorandum 07-07, an updated version of Automated Systems for Child Support Enforcement: A Guide for States. This guide suggested optional enhancements to the statewide system functionality in order to take full advantage of the data provided by the Federal systems.
  • Information Memorandum 07-05, Child Support Enforcement and Vital Records Data Exchange: State Successful Practices and Lessons Learned Guide;
  • Dear Colleague Letter 07-36, A Guide for Electronic Document Management.

OCSE continued to encourage States to disburse child support payments electronically to families via direct deposit and/or debit cards. OCSE doubled its target by having 10 States implement debit cards for child support disbursement in FY 2007.

Four Tribal Systems Workgroup meetings were held in FY 2007 in support of the Model Tribal Child Support Enforcement System (TCSES) Project. The workgroup was chartered to recommend guidelines to maximize the benefits of automating Tribal CSE programs while limiting the fiscal impact associated with design, development, and implementation of automated systems. In FY 2007, the workgroup‘s primary activities were to participate in Joint Application Design (JAD) sessions and walk through each component of the proposed Model TCSES. The group discussed and agreed to a general and detailed design with each succeeding JAD session laying the foundation for actual development of the TCSES.

4 Collaboration, Training and Technical Assistance Initiatives

OCSE provides collaboration, training, and technical assistance services to State, Tribal, Federal, and non-profit organizations to facilitate and promote the most effective techniques among the child support community and collaborating agencies.  In FY 2007, these activities were provided in a variety of key operational areas.

4.1 National Judicial/Child Support Enforcement Task Force

In FY 2007, the National Judicial/Child Support Enforcement Task Force continued its goal of enhancing collaboration between the IV-D and court/judicial communities. In FY 2007, Task Force activities and products supporting that goal included:

  • development of an electronic data exchange template with accompanying business case analysis to aid in substantiating the cost basis for legislative implementation;
  • delivery of a report on the practices of 637 judicial officers who regularly hear child support cases, which covered subjects including the use of incarceration vs. alternative sanctions in non-compliant child support cases, primary resources for learning about child support laws and regulations, and circumstances and standards under which a reduction of an existing child support obligation might occur;
  • a three-day Knowledge Transfer Training Program for 10 judges (completed in April with follow-up calls in June and July 2007); and
  • completion of a judicial/CSE communication matrix and resource guide placed on a Task Force Workplace, which is a web-based site where internal or draft documents are under development.

In addition, Task Force members published articles and other documents on the importance of collaboration between the IV-D and court/judicial communities.

4.2 Military Collaboration

In FY 2007, OCSE continued an initiative with the Department of Defense (DoD) to address not accepting “voluntary acknowledgement of paternity forms” as a prima facie showing of dependency when a custodial parent applies for military medical services.  OCSE collected all existing State and/or Tribal “voluntary acknowledgement of paternity forms” and posted them onto a central OCSE Web site to help military officials identify and validate forms presented to them through their Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) offices world-wide. When put into effect, the change in policy will have an immediate and positive impact by easing access to needed medical support for affected children.

4.3 National Training Workgroup

The National Training Workgroup (NTWG) consists of State, Federal, and Tribal child support training partners who meet bi-monthly to determine common training needs and discuss practices to share with child support workers. The NTWG completed the following training initiatives in FY 2007:

  • Training of Trainers session for child support trainers;
  • Participation in Customer Service Training for child support workers; and
  • Participation on the Planning Committee for the 17th National Child Support Enforcement Training Conference.

IV-D Directors’ Child Support Enforcement Leadership Seminar Pilot

To assist State and Tribal Child Support Directors in obtaining and refining the tools they need to exercise leadership and improve performance in the complex child support enforcement environment, OCSE developed and piloted a course titled “Improving Performance in Child Support Enforcement: A Seminar for Directors”. The curriculum has modules on: (1) Leading Change; (2) Leading People; (3) Accountability to Customers and the Public; and (4) Dynamic Leadership and Communications. OCSE also provided the 15 pilot participants with a Resource Guide containing information on a wide variety of information on reports and tools available to aid them in their work.

Tribal Child Support Program Training

In FY 2007, OCSE began development of a training curriculum on Tribal Child Support Programs. The computer-based and web-based curriculum consists of five courses:

  • Child Support Enforcement - Orientation;
  • Child Support Enforcement - Locate;
  • Child Support Enforcement - Paternity Establishment;
  • Child Support Enforcement - Enforcement; and
  • Child Support Enforcement - Intergovernmental.

Military and Customer Training

During May-July 2007, collaborative CSE/military training was delivered by OCSE and DoD personnel at four sites with eight States and one Tribe participating.

In December 2006, OCSE conducted two two-day training sessions in Jackson, Mississippi, titled “Customer Service Training for Child Support Enforcement Workers” for about 25 participants per session.  The participants were caseworkers, supervisors, and trainers from across Mississippi.  In June 2007, OCSE conducted a half-day customer service training session in Vermont for about 135 participants.

17th National OCSE Training Conference

The OCSE 17th National Child Support Enforcement Training Conference was held on September 10-12, 2007, in Washington, DC. The theme of the conference was “Child Support University.”

The conference addressed the importance of collaborative approaches to achieving mutual program goals. Plenary session topics included Personal Leadership, Driving Performance in Collections, and Strategies for Improving Child Support Enforcement: Views from Princeton and Beyond.

Approximately 400 State, local, Tribal, and Federal child support professionals and vendors attended the conference. OCSE‘s Child Support University concept received outstanding feedback from participants, all of whom received CSE graduate certificates of attendance.

4.4 National Electronic Child Support Resource System (NECSRS)

A survey and report were completed to determine if OCSE‘s National Electronic Child Support Resource System (NECSRS) was meeting its objectives effectively to provide an electronic system to facilitate rapid, timely access and dissemination of CSE resource materials among Federal, State, local, and Tribal CSE organizations; identify and index resource materials; and provide NECSRS users with the ability to search, locate, view, and/or download resources from an extensive library of CSE resource materials via the Internet. Based on the survey findings, OCSE made a modification to enhance NECSRS by incorporating a no-cost search engine tool powered by Google that allows faster, more efficient access to information.

4.5 Past-Due Child Support and the Project to Avoid Increasing Delinquencies (PAID)

Despite record collections by State CSE programs, considerable sums of child support go unpaid every year. As of September 30, 2007, States reported that the total national unpaid child support debt that has accumulated since the program began in 1975 is $106 billion. This large accumulation of child support arrears is a serious concern for a number of reasons. First, if these arrears could be collected, the additional income clearly would benefit the children and families who are owed this child support. Second, some of these arrears are owed to the government. Finally, large arrears balances give the impression that State CSE programs are not doing their job, when, in fact, the situation is much more complicated. For instance, even though the total amount of arrears due and unpaid since the program started until FY 2007 is about $106 billion, the total cumulative distributed collections for these past 32 fiscal years is about $311 billion.

In order to gain a better understanding of the child support debt, OCSE and the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE) contracted with the Urban Institute to conduct a detailed study of child support arrears in nine large States: Arizona, Florida, Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas. As a result of this study, in FY 2007, the Urban Institute published a report called Assessing Child Support Arrears in Nine Large States and the Nation[2]. Major observations of the study included the following:

  • Most debt is owed by low-income parents who make less than $10,000 a year.
  • Most debtors owe small amounts, but a greater percentage of the debt is owed by a smaller number of persons who owe a larger amount of arrears. In the nine study States 11 percent of the noncustodial parents with an obligation to pay child support owed 54 percent of the arrears in these States. Each of these debtors owed over $30,000 in arrears.
  • Charging interest routinely results in significantly higher arrears. Two of the nine study States charge interest routinely, and they reported that interest represented over 20 percent of their arrears.
  • Based on a simulation model for seven States, it is estimated that less than half of existing arrears will be collected over the next 10 years. Further, in these seven States the total arrears is predicted to grow by at least 50 percent over the next 10 years.

Based on this study, a number of State agencies have undertaken numerous strategies to improve management of their arrearages. Such efforts include adopting new procedures, setting more appropriate orders for low-income parents, and/or expanding resources to enhance collection capabilities.

For FY 2007 and beyond, increasing the collection of current support and preventing and reducing arrears accumulation was identified as a national initiative by State IV-D Directors and OCSE. The Project to Avoid Increasing Delinquencies (PAID) Initiative, established in February 2007, seeks to focus on the program‘s core mission of increasing child support collections and reducing and preventing the accumulation of arrears. Specifically, this initiative renews emphasis on areas that have been a priority since the start of the program and ensures OCSE resources are supporting States in getting results.

With more knowledge about the composition of child support debt, the program can design and implement more effective strategies to collect debt from those who have the ability to pay and develop more appropriate policies for those low-income parents who do not. The PAID Initiative provided information and insights into managing child support debt, reducing its growth, and enhancing the ability to increase collections for children.

In FY 2007, OCSE, in consultation with States and as part of the PAID Initiative, developed a number of tools to assist States‘ efforts to increase collections and prevent and/or decrease arrears:

  • The PAID Practices Guide is a high-level overview of practices, intended for use by States and OCSE, to foster discussions of processes that could be employed to set appropriate orders, employ early intervention, improve locate and enforcement, review and modify orders, and manage existing arrears. 
  • The PAID In Full Guide is an expanded analysis tool that provides implementation criteria on individual PAID practices to assist readers looking for methods to optimize their processes.  In FY 2007, guides on four critical core processes were published: income withholding, review and adjustment, financial institution freeze and seize, and case closure.
  • PAID UPdates are brief summaries of individual PAID practices collected from Child Support Enforcement agencies across the country. They highlight efforts that have produced quantifiable results and have an impact on increasing child support collections or reducing arrears. Five UPdates were developed in FY 2007 and transmitted electronically to States.
  • The PAID Workplace is an electronic Web site designed to facilitate the exchange of useful information about PAID practices and access to guidance documents. A logic model outlining PAID activities, outputs, and outcomes also is available on the Workplace.
  • PAID Attention meetings are conducted to analyze and review individual State‘s practices with State and Federal staff to ensure a collaborative and comprehensive approach for providing technical assistance and coordinating technical support site visits.
  • Workgroups, comprised of State and Federal staff, have been established on a number of topics related to PAID, including arrears stratification, unreported/unearned income, and data mining.

These efforts are directed toward the goal of maximizing available technical assistance resources by coordinating and targeting them so that they can be most helpful and effective.

5 Program Improvements

5.1 Cumulative Total Distributed Collections

Since the inception of the Federal Child Support Program in 1975, the cumulative total of distributed collections through FY 2007 was about $311 billion. In FY 2007, $24.9 billion was distributed. Table 1 (below) shows cumulative total distributed collections over a 30-year period.

Table 1: Cumulative Total Distributed Collections
Fiscal Year Dollar Amount Fiscal Year Dollar Amount
1978 $2,604,235,499 1993 $62,703,972,657
1979 3,937,494,508 1994 72,554,132,067
1980 5,415,194,214 1995 83,381,299,246
1981 7,044,121,631 1996 95,401,088,670
1982 8,814,499,727 1997 108,765,060,372
1983 10,838,683,689 1998 123,112,767,053
1984 13,216,771,333 1999 139,013,968,130
1985 15,910,299,422 2000 156,868,239,652
1986 19,154,894,898 2001 175,825,836,760
1987 23,072,392,802 2002 195,962,703,831
1988 27,685,832,571 2003 217,139,093,713
1989 32,935,583,901 2004 239,000,352,589
1990 38,945,708,783 2005 262,006,232,720
1991 45,831,327,758 2006 285,939,616,977
1992 53,795,849,558 2007 310,794,385,465


5.2 Undistributed Collections

Undistributed Collections (UDC) are child support payments that have been collected by State Child Support offices that have not been sent to custodial parents. These payments, collected on behalf of individual recipients, cannot be disbursed immediately because of the lack of identifying information, unknown whereabouts of the intended recipient, the need to determine recipient welfare status, dispute resolution, and the like.

Figure 1 shows UDC changes between FY 1999 and FY 2007. From FY 1999 to FY 2001, UDC rose by 35 percent to $738 million. By FY 2007, UDC had decreased to $472 million, which is $73 million (or 13 percent) less than UDC in FY 1999, and $266 million (36 percent) less than in FY 2001 when UDC was at its highest point.

Figure 1. Net Undistributed Collections (UDC) and UDC as Percentage of Total Collections

Graphical representation of the data presented in the accompanying table

Figure Data: Net Undistributed Collections (UDC) and UDC as Percentage of Total Collections
FY 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Source: Form OCSE-34A line 9b 4th quarter
Net UDC in Millions 545 647 738 657 532 479 497 485 472
% of Total Collections 3.31% 3.49% 3.75% 3.16% 2.45% 2.15% 2.15% 2.04% 1.86%

Overall, net UDC is small relative to the total child support collections. UDC as a percentage of total collections started with 3.31 percent in FY 1999, reached its highest point (3.75 percent) in FY 2001, and declined to 1.86 percent in FY 2007 (Figure 1).

Table 2 categorizes collections remaining undistributed in the past three years into “good UDC” (UDC that will be distributed in the near future, either within six months from receipt of the collections or within a few days to a few months following the end of the current quarter) and “other UDC” (includes collections being held pending resolution of legal disputes; collections being held pending transfer to other State or Federal agency; collections being held pending location of the custodial or noncustodial parent; collections disbursed but uncashed and stale-dated; collections with inaccurate or missing information; and other collections remaining undistributed). In the past three years, good UDC were close to or more than 50 percent of the total UDC and the percentage of good UDC among the total UDC increased from FY 2005 to FY 2007.

States also report undistributed collections by the length of time in which collections remain undistributed. These undistributed collections are grouped into less-than-six-month UDC and more-than-six-month UDC (Table 2). The six-month period set forth in Section 464(a)(3)(B) of the Social Security Act and 45 CFR 303.72(h)(5) specifies the maximum timeframe during which amounts received through the Federal income tax refund offset may be held before distribution to the custodial parent. In each of the past three years, more than 70 percent of the total UDC was distributed within the first six months, with the remaining (less than 30 percent of the total UDC) retained more than six months.

Table 2: Collections Remaining Undistributed in the Past Three Years
Fiscal Year Good UDC  Other UDC Total < 6 Months > 6 Months Total
Source: Schedule UDC
2007 $241,945,588 $222,695,632 $464,641,220 $333,905,776 $130,735,444 $464,641,220
  52.1% 47.9% 100.0% 71.9% 28.1% 100.0%
2006 $206,472,631 $194,029,612 $400,502,243 $294,395,197 $106,107,046 $400,502,243
  51.6% 48.4% 100.0% 73.5% 26.5% 100.0%
2005 $189,706,247 $192,775,704 $382,481,951 $278,012,978 $104,468,973 $382,481,951
  49.6% 50.4% 100.0% 72.7% 27.3% 100.0%

 

OCSE recognized that growth in UDC was becoming a problem and sought to address the issue in a variety of ways. In FY 2007, OCSE continued to conduct meetings and hold quarterly conference calls with the Federal and regional staff responsible for monitoring UDC. These conference calls provided an opportunity for staff to identify States that have made progress and those needing technical assistance with their UDC data.

 

5.3 Medical Support

OCSE‘s FY 2005-2009 National Strategic Plan includes the establishment and enforcement of medical support as a stand-alone goal.  OCSE acknowledges that the provision of medical coverage by the custodial parent (or step-parent) may be a better option for many children than the traditional practice of ordering noncustodial parents to provide medical coverage.  In addition, the program recognizes its role in assisting States to control their Medicaid expenditures by placing the financial responsibility for health care on the family, not the taxpayer, to the greatest extent possible.  The Strategic Plan includes performance indicators for both the establishment and enforcement of medical support, as well as for the percentage of IV-D children with health care coverage from any source, and the Medicaid cost savings attributable to OCSE medical support efforts.   

The Child Support Performance and Incentive Act of 1998 (CSPIA) mandated the establishment of the Medical Child Support Working Group (MCSWG) to identify impediments to the effective enforcement of medical support. The medical support provisions in the regulations, published September 20, 2006, addressed recommendations of the MCSWG. CSPIA also mandated establishment of the Medical Support Incentive Workgroup (MSIW) to develop a performance measure of the effectiveness of States in establishing and enforcing medical support obligations. In FY 2007, State CSE programs reported information that allows OCSE to determine their performance in establishing and enforcing medical support orders for children. As recommended by the workgroup, for the second year these data were audited to assess the reliability of the two proposed medical support indicators for management purposes. While not affecting incentive payments or penalty determinations, the Office of Audit reviewed the proposed establishment and enforcement indicators to determine if States reported data in accordance with form OCSE-157 instructions and Federal regulations.

The OCSE Employer Services team continued to provide extensive technical assistance to employers on the National Medical Support Notice (NMSN) through articles in publications, presentations at conferences and teleconferences, and explanatory material on its Web site. The OCSE Web site has an electronic version of the NMSN that can be downloaded for use by State workers. The Employer Services team also continued to work with States by responding to individual requests for assistance.

OCSE provided guidance to States and localities on how to assist children of active duty military personnel and military retirees in obtaining health care coverage through the Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS), a database used to confirm enrollment and eligibility for health care benefits through the military. The Employer Services team, in collaboration with the DoD, maintains instructions on pursing health insurance for the dependent of a military member via their Web site, in Working with the Military as an Employer: A Quick Guide.

ACF hosted three regional medical support related collaboration meetings in FY 2007. These meetings brought together State Directors from Medicaid, State Child Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), and the CSE program to discuss ways to increase medical support for children and cost savings through collaboration among these agencies at the State level. These meetings also were attended by Federal staff from OCSE and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Regional meetings were held on August 20-22 in Oklahoma City, August 27-29 in Vermont and June 19 and September 20 in Wilmington, Delaware.

5.4 Grants and Waivers

The following grants and waivers provided funding for services or activities which benefited the Child Support Enforcement Program, but failed to meet the program requirements.

Section 1115 Demonstration Grants

Section 1115(a) of the Social Security Act provides OCSE the authority to fund demonstration project grants.[3] In FY 2007, OCSE awarded $539,984 in Section 1115 grants to the following six State agencies:

  • The New Jersey Department of Human Services received $150,000 to implement a comprehensive approach to establishing and enforcing medical support orders.
  • The Maryland Department of Human Resources Child Support Enforcement Administration received $150,000 to partner with the District of Columbia Child Support Services Division to establish a program for managing its shared interstate caseload.
  • The District of Columbia‘s Office of the Attorney General, Child Support Services Division, received $60,000 to evaluate the recently expanded pass-through and disregard policy.
  • The Louisiana Department of Social Services received $59,984 to demonstrate improved performance in current collections through collaboration with the courts and use of early intervention techniques.
  • The Texas Office of Attorney General Child Support Agency received $60,000 to work with the State‘s Medicaid/SCHIP Agency to improve medical support outcomes and reduce Medicaid costs.
  • The State of Washington Department of Social and Health Services Division of Child Support received $60,000 to strengthen the data exchange between the TANF and child support programs.

These projects will help improve child support enforcement in six States. The grants are designed to help families achieve self-sufficiency and promote stability for children, mothers, and fathers.

Special Improvement Project (SIP) Grants

Under the authority of Section 452(j) of the Social Security Act, Special Improvement Project (SIP) Grants provide Federal funds for research and demonstration programs and special projects of regional or national significance. Eligible applicants include State and local public agencies, for profit and nonprofit agencies (including faith-based organizations) and Tribal organizations.

The Special Improvement Project (SIP) Grant Program provides funding for projects that further the national child support program mission and goals and help improve program performance. In FY 2007, the SIP grants provided nearly $600,000 in funding for six grants to two child support agencies, a Tribe, a State court, a local prosecutor‘s office and a nonprofit organization to advance the performance of the nation‘s child support enforcement system.

  • Two grants are designed to develop methods to work more effectively with incarcerated and recently released noncustodial parents:

    • The Kern County Department of Child Support Services in Bakersfield, CA received $100,000 to partner with the Kern County Parole Office. The “On-the-Way-Out” Project will place a teleconferencing kiosk in the local Parole Office to provide newly released noncustodial parents immediate access to child support staff. Parole Officers will coordinate with Kern County DCSS staff so that participants can be interviewed remotely, without requiring a face-to-face meeting.
    • The Sagamore Institute, Inc. of Indianapolis, IN received $83,498 to develop a timely approach to modifying child support orders for incarcerated noncustodial parents in Indiana prisons and also will pilot a program “Work-Responsibility-Reward” to encourage noncustodial parent responsibility.
  • One grant is designed to promote Tribal parental responsibility and healthy marriage:
    • Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe of Tokeland, WA received $99,896 for a collaboration project, “Shoalwater Bay-Washington State Outreach, Education and Support Enforcement Program.” This project will establish an integrated case management process with Washington State Division of Child Support and provide community outreach and education services and referrals to encourage Tribal parental responsibility and healthy marriage.
  • Three grants were awarded for child support and court collaboration efforts to improve client outcomes and component operating efficiency:
    • The Texas Office of the Attorney General received $100,000 to improve parental understanding and compliance with court-ordered child support, medical support, and custody/visitation.
    • The Cuyahoga County Prosecutor‘s Office of Cleveland, OH, received $100,000 to develop and deliver cross-training curricula on model collection and enforcement tools at two intra-jurisdictional trainings for judges, child support staff, prosecutors, probation departments, and numerous financial institutions.
    • The New York State Unified Court System received $99,830 to expand the Parent Success Initiative (PSI), which previously served only voluntary noncustodial parent participants, in Onondaga County to serve an additional 200 mandated referrals each year to receive parenting and job placement services. Grant funds will support screening and case management.

Child Access and Visitation Grants

The Grants to States for the Access and Visitation Program (42 U.S.C. 699b) was authorized by Congress through passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. The goal of the program, as set in statute, is to “”¦enable States to establish and administer programs to support and facilitate noncustodial parents‘ access to and visitation of their children, by means of activities including mediation (both voluntary and mandatory), counseling, education, development of parenting plans, visitation enforcement (including monitoring, supervision and neutral drop-off and pick-up), and development of guidelines for visitation and alternative custody arrangements.”

Since its inception in 1996, a total of $10 million has been appropriated each year to be allocated among the States for the Access and Visitation Program, with each State required to contribute 10 percent of total program costs. The funds are allocated to each State per Section 469B (42 U.S.C. 669b) using the following funding formula, with a minimum allocation of $100,000 per State.

Federal law requires that each State monitor, evaluate, and report on services funded through access and visitation. This requirement is satisfied through the annual submission of the “State Child Access Program Survey,“ which includes:

  • State agency contact information;
  • services funded;
  • provider agency contact information;
  • number of parents served;
  • socio-economic and demographic information on families served; and
  • increases in noncustodial parenting time with children.

From FY 1998 through FY 2007, over a half million parents were recipients of services through State-administered Access and Visitation Grant Programs. Figure 2 provides statistics on the number of recipients of access and visitation services.

Based on OCSE‘s most recent data, States provided services to an estimated 79,558 parents in FY 2007. Nearly equal numbers of fathers (37,364) and mothers (39,657) were served in addition to 2,537 grandparents and/or legal guardians (Figure 3). The majority of parents served were unmarried and poor with annual incomes of less than $20,000. Over 83,500 children were associated with the total number of parents served.

States continue to fund a range of access and visitation services. Parent education, mediation, and parenting plans rank among the most popular programs (Figure 4).[4]

Figure 2. Number of Parents or Grandparents/Legal Guardians Served Annually

Count of legal guardians served per year

Figure Data: Number of Parents or Grandparent/Legal Guardians Served Annually
FY 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Mother 10000 20500 23500 27738 29638 34629 36400 33795 36830 39657
Father 9000 19500 24500 27945 32584 32936 32500 32174 34212 37364
Grandparents/
Legal Guardians
          1958 2262 2873 2435 2537
Total 19000 40000 48000 55683 62219 69523 71162 68842 73477 79558

Figure 3: Recipients of Access and Visitation Services by Type, FY 2007

Recipients of Access and Visitation Services by Type, FY 2007

Figure Data: Recipients of Access and Visitation Services by Type, FY 2007
Mothers Fathers Grandparents/
Legal Guardians
Children
39,657 (24.3%) 37,364 (22.9%) 2,537 (1.6%) 83,500 (51.2%)

Figure 4: Number of Clients by Services Provided, FY 2007

Recipients of Access and Visitation Services by Type

Figure Data: Number of Clients by Services Provided, FY 2007
Mediation Counseling Parent
Education
Parenting
Plans
Supervised
Visitation
Neutral
Drop-Off
20951 6035 67158 21688 17641 7952

 

Healthy Marriage Initiative Waivers

 

Healthy Marriage Initiative Waivers are aimed at helping couples and individuals who wish to gain greater access to marriage education services from which they may acquire the skills and knowledge necessary to form and sustain a healthy marriage.

These waivers allow States and approved sites to provide healthy-marriage education integrated with child support enforcement services and to conduct a media campaign describing the advantages of marriage, especially for low-income populations. These services to parents are intended to strengthen relationships and foster marriage, when appropriate. This education is designed to be voluntary and require domestic violence safeguards. Federal funds for these projects provide 66 percent of total project costs while State and other non-Federal funds provide the remaining 34 percent.

In FY 2007, OCSE awarded a waiver to Indiana, OCSE‘s 15th Child Support Healthy Marriage Waiver. Indiana proposes to serve 2,000 participants over the term of the waiver (June 2007 - June 2012).

5.5 Consumer Services

OCSE operates an Internet Web site with easy access and search capability. The site offers child support professionals and the public a significant amount of information about the CSE Program. OCSE also responds to thousands of customer, congressional, and White House case inquiries and requests for program information; operates the National Reference Center, which responds to requests for child support publications, provides services to customers and child support professionals in the international community; and publishes the OCSE national newsletter, Child Support Report.

In FY 2007, OCSE continued to provide citizen access to on-demand answers to frequently asked child support questions.  Approximately 905,000 people visited the Web site for the questions and answers on the CSE Program.  In addition, 4,600 individual questions were answered via the Web. 

6 Performance-Based Management

6.1 The Strategic Plan

The success of the CSE Program is measured through the use of specific performance indicators in the FY 2005-2009 National Strategic Plan that support the following five goals:

  • all children have established parentage;
  • all children in IV-D cases have support orders;
  • all children in IV-D cases have medical coverage;
  • all children in IV-D cases receive financial support from parents, as ordered; and
  • the IV-D program will be efficient and responsive in its operations.

The Plan‘s mission, vision, guiding principles, goals, objectives, and indicators are intended to bring child support professionals everywhere, and all others who collaborate with the IV-D program, an understanding of how the work they do directly affects the outcomes in our program. The Plan is a practical management tool for setting work priorities and focusing resources on results. It also provides a direction for the program and gives parents and taxpayers a tool for holding OCSE accountable for progress.

This Plan, unlike the previous strategic plans, also included strategies for achieving the desired outcomes. These strategies emphasize prevention and early intervention; proactive case management to ensure reliable support payments; simplified distribution of collections and prompt payment of families first; health coverage for children as a primary consideration; and elimination of barriers associated with multi-state cases.

Using these strategies, outcomes improved for children nationally as noted above. More child support was collected and distributed and the rate of accumulation of arrears began to decrease.

6.2 Budget and Performance Integration

The CSE Program has taken significant steps to improve its performance by integrating performance review with budget decisions. In FY 2003, the CSE Program underwent a program assessment and was recognized as one of the most effective Federally-funded programs. To support the integration of budget and performance, OCSE has a measure that calculates efficiency by comparing total IV-D dollars collected by States with total IV-D dollars they expend for administrative purposes, the Child Support Performance and Incentive Act (CSPIA) cost-effectiveness ratio (CER). In FY 2007, the national cost-effectiveness ratio was $4.73, which exceeded the target of $4.56. OCSE‘s budget requests and performance plan are aligned with those of the Department of Health and Human Services and OCSE has collaborated successfully with States to develop national performance goals.

6.3 Performance-Based Incentives and Penalties

Since 1975, the Federal Government has paid incentives each year to State CSE programs to encourage improved child support collections through efficient establishment and enforcement techniques. These incentive payments are a key source of funding for State programs.

The method for calculating incentive payments changed with the adoption of the Child Support Performance and Incentive Act (CSPIA) in 1998. An Incentive Funding Workgroup composed of Federal and State partners made recommendations to the Secretary to develop this system. Four key elements of the performance-based incentive system include:

  • incentive payments based on measured performance in five areas: paternity establishment, order establishment, current collections, cases paying toward arrears, and cost-effectiveness;
  • reliable and complete data (as determined by annual data reliability audits and reviews);
  • annual legislated amounts from which States are paid; and
  • incentives must be reinvested into State child support programs.

In FY 2007, all 54 States and territories received an incentive payment for the five performance measures. This is an improvement over the results in FY 2006, in which 51 States and territories received incentives for all five performance measures and three States received an incentive for four measures.

Penalties also may be assessed when the calculated level of performance for any of the three penalty measures (paternity establishment, support order establishment, or current collections) fail to achieve a specified level, or if States‘ data used to compute incentive measures are found to be incomplete or unreliable, or when States are not in compliance with certain child support requirements. There is an automatic corrective action year. The corrective action year is the fiscal year immediately following the year of the deficiency. If the State‘s data are determined complete and reliable and the related performance is adequate for the corrective action year, the penalty is not imposed.

If the corrective action was unsuccessful, the financial penalty is a reduction to the State‘s Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant. The penalty amount is calculated as 1 to 2 percent of the adjusted State Family Assistance Grant (SFAG) for the TANF program for the first year of the deficiency. The penalty amount increases each year, up to 5 percent, for each consecutive year the State‘s data are found to be incomplete, unreliable, or the State‘s performance on a penalty measure fails to attain the specified level of performance. In FY 2007, three States incurred penalties and two States received warning letters for failing to reach such specified levels in paternity establishment.

6.4 Audits and Data Reliability

The passage of PRWORA changed the direction and emphasis of audits of State CSE programs conducted by OCSE. Legislative requirements now emphasize performance and outcomes rather than the pre-PRWORA requirements that focused on processing and taking actions on child support cases.

As indicated in Section 6.3, States receive financial incentives based on meeting or exceeding standards for each of five performance measures related to paternity and order establishment, collecting child support, and cost-effectiveness. The incentives are paid based on data that States report to the Federal Government. The OCSE Office of Audit performs Data Reliability Audits (DRAs) to evaluate the completeness, accuracy, security, and reliability of these data reported and produced by State reporting systems. The DRAs help ensure that incentives are earned and paid only on the basis of verifiable data and that the incentive payment system is fair and equitable. In addition, while not currently subject to incentives or penalties, data related to a proposed medical support establishment measure and a medical support enforcement measure were subject to FY 2007 data reliability audits.

FY 2007 was the eighth year OCSE calculated and paid incentives to States for meeting performance standards in the five mandated performance measure areas. All 54 States/territories and jurisdictions passed the DRA/MDR[5] in FY 2007, an improvement over the 52 States that passed in FY 2006 and the 50 States that passed in FY 2005.

6.5 Cost Audits

OCSE also is required by Section 452(a)(4)(C)(ii) of the Social Security Act to evaluate the adequacy of the financial management of a State‘s program. Specifically, OCSE is mandated to perform reviews of expenditures claimed by States for Federal reimbursement. The primary objectives of a cost audit are to determine whether costs claimed by the State for Federal reimbursement are allowable, allocable, and reasonable to the child support program and to ensure that States bear their fair share of child support costs. Financial audits are performed after the DRAs are completed to the extent that time and resources are available before beginning the next fiscal year‘s DRAs. Findings from cost audits for which a final report was issued in FY 2007 included unallowable non-IV-D costs claimed for reimbursement in the amount of $1,025,224.

6.6 Self-Assessment

Section 454(15)(A) of the Social Security Act requires States to perform annual assessments of their respective CSE programs and to report the findings to HHS. State annual self-assessments must cover a 12-month period and include the following mandatory sections: Executive Summary of Review Findings, Description of Optional Review Criteria Included in the Report, Description of Sampling Methodology Used, and Results of the Self-Assessment Review. They also may include the following two optional review criteria: Program Direction, which allows States to describe the relationship between program compliance with respect to self-assessment review criteria and program performance based upon the Child Support Program incentive measures; and Program Service Enhancement, which provides a description of innovative activities put into practice that led to improved program performance and customer service.

The mandatory performance criteria are as follows:

  • Case Closure;
  • Establishment of Paternity and Support Orders;
  • Enforcement of Orders; Disbursement of Collections;
  • Securing and Enforcement of Medical Support Orders;
  • Review and Adjustment of Support Orders;
  • Interstate Services; and
  • Expedited Processes.

Each performance criterion has a corresponding Federal compliance standard. The annual self-assessment report must include a description of the corrective action taken or planned by States for every mandatory self-assessment review criteria for which they fail to achieve the corresponding Federal compliance standard.

In FY 2007, 31 States met the Federal compliance standard for all performance measures included in the annual State self-assessment reviews. Each State that failed to meet its Federal standards submitted corrective action plans for each failed measure. These plans described how the respective States intend to ensure future compliance with each standard they failed to meet.

6.7 Coordination Council

The purpose of the OCSE Coordination Council is to coordinate strategic and ongoing activities across OCSE Divisions and Regional Offices that support the FY 2005-2009 National Strategic Plan.  More specifically, the Coordination Council tracks the activities and projects that OCSE staff undertake by mapping the activities to the strategies in the Strategic Plan.  This enables OCSE management to identify cross-cutting activities, eliminate any duplicate efforts by merging activities where appropriate, and determine any gaps in OCSE activities.

7 Project Save Our Children

Project Save Our Children (PSOC) is a child support enforcement initiative that targets criminally delinquent parents who willfully fail to take responsibility for their children, owe large sums of past-due child support, and who are very skillful in hiding assets. By prosecuting those parents who can but will not provide support for their children, PSOC sends a pointed message about the importance of parental responsibility. During FY 2007, the PSOC program resulted in $8,086,608 in child support collections from 1,139 child support cases.

During FY 2007, PSOC task force units continued to access the online Child Support Enforcement Tracking System 5 (CSETS 5), a redeveloped system that is available at all screening sites used to track cases, including restitution payments. This allows faster and more accurate reporting of case and payment history information.

Between January 1, 1997, and December 31, 2007, there were 180 PSOC convictions in South Dakota alone, which resulted in collections of $1,366,102.  One significant statistic related to these 180 convictions is that 88 NCPs paid, or now are making, monthly payments.

In addition, PSOC provided ongoing Web-based training required for all Investigative Analysts on the law enforcement data system, as well as other data systems. PSOC also contributed several articles to various newspapers and communications media throughout the nation, including the Child Support Report, about investigations which resulted in the arrest and recovery of restitution ordered by the court for nonpayment of child support.

8 The Tribal IV-D Program

In FY 2007, the Tribal Child R Part 309 including: establishment of paternity; establishment of support orders; modification and enforcement of support orders; collection and distribution of support; and location of noncustodial and custodial parents and their assets.

The following 12 programs were fully operational, comprehensive IV-D Tribal Programs under the Tribal Child Support regulations:

  • Chickasaw Nation, OK
  • Navajo Nation, AZ and NM
  • Puyallup Tribe, WA
  • Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate Sioux Tribe, SD
  • Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians, WI
  • Menominee Indian Tribe, WI
  • Port Gamble S‘Klallam Tribe, WA
  • Lummi Nation, WA
  • Forest County Potawatomi Community, WI
  • Cherokee Nation, OK
  • Central Council Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes, AK
  • Osage Nation, OK

These Tribes participated in national child support meetings and conferences which included the National Child Support Interstate and Systems Symposium; Region X Tribal/State Summit; the National Tribal Child Support Directors Association; the National Tribal Child Support Enforcement Association Conference; the National Child Support Enforcement Association Conference; the 17th National Child Support Training Conference; and the Western Interstate Child Support Enforcement Conference. OCSE also provided on-site technical assistance to both fully funded and start-up Tribal applicants upon request.

A total of $17.8 million was collected, distributed, and sent to States during FY 2007 from the 12 Tribal comprehensive programs for those inter-jurisdictional cases that Tribes enforced for States. This represents a 37 percent increase over the $12.9 million of collections sent to States in FY 2006.

The following 21 programs received second year start-up funding during FY 2007:

  • Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, WA
  • Three Affiliated Tribes - Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arickara Nation, ND
  • Oneida Nation, WI
  • Winnebago Tribe, NE
  • Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians, MN
  • White Earth Nation, MN
  • Keweenaw Bay Indian Community, MI
  • Pueblo of Zuni, NM
  • Muscogee (Creek) Nation, OK
  • Kickapoo Tribe, KS
  • Ponca Tribe, OK
  • Penobscot Nation, ME
  • Mescalero Apache Tribe, NM
  • Kaw Nation, OK
  • Comanche Nation, OK
  • Klamath Tribes, OR
  • Tulalip Tribes, WA
  • Nooksack Indian Tribe, WA
  • Modoc Tribe, OK
  • Quinault Indian Nation, WA
  • Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, OR

The following highlights some accomplishments of the comprehensive Tribal programs as determined by their narrative reports for FY 2007.

Cherokee Nation

  • Received full funding to operate its child support program in April 2007.
  • Handled over 5,000 cases in collaboration with the State of Oklahoma and the Chickasaw Nation.
  • Hired additional staff and conducted training based on 50 cases received from the Chickasaw Nation.
  • Collected and distributed more than $20,000; by end of the fiscal year had a collection on 91 of 100 cases.

Chickasaw Nation

  • Managed 5,358 active cases.
  • Established paternity for 163 children.
  • Monitored noncustodial parents progress in obtaining and/or maintaining employment, as well as monitoring their child support payments to the custodial parent.
  • Collected, distributed, and sent to States more than $5 million in child support.
  • Distributed about $89,000 from the “undistributed list.”
  • Collected more than $115,000 from clients in their Tribal Employment Payment Project.

Forest County Potawatomi

  • Experienced a 38 percent increase in child support cases with a total of 475 cases in 2007.
  • Collected, distributed, and sent to States more than $2 million for the fiscal year (a 24 percent increase in collections).
  • Resolved paternity for 70 percent of applications.

Lac du Flambeau

  • Maintained a caseload of 955 that averaged 1.5 children per case.
  • Provided services for 657 tribal children.
  • Distributed more than $440,000 in collections that was applied toward the $690,000 due in current support and a total of $247,656 was applied towards arrears.

Lummi Nation

  • Maintained a caseload of 500 open cases; 139 opened in FY 2007.
  • Full-time staff consisted of 3 caseworkers, a payment specialist, an administrative assistant, and an attorney.
  • Collected, disbursed, and forwarded to States about $300,000.

Menominee

  • Of 1,560 cases, 1,290 had orders (about 80 percent).
  • Distributed collections totaled $1.1 million; an additional $44,200 was sent to States.
  • Established 87 paternities in FY 2007.

The Navajo Nation

  • Caseload increased from about 15,900 to about 16,600 (almost 5 percent).
  • More than 10,300 paternities were established (more than a 4 percent increase over the number established in 2006).
  • More than 4,100 orders were established (more than a 6 percent increase over the number established in 2006).
  • The annual budget of $792,616 was included as part of the Joint Powers Agreement between Navajo Nation and New Mexico.

Port Gamble S‘Klallam

  • Caseload is in excess of 300 and increased 33 percent over the FY 2006 caseload.
  • Collections doubled since FY 2006.
  • Collected and distributed $74,400 in child support; an additional $43,000 was collected and sent to States.
  • Relied heavily on an agreement-based process;[6] 92 percent of agreed cases paid child support. In non-agreed cases, only 32 percent cases paid child support.

Puyallup

  • Established a Judicial based child support program.
  • Established more Agreed Orders of Paternity and Child Support Orders, as a result Voluntary Wage Assignments are being signed and immediately implemented.
  • Increased collections to $122,528 in FY 2007.
  • The program continued to open cases with Tribal members for direct services and continually received referrals for direct services.
  • Executed extensive customer service practice in dealing with child support cases.
  • Utilized access databases for case set-up and statistical information and, in doing so, decreased manual gathering of data.

Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate

  • Continued hiring and training staff.
  • Processed 33 new applications per month.
  • Completed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the State of South Dakota and the Tribe to meet the needs of the Child Support Enforcement Services.
  • Processed child support collections; disbursement payments were made on a daily basis.

Tlingit and Haida

  • Officially opened its doors in March 2007.
  • Serves 20 villages and communities that are spread over 43,000 square miles within the Southeastern Alaskan Panhandle, which is the Tribe‘s traditional service area.
  • Caseworkers successfully accomplished sampling of DNA testing for several individuals, which resulted in successful establishment of paternity.
  • Tribal Child Support Unit (TCSU) has networked successfully with the Central Council Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribe‘s employment and training services to provide noncustodial parents with new job training skills. This has resulted in noncustodial parents obtaining new employment and has empowered them to start making child support payments.
  • In March of 2007, TCSU staff successfully negotiated the transfer of hundreds of existing cases with Tribal members from the Alaska Child Support Services Division.
  • Due to the delay of transferring of the cases, the FY 2007 caseload consisted of two cases; paternity and a child support order have been established in each case. This did not reflect the hundreds of cases that caseworkers were in the process of opening.

9 International Program

In support of the Hague Special Commission, the U.S. has taken a leadership role in organizing and coordinating the Administrative Cooperation Working Group (ACWG). The stated goals of the ACWG are to improve administrative cooperation among participating countries and to develop possible recommendations on administrative cooperation for the language and implementation of the new Child Support Convention. Approximately 60 individuals representing 15 countries and organizations participated in the work of the ACWG during 2007. In its 2007 report, the ACWG and its subcommittees (Country Profile and Monitoring and Review of the Operation and Implementation of the Convention) submitted a Country Profile questionnaire for consideration by the Diplomatic Conference and discussed issues related to post-Convention implementation, including dissemination of good practices and the establishment of an advisory committee that would provide ongoing post-Convention implementation assistance. The U.S. delegation is committed to ensuring a results-oriented, effective Convention and the U.S. child support system serves as the model for performance-based measurement and monitoring of child support efforts.

During FY 2007, the U.S. completed foreign reciprocating agreements with El Salvador, Finland, Hungary, Saskatchewan, and the Yukon Territory. Since 1996, the U.S. has completed bi-lateral agreements with 12 countries and 11 Canadian Provinces/Territories. Under such an agreement, both countries agree to provide child support services cost-free upon request from another country.

OCSE provided training for State caseworkers through a series of teleconferences on the topic of International Child Support Case Processing. Representatives from Canada, Finland, and the United Kingdom gave presentations and responded to inquiries from State CSE caseworkers who handle international cases. OCSE also is collaborating with Canada to improve electronic payment processing in international cases.

OCSE also participated in the International Heads of Child Support Agencies meeting during 2007. Officials from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, United Kingdom, and the U.S. used this forum to share innovative practices and to discuss collaborative efforts to improve international case processing.

10 Appendices

Appendix I. Child Support Enforcement: Charts and Graphs

Cases

Figure 1 - The Child Support Caseload by Total, Current, Former, and Never Assistance and Percentages for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Figure 2 - Percentage of Caseload by State, FY 2007

Figure 3 - Number and Percentage of Child Support Cases With and Without Support Orders Established for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Figure 4 - Number of Cases for Which a Collection Was Made by Current, Former, and Never Assistance for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Paternities Acknowledged

Figure 5 - Paternities Established or Acknowledged for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Collections

Figure 6 - Percent of Collections Distributed to Current, Former, Never, and Medicaid Assistance Cases, FY 2007

Figure 7 - Total Collections Received by Method of Collection, FY 2007

Figure 8 - Total Distributed Collections by TANF/Foster Care and Non-TANF Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Figure 9 - Percentage of Net Undistributed Collections (UDC) by Category and Age, FY 2007

Expenditures

Figure 10 - Total Administrative Expenditures for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Figure 11 - Total Automated Data Processing (ADP) Expenditures for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Number of Children

Figure 12 - Total Number of Children in the IV-D Program for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS)

Figure 13 - Number of Unique Persons Matched and Number of Persons in the Federal Case Registry (FCR) by Participant Type for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Figure 14 - Federal Offset Collections for Five Processing Years

Figure 1: The Child Support Caseload by Total, Current, Former, and Never Assistance and Percentages for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Families formerly on public assistance continued to comprise the largest portion of the Child Support caseload.
Figure Data: The Child Support Caseload by Total, Current, Former, and Never Assistance and Percentages for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
FY 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Source: Form OCSE-157 lines 1+3
Total (in Millions) 15.9 15.9 15.9 15.8 15.8
Current Assistance (in Millions) 2.8 2.6 2.5 2.3 2.1
Former Assistance (in Millions) 7.4 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.2
Never Assistance (in Millions) 5.8 5.9 6.1 6.2 6.4
Current Assist. % 18% 17% 16% 15% 13%
Former Assist. % 46% 46% 46% 46% 46%
Never Assist. % 36% 37% 38% 39% 41%

Families formerly on public assistance continued to comprise the largest portion of the Child Support caseload.


Figure 2. Percentage of Caseload by State, Fiscal Year 2007

Eight States comprise more than 46.5 percent of the total child support caseload.

Source: Form OCSE-157, lines 1 and 3

Eight States comprise more than 46.5 percent of the total child support caseload.


Figure 3: Number and Percentage of Child Support Cases With and Without Support Orders Established for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Cases with orders have gradually increased while cases without orders have gradually decreased since FY 2003.
Figure Data: Number and Percentage of Child Support Cases With and Without Support Orders Established for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
FY 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Source: Form OCSE-157 lines 1 and 2
Total Cases(in Millions) 15.9 15.9 15.9 15.8 15.8
Cases with Orders (in Millions) 11.5 11.8 12.0 12.2 12.3
Cases without Orders (in Millions) 4.4 4.1 3.9 3.6 3.4
Cases with Orders % 72% 74% 75% 77% 78%
Cases w/o Orders % 28% 26% 25% 23% 22%

Cases with orders have gradually increased while cases without orders have gradually decreased since FY 2003.


Figure 4: Number of Cases for Which a Collection Was Made by Current, Former, and Never Assistance for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

The total number of IV-D cases for which a collection was made has steadily increased between FY 2003 and FY 2007
Figure Data: Number of Cases for Which a Collection Was Made by Current, Former, and Never Assistance for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
FY 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Source: Form OCSE-157 line 18
Total(in Thousands) 7,982 8,134 8,304 8,531 8,685
Current Assistance(in Thousands) 804 781 756 747 710
Former Assistance(in Thousands) 3,818 3,852 3,908 3,967 3,997
Never Assistance(in Thousands) 3,360 3,500 3,640 3,816 3,978

The total number of IV-D cases for which a collection was made has steadily increased between FY 2003 and FY 2007, largely driven by increases in the number of collections made for cases never on assistance.


Figure 5: Paternities Established or Acknowledged for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Paternity is determined for most children through in-hospital and other acknowledgement programs.
Figure Data: Paternities Established or Acknowledged for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
FY 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Source: Form OCSE-157 lines 10 and 16
Paternities Established (in Thousands) 663 692 690 675 640
Paternities Acknowledged7(in Thousands) 862 915 950 1,026 1,089
Total (in Thousands) 1,525 1,607 1,640 1,701 1,729

Paternity is determined for most children through in-hospital and other acknowledgement programs.


Figure 6: Percent of Collections Distributed to Current, Former, Never, and Medicaid Assistance Cases, FY 2007

Most child support collections were made for families who were never on assistance.
Figure Data: Percent of Collections Distributed to Current, Former, Never, and Medicaid Assistance Cases, FY 2007 ($24.9 Billion Distributed)
Current Assistance Former Assistance Never Assistance Medicaid Assistance
Source: Form OCSE-34A line 8G
$946,283,222(4%) $9,469,870,384(38%) $11,322,297,160(46%) $3,116,317,722(12%)

Most child support collections were made for families who were never on assistance. Former assistance and never assistance families combined received 84 percent of the child support collections in FY 2007.


Figure 7: Total Collections Received by Method of Collection,FY 2007

Overwhelmingly, most child support is received through wage withholding.
Figure Data: Total Collections Received by Method of Collection, FY 2007
($30.2 Billion Received)
Income Withholding Unemployment Offset Federal Tax Offset State Tax Offset Other Sources Other States
Source: Form OCSE-34A lines 2a thru 2g
$21,036,378,972
(70%)
$489,878,815
(2%)
$1,582,838,061
(5%)
$217,370,718
(1%)
$5,498,315,651
(18%)
$1,357,884,423
(4%)

Overwhelmingly, most child support is received through wage withholding.


Figure 8: Total Distributed Collections by TANF/Foster Care and Non-TANF Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Most child support collections are made for non-welfare families. Welfare collections continue to decline.
Figure Data: Total Collections Received by Method of Collection, FY 2007
FY 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Source: Form OCSE-34A, line 8G; TANF/FC: line 8, columns (A+B) + line 7a, columns (C+D)
TANF/FC (in Billions) $3.0 $2.2 $2.2 $2.1 $2.1
Non-TANF/FC (in Billions) $18.2 $19.6 $20.7 $21.8 $22.8
Total (in Billions) $21.2 $21.9 $22.9 $23.9 $24.9

Most child support collections are made for non-welfare families. Welfare collections continue to decline mostly because of the decrease in the TANF/FC caseload.


Figure 9: Percentage of Net Undistributed Collections (UDC) by Category and Age, FY 2007[10]

Collections held for future support account for the largest percent of undistributed collections.
Net UDC By Category
Category Received within the past 2 days Tax offsets held for up to 6 months Collections received and held for future support Being held pending transfer to other states & resolution of legal disputes Unidentified collections Being held pending location of CP or NCP Disbursed but uncashed & stale-dated Inaccurate or missing information Other
Source: Form Schedule UDC, lines 2-6, 8-12
Collections 11.9% 19.1% 21.9% 9.5% 6.7% 10% 5.9% 6.2% 8.9%

Collections held for future support account for the largest percent of undistributed collections.
Net UDC By Age
Age Up to 2 business days of receipt More than 2 days but no more than 30 days More than 30 days but no more than 6 months More than 6 months but no more than 1 year More than 1 year but no more than 3 years More than 3 years but no more than 5 years More than 5 years
Source: Form Schedule UDC, lines 14-20
Collections 14.2% 25.4% 33.3% 5.8% 9.4% 3.7% 8.2%

Collections held for future support account for the largest percent of undistributed collections.


Figure 10: Total Administrative Expenditures for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

In FY 2007, total administrative expenditures remained basically unchanged from FY 2006.
Figure Data: Total Administrative Expenditures for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
FY 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Source: Form OCSE-396A line 9 column A+C
Total (in Billions) $5.2 $5.3 $5.4 $5.6 $5.6
Federal Share (in Billions) $3.4 $3.5 $3.5 $3.7 $3.7
State Share (in Billions) $1.8 $1.8 $1.8 $1.9 $1.9

In FY 2007, total administrative expenditures remained basically unchanged from FY 2006.


Figure 11: Total Automated Data Processing (ADP) Expenditures for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Automated Data Processing (ADP) expenditures increased 6 percent between FY 2003 and FY 2007.
Figure Data: Total Automated Data Processing (ADP) Expenditures for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
FY 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Source: Form OCSE-396A, lines 4, 5, and 6
Total (in Millions) $810 $880 $835 $876 $862

Automated Data Processing (ADP) expenditures increased 6 percent between FY 2003 and FY 2007.


Figure 12: Total Number of Children in the IV-D Program for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

The number of children in the Child Support Program decreased from 17.6 million in FY 2003 to 17.1 million in FY 2007.
Figure Data: Total Number of Children in the IV-D Program for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
FY 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Source: Form OCSE-157, line 4
Total (in Millions) 17.6 17.3 17.2 17.3 17.1

The number of children in the Child Support Program decreased from 17.6 million in FY 2003 to 17.1 million in FY 2007.


Figure 13: Number of Unique Persons Matched and Number of Persons in the Federal Case Registry by Participant Type for Five Fiscal Years

The number of unique persons matched decreased by 1 percent between FY 2006 and 2007.
Figure Data: Number of Unique Persons (NCPs and PFs) Matched by FPLS for Five Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Persons Matched 4,566,268 4,225,570 4,706,263 4,980,433 4,940,371

Children make up the largest portion of the participant types.
Figure Data: Number of Persons in the FCR by Participant Type as of 9/30/07
Participant Type Non-custodial parents Putative fathers Custodial parents Children
People 11,649,746 1,225,112 12,662,255 20,046,692

The number of unique persons matched decreased by 1 percent between FY 2006 and 2007. Children make up the largest portion of the participant types.


Figure 14: Federal Offset Collections for Five Processing Years

Federal Offset collections for 2007 were $1.69 billion, a 5.8 percent increase over the previous year.
Figure Data: Federal Offset Collections for Five Processing Years
Fiscal Year 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Federal Offset Collections $1,553,949,260 $1,489,147,415 $1,584,234,102 $1,600,239,060 $1,692,858,631

Federal Offset collections for 2007 were $1.69 billion, a 5.8 percent increase over the previous year.


Appendix II. Child Support Enforcement: Box Scores

Appendix III. Child Support Enforcement: Summary Tables

Program Overview

Program Collections

Federal and State Share of Collections

Undistributed Collections

Other Collections

Payments to Families

Interstate Activity

Cost-Effectiveness

Incentives

Medical Support

Program Expenditures

Functional Costs

Fees

Cases and Caseloads

Orders Established

Paternities

Services Provided

Services Required

Staff

Current Support

Arrears

Non-Cooperation and Good Cause

Children

Federal Parent Locator Service

Tribal Program

Appendix IV. Glossary: Financial and Statistical Terms

Program Collections

Table 4 - Total Distributed Collections (Form OCSE-34A, line 8E; beginning in FY 2004, line 8, column G)

Total amount of collections distributed during the year on behalf of both TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) and non-TANF families. Total collections are calculated as the sums of Current IV-A and IV-E Assistance, Former IV-A and IV-E Assistance, Medicaid Never Assistance, and Other Never Assistance.

Table 8 - Distributed Medicaid Never Assistance Collections (Form OCSE-34A, line 8, column E)

The amount of collections received and distributed on behalf of children who are receiving Child Support Enforcement services under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act (SSA), and who are either currently receiving or who have formerly received Medicaid payments under Title XIX of the SSA, but who are not currently receiving and who have never formerly received assistance under either Title IV-A (TANF or AFDC) or Title IV-E (Foster Care) of the SSA.

Table 10 - Distributed TANF/Foster Care Collections (Form OCSE-34A, line 8, columns (A+B) + line 7a, column C; beginning in FY 2004, line 8, columns (A+B) + line 7a, columns (C+D))

The portion of total collections received on behalf of families receiving assistance under the TANF program plus children placed in foster care facilities. These collections are divided between the State and Federal governments to reimburse their respective shares of either Title IV-A assistance payments or Title IV-E Foster Care maintenance payments.

Table 13 - Distributed Non-TANF Collections (Form OCSE-34A, line 7b, column C + 7c, column C + line 8, column D; beginning in FY 2004, line 7b, columns (C+D) + line 7c, columns (C+D) + line 8, columns (E+F))

The portion of total collections received on behalf of families not receiving assistance under the TANF/Foster Care programs and distributed to those families during the year.

Federal and State Share of Collections

Table 14 - Federal Share of TANF/Foster Care Collections (Form OCSE-34A, line 12a + line10, column B; beginning in FY 2004, line 10a, column G + line 10b, column G)

The portion of child support collections used to reimburse the Federal government for its share of past assistance payments under Title IV-E and IV-A of the Social Security Act.

Table 15 - State Share of TANF/Foster Care Collections (Form OCSE-34A, line 7a, column E - line 10, column E; beginning in FY 2004, lines 7a, column G - (line 10a, column G + line 10b, column G))

The portion of child support collections used to reimburse the State government for its share of past assistance payments under Title IV-E and IV-A of the Social Security Act.

Undistributed Collections

Table 17 - Net Undistributed Collections (Form OCSE-34A, line 9b, column E; beginning in FY 2004, line 9b, column G (4th quarter))

The amount of collections that remains available for distribution in a future quarter.

Other Collections

Table 25 - Collections Forwarded to Non-IV-D Cases (Form OCSE-34A, line 4, column E; beginning in FY 2004, line 4, column G)

Those collections received through income withholding and processed through the State Disbursement Unit on behalf of Non-IV-D cases that were forwarded to the custodial parent during the quarter.

Payments to Families

Table 29 - Total Payments to Families (Form OCSE-34A, line 7c, column E; beginning in FY 2004, line 7c, column G)

The total collections that are distributed to the family but assigned by the family and forwarded to another state agency (e.g., a State run Foster Care or Child Care program). Also includes the amount of collections that are distributed to the family but sent, at the direction of the family, to the address of a private collection agency.

Table 30 - TANF/Foster Care Payments to Families (Form OCSE-34A, line 7c, columns (A+B))

Amounts of Current IV-A Assistance collections received and distributed on behalf of children who are recipients of TANF. Also includes Current IV-E Assistance collections received and distributed on behalf of children who are entitled to Foster Care maintenance assistance programs.

Interstate Activity

Table 31 - Interstate Collections Forwarded to Other States (Form OCSE-34A, line 5, column E; beginning in FY 2004, line 5, column G)

Amounts received in response to a request for assistance from another State and forwarded during the quarter to that State for distribution, including interstate cases and Administrative Enforcement in Interstate (AEI) collections.

Cost-Effectiveness

Table 34 - Cost Effectiveness Ratio (Form OCSE-34A, lines 5+8+13 divided by

OCSE-396A, line 9, columns (A+C) minus line 1b, columns (A+C))

The total of collections forwarded to other States, plus total collections distributed, plus fees retained by other States, divided by total current quarter claims and total prior quarter adjustments minus Non IV-D cost.

Incentives

Tables 35 and 36 - Incentive Payment Estimates and Actuals (Form OCSE-34A, line 11, column E; beginning in FY 2004, line 11, column G) and Financial Management

The amount of money States earn for running an efficient child support program. This amount is estimated prior to the start of the fiscal year and is reported by the State on a quarterly basis. Actual incentive amounts are computed after the end of the fiscal year and appropriate adjustments are made in State grant awards.

Medical Support

Table 37 - Medical Support Payments to Families (Form OCSE-34A, line 7b, column E; beginning in FY 2004, line 7b, column G)

The portion of any collection that corresponds to any amount specifically designated in a support order for medical support. To the extent that medical support has been assigned to the State, medical support collections must be forwarded to the Medicaid agency for distribution in accordance with current regulations under Title XIX of the Social Security Act (Medicaid). Otherwise, the amount must be forwarded to the family.

Program Expenditures

Table 40 - Total Administrative Expenditures (Form OCSE-396A, line 9, columns (A+C))

Total amount of expenditures eligible for Federal funding that is claimed by the State during the year for the administration of the Child Support Enforcement program. Including all amounts claimed during the year, whether expended during the current or a previous fiscal year. The amounts being reported have been reduced by the amount of program income (fees and costs recovered in excess of fees and interest earned and other program income) received by the States.

Table 41 - Federal Share of Administrative Expenditures (Form OCSE-396A, line 9, columns (B+D))

Net Federal Share of current quarter claims plus prior quarter adjustments.

Table 42 - State Share of Administrative Expenditures (Form OCSE-396A, line 16, columns (B+D) minus line 11, column B)

Total State share of current quarter expenditures plus prior quarter adjustments minus Federal FPLS fees.

Table 43 - Non-IV-D Costs (Form OCSE-396A, line 1b, columns (A+C))

The amount of administrative expenditures attributable to the collecting, entering, maintaining, and processing information relative to non-IV-D child support cases in the State Case Registry and to the processing of non-IV-D child support collections through the State Disbursement Unit. Non-IV-D cases are those for which there is no assignment of support rights to the State or where the State has not received an application for Title IV-D services.

Functional Costs

Table 44 - ADP Expenditures (Form OCSE-396A, lines 4, 5, and 6)

Expenditures made in accordance with the terms of an approved Advance Planning Document for the planning, design, development, implementation, enhancement, or operation of an automated Statewide Child Support Enforcement System (CSES).

Table 45 - Expenditures for Laboratory Tests for Paternity Establishment (Form OCSE-396A, line 8, columns (A+C))

The amount expended for laboratory costs associated with the process of determining paternity. This amount is the “net” amount of expenditures, reduced by any fees collected by the State to recoup the cost of these services.

Cases and Caseloads

Table 49 - Total Caseload (Form OCSE-157, lines 1 and 3, column a)

The number of IV-D cases open on the last day of the fiscal year, including the number of open cases at the end of the fiscal year as a result of requests for assistance received from other States.

Table 51 - Cases for Which the State Has No Jurisdiction (Form OCSE-157, line 3)

Open cases on the last day of the fiscal year over which the State has no jurisdiction. This includes cases that involve an individual over whom the IV-D agency has no civil jurisdiction available to pursue or effectuate any child support actions.

Orders Established

Table 55 - Total Cases with Support Orders Established (Form OCSE-157, line 2)

The number of IV-D cases open on the last day of the fiscal year that have support orders established. Includes cases with orders entered prior to the case becoming a IV-D case, as well as cases with orders established by the IV-D agency. Judgments for arrears, regardless of whether there is a payment schedule or an order for ongoing support, are also included.

Paternities

Table 57 - Total Number of Paternities Established or Acknowledged (Form OCSE-

157, lines 10 and 16, column a)

The number of children born out-of-wedlock in the reporting State for which paternity has been acknowledged during the fiscal year. Include children with paternity acknowledged through the State‘s voluntary in-hospital acknowledgment program and other acknowledgment processes. Also reported is the number of children in cases in the IV-D caseload for whom paternity was established or acknowledged during the fiscal year.

Table 58 - Paternity Establishment (Form OCSE-157, lines 5, 6, 8, and 9)

The number of children in the IV-D caseload in cases open at the end of the current fiscal year who were born out-of-wedlock. Also the number of children born out of wedlock in the IV-D caseload in cases open at the end of the fiscal year who have paternity established or acknowledged.

The total number of children who were born out of wedlock in the State during the fiscal year. Also included is the number of minor children who were born out of wedlock in the State for whom paternity has been established or acknowledged during the fiscal year.

Services Provided

Table 59 - Title IV-A Cases Closed Where a Child Support Payment was Received (Form OCSE-157, line 14)

Includes all cases terminated from TANF during the fiscal year in which there was any child support collection in the month of termination.

Table 60 - Number of Support Orders Established During the Fiscal Year (Form OCSE-157, line 17)

The number of cases in which support orders were established by the IV-D agency during the fiscal year. Includes support orders established for medical support or health insurance.

Table 61 - Number of IV-D Cases in Which a Collection Was Made on an Obligation (Form OCSE-157, line 18)

The number of cases for which one or more collections were made during the fiscal year. Included are cases where no support order is established but a voluntary payment was made.

Table 62 - Cases Sent to Another State (Form OCSE-157, line 19)

The number of interstate cases the reporting State sent to other States during the fiscal year. Includes cases submitted for location, establishment of paternity or support order, enforcement of support, or any other IV-D activity.

Table 63 - Cases Received from Another State (Form OCSE-157, line 20)

The number of interstate cases received from another State during the fiscal year.

Services Required

Table 64 - Cases Requiring Services to Establish a Support Order (Form OCSE-157, line 12, columns (b+c+d))

Total number of IV-D cases open at the end of the fiscal year that need services to establish a support order.

Table 65 - Children Requiring Paternity Determination Services (Form OCSE-157, line 13)

The number of children in cases that are open at the end of the fiscal year who required paternity establishment. This includes all children whose paternity has not been established and children in the process of having paternity established. If there is more than one putative father for a child, this child is only counted once.

Staff

Table 67 - Full-Time Equivalent Staff by State and Local, Under Cooperative Agreement, and Privatized IV-D Offices (Form OCSE-157, lines 30, 31, and 32)

The total number of FTE staff employed by the State and local IV-D agencies.

The total number of FTE staff employed by an agency (public or private) working under a cooperative agreement with the IV-D agency.

The total number of FTE staff employed by privatized IV-D agencies.

Current Support

Table 69 - Amount of Current Support Due (Form OCSE-157, line 24)

The total amount of current support due for the fiscal year for all IV-D cases, including total voluntary collections.

Table 70 - Amount of Support Distributed as Current Support (Form OCSE-157, line 25)

The total amount of support distributed as current support during the fiscal year for all IV-D cases. Voluntary payments are considered current support and should be included even though there is no order to require payment. If a State recovers cost or fees from a child support collection, the State must report the total amount of collections rather than the net amount sent to the family.

Arrears

Table 71 - Total Amount of Arrearages Due for All Fiscal Years (Form OCSE-157, line 26)

The total amount of arrears due and unpaid as of the end of the fiscal year for all fiscal years, including the fiscal year covered by the report. Interest and penalties on arrearages may be included.

Table 72 - Total Amount of Support Distributed as Arrears (Form OCSE-157, line 27)

The total amount of support distributed this fiscal year as arrearages. This amount includes judgments ordered and paid this fiscal year for prior year support.

Tables 73 and 74 - Cases with Arrears Due and Cases Paying Towards Arrears (Form OCSE-157, lines 28 and 29)

The number of cases with arrears due during the fiscal year, including cases closed during the fiscal year with arrearages.

The number of cases in which there was at least one payment toward arrears

during the fiscal year and the total number of IV-D cases in which

payments of past-due child support were received during the fiscal year. Part or all of the payments were distributed to the family to which the past-due child support was owed.

Non-Cooperation and Good Cause

Table 76 - Cases Open with a Determination of Non-Cooperation (Form OCSE-157, line 38: beginning in FY 2006, line 37)

The number of IV-D TANF cases open at the end of the fiscal year in which a determination was made that the custodial parent refused to cooperate with State agencies in identifying and locating the non-custodial parent.

Table 77 - Cases Open with Good Cause Determinations (Form OCSE-157, line 39: beginning in FY 2006, line 38)

The number of cases open during the fiscal year in which it was determined by the State that the custodial parent has a good cause for refusing to cooperate with State agencies in identifying and locating the non-custodial parent.

Children

Table 78 - Children with Paternity Resolved (Form OCSE-157, line 7)

The number of children in the IV-D caseload open at the end of the fiscal year with paternity resolved. Include all children born within a marriage, legitimized by marriage or adoption and children with paternity established or acknowledged.

Table 79 - Total Number of Children in IV-D Cases (Form OCSE 157, line 4)

The total number of children in IV-D cases open at the end of the Federal fiscal year reported on Line 1. This includes those children who are over age 18, at State‘s option.

Tribal Program

Table 90 - Tribal CSE Program Total Distributed Collections and Total Collections Forwarded to States (Form OCSE-34A, lines 8 and 5)

Collections distributed by the Tribe during the quarter, itemized by case designation.

Amounts received in response to a request for assistance from another Tribe or State and forwarded during the quarter to that Tribe or State for distribution.

Table 91 - Tribal CSE Program Total Expenditures (Outlays) and Total Federal share (Form OCSE 269A, lines 10a and 10c)

The number of total outlays and the amount of total Federal share.

Table 92 - Tribal CSE Program Total Caseload (Reports submitted by Tribes for FYs 2001-2006; beginning in FY 2007, OCSE-75, line 1)

The total number of IV-D cases open on the last day of the fiscal year. Include cases open at end of the fiscal year as a result of requests for assistance received from other Tribes or States, as well as cases open in the reporting Tribe referred to another Tribe or State.

Table 93 - Tribal CSE Program Total Support Orders Established (Reports submitted by Tribes for FYs 2001-2006; beginning in FY 2007, OCSE-75, line 2)

The total number of IV-D cases that have support orders established. Include cases with orders entered prior to the case becoming a IV-D case, as well as cases with orders established by the IV-D agency. Include judgments for arrears, regardless of whether there is a payment schedule or an order for ongoing support.

Table 94 - Tribal CSE Program Total Paternities Established (Reports submitted by Tribes for FYs 2001-2006; beginning in FY 2007, OCSE-75, line 4)

Report the number of children in cases open during or at the end of the fiscal year with paternity established or acknowledged.

Table 95 - Tribal CSE Program Total Amount of Current Support Due (Reports submitted by Tribes for FYs 2001-2006; beginning in FY 2007, OCSE-75, line 5)

The total amount of current support due on all IV-D cases including voluntary collections.

[1] The methodology for estimating collections attributable to the NDNH data can be found at: “A Guidebook for a Common Methodology for Determining NDNH-Attributable Child Support Collections” on the ACF Web site

[2]The report is available on the ACF Web site at: Assessing Child Support Arrears in Nine Large States and the Nation.

[3]Only State IV-D agencies or the State umbrella agencies of which they are a part can receive the grants. The agencies can contract with other agencies, universities, or private consultants to join in these efforts. States must apply for these funds in response to an OCSE grant announcement.

[4]Parenting plans - plans agreed on between parents defining access and visitation schedules with minor children.

[5]Modified Data Reliability Audits are reviews of the audit trails of data reported by States to ensure that such data have not undergone any significant change since the last Data Reliability Audit.

[6]Agreement-based process encourages parents to work together to achieve a common goal.

[7] Includes in-hospital and other paternities acknowledged. State paternity acknowledgements include an unknown number of acknowledgements for children in the IV-D caseload.

[8] Income withholding includes some collections for non-IV-D families.

[9] Includes administrative enforcement in interstate (AEI) cases and other sources.

[10] Net UDC is Gross UDC minus UDC Determined Undistributable and Abandoned.

[11] The Number of Unique Persons (NCPs and PFs) Matched is derived by unduplicating SSNs located across all data types (W4, QW, and UI).

[12] The The figures for the individual participant types are unduplicated within that category but not between them--i.e., an individual may appear in more than one category, but is only counted once within that category. Children – this number may be higher than the total number of children in Figure 12 due to States not closing cases on the FCR even though they are closed in the State’s system and due to States not deleting children off of the FCR case when they have emancipated and no arrears are owed for that particular child.

[13] In 2003, the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act was passed which included an increase of the child tax credit from $600 to $1,000 per qualifying child effective for the 2003 Tax Year. Because the credit was issued mid-year, the decision was made to issue Advance Child Tax Credit payments to qualifying families worth $400 for each qualifying child. Also eligible for offset, these payments resulted in an additional $120 million in collections for the Federal Offset Program.