< Back to Search

FY2009 Annual Report to Congress

Office of Child Support Enforcement

Published: December 1, 2009
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

Executive Summary

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 (HHS). The mission of ACF is to promote the economic and social well-being of children, families, youth, 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. In recent years, the program has shifted its primary focus from welfare cost reimbursement to family support, increasing the amount of support payments passed on to families and improving the program’s effectiveness in obtaining reliable support for children.

During FY 2009, child support payments of nearly $26.4 billion were collected and distributed; expenditures totaled about $5.8 billion; the total caseload of custodial parents seeking support was 15.8 million; over 1.8 million paternities were established or acknowledged; and 1.3 million support orders were established.

I. Focusing on Results

A. The National Child Support Enforcement Strategic Plan

FY 2009 was the final year of the FY 2005-2009 National Child Support Enforcement Strategic Plan. In addition to establishing the major focus of the CSE program on ensuring that child support is a reliable source of income for children and families, major objectives of the FY 2005-2009 Strategic Plan included ensuring that all children have established parentage, support orders, and medical coverage, and receive financial support from both parents, as ordered. Also among the major objectives were: ensuring the IV-D Program is operated in a cost-effective manner; preventing accumulation of child support arrears through early intervention when a non custodial parent becomes delinquent; and ensuring that accountability and commitment in measuring performance is maintained and strengthened through the use of program performance indicators. In FY2009, States continued to make progress in meeting these goals and objectives. However, the CSE Program did experience a decrease in child support collections for the first time in its history largely attributed to the downturn in the American economy.

B. Performance-Based Incentives and Penalties

The Child Support Enforcement Performance-Based Incentive and Penalty System is used to reward States for good or improved performance and to impose penalties when State performance falls below a specified level and has not improved. The Performance-Based Incentive and Penalty System measures State levels of performance in the following five program areas: paternity establishment; cases with support orders; collection of current support; collection of arrears; and cost-effectiveness. In FY 2009, 51 States/Territories received an incentive payment for meeting all five performance measures.

Penalties are assessed when a State’s measured level of performance in paternity establishment, support order establishment, or current collections falls below the specified level, or when a State’s data used to compute incentive measures are found to be incomplete or unreliable, or when a State is not in compliance with certain Federal child support requirements. No State/Territory received a penalty for any of these reasons for FY 2009.

C. State Plan

State child support agencies must submit approvable State plans describing the nature and scope of the respective State’s CSE program. In FY 2009, States submitted State plans certifying compliance with the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005.

D. Data Reliability

The OCSE Office of Audit performs Data Reliability Audits (DRAs) to evaluate the completeness, accuracy, security, and reliability of data reported and produced by State reporting systems. DRAs help ensure that incentives are earned and paid on the basis of verifiable data only and that the incentive payment system is fair and equitable. In FY 2009, 51 States/Territories and jurisdictions passed the DRAs.

OCSE is also required to evaluate the adequacy of each State program’s financial management. Findings from cost audits for which a final report was issued in FY 2009 included unallowable non-IV-D costs claimed for reimbursement for one State in the amount of $499,630.

II. Automation

The Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS) including the National Directory of New Hires (NDNH), was established by Congress in 1996 for the primary purpose of assisting State Child Support agencies in locating parents and enforcing child support orders. Since 1996, Congress has authorized certain State and Federal agencies to receive information from the NDNH for authorized purposes. In addition to the NDNH, the FPLS includes two other data bases supporting OCSE business processes, allowing OCSE to improve its performance and achieve its goals. These data bases are the Federal Case Registry of Child Support Orders, which consists of child support case and participant information from 54 States and Territories, and the Federal Offset System (FOS), which contains data certified by States regarding the amount of past-due child support owed by noncustodial parents.

Highlights of FPLS activities during FY 2009 included:

  • NDNH W-4 (Employee Withholding Allowance Certificate) data matches resulted in national child support collections of approximately $386 million, through income withholding request sent by State Child Support agencies to employers.
  • The FPLS FOS collected $2.2 billion in past-due child support.
  • State Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) agencies avoided at least $2.9 million in erroneous costs by using NDNH data in the states that utilized the data.
  • The Financial Management Service debt program yielded additional collections of over $1 million over just the final months of FY 2009 after adding NDNH as a resource.

III.Tribal IV-D Program

Comprehensive Tribal Child Support Programs provide full child support services including: establishment of paternity and support orders; modification and enforcement of support orders; collection and distribution of support; and location of noncustodial and custodial parents and their assets. Start-up Tribal programs in the developmental stages of operation do not meet the requirements for being considered Comprehensive.

In FY 2009, four Tribal Start-up programs became comprehensive, increasing the total number of comprehensive programs to 36. These 36 comprehensive programs collected and distributed over $19 million in child support payments to families and forwarded almost $5 million to other States and Tribes during FY 2009.

IV. International Child Support Program

In the International Child Support Program, foreign countries agree to provide child support services cost-free upon request from another country via reciprocating agreements. In FY 2009, the United States (U.S.) completed one foreign reciprocating agreement with Israel and published two “Caseworker Guides for Processing Cases with Foreign Reciprocating Countries”, featuring El Salvador and Switzerland. During this fiscal year, representatives from the U.S. also participated in the International Heads of Child Support Agencies Meeting held in the United Kingdom.

V. Grants and Initiatives

Section 1115(a) of the Social Security Act provides OCSE with the authority to fund demonstration grants to test and evaluate new policies and practices intended to improve OCSE program operations. As part of the ACF Healthy Marriage Initiative, OCSE awarded 15 Section 1115 waiver and demonstration grants to fund Community Healthy Marriage projects. In addition to Section 1115 waiver and demonstration grants, OCSE also issues Special Improvement Project (SIP) Grants that provide funding for projects that further the child support mission and help improve program performance. In FY 2009, OCSE awarded 30 Section 1115 projects for $2.35 million and four SIP grants totaling $378,381.

Grants to States for the Access and Visitation (AV) Program (42 U.S.C. 699(b)) were authorized by Congress through passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) of 1996. The statutory goal of the program is to enable States to establish and administer programs to support and facilitate noncustodial parents’ access to and visitation of their children. Since its inception in FY 1996, $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.

Program initiatives and collaborations continued to be essential to the successful fulfillment of OCSE’s mission of reaching a larger population of children and families with more comprehensive services during FY 2009 as OCSE partnered with the Office of Family Assistance, the Department of Labor, Department of Justice, Department of Veteran Affairs, and States to implement strategies to increase collections and improve services provided to children and families.

VI. Consumer Services

During FY 2009, OCSE maintained a Web site that provided child support professionals and the public with easy access to and search capability of a significant amount of information about the OCSE Program online. OCSE responded via e-mail, telephone and/or in-writing to thousands of customer, Congressional, and White House case inquiries and requests for information. OCSE also operated the National Reference Center, which: responded to requests for child support publications; published the Child Support Report monthly newsletter; and provided culturally appropriate services through its newly produced online Hispanic Child Support Resource Center and DVD Toolkit designed for Hispanic outreach, partnership development, and training.

Foreword

I am pleased to present the 30th Annual Report to Congress on the Child Support Enforcement (CSE) Program, providing the program’s status, highlighting its accomplishments achieved during FY 2009.

FY 2009 marked the culmination of the fifth and final year of the FY 2005-2009 National CSE Strategic Plan, which helped to establish the direction and focus of program priorities and resources during this time. Overall, continued progress was made toward achieving the goals and objectives of this plan, including those related to ensuring that all children in the CSE Program receive financial support from both parents.

As in previous years, in FY 2009, the program focused on ensuring that child support payments were collected and distributed quickly and appropriately to children and families and that these payments continued to serve as a reliable source of income for those who depended upon them to meet their daily needs. At the same time, the program also carried out a variety of innovative grant programs and research activities designed to work towards preventing the need for child support, engaging fathers from birth, increasing economic stability, building healthy relationships, increasing health coverage, and reducing family violence. These activities reflect the program’s ongoing shift from its law enforcement and welfare cost-recovery origins toward a more holistic family support approach.

However, the program was not without challenges, most of which resulted from a downturn in the American economy and corresponding reductions in child support collections, expenditures, and full time equivalent staff. In FY 2009, total distributed child support collections decreased to $26.4 billion from $26.6 billion in FY 2008. This was the first annual decrease in distributed collections in the history of the CSE Program.

In spite of these challenges, our commitment to children in the child support caseload remains strong and we will continue to collaborate with States, jurisdictions, Tribes, and our other partners to ensure that progress in the CSE Program is sustained and parents are held responsible for the financial support of their dependent children.

Kathleen Sebelius

I. 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 (HHS). The mission of ACF is to promote the economic and social well-being of children, families, youth, and communities.

The OCSE 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. In recent years, the program has shifted its primary focus from welfare cost reimbursement to family support, increasing the amount of support payments passed on to families and improving the program’s effectiveness in obtaining reliable support for children.

Families receiving aide as part of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program are required to assign their support rights to the State as a condition of receipt of assistance. Assignments also are secured on behalf of children placed in foster care and receiving foster care maintenance payments under Title IV-E of the Social Security Act “where appropriate”. Families receiving Medicaid are required to assign their rights to medical support to the State as a condition of receipt of Medicaid. In addition, any other parent or person with custody of a child who has a parent living outside of the home in need of child support enforcement services may apply for those services at their local child support enforcement agency.

The OCSE Program distributes over 90 percent of collections directly to children and families. In families that have never received TANF, the program forwards collections directly to the custodial family. For families that receive TANF assistance, States have the option to distribute assigned collections to families or to retain them to reimburse the State and Federal Government for the costs of the public assistance provided. In addition, the State may also retain assigned support collected through the Federal tax offset process on behalf of families that used to receive assistance.

In FY 2009, OCSE continued the recent trend of broadening the program’s reach to new partners, customers, and stakeholders while at the same time maintaining focused efforts on the CSE Program’s core mission – collecting support for children and families.

FY 2009 Performance Highlight

Child support payments of nearly $26.4 billion were collected and distributed; expenditures totaled about $5.8 billion; caseloads increased to 15.8 million; over 1.8 million paternities were established or acknowledged; and 1.3 million support orders were established.

II. Focusing on Results

A. The National Child Support Enforcement Strategic Plan

FY 2009 was the final year of the 2005-2009 National Child Support Enforcement Strategic Plan, which was the product of effective collaboration among OCSE, States, and jurisdictions. Several themes articulated in the Strategic Plan sharpened the program’s focus over this time. For example, the Strategic Plan recognizes that families come first. Also, it stresses various crucial needs of children and includes among its major goals: ensuring that all children have established parentage, support orders, and medical coverage; ensuring that all children receive financial support from parents, as ordered; and ensuring that the CSE Program is efficient and responsive in its operations. The FY 2005-2009 Strategic Plan also underscored the importance of preventing the build-up of unpaid child support through early intervention rather than traditional debt threshold-based enforcement and stressed the importance of accountability and a commitment to measuring program performance through performance indicators.

B. Performance-Based Incentives and Penalties

The FY 2005-2009 National Child Support Strategic Plan also included performance indicators to measure the program’s success in achieving the goals and objectives. OCSE’s Performance-Based Incentive and Penalty Systems takes into account State program performance levels, and States performing above a certain level merit an incentive payment, while States performing below a certain level receive a penalty. The better a State performs, the larger its incentive payments. It also is possible for a State to receive neither an incentive payment nor a penalty. Incentives are rewarded for good or significantly improved performance, while penalties are imposed if performance is poor and has not improved.

The performance-based incentive system measures State performance in five program areas: 1) paternity establishment; 2) cases with support orders; 3) collections on current support; 4) collection on arrears; and 5) cost-effectiveness. The performance-based penalty system measures State performance in three of these areas: 1) paternity establishment; 2) cases with support orders; and 3) collections on current support.

FY 2009 Program Highlight

National averages for the performance measures were:

  • IV-D Paternity Establishment Percentage: 97.75; and Statewide Paternity Establishment Percentage: 94.53
  • Percent of Support Orders Established: 79.41
  • Percent of Current Support Collected: 61.78
  • Percent of Cases with Arrears Paying Towards Arrears: 63.34
  • Cost-Effectiveness Ratio: $4.78

Since 1975, the Federal Government has paid incentives each year to State CSE programs to encourage improvement in child support collections through adhering to efficient establishment and enforcement techniques. The current performance-based incentive system was mandated by the Child Support Performance and Incentive Act (CSPIA) of 1998.

FY 2009 Performance Highlight

Fifty-one States/Territories received an incentive payment for meeting the requirements of all five performance measures. One State did not meet the cost-effectiveness performance measure and hence received an incentive payment based on four performance measures.

As mentioned earlier, penalties may be assessed when the level of performance for any of the three penalty measures (paternity establishment, support order establishment, or current collections) fails to achieve a specified level, when a State’s data used to compute incentive measures are found to be incomplete or unreliable, or when a State is not in compliance with certain child support requirements. When any of these conditions occur, 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 imposed as a reduction to the State’s TANF block grant. The penalty amount is calculated as one to two percent of the adjusted State Family Assistance Grant (SFAG) for the TANF program for the first year of the deficiency. The penalty amount increases, up to five percent, for each consecutive year the State’s data are found to be incomplete or unreliable, or the State’s performance on a penalty measure fails to attain the specified level of performance.

FY 2009 Program Highlight

Seven States received congratulatory letters for showing an improvement of two to six percentage points over FY 2008. Two States showed a deficiency related to paternity establishment percentage (PEP) and will have one corrective action year to correct the deficiency. One State showed a deficiency related to arrearage collections.

FY 2009 Program Highlight

On February 17, 2009, President Obama signed into law the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). ARRA temporarily reinstated longstanding authority eliminated by the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA) that allowed States to claim Federal matching funds on program expenditures made with performance incentive payments. This temporary reinstatement of matching authority was effective October 1, 2008 through September 30, 2010. Funds distributed to the State child support agencies as a result of ARRA were used for the program costs of carrying out the OCSE Program.

In addition, ARRA provided a one-time economic recovery payment (ERP) of $250 to an estimated 60 million recipients of Social Security (SSA), Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Railroad Retirement Benefits (RRB), and Veterans’ Disability Compensation or Pension Benefits. Treasury’s Financial Management Service (FMS) certifies and issues these payments. Through the offset of 452,514 ERP payments, child support agencies collected $111,689,930 in delinquent child support collections, boosting child support collection rates in 2009.

C. State Plan

As a condition of receiving Federal Financial Participation (FFP) funding, the State child support agency must submit an approvable State Plan describing the nature and scope of its CSE Program. The State Plan consists of preprinted pages and related attachments, and contains all the information necessary for OCSE to determine whether it can be approved.

The authority to approve State Plans is delegated to the Regional Offices, but the Commissioner of OCSE retains the authority for determining that a State’s child support plan is not approvable.

FY 2009 Program Highlight

States submitted State Plans certifying compliance with the DRA. The DRA eliminated the requirement that families assign their right to support owed before applying for TANF assistance and provided a set of State options to expand family distribution. By combining all of the DRA distribution options, States are able to distribute all collected child support to families. The DRA distribution provisions are designed to make child support collections a more reliable source of income for families. Through the DRA, States have the option to:

  • Implement a pass-through with Federal cost sharing;
  • Eliminate older pre-assistance arrearages; and
  • Distribute child support arrearages in former assistance cases to families first.

Partly due to State budget deficits, only one State has taken up the option of 100 percent family distribution by implementing all of the options. Twenty-one States implemented a pass-through; fifteen States eliminated older pre-assistance arrearages; and eight States implemented multiple options. Currently, seventy-four percent of the States have implemented at least one of the distribution options.

D. Audits

Data Reliability Audits

Federal auditors’ assessment of data reliability is a critical means to assuring that both incentives and penalties are based on accurate State-reported data. This is an important control, not only for the expenditure of Federal funds, but also for ensuring the fairness of the system.

The passage of the PRWORA in 1996 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. Beginning in FY 2000, as required by the CSPIA, States began receiving financial incentives based on meeting or exceeding standards for each of five performance measures related to paternity and order establishment, child support collections, and cost-effectiveness.

These five performance measures are evaluated using 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 on the basis of verifiable data only and that the incentive payment system is fair and equitable. Fifty-one States/Territories and jurisdictions passed the DRAs/Data Reliability Results (DRRs) in FY 2009.

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 each State’s CSE program. Specifically, OCSE is mandated to perform reviews of expenditures claimed by States for Federal reimbursement. The primary objectives of such a cost audit are to determine whether child support costs claimed by the State for Federal reimbursement are allowable, allocable, and reasonable, 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 2009 included unallowable non-IV-D costs claimed for reimbursement for one State in the amount of $499,630.

III. Automation

Automation is critical to the operation and success of the CSE 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 contributes to an increase in the overall effectiveness and performance of the CSE Program. 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. Statewide CSE systems receive valuable locate and enforcement information from the FPLS, but the effective use of this information depends upon the level of automation in these statewide systems. Without the technology and the technical assistance OCSE provides, the CSE Program would not be able to accomplish its mission and provide its services.

A. The Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS)

Since its inception, the CSE Program has used information available through the FPLS to locate parents who have financial obligations and to collect and distribute money to children who depend on parental financial support for food, shelter, education, medical care and other needs. The FPLS has been continually refined and expanded to support ongoing 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 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 2009, the FCR contained over 19.6 million cases and included participant information on more than 45 million individuals.
  • The National Directory of New Hires (NDNH) contains employment and unemployment information collected from 54 States and Territories and from all Federal agencies.
  • 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 CSE agencies); the Department of State to deny issuance of passports to delinquent noncustodial parents;and over 4,600 multistate financial institutions to identify noncustodial parents’ assets so that States can levy their accounts to collect past-due child support.

FY 2009 Performance Highlight

NDNH W-4 (Employee Withholding Allowance Certificate) data matches resulted in national child support collections of approximately $386 million through income withholdings sent by State CSE agencies to employers. In tax year 2009, the FPLS FOS collected $2.2 billion in past-due child support.

  • The Intergovernmental Referral Guide (IRG) provides child support case processing procedures and information from each of the 54 State and Territorial jurisdictions that is used to increase the efficiency of interstate case processing.
  • The Electronic Income Withholding Order (e-IWO) was designed, developed, and implemented in 2005 by OCSE as a process to enable States to send income withholding orders (IWOs) electronically to employers. In FY 2009, over 100,000 e-IWOs were sent using this application, creating greater efficiencies, time, and cost savings for both States and employers.
  • 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 e-IWOs by States directly to the Department of Defense, the largest single employer in the United 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.

The FPLS was legislatively mandated for the primary purpose of assisting State child support agencies in locating parents and enforcing child support orders. However, Congress also has authorized certain State and Federal agencies to receive information from the NDNH for authorized purposes, primarily to reduce improper payments from public benefit programs.

In addition to its support of the OCSE mission, the FPLS promotes data sharing to improve accurately eligibility determinations, program efficiencies and customer service. Through the NDNH, OCSE maintains a centralized source of employment and location data. Authorized agencies using FPLS data include: Social Security Administration (SSA), Department of Labor (DoL), Department of Education (ED), Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Financial Management Service (FMS), State Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) agencies, and State Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Programs (SNAP).

Program Highlight

  • State TANF agencies avoided at least $2.9 million in erroneous costs by using NDNH data in FY 2009 in the states that utilized the data.
  • FMS debt program has yielded additional collections of over $1 million since adding the NDNH as a resource in the final months of FY 2009.
  • SSA estimates annual benefits of approximately $186.1 million in prevented overpayments and adjusted payment amounts in the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) Program in FY 2009.

To carry out Congressionally-authorized data matching between OCSE and other Federal and State agencies as efficiently and effectively as possible, OCSE has developed standardized data sharing standards and processes for its authorized users. These data sharing initiatives allow legislatively authorized agencies to reduce erroneous payments and overall program costs in public assistance and benefit programs.

B. State and Tribal Automation

Given the caseload and complexity of the OCSE program, automation is an essential tool for the program to meet standards of efficiency and effectiveness. 53 of the 54 States and territories have single statewide OCSE systems that have been certified as meeting the minimum automation requirements of the Uniform Family Support Act of 1988 (UIFSA) and PRWORA of 1996 as set forth in the Automated Systems for Child Support Enforcement: A Guide for States. The automation standards used by the States required and recommended data elements that should be exchanged between OCSE agencies and developed an “essentials document” for Tribal automation. This essentials document serves as the basis for the Model Tribal System.

In FY 2009, the Forest County Potawatomi Tribe of Wisconsin began piloting the Model Tribal System for use by Comprehensive Tribal child support grantees. Also, in FY 2009, States continued to replace, update or enhance their statewide OCSE systems that were built on an aging infrastructure that in many cases is no longer being supported. Almost half of the State CSE agencies planned for either major enhancements or replacement of their legacy CSE systems in FY 2009.

IV. Tribal IV-D Program

The Tribal OCSE Program authorizes direct grants to Indian Tribes and Tribal organizations to operate OCSE Programs. Funding for Tribal IV-D grants is authorized pursuant to 45 CFR, Part 309, Final Rule on Tribal OCSE Programs, published March 30, 2004.

The Tribal OCSE Program oversees Start-up Tribal Programs and Comprehensive Tribal IV-D Programs. Start-Up Tribal Programs are in the developmental stages of operation. These programs have not met the requirements set forth in the Final Rule.

FY 2009 Performance Highlight

Four Tribal Start-up Programs became Comprehensive, increasing the number of Comprehensive Programs to 36. Over $19 million in child support payments was collected and distributed to families by Comprehensive Programs and almost $5 million was forwarded to other States and Tribes.

The four new Comprehensive Tribes in FY 2009 were:

  • Chippewa Cree (Rocky Boys Res), MT
  • Confederate Tribe of Colville, WA
  • Nez Perce, ID
  • Tulalip, WA

In addition, the following nine Start-up Programs sought funding to become a fully operational Comprehensive Tribal IV-D Program in FY 2009:

  • Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe
  • Eastern Shoshone Tribe, WY
  • Blackfeet Nation, MT
  • Aleutian-Pribilof Islands, AK
  • Coeur D’Alene Tribe, ID
  • Suquamish Tribe, WA
  • Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe, MN
  • Kickapoo, OK
  • Fort Belknap Indian Community, MT

Comprehensive Tribal OCSE Programs are fully operational, providing child support services 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. (See Appendix D for Tribal Accomplishments in FY 2009).

V. International Child Support Program

In FY 2009, no activities occurred but there were developments on the following:

  • The U.S. completed one foreign reciprocating agreement with Israel. From FY 1996 to FY 2009, the U.S. completed bilateral agreements with 14 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 published two “Caseworker Guides for Processing Cases with Foreign Reciprocating Countries,” featuring El Salvador and Switzerland, and
  • OCSE also participated in the International Heads of Child Support Agencies meeting during FY 2009, which was held in the United Kingdom. Officials from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, United Kingdom, and the U.S. used this forum to share innovative practices and discuss collaborative efforts to improve international case processing during FY 2009.

VI. Grants and Initiatives

A. Section 1115 and Special Improvement Project (SIP) Grants

Section 1115 (a) of the Social Security Act provides OCSE with the authority to fund demonstration grants to test and evaluate new policies and practices that are intended to improve the operation of the OCSE program. The Special Improvement Project (SIP) grant program also provides funding for projects that further the Child Support mission and goals and help improve program performance.

In FY 2009, Section 1115 grants included awards for: a) projects to avoid increasing child support delinquencies, including strategies to increase collections of current support and reduce arrearages; b) projects that provide family-centered services for unwed parents in the IV-D caseload; c) projects in support of the prisoner reentry initiative; d) projects to address the sudden and prolonged effect of the economic downturn on the IV-D caseload and program operations; e) grants to fund partnerships among OCSE, TANF, and Universities to strengthen families; and f) projects to coordinate and improve medical child support and children’s health care coverage provided through medicaid - CHIP coverage.

In FY 2009, SIP grants included awards for: a) implementing an outbound interactive voice response system; b) unifying child welfare and child support court proceedings as well as expanding the use of technology in courts; c) allowing family court judges to court-order non custodial parents into jobs rather than jail; and d) expanding case conferencing statewide to assist parents in their agreement on child support and/or medical support.

FY 2009 Program Highlight

OCSE awarded 30 Section 1115 grants for $2,349,785 and four SIP grants totaling $378,381.

B. Healthy Marriage Initiative Grants

ACF in FY 2003 launched the Healthy Marriage Initiative (HMI) targetinglow-income populations around the nation. This initiative consisted of three multi-year demonstration programs – 1) Supporting Healthy Marriages, 2) Building Strong Families, and 3) the Community Healthy Marriage Initiative. Although each demonstration program has a unique set of eligibility criteria and work with families presenting different family structures, each targeted population is introduced to a range of marriage and relationship education, case management services, and referrals to other services as needed. The three demonstration projects together are designed to build in-state networks of providers and community partnerships with the intention of being sustained beyond the period of Federal funding.

As part of the ACF initiative, OCSE awarded 15 Section 1115 waiver demonstrations of the Community Healthy Marriage Initiative to various State IV-D agencies around the nation. The demonstration projects were phased-in starting in FY 2004 and the last of the 15 projects started in FY 2007. Each of these demonstrations last for a period of time from three through five years.

C. Child Access and Visitation Grants

The grants to States for the Access and Visitation (AV) Program (42 U.S.C. 699(b)) was authorized by Congress through passage of PRWORA. The statutory goal of the program 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. A number of States use their Access and Visitation grant funds to support supervised visitation services for children placed in foster care.

Since its inception, $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 pursuant to Section 469B (42 U.S.C. 669(b)) using the following funding formula, with a minimum allocation of $100,000 per State:

“The allotment of a State for a fiscal year is the amount that bears the same ratio to $10,000,000 for grants under this section for the fiscal year as the number of children in the State living with only one biological parent bears to the total number of such children in all States.”

D. Other Initiatives and Collaborations

Program initiatives and collaborations continue to be an essential component to successfully fulfilling OCSE’s mission of reaching a larger population with more comprehensive services. Collaborations help the program broaden its capacity to blend interrelated issues and help provide a framework for addressing the appropriateness and effectiveness of services provided.

FY 2009 Program Highlight

OCSE participated in the following collaborations:

National Judicial/Child Support Enforcement Task Force. The National Judicial/Child Support Enforcement Task Force continued its role in support of increased child support collections through enhanced collaboration between the IV-D and court/judicial communities. Problem solving techniques were applied in child support venues, a new publication, “Setting Appropriate Child Support Orders”, was posted on the web site, and modules were developed and tested to aid judges in more efficiently and effectively processing child support cases.

Collaboration Institute. OCSE, Office of Family Assistance (OFA), and the DoL’s Employment and Training Administration jointly held a Collaboration Institute for 13 jurisdictions in urban areas. The goal was to strengthen coordination, communication, collaboration, and share promising practices in these cities and counties to develop and enhance integrated service delivery strategies.

Department of Labor/Department of Justice/Child Support Enforcement Prisoner Reentry Initiative. OCSE successfully linked Section 1115 grants to existing Department of Justice and Department of Labor grants in seven States. OCSE grantees will provide child support case management and parenting classes to incarcerated parents in the pre-release setting as well as in reentry.

Substance Abuse & Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)/Child Support Enforcement Drug Court Initiative. OCSE conducted a national conference call highlighting collaborative efforts between SAMHSA and child support agencies.

Military/Child Support Enforcement Collaboration. OCSE, Department of Defense (DoD), and the Defense Finance Accounting Service (DFAS) continue to collaborate in providing training on military cases for child support case workers and trainers, reaching seven States and three Tribes in FY 2009.

Department of Veterans Affairs/American Bar Association. OCSE partnered with Veterans Affairs (VA) and American Bar Association (ABA) to provide legal child support assistance to veterans experiencing homelessness.

Department of Justice U.S. Administrative Office of the Courts. OCSE participated as a member of the Defendant Offender Workforce Development (DOWD) discussion group, a consortium of Federal agencies that meet on a quarterly basis to address issues surrounding incarceration and reentry issues in the Federal prison system.

Administration for Children and Families Office of Community Services. OCSE joined other program offices within ACF to expand use of the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and to promote asset building strategies.

VII. Consumer Services

OCSE maintains Web site that provides child support professionals and the public with easy access and search capability to a significant amount of information about the child support program. OCSE also responds, via e-mail, in writing, and on the telephone to thousands of customer, Congressional, and White House case inquiries and requests for program information; operates the National Reference Center that responds to requests for child support publications; provides services to customers and child support professionals in the international and tribal community; and publishes the CSE national newsletter, Child Support Report.

Program Highlight

OCSE tailored customer service approaches and provided culturally appropriate services through its newly produced online Hispanic Child Support Resource Center and DVD, “Toolkit Material for Hispanic Outreach, Partnership Development and Training.” The Toolkit is readily accessible and assists child support offices, judicial staff, community-based organizations and other partners to extend outreach to the Hispanic community with bilingual customizable materials. A Spanish version of the OCSE Handbook was also designed and distributed to inform Hispanic parents of child support services.

VIII. Appendices

A. Appendix I. Child Support Enforcement: Charts & Graphs

List of Charts

Cases

  • Figure 1: Child Support Caseload by Total, Current, Former, and Never Assistance and Percentages for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
  • Figure 2: Number and Percentage of Child Support Cases Open With and Without Support Orders Established for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
  • Figure 3: Number of Cases for Which a Collection Was Made by Current, Former, and Never Assistance for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Paternities Acknowledged

  • Figure 4: Paternities Established or Acknowledged for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Collections

  • Figure 5: Total Child Support Collections Received by Methods of Collections, FY 2009
  • Figure 6: Percentage of Net Undistributed Collections (UDC) by Category and Age, FY 2009

Expenditures

  • Figure 7: Total Administrative Expenditures for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
  • Figure 8: Total Automated Data Processing (ADP) Expenditures for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Number of Children

  • Figure 9: Total Number of Children in the IV-D Program for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS)

  • Figure 10: Number of Unique Persons Matched for Five Fiscal Years and Number of Persons in the Federal Case Registry (FCR) by Participant Type as of 9/30/09
  • Figure 11: Federal Offset Collections for Five Processing Years

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

Graphical representation of the data presented in the table below

Figure 1 Data: Child Support Caseload by Total, Current, Former, and Never Assistance and Percentages for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Source: Form OCSE-157 lines 1 and 3
Total (millions) 15.9 15.8 15.8 15.7 15.8
Current Assistance (millions) 2.5 2.3 2.1 2.0 2.2
Former Assistance (millions) 7.3 7.3 7.2 7.1 6.9
Never Assistance (millions) 6.1 6.2 6.4 6.6 6.7
Current Assistance (%) 16% 15% 14% 13% 14%
Former Assistance (%) 46% 46% 46% 45% 43%
Never Assistance (%) 38% 39% 41% 42% 43%

As a result of the impact of the economic downturn, we saw an increase of over 6 percent in the current assistance (TANF) cases during FY 2009. This is the first increase in current assistance cases since we began collecting this data in FY 1999.

Figure 2: Number and Percentage of Child Support Cases Open With and Without Support Orders Established for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Graphical representation of the data presented in the table below

Figure 2 Data: Number and Percentage of Child Support Cases Open With and Without Support Orders Established for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
*Data does not reflect the number of cases over which States have no jurisdiction as reported on line 3 of the OCSE-157 report.
Total Cases Open (Millions)* 15.9 15.8 15.8 15.7 15.8
With Orders (Millions) 12.0 12.2 12.3 12.3 12.5
Without Orders (Millions) 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.3 3.2
With Orders % 76% 77% 78% 79% 79%
Without Orders % 24% 23% 22% 21% 21%

The total child support caseload increased slightly in FY 2009 to 15.8 million cases compared to the 15.7 million cases in FY 2008. Also, cases with orders slightly increased and cases without orders decreased from the previous fiscal year.

Figure 3: Number of Cases for Which a Collection Was Made by Current, Former, and Never Assistance for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Graphical representation of the data presented in the table below

Figure 3 Data: Number of Cases for Which a Collection Was Made by Current, Former, and Never Assistance for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year 2005 2006 2007 2003 2009
Source: Form OCSE-157 line 18
Total (Millions) 8.3 8.5 8.7 8.9 8.9
Current Assistance (Millions) 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7
Former Assistance (Millions) 3.9 4.0 40 4.1 4.0
Never Assistance (Millions) 3.6 3.8 40 4.1 4.2

At 8.9 million, the total number of child support cases for which a collection was made in FY 2009 remained unchanged. However, this number slightly decreased in former assistance cases and increased in the never assistance cases, in comparison with the previous year. Collections in current assistance cases were unchanged.

Figure 4: Paternities Established or Acknowledged for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Graphical representation of the data presented in the table below

Figure 4 Data: Paternities Established or Acknowledged for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Source: Form OCSE-157 lines 10 and 16
1 Includes in-hospital and other paternities acknowledged. Paternity acknowledgements include an unknown number of acknowledgements for children in the IV-D caseload.
Total (Thousands) 1,639 1,701 1,729 1,797 1,810
Paternity Acknowledged (Thousands)1 950 1,026 1,089 1,168 1,167
Paternity Established 689 675 640 629 643

In FY 2009, over 1.8 million paternities were acknowledged - largely through the in-hospital acknowledgement program. In FY 2009, the number of paternities established by IV-D programs increased after steadily declining over the previous four fiscal years.

Figure 5: Total Child Support Collections Received by Methods of Collections, FY 2009

Graphical representation of the data presented in the table below

Figure 5 Data: Total Child Support Collections Received by Methods of Collections, FY 2009 (31.7 Billion Collected)
Method Percent Dollar Amount
Source: Form OCSE-34A lines 2a thru 2h
2 Income withholding includes some collections from non-IV-D families.
3 Other sources include but are not limited to administrative enforcement in interstate (AEI) cases; payments received directly from non-custodial parents; collections received through the IRS' full collection process; collections received as a result of the administrative offset process; and collections received through the Financial Institution Data Match.
Income Withholding2 61.4% $21.4 billion
Unemployement Intercept Offset 5.3% $1.7 billion
Federal Tax Offset 6.2% $2.0 billion
State Tax Offset 0.7% $221 million
Other Source3 16.0% $5.1 billion
Other States 4.3% $1.4 billion
Other Countries 0.1% $242 million
Total 100% $31.7 billion

More than 67 percent of child support is withheld from employees' paychecks. Even though income withholding continues to be the most effective way of collecting child support, it decreased to $21.4 billion in FY 2009 from $21.9 billion in FY 2008. This is the first time ever that collections through income withholding decreased, as intercepts from employment rates dropped substantially in FY 2009. Intercepts from Unemployment Insurance increased from 634 million in FY 2008 to 1.7 billion in FY 2009, a 160 percent increase.

Figure 6: Percentage of Net Undistributed Collections (UDC) by Category and Age, FY 20094

Graphical representation of the data presented in the table below

Figure Data: Net UDC by Category
Category Percent

Source: Form OCSE-34A, Part 2, lines 3-7 and 9-13

Tax Offset held up to 6 months 32%
Held for Future 21%
Legal Dispute & other State 6%
Unidentified 2%
Location of CP or NCP 8%
Uncashed 4%
Missing info 10%
Other 9%
Past 2 Business days 8%

Graphical representation of the data presented in the table below

Figure Data: Net UDC By Age
Age Percent
Source: Form OCSE-34A, Part 2, lines 14-20
> 5 Years 4%
> 3 years < 5 years 3%
> 1 year <= 3 years 7%
> 6 months <= 1 year 5%
> 30 days <= 6 months 39%
> 2 days <= 30 days 30%
<= 2 days 12%

Tax offset held up to 6 months due to third party spousal claims continues to be the largest source of the undistributed collections by category in FY 2009.

4 Net UDC is the amount of collections that remained undistributed at the end of the previous quarter.

Figure 7: Total Administrative Expenditures for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Graphical representation of the data presented in the table below

Figure 7 Data: Total Administrative Expenditures for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Source: Form OCSE-396A line 9, column A, B, C, D
Beginning in FY 2008, Form OCSE-396A line 7, column A, B, C, D
Total (Billions) $5.3 $5.6 $5.6 $5.9 $5.9
Federal Share (Billions) $3.5 $3.7 $3.7 $3.7 $3.9
State Share (Billions) $1.8 $1.9 $1.9 $2.2 $2.0

In FY 2009, total expenditures decreased for the first time in the history of the program. This decrease was driven by a 9 percent decrease in State spending, as State tax revenues fell and State budgets ran unprecedented deficits.

Figure 8: Total Automated Data Processing (ADP) Expenditures for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Graphical representation of the data presented in the table below

Figure 8 Data: Total Automated Data Processing (ADP) Expenditures for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Source: Form OCSE-396A, lines 4, 5, and 6, column A+C
Total (Millions) $835 $876 $862 $925 $773

Automated Data Processing (ADP) expenditures were $773 million in FY 2009, a decrease of 16.4 percent from FY 2008.

Figure 9: Total Number of Children in the IV-D Program for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Graphical representation of the data presented in the table below

Figure 9 Data: Total Number of Children in the IV-D Program for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Source: Form OCSE-157, line 4
Total 17,173,286 17,261,575 17,121,013 17,031,940 17,413,972

In FY 2009, the number of children in the child support program increased to 17.4 million, an increase of 2.2 percent over the previous year--the first increase since FY 2006.

Figure 10: Number of Unique Persons (NCPs and PFs) Matched5 by the Federal Parent Locate Service (FPLS) for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Graphical representation of the data presented in the table below

Figure 10 Data: Number of Unique Persons (NCPs and FPs) Matched by the Federal Parent Locate Service (FPLS) for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
5 The Number of Unique Persons (NCPs and PFs) Matched is derived by unduplicating SSNs located across all data types (W-4, QW, and UI).
Number of Unique Persons Matched5 (Millions) 4.7 5.0 (+6%) 4.9 (-1%) 4.9 (0%) 4.8 (-3%)

Due to the downturn in the economy, we saw a reduction in the number of new hire and quarterly wage records submitted to the NDNH in FY 2009. This resulted in a 3 percent decrease in the number of unique persons matched.

Figure 11: Federal Offset Collections for Five Processing Years

Graphical representation of the data presented in the table below

Figure 11 Data: Federal Offset Collections for Five Processing Years
Processing Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
6 The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 allowed States to certify nearly 1 million additional non-TANF debts in Processing Year (PY) 2008 that were previously not eligible for tax refund offset. It is estimated that this resulted in at least an additional $200 million collected. The Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 provided economic stimulus payments of up to $600 ($1,200 if filing a joint return, plus additional amounts for each qualifying child), to be made to over 130 million American households. These payments were eligible for tax refund offset and resulted in an additional $863 million in collections in PY 2008.
7 The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 provided one-time Economic Recovery payments (ERP) of $250 to an estimated 60 million recipients of Social Security (SSA), Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Railroad Retirement Benefits (RRB), and Veterans' Disability Compensation or Pension Benefits. These payments were eligible for administrative offset and resulted in an additional $111 million in collections in PY 2009.
Total Net Collections (Billions) $1.58 $1.60 (+1.0%) $1.69 (+5.8%) $2.856 (+88.4%) $2.197 (-232%)

The chart above shows a dramatic increase in Federal offset collections in FY 2008, and a dramatic decrease in FY 2009. This trend is due to special payments that were made in fiscal years 2008 and 2009. If these special payments are excluded, there is a 17 percent increase in FY 2008 and a 5 percent increase in FY 2009. See the footnotes below for details on these special payments.

B. Appendix II. Child Support Enforcement: Box Scores

C. Appendix III. Child Support Enforcement: Summary Tables

List of 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

D. Appendix IV. Child Support Enforcement: Tribal Accomplishments

The following matrix highlights some accomplishments of the Tribal ComprehensiveV-D Programs set forth in their narrative reports for FY 2009.

Tribal Program Accomplishments

9The Economic Impact Initiative’s goal is to determine the root causes of nonpayment of support and to identify proven, successful means of securing regular payments.

10 Undistributed collections that are manually distributed by the finance employee.

11 Includes Federal and State income taxes, bank levies, bench warrant cash bonds, and Worker’s Compensation settlements.

Cherokee Nation
  • Established paternities for 1,936 out of 2,363 children.
  • Managed a caseload of 3,575; 1,349 were cases with support orders and 1,984 were cases open at the end of the reporting period.
  • Serviced 250-275 new cases and/or referrals/transfers from other IV-D programs.
  • Collected and distributed over $2.3 million in current child support.
  • Implemented a two-year Economic Impact Initiative9, part of an on-going development of a 5 year Strategic Plan.
Chickasaw Nation
  • Collected nearly $98,000 in child support.
  • Established or acknowledged paternities for 1,650 children.
  • Processed and distributed $83,184 from the “undistributed list10.”
  • Mailed approximately 900 applications to new child support applicants. As a result, 443 new cases were opened.
  • Distributed over $195,000 to custodial parents thru Large Lump Sum collections.11
Chippewa Cree
  • Became a fully comprehensive IV-D program in April 2009.
  • Received $246,094 thru a grant award for a six month period. The grant award allowed six positions to be filled.
  • Staff received training in various areas of the program.
  • Eight cases were transferred from the Tribal Court System to the Tribal Child Support Program.
Comanche Nation
  • Became a fully comprehensive IV-D program on October 23, 2008.
  • Staffing level was increased to six.
  • Distributed a lump sum payment of $15,000 to a custodial parent.
Forest County Potawatomi
  • Established paternity for all 546 children, resulting in a 100 percent paternity rate.
  • Child support cases consisted of a total of 255 cases; of those cases, 253 had support orders, resulting in a 99.5 percent order establishment rate.
  • Collected nearly $3 million in child support, an increase of 6.7 percent from FY 2008. $992,700 was collected for other State and Tribal IV-D programs.
  • Expenditures totaled $641,509 in FY 2009, resulting in a cost effectiveness rate of $5.68.
  • Was selected as the pilot for the online Model Tribal System and several Tribal staff members were trained on the automated system in February and March in Washington, DC.
Kaw Nation
  • Increased caseload by 360 percent from 12 cases when the program opened to 44 cases at the end of the first full year.
  • Established paternity for 7 children, resulting in a 90 paternity establishment rate.
  • Established support orders for 75 percent of the cases.
  • Collected and distributed 70 percent of current support owed and 9.5 percent of past due support.
Keweenaw Bay
  • Established paternity for 3 cases.
  • Established support orders for 31 cases in Keweenaw Tribal Court.
  • Attained a current support collection rate of 80 percent.
Kickapoo
  • Expended $220,903 by the end of the fiscal year.
  • Managed a caseload of 25 cases.
  • Established paternity for two cases based on DNA testing.
  • Collected and distributed approximately $6,022 for current support.
Klamath
  • Became a comprehensive Tribal IV-D program in October 2008.
  • Managed a caseload of 58 cases by the end of the fiscal year; 43 of those cases had a support order.
  • Provided staff training on Tribal IV-D services.
  • Established paternity for 61 children out of 71 children in open cases.
  • Made collections in 70 percent of current support cases and 55 percent in arrears cases.
Lac du Flambeau
  • Managed a caseload of 854 cases.
  • Collected $8,081 from executed warrants.
  • Collected and distributed $560,029 as current support, which resulted in a collections rate of 76 percent; and $159,581 was collected and distributed as arrears.
Lummi Nation
  • Collected and disbursed $374,855 in child support.
  • Managed a caseload of 539 cases.
  • Opened 141 new child support cases.
  • Established 65 new child support orders.
Menominee
  • Paternity establishment rate was 106 percent.
  • Had 1,680 cases open at the end of the fiscal year, of these open cases, 1,467 had support orders that were enforced.
  • Collected and distributed almost $1.6 million; $1.4 million directly for child support, over $12,000 for medical support, and $185,000 was distributed to assistance reimbursement.
  • $911,941 was collected from Income Withholding.
Mescalero Apache
  • Became a comprehensive Tribal IV-D program in October 2008.
  • Established paternity for 11 children through DNA testing or acknowledgement of paternity.
  • Established 15 new support orders.
  • Collected and distributed $115,444 in current support collections.
  • Collected and distributed $31,672 in past due support collections.
Modoc
  • Became a comprehensive Tribal IV-D program in FY 2008.
  • Disbursed $345,923 in current support which amounted to a 59 percent current support collection rate.
  • Established paternity for 356 children, which amounted to a 79 percent paternity establishment percentage.
Muscogee (Creek) Nation
  • Managed a caseload of 866 cases. Added 367 new cases; 499 cases were transferred from Chickasaw Nation.
  • Collected $488,776 in current support and $357,546 in past due support, a total of $846,322 in collections.
  • Paternity was established in 90 percent of transferred or newly filed cases, exceeding the target of 50 percent.
Navajo Nation
  • Managed a caseload of 15,992 cases; 695 were State or Tribal TANF and 15,297 were non-TANF.
  • Had 4,420 cases with support orders.
  • Established or acknowledged paternities for 10,026 children.
  • Collected a total of $6,909,550 in child support, a decrease of $822,916.
Nez Perce
  • Became a comprehensive Tribal IV-D program in April 2009.
  • Based on six months of operation, 47 cases were received by referral or new application; only two sought paternity establishment, collected $3,669 in current support, and collected $18,874 in past due payments.
Nooksack
  • Became a comprehensive Tribal IV-D program in FY 2009.
  • Managed a caseload of 131 open cases; 98 cases were Tribal TANF.
  • Collected $21,945 for current support.
  • Established or acknowledged 3 paternity cases.
Northern Arapaho
  • Became a comprehensive Tribal IV-D program on October 7, 2008.
  • Managed a caseload of 1,855 cases.
  • Collected $36,101 in FY 2009.
Oneida Nation
  • Managed a caseload of 804 cases.
  • Paternity establishment rate was 87 percent.
  • Total expenditures were $454,418.
  • Cost effectiveness ratio was $3.08.
  • Collected close to $900,000 for current support which resulted in a current collection rate of 99 percent.
Osage Nation
  • Managed a caseload of 226 cases.
  • Expended $462,576 in FY 2009.
  • Established 181 cases with support orders.
  • Established paternities for 16 children.
  • Collected and distributed $372,798 in current support and $126,037 in past due support.
Penobscot Nation
  • Staff participated in and completed several trainings.
  • Collected about $3,000 in child support payments.
  • Collected 75 percent on all child support orders.
  • Had a 100 percent paternity establishment rate.
Port Gamble S’Klallam
  • Compared to FY 2008, caseload increased by 14 percent in FY 2009.
  • Collected and distributed $86,365 in current support due and $61,412 in past due support.
  • Expended $915,981 in FY 2009.
  • Established paternities for 269 children.
Puyallup
  • Paternity was established for 200 children.
  • Collected $577,908 in child support, an increase of 19 percent from FY 2008.
  • Managed a caseload of more than 754 active cases by the end of the fiscal year.
  • Closed 323 cases.
Quinault Nation
  • Established paternities for 163 children and established 94 new support orders.
  • Collected $39,687 in current support and $50,906 in past due support.
  • Opened 118 new cases in FY 2009.
  • Managed a total caseload of 548 cases, 32 cases were opened and closed within the fiscal year leaving a total caseload of 516 open at the end of the fiscal year.
Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate
  • Provided technical assistance and training to several Tribal start-up child support programs.
  • Managed a caseload of 1,405 cases.
  • Support orders were established for 1,045 cases.
  • Paternities were established or acknowledged for 22 children.
  • Collected and distributed $597,830 in current support.
  • Total program costs were $866,087.
Three Affiliated Tribes
  • Managed a caseload of 461 cases.
  • Established or acknowledged paternities for 10 children.
  • Collected and distributed $501,630 in current support and $25,082 in past due support.
Tlingit and Haida
  • Opened 192 new cases and managed a caseload of 593 cases.
  • Collected and distributed $112,371 in child support, an increase of 254 percent from the previous year.
Tulalip
  • Became a comprehensive Tribal IV-D program on February 22, 2009.
  • Managed a caseload of 219 cases.
  • Continued to build relationships with Tulalip programs and Washington State to effectively handle child support cases.
Umatilla Indian Reservation
  • Managed a caseload of 64 cases, mostly referred from the State of Oregon.
  • Collected $19,127, a collection rate of 58 percent.
  • Collected $6,912 in past due support.
White Earth Nation
  • Became a comprehensive Tribal IV-D program on April 1, 2009.
  • Primary emphasis was the development of the child support caseload through Tribal outreach efforts as well as working with Tribal partners.
  • Distributed pamphlets and flyers to get out information about the Tribal child support program.
Winnebago
  • Became a comprehensive Tribal IV-D program on October 1, 2009.
  • Developed a Case Processing Manual.
  • Operated a Tribal TANF program.

E. Appendix V. Glossary - Financial and Statistical Terms

Program Collections

Table 4 - Total Distributed Collections (Form OCSE-34A – Part 1, 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 – Part 1, 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, columns (C+D); beginning in FY 2008, OCSE-34A – Part 1, line 8, columns (A+B) + line 7b, 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, columns (C+D) + line 7c, columns (C+D) + 8, columns (E+F); beginning in FY 2008, OCSE-34A – Part 1, line 7c, columns (C+D) + line 7d, 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 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 B – (Lines 10a, column G + 10b, column G); beginning in FY 2008, OCSE-34A – Part 1, line 7b, column G - (lines 10a, column G + 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 – Part 1, 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 G; beginning in FY 2008, OCSE-34A – Part 1, line 4a, 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 G; beginning in FY 2008, OCSE-34A – Part 1, line 7d, column G)

The total collections that are distributed either to the family or to the foster care agency to be used on the child’s behalf.

Table 30 – Current TANF/Foster Care Assistance Payments to Families (Form OCSE-34A, line 7c, columns (A+B); beginning in FY 2008, OCSE-34A – Part 1, line 7d, columns (A+B))

The total amount of collections that are distributed either to the family or to the foster care agency to be used on the child’s behalf.

Interstate Activity

Table 31 - Interstate Collections Forwarded to Other States (Form OCSE-34A, line 5, column G; beginning in FY 2008, OCSE-34A – Part 1, line 4b, 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, column G divided by OCSE-396A, line 9, columns (A+C) minus line 1b, columns (A+C); beginning in FY 2008, OCSE-34A – Part 1, lines 4b, 4c, 8, 11, column G divided by OCSE-396A, line 7 (columns A+C) minus line 1c, 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 G; beginning in FY 2008, OCSE-396A, line 8, column E 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 G; beginning in FY 2008, OCSE-34A – Part 1, line 7c, 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); beginning in FY 2008, line 7, 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. Includes 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); beginning in FY 2008, line 7, 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 7, columns (A+C) minus line 7, column (B+D))

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

Table 44 - Non-IV-D Costs (Form OCSE-396A, line 1c, 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 45 - ADP Expenditures (Form OCSE-396A, lines 4, 5, and 6, columns (A+C))

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

Cases and Caseloads

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

The number of IVD 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 IVD 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 IVD case, as well as cases with orders established by the IVD 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. Includes children with paternity acknowledged through the State’s voluntary inhospital acknowledgement program and other acknowledgement processes. Also reported is the number of children in cases in the IVD caseload for whom paternity was established or acknowledged during the fiscal year.

Table 58 - Paternity Establishment (Form OCSE-157, lines 5a, 6, 8a, 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 – TANF 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 IVD agency during the fiscal year. Includes support orders established for medical support or health insurance.

Table 61 - Number of 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 IVD 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)

Total number of IVD 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, Cooperative Agreements, 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 IVD agencies.

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

The total number of FTE staff employed by privatized IVD agencies.

Current Support

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

The total amount of current support by current, former and never assistance for the fiscal year for all IV-D cases; includes 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.

Arrears

Table 71 – Total Amount of Arrearages Due (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 IVD cases in which payments of pastdue child support were received during the fiscal year. Part or all of the payments were distributed to the family to which the pastdue 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 IVD 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 noncustodial 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 noncustodial parent.

Children

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

The number of children in the IVD 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 number of children in the IVD caseload in cases open at the end of the fiscal year. This includes those children who are under age 18.

Tribal Program

Tables 92 and 93 – 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 and forwarded during the quarter to that Tribe for distribution.

Table 94 – Tribal CSE Program Total Expenditures (Outlays) (Standard Form 269A, lines 10a)

The number of total outlays.

Table 95 – Tribal CSE Program Caseload (OCSE-75, line 1)

The total number of IV-D cases open on the last day of the fiscal year. Include cases open at the 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 96 – Tribal CSE Program Support Orders Established (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 IVD case, as well as cases with orders established by the IVD agency. Include judgments for arrears, regardless of whether there is a payment schedule or an order for ongoing support.

Table 97 – Tribal CSE Program Total Number of Children Without Paternities Established (OCSE-75, line 3)

Report the number of children in cases open at the end of the previous fiscal year who needed paternity established.

Table 98 – Tribal CSE Program Children With Paternity Established or Acknowledged (OCSE-75, line 4)

Report the number of children in cases open during or at the end of the fiscal year for whom paternity was established or acknowledged. This includes acknowledgments after genetic testing, but before adjudication, if applicable.

Include children with paternity acknowledged through a voluntary inhospital acknowledgment program and other acknowledgment processes.