Office of Child Support Enforcement
23rd Annual Report to Congress
FOREWORD
President Clinton and I have made improving child support enforcement and increasing child support collections a top priority. This 23rd Annual Report to Congress highlights the Child Support Enforcement (CSE) program's accomplishments and demonstrates the progress made during FY 1998.
Together with our partners in the nation's CSE program, we have strengthened the enforcement of child support dramatically since 1992. In FY 1998, a record $14.3 billion was collected on behalf of children, an increase of 81 percent since FY 1992. In addition, 1.4 million paternities were established, an increase of 171 percent over FY 1992, largely due to paternities established through the voluntary in-hospital paternity programs.
Gains also were made in establishing support orders and in locating noncustodial parents who were not paying child support: 1.1 million orders were established and the income, assets, or employers of 6.5 million parents were located.
These numbers--a testimony to the commitment and dedication of individuals at the local, State, and Federal levels of the CSE program--send a strong message that parental responsibility is not an option.
Although this important work has helped millions of children, millions more are still deprived of the support they need and deserve. The collection of child support is a crucial part of this Administration's continuing resolve to help families attain self-sufficiency.
On signing the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act into law in 1996, President Clinton noted that "There is no area where we need more personal responsibility than child support." When paid regularly, it provides millions of children and families the resources needed to improve their daily lives.
Fiscal Year 1998 is the last year the Annual Report is required to be submitted, and a great deal has happened in the child support program since that time. We are including, immediately following this Foreword, a special section on more recent accomplishments.
Donna E. Shalala
FISCAL YEAR PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
Collections
Collected a record $14.3 billion, an increase of more than 80 percent since 1992.
Income Tax Refunds
Collected a record $1.1 billion in delinquent child support by intercepting income tax refunds of nonpaying parents.
Paternities Established
Established paternity for 1.4 million children.
Support Orders Established
Established 1.1 million new support orders.
Parents Located
Located the income, assets, or employers of 6.5 million parents.
Customers Served
Provided services to customers in 19.4 million cases.
RECENT ACCOMPLISHMENTS (FY 1999 AND FOLLOWING)*
Collections
FY 1999 distributed collections: nearly $16 billion
States/Territories with Certified Systems
Through FY 1999: 47
STATE | 1998 | 1999** | Percent Change |
---|---|---|---|
Alabama | $172,407,203 | 185,929,914 | 8 |
Alaska | 64,262,422 | 67,131,846 | 4 |
Arizona | 144,347,745 | 169,232,529 | 17 |
Arkansas | 99,373,428 | 108,480,842 | 9 |
California | 1,372,354,157 | 1,604,173,701 | 17 |
Colorado | 140,311,116 | 163,546,023 | 17 |
Connecticut | 154,373,662 | 175,487,270 | 14 |
Delaware | 42,005,824 | 44,962,003 | 7 |
D.C. | 32,715,624 | 35,137,996 | 7 |
Florida | 507,112,518 | 579,827,499 | 14 |
Georgia | 300,772,452 | 330,631,555 | 10 |
Guam | 7,251,380 | 7,660,532 | 6 |
Hawaii | 62,314,371 | 60,520,055 | -3 |
Idaho | 53,778,625 | 64,268,499 | 20 |
Illinois | 300,239,940 | 325,562,478 | 8 |
Indiana | 277,203,313 | 271,110,248 | 19 |
Iowa | 185,098,729 | 201,219,305 | 9 |
Kansas | 122,229,999 | 138,181,151 | 13 |
Kentucky | 185,549,683 | 206,241,206 | 11 |
Louisiana | 170,555,482 | 188,131,410 | 10 |
Maine | 73,782,781 | 80,663,945 | 9 |
Maryland | 357,094,944 | 350,165,942 | -2 |
Massachusetts | 274,662,473 | 291,485,832 | 6 |
Michigan | 1,151,824,001 | 1,274,637,793 | 11 |
Minnesota | 394,670,957 | 384,847,451 | -2 |
Mississippi | 112,224,456 | 128,877,572 | 15 |
Missouri | 286,734,739 | 285,818,836 | 0 |
Montana | 36,921,587 | 38,221,855 | 4 |
Nebraska | 117,127,490 | 110,565,311 | -6 |
Nevada | 69,133,221 | 92,121,885 | 33 |
New Hampshire | 60,975,803 | 66,166127 | 9 |
New Jersey | 581,901,606 | 635,116,977 | 9 |
New Mexico | 37,310,412 | 34,894,675 | -6 |
New York | 834,476,910 | 909,755,049 | 9 |
No. Carolina | 311,684,239 | 347,969,980 | 12 |
No. Dakota | 36,064,761 | 40,878,761 | 13 |
Ohio | 1,151,228,761 | 1,301,311,021 | 13 |
Oklahoma | 86,664,599 | 96,191,903 | 11 |
Oregon | 209,181,643 | 231,875,332 | 11 |
Pennsylvania | 1,042,987,090 | 1,107,687,051 | 6 |
Puerto Rico | 145,131,794 | 166,021,553 | 14 |
Rhode Island | 41,902,316 | 44,304,705 | 6 |
So. Carolina | 153,915,622 | 173,756,503 | 13 |
So. Dakota | 34,488,847 | 38,323,366 | 11 |
Tennessee | 188,406,296 | 224,245,130 | 19 |
Texas | 685,028,480 | 802,911,218 | 17 |
Utah | 97,013,689 | 107,336,207 | 11 |
Vermont | 31,712,200 | 34,880,355 | 10 |
Virgin Is. | 6,122,511 | 6,141,919 | 0 |
Virginia | 276,875,539 | 312,776,989 | 13 |
Washington | 474,432,883 | 515,859,493 | 9 |
West Virginia | 109,384,212 | 92,767,171 | -15 |
Wisconsin | 499,272,091 | 532,502,415 | 7 |
Wyoming | 33,110,055 | 38,462,270 | 16 |
National Totals | $14,347,706,681 | 15,826,978,654 | 10 |
Note: ** FY 1999 data is preliminary. |
The Office of Child Support Enforcement has been working with the State child support agencies to implement the child support enforcement tools included in PRWORA.
State Disbursement Units and Case Registries
With a few exceptions, virtually all States now have their central case registries and State disbursement units (SDUs) up and running. Central case registries provide States with a single database of State cases so that there is an accurate source of case information. SDUs provide a single automated location for collections and disbursements, allowing for greater efficiencies and getting payments to families faster. In addition, SDUs make the task of withholding child support from wages easier for employers because there is only one location to send payments to, rather than a multitude of county locations.
National Directory of New Hires and Federal Case Registry
Since its inception on October 1, 1998 through March 2000, the National Directory of New Hires (NDNH) has located 3.5 million parents who were delinquent in their child support payments. The NDNH works in conjunction with the new Federal Case Registry, a Federal database of records of all parents who owe child support.
The Registry contains records of 16 million cases from across the country, allowing delinquent parents to be tracked across State lines. The Federal Case Registry and National Directory of New Hires have received numerous awards, including Vice President Gore's "Hammer Award," sponsored by the National Partnership for Reinventing Government. The NDNH was a finalist in the prestigious Innovations in American Government Awards Program.
Financial Institution Data Match
A new program to match delinquent parents with financial records, started in 1999, has so far identified 897,160 delinquent parents with financial accounts with a value of $3 billion. This program matches records of delinquent parents, identified by States, with financial institution records. Multistate financial institutions match records by using information from OCSE on delinquent parents. The information is then sent back to the States to "freeze and seize" the assets.
National Ad Campaign
A Public Service Advisory campaign, "They're Your Kids, Be Their Dad," was launched in FY 1999. The States of Ohio (lead State), Illinois, Indiana, and Maryland and a major advertising agency are working with OCSE to encourage fathers to provide the emotional and financial support their children need and deserve.
Passport Denial Program
The Passport Denial Program has collected more than $4 million in lump sum child support payments. Since the program's inception in 1998, about 14,000 delinquent parents have had passport applications denied until they pay their child support.
* Due to a revised form used by States to report statistical information to OCSE, some statistical data for FY 1999 are not currently available. The number of paternities established in FY 1999 is among the data that are not yet available. In addition, some information for FY 1999 may not be comparable to previous years.
THE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM
- Paternity Establishment
- Interstate Enforcement
- Automation
- Technical Assistance and Training
- The Expanded Federal Parent Locator Service
- Federal Tax Refund and Administrative Offset Programs
- Passport Denial Program
- Audit
- Division of Consumer Services
- OCSE Webpage
- Public Inquiries
- National Resource Center
- Customer Satisfaction Surveys
- OIG Survey of States' Satisfaction with OCSE
- The Big 8
- Child Support Enforcement Financing Consultation Project
- Tribal Activities
- Special Improvement Projects and Tribal Planning Grants
- Project Save Our Children
- Collaboration and Partnerships
- Responsible Fatherhood Demonstrations
- Grants to States for Access and Visitation
- Domestic Violence
- International Activities
OVERVIEW
In 1975 Congress created the Child Support Enforcement (CSE) Program by enacting Title IV-D of the Social Security Act for the purpose of establishing and enforcing the support obligations owed by noncustodial parents to their children.
The CSE Program is a joint undertaking involving Federal, State, and local cooperative efforts. Because the States and territories run their own CSE programs, there are 54 separate systems, each with is own unique laws and procedures.
The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) is the Federal agency that oversees administration of the CSE Program. Within DHHS, the Administration for Children and Families' Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) provides Federal oversight of the program.
OCSE sets program standards and policy, evaluates States' performance in conducting their programs, and offers technical assistance and training to States. It conducts audits of State program activities and operates the Federal Parent Locator Service, National Training Center, and National Resource Center.
The Federal Government shares in the cost of funding the CSE program by reimbursing a substantial part of States' administrative costs and providing incentive payments to States. OCSE acts in cooperation with the Internal Revenue Service in facilitating collection of overdue support from Federal income tax refunds.
State governments work directly with families through State child support enforcement agencies and/or their local counterparts. These agencies work closely with a variety of government entities in four areas: locating noncustodial parents; establishing paternity; establishing support orders; and collecting and distributing support.
CSE services are available automatically for families receiving assistance under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program. Current child support collected usually reimburses the State and Federal governments for TANF payments made to the family. Child support services also are available to families not receiving TANF who apply for such services. Child support payments that are collected on behalf of nonTANF families are sent to the family. For these families, States must charge an application fee of up to $25 but may pay this fee from State funds.
State child support offices work with prosecuting attorneys and other law enforcement agencies to establish and enforce support orders. Each State CSE agency operates under a State plan approved by OCSE. State governments, and in some cases city, county, and/or local governments, participate in funding the program. In 1984, 1988, 1993, and 1996 Congress enacted significant amendments to the CSE program, providing the States with additional remedies to collect child support.
The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), signed by President Clinton into law on August 22, 1996, established the most sweeping revisions of the child support program to date. PRWORA provided States with new enforcement tools to ensure that children receive the support due them and that they are financially supported by both parents. The 1996 legislation also recognized the importance of children's access to their noncustodial parents by including grants to help States establish programs that support and facilitate noncustodial parents' visitation with and access to their children. In addition, the law created the National Directory of New Hires to help States with interstate enforcement efforts.
The federal mandates aim to streamline child support collections, increase paternity establishments and child support orders, strengthen penalties for delinquent payments, and encourage payment of child support. Because child support is primarily a function of state family law, PRWORA required state legislatures to make numerous changes in state law as a condition of receiving financial support for child support. Under contract to OCSE, the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), in 1998, undertook a review of State legislation in response to PRWORA.
Through FY 1998 the great majority of states had passed needed legislation to bring their programs into conformity with federal law. For example state agencies must have the authority under state law to issue administrative subpoenas for financial, employment and benefit information. By the end of FY 1998, 48 states had enacted this provision. Federal law also requires state agencies to be able to access records of state and local governments, including vital statistics and state and local tax and revenue records (49 states). States are required to have simple civil processes for voluntary paternity acknowledgment (44 states). Federal law requires genetic tests, if they meet a certain threshold of probability, to be admissible in a paternity proceeding and to constitute at least a rebuttable presumption of paternity (47 states). States are required to have laws to withhold, suspend, or restrict the use of driver's licenses (50 states). Employers are required to withhold income according to the withholding notice (49 states). Federal law requires states to direct their child support agencies to enter into agreements for information matching with financial institutions in the state (48 states). States are required to mandate that all child support orders handled by the child support agency include a provision for health care coverage (44 states).
Other PRWORA requirements were embraced in a similar manner by states determined to improve child support services to children and families. As of the end of FY 1998, in those instances where a State's legislation remained inconsistent with PRWORA, OCSE continued to consult and provide technical assistance to help the State achieve compliance. For a more detailed review of States' child support legislative activity in response to PRWORA in FY 1998, see NCSL's State Legislative Report, "Child Support Enforcement: State Legislation in Response to the 1996 Federal Welfare Reform Act," September, 1998, Vol. 23, No. 17, available from NCSL, 1560 Broadway, Suite 700, Denver, Colorado 80202 (303) 830-2200.
As part of its ongoing Government Performance and Results Act process, which reforms the way Federal agencies do business, in FY 1998, with its State and other Federal partners, OCSE:
- Continued to implement a national strategic plan that includes the CSE program's mission, vision, goals and objectives;
- Collaborated on the development of fifteen outcome measures, including at least one for each goal and objective;
- Developed a performance-based incentive plan (proposed to be phased in beginning October 1, 1999) to reward States' performance in five areas: establishment of paternities, establishment of support orders, collections on current support, collections on overdue support, and cost-effectiveness; and
- Revised data reporting forms to collect information necessary to measure success in achieving strategic plan goals, calculating proposed incentives, and reducing reporting burdens.
PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
Paternity Establishment
To improve collections and better the lives of children, a major child support goal has been to increase paternity establishment for those children born outside marriage. In FY 1998,paternity establishments rose to 1.4 million in 1998, an increase of 171 percent from the 516,000 in 1992. This was also an increase of 12 percent from the 1.3 million paternities established in 1997.
A major factor in the increase in paternities established was the success of the in-hospital voluntary paternity acknowledgment program, which requires the cooperation of a newly born child's parents. In FY 1998 over 614,000 paternities were voluntarily established in hospitals and other similar settings. This was an increase of 26 percent from the previous year's 486,786 and demonstrates that many parents want to take responsibility for their children.
With more paternities being established than children being born out of wedlock, progress is being made in reducing the number of children who do not have a legally established father in their lives. Such a relationship is necessary for securing the financial and emotional support children need and deserve for their healthy development and well-being.
Interstate Enforcement
The child support provisions of PRWORA required all States to adopt the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA) by January 1, 1998.
All States and jurisdictions met this requirement.
UIFSA was drafted by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL) and approved by the American Bar Association in 1993 as a replacement for the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (URESA), the model interstate child support enforcement law dating back to the 1950s. URESA required enacting States to reciprocate in the enforcement of duties of support, but, since it was a State law, States enacted various forms of it. Often, this made the interstate enforcement of support difficult.
In contrast, UIFSA provides for uniform rules, procedures, and forms for interstate cases. To inform the child support community, in November, 1996 OCSE issued the July 18, 1996 version of UIFSA, which modified the 1992 version, with a memo from NCCUSL explaining changes. OCSE reissued this version in March, 1997 along with revised comments.
In FY 1998, OCSE continued to work collaboratively with the States on interstate issues, holding retreats to discuss PRWORA enforcement mechanisms and approaches to resolve interstate cases with special problems and providing on-site UIFSA training to States and judicial organizations. Also, OCSE issued OCSE-AT-98-05 on implementing automated administrative enforcement in interstate cases.
Automation
During FY 1998, OCSE certified 18 more States as meeting Family Support Act of 1988 automation requirements. The States certified in FY 1998 were: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Guam, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Texas, Tennessee, and Vermont. This brought the total number of certified States to 35.
Another eight States, however, had certification reviews conducted in FY 1998, and six were eventually certified the following year. Therefore, by the end of FY 1998, 41 States had statewide operational CSE automated systems that met the functional requirements of the Family Support Act of 1988.
In addition, eight States (California, Indiana, Kansas, Michigan, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio) that requested the alternative systems penalty for missing the Family Support Act of 1988 deadline (October 1, 1997) were fined $24,318,515 in FY 1998.
To implement the automation provisions of PRWORA, OCSE:
- Published in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking regarding automation regulations in March, 1998 and the final regulation in August. The final regulation was disseminated to States via OCSE-AT-98-26;
- Disseminated a draft of the functional requirements for PRWORA automation requirements in April, 1998 as OCSE AT-98-13; and
- Disseminated the PRWORA financial distribution test deck generator in April, as OCSE-AT-98-15.
Also in FY 1998, OCSE's CSEnet project began assisting the States by developing the interface between the States' CSE systems and the CSEnet host - the server that directs interstate requests. CSEnet is a nationwide communications network linking State child support enforcement agencies. The network serves as a conduit for the transmission of information between State automated CSE systems. The purpose is to enhance States' management of interstate child support cases by providing a cost-effective and efficient communications network that is flexible and powerful enough to accommodate changes in policy, functionality, and increased State caseloads. By the end of FY 1998, the number of States connected to the network through fully automated interfaces rose from 13 to 33.
Technical Assistance and Training
The Division of State and Local Assistance (DSLA), includes the National Training Center, the Technical Assistance Branch, and the Special Initiatives Branch. During FY 1998, DSLA worked in partnership with the Training and Technical Assistance Work Group, the OCSE Regional Offices, other OCSE components, and a variety of national organizations. These included the National Child Support Enforcement Association, the Eastern Regional Interstate Enforcement Association, State CSE agencies, and financial organizations, to provide national leadership on special initiatives and develop national technical assistance (TA) and training strategies to address States' needs.
As a result of a State Needs Assessment, a "top ten" list of State TA priority areas was identified in FY 1998. It included: distribution and centralized collections; increasing collections; interstate; paternity establishment; automated systems; self-assessment; Tribal child support services; new hire reporting; fatherhood initiatives; and training. DSLA coordinated with other OCSE components and the Regional Offices to ensure that these priority areas were addressed.
- Several training courses were developed and delivered: a standardized 2-1/2 day curriculum on Interstate Case Processing/UIFSA; a 2-1/2 day stand-alone curriculum on Distribution; and the Training of Trainer (TOT) course. The TOT course was delivered to teams of regional and State staff. Those teams will, in turn, deliver the training at State and local agencies;
- Eleven Special Improvement Project grants, totaling $1,005,667, were awarded in areas such as paternity establishment, enforcement, fatherhood, IV-A/IV-D collaboration, and Tribal program services;
- Training modules were outlined as a beginning step in the development of a curriculum for IV-D Directors; and
- Resource materials were provided to States, including the Compendium of State Best Practices, 4th Edition; summaries of an interstate retreat; an issuance on funding opportunities for the employment and training of noncustodial parents; and a matrix on State license restrictions, suspensions and revocations.
Strides also were made in developing tools to promote the use of new technology and distance learning by:
- Beginning development of a series of computer based training (CBT) courses, including an orientation to child support; and
- Conducting the 8th National CSE Training Conference, "Meeting the Child Support Challenge: Children First" from September 28 - 30, 1998 in Washington, DC. Distance Learning was emphasized through use of both satellite and video-conferencing technology.
DLSA also provided the major staff work for OCSE's National Symposium on Children, Courts and the Federal Child Support Enforcement Program. The symposium brought together, for the first time, representatives from the judiciary, court administration, and State and Federal IV-D representatives in an educational forum identifying PRWORA requirements and their impact on courts.
The Expanded Federal Parent Locator Service
The Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS) is a computerized national network that provides Social Security Numbers, addresses, and employer and wage information to State and local CSE agencies to establish and enforce child support orders.
THE NATIONAL DIRECTORY OF NEW HIRES
Under PRWORA, the FPLS has been expanded to include the National Directory of New Hires (NDNH) and the Federal Case Registry (FCR). Under this expanded program, each State operates a State Directory of New Hires (SDNH), to which employers send information on newly hired employees within 20 days of hire. The SDNH forwards this data to the NDNH, along with quarterly wage (QW) data and unemployment insurance (UI) claimant information. From this national repository of data, the NDNH then provides key information to help State caseworkers establish paternities, establish and enforce child support orders, and initiate wage withholdings.
The NDNH was implemented on October 1, 1997, and as of the end of FY 1998 contained over 436 million new hire, QW, and UI records. To smooth the transition to the expanded system, the pre-existing FPLS, which accesses certain Federal databases, continued operation during FY 1998, using the NDNH as a new source of locate information. The NDNH responded to daily requests from State CSE agencies searching for noncustodial parents and putative fathers. During FY 1998, locate information was returned to States from the NDNH on over 1.2 million noncustodial parents and putative fathers.
THE FEDERAL CASE REGISTRY
The Federal Case Registry (FCR) was under development throughout FY 1998. Under this part of the program, every State will operate a State Case Registry (SCR) and send key child support case data to the FCR, which will automatically compare it with submissions from other States and with the employment data in the NDNH. Successful matches between child support obligors and employment and locate data will be returned to the appropriate States for further action.
To ensure that the FCR would be up and running by the October 1998 deadline, OCSE engaged in extensive database development, secured enormous computer and network capacity, and coordinated simultaneous systems development efforts with State agencies. The agency also developed adequate policy and systems safeguards to protect against unauthorized use of FCR data, particularly the Family Violence Indicator (FVI), which States can place on participants in child support cases who are at risk of harm from domestic or child abuse.
Intensive technical assistance was provided to help States develop and integrate these new systems, as well as prepare them to use the automatic match data expected after implementation of the FCR. At the end of FY 1998, over 40 States and Territories were expected to provide initial submissions of child support case information, with several more to follow shortly after. Implementation of the FCR was on schedule to occur as legislatively mandated in October 1998.
As a result of the automatic matching between the NDNH and FCR, State caseworkers will receive up-to-date locate and employment information from the expanded FPLS without having to make a locate request. This allows them to quickly initiate wage withholding, through which approximately 60 percent of child support is collected. Upon full implementation, the FPLS will give States the unprecedented ability to track noncustodial parents across State lines, which historically is one of the most difficult tasks in collecting child support payments.
FEDERAL PARENT LOCATOR SERVICE
The FPLS that operated before the expansion begun under PRWORA continued operating in FY 1998. The FPLS responds to locate requests from States and uses the most current information available from data sources external to the child support system, including the Internal Revenue Service, Social Security Administration, Department of Defense, Department of Veterans Affairs, and State Employment Security Agencies. During FY 1998, the FPLS processed over 5.5 million requests for information from State and local CSE agencies, an increase of approximately 12 percent over FY 97.
Federal Tax Refund and Administrative Offset Programs
OCSE continued operating the Federal Tax Refund Offset Program, which collects delinquent child support payments from Federal income tax refunds. In FY 1998, the program set another record by collecting $1.1 billion in delinquent child support. In addition, the first collections from the Administrative Offset Program were transferred to States at the beginning of FY 1998. The Administrative Offset Program, created under the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996 and reinforced in Executive Order 13019, collects delinquent child support from certain Federal payments, such as Federal retirement benefits, and payments to private vendors.
Passport Denial Program
Another provision of PRWORA made available the passport denial program as an enforcement mechanism. The passport denial program is operated as part of the Federal Offset Program and is designed to help States enforce the child support obligations of the most egregious delinquent obligors. Under the program, non-custodial parents certified by a State as having arrearages of at least $5,000 are submitted by OCSE to the Department of State, which "flags" their name and denies them a U.S. passport upon application. The State can then remove them from the program once arrangements have been made to satisfy the child support arrearage. The program was implemented in June 1998 and by the end of the fiscal year 30 to 40 passports per day were being denied to delinquent obligors.
Audit
The passage of PRWORA changed the direction and emphasis of audits of State CSE programs conducted by the OCSE Division of Audit. Audit requirements now emphasize performance and outcomes instead of processes. Beginning in FY 2000, as part of PRWORA and the Child Support Performance and Incentives Act of 1998, States will be eligible for incentives based on performance, as reported to OCSE. States will report performance indicator data to demonstrate how they meet performance standards. States that meet or exceed the standards for each of the performance measures will become eligible for incentive payments.
The Division of Audit will evaluate the completeness, reliability, and security of data produced by the States' reporting systems and the accuracy of the reporting systems used in calculating performance indicator data. Data Reliability Audits (DRAs) will be conducted to ensure that the States' systems produce data that is reliable and accurate.
During FY 1998, the Audit Division initiated the process to evaluate State systems that will support PRWORA-required performance indicator data. An audit guide for assessing the reliability of data was developed after numerous contacts and meetings with other Federal agencies. The Division developed a training course in Data Reliability Auditing and delivered it to audit staff. Pilot audits were initiated in eight States, for management purposes only, to perform a preliminary assessment of the data. Management was informed of the results of each pilot audit.
OCSE also is required to evaluate the adequacy of the financial management of a State's program. Specifically, OCSE Division of Audit is mandated to perform administrative cost audits and reviews to determine whether collections and disbursements of support payments are correctly and fully accounted for. The primary objectives of an administrative cost audit are:
- To determine whether costs claimed by the State for Federal reimbursement are allowable, allocable, and reasonable to the child support program;
- To determine if the State has sufficient internal controls in operation to effectively ensure that costs claimed are valid and adequately supported; and
- To ensure that States bear their fair share of child support costs.
In FY 1998, OCSE Division of Audit continued to evaluate the States' financial and statistical data reporting systems in order to determine whether the systems were sufficient for compiling information needed for the OCSE-158 report (the Child Support Enforcement Program Annual Data Summary). OCSE issued 17 Reporting System Review (RSR) reports, 12 Limited Cost review reports, and 1 Administrative Cost review report.
The RSRs identified system deficiencies in the areas of collections, expenditures, and statistical reporting for the OCSE-158. Improvements were suggested for the reporting systems in all States reviewed. Deficiencies noted included inaccurately reported collections, failure to report interest income and other program income, and failures to define or report data in compliance with Federal reporting requirements.
Deficiencies noted in the one Administrative Cost and 12 Limited Cost reviews included: training and other unallowable costs incorrectly charged to the IV-D program; incorrect allocation of indirect costs; overbilling of salaries and fringe benefits; lack of supporting documentation; claims related to fee for service agreements billed in excess of the amount allowable by law; and billing for nonIV-D costs. Also, program income and earned interest income were not reported as an offset to expenditures.
SELF-ASSESSMENT
In FY 1998, the Division of Audit continued its technical assistance activity in the area of Self-Assessment by finalizing the work that had been initiated by the Self-Assessment Core Workgroup in FY 1997. Finalizing the workgroup's efforts resulted in:
- Defining the compliance criteria that would be reviewed by each State;
- Developing and formalizing a process/methodology to be used to conduct the reviews; and
- Preparing a format to be used by the States to report review results to OCSE.
These component parts were packaged in an Action Transmittal (AT-98-12) and distributed to the States and other interested parties for implementation. In addition, the Division of Audit developed a training seminar to facilitate the States' first year efforts of conducting self-reviews of their IV-D programs. The seminar was presented by OCSE Division of Audit staff at one site in each of the 10 Federal Regions.
SERVICE TO CUSTOMERS
Division of Consumer Services
OCSE's Division of Consumer Services provides a wide variety of services to the agency's customer base. These include: operating an Internet Webpage; responding to customer, congressional, and White House mail; operating the National Resource Center; writing and publishing the CSE national newsletter, Child Support Report; and carrying out special assignments and initiatives, such as those related to the nation's Hispanic population and customer satisfaction surveys. Each of these is discussed below.
OCSE Webpage
In FY 1998, OCSE improved its Website by providing enhanced overall search capability to access information anywhere on the OCSE Home Page. OCSE continued to provide a significant amount of information about the CSE program on the Website. This includes basic descriptive information on the program, announcements about program-related events, current and past issues of the Child Support Report, annual reports, research reports, policy documents (relevant legislation and regulations in the form of Action Transmittals, Information Memoranda, Dear Colleague Letters and Policy Interpretation Questions), information related to child support enforcement from outside the agency, and links to State CSE home pages. The feedback feature of the Home Page allows individuals to make inquiries about their particular cases.
The Website was enhanced by the addition to the Home Page of a National Electronic Child Support Resource System (NECSRS). The primary emphasis of NECSRS is the transmission of electronic information. It provides child support professionals and the general public easy access and search capability to the wealth of CSE information available from the Federal Government, States, Tribes and localities.
Public Inquiries
In FY 1998, OCSE's public inquiries unit responded to nearly 4,800 written inquiries and more than 8,500 telephone calls. The public inquiries site on the Internet triggered an additional 1,500 messages with questions about child support laws and practices. As children and families are the beneficiaries of the child support program, on their behalf OCSE provides general and specific information and referrals, as appropriate, to custodial and noncustodial parents, advocates, Congressional staff, and members of special interest groups.
National Resource Center
The National Resource Center receives and responds to requests for child support publications and materials from a variety of sources. Requests by telephone and mail, for example, come from academic institutions, advocacy groups, CSE offices, Congressional staff, consultants, courts, employers, Federal agencies, judges, lawyers, private citizens, and State and local government. During FY 1998, more than 1,600 requests for publications were received by the Center. In response, more than 113,000 publications were mailed, including more than 30,000 copies of the popular Handbook on Child Support Enforcement, a how-to guide to help parents get the child support payments their children need and deserve.
Customer Satisfaction Surveys
The agency continued to be invested in customer service activities during FY 1998. A joint Federal/State/local child support customer service workgroup oversaw the development of a national customer satisfaction survey instrument. Another survey instrument, developed by the workgroup for States to use on a voluntary basis in determining the satisfaction of customers with their child support services, was provided to all child support directors for their use on a voluntary basis. In addition, an initiative was undertaken in FY 1998 to look at barriers that prevent or hinder some custodial parents in large urban areas from applying for CSE services.
OIG Survey of States' Satisfaction with OCSE
In FY 1998, as part of its customer satisfaction initiative, OCSE requested the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) to undertake a CSE State satisfaction survey. OCSE was the first Federal agency to request such a study.
Using a structured telephone format, OIG contacted all 50 States, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands--in most cases speaking to the child support program director. The survey covered each State's program highlights, working relationships with OCSE, and suggestions for improving service. Respondents were asked to differentiate their answers between the Central and Regional Offices for most questions. Six States (Colorado, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, South Carolina, and Texas) were selected for on-site visits and in-depth interviews.
The results of the survey are very supportive of the services OCSE provides to States and of the relationship between OCSE and its State partners. Forty-seven States are very or somewhat satisfied with OCSE's Central Office, while 49 States are very or somewhat satisfied with their Regional OCSE Office. A majority of States say their satisfaction with OCSE's services has increased over the past two years. Forty-four say it has increased with the Central Office and 28 say it has increased with the Regional Office.
Copies of the survey, which is in two volumes, may be obtained by calling the New York Regional OIG Office at (212) 264-1998, or via the Internet at http://oig.hhs.gov/ . Document reference numbers are OEI-02-97-00310, Child Support Enforcement State Satisfaction Survey, and OEI-02-97-00311, Child Support Enforcement State Satisfaction Survey Case Studies.
HISPANIC INITIATIVES
During FY 1998, OCSE's Hispanic action items included: informing OCSE policymakers about Hispanics; designing OCSE information about child support enforcement for Hispanic families; and partnering with national and community-based Latino organizations. OCSE has established in-house Hispanic expertise for outreach and communications, as well as the use of culturally effective media and methods.
OCSE materials are not just translated but adapted culturally for Latinos. OCSE publishes its FACT Sheet and other information in Spanish and makes program information available in Spanish on its Webpage.
CHILD SUPPORT REPORT
OCSE's national monthly newsletter Provides useful and timely information about the program to those who work in the field and to other interested individuals and organizations. By keeping abreast of national CSE issues and learning about what other States are doing, caseworkers, managers, and agency directors in the States can improve their own practices. Articles in FY 1998 included, "States Meet New Hire Deadline;" "Working with Low Income Fathers;" "State Legislators and Child Support;" "The NFL Responsible Fatherhood Campaign;" "CBT: A Tool for Maximizing Training Funds;" and "The Impact of Child Support Following Divorce."
SPECIAL INITIATIVES
The Big 8
This effort is targeted at those eight States that have the largest caseloads: California, Florida, Illinois, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas. Together, their caseloads and distributed collections make up nearly 50 percent of the national total.
The Big 8 partnership is designed as one of the key activities to achieve national goals and meet expectations that child support is an integral part of achieving real welfare reform. A central part of the effort is coordinating with senior officials and technical experts in Headquarters, Regional Offices, and the field to take advantage of the rich body of experience available in all States. The partnership seeks to build models and new processes targeted at high volume and high impact and that can be replicated in all States to benefit children and families. Priority issues before the group are systems development, cases without orders, and creative planning to dramatically increase paternity establishment and collections.
In FY 1998, the Big 8's Federal/State UIFSA Workgroup focused on ways to improve interstate collections. The Big 8 States were urged to implement the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act in a coordinated and uniform fashion and to treat each other's interstate requests as if they were in-State actions.
Child Support Enforcement Consultation Project
In the spring of 1998 the Office of Child Support Enforcement began a project to re-examine the financing of the program at the national and State levels. The project involved commissioning a national study and organizing an extensive series of meetings around the country to consult broadly with the States, advocates, and other interested parties.
The project was undertaken because of the interest--within the Administration, in Congress, and among some of the advocacy groups and other national organizations--in streamlining the structure of child support enforcement financing.
This effort to consult broadly on child support enforcement financing was first announced in the President's Budget for FY 1999. It was described as a broad-scale effort to review the mechanisms by which child support enforcement programs are financed at the State, local and national levels, and to examine policy and legislative options for maintaining and strengthening the program, assuring reasonable costs to the public and fair distribution of the financial burden, and providing for an effective set of fiscal incentives. OCSE's commitment to consulting with States, advocates, and other stakeholders on financing was reiterated in the FY 2000 Budget.
In the summer of 1998 officials within the Administration met to outline the key topics and devise a set of questions to be used in the course of the nationwide consultation effort. On July 31, in Washington, DC, the first of several public consultation meetings was held to discuss child support financing in general. That meeting involved major advocacy and intergovernmental groups, Congressional staff, the Congressional Research Service, the General Accounting Office, OMB and HHS staff, and a number of State child support officials.
Similar sessions were held around the country to solicit advice and comment from State officials, advocates, and other interested parties.
Also in 1998, the Lewin Group worked on a contract to study the means by which States finance the State share of funding for the administration of their child support enforcement programs.
Tribal Activities
Enactment of PRWORA authorized for the first time the direct funding of Tribal child support programs. In the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (P.L.105-277), Congress amended PRWORA to give OCSE greater flexibility in providing direct funding for Tribal CSE programs. This law requires OCSE to promulgate regulations before issuing grants directly to Tribes.
In the spirit of the Presidential Executive Memoranda of April 29, 1994 and May 14, 1998, and the DHHS consultation policy, OCSE consulted extensively in FY 1998 with Indian Tribes and Tribal organizations and other interested parties before beginning the task of drafting proposed rules. Six government-to-government consultations were held across the country to allow as many people as possible to have input into the regulation process.
Each of the consultations had two parts. The first provided an overview of the national CSE program. This session was designed for those persons who were new to the Tribal CSE arena, as well as for those who needed additional background information about paternity establishment and child support enforcement.
The second part of the consultation session was devoted to Federal staff listening to Tribal input regarding the regulations. To help focus the discussions, participants were divided into three tracks: Tribal leadership, legal, and social work.
In addition to the on-site consultations, OCSE established a Tribal CSE "800" number for phone inquiries and suggestions relative to the development of the regulations.
SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS AND TRIBAL PLANNING GRANTS
Under the Tribal Planning Grant and Special Improvement Project (SIP) Grant program announcements, OCSE awarded four grants to foster the planning, development, and improvement of Tribal CSE programs. The recipients of planning grants were the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians in Wisconsin and the Central Council of Tlingit-Haida Tribes in Alaska. The SIP grants were awarded to two Washington State Tribes: the Colville Tribe and the Puyallup Tribe.
The purpose of these grants was to foster the development and improvement of Tribal CSE programs. OCSE also used the grants as laboratories to learn about the development and operation of Tribal child support programs and barriers to effective program implementation.
Project Save Our Children
Project Save Our Children (PSOC) is based on a model project in Columbus, Ohio, launched in 1998. The Midwest law enforcement task force, formed by OCSE and the HHS Inspector General's Office, joined with Justice Department prosecutors and investigators, State child support agencies, and local law enforcement officials to coordinate efforts in a new investigative initiative. Since that beginning, four more sites have been established: in Baltimore, Maryland; Dallas, Texas; New York, New York; and Sacramento, California.
The PSOC initiative covers 18 States and the District of Columbia: California, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia. These States account for 65 percent of the nation's child support cases. State child support offices refer their most serious cases to PSOC sites, where trained investigative staff locate the violator, document information needed for prosecution, and turn the cases over to prosecutors.
PSOC is targeted at the group of parents who over long periods of time willfully fail to take responsibility for their children. The goal of PSOC is to increase child support collections through the identification, investigation, and, when warranted, prosecution of flagrant, delinquent child support offenders. By prosecuting parents who will not provide support, a pointed message of responsibility is sent which may help to give their children a better chance in life.
To date more than 1200 cases have been received. Eight hundred of them have been referred to investigative units, and 275 arrests have been made. More than $5.3 million in restitution has been ordered.
Collaboration and Partnerships
In FY 1998, OCSE and other ACF programs continued their collaborations to promote child support services for custodial families participating in ACF programs, including Head Start, Child Care, Child Welfare, Community Services, Family Assistance and Developmental Disabilities/Mental Retardation. OCSE also entered into a partnership agreement with the National Head Start Association to work together to foster local partnerships between Head Start Programs and Child Support Offices nationwide.
Six States--Alaska, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota and Missouri--are implementing demonstration grants awarded by OCSE to develop models of collaboration between the Child Support, Head Start, and Child Care Programs. South Carolina has a grant to demonstrate using the FPLS to speed the location of parents of children in foster care to free these children for permanent adoption. The total amount of these awards was $275,000. OCSE staff continued to speak and conduct workshops on child support services at conferences and meetings of the other ACF programs.
Responsible Fatherhood Demonstrations
OCSE provides $1.5 million annually to fund Responsible Fatherhood demonstrations under section 1115 of the Social Security Act. Projects in eight states (California, New Hampshire, Maryland, Colorado, Massachusetts, Wisconsin, Missouri and Washington) currently assist low income noncustodial parents to become better connected with their children following separation through providing employment and training assistance, peer group motivation, access and visitation services, and social services as needed. Over 300 parents have been assisted by these projects through FY 1998.
Grants to States for Access and Visitation
Section 391 of PRWORA authorized $10,000,000 annually to enable States to establish and administer programs to support and facilitate noncustodial parents access to and visitation of their children. Activities funded in FY 1998 included: mediation, counseling, parental education, development of parenting plans, visitation enforcement, monitored visitation, neutral drop off and pickup, supervised visitation, and development of guidelines for visitation and custody.
Data for 29 States indicates that almost 20,000 individuals received services. Most common services: parenting education, development of parenting plans, and mediation. Most States used a mix of services, urban and rural areas being almost equally served. Of those served, 19 percent were African Americans, 10 percent Hispanic, 26 percent unmarried, 25 percent separated, and 48 percent divorced.
Most of the service providers were either nonprofit agencies or courts. Individuals were referred to services by the courts, IV-D or welfare agencies, and others, as well as by self-referral. Services were both mandatory and voluntary, as determined by the State.
Domestic Violence
In FY 1998, OCSE staff worked to implement the provisions in PRWORA promoting the interaction of child support enforcement and domestic violence services. These provisions included: cooperation and good cause; the safeguarding of information requirements, the family violence indicator, and the family violence option.
OCSE's work in this area took a number of forms, including the award of grants to Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, and New York to examine various practices regarding cooperation/good cause and domestic violence.
OCSE staff served on the DHHS steering committee on domestic violence, composed of the DHHS OPDIVs, as well as the planning committee, and spoke at two national NCSEA conferences on domestic violence and child support. OCSE staff also served on an editorial board composed of domestic violence experts to assist the National Resource Center on Domestic Violence to formulate and issue several research papers on domestic violence and welfare reform. These articles were then disseminated to all child support agencies by Dear Colleague letters.
OCSE also helped to disseminate information on innovative practices involving child support and domestic violence, including Washington State's Address Confidentiality program and Anne Arundel County, Maryland's training in domestic violence of all its child support workers. The agency also began a consultation process with States to inform them of the family violence indicator requirements and to help them develop mechanisms for flagging cases.
International Activities
The pace of Federal international child support activities established under PRWORA increased during FY 1998. Initial negotiations establishing the newly authorized Federal level international reciprocity agreements were held with many nations. Supported by local U.S. embassy staff, negotiating teams including Department of State and IV-D officials met with their counterparts in 20 nations during the year to explore increasing and formalizing child support cooperation with U.S. jurisdictions.
On October 6, 1997, OCSE issued Dear Colleague Letter 97-65, announcing the conclusion of the first Federal reciprocity agreement with Ireland. In July, 1998, Dear Colleague letter 98-67 announced that the second Federal level reciprocity agreement had become effective with the Slovak Republic. Federal level reciprocity agreements, authorized under 42 U.S.C. 659A, are based on the establishment of procedures in the foreign country which provide that CSE services, including legal and administrative assistance, will be provided at no cost to all U.S. residents.
RESEARCH
During FY 1998, OCSE provided second year funding to 22 research and demonstration projects in 16 States. The total amount awarded for all the grants was approximately $1.0 million. As indicated below, these projects, which are envisioned as 3-year demonstrations, encompass a wide array of child support activities.
Child Support Assurance
- (Minnesota): Design a child support assurance program model that is adapted to the post-PRWORA world;
Domestic Violence
- (Massachusetts): Test different approaches to handling TANF/IV-D cases with a history of domestic violence;
- (Minnesota): Interviewing and Client Referral Services Demonstrate and evaluate a coordinated IV-A/IV-D process to increase the cooperation of custodial parents who receive public assistance in establishing paternity and obtaining child support payments;
- (Missouri): Increase knowledge about domestic violence, increase the safety of victims of domestic violence and increase collections on behalf of these families;
Fatherhood
- (Maryland): Assist noncustodial parents who need social, employment, or access and visitation services with a comprehensive mix of services and motivation to assist them to be responsible parents;
- (Washington State): Increase the incomes, child support compliance, and fatherhood involvement of low or no income custodial parents;
Head Start and Child Care
- (Alaska, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri): To develop and implement models of collaboration between Child Support Enforcement, Child Care, and Head Start programs at State and local levels;
- (South Carolina): Demonstrate the use of location services available to support enforcement agencies to facilitate family preservation through the placement of children currently in foster care with a biological parent.
Parenting
-
(California, Missouri, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, Colorado): Providing noncustodial parents with employment and access and visitation assistance through a comprehensive mix of services and motivation to become responsible parents;
Review and Adjustment
- (Alaska): A statewide project to use modern technology to periodically collect income information from various sources to be used for reviewing and adjusting child support orders;
- (Maine): Demonstrate the effectiveness of an on-going automated interface with the courts in increasing the number of modifications of child support orders through automated review and adjustment;
- (Oklahoma): Inform parents about new laws regarding requesting review and adjustment through an intense public information campaign; and
- (Vermont): Test streamlined methods for reviewing and adjusting child support orders by concentrating on an automated approach.
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A. FY 98 Program Results
APPENDIX B. Regional and State Box Scores
APPENDIX D. FY 98 Action Transmittals
APPENDIX E. State Child Support Enforcement Agencies (This information is outdated and has been removed on 03/11/2009)
APPENDIX F. OCSE Organization Charts (not included)
APPENDIX A. FISCAL YEAR 98 PROGRAM RESULTS
The total IV-D Child Support caseload is an average of the quarterly case counts of all noncustodial parents who are now or may eventually be obligated under law for the support of one or more dependent children. Cases where families were referred to the Child Support agency because they are receiving TANF and title IV-E Foster Care are classified as TANF/FC cases; cases where the custodial parents applied for child support enforcement services or are receiving Medicaid but not TANF services are called non-TANF cases. Nationally, the Child Support Enforcement program had 19.4 million cases in FY 1998, an increase of 1.9 percent over fiscal year 1997 and an increase of 4.3 percent since FY 1994. During the five-year period from 1994 to 1998, the non-TANF portion of the caseload increased by 33 percent, while the TANF and TANF Arrears caseload has decreased by 18 percent.
1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Paternities (Thousands) | 676 | 932 | 1,058 | 1,294 | 1,462 |
In-Hospital Acknowledgements (Thousands) | 84 | 273 | 325 | 480 | 614 |
IV-D Paternities (Thousands) | 592 | 659 | 733 | 814 | 848 |
Some States voluntarily report in-hospital information to OCSE. In-hospital numbers include an unknown number of acknowledgments for children in the IV-D caseload and children outside the IV-D caseload.
The number of children for whom paternity has been established has grown steadily over the past five years. The combined total of in-hospital paternities acknowledged and IV-D paternities established was 1,462,565 for FY 1998. In FY 1994, 592,048 IV-D paternities were established by the State Child Support Enforcement agencies. By FY 1998, this had increased by 43 percent to 848,178 IV-D paternities established. The total number of in-hospital paternities acknowledgments for FY 1998 was 614,387. In-hospital paternities are reported on a voluntary basis. In FY 1998, 41 States reported in-hospital paternities.
1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Support Orders Established (Millions) | 1,024,675 | 1,051,336 | 1,092,992 | 1,155,973 | 1,147,701 |
Due to systems problems, the number of support orders for the State of Tennessee are not included in the total number for FY 97.
The legal establishment of an order to pay child support is a prerequisite to collecting child support. In FY 1998, the Child Support Enforcement program established 1,147,701 support orders a decrease of 1 percent from the previous year. The number of child support orders established have increased by more than 12 percent over the last five years.
Total | TANF & Arrears | Non-TANF | |
---|---|---|---|
Total Cases (Millions) | 19.4 | 8.5 | 10.9 |
Without Orders (Millions) | 7.9 | 3.6 | 4.3 |
With Orders(Millions) | 11.5 | 4.9 | 6.6 |
States report the number of cases remaining open on the last day of each quarter that have support orders established. Of the 19.4 million cases in the child support caseload in FY 1998, 59 percent had support orders (57.7% of TANF cases and 60.8% of Non-TANF cases had orders).
1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Cases (Millions) | 3.4 | 3.7 | 3.9 | 4.2 | 4.5 |
TANF (Millions) | 1.2 | 1.3 | 1.3 | 1.4 | 1.4 |
Non-TANF (Millions) | 2.2 | 2.4 | 2.6 | 2.8 | 3.1 |
States report the number of cases in which a collection was made during the second month of each quarter. In FY 1998 there were 4.5 million cases with a collection in the child support enforcement program. This is an increase of 7 percent from the previous fiscal year and a 32 percent increase since 1994.
1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Collections (Billions) | 9.8 | 10.8 | 12.0 | 13.3 | 14.3 |
TANF (Billions) | 2.5 | 2.7 | 2.8 | 2.8 | 2.6 |
Non-TANF (Billions) | 7.3 | 8.1 | 9.2 | 10.5 | 11.7 |
Total child support collections are the amounts collected by the program and distributed during the year on behalf of families receiving benefits from the TANF, Title IV-E foster care and Medicaid programs and for non-TANF families who have applied for child support services. In FY 1998, collections reached a record high of $14.3 billion, a 7.4 percent increase from the previous fiscal year. Non-TANF collections accounted for almost 82 percent of the total amount collected. Total collections have increased by 46 percent since 1994.
1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
TANF (Billions) | 2.5 | 2.7 | 2.8 | 2.8 | 2.6 |
TANF collections, including title IV-E Foster Care collections, amounted to $2.6 billion in FY 1998. This is a decrease of 6.8 percent over the previous year. This drop in TANF collections is a result of the decrease in the TANF caseload.
State Share | Federal Share | Pmt to Families | Incentive Points | Medical Support | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
TANF Collections (Millions ) | $1,089 | $961 | $152 | $396 | $52 |
The Federal and State governments retain portions of TANF child support collections as reimbursement for (Title IV-A) TANF payments to families. In FY 1998, States kept $1.1 billion as their share of TANF payment reimbursements and received an additional $396 million in collection incentives from the Federal share of TANF collections. The Federal share of the $2.6 billion collected in TANF cases amounted to $961 million. In FY 1998, TANF families received over $152 million in support collections and $52 million in medical support payments through the Child Support Enforcement program.
1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Non-AFDC Collections(Billions) | $7.3 | $8.1 | $9.2 | $10.5 | $11.7 |
Non-TANF distributed collections are child support payments made on behalf of and distributed to families who have applied for Child Support Enforcement services. In FY 1998 non-TANF collections rose to $11.7 billion, an increase of 11.2 percent since the previous year and a 60.2 percent increase since FY 1994.
1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Interstate Collections (Millions) | $785 | $837 | $898 | $983 | $1,032 |
Collections made on behalf of families in other States totaled a record $1,032 million in FY 1998, an increase of 5 percent. In five years, interstate collections rose by 31 percent. A State's distributed collection amount does not include collections made on behalf of other States. Hence, total distributed collections do not reflect the efforts put forth by one State to collect for another. In some cases, a substantial amount of child support is collected by one State on behalf of other States.
Wage Withholding | Unemployment Intercept Offset | Federal Tax Offset | State Tax Offset | Other | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Collections (% of Total) | 55.8% | 1.4% | 7.2% | 0.9% | 34.7% |
There are various ways in which child support payments are made. Wage withholding, withholding of unemployment compensation, and State income tax refund offsets are all powerful enforcement techniques. However, wage withholding is by far the most effective, totaling 56 percent of all collections in FY 1998. Federal and State income tax refund offsets contributed 7 percent and 1 percent, respectively; and the withholding of unemployment compensation accounted for 1 percent of total collections. The remaining 35 percent of collections was obtained from parents who sent their child support payments directly to the State Child Support Enforcement agency, payments received through other enforcement techniques, or collections received from other States.
Current Year Support | Prior Year Support | |
---|---|---|
Amount Due (Billions) | $18.7 | $46.9 |
Amount Received (Billions) | $9.5 | $3.9 |
Accounts receivable data present the total dollar amount of child support payments due and received by IV-D agencies. Information reported for FY 1998 indicates that $18.7 billion in current support and $46.9 billion in prior years support was due. Almost $9.5 billion or 51 percent of the current support due was collected. Of prior years support due, only $3.9 billion or 8 percent was collected. Comparisons of States' accounts receivable data are complicated because States count arrearages differently based on State laws and practices. For example, some States include unreimbursed public assistance as a debt and others do not. Some States have statutes of limitations governing collection of debt, some assess interest on arrearages which becomes part of the amount due, and some have policies for writing off bad debts.
1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Expenditures (Billions $) | 2.5 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 3.4 | 3.6 |
Federal Share (Billions $) | 1.7 | 2.1 | 2.0 | 2.3 | 2.4 |
State Share (Billions $) | 0.8 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 1.2 |
Total expenditures are the net amounts of combined Federal and State funds expended on the operation of the CSE program. The amounts reported are reduced by the amount of program income (fees and costs recovered in excess of fees, interest earned, and other program income received) received by the States. Total expenditures were $3.6 billion in FY 1998, an increase of almost 5 percent over FY 1997. Of this $3.6 billion, $2.4 billion was the Federal share and $1.2 billion was the States' share. The increases in program costs over the last five years are heavily impacted by the costs of developing and implementing automated systems, as required by the Family Support Act of 1988.
1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total (Dollars) | $3.85 | $3.59 | $3.95 | $3.90 | $4.00 |
Non-TANF (Dollars) | $2.85 | $2.70 | $3.01 | $3.07 | $3.26 |
TANF (Dollars) | $1.00 | $0.89 | $0.94 | $0.83 | $0.74 |
Nationally, $4.00 in child support payments are collected for every $1.00 spent to administer the Child Support Enforcement program. During the five-year period FY 1994 to FY 1998, the ratio of total child support collections to total administrative costs has fluctuated and remains in the vicinity of $4.00.
APPENDIX B. REGIONAL AND STATE BOX SCORES
Regional Box Scores
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $637,409,235 | 8.1 |
* TANF/FC | $182,234,528 | -7.3 |
* Non-TANF | $455,174,707 | 15.7 |
Total Expenditures | $156,302,000 | 0.0 |
Cost Effectiveness | $4.08 | 8.1 |
* TANF/FC | $1.17 | -7.3 |
* Non-TANF | $2.91 | 15.8 |
Paternities Established | 48,619 | 5.9 |
* IV-D | 24,855 | -6.5 |
* Acknowledgements | 23,764 | 23.1 |
Orders Established | 57,368 | 10.6 |
Locations | 211,994 | -25.0 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 2,124 | 1.5 |
Total Caseload | 714,236 | 2.2 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 378,925 | -6.0 |
* Non-TANF | 335,311 | 13.5 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $1,567,632,821 | 4.1 |
* TANF/FC | $268,030,029 | -15.3 |
* Non-TANF | $1,299,602,792 | 9.2 |
Total Expenditures | $355,342,000 | 2.9 |
Cost Effectiveness | $4.41 | 1.1 |
* TANF/FC | $0.75 | -17.7 |
* Non-TANF | $3.66 | 6.1 |
Paternities Established | 147,395 | 0.1 |
* IV-D | 49,338 | -20.9 |
* Acknowledgements | 98,057 | 15.6 |
Orders Established | 82,588 | -1.7 |
Locations | 490,424 | 10.0 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 5,898 | 1.3 |
Total Caseload | 2,016,484 | 0.8 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 855,868 | 0.5 |
* Non-TANF | 1,160,616 | 1.0 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $1,861,063,233 | 4.0 |
* TANF/FC | $217,974,840 | -8.3 |
* Non-TANF | $1,643,088,393 | 5.9 |
Total Expenditures | $349,211,000 | 10.4 |
Cost Effectiveness | $5.33 | -5.7 |
* TANF/FC | $0.62 | -16.9 |
* Non-TANF | $4.71 | -4.0 |
Paternities Established | 141,838 | -6.6 |
* IV-D | 93,014 | -20.1 |
* Acknowledgements | 48,824 | 37.7 |
Orders Established | 168,621 | -9.3 |
Locations | 393,063 | 4.5 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 5,848 | 9.0 |
Total Caseload | 1,902,564 | -6.0 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 699,637 | -15.3 |
* Non-TANF | 1,202,927 | 0.3 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $1,932,072,469 | 7.2 |
* TANF/FC | $295,657,492 | -24.7 |
* Non-TANF | $1,636,414,977 | 16.1 |
Total Expenditures | $579,219,000 | 13.7 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.34 | -5.7 |
* TANF/FC | $0.51 | -33.8 |
* Non-TANF | $2.83 | 2.1 |
Paternities Established | 231,477 | 38.3 |
* IV-D | 137,654 | 29.2 |
* Acknowledgements | 93,823 | 54.4 |
Orders Established | 198,419 | 19.4 |
Locations | 713,483 | -4.0 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 8,715 | 1.9 |
Total Caseload | 3,720,434 | 5.0 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 1,269,493 | -9.9 |
* Non-TANF | 2,450,941 | 14.8 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $3,724,439,063 | 7.4 |
* TANF/FC | $481,115,000 | -9.4 |
* Non-TANF | $3,243,324,063 | 10.5 |
Total Expenditures | $718,243,000 | 2.7 |
Cost Effectiveness | $5.19 | 4.7 |
* TANF/FC | $0.67 | -11.7 |
* Non-TANF | $4.52 | 7.6 |
Paternities Established | 193,513 | -5.7 |
* IV-D | 121,814 | -16.5 |
* Acknowledgements | 71,699 | 20.6 |
Orders Established | 192,338 | -12.3 |
Locations | 820,274 | 3.4 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 11,962 | 9.4 |
Total Caseload | 4,494,166 | 2.7 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 2,309,471 | -0.9 |
* Non-TANF | 2,184,695 | 6.8 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $1,078,932,401 | 10.3 |
* TANF/FC | $190,159,202 | 0.8 |
* Non-TANF | $888,773,199 | 12.5 |
Total Expenditures | $310,189,000 | 2.0 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.48 | 8.1 |
* TANF/FC | $0.61 | -1.2 |
* Non-TANF | $2.87 | 10.3 |
Paternities Established | 186,490 | 39.7 |
* IV-D | 119,922 | 63.4 |
* Acknowledgements | 66,568 | 10.8 |
Orders Established | 76,413 | -2.5 |
Locations | 560,247 | -28.0 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 4,692 | 2.1 |
Total Caseload | 1,789,363 | 12.4 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 460,880 | -22.1 |
* Non-TANF | 1,328,483 | 32.8 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $711,190,957 | 0.4 |
* TANF/FC | $138,154,741 | 4.4 |
* Non-TANF | $573,036,216 | -0.5 |
Total Expenditures | $189,094,000 | 5.2 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.76 | -4.6 |
* TANF/FC | $0.73 | -0.8 |
* Non-TANF | $3.03 | -5.4 |
Paternities Established | 69,573 | 18.5 |
* IV-D | 38,524 | 10.5 |
* Acknowledgements | 31,049 | 30.2 |
Orders Established | 59,891 | 13.2 |
Locations | 667,598 | 37.7 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 2,463 | -2.9 |
Total Caseload | 879,500 | 11.6 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 379,131 | 8.6 |
* Non-TANF | 500,369 | 13.9 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $377,910,055 | 13.4 |
* TANF/FC | $71,297,479 | -13.7 |
* Non-TANF | $306,612,576 | 22.3 |
Total Expenditures | $110,963,000 | 8.3 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.41 | 4.7 |
* TANF/FC | $0.64 | -20.3 |
* Non-TANF | $2.76 | 12.9 |
Paternities Established | 26,389 | -2.7 |
* IV-D | 11,567 | -6.6 |
* Acknowledgements | 14,822 | 0.6 |
Orders Established | 24,267 | -14.1 |
Locations | 292,794 | 29.8 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 1,834 | 6.7 |
Total Caseload | 500,416 | -2.6 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 215,220 | -11.5 |
* Non-TANF | 285,196 | 5.4 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $1,655,400,874 | 15.9 |
* TANF/FC | $652,205,799 | 10.2 |
* Non-TANF | $1,003,195,075 | 20.0 |
Total Expenditures | $621,621,000 | -0.9 |
Cost Effectiveness | $2.66 | 16.9 |
* TANF/FC | $1.05 | 11.2 |
* Non-TANF | $1.61 | 21.0 |
Paternities Established | 374,116 | 19.3 |
* IV-D | 229,374 | 6.8 |
* Acknowledgements | 144,742 | 46.6 |
Orders Established | 241,334 | 0.7 |
Locations | 984,627 | -13.3 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 9,831 | 20.2 |
Total Caseload | 2,583,850 | -4.5 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 1,568,765 | -8.5 |
* Non-TANF | 1,015,085 | 2.5 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $801,655,573 | 5.1 |
* TANF/FC | $153,100,513 | -11.4 |
* Non-TANF | $648,555,060 | 9.9 |
Total Expenditures | $199,151,000 | 4.8 |
Cost Effectiveness | $4.03 | 0.3 |
* TANF/FC | $0.77 | -15.4 |
* Non-TANF | $3.26 | 4.9 |
Paternities Established | 43,155 | -1.4 |
* IV-D | 22,116 | 5.9 |
* Acknowledgements | 21,039 | -8.1 |
Orders Established | 46,462 | -6.0 |
Locations | 1,450,542 | 23.3 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 2,865 | 6.5 |
Total Caseload | 818,436 | 0.5 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 368,414 | -5.7 |
* Non-TANF | 450,022 | 6.1 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $14,347,706,681 | 7.4 |
* TANF/FC | $2,649,929,623 | -6.8 |
* Non-TANF | $11,697,777,058 | 11.2 |
Total Expenditures | $3,589,335,000 | 4.6 |
Cost Effectiveness | $4.00 | 2.6 |
* TANF/FC | $0.74 | -10.9 |
* Non-TANF | $3.26 | 6.3 |
Paternities Established | 1,462,565 | 13.0 |
* IV-D | 848,178 | 4.2 |
* Acknowledgements | 614,387 | 27.9 |
Orders Established | 1,147,701 | -0.7 |
Locations | 6,585,046 | 2.2 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 56,232 | 7.1 |
Total Caseload | 19,419,449 | 1.9 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 8,505,804 | -6.6 |
* Non-TANF | 10,913,645 | 9.7 |
Illinois, and Wisconsin FTEs are estimated using previous years' data for FY 98.
State Box Scores
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $172,407,203 | 1.1 |
* TANF/FC | $15,486,257 | -33.7 |
* Non-TANF | $156,920,946 | 6.6 |
Total Expenditures | $50,747,000 | 23.0 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.40 | -17.8 |
* TANF/FC | $0.31 | -45.3 |
* Non-TANF | $3.09 | -13.4 |
Paternities Established | 9,995 | -17.4 |
* IV-D | 5,418 | -17.4 |
* Acknowledgements | 4,577 | -17.4 |
Orders Established | 21,176 | 19.8 |
Locations | 48,914 | 36.7 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 699 | -5.5 |
Total Caseload | 365,914 | -0.8 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 114,543 | -1.3 |
* Non-TANF | 251,371 | -0.7 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $64,262,422 | -1.0 |
* TANF/FC | $17,690,635 | -14.3 |
* Non-TANF | $46,571,787 | 5.2 |
Total Expenditures | $18,244,000 | -2.3 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.52 | 1.2 |
* TANF/FC | $0.97 | -12.2 |
* Non-TANF | $2.55 | 7.5 |
Paternities Established | 3,976 | 23.2 |
* IV-D | 1,806 | 76.2 |
* Acknowledgements | 2,170 | -1.5 |
Orders Established | 3,146 | -4.1 |
Locations | 16,438 | -15.8 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 235 | -1.3 |
Total Caseload | 59,272 | 2.5 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 28,901 | -12.2 |
* Non-TANF | 30,371 | 21.8 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $144,347,745 | 9.3 |
* TANF/FC | $20,631,588 | -20.7 |
* Non-TANF | $123,716,157 | 16.7 |
Total Expenditures | $54,188,000 | 10.4 |
Cost Effectiveness | $2.66 | -1.1 |
* TANF/FC | $0.38 | -28.3 |
* Non-TANF | $2.28 | 5.6 |
Paternities Established | 30,159 | 29.2 |
* IV-D | 14,544 | 39.1 |
* Acknowledgements | 15,615 | 21.1 |
Orders Established | 9,121 | 21.3 |
Locations | 40,945 | -36.7 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 967 | -12.3 |
Total Caseload | 328,944 | 21.1 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 138,278 | 4.2 |
* Non-TANF | 190,666 | 37.3 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $99,373,428 | 8.7 |
* TANF/FC | $14,759,855 | -25.7 |
* Non-TANF | $84,613,573 | 18.2 |
Total Expenditures | $34,541,000 | -25.4 |
Cost Effectiveness | $2.88 | 45.7 |
* TANF/FC | $0.43 | 0.1 |
* Non-TANF | $2.45 | 58.4 |
Paternities Established | 16,138 | 29.8 |
* IV-D | 9,273 | 30.2 |
* Acknowledgements | 6,865 | 29.2 |
Orders Established | 9,070 | 22.0 |
Locations | 80,279 | -1.5 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 633 | 0.0 |
Total Caseload | 173,200 | 25.7 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 72,091 | 12.5 |
* Non-TANF | 101,109 | 37.2 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $1,372,354,157 | 16.9 |
* TANF/FC | $611,023,488 | 12.2 |
* Non-TANF | $761,330,669 | 20.9 |
Total Expenditures | $515,391,000 | 0.3 |
Cost Effectiveness | $2.72 | 19.0 |
* TANF/FC | $1.25 | 17.9 |
* Non-TANF | $1.47 | 19.9 |
Paternities Established | 337,262 | 17.9 |
* IV-D | 210,340 | 5.0 |
* Acknowledgements | 126,922 | 47.8 |
Orders Established | 223,541 | 0.4 |
Locations | 723,673 | -16.6 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 8,122 | 26.2 |
Total Caseload | 2,092,732 | -8.1 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 1,375,032 | -9.8 |
* Non-TANF | 717,700 | -4.6 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $140,311,116 | 13.6 |
* TANF/FC | $29,957,797 | -18.9 |
* Non-TANF | $110,353,319 | 27.4 |
Total Expenditures | $45,083,000 | 11.9 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.11 | 1.4 |
* TANF/FC | $0.66 | -28.0 |
* Non-TANF | $2.45 | 13.9 |
Paternities Established | 13,375 | 5.0 |
* IV-D | 5,065 | -4.3 |
* Acknowledgements | 8,310 | 11.7 |
Orders Established | 9,982 | 3.9 |
Locations | 73,582 | 13.6 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 696 | 6.6 |
Total Caseload | 216,428 | 2.5 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 104,246 | -4.0 |
* Non-TANF | 112,182 | 9.4 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $154,373,662 | 9.1 |
* TANF/FC | $56,903,538 | -5.7 |
* Non-TANF | $97,470,124 | 20.0 |
Total Expenditures | $47,853,000 | 4.3 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.23 | 4.7 |
* TANF/FC | $1.19 | -9.5 |
* Non-TANF | $2.04 | 15.3 |
Paternities Established | 13,322 | 25.8 |
* IV-D | 7,082 | -15.0 |
* Acknowledgements | 6,240 | 176.6 |
Orders Established | 31,995 | 30.0 |
Locations | 51,419 | -14.1 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 570 | 12.6 |
Total Caseload | 253,977 | 8.1 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 144,813 | 1.5 |
* Non-TANF | 109,164 | 18.3 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $32,715,624 | 9.4 |
* TANF/FC | $4,689,310 | -16.7 |
* Non-TANF | $28,026,314 | 15.5 |
Total Expenditures | $16,545,000 | 66.5 |
Cost Effectiveness | $1.97 | -34.5 |
* TANF/FC | $0.28 | -50.6 |
* Non-TANF | $1.69 | -30.8 |
Paternities Established | 3,465 | -40.3 |
* IV-D | 2,364 | 34.3 |
* Acknowledgements | 1,101 | -72.7 |
Orders Established | 6,814 | 327.7 |
Locations | 3,308 | -57.4 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 215 | 0.0 |
Total Caseload | 106,887 | 2.2 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 42,616 | 4.9 |
* Non-TANF | 64,271 | 0.0 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $42,005,824 | 8.8 |
* TANF/FC | $7,594,950 | -4.6 |
* Non-TANF | $34,410,874 | 12.3 |
Total Expenditures | $16,490,000 | -4.9 |
Cost Effectiveness | $2.55 | 14.5 |
* TANF/FC | $0.46 | 0.1 |
* Non-TANF | $2.09 | 18.2 |
Paternities Established | 4,477 | -26.9 |
* IV-D | 2,946 | -4.5 |
* Acknowledgements | 1,531 | -49.7 |
Orders Established | 2,354 | 0.6 |
Locations | 62,045 | 71.5 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 184 | -8.0 |
Total Caseload | 60,634 | 3.1 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 24,600 | -5.0 |
* Non-TANF | 36,034 | 9.5 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $507,112,518 | 4.6 |
* TANF/FC | $61,624,671 | -38.5 |
* Non-TANF | $445,487,847 | 15.9 |
Total Expenditures | $166,882,000 | 18.8 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.04 | -11.9 |
* TANF/FC | $0.37 | -48.1 |
* Non-TANF | $2.67 | -2.4 |
Paternities Established | 59,760 | 101.6 |
* IV-D | 48,385 | 135.6 |
* Acknowledgements | 18,852 | 106.9 |
Orders Established | 25,958 | 24.3 |
Locations | 40,829 | -1.4 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 2,796 | 0.7 |
Total Caseload | 982,996 | 4.5 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 342,421 | -5.1 |
* Non-TANF | 640,575 | 10.5 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $300,772,452 | 8.2 |
* TANF/FC | $58,404,611 | -24.3 |
* Non-TANF | $242,367,841 | 20.6 |
Total Expenditures | $85,109,000 | 18.9 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.54 | -8.9 |
* TANF/FC | $0.69 | -36.0 |
* Non-TANF | $2.85 | 1.6 |
Paternities Established | 37,084 | NA |
* IV-D | 9,970 | 44.0 |
* Acknowledgements | 27,114 | NA |
Orders Established | 31,092 | -2.4 |
Locations | 62,993 | 7.1 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 1,115 | 4.7 |
Total Caseload | 531,016 | 3.6 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 198,557 | -9.5 |
* Non-TANF | 332,459 | 13.4 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $7,251,380 | 8.5 |
* TANF/FC | $1,465,044 | 11.0 |
* Non-TANF | $5,786,336 | 7.9 |
Total Expenditures | $4,215,000 | 19.2 |
Cost Effectiveness | $1.73 | -8.5 |
* TANF/FC | $0.36 | -3.6 |
* Non-TANF | $1.37 | -9.7 |
Paternities Established | 526 | 14.1 |
* IV-D | 526 | 14.1 |
* Acknowledgements | NA | NA |
Orders Established | 336 | -3.7 |
Locations | 5,647 | 130.2 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 58 | 5.5 |
Total Caseload | 9,955 | 7.3 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 5,528 | -10.8 |
* Non-TANF | 4,427 | 43.7 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $62,314,371 | 13.3 |
* TANF/FC | $11,577,740 | 0.6 |
* Non-TANF | $50,736,631 | 16.6 |
Total Expenditures | $23,961,000 | 2.2 |
Cost Effectiveness | $2.60 | 10.8 |
* TANF/FC | $0.48 | -2.3 |
* Non-TANF | $2.12 | 14.2 |
Paternities Established | 1,671 | -5.1 |
* IV-D | 1,671 | -5.1 |
* Acknowledgements | NA | NA |
Orders Established | 4,150 | -7.5 |
Locations | 199,530 | 8.0 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 199 | -1.0 |
Total Caseload | 68,103 | 5.8 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 21,367 | 0.6 |
* Non-TANF | 46,736 | 8.3 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $53,778,625 | 12.0 |
* TANF/FC | $7,873,702 | -23.0 |
* Non-TANF | $45,904,923 | 21.4 |
Total Expenditures | $14,561,000 | -17.3 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.69 | 35.3 |
* TANF/FC | $0.54 | -7.0 |
* Non-TANF | $3.15 | 46.8 |
Paternities Established | 4,457 | 31.3 |
* IV-D | 2,910 | 49.8 |
* Acknowledgements | 1,547 | 6.5 |
Orders Established | 3,218 | 30.9 |
Locations | 15,097 | -11.8 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 153 | -4.4 |
Total Caseload | 87,218 | 4.3 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 27,691 | -19.8 |
* Non-TANF | 59,527 | 21.1 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $300,239,940 | 12.3 |
* TANF/FC | $80,565,587 | 3.7 |
* Non-TANF | $219,674,353 | 15.8 |
Total Expenditures | $119,900,000 | -8.3 |
Cost Effectiveness | $2.50 | 22.2 |
* TANF/FC | $0.67 | 12.7 |
* Non-TANF | $1.83 | 26.1 |
Paternities Established | 82,005 | 6.9 |
* IV-D | 50,456 | 6.2 |
* Acknowledgements | 31,549 | 8.0 |
Orders Established | 30,765 | 3.7 |
Locations | 64,925 | -5.7 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 1,665 | NA |
Total Caseload | 746,331 | 0.9 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 391,137 | -3.5 |
* Non-TANF | 355,194 | 6.2 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $227,203,313 | 9.0 |
* TANF/FC | $38,070,056 | -4.5 |
* Non-TANF | $189,133,257 | 12.2 |
Total Expenditures | $41,694,000 | 23.6 |
Cost Effectiveness | $5.45 | -11.8 |
* TANF/FC | $0.91 | -23.0 |
* Non-TANF | $4.54 | -9.1 |
Paternities Established | 2,260 | -88.6 |
* IV-D | 2,260 | -88.6 |
* Acknowledgements | NA | NA |
Orders Established | 32,272 | -28.5 |
Locations | 433 | NA |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 775 | 22.2 |
Total Caseload | 343,960 | -16.3 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 62,781 | 3.2 |
* Non-TANF | 281,179 | -19.7 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $185,098,729 | 11.4 |
* TANF/FC | $42,357,762 | 3.9 |
* Non-TANF | $142,740,967 | 13.8 |
Total Expenditures | $38,646,000 | 13.3 |
Cost Effectiveness | $4.79 | -1.7 |
* TANF/FC | $1.10 | -8.0 |
* Non-TANF | $3.69 | 0.4 |
Paternities Established | 3,897 | -40.3 |
* IV-D | 614 | -67.4 |
* Acknowledgements | 3,283 | -29.3 |
Orders Established | 14,930 | 18.8 |
Locations | 190,124 | 32.8 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 518 | -2.3 |
Total Caseload | 207,751 | 3.1 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 98,803 | 0.7 |
* Non-TANF | 108,948 | 5.5 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $122,229,999 | 6.3 |
* TANF/FC | $24,763,992 | -8.5 |
* Non-TANF | $97,466,007 | 10.9 |
Total Expenditures | $40,066,000 | 6.6 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.05 | -0.3 |
* TANF/FC | $0.62 | -13.9 |
* Non-TANF | $2.43 | 3.9 |
Paternities Established | 16,647 | 9.5 |
* IV-D | 10,404 | 12.9 |
* Acknowledgements | 6,243 | 4.4 |
Orders Established | 17,318 | 24.6 |
Locations | 143,609 | 6.3 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 442 | -1.8 |
Total Caseload | 144,806 | 1.6 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 48,182 | -11.5 |
* Non-TANF | 96,624 | 9.6 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $185,549,683 | 12.9 |
* TANF/FC | $37,785,747 | -4.2 |
* Non-TANF | $147,763,936 | 18.3 |
Total Expenditures | $47,620,000 | 10.0 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.89 | 2.4 |
* TANF/FC | $0.79 | -13.3 |
* Non-TANF | $3.10 | 7.4 |
Paternities Established | 11,419 | -12.1 |
* IV-D | 9,345 | -4.1 |
* Acknowledgements | 2,074 | -36.1 |
Orders Established | 27,190 | -8.7 |
Locations | 27,286 | 9.6 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 891 | 5.6 |
Total Caseload | 314,518 | 5.8 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 124,008 | 5.2 |
* Non-TANF | 190,510 | 6.2 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $170,555,482 | 10.2 |
* TANF/FC | $21,552,936 | -20.5 |
* Non-TANF | $149,002,546 | 16.7 |
Total Expenditures | $42,329,000 | 18.3 |
Cost Effectiveness | $4.03 | -6.9 |
* TANF/FC | $0.52 | -31.4 |
* Non-TANF | $3.51 | -1.7 |
Paternities Established | 25,292 | -14.5 |
* IV-D | 22,391 | 78.3 |
* Acknowledgements | 2,901 | -83.0 |
Orders Established | 17,419 | 5.7 |
Locations | 38,554 | 51.4 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 895 | 2.4 |
Total Caseload | 332,741 | -0.2 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 83,106 | -27.0 |
* Non-TANF | 249,635 | 13.7 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $73,782,781 | 7.5 |
* TANF/FC | $30,408,557 | -4.4 |
* Non-TANF | $43,374,224 | 17.8 |
Total Expenditures | $17,364,000 | 7.1 |
Cost Effectiveness | $4.25 | 0.5 |
* TANF/FC | $1.75 | -10.8 |
* Non-TANF | $2.50 | 10.2 |
Paternities Established | 2,243 | -1.4 |
* IV-D | 2,243 | -1.4 |
* Acknowledgements | NA | NA |
Orders Established | 4,687 | -12.7 |
Locations | 79,872 | -17.3 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 252 | 4.6 |
Total Caseload | 69,981 | -10.9 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 35,196 | -21.8 |
* Non-TANF | 34,785 | 3.6 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $357,094,944 | 10.8 |
* TANF/FC | $31,480,290 | -17.2 |
* Non-TANF | $325,614,654 | 14.5 |
Total Expenditures | $82,899,000 | 13.3 |
Cost Effectiveness | $4.31 | -2.2 |
* TANF/FC | $0.38 | -26.9 |
* Non-TANF | $3.93 | 1.1 |
Paternities Established | 53,002 | 133.4 |
* IV-D | 38,392 | 201.9 |
* Acknowledgements | 14,610 | 46.2 |
Orders Established | 20,933 | 17.4 |
Locations | 67,324 | 20.5 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 919 | -9.3 |
Total Caseload | 320,357 | -21.2 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 102,394 | -46.8 |
* Non-TANF | 217,963 | 2.0 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $274,662,473 | 6.2 |
* TANF/FC | $58,241,894 | -13.6 |
* Non-TANF | $216,420,579 | 13.2 |
Total Expenditures | $59,950,000 | -6.2 |
Cost Effectiveness | $4.53 | 12.0 |
* TANF/FC | $0.96 | -8.9 |
* Non-TANF | $3.57 | 19.3 |
Paternities Established | 24,902 | 2.2 |
* IV-D | 10,047 | -1.0 |
* Acknowledgements | 14,855 | 4.5 |
Orders Established | 12,297 | -8.4 |
Locations | 29,960 | -62.5 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 828 | -2.4 |
Total Caseload | 239,446 | -1.0 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 126,899 | -11.9 |
* Non-TANF | 112,547 | 15.0 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $1,151,824,001 | 5.5 |
* TANF/FC | $150,356,782 | -7.0 |
* Non-TANF | $1,001,467,219 | 7.6 |
Total Expenditures | $160,376,000 | -0.7 |
Cost Effectiveness | $7.18 | 6.1 |
* TANF/FC | $0.94 | -6.1 |
* Non-TANF | $6.24 | 8.3 |
Paternities Established | 35,880 | -6.6 |
* IV-D | 13,443 | -23.9 |
* Acknowledgements | 22,437 | 8.1 |
Orders Established | 28,212 | -11.8 |
Locations | 73,288 | -65.2 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 2,441 | 8.9 |
Total Caseload | 1,720,920 | 6.2 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 1,209,493 | 1.4 |
* Non-TANF | 511,427 | 19.8 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $394,670,957 | 11.1 |
* TANF/FC | $56,176,935 | -13.0 |
* Non-TANF | $338,494,022 | 16.4 |
Total Expenditures | $102,461,000 | 19.3 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.85 | -6.9 |
* TANF/FC | $0.55 | -26.8 |
* Non-TANF | $3.30 | -2.5 |
Paternities Established | 14,420 | -21.2 |
* IV-D | 4,510 | -48.8 |
* Acknowledgements | 9,910 | 4.4 |
Orders Established | 18,657 | -14.0 |
Locations | 30,594 | 108.2 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 1,402 | -5.4 |
Total Caseload | 268,437 | 6.8 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 118,697 | 1.9 |
* Non-TANF | 149,740 | 11.0 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $112,224,456 | 15.7 |
* TANF/FC | $16,926,840 | -22.6 |
* Non-TANF | $95,297,616 | 26.8 |
Total Expenditures | $30,376,000 | -1.4 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.70 | 17.4 |
* TANF/FC | $0.56 | -21.1 |
* Non-TANF | $3.14 | 28.6 |
Paternities Established | 21,059 | 3.8 |
* IV-D | 13,218 | -9.2 |
* Acknowledgements | 7,841 | 37.1 |
Orders Established | 14,561 | 10.9 |
Locations | 152,597 | 25.9 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 656 | -3.1 |
Total Caseload | 289,339 | 5.4 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 76,684 | -17.3 |
* Non-TANF | 212,655 | 17.0 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $286,734,739 | -9.9 |
* TANF/FC | $58,139,912 | 12.1 |
* Non-TANF | $228,594,827 | -14.2 |
Total Expenditures | $85,274,000 | 8.4 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.36 | -17.0 |
* TANF/FC | $0.68 | 3.1 |
* Non-TANF | $2.68 | -20.9 |
Paternities Established | 41,963 | 42.0 |
* IV-D | 23,970 | 21.5 |
* Acknowledgements | 17,993 | 83.1 |
Orders Established | 22,756 | 7.6 |
Locations | 302,465 | 75.2 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 1,105 | -5.2 |
Total Caseload | 405,522 | 29.0 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 199,493 | 22.4 |
* Non-TANF | 206,029 | 36.0 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $36,921,587 | 10.5 |
* TANF/FC | $7,212,886 | -13.4 |
* Non-TANF | $29,708,701 | 18.5 |
Total Expenditures | $11,706,000 | -4.2 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.16 | 15.6 |
* TANF/FC | $0.62 | -9.0 |
* Non-TANF | $2.54 | 23.8 |
Paternities Established | 2,204 | -2.8 |
* IV-D | 1,187 | -15.5 |
* Acknowledgements | 1,017 | 17.8 |
Orders Established | 2,232 | -26.7 |
Locations | 59,035 | -12.6 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 190 | -4.5 |
Total Caseload | 41,342 | -0.9 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 14,905 | -15.7 |
* Non-TANF | 26,437 | 10.0 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $117,127,490 | 7.8 |
* TANF/FC | $12,893,075 | 1.7 |
* Non-TANF | $104,234,415 | 8.6 |
Total Expenditures | $25,108,000 | -14.5 |
Cost Effectiveness | $4.18 | 13.0 |
* TANF/FC | $0.51 | 18.1 |
* Non-TANF | $3.67 | 12.3 |
Paternities Established | 7,066 | -4.9 |
* IV-D | 3,536 | -12.3 |
* Acknowledgements | 3,530 | 3.8 |
Orders Established | 4,887 | -7.8 |
Locations | 31,400 | -7.7 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 398 | 2.1 |
Total Caseload | 121,421 | -6.5 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 32,653 | -2.4 |
* Non-TANF | 88,768 | -7.9 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $69,133,221 | 15.1 |
* TANF/FC | $7,507,939 | -11.0 |
* Non-TANF | $61,625,282 | 19.4 |
Total Expenditures | $23,866,000 | -36.2 |
Cost Effectiveness | $2.89 | 79.9 |
* TANF/FC | $0.31 | 37.5 |
* Non-TANF | $2.58 | 86.9 |
Paternities Established | 4,498 | 145.5 |
* IV-D | 2,293 | 25.2 |
* Acknowledgements | 2,205 | NA |
Orders Established | 4,186 | -10.7 |
Locations | 14,832 | -6.5 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 485 | 26.6 |
Total Caseload | 84,116 | 1.9 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 28,560 | -5.4 |
* Non-TANF | 55,556 | 6.1 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $60,975,803 | 11.9 |
* TANF/FC | $8,994,605 | -8.6 |
* Non-TANF | $51,981,198 | 16.5 |
Total Expenditures | $13,562,000 | -0.2 |
Cost Effectiveness | $4.49 | 12.0 |
* TANF/FC | $0.66 | -8.9 |
* Non-TANF | $3.83 | 16.6 |
Paternities Established | 3,589 | 9.8 |
* IV-D | 920 | 58.6 |
* Acknowledgements | 2,669 | -0.8 |
Orders Established | 3,877 | 0.3 |
Locations | 7,548 | 36.9 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 216 | -5.3 |
Total Caseload | 51,352 | 4.2 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 19,258 | -1.2 |
* Non-TANF | 32,094 | 7.8 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $581,901,606 | 5.1 |
* TANF/FC | $77,519,674 | -12.1 |
* Non-TANF | $504,381,932 | 8.3 |
Total Expenditures | $125,291,000 | 8.4 |
Cost Effectiveness | $6.18 | 29.0 |
* TANF/FC | $0.82 | 7.5 |
* Non-TANF | $5.36 | 33.1 |
Paternities Established | 32,689 | -0.1 |
* IV-D | 11,273 | -10.3 |
* Acknowledgements | 21,416 | 6.3 |
Orders Established | 23,192 | -6.2 |
Locations | 192,990 | 26.7 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 2,162 | -2.2 |
Total Caseload | 482,752 | -5.4 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 204,116 | -7.9 |
* Non-TANF | 278,636 | -3.4 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $37,310,412 | 8.4 |
* TANF/FC | $9,381,495 | -1.2 |
* Non-TANF | $27,928,917 | 12.1 |
Total Expenditures | $23,406,000 | -1.4 |
Cost Effectiveness | $1.59 | 9.6 |
* TANF/FC | $0.40 | -0.1 |
* Non-TANF | $1.19 | 13.3 |
Paternities Established | 9,563 | 244.7 |
* IV-D | 9,563 | 244.7 |
* Acknowledgements | NA | NA |
Orders Established | 3,633 | -39.8 |
Locations | 6,145 | -60.3 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 266 | 15.7 |
Total Caseload | 77,894 | 4.0 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 20,607 | -14.5 |
* Non-TANF | 57,287 | 12.7 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $834,476,910 | 3.8 |
* TANF/FC | $187,613,358 | -16.5 |
* Non-TANF | $646,863,552 | 11.7 |
Total Expenditures | $200,763,000 | 0.1 |
Cost Effectiveness | $4.15 | 3.6 |
* TANF/FC | $0.93 | -17.0 |
* Non-TANF | $3.22 | 11.5 |
Paternities Established | 87,733 | -5.1 |
* IV-D | 38,001 | -23.5 |
* Acknowledgements | NA | NA |
Orders Established | 49,481 | 9.2 |
Locations | 291,067 | 1.2 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 2,921 | 1.9 |
Total Caseload | 1,295,109 | 1.0 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 562,386 | 0.8 |
* Non-TANF | 732,723 | 1.2 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $311,684,239 | 4.3 |
* TANF/FC | $51,171,022 | -31.1 |
* Non-TANF | $260,513,217 | 16.0 |
Total Expenditures | $108,863,000 | 3.1 |
Cost Effectiveness | $2.86 | 1.1 |
* TANF/FC | $0.47 | -33.2 |
* Non-TANF | $2.39 | 12.4 |
Paternities Established | 49,431 | 16.5 |
* IV-D | 30,592 | 23.5 |
* Acknowledgements | 18,839 | 6.6 |
Orders Established | 35,959 | -8.4 |
Locations | 62,257 | -58.2 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 1,625 | 15.0 |
Total Caseload | 520,191 | 12.2 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 178,770 | -29.4 |
* Non-TANF | 341,421 | 62.3 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $36,064,761 | 12.0 |
* TANF/FC | $4,744,083 | -20.5 |
* Non-TANF | $31,320,678 | 19.4 |
Total Expenditures | $7,594,000 | 21.2 |
Cost Effectiveness | $4.74 | -7.8 |
* TANF/FC | $0.62 | -34.9 |
* Non-TANF | $4.12 | -1.6 |
Paternities Established | 1,699 | 27.1 |
* IV-D | 1,699 | 27.1 |
* Acknowledgements | NA | NA |
Orders Established | 2,177 | 4.7 |
Locations | 4,425 | -6.8 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 130 | 25.0 |
Total Caseload | 40,783 | -11.4 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 19,112 | -18.8 |
* Non-TANF | 21,671 | -3.6 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $1,151,228,761 | 6.2 |
* TANF/FC | $102,348,309 | -17.1 |
* Non-TANF | $1,048,880,452 | 9.3 |
Total Expenditures | $202,888,000 | -2.8 |
Cost Effectiveness | $5.67 | 9.2 |
* TANF/FC | $0.50 | -15.5 |
* Non-TANF | $5.17 | 12.4 |
Paternities Established | 45,587 | 19.2 |
* IV-D | 37,784 | -1.2 |
* Acknowledgements | 7,803 | NA |
Orders Established | 63,014 | 0.8 |
Locations | 390,871 | 8.2 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 4,656 | 19.9 |
Total Caseload | 939,155 | -2.9 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 396,726 | -12.0 |
* Non-TANF | 542,429 | 5.2 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $86,664,599 | 8.6 |
* TANF/FC | $22,482,608 | -6.2 |
* Non-TANF | $64,181,991 | 15.0 |
Total Expenditures | $27,935,000 | 6.3 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.10 | 2.2 |
* TANF/FC | $0.80 | -12.3 |
* Non-TANF | $2.30 | 8.4 |
Paternities Established | 7,124 | 13.2 |
* IV-D | 7,124 | 13.2 |
* Acknowledgements | NA | NA |
Orders Established | 9,272 | 10.5 |
Locations | 63,974 | 77.0 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 483 | 5.7 |
Total Caseload | 134,461 | -0.6 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 46,359 | -4.9 |
* Non-TANF | 88,102 | 1.8 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $209,181,643 | 5.7 |
* TANF/FC | $25,003,102 | -14.6 |
* Non-TANF | $184,178,541 | 9.2 |
Total Expenditures | $39,516,000 | -7.1 |
Cost Effectiveness | $5.29 | 13.7 |
* TANF/FC | $0.63 | -8.5 |
* Non-TANF | $4.66 | 17.5 |
Paternities Established | 9,590 | -27.7 |
* IV-D | 3,674 | -29.9 |
* Acknowledgements | 5,916 | -26.2 |
Orders Established | 12,850 | -17.8 |
Locations | 102,938 | -4.9 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 686 | 23.8 |
Total Caseload | 267,783 | -5.6 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 95,579 | -8.5 |
* Non-TANF | 172,204 | -3.9 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $1,042,987,090 | 3.6 |
* TANF/FC | $117,670,354 | -4.6 |
* Non-TANF | $925,316,736 | 4.7 |
Total Expenditures | $147,723,000 | 8.8 |
Cost Effectiveness | $5.68 | -23.4 |
* TANF/FC | $0.79 | -13.1 |
* Non-TANF | $4.89 | -24.9 |
Paternities Established | 47,081 | NA |
* IV-D | 30,555 | -62.2 |
* Acknowledgements | 16,526 | NA |
Orders Established | 108,510 | -21.6 |
Locations | 105,875 | -26.4 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 3,074 | 20.9 |
Total Caseload | 875,637 | -6.1 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 376,294 | -5.6 |
* Non-TANF | 499,343 | -6.5 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $145,131,794 | 1.8 |
* TANF/FC | $2,323,558 | -17.4 |
* Non-TANF | $142,808,236 | 2.2 |
Total Expenditures | $26,994,000 | 1.7 |
Cost Effectiveness | $5.38 | 0.2 |
* TANF/FC | $0.09 | -15.1 |
* Non-TANF | $5.29 | 0.5 |
Paternities Established | 26,942 | 22.6 |
* IV-D | 33 | 57.1 |
* Acknowledgements | 26,909 | 22.6 |
Orders Established | 9,359 | -29.8 |
Locations | 6,015 | 16.1 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 782 | 10.5 |
Total Caseload | 227,176 | 14.5 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 85,703 | 26.3 |
* Non-TANF | 141,473 | 8.4 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $41,902,316 | 7.9 |
* TANF/FC | $19,131,070 | 1.4 |
* Non-TANF | $22,771,246 | 14.1 |
Total Expenditures | $10,016,000 | 11.7 |
Cost Effectiveness | $4.18 | -3.5 |
* TANF/FC | $1.91 | -9.2 |
* Non-TANF | $2.27 | 2.0 |
Paternities Established | 3,585 | -20.7 |
* IV-D | 3,585 | -20.7 |
* Acknowledgements | NA | NA |
Orders Established | 2,283 | -16.1 |
Locations | 41,065 | 65.9 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 154 | -8.3 |
Total Caseload | 72,458 | 1.6 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 38,058 | -4.0 |
* Non-TANF | 34,400 | 8.7 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $153,915,622 | 13.5 |
* TANF/FC | $20,071,757 | -19.5 |
* Non-TANF | $133,843,865 | 20.9 |
Total Expenditures | $32,649,000 | 3.4 |
Cost Effectiveness | $4.71 | 9.7 |
* TANF/FC | $0.61 | -22.7 |
* Non-TANF | $4.10 | 17.0 |
Paternities Established | 13,941 | 4.2 |
* IV-D | 13,941 | 4.2 |
* Acknowledgements | NA | NA |
Orders Established | 13,641 | -0.1 |
Locations | 46,996 | 3.9 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 234 | 0.0 |
Total Caseload | 218,833 | -1.6 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 30,962 | -38.2 |
* Non-TANF | 187,871 | 9.1 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $34,488,847 | 11.7 |
* TANF/FC | $5,294,107 | -14.1 |
* Non-TANF | $29,194,740 | 18.1 |
Total Expenditures | $5,629,000 | 5.6 |
Cost Effectiveness | $6.13 | 5.8 |
* TANF/FC | $0.94 | -18.7 |
* Non-TANF | $5.19 | 11.9 |
Paternities Established | 2,280 | -16.4 |
* IV-D | 725 | -9.1 |
* Acknowledgements | 1,555 | -19.4 |
Orders Established | 3,792 | -3.0 |
Locations | 30,370 | 63.2 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 87 | 7.4 |
Total Caseload | 33,479 | 1.3 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 16,205 | -5.3 |
* Non-TANF | 17,274 | 8.2 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $188,406,296 | 9.0 |
* TANF/FC | $34,186,587 | 8.3 |
* Non-TANF | $154,219,709 | 9.2 |
Total Expenditures | $56,973,000 | 26.9 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.31 | -14.0 |
* TANF/FC | $0.60 | -14.6 |
* Non-TANF | $2.71 | -13.9 |
Paternities Established | 21,311 | -5.5 |
* IV-D | 6,785 | -32.5 |
* Acknowledgements | 14,526 | 16.3 |
Orders Established | 28,842 | NA |
Locations | 271,611 | 1.8 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 679 | -0.4 |
Total Caseload | 497,627 | 7.5 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 203,548 | 2.6 |
* Non-TANF | 294,079 | 11.2 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $685,028,480 | 10.8 |
* TANF/FC | $121,982,308 | 12.8 |
* Non-TANF | $563,046,172 | 10.4 |
Total Expenditures | $181,978,000 | 5.8 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.76 | 4.6 |
* TANF/FC | $0.67 | 6.6 |
* Non-TANF | $3.09 | 4.2 |
Paternities Established | 128,373 | 55.8 |
* IV-D | 71,571 | 60.4 |
* Acknowledgements | 56,802 | 50.4 |
Orders Established | 37,019 | -7.6 |
Locations | 371,295 | -40.1 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 2,415 | 0.5 |
Total Caseload | 1,071,067 | 17.6 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 238,717 | -29.9 |
* Non-TANF | 832,350 | 46.1 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $97,013,689 | 14.8 |
* TANF/FC | $21,261,676 | 1.2 |
* Non-TANF | $75,752,013 | 19.2 |
Total Expenditures | $32,059,000 | 7.7 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.02 | 6.3 |
* TANF/FC | $0.66 | -6.5 |
* Non-TANF | $2.36 | 10.5 |
Paternities Established | 5,925 | -20.2 |
* IV-D | 1,985 | -32.0 |
* Acknowledgements | 3,940 | -12.6 |
Orders Established | 4,386 | -47.1 |
Locations | 100,084 | 102.9 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 517 | 3.4 |
Total Caseload | 109,262 | -4.9 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 44,456 | -25.6 |
* Non-TANF | 64,806 | 17.4 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $31,712,200 | 13.8 |
* TANF/FC | $8,554,864 | 2.1 |
* Non-TANF | $23,157,336 | 18.8 |
Total Expenditures | $7,557,000 | -3.1 |
Cost Effectiveness | $4.19 | 17.2 |
* TANF/FC | $1.13 | 5.2 |
* Non-TANF | $3.06 | 22.4 |
Paternities Established | 978 | 10.4 |
* IV-D | 978 | 30.9 |
* Acknowledgements | NA | NA |
Orders Established | 2,229 | 18.3 |
Locations | 2,130 | -86.9 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 104 | 3.0 |
Total Caseload | 27,022 | 19.1 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 14,701 | 18.7 |
* Non-TANF | 12,321 | 19.6 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $6,122,511 | 3.4 |
* TANF/FC | $573,439 | -8.7 |
* Non-TANF | $5,549,072 | 4.8 |
Total Expenditures | $2,294,000 | -5.7 |
Cost Effectiveness | $2.67 | 9.7 |
* TANF/FC | $0.25 | -3.2 |
* Non-TANF | $2.42 | 11.2 |
Paternities Established | 31 | -74.2 |
* IV-D | 31 | -74.2 |
* Acknowledgements | NA | NA |
Orders Established | 556 | -9.3 |
Locations | 352 | -48.2 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 33 | -13.2 |
Total Caseload | 11,447 | 7.2 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 3,663 | -4.2 |
* Non-TANF | 7,784 | 13.6 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $276,875,539 | -5.4 |
* TANF/FC | $43,326,488 | -7.6 |
* Non-TANF | $233,549,051 | -5.0 |
Total Expenditures | $61,083,000 | 9.1 |
Cost Effectiveness | $4.53 | -13.4 |
* TANF/FC | $0.71 | -15.2 |
* Non-TANF | $3.82 | -13.1 |
Paternities Established | 23,044 | 5.6 |
* IV-D | 11,793 | 1.9 |
* Acknowledgements | 11,251 | 9.7 |
Orders Established | 20,298 | 22.9 |
Locations | 116,487 | 17.6 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 835 | -5.6 |
Total Caseload | 414,861 | 2.5 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 127,289 | -4.9 |
* Non-TANF | 287,572 | 6.1 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $474,432,883 | 5.0 |
* TANF/FC | $102,533,074 | -8.9 |
* Non-TANF | $371,899,809 | 9.7 |
Total Expenditures | $126,830,000 | 14.1 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.74 | -8.0 |
* TANF/FC | $0.81 | -20.0 |
* Non-TANF | $2.93 | -4.0 |
Paternities Established | 25,132 | 5.2 |
* IV-D | 13,726 | 8.4 |
* Acknowledgements | 11,406 | 1.6 |
Orders Established | 27,248 | -2.8 |
Locations | 1,316,069 | 27.6 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 1,791 | 3.0 |
Total Caseload | 404,163 | 3.8 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 216,243 | -1.1 |
* Non-TANF | 187,920 | 9.9 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $109,384,212 | 11.4 |
* TANF/FC | $13,213,448 | -17.0 |
* Non-TANF | $96,170,764 | 17.0 |
Total Expenditures | $24,471,000 | 0.6 |
Cost Effectiveness | $4.47 | 10.8 |
* TANF/FC | $0.54 | -17.5 |
* Non-TANF | $3.93 | 16.3 |
Paternities Established | 10,769 | -7.3 |
* IV-D | 6,964 | 6.8 |
* Acknowledgements | 3,805 | -25.3 |
Orders Established | 9,712 | 3.8 |
Locations | 38,024 | 13.3 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 621 | 22.0 |
Total Caseload | 124,188 | 5.8 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 26,444 | -23.4 |
* Non-TANF | 97,744 | 17.9 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $499,272,091 | 8.6 |
* TANF/FC | $53,597,331 | -15.7 |
* Non-TANF | $445,674,760 | 12.5 |
Total Expenditures | $90,924,000 | 14.8 |
Cost Effectiveness | $5.43 | -6.5 |
* TANF/FC | $0.59 | -26.5 |
* Non-TANF | $4.84 | -3.3 |
Paternities Established | 13,361 | -3.0 |
* IV-D | 13,361 | -3.0 |
* Acknowledgements | NA | NA |
Orders Established | 19,418 | -31.3 |
Locations | 260,163 | 88.6 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 1,023 | NA |
Total Caseload | 475,363 | 22.8 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 130,637 | 25.0 |
* Non-TANF | 344,726 | 22.0 |
Amount | %Change from FY 97 | |
---|---|---|
Collections Distributed | $33,110,055 | 15.4 |
* TANF/FC | $2,826,930 | -33.2 |
* Non-TANF | $30,283,125 | 23.9 |
Total Expenditures | $8,892,000 | 3.6 |
Cost Effectiveness | $3.98 | 19.2 |
* TANF/FC | $0.34 | -31.0 |
* Non-TANF | $3.64 | 27.8 |
Paternities Established | 906 | 44.5 |
* IV-D | 906 | 44.5 |
* Acknowledgements | NA | NA |
Orders Established | 1,698 | 30.1 |
Locations | 25,298 | 22.9 |
Full Time Equiv. Staff | 214 | 17.6 |
Total Caseload | 59,122 | -11.6 |
* TANF/FC & Arrears | 16,296 | -0.9 |
* Non-TANF | 42,826 | -15.1 |
APPDENDIX C. STATE DATA TABLES
Program Overview
Table 1: Financial Overview for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years ($000)
Table 2: Statistical Overview for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Table 3: Program Trends for Fy 1992, 1997, And 1998
Program Collections
Table 4: Total Distributed Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Table 5: Distributed AFDC-TANF/Foster Care Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Table 6: Distributed TANF Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Table 7: Distributed Foster Care Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Table 8: Distributed Non-AFDC-TANF Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Table 10: Net Federal Share of AFDC-TANF/Foster Care Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Federal and State Shares and Incentives
Table 11: State Share of AFDC-TANF/Foster Care Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Table 12: Incentive Payments Estimates for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Table 13: Incentive Payments Actuals for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Payments to Families
Table 14: AFDC-TANF/Foster Care Payments to Families for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Table 15: Medical Support Payments to Families And Medicaid
Method Of Collection
Table 17: Total Collections Made By the States By Method of Collection, FY 1998
Table 18: AFDC-TANF/Foster Care Collections Made By the States By Method of Collection, FY 1998
Table 19: Non-AFDC-TANF Collections Made By the States By Method of Collection, FY 1998
Table 20: Total Administrative Expenditures for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Program Savings
Table 21: Total Program Savings for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Program Expenditures
Table 22: EES Received and Costs Recovered for Non-AFDC-TANF Cases for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Functional Costs
Table 23: Total ADP Expenditures for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Table 24: ADP Expenditures at Enhanced Rate for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Table 25: Expenditures for Laboratory Tests for Paternity Establishment
Caseload and Cases With Collections
Table 26: Average CSE Caseload By TANF/FC, Non-TANF, and TANF/FC Arrears Only, FY 1998
Table 27: Average Annual CSE Caseload with Orders Established, FY 1998
Location, Paternity, Establishment, and Enforcement Services Required
Locations
Table 34: Absent Parents Located By TANF/FC, Non-TANF and TANF/FC Arrears Only, FY 1998
Table 35: Absent Parents Located to Establish and Enforce or Modify an Order, FY 1998
Paternities
Table 38: Total Number of Paternities Established for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Table 39: Paternities Established By TANF/FC, Non-TANF, and TANF/FC Arrears Only, FY 1998
Table 39a: In-Hospital Voluntary Paternity Acknowledgements
Table 40: IV-D Paternity Standard Data for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Orders Established and Enforced
Table 41: Number of Support Orders Established TANF/FC, Non-TANF, and TANF/FC Arrears Only, FY 1998
Table 42: Total Number of Support Orders Established That Include Health Insurance
Table 44: Total Number of Support Orders Enforced or Modified That Include Health Insurance
AFDC
Staffing
Table 46: Total Full Time Equivalent Staff Employed As of September 30, 1998
Table 48: Total Salary and Fringe Benefits for Full Time Staff Employed As of September 30, 1998
Table 49: State Workload Per Full-Time Equivalent (FTE), FY 1998
Voluntary Payments
Table 51: Total Cases With Voluntary Payments, FY 1998
Table 52: Total Amount of Voluntary Payments, FY 1998
Cases Opened and Closed
Table 53: Total Number of Cases Opened During the Year, FY 1998
Table 54: Total Number of Cases Opened for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Table 55: Total Number of Cases Closed During the Year, FY 1998
Table 56: Total Number of Cases Closed for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Federal Income Tax Refund Offset
Table 57: Federal Income Tax Refund Offset Program, FY 1998
Table 58: Federal Income Tax Refund Offset Program Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
Table 59: IRS Full Collections, FY 1998
Accounts Receivable: Current Amounts
Table 60: Accounts Receivable: Amount of Total Current Support Due, FY 1998
Table 61: Accounts Receivable: Amount of Total Current Support Received, FY 1998
Accounts Receivable: Prior Years' Amounts
Table 62: Accounts Receivable: Amount of Total Prior Year Support Due, FY 1998
Table 63: Accounts Receivable: Amount of Total Prior Year Support Received, FY 1998
Accounts Receivable: This Year's Amounts
Table 64: Accounts Receivable: Amount of Total Support Due for Orders Entered This Year, FY 1998
Accounts Receivable: Current Orders
Accounts Receivable: Prior Year's Orders
Accounts Receivable: Orders Entered During the Year
Interstate Activity
Table 74: Interstate Activity: Cases in Which Collections Were Sent to Other States, FY 1998
Table 75: Interstate Activity: Cases in Which Collections Were Received from Other States, FY 1998
Table 76: Interstate Activity: Total Collections Made On Behalf of Other States, FY 1998
Table 77: Interstate Activity: Total Collections Received from Other States, FY 1998
STATE | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
ALABAMA | 6,141 | 6,109 | 4,837 | 3,009 | 1,878 |
ALASKA | 1,894 | 2,365 | 2,448 | 2,857 | 2,740 |
ARIZONA | 2,098 | 1,403 | 268 | 272 | 0 |
ARKANSAS | 6,865 | 2,413 | 3,224 | 2,857 | 7,281 |
CALIFORNIA | 18,628 | 18,419 | 22,301 | 45,393 | 38,832 |
COLORADO | 6,304 | 5,300 | 7,659 | 8,216 | 7,832 |
CONNECTICUT | 1,403 | 1,509 | 2,013 | 2,512 | 5,358 |
DELAWARE | 160 | 209 | 0 | 884 | 2,930 |
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 417 |
FLORIDA | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16,105 | 24,761 |
GEORGIA | 19,063 | 12,330 | 10,026 | 24,909 | 15,453 |
GUAM | 160 | 237 | 101 | 0 | 0 |
HAWAII | 197 | 547 | 735 | 556 | 448 |
IDAHO | 1,950 | 1,997 | 2,044 | 2,046 | 1,262 |
ILLINOIS | 0 | 1 | 256 | 14,495 | 13,600 |
INDIANA | 473 | 334 | 0 | 2,889 | 1,511 |
IOWA | 7,629 | 9,155 | 8,455 | 8,143 | 6,600 |
KANSAS | 4,410 | 4,769 | 5,307 | 5,265 | 3,612 |
KENTUCKY | 2,324 | 9,462 | 3,036 | 3,930 | 1,398 |
LOUISIANA | 29 | 675 | 1,496 | 5,815 | 4,552 |
MAINE | 9,878 | 12,857 | 5,141 | 18,638 | 17,438 |
MARYLAND | 4,873 | 5,090 | 6,137 | 9,411 | 10,048 |
MASSACHUSETTS | 19,626 | 23,475 | 10,385 | 10,118 | 8,133 |
MICHIGAN | 1,027 | 1,381 | 1,362 | 1,328 | 1,604 |
MINNESOTA | 8,296 | 9,112 | 8,815 | 9,619 | 22,385 |
MISSISSIPPI | 2,794 | 2,939 | 4,857 | 6,965 | 5,285 |
MISSOURI | 7,833 | 8,684 | 9,434 | 7,519 | 5,719 |
MONTANA | 191 | 154 | 137 | 152 | 67 |
NEBRASKA | 2,599 | 103 | 210 | 219 | 23 |
NEVADA | 1,313 | 1,264 | 1,315 | 947 | 1,291 |
NEW HAMPSHIRE | 4,308 | 5,733 | 5,096 | 6,019 | 3,969 |
NEW JERSEY | 19,926 | 13,798 | 15,101 | 15,603 | 17,005 |
NEW MEXICO | NA | NA | NA | NA | 359 |
NEW YORK | 12,067 | 11,598 | 13,376 | 15,136 | 14,325 |
NORTH CAROLINA | 21,984 | 22,707 | 22,683 | 13,858 | 9,097 |
NORTH DAKOTA | 2,203 | 2,124 | 1,956 | 1,907 | 1,360 |
OHIO | 16,001 | 16,997 | 18,330 | 19,351 | 18,218 |
OKLAHOMA | 3,567 | 3,714 | 4,183 | 3,900 | 3,547 |
OREGON | 6,164 | 5,783 | 5,573 | 5,315 | 4,485 |
PENNSYLVANIA | 15,648 | 15,752 | 19,759 | 21,130 | 23,460 |
PUERTO RICO | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
RHODE ISLAND | 1,150 | 1,405 | 1,545 | 1,569 | 1,018 |
SOUTH CAROLINA | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
SOUTH DAKOTA | 1,765 | 1,711 | 1,700 | 1,531 | 971 |
TENNESSEE | 5,140 | 5,274 | 5,940 | 1,700 | 11,097 |
TEXAS | 6,477 | 7,660 | 8,273 | 6,607 | 4,165 |
UTAH | 637 | 723 | 1,673 | 2,652 | 2,951 |
VERMONT | 1,084 | 630 | 302 | 1,206 | 1,791 |
VIRGIN ISLANDS | 26 | 65 | 12 | 6 | 16 |
VIRGINIA | 5,866 | 8,726 | 4,747 | 11,253 | 160,862 |
WASHINGTON | 12,857 | 13,871 | 16,384 | 7,750 | 4,579 |
WEST VIRGINIA | 1,788 | 3,806 | 2,298 | 625 | 238 |
WISCONSIN | 8,580 | 9,741 | 13,800 | 3,126 | 2,522 |
WYOMING | 125 | 15 | 584 | 867 | 320 |
NATIONWIDE TOTALS | 285,521 | 294,126 | 285,314 | 356,180 | 498,813 |
SOURCE: FORM OCSE-156 LINE 5 (A) |
APPENDIX G: FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE HISTORY OF CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT
1950
The first Federal child support enforcement legislation was Section 402(a)(11) of the Social Security Act [42 USC 602(a)(11)], which required State welfare agencies to notify appropriate law enforcement officials upon providing Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) with respect to a child who was abandoned or deserted by a parent.
Also that year, the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws and the American Bar Association approved the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (subsequent amendments to this Act were approved in 1952, 1958, and 1968).
1965
Public Law (P.L.) 89-97, the Social Security Amendments of 1965, allowed a State or local welfare agency to obtain from the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare the address and place of employment of an absent parent who owed child support under a court order for support.
1967
P.L. 90-248, the Social Security Amendments of 1967, allowed States to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) the addresses of absent parents who owed child support under a court order for support. In addition, each State was required to establish a single organizational unit to establish paternity and collect child support for deserted children receiving AFDC. States were also required to work cooperatively with each other under child support reciprocity agreements and with courts and law enforcement officials.
1975
P.L. 93-647, the Social Security Amendments of 1974, created, inter alia, Part D of Title IV of the Social Security Act [Sections 451, et seq.; 42 USC 651, et seq.]. The key child support enforcement provisions, which reflect three years of intense Congressional attention, are as follows:
- The Secretary of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (now the Department of Health and Human Services or DHHS) has primary responsibility for the Program and is required to establish a separate organizational unit to operate the program. Operational responsibilities include (1) establishing a parent locator service; (2) establishing standards for State program organization, staffing, and operation to assure an effective program; (3) reviewing and approving State plans for the program; (4) evaluating State program operations by conducting audits of each State's program; (5) certifying cases for referral to the Federal courts to enforce support obligations; (6) certifying cases for referral to the IRS for support collections; (7) providing technical assistance to States and assisting them with reporting procedures; (8) maintaining records of program operations, expenditures, and collections; and (9) submitting an annual report to the Congress.
- Primary responsibility for operating the Child Support Enforcement Program is placed on the States pursuant to the State plan. The major requirements of a State plan are that (1) the State designate a single and separate organizational unit to administer the program; (2) the State undertake to establish paternity and secure support for individuals receiving AFDC and others who apply directly for child support enforcement services; (3) child support payments be made to the State for distribution; (4) the State enter into cooperative agreements with appropriate courts and law enforcement officials; (5) the State establish a State parent locator service that uses State and local parent location resources and the Federal Parent Locator Service; (6) the State cooperate with any other State in locating an absent parent, establishing paternity, and securing support; and (7) the State maintain a full record of collections and disbursements made under the plan.
- Procedures were set out for the distribution of child support collections received on behalf of families receiving AFDC.
- Incentive payments to States for collections made on AFDC cases were created.
- Monies due and payable to Federal employees became subject to garnishment for the collection of child support.
- New eligibility requirements were added to the AFDC program, which required each applicant for, or recipient of, AFDC to make an assignment of support rights to the State; to cooperate with the State in establishing paternity and securing support; and to furnish his or her Social Security number to the State.
The effective date of P.L. 93-647 was July 1, 1975, except for the provision regarding garnishment of Federal employees, which was effective upon enactment. However, several problems were identified prior to the effective date and Congress passed P.L. 94-46 to extend the effective date to August 1, 1975. In addition, P.L. 94-88 was passed in August 1975 to allow States to obtain waivers from certain program requirements under certain conditions until June 30, 1976 and to receive Federal reimbursement at a reduced rate. This law also eased the requirement for AFDC recipients to cooperate with State child support enforcement agencies when such cooperation would not be in the best interests of the child. It also provided for supplemental payments to AFDC recipients whose grants would be reduced due to the implementation of the child support enforcement program.
1976
P.L. 94-566, effective October 20, 1976, required State employment agencies to provide absent parents' addresses to State child support enforcement agencies.
1977
P.L. 95-30, effective May 23, 1977, made several amendments to Title IV-D:
- Provisions relating to the garnishment of a Federal employee's wages for child support were amended to (1) include employees of the District of Columbia; (2) specify the conditions and procedures to be followed to serve garnishments on Federal agencies; (3) authorize the issuance of garnishment regulations by the three branches of the Federal Government and by the District; and (4) define further certain terms used.
- Section 454 of the Social Security Act (42 USC 654) was amended to require the State plan to provide bonding for employees who receive, handle, or disburse cash and to insure that the accounting and collection functions be performed by different individuals.
- The incentive payment provision, under section 458(a) of the Social Security Act [42 USC 658(a)], was amended to change the rate to 15 percent of AFDC collections (from 25 percent for the first 12 months and 10 percent thereafter).
P.L. 95-142, the Medicare-Medicaid Antifraud and Abuse Amendments of 1977, established a medical support enforcement program, under which States could require Medicaid applicants to assign to the State their rights to medical support. State Medicaid agencies were allowed to enter into cooperative agreements with any appropriate agency of any State, including the IV-D agency, for assistance with the enforcement and collection of medical support obligations. Incentives were also available to localities making child support collections for States and for States securing collections on behalf of other States.
1978
P.L. 95-598, the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978, repealed section 456(b) of the Social Security Act [42 USC 656(b)], which had barred the discharge in bankruptcy of assigned child support debts. (Note: this section of the Social Security Act (now 546(h)) was restored by P.L. 97-35 in 1981.)
1980
P.L. 96-178 extended Federal Financial Participation (FFP) for non-AFDC services to March 31, 1980, retroactive to October 1, 1978.
P.L. 96-265, the Social Security Disability Amendments of 1980, increased Federal matching funds to 90 percent, effective July 1, 1981, for the costs of developing, implementing, and enhancing approved automated child support management information systems. Federal matching funds were also made available for child support enforcement duties performed by certain court personnel. In another provision, the law authorized the use of the IRS to collect child support arrearages on behalf of non-AFDC families. Finally, the law provided State and local IV-D agencies access to wage information held by the Social Security Administration and State employment security agencies for use in establishing and enforcing child support obligations.
P.L. 96-272, the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980, contained four amendments to Title IV-D of the Social Security Act. First, the law made FFP for non-AFDC services available on a permanent basis. Second, it allowed States to receive incentive payments on all AFDC collections as well as interstate collections. Third, as of October 1, 1979, States were required to claim reimbursement for expenditures within two years, with some exceptions. The fourth change postponed until October, 1980, the imposition of the 5 percent penalty on AFDC reimbursement for States not having effective child support enforcement programs.
1981
P.L. 97-35, the Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1981, added five amendments to the IV-D provisions. First, IRS was authorized to withhold all or a part of certain individuals' Federal income tax refunds for collection of delinquent child support obligations. Second, IV-D agencies were required to collect spousal support for AFDC families. Third, for non-AFDC cases, IV-D agencies were required to collect fees from absent parents who were delinquent in their child support payments. Fourth, child support obligations assigned to the State no longer were dischargeable in bankruptcy proceedings. The law imposed on States a requirement to withhold a portion of unemployment benefits from absent parents delinquent in their support payments.
1982
P.L. 97-248, the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982, included the following provisions, affecting the IV-D program:
- FFP was reduced from 75 to 70 percent, effective October 1, 1982. Incentives were reduced from 15 to 12 percent, effective October 1, 1983. The provision for reimbursement of costs of certain court personnel that exceed the amount of funds spent by a State on similar court expenses during calendar year 1978 was repealed.
- The mandatory non-AFDC collection fee imposed by P.L. 97-35 was repealed, retroactive to August 13, 1981. States were allowed to elect not to recover costs or to recover costs from collections or from fees imposed on absent parents. Another provision allowed States to collect spousal support in certain non-AFDC cases.
- As of October 1, 1982, members of the uniformed services on active duty are required to make allotments from their pay when support arrearages reach the equivalent of a 2-month delinquency.
- Also beginning October 1, 1982, States were allowed to reimburse themselves for AFDC grants paid to families for the first month in which the collection of child support is sufficient to make a family ineligible for AFDC.
P.L. 97-253, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1982, provided for the disclosure of information obtained under authority of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 to various programs, including State child support enforcement agencies.
P.L. 97-252, the Uniformed Services Former Spouses' Protection Act, authorized treatment of military retirement or retainer pay as property to be divided by State courts in connection with divorce, dissolution, annulment, or legal separation proceedings.
1984
P.L. 98-378, the Child Support Enforcement Amendments of 1984, featured provisions that required critical improvements in State and local child support enforcement programs in four major areas:
- Mandatory Practices
All States must enact statutes providing for the use of improved enforcement mechanisms, including (1) mandatory income withholding procedures; (2) expedited processes for establishing and enforcing support orders; (3) State income tax refund interceptions; (4) liens against real and personal property, security or bonds to assure compliance with support obligations; and (5) reports of support delinquency information to consumer reporting agencies. State law must allow for the bringing of paternity actions any time prior to a child's 18th birthday and all support orders issued or modified after October 1, 1985, must include a provision for wage withholding.
- Federal Financial Participation and Audit Provisions
To encourage greater reliance on performance-based incentives, Federal matching funds were reduced by 2 percent in FY 1988 (to 68 percent) and another 2 percent in FY 1990 (to 66 percent). Federal matching funds at 90 percent became available for the development and installation of automated systems, including computer hardware purchases, to facilitate income withholding and other newly required procedures.
State incentive payments were reset at 6 percent for both AFDC and non-AFDC collections. These percentages can increase to as much as 10 percent for both categories for very cost-effective States, but a State's non-AFDC incentive payments are limited by the amount of incentives received for AFDC collections. The law further required States to pass incentives through to local child support enforcement agencies where these agencies have participated in the costs of the program.
Annual State audits were replaced with audits conducted at least once every 3 years. The focus of the audits was altered to evaluate a State's effectiveness on the basis of program performance as well as operational compliance. Penalties for noncompliance are from 1 to 5 percent of the Federal share of the State's AFDC funds. The Federal government may suspend imposition of a penalty based on a State's filing of, and complying with, an acceptable corrective action plan.
- Improved Interstate Enforcement
The proven enforcement techniques discussed above must be applied to interstate cases as well as intrastate cases. Both States involved in an interstate case may take credit for the collection when reporting total collections for the purpose of calculating incentives. Special demonstration grants were authorized beginning in FY 1985 to fund innovative methods of interstate enforcement and collection. Federal audits will focus on States' effectiveness in establishing and enforcing obligations across State lines.
- Equal Services for Welfare and Nonwelfare Families
The Social Security Act was amended to show that Congress intended the Child Support Enforcement Program to aid both nonwelfare and welfare families. Several specific requirements were directed at improving State services to nonwelfare families. All of the mandatory practices must be made available for both classes of cases; the interception of Federal income tax refunds is extended to nonwelfare cases; incentive payments for nonwelfare cases became available for the first time; when families are terminated from the welfare rolls, they automatically must receive nonwelfare support enforcement services without being charged an application fee; and States must publicize the availability of nonwelfare support enforcement services.
- Other Provisions
States were required to (1) collect support in certain foster care cases; (2) collect spousal support in addition to child support where both are due in a case; (3) notify AFDC recipients, at least yearly, of the collections made in their individual cases;(4) establish State commissions to examine, investigate, and study the operation of the State's child support system and report findings to the State's governor; (5) formulate guidelines for determining appropriate child support obligation amounts and distribute the guidelines to judges and other individuals who possess authority to establish obligation amounts; (6) offset the costs of the program by charging various fees to nonwelfare families and to delinquent absent parents; (7) allow families whose AFDC eligibility is terminated as a result of the payment of child support to remain eligible to receive Medicaid for 4 months; and (8) seek to establish medical support orders in addition to monetary awards. The Federal Parent Locator Service was made more accessible and effective in locating absent parents. Sunset provisions are included in the extension of Medicaid eligibility and Federal tax offsets for non-AFDC families.
P.L. 98-369, the Tax Reform Act of 1984, included two tax provisions pertaining to alimony and child support.
- Under prior law, alimony was deductible by the payor and includible in the income of the payee. The 1984 law revised the rules relating to the definition of alimony. Generally, only cash payments that will terminate on the death of the payee spouse qualify as alimony. Alimony payments, if in excess of $10,000 per year, generally must be payable for at least 6 years and must not decline by more than $10,000. The prior law requirement that the payment be based on a legal support obligation was repealed and payors are required to furnish to the IRS the Social Security number of the payee spouse. A $50 penalty for failure to do so will be imposed. The provision is effective for divorce or separation agreements or orders executed after 1984.
- The 1984 law also provided that the $1,000 dependency exemption for a child of divorced or separated parents generally will be allocated to the custodial parent unless the custodial parent signs a written declaration that he or she will not claim the exemption for the year. Each parent may claim the medical expenses that he or she pays for the child, for purposes of computing the medical expense deduction. The provision is effective for taxable years beginning after 1984.
1986
P.L. 99-509, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986, included one child support enforcement amendment prohibiting the retroactive modification of child support awards. Under this new requirement, State laws must provide for either parent to apply for modification of an existing order with notice provided to the other parent. No modification is permitted before the date of this notification.
1987
P.L. 100-203, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987, required States to provide child support enforcement services to all families with an absent parent who receives Medicaid and who assigned their support rights to the State, regardless of whether they are receiving AFDC.
1988
P.L. 100-485, the Family Support Act of 1988, emphasized the duties of parents to work and support their children and, in particular, emphasized child support enforcement as the first line of defense against welfare dependence. The key child support enforcement provisions, in brief, include:
- Guidelines for Child Support Awards
Judges and other officials are required to use State guidelines for child support unless they are rebutted by a written finding that applying the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate in a particular case. States must review guidelines for awards every four years. Beginning five years after enactment, States generally must review and adjust individual case awards every three years for AFDC cases. The same applies to other IV-D cases, except review and adjustment must be at the request of a parent.
- Establishment of Paternity
States are required to meet Federal standards for the establishment of paternity. The standard relates to the percentage obtained by dividing the number of children in the State who are born out of wedlock, are receiving cash benefits or IV-D child support services, and for whom paternity has been established by the number of children who are born out of wedlock and are receiving cash benefits or IV-D child support services. To meet Federal requirements, this percentage in a State must: (1) be at least 50 percent; (2) be at least equal to the average for all States; or (3) have increased by 3 percentage points from fiscal years 1988 to 1991 and by 3 percentage points each year thereafter.
States are mandated to require all parties in a contested paternity case to take a genetic test upon request of any party. The Federal matching rate for laboratory testing to establish paternity is set at 90 percent.
- Disregard of Child Support
The child support enforcement disregard authorized under the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 is clarified so that it applies to a payment made by the noncustodial parent in the month it was due even though it was received in a subsequent month.
- Requirement for Prompt State Response
The Secretary of DHHS is required to set time limits within which States must accept and respond to requests for assistance in establishing and enforcing support orders as well as time limits within which child support payments collected by the State IV-D agency must be distributed to the families to whom they are owed.
- Requirement for Automated Tracking and Monitoring System
Every State that does not have a Statewide automated tracking and monitoring system in effect must submit an advance planning document that meets Federal requirements by October 1, 1991. The Secretary must approve each document within nine months after submission. By October 1, 1995, every State must have an approved system in effect. Federal 90 percent matching rates for this activity expire September 30, 1995.
- Interstate Enforcement
A Commission on Interstate Child Support was created to hold national conferences on interstate child support enforcement reform and to report to Congress no later than October 1, 1990 on recommendations for improvements in the system and revisions in the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act.
- Computing Incentive Payments
Amounts spent by States for interstate demonstration projects are excluded from calculating the amount of the States' incentive payments.
- Use of INTERNET System
The Secretaries of Labor and DHHS are required to enter into an agreement to give the Federal Parent Locator Service prompt access to wage and unemployment compensation claims information useful in locating absent parents.
- Wage Withholding
With respect to IV-D cases, each State must provide for immediate wage withholding in the case of orders that are issued or modified on or after the first day of the 25th month beginning after the date of enactment unless: (1) one of the parties demonstrates, and the court finds, that there is good cause not to require such withholding; or (2) there is a written agreement between both parties providing for an alternative arrangement. Prior law requirements for mandatory wage withholding in cases where payments are in arrears apply to orders that are not subject to immediate wage withholding. States are required to provide for immediate wage withholding for all support orders initially issued on or after January 1, 1994, regardless of whether a parent has applied for IV-D services.
- Work and Training Demonstration Programs for Noncustodial Parents
The Secretary of DHHS is required to grant waivers to up to five States to allow them to provide services to noncustodial parents under the JOBS program. No new power is granted to the States to require participation by noncustodial parents.
- Data Collection and Reporting
The Secretary of DHHS is required to collect and maintain State-by-State statistics on paternity establishment, location of absent parent for the purpose of establishing a support obligation, enforcement of a child support obligation, and location of absent parent for the purpose of enforcing or modifying an established obligation.
- Use of Social Security Number
Each State must, in the administration of any law involving the issuance of a birth certificate, require each parent to furnish his or her Social Security number (SSN), unless the State finds good cause for not requiring the parent to furnish it. The SSN shall not appear on the birth certificate, and the use of the SSN obtained through the birth record is restricted to child support enforcement purposes, except under certain circumstances.
- Notification of Support Collected
Each State required to inform families receiving AFDC of the amount of support collected on their behalf on a monthly basis, rather than annually as provided under prior law. States may provide quarterly notification if the Secretary of DHHS determines that monthly reporting imposes an unreasonable administrative burden. This provision is effective 4 years after the date of enactment.
1989
P.L. 101-239, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989, made permanent the requirement that Medicaid benefits continue for 4 months after a family loses AFDC eligibility as a result of collection of child support payments.
1990
P.L. 101-508, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, permanently extended the Federal provision that allows States to ask the IRS to collect child support arrearages of at least $500 out of income tax refunds otherwise due to noncustodial parents. The minor child restriction is to be eliminated for adults with a current support order who are disabled, as defined under OASDI or SSI. The IRS offset can be used for spousal support when spousal and child support are included in the same support order.
P.L. 101-508 also extended the life of the Interstate Child Support Commission from July 1, 1991 to July 1, 1992, required the Commission to submit its report no later than May 1, 1992, and authorized the Commission to hire its own staff.
1992
P.L. 102-521, the Child Support Recovery Act of 1992, imposed a Federal criminal penalty for the willful failure to pay a past-due child support obligation with respect to a child who resides in another State that has remained unpaid for longer than a year or is greater than $5,000. For the first conviction the penalty is a fine of up to $5,000 and/or imprisonment for not more than six months; for a second conviction, a fine of not more than $250,000 and/or imprisonment for up to two years.
P.L. 102-537, the Ted Weiss Child Support Enforcement Act of 1992, amended the Fair Credit Reporting Act to require consumer credit reporting agencies to include in any consumer report information on child support delinquencies provided by or verified by State or local CSE agencies, which antedates the report by 7 years.
1993
P.L. 103-66, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, increased the percentage of children for whom the State must establish paternity and required States to adopt laws requiring civil procedures to voluntarily acknowledge paternity (including hospital-based programs).
P.L. 103-66 also required States to adopt laws to ensure the compliance of health insurers and employers in carrying out court or administrative orders for medical child support and included a provision that forbids health insurers to deny coverage to children who are not living with the covered individual or who were born outside of marriage.
1994
P.L. 103-383, the Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders Act, requires each state to enforce, according to its terms, a child support order by a court (or administrative authority) of another state, with conditions and specifications for resolving issues of jurisdiction.
P.L. 103-394, the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1994, protects child support from being discharged in bankruptcy. Among many other provisions, the new law includes child support as an exception to automatic stays, for judicial liens, and to discharge of debts in bankruptcy. It also provides protection against trustee avoidance, facilitates access to bankruptcy proceedings, and assigns child support a priority for collecting claims from debtors.
P.L. 103-403, the Small Business Administration Reauthorization and Amendments Act, requires that recipients of financial assistance not be more than 60 days delinquent in paying child support.
P.L. 103-432, the Social Security Amendments of 1994, requires state IV-D agencies to periodically report parents who are at least two months delinquent in paying child support to credit bureaus, modifies the benchmarks under the Paternity Establishment Percentage formula used to determine the states' substantial compliance, and requires DHHS to provide free access for the Justice Department to the Federal Parent Locator Service in cases involving the unlawful taking or restraint of a child and/or the making or enforcing of a child custody determination.
1996
P.L. 104-193, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996
On August 22, President Clinton signed into law "The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996," a comprehensive bipartisan welfare reform plan that dramatically changed the nation's welfare system into one that requires work in exchange for time-limited assistance. The law contains strong work requirements, a performance bonus to reward states for moving welfare recipients into jobs, state maintenance of effort requirements, comprehensive child support enforcement, and supports for families moving from welfare to work.
The new law includes the child support enforcement measures President Clinton proposed in 1994--the most sweeping crackdown on non-paying parents in history. Under the new law, each state must operate a child support enforcement program meeting federal requirements in order to be eligible for Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) block grants. Provisions include:
- National new hire reporting system. The law establishes a Federal Case Registry and National Directory of New Hires to track delinquent parents across state lines. It also requires that employers report all new hires to state agencies for transmittal of new hire information to the National Directory of New Hires.
- Streamlines paternity establishment. The new law streamlines the legal process for paternity establishment, making it easier and faster to establish paternities. It also expands the voluntary in-hospital paternity establishment program and requires a state form for voluntary paternity acknowledgement.
- Uniform interstate child support laws. The new law provides for uniform rules, procedures, and forms for interstate cases.
- Computerized state-wide collections. The new law requires states to establish central registries of child support orders and centralized collection and disbursement units. It also requires expedited state procedures for child support enforcement.
- Tough new penalties. Under the new law, states can implement tough child support enforcement techniques. The new law expands wage garnishment, allows all states to seize assets, allows states to require community service in some cases, and enables states to revoke drivers and professional licenses for parents who owe delinquent child support.
- Families First. Under a new "Family First" policy, families no longer receiving assistance will have priority in the distribution of child support arrears.
- Access and visitation programs. In an effort to increase noncustodial parents' involvement in their children's lives, the new law includes grants to help states establish programs that support and facilitate noncustodial parents' visitation with and access to their children.
1997
P.L 105-33, the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 made a number of amendments to the Social Security Act, including creating the Children's Health Insurance Program in title XXI to help provide medical coverage to children of working poor families who are not eligible for private health insurance, and who are earning too much to receive Medicaid. The Balanced Budget Act also amended section 454 of the Social Security Act regarding cooperation/good cause, and the FPLS language in section 453 to clarify the authority permitting certain re-disclosures of wage and claim information. Also, this Act authorized for the first time the direct funding of Tribal support programs, with Congress giving OCSE greater flexibility in providing direct funding for Tribal CSE programs and requiring OCSE to promulgate regulations before issuing grants directly to Tribes.
APPENDIX H. FACT SHEETS AND NEWS RELEASES
Fact Sheet: Child Support Enforcement: A Clinton Administration Priority
Date: Wednesday, June 24, 1998
Contact: ACF Press Office (202) 401-9215
Overview
The goal of the Child Support Enforcement (CSE) program, established in 1975 under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act, is to ensure that children are supported financially by both parents.
Designed as a joint federal, state, and local partnership, the program involves 54 separate state and territory systems, each with its own unique laws and procedures. The program is usually run by state and local human service agencies, often with the help of prosecuting attorneys and other law enforcement officials as well as officials of family or domestic relations courts. At the federal level, the Department of Health and Human Services provides technical assistance and funding to states through the Office of Child Support Enforcement and also operates the Federal Parent Locator System, a computer matching system that locates non-custodial parents who owe child support.
Despite recent record improvements in paternity establishment and child support collections, much more needs to be done to ensure that all children born out-of-wedlock have paternity established and that all non-custodial parents provide financial support for their children. Currently, only about one-half of the custodial parents due child support receive full payment. About twenty-five percent receive partial payment and twenty-five percent receive nothing.
For that reason, President Clinton proposed, and Congress passed, legislation to strengthen and improve state child support collection activities. These provisions, included in the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996, could increase child support collections to over $24 billion in 10 years: a national new hire reporting system, streamlined paternity establishment, uniform interstate child support laws, computerized state-wide collections, and tough new penalties, such as driver's license revocation.
Clinton Administration Increases and Innovations
President Clinton has made improving child support enforcement and increasing child support collections a top priority. Since taking office, the President has cracked down on non-paying parents and strengthened child support enforcement, resulting in record child support collections: In FY 1997, the federal-state partnership collected an estimated $13.4 billion from non-custodial parents, an increase of $5 billion since 1992. The number of families that are receiving child support has increased to 4.2 million in 1997, an increase of 48 percent since 1992.
Encouraging State Innovations. In October, 1997 HHS announced the award of $1.5 million in demonstration grants to 17 states to support innovative projects to improve the nation's child support enforcement program. The projects will test:
- cooperation with child support requirements by Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) applicants and recipients;
- new models for coping with domestic violence in the context of child support enforcement; models of collaboration between child support enforcement, Head Start and Child Care programs at the state and local levels;
- collaborations to facilitate family preservation between child support and child welfare programs;
- reviewing and adjusting child support orders; the effect of child support collections on welfare recipient income; and,
- models for making the child support enforcement program responsive to the needs of low-income noncustodial fathers to encourage greater parental responsibility.
In December, 1997 HHS announced approval of a child support waiver to allow the State of Washington to use federal funds normally used for child support enforcement to fund "Devoted Dads," an innovative public/private partnership to promote the responsible roles of fathers in the
financial and emotional support of their children. The project, which serves the Tacoma, Washington Enterprise Community, intends to reach non-custodial parents, particularly young and at-risk fathers. This demonstration is the first child support waiver granted for an enterprise community.
Executive Action. While working toward comprehensive improvement of child support enforcement, President Clinton used his executive authority to increase child support collections. Since taking office, the President has directed the Treasury Department to activate a centralized, streamlined Federal system to offset child support debts against most Federal payments; ordered Federal agencies to take necessary steps to deny loans, loan guarantees, or loan insurance to any individual who is delinquent on child support debt; implemented a new program that will help track non-paying parents across state lines; proposed new regulations requiring women who apply for welfare to comply with paternity establishment requirements before receiving benefits; and issued an executive order to make the federal government a model employer in the area of child support enforcement. The Clinton Administration granted welfare reform waivers to 43 states, and more than two-thirds of these states used their waivers to pursue innovative child support reforms.
Increasing Resources. President Clinton has proposed annual expansions in child support enforcement, increasing resources by 53 percent since taking office. HHS has also launched an initiative and given demonstration grants to states to promote improved performance, service quality and public satisfaction in the child support program. The President's FY 1999 budget
proposal allocates $3.2 billion to state child support enforcement programs, a 19 percent increase over FY 1998.
Prosecuting non-payers. Billions of dollars more in support is owed to children whose parents have crossed state lines to avoid paying. Under the Child Support Recovery Act, the Justice Department is investigating and prosecuting such cases. At President Clinton's direction, the Justice Department submitted legislation to Congress in September 1996 that would make it a felony offense to cross state lines to evade a child support obligation if the obligation has remained unpaid for longer than one year or is greater than $5,000; or to willfully fail to pay a child support obligation for a child living in another state if the obligation has remained unpaid for a period longer than two years or is greater than $10,000. The President signed the bill into law on June 24, 1998.
Seizing tax refunds. The Federal government collected $1.1 billion in delinquent child support by intercepting income tax refunds of non-paying parents for tax year 1996. The amount was 10 percent higher than the previous year, and up 66 percent since 1992. Nearly 1.3 million families benefited from these collections.
Improving paternity establishment. The Clinton Administration has made paternity establishment a top priority. In FY 1997, an estimated 1.26 million paternities were established and acknowledged by parents. Of these, nearly 48,000 were in-hospital paternities voluntarily acknowledged. Since the inception of the voluntary program in 1993, acknowledgments have grown nearly six-fold. The number of paternities established in 1997 exceeded the number of out-of-wedlock births during the year, meaning paternities are being established for children born in earlier years. In 1992, paternity was established for just 40 percent of children born out-of-wedlock.
U.S. Postal Service Posts "Wanted Lists." The U.S. Postal Service is working with states to display post office "Wanted Lists" of parents who owe child support. The President has challenged every state to create such a "Wanted List" to expand efforts to track down parents who owe support and send the strongest possible message that evasion of child support responsibilities is a serious offense.
Action through the Internet. HHS's Office of Child Support Enforcement now has a home page on the Internet that provides information on the child support enforcement program, tells parents where they can apply for child support assistance, and provides links to states that have their own home pages.
Improvements Under the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996
At President Clinton's urging, the new welfare reform law includes the child support enforcement measures the President proposed in 1994 -- the most sweeping crackdown on non-paying parents in history. Under the new law, each state must operate a child support enforcement program meeting federal requirements in order to be eligible for Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) block grants. Provisions include:
National new hire reporting system. The law establishes a Federal Case Registry and National Directory of New Hires to track delinquent parents across state lines. It also requires that employers report all new hires to state agencies for transmittal to the National Directory of New Hires. This builds on President Clinton's June 1996 executive action to track delinquent parents
across state lines. The law also expands and streamlines procedures for direct withholding of child support from wages. Since the implementation of the National Directory (to be fully operational by October 1, 1998), over 1 million parents who are not now paying child support to the children have been identified. They would not have been found without the National and State Directories. Location information is passed to the states for action.
Streamlined paternity establishment. The new law streamlines the legal process for paternity establishment, making it easier and faster to establish paternities. It also expands the voluntary in-hospital paternity establishment program, started by the Clinton Administration in 1993, and requires a state affidavit for voluntary paternity acknowledgment. These affidavits must meet minimum requirements set by the Secretary of HHS. In addition, the law mandates that states publicize the availability and encourage the use of voluntary paternity establishment processes. Individuals who fail to cooperate with paternity establishment will have their monthly cash assistance reduced by at least 25 percent.
Uniform interstate child support laws. The new law provides for uniform rules, procedures, and forms for interstate cases.
Computerized state-wide collections. The new law requires states to establish central registries of child support orders and centralized collection and disbursement units. It also requires expedited state procedures for child support enforcement.
Tough new penalties. Under the new law, states can implement tough child support enforcement techniques. The new law will expand wage garnishment, allow states to seize assets, allow states to require community service in some cases, and enable states to revoke driver and professional licenses for parents who owe delinquent child support.
"Families First." Under a new "Family First" policy, families no longer receiving assistance will have priority in the distribution of child support arrears. This new policy will bring families who have left welfare for work about $1 billion in support over the first six years.
Access and visitation programs. In an effort to increase noncustodial parents' involvement in their children's lives, the new law includes grants to help states establish programs that support and facilitate noncustodial parents' visitation and access to their children. In October, 1997, HHS announced the award of $10 million in grants to all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and U.S. territories to promote access and visitation programs. The minimum allotment per state for FY 1997 is $50,000.
New State Incentives. Current law provides for HHS to make incentive payments to states for their child support enforcement systems, but these payments are based on only one factor: cost-effectiveness. Under the new welfare reform law, HHS was authorized to prepare an alternative incentive plan. On March 13, 1997, Secretary Shalala submitted a proposal to Congress which was designed to further improve the performance of state child support enforcement programs by linking federal incentive payments to states to their performance in five key areas: establishment of paternities, establishment of child support orders, collections on current child support owed, collection on previously or past due child support owed, and cost-effectiveness. To reinforce the goal of achieving self-sufficiency, states will be rewarded for collection in all child support cases, but with a stronger emphasis on welfare and former welfare cases. On September 16, 1997, Secretary Shalala joined Rep. Clay Shaw, chairman of the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Human Resources, and Rep. Sandy Levin, the ranking minority member of the subcommittee, in announcing legislation that is drawn from the HHS proposal. The House of
Representatives passed the bill on September 30, 1997, followed by the Senate. The legislation is awaiting final action by the Congress.
Fact Sheet: Child Support Enforcement Program
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Administration for Children and Families
The goal of the Child Support Enforcement (CSE) Program, which was established in 1975 under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act, is to ensure that children are financially supported by both their parents. Welfare reform legislation that President Clinton signed in 1996 provided strong measures for ensuring that children receive the support due them:
- States were required to enact uniform interstate laws by January 1, 1998.
- State and Federal CSE programs provide registries of newly hired employees.
- Paternity establishment has been streamlined.
- States will have computerized state-wide support collection and disbursement centers by October 1998.
- Tough new penalties, such as license revocation and seizure of assets, will be available when child support obligations are not met.
The 1996 legislation also recognizes the importance to children of access to their noncustodial parent: the new law includes grants to help States establish programs that support and facilitate noncustodial parents' visitation with and access to their children.
The CSE program is usually run by state and local human services departments, often with the help of prosecuting attorneys, other law enforcement agencies, and officials of family or domestic relations courts.
Child Support Enforcement services are available automatically for families receiving assistance under the new Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) programs. Any current child support collected reimburses the state and federal governments for TANF payments made to the family.
Child support services are also available to families not receiving TANF who apply for such services. Child support payments that are collected on behalf of non-TANF families are sent to the family. For these families, states must charge an application fee of up to $25, but may pay this fee from state funds. Some states may also charge for the cost of services rendered.
The most recent census data show that, in the Spring of 1992, 11.5 million families with children had a parent living elsewhere. Custodial parent families, 86 percent of which were headed by women and 14 percent headed by men, comprised one third of all families with their own, never married children under 21. Of the 11.5 million, only 6.2 million (54 percent) of the custodial parents had awards or agreements for child support. Of the total $17.7 billion owed for child support in 1991, $5.8 billion was not paid. Among those due support, about half received the full amount, about a quarter received partial payment and about a quarter received nothing.
During FY 1997, about $13.4 billion in child support payments was collected, and services were provided in over 19.3 million cases through the Program. Paternity was established for more than l.29 million children that year through CSE Program and voluntary in-hospital acknowledge-ments, providing vital links between the children and their noncustodial parents. Almost 1.2 million new child support orders child support orders were established through the Program in FY 1997. The Federal government collected a record $1.1 billion in delinquent child support by intercepting income tax refunds of non-paying parents for tax year 1996.
The Child Support Enforcement Program provides four major services: locating noncustodial parents, establishing paternity, establishing child support obligations, and enforcing child support orders.
Locating Absent Parents - Child support enforcement officials use local information and resources of State and Federal Parent Locator services to locate parents for child support enforcement, or to find a parent in parental kidnapping/custody disputes. About four million cases are processed annually by the Federal Parent Locator Service.
Establishing Paternity - Establishing paternity (legally identifying a child's father) is a necessary first step for obtaining an order for child support when children are born out of wedlock. Establishing paternity also provides access to Social security, pension and retirement benefits; health insurance and information; and interaction with members of both parents' families.
Many fathers voluntarily acknowledge paternity. Otherwise, father, mother, and child can be required to submit to genetic tests. The results are highly accurate. States must have procedures which allow paternity to be established at least up to the child's eighteenth birthday.
Establishing Support Obligations - States must have guidelines to establish how much a parent should pay for child support. Support agency staff can take child support cases to court, or to an administrative hearing process to establish the order. Health insurance coverage can also be ordered.
Enforcing Child Support Orders - A parent can be required to pay child support by income withholding. The new welfare reform legislation establishes State and Federal registries of newly hired employees to speed the transfer of wage withholding orders. Overdue child support can be collected from federal and state income tax refunds. Liens can be put on property, and the property itself may even be sold with the proceeds used to pay child support arrearages. Unpaid child support should be reported automatically to credit reporting bureaus, and drivers, professional, occupational and recreational licenses can be suspended if the obligated parent is not paying support as required.
For further information, contact the Office of Child Support Enforcement on Internet site /programs/cse. The site provides links to States that have their own home pages.
Press Release
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Thursday July 10, 1997
Contact: Michael Kharfen (202) 401-9215
Clinton Administration Reports Record Year of Child Support, Progress on Tough Child Support Enforcement Initiatives
The Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families announced dramatic improvement in the most critical areas of child support enforcement. According to the 20th Annual Report to Congress on Child Support Enforcement issued by HHS today, the federal/state child support enforcement program has made record increases in child support collections, paternity establishments, and families receiving collections.
For fiscal year 1995, $10.8 billion was collected from non-custodial parents. Preliminary data for fiscal year 1996 shows that the federal/state partnership collected a record $12 billion, surpassing the estimate of $11.8 billion that the President announced in September 1996. Since 1992 child support collections have increased by $4 billion, or 50 percent.
The report issued today also shows a dramatic increase in paternity establishment since President Clinton took office. In fiscal year 1995 over 900,000 paternities were established, exceeding the Administration's previous estimates of 735,000 paternities. Further, preliminary data for fiscal year 1996 shows that the number of paternities established rose to nearly 1 million, almost double, from 516,000 in 1992. The increase is attributable to paternities established as part of the Clinton administration's voluntary in-hospital paternity establishment regulation.
The report describes collections and other child support activities nationwide during fiscal year 1995 (October 1994- September 1995). It also contains state-by-state financial and program data. Highlights of some of the findings are:
- paternity establishment for 903,451 children in 1995 compared with 670,177 in 1994, an increase of 35 percent
- cases with a collection were 3.7 million in 1995 compared with 3.4 million, an increase of 9 percent
New estimates for fiscal year 1996 show more improved results for children. Cases with a collection increased to nearly 4 million, an increase of 43 percent over 2.8 million in 1992. Paternity establishments rose to nearly 1 million, an increase of 50 percent over 0.5 million in 1992.
HHS calculates the cost-effectiveness of the child support program by determining how much child support is collected per dollar of administrative spending. This ratio measures the management efficiency of the program and how effective it spends administrative funds. The program improved its cost-effectiveness ratio from 3.59 in 1995 to an estimated 3.94 in 1996, an increase of 10 percent. The result for children is more collections by a better-managed program.
"No parents should or will evade their responsibility to support their children," said David Gray Ross, deputy director, office of child support enforcement. "We, the states and the federal government, now have both the will and the way to find any parent, at home or at work, to collect child support and help their children to a stronger and brighter future."
The child support enforcement program serves families receiving assistance under the Aid to Families with Dependent Children Program and the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families Program, as well as other families who apply for service.
Note: The report is available from the HHS Administration for Children and Families, Office of Child Support Enforcement, 370 L'Enfant Promenade, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20047. Both this press release and the report is also available on the ACF world wide web site at /news/.
Fact Sheet: Clinton Administration Moving Forward On The Promise Of Welfare Reform
DATE: August 22, 1997
Contact: HHS Press Office (202) 690-6343
On August 22, 1996, President Clinton signed into law "The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996," a comprehensive bipartisan welfare reform plan that has dramatically changed the nation's welfare system into one that requires work in exchange for time-limited assistance. The law contains strong work requirements, a performance bonus to reward states for moving welfare recipients into jobs, state maintenance of effort requirements, comprehensive child support enforcement, and supports for families moving from welfare to work - including increased funding for child care and guaranteed medical coverage.
The Clinton Administration has taken numerous steps to ensure the success of the law. In the past year, the Clinton Administration has provided assistance to states and communities in implementing the law; created partnerships with the business, religious and non-profit communities to hire and train welfare recipients; and delivered on the President's pledge to invest in moving people from welfare to work and fix provisions in the law that had nothing to do with welfare reform. As a result of the Clinton Administration's focused efforts this year -- and throughout the last four years -- the welfare caseload fell by 3.4 million recipients, from 14.1 million in January 1993 to 10.7 million in May 1997, the largest welfare caseload decline in history.
TRANSFORMING THE BROKEN WELFARE SYSTEM:
Overhauling the Welfare System Nationwide: On July 1, the historic welfare law that the President signed last August went into effect in every state, making work and responsibility the law of the land. The Department of Health and Human Services has certified welfare plans for each state. In accordance with the welfare law, all plans require and reward work, impose time limits, and demand personal responsibility.
Building on the Administration's Welfare Reform Strategy: Even before welfare reform, many states were well on their way to changing their welfare programs to jobs programs. By waiving certain provisions in federal statutes, the Clinton Administration allowed 43 states -- more than all previous Administrations combined -- to require work, time-limit assistance, make work pay, improve child support enforcement, and encourage parental responsibility. A vast majority of states have chosen to continue or build on their welfare demonstration projects approved by the Clinton Administration.
Largest Caseload Decline in History: The welfare caseload fell by 3.4 million recipients, from 14.1 million in January 1993 to 10.7 million in May 1997, a drop of 24 percent since President Clinton took office. Forty-eight out of fifty states have seen their caseloads decline, with ten states reducing their rolls by 40 percent or more in the last four years. This is the largest welfare caseload decline in history and the lowest percentage of the population on welfare since 1970. According to the Council of Economic Advisors (CEA) analysis, the reduction in the welfare rolls can be attributed to the strong economic growth during the Clinton Administration, the waivers granted to states to test innovative strategies to move people from welfare to work, and other factors, which may include the Administration's expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit, strengthened child support enforcement, and increased funding for child care.
Mobilizing the Business Community: To make welfare reform a success and help move a million people from welfare into the workforce by the year 2000, President Clinton has enlisted the business community's leadership. At the President's urging, the Welfare to Work Partnership, chaired by United Airlines CEO Gerald Greenwald, was launched in May 1997, to lead the national business effort to hire people from the welfare rolls. So far 800 companies, large and small, have accepted the President's challenge to forge a national effort to help move those on public assistance into jobs in the private sector. In August 1997, the Welfare to Work Partnership launched: a toll-free hotline (1-888-USAJOB1), a web page (www.welfaretowork.org), a "Blueprint for Business" manual to help companies across the nation hire people off welfare; and a city to city challenge to help promote innovative and effective welfare to work initiatives in 12 cities with high levels of poverty during the next year.
Helping Welfare Recipients Get Off and Stay Off Welfare: The Vice President created the Welfare to Work Coalition to Sustain Success, a coalition of civic groups committed to helping former welfare recipients stay in the workforce and succeed. Tailoring their services to meet welfare recipients' needs and the organizations' strengths, the Coalition will focus on providing mentoring and other support services. Charter members of the Coalition include: the Boys and Girls Clubs of America, the Baptist Joint Committee, the United Way, the YMCA, and fourteen other civic groups.
Federal Government's Hiring Initiative: As the nation's largest employer, the federal government is also doing its fair share to hire people from the welfare rolls. In March 1997, the President directed each head of a Federal agency or department to develop a plan to hire and retain welfare recipients in jobs in the government. The President asked the Vice President to oversee this initiative, in which the federal agencies have agreed to directly hire at least 10,000 welfare recipients in the next four years without displacing current employees.
ADDRESSING BARRIERS TO MOVING FROM WELFARE TO SELF-SUFFICIENCY
Increasing Funding for and Improving Quality of Child Care: The welfare law increased child care funding by nearly $4 billion over 6 years, providing child care assistance to low-income working families and parents moving from welfare to work. In October 1996, HHS released the child care block grant funds for FY 1997 providing up to $1.92 billion to states, a significant increase over the estimated FY 1996 level of $1.35 billion. The Clinton Administration also has taken steps to ensure the health and safety of child care. In July 1997, President Clinton proposed new child care regulations, which include a new approach to help more children in child care receive the immunizations they need on time.
Developing Strategies to Address Transportation Issues: In May 1997, President Clinton announced Department of Transportation grants to 24 states to develop welfare to work transportation strategies. The President also urged Congress to adopt a six-year, $600 million grant program in his NEXTEA transportation bill that would support flexible, innovative transportation systems in rural, urban and suburban areas to get people to jobs.
Continuing to Strengthen Child Support Enforcement: Due to the President's unprecedented and sustained campaign to make noncustodial parents pay the child support they owe, the Clinton Administration collected a record $12 billion in child support in 1996, an increase of 50% since 1992. Paternity establishment almost doubled to nearly 1 million cases in FY 1996, from 516,000 in 1992. And the number of families actually receiving child support rose to 4 million cases with collections, an increase of 43 percent, over 2.8 million in 1992.
Implementing the Provisions in the Welfare Law: The welfare law included tough child support measures long-supported by the President, including: a national new hire reporting system; streamlined paternity establishment; uniform interstate child support laws; computerized state-wide collections; and tough new penalties. So far over half the states have enacted these provisions. The President has urged all states to put these enforcement tools in place to ensure that children and families get the support they need. These measures are projected to increase child support collections by an additional $24 billion over the next ten years.
Executive Actions: While working toward comprehensive improvement of child support enforcement, President Clinton used his executive authority to increase child support collections. Since taking office, President Clinton has: directed the Treasury Department to collect past-due child support from Federal payments including Federal income tax refunds and employee salaries; taken steps to deny Federal loans to any delinquent parents; and made the Federal government a model employer in the area of child support enforcement.
Preventing Teen Pregnancy: As a result of the Administration's focused effort since President Clinton took office, the national birth rate for teens aged 15-19 has continued to decline four straight years in row, decreasing by eight percent between 1991 and 1995. Significant components of the President's comprehensive effort to reduce teen pregnancy were included in the welfare law. The welfare law requires unmarried minor parents to stay in school and live at home, or in an adult-supervised setting; supports the creation of Second Chance Homes, which will provide teen parents with the skills and support they need; and provides $50 million a year in new funding for state abstinence education activities, beginning in FY 1998.
- Launching a National Strategy: In January 1997, the Clinton Administration launched a new comprehensive effort to prevent teen pregnancy and encourage adolescents to remain abstinent. The initiative, led by the Department of Health and Human Services, responded to a call from the President and Congress for a national strategy to prevent out-of-wedlock teen pregnancies and to a directive, under the new welfare law, to assure that at least 25 percent of communities in this country have teen pregnancy prevention programs in place. The strategy sends the strongest possible message to all teens that postponing sexual activity, staying in school, and preparing for work are the right things to do. It strengthens ongoing efforts across the nation by increasing opportunities through welfare reform; supporting promising approaches; building partnerships; improving data collection, research, and evaluation; and disseminating information on innovative and effective practices. The national strategy places a special emphasis on encouraging abstinence, especially among 9- to 14-year-old girls, through HHS' new Girl Power! campaign, which was launched in November 1996.
- Providing Resources to Promote Abstinence: The welfare law included $50 million a year in new funding for state abstinence education activities. In July, 1997 every state applied for this money to build on their state efforts to prevent teen pregnancy.
BALANCED BUDGET HELPS MOVE MORE PEOPLE FROM WELFARE TO WORK
The balanced budget that the President signed on August 5, 1997 delivered on the President's pledge to fulfill the promise of welfare reform by investing in moving people from welfare to work and fixing the provisions in the law that had nothing to do with welfare reform. Specifically:
$3 Billion to Help Move 1 Million People from Welfare to Work. As a result of the President's leadership, the balanced budget includes the total funding he requested to create a $3 billion Welfare to Work Jobs Challenge fund. This program will help states and local communities move long-term welfare recipients into lasting, unsubsidized jobs. These funds can be used for job creation, job placement and job retention efforts, including wage subsidies to private employers, and other critical post-employment support services. The Labor Department will provide oversight but the dollars will be placed in the hands of the localities who are on the front lines of the welfare reform effort.
A Welfare to Work Tax Credit. This provision will give employers an added incentive to hire long-term welfare recipients by providing a credit equal to 35 percent of the first $10,000 in wages in the first year of employment, and 50 percent of the first $10,000 in the second year, paid for new hires who have received welfare for an extended period. The credit, administered by the Treasury Department, is for two years per worker to encourage not only hiring but retention.
Focusing the Welfare Law on Work. The budget includes $12 billion to restore both disability and health benefits to legal immigrants who are currently receiving benefits or become disabled in the future, and to continue Medicaid coverage for currently disabled children receiving SSI. The budget bill will help 350,000 legal immigrants (in FY 2002) who would otherwise have been denied assistance. It also extended the SSI and Medicaid eligibility period for refugees and asylees from 5 years after entry in the country to 7 years to give these residents more time to naturalize. In addition, the budget bill improves the food stamp provisions in the welfare law by creating work slots and preserving food stamp benefits for those who are willing to work, but through no fault of their own, have not found employment.