< Back to Search

FY2010 Annual Report to Congress

Office of Child Support Enforcement

Published: June 28, 2013
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

Foreword

I am pleased to present the 31st Annual Report to Congress on the Child Support Program authorized under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act providing the program’s status and highlighting accomplishments during FY 2010.

FY 2010 marked the 35th anniversary of the Child Support Program.  During this time, the program evolved from a welfare cost-recovery program to a modern family-centered program designed to increase family self-sufficiency, avoid welfare costs, and meet the needs of children and their families.

As part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009, many state child support programs invested in technology projects, such as document imaging and data warehouses, to increase efficiency in FY 2010.  In addition, the development of a Model Tribal System was commenced to support tribal child support programs.  Use of automation and technology continues to be a hallmark of the Child Support Program at both federal and state levels.

I am proud of the program’s achievements in these difficult economic times.  In FY 2010, the program provided child support services and collected $26.6 billion for 17.5 million children in its caseload.  This includes $31.4 million in tribal IV-D child support collections, reflecting the growth of the tribal child support program.  In addition, another $3.8 billion in non-IV-D child support payments were collected by child support state disbursement units and then passed along to the families entitled to receive them.  In total, more than $30 billion in child support was collected in FY 2010, providing support to families in a timely manner to reduce child poverty and promote family self-sufficiency.

Kathleen Sebelius

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 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.

Focusing on Results

Between 1996 and 2008, following enactment of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) and the Child Support Performance and Incentive Act (CSPIA), child support performance dramatically improved.  Collections doubled as a result of increased automation, new legal authorities, performance-based funding, and increasing state investments.  However, the recession that began in FY 2008 had a noticeable impact on the child support program starting in FY 2009. 

After a drop in IV-D collections in FY 2009 due to the downturn in the economy, state child support collections increased by 0.6 percent to $26.6 billion in FY 2010.  However, FY 2010 collections remained slightly below the level of FY 2008, when the economic downturn and state budgets contractions began.  The proportion of these collections distributed to families was 94 percent.  In addition, another $3.8 billion in non-IV-D child support payments were collected by child support state disbursement units and then passed along to the families entitled to receive them.   In total, more than $30 billion was collected by the child support program during FY 2010. 

However, despite modest improvement, signs of weakened performance due to the economic crisis and reduced state resources persisted, relative to the pre-recession period.  For example, state performance improvements related to support order establishment, current collections, and arrears collections measures remained stalled since FY 2008.  Further, the percentage of “enforcement-ready” cases, those with support orders that had collections, declined for the second year in a row, with the sharpest declines in current and former assistance cases.  In FY 2010, total administrative expenditures were $5.8 million, a 1.3 percent decrease from the previous year.  This was the second year in a row with a decrease in administrative expenditures.

Child Support Regulations

In FY 2010, OCSE published two regulations, the Final Rule on Intergovernmental Child Support and the Final Rule on Computerized Tribal IV-D Systems and Office Automation.  

Performance-Based Incentives and Penalties

The Child Support Enforcement Performance-Based Incentive and Penalty System are 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.  This system measures state performance in five program areas:  paternity establishment; cases with support orders; collections on current support; collections on arrears; and cost effectiveness.  In FY 2010, 52 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 found to be not in compliance with certain child support requirements.  In FY 2010, one state/territory received a penalty for not meeting the required paternity establishment performance level.

Audits and Data Reliability

The OCSE Office of Audit performs Data Reliability Audits (DRA) 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 2010, 53 states/territories passed the DRAs.

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 2010, there were no federal regulations that required states to submit state plan pages; however, states continue to update their plans, as needed, in response to changes in state laws and procedures. 

The Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS)

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.  The FPLS also includes two other data bases supporting OCSE business processes: the Federal Case Registry of Child Support Orders (FCR), which consists of child support case and participant information from 54 states and territories; and the Federal Offset System, which contains data certified by states regarding the amount of past-due child support owed by noncustodial parents.  Since 1996, Congress has authorized certain federal agencies to receive information from the NDNH for authorized purposes. 

In FY 2010, the total number of persons located by the FPLS was about 8 million.  In FY 2010, the FPLS was directly responsible for child support collections of $3.4 billion, or 11 percent of the $30.4 billion in national child support collections.

State and Tribal Automation

In FY 2010 almost half of the state child support agencies were in the process of planning for either major enhancements to or replacement of their legacy child support systems.  The first of this new generation of child support systems, New Jersey’s NJKiDS, was fully certified as a comprehensive, single statewide system in July of 2010.

The Modoc Tribe of Oklahoma joined the pilot testing and enhancement of the Model Tribal System, a major testing effort initially begun by the Forest County Potawatomi Tribe of Wisconsin in FY 2009.  Pilot testing by both of these tribes continued throughout FY 2010.     

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 offers some child support services, but are in the developmental stages of operation and do not meet the requirements for being considered comprehensive. 

In FY 2010, there were 38 comprehensive tribal child support programs and 8 tribal start-up programs.  In FY 2010, comprehensive tribes reported total child support collections of $31.4 million, which was a 26 percent increase over tribal collections in FY 2009.  There were over 38,000 cases in the tribal program caseload, a 7 percent increase from FY 2009; over 27,000 children with paternity established, a 38 percent increase from FY 2009; and over 21,000 cases with support orders established, a 24 percent increase from FY 2009.

International Child Support Program

The U.S. has bilateral child support 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.  In addition, on September 29, 2010, the United States Senate approved the Resolution of Advice and Consent regarding the Hague Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance.  The next step in the treaty process is for Congress to adopt implementing legislation, and for states to pass similar legislation, to help ensure an effective, efficient, and affordable system of international child support enforcement. 

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 that are intended to improve the operation of the OCSE program.  The Special Improvement Project (SIP) Grant Program provides funding for projects that further the child support mission and goals and help improve program performance. In FY 2010, OCSE awarded ten Section 1115 grants, including: one project to address child support needs of active duty military members; seven projects that support involving building assets for fathers and families; and two projects related to avoiding increasing child support order delinquencies through collaboration with other agencies or programs.  Likewise, in FY 2010, OCSE awarded three SIP grants for projects related to the provision and/or referral to community-based services focused on helping families to strengthen self-sufficiency skills.   

As part of the ACF Healthy Marriage initiative, launched in FY 2003, OCSE awarded 15 Section 1115 waiver demonstrations 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.  These demonstrations last for a period of time from three through five years.  Ten projects had ended by FY 2010 and five remained open.    
Grants to states for the Access and Visitation (AV) Program (42 U.S.C. 699(b)) was authorized in the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (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.  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 continue to be critical to successfully fulfilling OCSE’s goal of improving child support outcomes for all children.  During FY 2010, OCSE participated in various collaborations with offices within ACF and other agencies such as the Departments of Justice, Labor, and Veterans Affairs. 

Consumer Services

During FY 2010, OCSE maintained an internet web site that provided child support professionals and the public with easy access and search capability to a significant amount of information about the program.  OCSE also responded via e-mail, telephone, and in writing to thousands of inquiries on program services, case-specific inquiries, and requests for information.

Fiscal Year 2010 Report

Introduction

FY 2010 marked the 35th anniversary of the Child Support Program, a federal/state/tribal partnership that operates under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act.  The program functions in all states and several territories and tribes.  The program’s mission is to assure 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 to collect child support.  The Child Support Program has evolved from a welfare cost-recovery program to a modern family-centered program designed to increase family self-sufficiency, avoid welfare costs, and meet the needs of children and their families.

The Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE), responsible for administering the Child Support Program, 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. 

Focusing on Results

During FY 2010, IV-D child support collections of $26.6 billion were distributed.  As the program has evolved away from a welfare cost-recovery program, more collections are going to families and fewer collections are reserved to reimburse welfare programs.  The proportion of these collections distributed to families was 94 percent.  Only 6 percent of these collections went to state or federal governments for assistance reimbursement.

Figure 1: Total Distributed Collections by Distribution Method

image

Figure Data: Total Distributed Collections by Distribution Method ($26.6 Billion Distributed)
Total Payments to Families or Foster Care Total Medical Support Total Passed Through Total Fees Withheld by State Total Assistance Reimbursement
$24.5 Billion $305.4 Million $134.7 Million $37.1 Million $1.6 Billion

 

Between 1996 and 2008, following enactment of PRWORA and Child Support Performance and Incentive Act (CSPIA), child support performance dramatically improved.  Collections doubled as a result of increased automation, new legal authorities, performance-based funding, and increasing state investments.  However, the recession that began in FY 2008 had a noticeable impact on the child support program starting in FY 2009. 

The economic downturn continued to have an impact on the Child Support Program in FY 2010.  The total number of child support cases in the IV-D caseload has increased modestly by 0.4 percent since FY 2009 and by 1.2 percent since FY 2008.  However, current assistance cases (those involving families receiving cash assistance under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program or federal foster care maintenance payments under Title IV-E) have increased by 0.9 percent since FY 2009 and by 7.3 percent since FY 2008.

After a drop in child support collections in FY 2009 due to the downturn in the economy, state child support collections increased by 0.6 percent to $26.6 billion in FY 2010, but remained slightly below the level of FY 2008.  In contrast, in the two year period 2006 to 2008, collections increased by 11 percent.  There were significant state by state variations with collections declining in 29 states between 2008 and 2010. By contrast, there were no state declines in collections between 2006 and 2008. 

State child support agencies operate state disbursement units (SDUs) to collect, disburse, and account for child support payments to all families, when the payments are collected through an income withholding order.  So, in addition to the $26.6 billion collected for cases receiving IV-D services, another $3.8 billion was collected and forwarded to non-IV-D cases through the SDUs. 

Figure 2: Total IV-D and Non-IV-D Collections

image

Figure Data: Total IV-D and Non-IV-D Collections
Fiscal Year 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
IV-D Collections (Billions) $23.9 $24.9 $26.6 $26.4 $26.6
Non-IV-D Collections (Billions) $3.6 $3.8 $3.8 $3.9 $3.8

 

Total child support collected by state child support agencies in FY 2010 was more than $30 billion.

In FY 2010, signs of weakened performance due to the economic crisis and reduced state resources persisted, relative to the pre-recession period.  For example, state performance improvements related to support order establishment, current collections, and arrears collections measures have stalled since FY 2008.  Fifteen states saw a decline in support order establishment, 31 states saw a decline in current collections, and 39 states saw a decline in arrears collections.  In addition, the percentage of “enforcement-ready” cases, those with support orders that had collections, declined for the second year in a row, with the sharpest declines in current and former assistance cases.  The percentage of current assistance cases with orders that had collections declined from 59.5 percent in FY 2008 to 55.6 percent in FY 2010 and the percentage of former assistance cases with orders that had collections declined from 68.0 percent to 65.2 percent during this two year period.  The percentage of never assistance cases with orders that had collections declined more modestly, from 80.0 percent to 78.2 percent at the same time.

The child support program continues to demonstrate a high return on investment.  In FY 2010, the national cost-effectiveness ratio was $4.88, compared to $4.78 in FY 2009.  The improvement in cost-effectiveness this year is due largely to declines in state program expenditures.  In FY 2010, total administrative expenditures were $5.8 million, a 1.3 percent decrease from the previous year.  This is the second year in a row that we saw a decrease in administrative expenditures.  Between FY 2008 and FY 2010, expenditures declined 2 percent, compared to an increase of 6 percent between FY 2006 and FY 2008.  There were significant state-by-state variations here as well, with administrative expenditures declining in 19 states.

Figure 3: Total Administrative Expenditures

image

Figure Data: Total Administrative Expenditures Data (in billions)
Fiscal Year 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Total (Billions) $5.6 $5.6 $5.9 $5.9 $5.8
Federal Share (Billions) $3.7 $3.7 $3.7 $3.9 $3.8
State Share (Billions) $1.9 $1.9 $2.2 $2.0 $2.0

 

Total Administrative Expenditures

The overall decline in administrative expenditures was driven by an 11 percent decrease in state spending from FY 2008 to FY 2010.  State spending declined by 11 percent in FY 2009 and remained flat in FY 2010.  Many states need to replace, update, or enhance their statewide child support systems that were built on aging infrastructures that in many cases are no longer supported.  However, we saw even larger decreases in administrative expenditures for computer systems over this two year period.  There was a 16 percent decrease in FY 2009, and a 27 percent decrease in FY 2010 from FY 2009.    Full time equivalent (FTE) staff has also been declining steadily since FY 2008, with the number of total full time employees in state child support programs down by 5 percent between FY 2008 and FY 2010.  FTE levels have declined by 3.1 percent in FY 2010 over FY 2009 with FTEs decreasing in 37 states in FY 2010 over FY 2009.

Child Support Regulations

In FY 2010, OCSE published two regulations, the Final Rule on Intergovernmental Child Support and the Final Rule on Computerized Tribal IV-D Systems and Office Automation. The Final Rule on Intergovernmental Child Support made various revisions to federal requirements for establishing and enforcing intergovernmental support obligations in cases receiving services under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act.

The Final Rule on Computerized Tribal IV-D Systems and Office Automation enables tribes and tribal organizations that operate comprehensive tribal child support programs under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act to apply for and receive direct federal funding for the costs of automated data processing.

Performance-Based Incentives and Penalties

The child support program has a strong performance management system established by the Child Support Performance Incentive Act of 1998 (CSPIA).  Under CSPIA, states are measured in five program areas:  paternity establishment, support orders establishment, current support collected, cases paying towards arrears and cost effectiveness.  This performance based incentive and penalty program 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.  Performance data maintained by states are regularly audited for completeness and reliability.

Between FY 2008 and FY 2010, the statewide paternity establishment percentage (PEP) rate decreased from 96 percent to 95 percent, while IV-D paternity establishment increased from 95 percent to 97 percent.  Feedback from the field continues to suggest that states are facing greater challenges to maintain the high performance levels.  At the time the incentive/penalty structure began, states had a backlog of cases that enabled them to exceed the 90 percent performance level for PEP.  However, with the maturation of the system and the declining birth rate, many states have reduced or even eliminated their backlog of cases for establishing paternity.  Normal annual variations in performance (91 percent rate one year, 89 percent the next) can result in a substantial penalty without indicating operational or performance problems.  While the number of states currently receiving a penalty is still low, we believe that, in the future, more and more states will find it difficult to achieve the current acceptable performance level and will allocate a disproportionate amount of resources to this function in an attempt to stay out of penalty status.

Over this same two-year period, the percent of cases with support orders established increased from 79 to 80 percent, the current support collection rate remained the same at 62 percent, and the percent of cases paying towards arrears decreased from 63 percent to 62 percent.  Cost-effectiveness increased from $4.80 in FY 2008 to $4.88 in FY 2010.  Increases in this measure stem mainly from declines in state program expenditures due to budget shortfalls compared to collections that have not declined to the same extent, but have remained flat.  Research has shown that reductions in program expenditures due to funding shortfalls negatively affect program performance particularly in regard's to labor-intensive initiatives such as support order establishment, arrears collection initiatives, intensive work with hard-to-serve customers, and employer initiatives.1

Penalties are assessed when a state’s measured level of performance in paternity establishment, support orders established, or current support collected 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 found to be non-compliant with certain federal child support requirements.  In FY 2010, one state/territory received a penalty for their PEP level that remained unchanged from FY 2009.

Three states received congratulatory letters for showing an improvement of two to six percentage points for their PEP level over FY 2009.  One state showed a deficiency related to the PEP and will have one corrective action year to correct the deficiency.

Audits and Data Reliability

The OCSE Office of Audit performs Data Reliability Audits (DRAs) or Data Reliability Reviews (DRRs) to evaluate the completeness, accuracy, security, and reliability of data reported and produced by state reporting systems.  The DRAs/DRRs 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 2010, 53 states/territories passed the DRAs/ DRRs.  Three states that failed in FY 2009 received congratulatory letters for reporting complete and reliable data in FY 2010.

OCSE also is 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 2010 included unreported program income and unallowable non-IV-D costs claimed for reimbursement in the amount of $6,429,940.

State Plan

State child support agencies must submit approvable state plans describing the nature and scope of the respective state’s child support program.  In FY 2010 there were no federal regulations issued that required states to submit new state plan components.  However, states continued to update their plans as needed in response to changes in state laws and procedures.

The Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS)

Figure 4: Total Number of Persons (NCPs amd PFs) Located1 by the FPLS - Fiscal Years 2006-2010

image

Figure Data: Total Number of Persons (NCPs and PFs) Located1 by the FPLS - Fiscal Years 2006-2010
Fiscal Year 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
1 The Total Number of Persons Located, noncustodial parents (NCPs) and putative fathers (PFs), is the sum of individual state totals.   Since individuals may be involved in child support cases in more than one state, there may be duplicates between the states.
Total Number of Persons Located (Millions) 8.3 7.8 7.8 8.2 7.7
Percent Change from Previous Year   -6% 0% 5% -6%

 

$3.4 billion

The amount of collections attributable to the FPLS in FY 2010, which represents 11 percent of total child support collections of $30.4 billion.

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.  The FPLS includes two other major databases supporting OCSE business processes: the Federal Case Registry of Child Support Orders (FCR), which consists of child support case and participant information from 54 states and territories; and the Federal Offset System, which contains data certified by states regarding the amount of past-due child support owed by noncustodial parents. 

Enhanced federal enforcement activities played a larger role in helping to maintain collections in FY 2010.  Collections coming directly from the various federal programs—including Federal Offset, SSA Garnishments, Multi-State Financial Institution Data Match, Passport Denial Program, National Directory of New Hires-FCR Match, and Insurance Match—increased by over 5 percent from FY 2009.

While the FPLS was legislatively mandated for the primary purpose of assisting state child support agencies in locating parents and enforcing child support orders, Congress 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.  Authorized agencies and programs using FPLS data include the:  Social Security Administration, Department of Treasury, Department of Labor, Department of Education, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

  • In FY 2010, 13 state TANF agencies reported avoiding approximately $2.7 million in erroneous costs by using NDNH data.
  • FMS used a combination of NDNH and other data to recover about $17 million in federal non-tax debt and $5 million in payment agreement collections.
  • SSA estimated approximately $186 million in prevented overpayments and adjusted payment amounts in the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) Program by using NDNH data.
  • IRS used FCR and other data to recover over $440 million in additional taxes.

State and Tribal Automation

Many states need to replace, update, or enhance their statewide child support systems that were built on aging infrastructures that in many cases are no longer being supported.  While almost half of the state child support agencies were planning for either major enhancements or replacement of their legacy child support systems, we saw significant decreases in state spending for automation in 2010.  The first of this new generation of child support systems, New Jersey’s NJKiDS was certified as a comprehensive single statewide system in July of 2010.  In addition, during FY 2010 many states used Recovery Act funds on short-term technology/automation projects, such as document imaging and data warehouses to improve efficiency.

In FY 2010 the Modoc Tribe of Oklahoma joined the pilot testing and enhancement of the Model Tribal System, a major testing effort initially begun by the Forest County Potawatomi Tribe of Wisconsin in FY 2009.  Pilot testing by both of these tribes continued throughout FY 2010.

Tribal IV-D Child Support Program

Figure 5: Total Tribal Child Support Collections

image

Figure Data: Total Tribal Child Support Collections
Fiscal Year 2007 2008 2009 2010
Total Collections (Millions) $17.8 $23.2 $24.9 $31.4

 

The Tribal Child Support Program provides direct grants to Indian Tribes and tribal organizations to operate child support programs.  The Tribal Child Support Program oversees both comprehensive tribal IV-D child support programs and start-up tribal programs.

There were 38 Comprehensive Tribal Programs in FY 2010. 

Two new Comprehensive Tribes in FY 2010

  • Coeur D’Alene Tribe, ID
  • Eastern Shoshone, WY

8 Start-up Programs applied to become fully Comprehensive

  • Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe, MN
  • Blackfeet Nation, MT
  • Aleutian-Pribilof Islands, AK
  • Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe, MN
  • Kickapoo, OK
  • Fort Belknap Indian Community, MT
  • Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, ND
  • Lac Courte Oreilles, WI

Comprehensive tribal child support programs are fully operational, providing the full range of 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.  Start-up tribal programs offer some child support services, but are in the developmental stages of operation and do not meet the requirements for being considered comprehensive. In FY 2010, there were 38 comprehensive tribal child support programs—including two newly approved tribes—and 8 tribal start-up programs applied to become fully comprehensive. 
(See Appendix C for the Tribal Accomplishments in FY 2010).

Funding for tribal IV-D grants is authorized pursuant to Title IV-D of the Social Security Act as required by CFR 45 Section 309.170(b), and Final Rule on Tribal Child Support Programs, published March 30, 2004 in 45 CFR Part 309.  In FY 2010, comprehensive tribes reported total child support collections of $31.4 million, which was a 26 percent increase over tribal collections in FY 2009.

In FY 2010, there were over 38,000 cases in the tribal program caseload, a 7 percent increase from FY 2009; over 27,000 children with paternity established, a 38 percent increase from FY 2009; and over 21,000 cases with support orders established, a 24 percent increase from FY 2009. 

International Child Support Program

As the U.S. central authority for international child support, during FY 2010 OCSE provided assistance to families, states, and countries seeking support when family members live in one of the 14 countries or 11 Canadian provinces which the U.S. has bilateral child support agreements with.  Under such reciprocal agreements, both countries provide child support services cost-free upon request from the other country.  During FY 2010, OCSE provided all foreign reciprocating countries with a Dear Colleague Letter (IDCL-10-01) updating the appropriate program contacts for different information related to international child support enforcement and continued to work with the public and state agencies on case-specific international inquiries.

In addition, on September 29, 2010, the United States Senate approved the Resolution of Advice and Consent regarding the Hague Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance.  The next step in the treaty process is for Congress to adopt implementing legislation, and for states to pass similar legislation, to help ensure an effective, efficient, and affordable system of international child support enforcement.  This Convention advances important objectives by promoting the enforcement of child support obligations in cases where the custodial parent and child are in one country and the noncustodial parent is in another.  The main advantage to the U.S. of joining this Convention is that more children living in the United States will receive the financial support of both their parents, wherever the parents live. 

Grants and Initiatives

$1.1 million

The amount awarded for Section 1115 and SIP grants in FY 2010.

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 child support program.  The Special Improvement Project (SIP) Grant Program provides funding for projects that further the child support mission and goals and help improve program performance.  In FY 2010, OCSE awarded ten Section 1115 grants, including: one project to address child support needs of active duty military members; seven projects that involved building assets for fathers and families; and two projects related to avoiding increasing child support order delinquencies through collaboration with other agencies or programs.  Likewise, in FY 2010, OCSE awarded three SIP grants for projects focused on helping families to strengthen their self-sufficiency skills.   

5

The number of Healthy Marriage Projects still operating during FY 2010.

Recognizing the apparent link between family structures and child well-being outcomes, in FY 2003 ACF launched the Healthy Marriage Initiative (HMI) targeting low-income populations around the nation.  As part of the ACF initiative, OCSE awarded 15 Section 1115 waiver demonstrations of the Community Healthy Marriage Initiative to various state IV-D CSE 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 can last from three to five years.  Ten projects had ended by FY 2010 and five remained open.

$10 million

 

The amount appropriated each year to be allocated among States for Access and Visitation programs.

Grants to states for the Access and Visitation Program (42 U.S.C. 699(b)) was authorized through enactment of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA).  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 the total program costs.  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.

Cross-cutting initiatives and collaborations with other offices and agencies continued to be critical to successfully fulfilling OCSE’s goal of improving child support outcomes for all children in FY 2010.  Partnerships are a particularly effective way to increase the reliability of child support payments by addressing the underlying reasons parents are not paying their obligations (such as unemployment, parental conflict, or disengagement) and help the program to work with both parents to assure that they have the tools they need to provide for their children.  During FY 2010, OCSE partnered in various collaborations with other offices within ACF and outside agencies such as the Departments of Justice, Labor, and Veterans Affairs.

Consumer Services

During FY 2010, OCSE maintained an internet web site that provided 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 responded via e-mail, telephone, and in writing to thousands of inquiries on program services, case-specific inquiries, and requests for information.

Appendices

A. Appendix I. Child Support Enforcement: Box Scores

B. Appendix II. Child Support Enforcement: 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

C. Appendix III. Child Support Enforcement: Tribal Accomplishments

The following matrix highlights some accomplishments of the Tribal Comprehensive IV-D Programs set forth in their narrative and 75 reports for FY 2010.

Tribal Program Accomplishments
Cherokee Nation
  • Had 32 new paternity cases with 26 of the cases being established.
  • Collected and distributed over $4.4 million in current child support, a difference of approximately $2.1 million from FY 2009.
  • 142 new cases and/or referrals/transfers from other IV-D programs were serviced.
  • Cost of the program was over $1.6 million, a difference of almost $42,000 from FY 2009.
Chickasaw Nation
  • Paternity was established and/or acknowledged for 1,517 children; 1,813 cases had child support orders established.  This resulted in an increase of 10 percent from the previous year.
  • Collected and distributed $1,958,800 in current child support and $1,425,308 in past due child support.
  • Total caseload was 2,197 cases.
  • Total amount of current support due was $4,026,012; of which 49 percent was collected.
Chippewa Cree (Rocky Boys)
  • Paternity was established for 248 children.
  • Collected and distributed $14,604 in child support.
  • Had $28,740 in collections sent to other states.
  • Total caseload was 237 cases.
  • Total expenditures (outlays) were $720,857.
Coeur D’Alene
  • Became a fully comprehensive IV-D program on January 7, 2010.
  • Three objectives were completed during the first phase of comprehensive funding:  (1) identifying suitable office space, (2) hiring and training staff, and (3) furnishing office space.
Comanche Nation
  • Caseload increased by 17 percent from previous fiscal year; now at a total of 244 cases.  Of the 244 cases, 163 had support orders; a 50 percent increase since FY 2009.
  • Paternity was established and acknowledged for 13 children.
  • Staffing level was increased to six.
  • Total amount of current support was $234,186; an 80 percent increase from FY 2009.
Confederate Tribe of Colville

               Not Available

Eastern Shoshone
  • Had a caseload of 177 open cases; 57 cases had a support order.
  • Established and/or acknowledged paternity for 72 children.
  • Total amount of current support collected and distributed was $200; this amount depicts one individual determined to pay his child support voluntarily monthly.
Forest County Potawatomi
  • 592 children within the caseload had paternity established or acknowledged.
  • Total of 273 cases within the exclusive jurisdiction of the tribe, a 7 percent increase from FY 2009.   Of those cases, 268 had a child support order, for an establishment rate of 98 percent.  Tribe enforced an additional 234 cases for foreign jurisdictions.
  • Collected nearly $3 million in child support.  Over $1 million was collected for other State and Tribal IV-D programs. 
  • Total expenditures were $642,009.  Of that total, $91,764 was expenses for the piloting of the Model Tribal System (MTS).
Kaw Nation
  • Total caseload increased by 30 percent from 48 cases to 69 cases.
  • Paternity was established for five children, now 95 percent of the children have paternity established.
  • 77 percent of cases had established obligations; 53 of the 69 have obligations.  This is an increase of 2 percent over the end of FY 2009.
  • 56 percent of current support owed was collected and distributed; the goal was 50 percent.
Keweenaw Bay
  • Established paternity for one case.
  • Collection rate slightly rose to 81 percent from the previous fiscal year’s 80 percent rate.
Kickapoo
  • Expended $220,903 by the end of the fiscal year.
  • Managed a caseload of 42 active cases, of which 37 cases had a support order established.
  • Established paternity for three children.
  • Collected $39,870 in current support.
Klamath
  • Total caseload increased from 58 cases to 211 cases.
  • Current child support and arrearages collected and distributed was $53,329.
Lac du Flambeau
  • Had a total of 1,092 child support cases. 
  • Collected $543,335 for current support and arrearages.
  • 28 children had paternity established and/or acknowledged.
Lummi Nation
  • Collected and distributed $377,064 in child support.
  • Had 723 open cases.
Menominee
  • Paternity was established for 51 children.
  • Total collections were $1.6 million.  Of this amount, $1.5 million was available for distribution with the difference sent to other States and non-IV-D cases.
  • Total expenditures were $795,608.
Mescalero Apache
  • Established paternity for 8 children.
  • Had a caseload of 59 new cases.
  • Collected $286,324 in child support.
Modoc
  • Caseload increased to over 2,000 cases within four office locations.
  • Provided child support services to 15 Tribal governments and children.
  • Continued to pilot the Model Tribal System (MTS).
Muscogee (Creek) Nation
  • Managed a caseload of 1,077 active cases.  Of these cases, 698 or (65 percent) had child support orders.  This exceeds the target rate of 60 percent.
  • Established paternity for 922 children.
  • Collected $775,181 in current support and collected $494,250 in past due support, a total collection amount of $1.3 million.
Navajo Nation
  • Managed a caseload of 16,257 cases; 607 were TANF cases.
  • Had 5,062 cases with support orders.
  • Established and/or acknowledged paternities for 12,978 children.
  • Collected a total of $7,393,032 in child support, which reflects more collections than FY 2009’s total of $6,909,550.           
Nez Perce
  • Had a caseload of 18 new cases, for a combined total of 170 active cases. 
  • Established two child support orders. 
  • Established paternity for two children.
  • Collected $47,375 in current support and $54,084 in past due support.
Nooksack
  • Had 275 open cases.   Of that amount, 160 were TANF cases.
  • Completed the transfer of all Tribal TANF cases that were previously on the Washington State Division of Child Support caseload.
  • Collected over $76,000 in child support, a 250 percent increase from the previous year.
Northern Arapaho
  • Managed a caseload of 1,633 cases.
  • Collected and distributed almost $170,000 in current child support.
  • Collected and distributed $16,376 in past due support.
  • Established paternity for 29 children.
Oneida Nation      
  • Managed a caseload of 1,434 cases.
  • Paternity establishment rate was 92 percent, increased a little from the previous year due to cases being transferred and paternities being established.
  • Successfully transferred 560 cases from county circuit court to the jurisdiction of the Oneida tribe.
  • Total expenditures (outlays) were $660,637.
  • Percent of cases with support orders established was 86 percent.
Osage Nation
  • Collected $565,203 in child support. 
  • Osage Nation Child Support Program helped provide assistance to responding states for which registered orders are needed.
  • With the help of the Osage Nation Child Support Program, states were able to collect an additional $110,259 that may have gone uncollected.
Penobscot Nation
  • Collected roughly $59,355 in child support payments.
  • Managed a caseload of 28 cases.
  • Collected 88 percent on all child support orders.
  • Had a 100 percent paternity establishment rate.
Ponca

              Not Available

Port Gamble S’Klallam
  • Managed a caseload of 452 cases, an increase of 6 percent from the previous year.
  • Support orders were established for 92 percent of the children.
  • Collected $138,406 in child support.
Pueblo of Zuni

              Not Available

Puyallup
  • Collected $550,809 in child support, $414,615 was collected and distributed for current support.
  • Established paternity for 351 children.
  • Managed a caseload of 834 active cases, 484 cases had a support order.
  • Closed 227 cases due to arrears being paid in full and not owing current child support.
Quinault Nation
  • Established paternity for 122 children.
  • Established 145 new child support orders.
  • Collected and distributed $80,538 in current child support and $47,965 was collected and distributed in past due child support.
  • Managed a caseload of 815 cases with 196 cases with established child support orders at the end of the fiscal year.
Red Lake Band

              Not Available

Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate
  • Managed a caseload of 1,497 cases.
  • Cases with a support order were 1,282.
  • Established or acknowledged paternities for 24 children.
  • Collected and distributed $559,383 in current child support.                        
Three Affiliated Tribes

              Not Available

Tlingit and Haida
  • Managed a caseload of 661 cases.
  • 566 cases had established support orders.
  • 941 children had established or acknowledged paternities.
  • Collected and distributed $94,194 in current support and $124,190 in past due support.
Tulalip
  • Managed a caseload of 445 cases.
  • Had 189 child support orders at the end of the fiscal year.
  • Established or acknowledged paternity for 340 children.
  • Collected and distributed $160,951 in current support.
Umatilla Indian Reservation
  • Collected and distributed $90,865 in current support and collected $1.5 million in past due support, a 5 percent increase from FY 2009.
  • Managed a caseload of 94 cases. 
  • Collected $38,683 on cases referred from other jurisdictions.
White Earth Nation
  • Managed a caseload of 287 cases.
  • Established or acknowledged paternities for 174 children.
  • Collected and distributed $278,278 in current support.
Winnebago
  • Managed a caseload of 494 cases, an increase of 31 percent from the previous fiscal year.
  • Established paternities for 130 out of 203 children, exceeding the target performance rate of 40 percent.
  • Established 75 new court orders, exceeding the target performance rate of 40 percent.
  • Total collections/disbursements were $305,898.
  • Participated in the Model Tribal System (MTS).

D. Appendix IV. 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 16 - 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 21 - 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 27 – 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 28 – 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 29 - 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 32 – 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 33 and 34 - 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 35 - 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 38 – 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.  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 39 - 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 40 - 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 42 - 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 43 - ADP Expenditures (Form OCSE-396A, lines 4, 5, and 6, columns (A+C))

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

Cases and Caseloads

Table 47 – 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 49- 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 59 – 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 an 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 66 - 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 67 - 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 68 – 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 69 - 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 70 - 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 71 - 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 72 - 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 73 - Cases Requiring Services to Establish a Support Order (Form OCSE-157, line 12)

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

Table 74 - 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 76 – 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 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 78 - 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 79 - 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 80 – 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 81 - 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 82 and 83 - 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 85 - 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 86 - 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 87 - 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 88 - Total Number of Children in IV-D Cases (Form OCSE 157, line 4)
The number of children in the IV‑D caseload in cases open at the end of the fiscal year.  This includes those children who are under age 18.

Tribal Program

Tables 103 and 104 – 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 105 – Tribal CSE Program Total Expenditures (Outlays) (Standard Form 269A, lines 10a)

The number of total outlays.

Table 106 – 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 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 107 – 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 an 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 108 – Tribal CSE Program Total Number of Children in the Current Year Needing Paternity Established (OCSE-75, line 3)

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

Table 109 – 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 which paternity was established or acknowledged.  This includes acknowledgments after genetic testing, but before adjudication, if applicable.  Include children with paternity acknowledged through a voluntary in‑hospital acknowledgment program and other acknowledgment processes.

 

1The Lewin Group and ECONorthwest,  Anticipated Effects of the Deficit Reduction Act Provisions on Child Support Program Financing and Performance Summary of Data Analysis and IV-D Director Calls (July 2007).