< Back to Search

Review of Federal Case Registry Options

DCL-03-44

Published: December 5, 2003
Information About:
State/Local Child Support Agencies
Topics:
Federal Systems, Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS)
Types:
Policy, Dear Colleague Letters (DCL)
Tags:
Location Systems

DEAR COLLEAGUE LETTER

DCL-03-44

ATTACHMENT: Appendix L, FCR Options for Data Received
FPLS/FCR Option Election Matrix by State

DATE: December 5, 2003

TO: ALL STATE IV-D DIRECTORS

RE: Review of Federal Case Registry Options

Dear Colleague:

The Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS) provides state Child Support Enforcement (CSE) agencies with a vast amount of Social Security number, address, income and asset information. With such a large amount of data to process, many states have taken advantage of Federal Case Registry (FCR) data suppression and optional implementation capabilities.

The purpose of this letter is to encourage states to review their elections to suppress data (i.e., acknowledgement or certain proactive match records) and receive additional data (e.g., SVES Title II, Title XVI, and Prisoner information, FCR Data Inconsistency File, and the Unscrubbed Address Data from the NDNH) that allow state agencies to process FPLS data in a more automated fashion.

To aid in the review of these FPLS options, attached are:

  • Appendix L, FCR Options for Data Received – This document is to be located in the Federal Case Registry (FCR) Interface Guidance Document (IGD). It provides a summary of FCR options and their recommended use, consolidates the documentation of the various data suppression features and optional components of the FCR, and provides instructions for where to send elections.
  • FPLS/FCR Option Election Matrix by State – This document reflects the status of each state's exercise of the options shown in Appendix L.

States may contact their State Technical Support (TS) Liaisons with any questions regarding the FCR data filtering options, or to discuss FPLS enhancements and how to program their state systems to effectively process the data.

Once programming is in place to accept new data, states representatives should inform their State TS Liaison that they want the new data transmitted.

Sincerely,

Sherri Z. Heller, Ed.D.
Commissioner
Office of Child Support Enforcement

Enclosures

cc: Regional Program Managers
ACF Regional Administrators