< Back to Search

FY2011 Annual Report to Congress

Office of Child Support Enforcement

Published: December 31, 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 32nd Annual Report to Congress on the Child Support Program, which is authorized under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act, providing the program’s status and highlighting its accomplishments during FY 2011.

In FY 2011 the Child Support Program continued its evolution 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.  Use of automation and technology also continued to be a hallmark of the program at both federal and state levels.

I am proud of the program’s achievements in FY 2011.  The program provided child support services and collected $27.3 billion for 17.3 million children in its caseload.  This included $40 million in tribal IV-D child support collections, reflecting the continued growth of the tribal child support program during FY 2011.  In addition, state child support disbursement units collected another $3.9 billion in non-IV-D child support payments made through income withholding orders and distributed those collections to the families entitled to receive them.  In total, more than $31 billion in child support was collected in FY 2011, providing support to families to reduce child poverty and promote family self-sufficiency. 

Kathleen Sebelius

Executive Summary

Introduction

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 54 states and territories and over 50 tribes.  These programs are operated primarily through Social Services Departments, Attorney General Offices, or Departments of Revenue.  The program’s mission is to encourage responsible parenting, family self-sufficiency and child well-being and to recognize the essential role of both parents in supporting their children.  The national child support program assures that assistance in obtaining support, including financial and medical, is available to children through locating parents, establishing paternity, establishing and modifying support obligations, and enforcing those obligations.  In FY 2011, the program continued to focus primarily on family support over welfare cost reimbursement, increasing the amount of support payments passed on to families and improving the program’s effectiveness in obtaining regular support for children.

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. 

Collections and Expenditures

During FY 2011, IV-D child support collections of $27.3 billion were distributed.  The proportion of these collections distributed to families was 94 percent.  Only six percent of these collections went to state or federal governments for assistance reimbursement.  In FY 2011, total administrative expenditures were $5.7 billion, a two percent decrease from the previous year.  This is the third year in a row that the Child Support Program’s total administrative expenditures decreased.

During FY 2011, there was a significant increase (28 percent) in child support program automated data processing expenditures, reversing the two-year trend of decreasing expenditures.  These expenditures showed a 16 percent drop in 2009, and a 27 percent drop in 2010.  However, during these prior years, some states used American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 funds for short-term technology programs, which would not have been reported as data processing expenditures.  Despite the automated data processing expenditures increase in FY 2011, these expenditures were still 22 percent below the FY 2008 pre-recession level.

Focusing on Results - Performance-Based Incentives and Penalties

The Child Support Program has a strong performance-based management system established by the Child Support Performance Incentive Act of 1998 (CSPIA).  Under CSPIA, states are measured in five performance areas:  paternity establishment, support orders established, 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, accuracy, and reliability.   

While the number of states receiving penalties for failure to meet the 90 percent performance level requirement for paternity establishment is still low, feedback from the field continues to suggest that states are facing greater challenges to maintain the performance level required.  Normal annual variations in performance (91 percent one year, and 89 percent the next year) can result in a substantial penalty without indicating operational or performance problems.  We believe that, in the future, more states will find it difficult to achieve the current acceptable performance level, and will allocate a disproportionate amount of resources to this effort in order to avoid a penalty.

Audits and Data Reliability

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

Child Support Regulations

In FY 2011, OCSE published two new regulations, the Final Rule on State Systems Advance Planning Document Process (APD) and the Final Rule on Safeguarding Child Support Information.  The Final Rule on State Systems Advance Planning Document Process revises federal requirements for the Advance Planning Document processes that govern the procedures by which states obtain approval for Federal Financial Participation (FFP) for the cost of data processing equipment and services.   The Final Rule on Safeguarding Child Support Information specifies requirements for State Parent Locator Service (SPLS) responses to authorized location requests, and state child support agency safeguards for confidential information and authorized disclosures of this information.  In particular, the safeguarding rule implements the provision in the Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-351) that authorizes use of child support data to assist child welfare agencies in identifying and locating noncustodial parents and relatives to place children in kinship care and to keep siblings together during out of home placement.

State Plan

State child support agencies must submit state plans subject to approval describing the nature and scope of the respective state’s child support program.  In FY 2011, states submitted three state plan pages certifying compliance with the Final Rule on Intergovernmental Child Support (published in FY 2010) and the Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (enacted by Congress and signed by the President in early FY 2011).  The Intergovernmental Child Support Final Rule changed the title and scope of the former interstate child support regulation to explicitly recognize the fact that states receive cases from tribes and foreign countries as well as from other states.  The Claims Resolution Act made reforms to the Unemployment Insurance (UI) program, including a new requirement to report to the State Directory of New Hires (SDNH) the date that an employee first performs services for pay.

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 (FCR) 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. 

State and Tribal Automation

Almost a third of the state child support agencies were planning for either major enhancements to or replacement of their legacy child support systems in FY 2011.  Several states were in the design and development phases of their replacement projects, while a number of other states were in the planning phases.

In FY 2011, the Modoc Tribe of Oklahoma and the Forest County Potawatomi Community Tribe of Wisconsin completed acceptance testing of the Model Tribal System, a comprehensive child support system designed collaboratively by tribes and then built by OCSE for all tribal programs’ use. 

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

As of the end of FY 2011, there were a total of 52 tribal child support programs, 41 comprehensive and 11 start-up programs.  In FY 2011, comprehensive tribes reported total IV-D child support collections of $40 million, which was a 16 percent increase over tribal collections in FY 2010.  In addition, there were over 42,000 cases in the tribal program caseload, over 26,000 children with paternity established, and over 26,000 cases with support orders established.

International Child Support Program

Section 459A of the Social Security Act authorizes the Secretary of State, with the concurrence of the Secretary of Health and Human Services, to declare foreign countries or their political subdivisions to be reciprocating countries for child support enforcement.   The United States has designated 14 countries and 11 Canadian provinces and territories as foreign reciprocating countries for child support purposes.

In August 2011, OCSE hosted the annual International Heads of Child Support Agencies meeting.  Officials from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the U.S. used this forum to share and discuss innovative practices and collaborative strategies to improve domestic and international case processing.

Also, as previously reported for FY 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 on September 29, 2010.  The next step in the treaty process is for Congress to adopt implementing legislation and for states to subsequently pass conforming amendments to state laws.   Once the Convention is fully in force, it will ensure a system for handling international child support cases that is more predictable, efficient, affordable, swift, and consistent.

Grants and Initiatives

OCSE awards grants under two sections of the Social Security Act:

  • Section 1115(a) of the Social Security Act authorizes OCSE to fund research and demonstration grants to promote IV-D purposes with a goal of improving the operation of the child support program.  Only state Title IV-D agencies or the state umbrella agencies of which they are a part can receive these grants.  States must apply for these funds in response to a grant announcement of the availability of funding under priorities that may differ each year.  These grant funds are eligible for FFP match, and no applicant match is required.
  • Section 452(j) of the Social Security Act provides federal funds for research and demonstration grants and special projects of regional or national significance relating to the operation of state child support programs.  These Special Improvement Projects (SIP) grant announcements are normally issued annually, and identify eligible applicants.  These grant funds are not eligible for FFP match, and no applicant match is required.  

In FY 2011, OCSE awarded nine Section 1115 grants that each supported child support program improvements in one or more of the following three areas:  1) developing strategies for child support involvement in workforce development activities for unemployed and underemployed parents, 2) creating child support university partnerships to support research and data analyses to inform Title IV-D agency policy and program implementation, and 3) piloting the integration of an OCSE designed data warehouse model with a state child support system.  In FY 2011, OCSE awarded three Special Improvement Project (SIP) grants to address the immediate needs of IV-D agencies given their ongoing limited financial resources, and to advance longer-term innovations to the child support program.  Examples of such innovations may include planning for and/or implementing strategies aimed at increasing reliable child support payments to children through use of innovative, family-centered child support services and practices.  Innovative program activities may include: establishing and maintaining realistic child support orders, reducing unmanageable child support debt, promoting noncustodial parents’ positive engagement in the lives of their children, increasing noncustodial parent employment and family economic stability, improving family relationships, promoting children’s health, collaborating to reduce family violence, and other activities that prevent the need for child support services in the first place. 

Program initiatives and collaborations continue to be critical to successfully fulfilling OCSE’s goal of improving child support outcomes for all children.  During FY 2011, OCSE participated in various collaborations with offices within ACF and other agencies such as the Departments of Justice, Labor, and Veterans Affairs. 

Access and Visitation

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).  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 AV Program, with each state required to contribute 10 percent of total program costs. 

Consumer Services

In FY 2011, OCSE continued to maintain an internet website (http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/css) 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 responded via e-mail, telephone, and in writing to thousands of customer inquiries. 

Fiscal Year 2011 Report

Introduction

The Child Support Program is a federal/state/tribal partnership that operates under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act.  The program functions in all 54 states and territories and over 50 tribes.  These programs are operated primarily through Social Services Departments, Attorney General Offices, or Departments of Revenue. The program’s mission is to encourage responsible parenting, family self-sufficiency and child well-being and to recognize the essential role of both parents in supporting their children.  The national child support program assures that assistance in obtaining support, including financial and medical, is available to children through locating parents, establishing paternity, establishing and modifying support obligations, and enforcing those obligations.  Since enactment of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) of 1996, 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 today’s constantly changing 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. 

Collections and Expenditures

During FY 2011, IV-D child support collections of $27.3 billion were distributed.  The proportion of these collections going directly to families was 94 percent.  Only six percent of these collections went to state or federal governments for assistance reimbursement.

Figure 1: Total Distributed Collections by Receipt

image

Figure Data: Total Distributed Collections by Receipt ($27.3 Billion Distributed)
Total Payments to Families or Foster Care Total Medical Support Total Passed Through to TANF Families Total Fees Withheld by State Total Assistance Reimbursement
$25.1 Billion $365.1 Million $139.4 Million $32.8 Million $1.6 Billion

 

In FY 2011, Child Support Program collections recovered above 2008 levels after two years of depressed totals.  IV-D distributed collections increased by 2.8 percent to $27.3 billion in FY 2011, compared to $26.6 billion in FY 2010, $26.4 billion in FY 2009, and $26.6 billion in FY 2008.  During the three-year period between FY 2008 and FY 2011, IV-D child support collections increased by three percent compared to an increase of 16 percent during the prior three years between FY 2005 and FY 2008.  The modest pace of growth in collections still points to continued challenges for state child support programs.  IV-D 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.  In addition to the increase in IV-D collections, there was an increase in collections sent to non-IV-D families, i.e. families not receiving establishment or enforcement services under the state or tribal IV-D program.  The non-IV-D collections increased by one percent over FY 2010 to $3.9 billion, thus total IV-D and non-IV-D collections increased to over $31 billion in FY 2011.

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

image

Figure Data: Total IV-D and Non-IV-D Collections
Fiscal Year 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
IV-D Collections (Billions) $24.9 $26.6 $26.4 $26.6 $27.3
Non-IV-D Collections (Billions) $3.8 $3.8 $3.9 $3.8 $3.9
Total Collected (Billions) $28.6 $30.4 $30.3 $30.4 $31.2

 

In FY 2011, total administrative expenditures were $5.7 billion, a two percent decrease from the previous year.  This is the third year in a row that we saw a decrease in total administrative expenditures.  The FY 2011 data show that total program expenditures decreased by four percent since 2008.  Between the previous three years, FY 2005 to FY 2008, total program expenditures increased by ten percent.  It is important to note significant state-by-state variations in spending levels and budget circumstances.  In two states, overall expenditures declined by 20 percent or more since FY 2008.  In addition, FY 2011 saw a shift in funding from the federal government to states.  The federal share of expenditures decreased by nine percent in FY 2011, as the funding reduction provision included in the Deficit Reduction Act (DRA) of 2005, P.L. 109-171, went into effect and state share of expenditures increased by 11 percent.  Prior to the enactment of the DRA, states could use expenditures from federal incentive payments as part of the state match for the program.  The DRA prohibited this practice effective in FY 2008.  The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), P.L. 111-5, temporarily changed the program’s authorization language to allow states to once again use federal incentive payments as their share of state expenditures eligible for federal match.  This temporary authorization expired on September 30, 2010.

Despite the decrease in overall expenditures, there was a significant upturn (28 percent) in automated data processing expenditures, reversing the two-year trend of decreasing expenditures.  In FY 2009 and FY 2010, some states used ARRA funds on short-term technology projects to increase efficiency in the program.  These ARRA funds were not reported as data processing expenditures and so were not factored into reported totals.  Even with this increase, these expenditures are 22 percent less than the pre-recession amount expended.   The number of full-time-equivalent staff continued to decrease.  The number of staff was down two percent in FY 2011, down three percent in FY 2010, and down two percent in FY 2009, for a total decrease of seven percent over three years after remaining at approximately the same level for several years. 

Despite the continued impact of a slowed economy, the child support program continues to be a cost-effective program. In FY2011, the program collected $5.12 for every $1 states and the federal government spent on the program.  However, this result should be interpreted with some caution as the increase in cost-effectiveness stemmed mainly from declines in state program expenditures due to budget shortfalls compared to collections that have not declined to the same extent.  Research has shown that reductions in program expenditures negatively affect program performance particularly in regards to labor-intensive initiatives such as current support, and arrears collection initiatives, work with hard-to-serve customers, and employer initiatives.1

Figure 3: Total Administrative Expenditures

image

Figure Data: Total Administrative Expenditures (in billions)
Fiscal Year 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Total (Billions) $5.6 $5.9 $5.9 $5.8 $5.7
Federal Share (Billions) $3.7 $3.7 $3.9 $3.8 $3.5
State Share (Billions) $1.9 $2.2 $2.0 $2.0 $2.2

 

1/The 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).

Focusing on Results - Performance-Based Incentives and Penalties

The Child Support Program has a strong performance-based management system established by the Child Support Performance Incentive Act of 1998 (CSPIA).  Under CSPIA, states are measured in five performance areas:  paternity establishment, support orders established, 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, accuracy, and reliability.

One state/territory received a congratulatory letter for showing an improvement of two to six percentage points in their PEP performance level over FY 2010.  One state/territory received a warning for not meeting the required PEP performance level and will have one corrective action year to correct the deficiency.  One state/territory received a penalty for failing to meet the required PEP performance level.

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.  

Between FY 2010 and FY 2011, the statewide paternity establishment percentage rate increased from 95 percent to 97 percent, and IV-D paternity establishment rate increased from 97 percent to 99 percent.  Although both measures increased, feedback from the field continues to suggest that states are facing greater challenges to maintain the high performance achieved through establishing paternity orders for backlogged cases in previous years.   At the time the incentive/penalty structure began, states had a backlog of cases that enabled them to exceed the 90 percent performance level required for their paternity establishment percentage (PEP).  However, with the maturation of the system and declining birth rate, many states reduced or even eliminated their backlog of cases for establishing paternity.  In FY 2011, the total number of paternities established or acknowledged declined by 3 percent from FY 2010, and by 7 percent from the FY 2009 level.  Normal annual variations in “steady-state” performance (91 percent one year, 89 percent the next year) 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 states will find it difficult to achieve the current acceptable performance level, and will allocate a disproportionate amount of resources to this effort in an attempt to stay out of penalty status.  Over this same period, from FY 2010 to FY 2011, the percent of cases with support orders established increased from 80 percent to 81 percent, the current support collection rate remained the same at 62 percent, and the percent of cases paying towards arrears remained the same at 62 percent. 

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 only on the basis of verifiable data and that the incentive payment system is fair and equitable.  In FY 2011, 52 states passed the DRAs/DRRs.  Two states failed the audit this year.  These two states received warning letters and will have one corrective action year to correct the deficiency.  One state that failed the audit in FY 2010, received a congratulatory letter for reporting complete and reliable data in FY 2011. 

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 2011 included unreported income and unallowable non-IV-D costs claimed for reimbursement in the amount of $8,330,784.

Child Support Regulations

In FY 2011, OCSE published two new regulations, the Final Rule on State Systems Advance Planning Document Process and the Final Rule on Safeguarding Child Support Information.  The Final Rule on State Systems Advance Planning Document Process revises federal requirements for the Advance Planning Document (APD) processes that govern the procedures by which states obtain approval for Federal Financial Participation (FFP) in the cost of acquiring automated data processing equipment and services.  The Final Rule on Safeguarding Child Support Information specifies requirements for State Parent Locator Service (SPLS) responses to authorized location requests, and state child support enforcement program safeguards for confidential information and authorized disclosures of this information. In particular, the safeguarding rule implements the provision in the Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-351) that authorizes use of child support data to assist child welfare agencies in identifying and locating noncustodial parents and relatives to place children in kinship care and to keep siblings together during out of home placement.

During FY 2011, OCSE’s roll out for each regulation consisted of providing workshops at major child support conferences and policy forums.  OCSE also developed training material and conducted webinars that were available to states across the country.  

State Plan

State child support agencies must submit state plans subject to approval describing the nature and scope of the respective state’s child support program.  In FY 2011, states submitted three state plan pages certifying compliance with the Final Rule on Intergovernmental Child Support (published in 2010) and the Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (enacted in early FY 2011).  The Intergovernmental Child Support Final Rule changes the title and scope of the former interstate child support regulation to explicitly recognize the fact that states receive cases from tribes and foreign countries as well as from other states.  The Final Rule addresses state processing of interstate and intrastate cases, tribal IV-D cases under Section 455 of the Social Security Act, and international cases under Sections 454(32) and 459A of the Social Security Act.  The Claims Resolution Act made reforms to the Unemployment Insurance (UI) program, including a new requirement that employers report to the State Directory of New Hires (SDNH) the date that an employee first performs services for pay. This is an anti-fraud measure aimed at reducing the number of overpayments to individuals receiving UI benefits.

The Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS)

Figure 4: Total Number of Persons (NCPs amd PFs) Located1 by the FPLS - Fiscal Years 2007-2011

image

Figure Data: Total Number of Persons (NCPs and PFs) Located1 by the FPLS - Fiscal Years 2007-2011
Fiscal Year 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
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) 7.8 7.8 8.2 7.7 8.1
Percent Change from Previous Year   0% 5% -6% 5%

 

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 major databases supporting OCSE business processes: the Federal Case Registry (FCR) of Child Support Orders, 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.

$3.7 billion

The amount of collections attributable to the FPLS in FY 2011, which represents 12 percent of total child support collections of $31.2 billion.

While the FPLS was legislatively mandated for the primary purpose of assisting state child support agencies in locating parents and enforcing child support orders, over time Congress has authorized certain state and federal agencies to receive information from the NDNH for authorized purposes, primarily to reduce improper payments from needs-based public benefit programs.  Authorized agencies and programs using FPLS data include:  Social Security Administration, Department of Labor, Department of Education, Housing and Urban Development, Internal Revenue Service, Financial Management Service, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance program.

In FY 2011, FPLS activities included:

  • NDNH W-4 data matches resulted in national child support collections of approximately $463 million, through income withholdings sent by state child support agencies to employers.
  • The Federal Offset Program, using the Child Support Debtor File collected $2.3 billion in past-due child support.
  • Collections attributed to data matches with financial institutions and insurance companies totaled $136 million.
  • Over $809 million was collected as a result of collaboration with Social Security Administration (SSA) to garnish benefits and with Department of State (DoS) to deny passport renewal for those past due in child support.

State and Tribal Automation

In FY 2011, the states continued to gradually replace, update, or enhance their statewide child support enforcement systems that were built on aging infrastructures that in many cases are no longer being supported.  Almost a third of all state child support agencies were planning for either major enhancements or replacement of their legacy systems.  Since the first of this new generation of child support systems, New Jersey’s NJKiDS, was certified as a comprehensive, single statewide system in FY 2010, a number of states advanced further into the design and development phases of their replacement projects.  These advanced projects include:  Florida, Maine, Texas, Delaware, and Colorado.  A number of states, including Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Indiana, Oregon, Oklahoma, and Pennsylvania, were completing the planning or procurement phases of acquisition of a new system.  A number of other states continue to informally explore the opportunities and pathways to enhanced automation of their child support systems.

In FY 2011, the Modoc Tribe of Oklahoma and the Forest County Potawatomi Community Tribe of Wisconsin completed acceptance testing of the Model Tribal System, a comprehensive child support system designed collaboratively by tribes and then built by OCSE for all tribal programs’ use. 

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 2011
Total Collections (Millions) $18 $23 $26 $34 $40

 

The Tribal Child Support Program provides direct grants to Indian Tribes and tribal organizations to operate child support programs.  Funding for tribal IV-D grants is authorized pursuant to Title IV-D of the Social Security Act as required by 45 CFR  Section 309.170(b), and Final Rule on Tribal Child Support Enforcement Programs, published March 30, 2004 in 45 CFR Part 309.  In FY 2011, tribes reported child support collections of $40 million, which was a 16 percent increase over tribal collections in FY 2010.

There were 41 Comprehensive Tribal Programs in FY 2011. 
Three new Comprehensive Tribes in FY 2011:

  • Suquamish, WA
  • Leech Lake Band, MN
  • Mille Lacs Band, MN

11 Start-up Programs had applications in review to become fully Comprehensive:

  • Blackfeet Nation, MT
  • Aleutian-Pribilof Islands, AK
  • Fort Belknap Indian Community, MT
  • Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, ND
  • Lac Courte Oreilles, WI
  • Kickapoo Tribe, OK
  • St. Regis Mohawk, NY
  • Stockbridge-Munsee, WI
  • Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation, KS
  • Salish & Kootenai Tribes, MT
  • Yurok Tribe, CA

There were over 43,000 cases in the tribal program caseload, a nine percent increase from FY 2010. Paternity was established for over 27,000 children, and support orders were established for over 26,000 cases.

The Tribal Child Support Program oversees start-up tribal programs, which are in the developmental stages of operation, and comprehensive tribal programs.

Start-up programs have not met the requirements set forth in the Final Rule.  Comprehensive tribal child support programs, however, 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.  See Appendix C for Tribal Accomplishments in FY 2011.

International Child Support Program

Section 459A of the Social Security Act authorizes the Secretary of State, with the concurrence of the Secretary of Health and Human Services, to declare foreign countries or their political subdivisions to be reciprocating countries for child support enforcement.   The United States has designated 14 countries and 11 Canadian provinces and territories as foreign reciprocating countries for child support purposes.  OCSE serves as the U.S. Central Authority for international child support and works closely with state child support agencies and our foreign partners to provide child support services to families in international cases involving the aforementioned countries and provinces/territories.

In August 2011, OCSE hosted the annual International Heads of Child Support Agencies meeting.  Officials from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the U.S. used this forum to share and discuss innovative practices and collaborative strategies to improve domestic and international case processing. 

In September 2011, OCSE published an updated and revised Caseworker’s Guide to Processing Cases with Canada.  U.S. states share the greatest volume of their international caseload with Canada.  Therefore, OCSE’s provision of timely and useful guidance to states through publication of the Canada caseworker’s guide is essential.  As of FY 2011, the U.S. had completed reciprocal agreements with 11 of the 13 Canadian provinces and territories.

Also, as previously reported for FY 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 on September 29, 2010.  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.  The Convention provides for a comprehensive system of cooperation between the child support authorities of contracting states, establishes procedures for recognition of foreign child support decisions, and requires effective measures for prompt enforcement of such decisions.  The next step in the treaty process is for Congress to enact implementing legislation and for states to subsequently pass conforming amendments to state laws.   Once the Convention is fully in force, it will ensure a system for handling international child support cases that is more predictable, efficient, affordable, swift, and consistent.

Grants and Initiatives

OCSE awards grants under two sections of the Social Security Act:

  • Section 1115(a) of the Social Security Act authorizes OCSE to fund research and demonstration grants to promote IV-D purposes with a goal of improving the operation of the child support program.  Only state Title IV-D agencies or the state umbrella agencies of which they are a part can receive these grants.  States must apply for these funds in response to a grant announcement of the availability of funding under priorities that may differ each year.  These grant funds are eligible for FFP match, and no applicant match is required.
  • Section 452(j) of the Social Security Act provides federal funds for research and demonstration grants and special projects of regional or national significance relating to the operation of state child support programs.  These Special Improvement Projects (SIP) grant announcements are normally issued annually, and identify eligible applicants.  These grant funds are not eligible for FFP match, and no applicant match is required.  

$1.2 million

The amount awarded for Section 1115 and SIP grants in FY 2011.

In FY 2011, OCSE awarded nine Section 1115 grants that each supported child support program improvements in one or more of the following three areas:  1) developing strategies for child support involvement in workforce development activities for unemployed and underemployed parents, 2) creating child support university partnerships to support research and data analyses to inform Title IV-D agency policy and program implementation, and 3) piloting the integration of an OCSE designed data warehouse model with a state child support system.  In FY 2011, OCSE awarded three Special Improvement Project (SIP) grants to address the immediate needs of IV-D agencies given their ongoing limited financial resources, and to advance longer-term innovations to the child support program.  Examples of such innovations may include planning for and/or implementing strategies aimed at increasing reliable child support payments to children through use of innovative, family-centered child support services and practices.  Innovative program activities may include: establishing and maintaining realistic child support orders, reducing unmanageable child support debt, promoting noncustodial parents’ positive engagement in the lives of their children, increasing noncustodial parent employment and family economic stability, improving family relationships, promoting children’s health, collaborating to reduce family violence, and other activities that prevent the need for child support services in the first place. 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. 

Program initiatives and collaborations continue to be critical to successfully fulfilling OCSE’s goal of improving child support outcomes for all children.  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.  Collaborations help the program to work with both parents to assure that they have the tools they need to provide for their children.  During FY 2011, OCSE participated in various collaborations with offices within ACF and other agencies such as the Department of Justice, the Department of Labor, and the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Access and Visitation

$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)) were authorized by Congress through enactment of 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 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 in FY 1996, $10 million has been appropriated each year to be allocated among the states for the AV Program, with each state required to contribute 10 percent of total program costs. 

Consumer Services

During FY 2011, OCSE continued to maintain an internet website (http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/css) 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 responded via e-mail, telephone, and in writing to thousands of customer inquiries and requests for information.  The Division of Consumer Services responded to requests for child support publications and published the monthly newsletter, the Child Support Report, which contains a blog for readership to engage in discussion about the Commissioner’s monthly message.  OCSE also provided culturally appropriate assistance through its online Hispanic Child Support Resource Center and DVD Toolkit designed for Hispanic and Latino outreach, partnership development, and training.  The DVD Toolkit has downloadable materials available in English and Spanish.   

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 (UDC)

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 examples of accomplishments and successes of the Tribal Comprehensive IV-D Programs as reported by the tribes in their narrative reports for FY 2011.

Tribal Program Accomplishments
Cherokee Nation
  • Had 31 new paternity cases with 28 of the cases being established.
  • Distributed over $4.9 million to families or to a state to offset state debt.
  • Had an active case count of 2,639 at the end of the fiscal year.

Successes - Worked with the court system staff on locating tribal funds to help utilize an ankle bracelet monitoring system; was provided the opportunity to complete outreach events with other Human Services programs; built a rapport with tribal hospital and clinics, and started facilitating paternity and/or child support education to the prenatal classes.

Chickasaw Nation
  • Paternity was established and/or acknowledged for 1,517 children in FY 2011
  • 1,923 cases had child support orders established.
  • Total caseload was 2,197 cases.
  • Total amount of current support due was $4,026,012, of which 49 percent was collected.

Successes – Had 321 case referrals for process service that were successfully served, a 73 percent success rate.  Enforcement remedies for 494 cases actively paying regular monthly obligation were processed, a success rate of 27 percent of monthly payments being received and distributed to families.  From October 1, 2010 to September 30, 2011 child support collections were $208,802 which was the highest collections for a fiscal year since the TEPP program’s inception.

Chippewa Cree (Rocky Boys)
  • Paternity was established for 11 children.
  • Had 629 cases at the end of fiscal year, 253 were open with 186 being open Tribal TANF cases.

Successes – Two staff members completed the one year Human Services certification and one obtained a college degree from encouragement to further their education.

Coeur D’Alene
  • Total collections were $24,870; $17,400 can be attributed to intercepts and voluntary garnishments of the bi-annual per capita payments.

Successes – Court staff and the Tribal Child Support Program staff worked together to encourage regular payment of child support and to prevent the accumulation of arrearages. This cooperative approach has worked extremely well for both programs.

Comanche Nation
  • Caseload increased by 24 percent from previous fiscal year, now at a total of 303 cases.  Of the 303 cases, 215 had support orders, a 29 percent increase since FY 2010.
  • Paternity was established or acknowledged for 1 child.
  • Total amount of current support was $169,522.

Successes – The program continues to remain as the most truly “manual” of the Oklahoma tribes and functions at 100 percent without being on the Oklahoma state system.

Confederated Tribes of Colville

              Not Available

Eastern Shoshone
  • Had a caseload of 179 open cases, 108 cases had a support order.
  • Established or acknowledged paternity for 58 children.
  • Total amount of current support collected and distributed was $11,542.

Successes – A good working relationship with the state of Wyoming and the Eastern Shoshone Child Support exists.  State of Wyoming Child Support Director and the Eastern Shoshone Tribal Child Support Director negotiated a “write off” or “waiver of aged – POSSE amounts – the amount was approximately $97,000 a savings to many NCPs.

Forest County Potawatomi
  • Had a paternity establishment rate of 98.36 percent.
  • Had a six percent increase in caseload within the jurisdiction for a total of 290 open cases at the end of the fiscal year. Tribe enforced an additional 229 cases for other jurisdictions.
  • Collected over $2.9 million in child support, maintaining a 98.7 percent collection rate which exceeds most state IV-D programs.  Almost $900,000 was collected for other state and Tribal IV-D programs. 
  • Total expenditures were $597,658 which is a decrease of $44,351 over FY 2010.

Successes – Completed the first version of the Model Tribal System and continued to actively participate in piloting the Model Tribal System.

Kaw Nation
  • Total caseload increased from 69 cases to 85 cases.
  • Paternity was established for seven children.
  • 81 percent of cases have established obligations; 69 of the 85.
  • 58 percent of current support owed was collected and distributed ($124,610 of $214,926); the goal was 50 percent.

Successes – Working with other tribes, the Kaw Nation has been able to garnish Tribal per capita payments the states were unable to garnish before.  Established a STEPP program to work with noncustodial parents who are in contempt for not paying child support.

Keweenaw Bay
  • Established paternity for one case during the fiscal year and has one pending paternity case. 
  • Currently enforces 119 cases.  Thirty of them are orders established.
  • Collection rate remained the same at 81 percent.
  • Past-due collection rate rose to 39 percent from 37 percent. 

Successes – Designed several things to promote the child support program through education and community outreach such as; magnets, chip clips, educational pamphlets, pens, note pads, and key chains.  Displayed information at Pow-Wows, educational booths, participated in evening extracurricular activities, and staff did a classroom presentation to the local schools on the basics of child support and establishing paternity.  We have designed an interactive presentation to engage students to learn about the costs of having children.  Teachers include staff in their syllabus each school year. 

Kickapoo, KS

              Not Available

Klamath
  • Total caseload increased from 211 cases to 265 cases.
  • Established 134 cases with support orders.
  • Collected and distributed $78,462 in current child support.

Successes – Gained more tribal members that wanted their cases to be with the tribe.  Located non-custodial parents through the use of Facebook, My Space, and an Ancestry Tree.  Continued to assist many tribal and community members on child support issues.  

Lac du Flambeau

              Not Available

Leech Lake Band

              Not Available

Lummi Nation
  • Collected and distributed $409,840 in current child support.
  • Opened 110 new cases for either establishment of paternity or child support, or both.

Successes - Participated in semi-annual meetings to refine the rules and procedures followed when working with tribes.  Participated in a number of community outreach events; specifically in a Head Start Health Fair.  Maintained a Microsoft Access Database of all cases, paternity, child support, and liaison cases alike.

Menominee
  • Had a total of 531 referrals, 67 of these referrals were for paternities establishment.
  • Paternity was established or acknowledged for 77 children.
  • Had 1,647 cases opened at the end of the year. 
  • Support orders were established for 1,509 cases resulting in a support establishment rate of 92 percent.
  • Total collections were $1.6 million. The rate of collections for current support increased by 18 percent compared to FY 2010.  

Successes – Continued to receive a high volume of referrals from assistance programs, including County economic support and the Menominee County Human Services Department, TANF, Kinship Care, and W-2.  Established a policy for dealing with incarcerated child support payers, with no chance of parole for the duration of the child/children’s minority, with a modification by the tribe’s tribal court to bring the support obligation to zero.

Mescalero Apache
  • Had a total of 321 active cases.
  • Paternity was established for 62 children.
  • Collected $256,473 in child support. 

Successes – Not Available

Mille Lacs Band

              Not Available

Modoc
  • Had a caseload of 1,515 cases.
  • Had 1,297 cases with a support order.
  • Established or acknowledged paternity for 1,261 children.
  • Collected and distributed over $2.5 million in current support.

Successes – Created a Model Tribal System (MTS) consortium that consists of tribes from all regions.  Partnered with SMI to distribute debit cards for persons currently receiving child support by check to access their child support without worrying about cashing a check because they do not have bank accounts.

Muscogee (Creek) Nation
  • Managed a caseload of 1,284 active cases.  Of these cases, 827 or (64 percent) currently have support orders. 
  • Established paternities for 1,320 children of the 1,442 needing paternity.
  • Collected over $1.2 million in current support and collected $372,606 in past due support for a total of $1.6 million in support.

 Successes – Established several outreach locations throughout communities.  This enables the program to be available throughout each month in an effort to be more accessible.  Worked closely with the Reintegration Program monitoring the progress of newly released NCPs from prison.   

Navajo Nation
  • Managed a caseload of 15,977 cases, 575 were TANF cases.
  • Had 5,460 cases with support orders.
  • Established and/or acknowledged paternities for 13,995 children.
  • Collected a total of $7,718,869 in child support, reflecting more collections than FY 2010 total of $7,393,032.          

Successes – Provided Debt Recalculation Utility (DRU) Training via the Internet to all Case Management Specialists and Child Support Enforcement Officers.  Continued collaboration efforts with the Navajo Nation Program for Self Reliance (formerly TANF).

Nez Perce
  • Caseload increased from 170 open cases to 342 open cases. 
  • Established paternity for three children with one pending.
  • Collected $105,767 in current support and $78,171 in past due support.

Successes – Completed and distributed three brochures through media outreach to tribal communities on the various child support services (approx. 500 brochures were distributed).  The Child Support Program website was revamped and launched online in March and a Facebook page was created (approx. 95 friends).  Five PSA videos were created for child support (214,000 viewers for the region).     

Nooksack
  • Had 304 open cases.  Of this amount, 180 were TANF cases; 69 were state TANF cases; and 55 were non-TANF cases.  271 of these cases had a support order established.
  • Collected $110,839 in current child support, a 45 percent increase from FY 2010.  Collected $10,491 in past-due child support, a 22 percent increase from FY 2010.  Collections totaled $121,330 for both current and past-due support.

Successes – Continued to initiate collaboration with other agencies within the tribe and outside the tribe for the highest quality holistic service.  This effort garnered positive feedback from custodial and non-custodial parents.  Formed a mutually beneficial relationship with partners in the British Columbia Family Maintenance Program which continued throughout FY 2011.  Had success navigating various regulations and protocols of jail and prison facilities to ensure that paternity testing was completed on incarcerated fathers.

Northern Arapaho

              Not Available

Oneida Nation      
  • Managed a caseload of 2,256 cases, an increase of 57 percent from FY 2010 due to full jurisdictional transfers from state circuit courts. 
  • Paternity establishment rate was 94 percent, an increase of two percent from FY 2010.
  • Expunged $135,679 of old state debt on 25 cases.
  • Percent of cases with support orders established was 87 percent, an increase of one percent from FY 2010.

Successes – Customer service survey resulted in a 99 percent overall satisfaction rating.  Completed the pilot testing for the Model Tribal System (MTS).

Osage Nation
  • Collected $674,820 in current child support, an increase of 13 percent from FY 2010. 
  • Had a caseload of 398 open cases.  Of this amount, 317 had a support order.
  • Paternity established or acknowledged for 11 children.

Successes – Maintained adequate success with the Tribal Intervention Program, an alternative to incarceration.

Penobscot Nation

              Not Available

Ponca

              Not Available

Port Gamble S’Klallam
  • Managed a caseload of 483 cases, a decrease of 17 percent.
  • Collected $79,936 in current child support. 
  • Collected $42,605 in past-due support.

Successes – Offered free tax services to low-income families which successfully provided more money to families and provided the opportunity to educate parents about earned income credit.

Pueblo of Zuni

              Not Available

Puyallup
  • Collected $365,234 in current child support.
  • Had a caseload of 915 active cases.  Of this amount 606 cases had a support order.
  • Collected approximately 57 percent of current support owed on the caseload.

Successes – Throughout the year, the program attended community events and handed out information at these events along with other programs in the community; providing brochures, contact information, applications and answered questions about the program and services that are provided.

Quinault Nation
  • Established 152 paternities.
  • Established 65 support orders.
  • Collected and disbursed $132,688 in current child support.

Successes – Not Available

Red Lake Band

              Not Available

Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate
  • Managed a caseload of 1,585 cases.
  • Had 1,119 cases with a support order.
  • Established or acknowledged paternities for 21 children.
  • Collected and distributed $669,937 in current child support.
  • Collections have increased by $110,553 from FY 2010.  

Successes – Established an excellent working environment with the state of South Dakota in which the communication lines remain excellent.                       

Suquamish
  • Received 68 cases via case referral.
  • Increased current child support collections within a three month period from 23.7 percent prior to receipt of cases to 31.9 percent. 
  • Past-due collections, within a three month period, increased from 12.6 percent to 20.1 percent.

Successes – Newly comprehensive tribe.  The information above is based on a three month period; therefore, the tribe did not have anything to report in this section.

Three Affiliated Tribes

              Not Available

Tlingit and Haida
  • Had 170 new open cases.
  • Distributed $291,168 in child support, collections increased by 33.33 percent from FY 2010.

Successes – Processed transferred cases more efficiently since the Child Support Services Division (CSSD) began providing the Transmittal #1 sheet.  Made major progress in dealing with backlog of cases.

Tulalip
  • Had a caseload of 576 cases, an increase of 29 percent.
  • Had 353 cases with a child support order, an increase of 87 percent.
  • Collected and distributed $296,494 in current support. 
  • Past-due support collected and distributed were $64,105.

Successes – Learned many lessons in the two years the program has been operating; the reality of having a child support program, and how the program best fits the community has been an enormous growing experience.

Umatilla Indian Reservation
  • Collected and distributed $215,362 in current support on 66 of 109 open cases or 60.5 percent. 
  • Collected $146,853 in current support due or 65 percent exceeding the 50 percent target.
  • Managed a caseload of 110 cases, an increase of 17 percent, 98 percent of caseload had a support order.

Successes – Created a child support worksheet in a spreadsheet format; offered to attorneys practicing in the Umatilla Tribal Court.

White Earth Nation
  • Had 130 open cases. 
  • Cases with a support order were 103.
  • Collected and distributed $332,034 in current support.

Successes – Developed a work plan which is an ongoing template to help with case scenarios; a step-by-step process on how to work cases that are in the program.

Winnebago
  • Managed a caseload of 680 cases, an increase of 66 percent.
  • Established paternities for 92 children, an increase of 67 percent.
  • Collected and distributed $315,864 in current support.

Successes – Helped a non-custodial parent get proper treatment for his addiction so he may become a productive father.

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) + line 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 – Part 1, 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 G – (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 for Two Consecutive Fiscal Years (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 for all Fiscal Years (Form OCSE-157, line 26)

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

Table 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 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 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, column G)

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 Expenditures (Outlays) (Standard Form 269A, line 10a; beginning in FY 2011, Standard Form 425, lines 10e & 10j)

The number of expenditures (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 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 Paternities 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.