OCSE Home . Program Information . News . Publications . Policy . State Links . OCSE Search . Help

Direct Deposit of Child Support Payments in Virginia Makes Receiving Child Support Faster and Easier

In Virginia, direct deposit of child support payments electronically into recipients' checking or savings accounts is a reality.

In the fall of 1997, the Virginia Department of Social Services' Division of Finance responded to requests by 40 custodial parents to participate in a pilot of a direct deposit program in Virginia. After collaborative planning with several major banking institutions in Virginia, on October 29, 1997, letters were mailed to this group of custodial parents announcing the new direct deposit program of child support payments. Funds were first electronically deposited into the customers' bank accounts on November 26, 1997.

The Portsmouth and Danville district offices were identified to serve as pilot sites, with their experiences providing the basis for a possible statewide program. The new program was marketed by mass mailing of brochures touting the slogan "Direct Deposit: Receiving Child Support is Now Faster and Easier" to a targeted customer base within the Portsmouth and Danville districts.

The marketing brochure contained a basic description of the Direct Deposit Program, citing the advantages of using this method of payment (get payment faster, check cannot be lost/stolen, no trips to/waits at bank). Attached was a tear-off application/authorization agreement for automatic deposit of child support payments.

As of July, 2000, there were 26,990 direct deposit accounts (checking and savings) to which 59,671 payments were made via direct deposit for Division of Child Support Enforcement customers, representing 27.1 percent of all child support payments in Virginia. This represents a tremendous savings in staff time over any manual methodology, expedites the payments to where they are needed, eliminates the possibility of lost or stolen checks, and lowers the State's undistributed receipts.

"Direct deposit allows the program to get money to custodial parents in the quickest way possible."... Nick Young

The Direct Deposit Program in Virginia is highly successful, continues to grow daily in enrollment, and is now marketed by Virginia's banking institutions, which stock the enrollment forms and mail completed forms to the Division of Child Support Enforcement. Additionally, the direct deposit forms are located in all district offices around Virginia, as well as on the Virginia Department of Social Services' Website.

"Direct deposit," says Virginia child support director Nick Young, "allows the child support enforcement program to fulfill its commitment to get money to custodial parents in the quickest way possible. It establishes and reinforces the bond that we have with our customers, and it has proven to be a cost savings measure, as well."

For more information, telephone Cheryl Parker at (804) 692-1355 or contact her by e-mail at chp8@email1.dss.state.va.uso

Internet Information on Financial Data Match

Gina Barbaro

OCSE recently enhanced its Website information pertaining to the Financial Institution Data Match (FIDM) program. The FIDM Web page, located at www.acf.dhhs.gov/program/cse, provides information on legislative authority, data specifications, implementation steps, in-state matching, federal matching, lien and levy processing, and operations.

The Web page has screens tailored to the information needs of parents, state agencies, and financial institutions. Its help feature enables users to find contact information for technical support from the state level, and to send a query for response by OCSE's FIDM specialists and technical support staff. The Web page includes the following educational, technical, and job aid information:

• Slide presentations on child support enforcement and FIDM Programs;
• Fact sheets on match requirements, federal matching with multistate financial institutions, matching at the state level, and lien and levy processing;
• Statutory requirements;
• Data specifications;
• Policy and program guidance;
• Contact information for state FIDM liaisons;
• Profiles of state lien and levy thresholds, due process, and appeal procedures; and
• Forms for multistate matching operations.

The FIDM Web page links to the OCSE internal search capabilities, allowing users to easily access and download other OCSE documents and other FIDM publications. For example, through the Web page link to OCSE's Online Interstate Roster and Referral Guide, state child support staff can access a profile of each state's threshold and process for seizing assets from financial institutions in interstate cases.

For more information, contact Gina Barbaro at (202) 401-5426.

Gina Barbaro is OCSE's Financial Industry Liaison.

State Self-Assessment Regulations Published

Published in the Federal Register on December 12, the state self-assessment regulations require states annually to assess the performance of their child support enforcement programs in accordance with standards specified by the Secretary of DHHS and to provide a report of findings to the Secretary.

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 requires states to conduct annual self-assessments of their child support programs to determine compliance with federal requirements.

Prior to welfare reform, states audited by OCSE were subject to a financial penalty if found not to be in substantial compliance with federal requirements. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) requires states to conduct annual self-assessments of their child support programs to determine compliance with federal requirements. There are no financial sanctions associated with self-assessments, which are intended as a management tool to help states evaluate their programs and assess performance.

For more information on self-assessment, see the July '98 and May '99 issues of Child Support Report.

A Conversation with Dr. Joan Kelly

Dr. Joan Kelly, a clinical psychologist with a Yale Ph.D., has studied mediation and the impact of divorce on children's adjustment for more than 30 years. She has published more than 60 articles, served on numerous editorial and advisory boards, and was a founding board member and president of the Academy of Family Mediators. The following interview is excerpted from the Fall, 1999, Newsletter of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC).

AFCC:You have been studying the effects of divorce on children over a thirty-year period. What do we know now that we didn't know in 1969?

JK: From 1970 until 1990, the tendency was to blame all of children's problems on the divorce. What we now understand as a result of much better research is that marital conflict is responsible for a great deal more of divorced children's adjustment problems than we used to believe. The symptoms we have seen in children of divorce are the same as those we now observe in children with married parents who are experiencing a high level of conflict.

AFCC: Does that mean that if there were no divorces we would see the same types of problems in children of married parents?

JK: Yes. Until the late 1980s, we were not studying children in the married family. But when research began comparing children of married parents with those of divorced parents and examining a multiplicity of variables, we learned that with married families there are enormous variations in children's adjustment. The central variables which account for the differences within both married and divorced families are the levels of conflict, violence, and the mental health of the mother. If you look at the research, the divorced children have more behavioral and academic problems than children whose parents are married, but the differences between the two groups are really quite small and they have been narrowing in recent years.

AFCC: Why do you think the gap is narrowing?

JK: One reason is that we have improved our measures and methodologies. Our society is also quite different now. Divorce no longer has the stigma it once did. There are more support systems, educational programs and information available for divorcing parents. . . . Most well-designed studies show that by their early 30s, there is no difference between young adults whose parents were divorced and those whose parents stayed married. . . .

AFCC: What is the impact of all of this information?

JK: It has really challenged our thinking about children of divorce and about divorce in general. . . . Rather than focusing on divorce, we now look for the conditions that create problems and those which accelerate improvement in child development.

AFCC: There has been quite a focus on the role of fathers lately. What does the research indicate?

JK: We've come full circle on fathers since the 1970s. Back then, we said that frequent contact with fathers was associated with better child adjustment following divorce. In the 1980s, several influential studies reported that there was no relationship between father contact and child adjustment. This was quite troubling for many clinicians. But in the 1990s-in fact, in the last two years-there have been studies that demonstrate a significant relationship between a father's post-divorce involvement with his children and their positive adjustment. This occurs if the father's involvement is characterized as emotionally supportive and "active parenting," meaning discipline, problem solving and appropriate parenting behaviors. . . . One very interesting finding from a national study is that when dads are more actively involved with their children's school, the children do better academically, are less likely to be suspended or expelled and like school better.

AFCC: Thank you.

Used with permission.

Colorado Caseload Management Training

In November and December 1999, Colorado's Division of Child Support Enforcement (DCSE) trained 440 county staff to use systems-generated reports to manage a caseload. In addition, county staff shared their own "best practices" in using various systems-generated reports to better manage their cases.

Although county participation was voluntary, 60 of Colorado's 63 counties were represented at one or more of the seven one-day training sessions held throughout the State.

"This kind of training can be used to impress upon staff how their individual working of the cases impacts the whole." ...Diane Young, Colorado DCSE Policy Specialist

The training focused on training staff to use available systems-generated reports. These reports included:

• The Caseload Listing Report, which enables determination at a glance of the case's next appropriate step (i.e., establishment of paternity and support, location of the noncustodial parent, enforcement of the child support order and/or medical support, closure of the case due to emancipation of the child, lack of locate, etc.);
• A Monthly Monitoring Report, which tracks performance on over 50 performance measures for each county. The report is used by the State to evaluate county performance;
• The OCSE 157;
• A report that identifies cases with no court order;
• A report that identifies cases with orders on the system that have no ledger established in accounting; and
• A report that identifies cases with judgments that have no arrearage posted on the system. Proper use of the reports enables workers to move stalled cases by taking the proper action. The goal is always to move cases into paying status. Examples:
• No order established for 90 days? Move the case back to locate for better locate information to permit service of process.
• No money coming in on a case with an order? Use locate to find an employer. Explore other enforcement actions if no employer can be found.
• Order on the system, but no ledger in accounting? Establish ledger.
• Interstate case? Is a request to another state to take action needed?
• Unworkable case? If case closure criteria are met, close the case.

In addition, the training was designed to help supervisors manage their teams. Besides assisting individual workers to identify problem cases and take action, the systems-generated reports can help supervisors to identify overall problems and see where the team needs to focus its efforts.

The training gave the State the opportunity to explain to county staff the federal performance measures on which the State is now evaluated in order to receive federal incentives. "This kind of training can be used to impress upon staff how their individual working of the cases impacts the whole--in particular, the State's ability to draw down federal dollars," says Diane Young, the DCSE Policy Specialist who managed the caseload management training project.

The training also provided a year-end boost to performance, according to DCSE staff. The State achieved ahead of schedule its year 2000 goal of collecting $200,000,000 by the end of 1999. In addition, the State achieved its performance measures for the year overall. While there were several reasons for this outcome, a marked improvement was noted on a number of factors between October (before the training) and the end of the year.

The biggest benefit: Instilling a mindset of caseload awareness that the caseload is workable and manageable.

The biggest benefit: Instilling a mindset of caseload awareness that the caseload is workable and manageable.

For more information, telephone Diane Young at (720) 947-5088, or contact her by e-mail at diane.young@state.co.us.

Washington State Employment Project Targets Noncustodial Parents

Begun in mid-1998, "Support Has A Rewarding Effect" (SHARE) is a project designed and implemented by the Tri-County Workforce Development Council (WDC), Yakima and Kittitas County Prosecuting Attorneys (PA), and the Yakima Office of the Division of Child Support (DCS). The goal is to assist unemployed or under-employed noncustodial parents in securing and retaining employment.

The goal is to assist unemployed or under-employed noncustodial parents in securing and retaining employment.

SHARE targets the noncustodial parents of minor children who meet the eligibility requirements for Welfare-to-Work (WtW) as established by federal regulations. SHARE's program design is as follows:

• DCS identifies and refers prospective noncustodial parents to the prosecutor through the contempt process;
• If a noncustodial parent appears to qualify, the court orders him to participate in SHARE. The PA then refers the noncustodial parent to WDC for WtW Services;
• WDC refers the noncustodial parent to an appropriate WtW Service Provider; and
• WtW Service Providers determine program eligibility, conduct the employability assessment, develop the individual service strategy, and enter into a Personal Responsibility Contract with the noncustodial parent. An initial written assessment is provided to the PA to enter into the case file.

Noncustodial parents receive the full range of services allowable under the WtW legislation, such as case management, job readiness, paid work experience, subsidized employment (on-the-job-training), job retention/support, post-employment activities and other allowable services. The mix and sequence of services provided are based on the individual noncustodial parent's skills, abilities, and barriers.

All activities are employment based to secure and retain unsubsidized employment while at the same time developing strategies for wage progression. Other points:

• The courts and DCS may temporarily reduce the current support payments for the noncustodial parent who is in compliance with the contempt court order and strategies agreed upon in the Personal Responsibility Contract;
• DCS may consider waiver of excessive child support debts owed to the State, especially if the support obligation was originally set higher than ability to pay;
• DCS and the prosecutor may review the support order for modification if it is out of line with the noncustodial parent's ability to pay;
• WtW Service Providers report monthly noncustodial parent's progress to DCS and PA; and
• All referrals are tracked to determine the overall impact of the project.

Because the SHARE Project is geared to help the "hardest to serve" noncustodial parents, it was determined that the prosecutor's help was necessary to require non-custodial parents to follow through with paying support if they were able, find employment so they could pay support, or enroll in WtW Employment/Training Services to aid them in finding employment.

The majority of noncustodial parents referred to SHARE have been referred to the prosecutor for the contempt diversion process. A small number of noncustodial parents have volunteered to be in the program. These volunteers did not need to go through the contempt process, but have been referred directly to the WtW providers for employment services.

As of June, 2000, there were 134 noncustodial parents enrolled in WtW employment and training services, with a total of $40,000 paid in child support. Communication and coordination among the partners have been the key to the success of the project. Having a clear understanding of each partner's role in the project is essential.

For more information, telephone Kathy Thomas at the Tri-County Workforce Development Council at (509) 574-1950, or e-mail her at kathyt@co.yakima.wa.us.

Maryland Helps Noncustodial Parents Find Employment

In the mid-1980s, Circuit Court Judge William O. Carr was concerned about absent parents appearing in his court who were not meeting their child support obligations due to unemployment. He initiated a discussion with Maryland's Department of Economic and Employment Development (DEED) about what could be done to address the problem.

The county has saved over $1,222,000 in incarceration expenses for the 1,300 non-custodial parents referred to the program.

The result was an agreement that the court could order noncustodial parents to participate in job search and counseling activities through DEED's Job Service. This was the beginning of Maryland's Absent Parent Employment Program (APEP). Program staff interviewed noncustodial parents, assisted in their job searches and provided liaison between individual noncustodial parents and the Bureau of Support Enforcement (BOSE).

The program expanded in 1988 when Maryland's Department of Human Resources committed State funds to the project. In 1991, DEED became the Maryland Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation (DLLR), but APEP's goal remained the same through these transitions: assist noncustodial parents to obtain employment, thus enabling them to meet their child support obligations.

Most participants are referred to APEP through the monthly show-cause court session. If the reason for nonpayment of child support is unemployment, the judge can order the parent to enter the program. The program also accepts volunteer participants. Anyone with a Harford County child support order is eligible to participate.

APEP's staff of two counselors is present in the courtroom and can perform initial intake for the program. An appointment is then made for the parent to report to the APEP offices at the Maryland Job Service.

The initial visit to the APEP office includes review and signing of program guidelines, assessment of the parent's skills and experience, and discussion of employment barriers and child support concerns. The parent is expected to visit the office weekly until he or she finds a job. Each participant is expected to complete at least four applications for employment each week and to submit a worksheet detailing the search activities he or she has undertaken during the week. APEP staff spot check with employers to verify that applications listed were actually submitted. Failure to participate as required may result in a bench warrant.

APEP staff performs the dual role of monitoring the parent's job search efforts for the court and the Bureau of Support Enforcement and assisting the parent in finding a job. APEP counselors discuss job search strategies and application and interviewing techniques, help create resumes, and make referrals to prospective employers. Parents are taught to use the CareerNet computer system within the Job Service to identify job opportunities available both locally and nationwide.

Counseling during weekly office visits may reveal other areas where the parent needs help. APEP staff refer parents to rehabilitation services, education/GED services, visitation programs, support modification programs, job skills training programs, and work credit programs.

APEP tracks parents' progress and keeps the Bureau of Support Enforcement informed of their status. When necessary, APEP staff members testify in court about a parent's progress in finding a job. Once the parent gets a job, the employment is verified. Information on the new employer is forwarded to the Bureau of Support Enforcement so that a wage lien may be sent to the employer directing child support withholding.

The program is successful in saving taxpayer dollars and in improving child support collections from once delinquent noncustodial parents. In its 10 years of operation, APEP estimates that the county has saved over $1,222,000 in incarceration expenses for the 1,300 non-custodial parents referred to the program.

In addition, the program has been successful in achieving its key mission: helping noncustodial parents find jobs. Eighty percent of program participants were employed in 1997, 81 percent in 1998, and 86 percent in 1999. This has translated into significant child support contributions by APEP participants: approximately $220,000 in 1997, $250,000 in 1998 and $214,000 in 1999.

For more information, telephone Julie McFillin at 410-836-4621, or contact her by e-mail at jmcfillin@careernet.state.md.us

2001 Conference Calendar

The Calendar is printed quarterly in CSR: in January, April, July, and October. If you are planning a meeting or conference and would like it to be included in the Calendar, please call OCSE's Bertha Hammett at (202) 401-5292 or fax her at (202) 401-5559. The Calendar is accessible through the Federal OCSE web site under the "News" section: www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cse/new.htm. Select "Calendar of Events."

January

23-26 California Family Support Council Family Support Officers' Training, Doubletree Hotel, Sacramento, CA, Mary Leibham (209) 558-3021.

February

5-7 NCSEA Mid-Winter Policy Forum and Conference: Family Self-Sufficiency-The Child Support Connection, Omni Shoreham, Washington, DC, Carol Henry (202) 624-8180.

20-23 California Family Support Council Quarterly Meeting, Riviera Resort & Racquet Club, Palm Springs, CA, Noanne St. Jean (559) 582-3211 X 2403.

26-27 OCSE State Self-Assessment Workshop, TBA, Washington, DC Metro Area, Myles Schlank (202) 401-9329. By Invitation Only.

March

18-21 28th National Conference on Juvenile Justice, John Ascuaga's Nugget Hotel, Reno, NV, For registration information call (703) 549-9222.

19-20 OCSE State Self-Assessment Workshop, TBA, For more information, contact Myles Schlank at (202) 401-9329. By Invitation Only.

19-21 OCSE Big Eight Plus One Information Sharing Conference, Drury Hotel, San Antonio, TX, Dan Fascione (215) 686-3724.

April

2-4 Spring Workshops on Child Support Enforcement Systems: "Seventh Inning Stretch-Polishing Your Game," Crown Plaza Hotel, Seattle, WA, Kathy McCaughin (202) 260-6785.

16-17 OCSE State Self-Assessment Workshop, TBA, Chicago, IL, Myles Schlank (202) 401-9329. By Invitation Only.

18-20 North Dakota Family Support Council's Annual Child Support Enforcement Training Conference, Holiday Inn, Bismarck, ND, Colin Barstad (701) 662-5374.

23-25 Spring Workshops on Child Support Enforcement Systems: "Seventh Inning Stretch-Polishing Your Game," Gateway Hotel, Crystal City, VA, Kathy McCaughin (202) 260-6785.

23-25 NCSEA For-Attorneys-Only Training Seminar, Spring Sidebar in Reno, Silver Legacy Hotel, Reno NV, Carol Henry (202) 624-8180.

OCSE's 11th National Child Support Enforcement Training Conference

September 10-12, 2001, Hyatt Regency Crystal City, Arlington, Virginia. For information contact Bertha Hammett at (202) 401-5292.

Medical Support News ... Children's Equity Act of 2000 Signed

On October 30, President Clinton signed the Federal Employees Health Benefits Children's Equity Act of 2000 into law as Public Law 106-394.

The new law amends 5 U.S.C. 89 to allow the Federal Government to enroll an employee and his or her family in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan when a state court or administrative authority orders the employee to provide health insurance coverage for a child of the employee but the employee fails to provide the coverage. The Federal Office of Personnel Management has been consulting with OCSE in implementing this new requirement.

For more information, contact Andrew J. Hagan at (202) 401-5375..