Cooperative Agreements between Indian Tribes and State IV-D Agencies

ACTION TRANSMITTAL

OCSE-AT-98-21

ISSUED: July 28, 1998

TO: State agencies administering child support enforcement plans under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act and other interested individuals.

SUBJECT: Implementing section 454(33) of the Social Security Act (the Act), Cooperative agreements between Indian Tribes and State agencies operating a State Child Support Enforcement Program under Title IV-D of the Act

BACKGROUND: This Action Transmittal deals with cooperative agreements between Indian Tribes and IV-D Agencies when the State is operating the IV-D Program. Regulations governing all aspects of direct grants to Indian Tribes to operate child support enforcement programs will be issued separately. The separate issuance will address any requirements for cooperative agreements between States and Tribes when the Tribe is operating the IV-D program.

Prior to enactment of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunities Act of 1996 (PRWORA), Title IV-D of the Act placed authority to administer the delivery of support enforcement (IV-D) services with the States and their local political instrumentalities. However, on most Indian reservations, the authority of State and local government and the jurisdiction of State law is limited or non-existent. The Constitution, numerous court decisions, and Federal law clearly reserve to Indian Tribes important powers of self-government, including the authority to make and enforce laws, to adjudicate civil and criminal disputes (including domestic relations cases), to tax, and to license. Therefore, most Tribes do not recognize State jurisdiction in many matters of law.

Consequently, States which have attempted to provide Title IV-D service on Tribal lands have generally been constrained in their abilities to establish paternity, or establish or enforce child support orders with respect to noncustodial parents who reside within the jurisdiction of an Indian reservation. Arrangements for child support services on Tribal lands may involve a specific Tribal agreement to recognize the State or county jurisdiction on Tribal lands for the narrow purpose of child support enforcement. In such agreements, Tribes agree to allow the IV-D agency to extend State IV-D procedures to the reservation. And, as a result, if the Tribe is willing to allow State IV-D personnel to pursue child support enforcement on the reservation pursuant to Federal requirements, it is not necessary for Tribal law to conform to Federal requirements in order for the State IV-D agency to receive Federal financial participation in the costs of providing such services, at the applicable matching rate under section 455 of the Act.

However, prior to enactment of PRWORA, different rules than those described above applied should a IV-D agency delegate any of the functions of the IV-D program to be performed by the Tribal entity. Specifically, when a function under Title IV-D was delegated by a IV-D agency to be performed by a Tribal entity, the entity to which the IV-D function was delegated was required to carry out the function in compliance with all relevant Federal requirements. Only under these circumstances was Federal reimbursement under Title IV-D available to the State for the costs incurred by the Tribal entity for performing IV-D functions. The cooperative agreement between the State and the Tribal entity had to meet the requirements of 45 CFR 302.34 and 303.107. More specifically, the agreement had to specify that, in accordance with 45 CFR 303.107(c), the Tribal entity had to comply with Title IV-D requirements with respect to the function or functions delegated to it.

With the enactment of PRWORA, a cooperative agreement with a Tribal entity need not require the Tribal entity to provide all IV-D services or that Tribal laws and procedures meet federal requirements for all IV-D functions. However, as a basic requirement, the Tribal entity must demonstrate that it has an established Tribal court system or Court of Indian Offenses with the authority to establish paternity, establish, modify or enforce support orders or to enter support orders in accordance with child support guidelines established or adopted by such Tribal entity. Prior to PRWORA, to the extent that a Tribal entity provided a IV-D service delegated to it by the State, the Tribal entity was required to meet all Federal requirements with respect to that service. A State could delegate one or multiple functions to the Tribal entity. For example, the State and Tribal entity could enter into a cooperative agreement for the Tribal entity to establish paternity and support orders, but not to enforce orders, in IV-D cases. In this instance, prior to enactment of PRWORA, the Tribal entity's laws and procedures were required to meet all Federal requirements with respect to paternity establishment and support order establishment before expenditures under the cooperative agreement were eligible for Federal matching funds.

New requirements for cooperative agreements, as well as new authority for direct funding of Tribes for operating child support enforcement programs, are addressed in Section 375 of PRWORA. This Action Transmittal addresses the requirements for cooperative agreements between Tribal entities and State IV-D agencies, and clarifies the changes to prior Federal policy as a result of the new section 454(33) of the Act, as amended by the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, which contained technical amendments to section 454(33) of the Act.

Section 5546 of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 also made technical amendments to the direct funding of Tribal child support enforcement programs under section 455(f) of the Act, as added by PRWORA. Revised section 455(f) directs the Secretary of HHS to issue regulations governing direct grants to Tribal entities for operating child support enforcement programs. Prior to issuing such regulations, extensive consultation with Tribal representatives is scheduled. Therefore, this Action Transmittal addresses only cooperative agreements between State IV-D programs and Tribal entities.

ATTACHMENT: Federal requirements with respect to cooperative agreements between State IV-D programs and Tribal entities for the provision of Title IV-D services.

SUPERCEDED MATERIAL:
OCSE-PIQ-89-13, dated November 13, 1989
OCSE-PIQ-95-01, dated June 2, 1995

INQUIRIES: Regional Administrators

David Gray Ross
Commissioner
Office of Child Support Enforcement

ATTACHMENT - Statutory Requirements

Section 454(33) of the Act was added by PRWORA and requires that a State IV-D plan provide that a State may enter into cooperative agreements with an Indian Tribe or Tribal organization (as defined in subsections (e) and (l) of section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b)) provided that the State has within its borders Indian Country (as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151) and the Indian Tribe or Tribal organization demonstrates that such Tribe or organization has an established Tribal court system or a Court of Indian Offenses with the authority to establish paternity, establish, modify, or enforce support orders, or to enter support orders in accordance with child support guidelines established or adopted by such Tribe or Tribal organization.

Section 454(33) authorizes cooperative agreements between States and Tribes or Tribal organizations under which the State and Tribe or Tribal organization shall provide for the cooperative delivery of child support enforcement services in Indian Country and for the forwarding of all collections pursuant to the functions performed by the Tribe or Tribal organization to the State IV-D agency or, conversely, by the State IV-D agency to the Tribe or Tribal organization, which shall distribute such collections in accordance with such agreement to the extent that such distribution is consistent with Title IV-D of the Act.

Section 454(33) of the Act does not nullify section 457 of the Act which specifies how collected support shall be distributed in cases where Indian families are receiving TANF assistance from the State or in cases where Indian families are receiving TANF assistance from the Tribe but formerly received assistance under Title IV-A of the Act from the State. Sections 454(33) and 457 must be read so that each provision is given effect.

Elementary rules of statutory construction provide that effect must be given to every word, clause and sentence of a statute and that a statute must be construed so that effect is given to all its provisions, so that no part will be inoperative or superfluous, void or insignificant, and so that one section will not destroy another unless the provision is the result of obvious mistake or error. Even though section 454(33) specifies that collections shall be distributed in accordance with State/Tribal cooperative agreements, this cannot be read to abrogate the requirements of section 457 affecting collections for current or prior IV-A assistance received from the State.

Section 457(a)(4) of the Act says:

In the case of an amount collected for a family in accordance with a cooperative agreement under section 454(33), distribute the amount so collected pursuant to the terms of the agreement.

This section does not negate sections 457(a)(1)-(a)(3). If Congress intended to negate these sections, it could have. E.g., in section 457(f) it states inter alia "Notwithstanding the preceding provisions of this section[.]" This illustrates that Congress can distinguish between those provisions that it intends should be given effect and those that should not. Section 457(a)(4) does not contain similar "notwithstanding the preceding provisions" language. There is no legal support for the conclusion that sections 457(a)(1)-(a)(3) should be read as ineffective.

Therefore, section 457(a)(4) of the Act must be read to require that, in the case of an amount of support collected for a family in accordance with a cooperative agreement under section 454(33), the State must distribute the amount so collected pursuant to the terms of the agreement to the extent that such distribution is consistent with other IV-D requirements.

Provision of IV-D Services on Tribal Lands

Prior to enactment of PRWORA, Federal funding under Title IV-D of the Act was limited to funding State child support enforcement programs and there was no direct Federal funding to Tribes for child support enforcement activities. Federal funding was available, through the State, for eligible expenditures of Tribes pursuant to a cooperative agreement with the State, under which the State delegated any of the functions of the IV-D program to the Tribal entity and the Tribal entity complied with any aspect of Title IV-D of the Act applicable to the function or functions delegated to the Tribe. Section 455(f) of the Act now provides for direct Federal payments to an Indian Tribe or Tribal organization that demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary of HHS that it has the capacity to operate a child support enforcement program which meets the requirements established by the Secretary in regulations. These regulations must be published in final form before direct Federal of Tribal child support enforcement programs is available.

While regulations governing the direct funding of Tribal programs will be issued after consultation with Tribes, there remain instances in which a State and Tribe may continue to provide IV-D services on Tribal lands pursuant to a State/Tribal cooperative agreement which meets the requirements of the new section 454(33) of the Act, or which existed prior to enactment of PRWORA. In addition, situations may continue in which a Tribe agrees to recognize the State or county jurisdiction on Tribal lands for the narrow purpose of child support enforcement. Federal funding of the appropriate share of State costs associated with the provision of services by the State or local agency under such an agreement is available.

Therefore, Title IV-D of the Act recognizes a number of options under which IV-D services may be provided on Tribal lands, including:

1. A Tribe or Tribal organization operates a child support enforcement program that meets the requirements for such a program established by the Secretary once regulations pursuant to section 455(f) of the Act are published in final form.
2. A State or local IV-D agency provides child support enforcement services on Tribal lands pursuant to an agreement under which the Tribe agrees to recognize the State or county jurisdiction on Tribal lands for the specific purpose of child support enforcement.
3. A State provides child support enforcement services on Tribal lands under jurisdiction over Indian Country that is lawfully exercised under section 402 of the Act entitled 'An Act to prescribe penalties for certain acts of violence or intimidation, and for other purposes', approved April 11, 1968 (25 U.S.C. 1322). Section 402 requires Tribal consent to State assumption of jurisdiction over Indian Country and is applicable to any State assumption of jurisdiction after 1968. To the extent that State jurisdiction is lawfully exercised within such Indian Country, those State laws that are of general application to private persons or private property shall have the same force and effect as they have elsewhere within that State.
4. A State and Tribe or Tribal organization provide for the delivery of child support enforcement services in Indian Country pursuant to a cooperative agreement in effect prior to August 22, 1996, the date of enactment of PRWORA.
5. A State and Tribe or Tribal organization provide for the cooperative delivery of child support enforcement services in Indian Country pursuant to section 454(33) of the Act.

This Action Transmittal addresses only the fifth option--the provision of IV-D services State/Tribal cooperative agreements under section 454(33) of the Act.

Questions and Answers

1. QUESTION: What requirements must be met before Federal funding is available for State expenditures incurred as a result of services provided on Tribal lands pursuant to a cooperative agreement between the State and a Tribe under section 454(33) of the Act?

   ANSWER: In accordance with section 454(33) of the Act:

   (1) the State must have within its borders Indian Country as defined in section 1151 of Title 18, United States Code. Section 1151 defines Indian Country as "(a) all land within the limits of any Indian reservation under the jurisdiction of the United States Government notwithstanding the issuance of any patent, and, including rights-of-way running through the reservation, (b) all dependent Indian communities within the borders of the United States whether within the original or subsequently acquired territory thereof, and whether within or without the limits of a state, and (c) all Indian allotments, the Indian titles to which have not been extinguished, including rights-of-way running through the same."

   (2) the Indian Tribe or Tribal organization must meet the definition of a Indian Tribe or Tribal organization as defined in subsections (e) and (l) of section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450(b). Section 4(e) and (l) of this Act define an Indian Tribe as "any Indian Tribe, band, nation, or other organized group or community, including any Alaska Native village or regional or village corporation as defined in or established pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), which is recognized as eligible for the special programs and services provided by the United States to Indians because of their status as Indians.", and Tribal organization as "the recognized governing body of any Indian Tribe; any legally established organization of Indians which is controlled, sanctioned, or chartered by such governing body or which is democratically elected by the adult members of the Indian community to be served by such organization and which includes the maximum participation of Indians in all phases of its activities [.]"

   (3) the Indian Tribe or Tribal organization must demonstrate that it has an established Tribal court system or a Court of Indian Offenses with the authority to perform the function which the State is delegating to the Tribe under the cooperative agreement. This would include one or more of the following functions: establishing paternity; establishing, modifying or enforcing support orders; and entering orders in accordance with child support guidelines. The guidelines used by the Tribe may be those established by the Tribe or those established of the State, and adopted by the Tribe.

   Section 454(33) of the Act does not require that Tribal laws or codes used by a Tribe for child support purposes must meet all applicable requirements under Title IV-D of the Act. This flexibility in the statute may allow States and Tribes to provide child support services while the Tribe works to enact or fine-tune Tribal code or law to include establishment or enforcement tools that have proved invaluable to States in providing successful child support services, but are not currently available to the Tribe.

2. QUESTION: Must Tribal laws or codes meet all IV-D requirements applicable to the function performed by the Tribe before FFP is available for services provided by that Tribe under cooperative agreement with the State?

   ANSWER: No. We are aware of Tribes in some States that could provide child support services to those who need them in Indian Country but currently do not because their Tribal code or laws do not meet applicable Federal IV-D requirements. In some cases, it may be Tribal culture that is inconsistent with certain Federal requirements and it may be inappropriate to impose the Federal requirement on the Tribe in pursuing child support.

   Enactment of section 454(33) of the Act recognizes these situations and allows States to enter into cooperative agreements with these Tribes. As a result of section 454(33), therefore, State/Tribal cooperative agreements need no longer meet all applicable IV-D requirements, as required in 45 CFR 302.34 and 303.107(c).

3. QUESTION: If Tribal laws or codes do not meet all IV-D requirements applicable to the function performed by the Tribe under a cooperative agreement with the State, to what extent may the Tribal law or codes differ from Federal IV-D requirements?

   ANSWER: Section 454(33) of the Act does not specify to what extent Tribal code or law must comply with Federal IV-D requirements before a State may enter into a cooperative agreement with a Tribe. Section 454(33) is broad enough to support Tribal law or procedure which varies from or expands upon IV-D requirements as long as such law or procedure does not directly conflict with such requirements. Therefore, it is a matter of State and Tribal judgment, reached after consultation and examination of applicable Tribal law and procedures, as to whether Tribal law and procedures will result in appropriate paternity establishment, child support order establishment and/or enforcement services being provided to families in need of them.

4. QUESTION: If a State enters into a cooperative agreement with a Tribe to perform specific IV-D functions, for example, paternity establishment, and the Tribal code or law does not meet all IV-D requirements, is the State at risk of failing to meet the "statewideness" requirements of section 454(1) of the Act?

   ANSWER: No, the State is not at risk because the Tribe is a sovereign nation, is not a part of the State, and Indian children and parents are not subject to State law while they reside within the boundaries of Tribal lands. Under section 454(33) of the Act, States have considerable flexibility in negotiating cooperative agreements with Tribal entities in circumstances which are suitable for such arrangements and result in Tribal children and families receiving much-needed support. Federal financial participation in the eligible costs of providing IV-D services under such State/Tribal cooperative agreements is not precluded by the existing "statewideness" requirement.

5. QUESTION: How are payments collected when only one of the contestants lives on Tribal land or a Tribal member moves off reservation during the life of a IV-D case?

   ANSWER: 28 U.S.C. 1738B(b) defines "State" to include "Indian Country (as defined in section 1151 of Title 18)" meaning that throughout this Full Faith and Credit provision wherever the term "State" appears it must be read to include "Tribe" as well.

   28 U.S.C. 1738B(b) goes on to define "child support order" to be "a judgment, decree, or order of a court requiring the payment of child support in periodic amounts or in a lump sum," and "court" to mean "a court or administrative agency of a State that is authorized by State law to establish the amount of child support payable by a contestant or make a modification of a child support order."

   28 U.S.C. 1738B(a) requires "the appropriate authorities of each State" to "enforce according to its terms a child support order made consistently with this section by a court of another State [.]" We believe that this means that where a Tribal court or administrative agency makes a child support order that is consistent with 28 U.S.C. 1738B(c) that order must be enforced by the State and where a State court or administrative agency makes a child support order that is consistent with 28 U.S.C. 1738B(c) that order must be enforced by the Tribe.

   In the situation where a Tribal court or administrative agency establishes a child support order consistent with 28 U.S.C. 1738B(c) and subsequently the obligor Tribal member moves off-reservation, the Tribe would lose jurisdiction over that Tribal member, but States would have to enforce that Tribal child support order according to its terms the same as they would have to enforce a valid child support order from any other State.

   In the situation where a State court or administrative agency establishes a child support order consistent with 28 U.S.C. 1738B(c) and subsequently the obligor Tribal member moves on-reservation the Tribe, under 28 U.S.C. 1738B(a), would have to enforce that State child support order according to its terms. Of course, a Tribe may consent to State jurisdiction on Indian land under a cooperative agreement whereby the State could enforce the child support order rather than the Tribe.

6. QUESTION: Does a cooperative agreement between a State and a Tribe have to provide for the Tribe to perform all IV-D functions?

   ANSWER: No. A cooperative agreement between a State and a Tribal entity need not provide that the Tribal entity provide all IV-D services or that Tribal laws and procedures meet Federal requirements for all IV-D functions, if only one or more of those functions is delegated to the Tribe. Therefore, a State may delegate one or multiple IV-D functions to the Tribal entity under a cooperative agreement. For example, the State and Tribal entity may enter into a cooperative agreement for the Tribal entity to establish paternity and support orders, but not to enforce orders, in IV-D cases. This may happen if a Tribe, at the time the cooperative agreement is entered, is not prepared to enforce orders because adequate mechanisms are not in place in Tribal code or procedures to enforce orders.

   In such cases, cooperative agreements governing limited IV-D functions may subsequently be expanded to cover more functions as the Tribe is willing and able to assume those responsibilities. In the meantime, the Tribe may allow the State to extend jurisdiction onto Tribal lands for the limited purpose of enforcing support orders. In any case, a State must attempt to enforce support by reaching any income or assets the obligated parent has outside of Indian Country, if the Tribal court order is consistent with the 28 U.S.C 173B(c), Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders. Some Tribes and States have begun cooperative agreements in this way and are now considering expanding those agreements.

7. QUESTION: For what expenditures under a State/Tribal cooperative agreement are Federal matching funds available? Specifically, if Federal financial participation (FFP) available in certain "start-up" costs incurred under a State/Tribal cooperative agreement?

   ANSWER: FFP is available for any expenditures under a State/Tribal cooperative agreement if such expenditures are otherwise eligible for reimbursement under Title IV-D of the Act and 45 CFR Part 304. This would include, in establishing a cooperative agreement for the provision of Title IV-D program services on Tribal lands, certain "startup costs" such as the hiring of staff, leasing of space, leasing or purchase of equipment, and training of Tribal personnel on Title IV-D procedures and requirements (see 45 CFR 304.20(b)(1)(iii) and iv)). Federal regulations at 45 CFR 304.21(d), provide that "FFP is available in IV-D costs incurred as of the first day of the calendar quarter in which a cooperative agreement or amendment is signed by parties sufficient to create a contractual arrangement under State law."

8. QUESTION: May a cooperative agreement between a State and a Tribe for the provision of Title IV-D services specify that the Tribe may set child support award amounts using its own guidelines, rather than those of the State?

   ANSWER: Yes. Nothing in Federal law or regulations precludes a State from entering into a cooperative agreement with a Tribe for delivery of IV-D services under which the Tribe operates a child support enforcement program on Tribal lands under laws and procedures which are different from those adopted by the State. Guidelines established or adopted by a Tribe are a requirement at 454(33), but they do not have to match the State's guidelines. For example, a Tribe may adopt a set of Tribal-specific child support guidelines to be used in setting and modifying all child support orders within the Tribe's sovereign jurisdiction, even if the guidelines are different from the guidelines adopted by the State. Having and using different guidelines for setting all child support orders within Tribal sovereign jurisdiction would not, in and of itself, render the State out of conformity with Title IV-D requirements, including the regulatory requirement that "...the State must establish one set of guidelines..."

9. QUESTION: Under what circumstances would a State and Tribe enter into a cooperative agreement under section 454(33) of the Act instead of the Tribe seeking direct funding under section 455(f) of the Act?

   ANSWER: Direct funding of Tribal child support enforcement programs is not available until the Secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services issues final regulations establishing the conditions for receipt of a grant under section 455(f) of the Act.

   A Tribe must determine whether it has the capacity, infrastructure and resources to operate a child support program which includes all basic functions of the program. Some Tribes, which already have established relationships with States to cooperatively deliver child support services in Indian Country, may decide that it is more advantageous to continue such relationships. Other Tribes, which can meet the requirements for cooperative agreements with States under section 454(33) of the Act, may choose to enter into such agreements. For some, these would be temporary approaches, until such time as the Tribe is capable of meeting the requirements under section 455(f) of the Act and the Secretary's regulations.

   Other Tribes, which are close to or already have in place the capacity to establish paternity, establish, modify and enforce support orders and locate noncustodial parents, either independently, or in collaboration with States, may decide to apply for funding under section 455(f) as soon as final regulations are published.

10. QUESTION: What effect do the Federal distribution requirements have on child support collected as a result of a cooperative agreement between a State and a Tribe or Tribal organization under section 454(33) of the Act?

    ANSWER: States and Tribes are authorized to negotiate cooperative agreements for the delivery of child support services in Indian Country, but these agreements must be consistent with Title IV-D of the Act. Section 454(33) of the Act authorizes cooperative agreements between States and Tribes or Tribal organizations and requires that support collected be forwarded to the State agency by the Tribe or Tribal organization, or conversely, by the State agency to the Tribe or Tribal organization depending on the functions performed by the State and Tribe or Tribal organization under the agreement. Section 454(33) also requires that support collected be distributed in accordance with the terms of the cooperative agreement. Under section 457(a)(4) of the Act, States and Tribes have flexibility to determine whether the State or the Tribe will distribute support under a State/Tribal cooperative agreement. Whether it is the State or the Tribe distributing collected support under a cooperative agreement, distribution must be consistent with IV-D distribution rules specified in section 457 of the Act.

    In cases where Indian families are receiving TANF assistance from the State, support must be distributed pursuant to section 457(a)(1) of the Act. The Tribe or Tribal organization must forward all collections to the State agency. The State must pay to the Federal government the Federal share of the amount so collected and may retain or distribute to the family the State share of the amount collected.

    In cases where Indian families are receiving TANF assistance from the Tribe, but which formerly received assistance from the State under Title IV-A of the Act, support must be distributed under section 457(a)(2) of the Act. In such cases the family would be paid current support and assigned arrearage would be subject to distribution rules under section 457(a)(2)(B).

    In cases where Indian families never received Title IV-A assistance, all collected support must be paid to the family pursuant to section 457(a)(3). State/Tribal cooperative agreements may not abrogate Indian families' rights under a support order in these cases.

    Even though section 454(33) specifies that collections shall be distributed in accordance with State/Tribal cooperative agreements, this cannot be read to abrogate the requirements of section 457 affecting collections for current or prior IV-A assistance received from the State.

11. QUESTION: If there is a cooperative agreement between the State IV-D agency and the Tribe to provide IV-D services, what access will the Tribe have to FPLS, federal debt recovery or the tax offset process?

    ANSWER: Under cooperative agreements with State IV-D agencies, Tribes will not have direct access to the FPLS, federal debt recovery or the tax offset process. However, Tribal cases will be processed using all resources available through the State IV-D program, as outlined in section 453(d) of the Act and federal regulations at 45 CFR 303.70, 303.71 and 303.72.

12. QUESTION: What are the implications for State IV-D automated systems when there is a cooperative agreement between the State IV-D agency and the Tribe for a Tribe to perform some or all of the IV-D functions, in terms of access and interconnectivity, if a Tribe uses automated systems to carry out the IV-D role?

    ANSWER: Under these circumstances, the Tribal entity must use the State's automated system to the same extent it is used by the State to perform the IV-D function(s) the Tribal entity will perform under the cooperative agreement. The State must provide necessary hardware, software and communications to tie child support offices on Tribal lands to the State's automated system. The State will include these activities and expenditures in an advance planning document update and request FFP at the appropriate Federal matching rate, subject to limitations including the $400 million cap on systems funding under section 344(b)(2) of PRWORA.

13. QUESTION: Can a District Attorney's office, which administers the IV-D program for the State, enter into a cooperative agreement with a Tribe?

    ANSWER: Yes, a district attorney's office acting as the IV-D agency under 45 CFR 302.34, may enter into a cooperative agreement with a Tribe under 454(33).