Child Support Report XXIV, No. 7, 20020701

The Passport Denial Program, which is operated as part of the Federal Offset Program, 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 exceeding $5,000 are submitted by OCSE to the Department of State (DoS), which "flags" their names and denies them U.S. passports upon application or the use of a passport service. The state can then remove their names from the program once the child support has been paid or appropriate arrangements have been made to satisfy the debt.

The program was implemented jointly by OCSE and DoS in June of 1998. Currently, an average of 60 passports per day are denied, up from 30 to 40 at the start of the program. Since June of 1998, the caseload has grown from two million to over three million cases.

Since its inception, this program has collected over $14 million in lump-sum payments. Significantly, this total does not include those obligors who set up payment plans and wage withholding as a result of being submitted for passport denial and represents only the amount that states voluntarily report.

Traveling overseas for employment purposes typically garners large lump-sum payments. Quite a few work-related payments have been made to California. An obligor working in Bahrain came back to the U.S. for vacation. While he was here, his passport expired. He paid $137,350, all of which went to the custodial parent. In order to travel to Europe to train U.S. troops stationed overseas in self-defense, an obligor paid $31,450. Another obligor, who wanted to travel to Europe for pleasure and business, made a lump-sum payment of $29,642.

Other states have also received employment-related payments. Arizona received a $45,900 payment from an obligor who was about to lose his job if he could not travel immediately. An obligor did a wire transfer to Maine from Japan in the amount of $42,500 so that he could continue working overseas. Still another, who also resides in Japan, made a $27,351 payment to Wisconsin. While working in Saudi Arabia, an obligor from Florida paid his case in full: $20,061. Washington State received a $15,000 payment from an obligor who needed to travel to Rome for employment purposes. Finally, a priest from Hawaii, who was scheduled to perform a wedding ceremony in India, borrowed $5,450 to put toward his arrears so he could travel.

Visiting family and friends overseas often brings in large collection amounts. An obligor in California made a $110,000 cash payment so he could visit his family in Malaysia. The State of Washington collected $34,255 from an obligor who had plans to visit his girlfriend in the Philippines. Another obligor from Washington state wanted to accompany his wife on a trip, but couldn't get a passport. Her father, as a graduation gift, had given her a trip to Russia. Tacoma County child support office insisted on payment in full. The obligor borrowed $7,601 from his grandmother and was able to accompany his wife. New York received $28,781 from an obligor so he could visit family overseas. Illinois collected $17,511 when an obligor wanted to visit his elderly mother and $9,218 from another who wished to visit his family in South America.

Entertainers frequently need to travel, and they make sizeable payments in order to obtain their passports. A special effects coordinator from California paid $14,000 so he could obtain his passport to work on a film in Europe, and a singer from Montana paid $11,000 towards his arrearages so that he could perform with a gospel group on tour in Japan and Germany.

Sometimes there are circumstances that just do not fit into any one specific category. An obligor from New York, who had no travel plans at all, and paid $65,321 just so he could have his passport. A California passport release case actually started back in October 2001. The obligor had no verifiable job or means of income. After many different stories, he finally claimed that his father had just died in Japan and he had to travel for the funeral. When the death certificate was received, it was for a woman who had died the month before! His request for a passport release was refused, and the office never heard from him again until he went to the county and paid his account in full: $55,545.

For more information on the passport denial program or to report your own success story, please contact OCSE's Rebecca Hamil at (202) 690-5378 or email the Special Collections Unit at scollections@acf.hhs.gov

11-14 - The Sixth Annual Conference of the Coalition for Marriage, Family and Couples Education, Arlington, VA, Diane Sollie, (202) 362-3332.

15-16 - Hispanic Leadership Forum, Arlington, VA, Frank Fajardo, (303) 844-3100, ext. 312.

21-23 - American Public Human Services Association (APHSA) Council Meeting, Washington, DC, Justin Latus, (202) 682-0100.

26 - Kansas Child Support Enforcement Annual Conference, Topeka, KS, Stephanie Petrie, (785) 776-4011, ext. 298.

30-August 1 - South Dakota Investigators Training Conference, Pierre, SD, Nichole MaComb, (605) 773-3641.

4-8 -National Child Support Enforcement Association (NCSEA) Annual Conference and Exposition, New Orleans, LA,Tara McFarlane, (202) 624-8180

12-13 - Pacific Hub Family Strengthening Conference, Seattle, WA, Frank Shields, (206) 615-2569

14 - Pacific Hub IV-D Directors Meeting, Seattle, WA, Anita Grandpre, RIX, (415) 437-8424 or Levi Fisher, RX, (206) 615-2519

19-21 - Annual Tribal Child Support Enforcement Meeting and Training conference, Hankinson, ND, Martha Renville, (605) 698-7131.

17-20 - Missouri Child Support Enforcement Association (MCSEA)(25th Anniversary), Columbia, MO, Ken Palermo, (636) 797-9852.

19 - National Child Support Enforcement Association (NCSEA) Child Support Tele-Talk Broadcast Interpreting Tax Returns, Tara McFarlane, (202) 624-8180.

23-25 - National Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) Training Conference, Arlington, VA, Bertha J. Hammett, (202) 401-5292.

25-27 - Nebraska Child Support Enforcement Association (NCSEA) Annual Training Conference, Grand Island, NE, Andi Clark, (402) 471-7384.

26-27 - Asian American and Pacific Islander Forum, Arlington, VA, Ja-Na Bordes, (202) 401-5713.

13-17 - Western Interstate Child Support Enforcement Council (WICSEC) Annual Training Conference, Portland, OR, Cheri Breitenstein, (503) 945-6158.

20-22 - Illinois Family Support Enforcement Association (IFSEA) Annual Conference & Members' Meeting, Naperville, IL, Yvette Perez-Trevino, (630) 844-8935.

27-31 - Domestic Relations Association of Pennsylvania Annual Conference, Farmington, PA, Jeannette Bowers, (717) 299-8145 or 299-8138.

TBA - Washington State Family Support Council's Annual Conference, Judy Young, (360) 664-5063.

TBA - Maryland Joint Child Support Conference, Ocean City, MD, Kelvin Harris, (410) 764-2843.

TBA - Michigan Family Support Council Annual Training Conference, Pam Sala, (313) 224-5281.

23-25 - New England Child Support Training Conference, Hyannis, MA, Chris Arciero, (617) 565-2472.

Commissioner Sherri Z. Heller recently announced the appointment of two new staff members to her front office team: Kimberly Berlin and William Rivera.

Ms. Berlin, Special Assistant to the Commissioner, will track and coordinate Dr. Heller's appointments, meetings, assigned tasks, and take the lead on certain special projects. In making this appointment, the Commissioner stressed Ms. Berlin's wide academic and private-sector background with an emphasis on the social sciences and her "long-term interest and experience with programs including welfare and domestic violence." Early on in her career she worked with community organizations such as immigrant farm workers. Dr. Heller also noted Ms. Berlin's particular interest in Knowledge Management - using systems and skills to eliminate barriers to the sharing of information and solutions for more effective programs.

Mr. Rivera will serve as Senior Advisor to the Commissioner. He will provide "in-house" legal support to Dr. Heller as well as to division chiefs, especially on inter-jurisdictional and statutory/regulatory problems. Commissioner Heller cited his "long-term commitment to child support enforcement," with a "particular interest in the policy area." The Commissioner also reported that Mr. Rivera has conducted research and analysis of the Family Support Act and various child support guideline models.

Mr. Rivera comes to the Office of Child Support Enforcement from the Justice Department, where he served from 1995 as a defense attorney for Federal agencies. He initially handled commercial matters such as contracts and bankruptcy, and more recently concentrated on defending Federal programs in areas such as the Freedom of Information and Privacy Acts. Mr. Rivera is the recipient of a Fulbright Fellowship and studied in Stockholm.

The hand-written letter addressed to OCSE in Washington, D.C. included a photograph of a young boy. Written in August 1998 by a distraught mother from a town on the outskirts of Manila, the letter began: "I send this picture of my son in case you could find his father please can you show it to him. He know he had a son back here in the Philippines Islands."

The mother knew relatively few facts about the father: name, birthday, his U.S. military base, and his date of reassignment back to the U.S. One more thing: He told her he was from Boston.

All contact between the couple ended when her son's father returned to the U.S. in 1988. She tried to raise the child herself, but a severe eye injury at age five resulted in years of expensive medical treatment including surgery to repair his damaged vision. Thinking that his father might still be in the military, perhaps with health insurance that could help with his son's medical expenses, the mother finally sought help.

This international request was transmitted to an OCSE Regional Office. This time, to Boston. There, OCSE staff contacted Gail Dorey, Supervisor of the Massachusetts Department of Revenue (DOR) Parent Locator Unit, to see if DOR could followup on this atypical case. DOR agreed and a Massachusetts IV-D application was mailed to the mother in the Philippines. In January 1999, DOR received her completed application.

Fortunately, the putative father's uncommon last name produced only one Boston address linked to that name. By effectively utilizing all of the locate resources available, Gail Dorey confirmed that while his parents resided at the Boston address, the putative father now lived in Utah.

With location accomplished, the next step was to involve Utah's Office of Child Support Services (CSS). Boston OCSE contacted its counterpart regional office in Denver, who advised that a case like this should be referred directly to LeAnn Wilber, CSS Interstate Coordinator for Utah's Office of Recovery Services.

In February 1999, DOR transferred the case to Utah, where Ms. Wilber, along with CSS Agent Susan Brandjes and John Bradley of the Utah Attorney General's Office, followed through on what was to be a prolonged process to secure support for a child on the other side of the globe.

First, a paternity affidavit was sent to the mother requesting blood samples from her and her child. The putative father was also contacted, and he immediately agreed to a paternity test.

The following month, CSS received the mother's signed paternity affidavit, along with her son's birth certificate and a statement from a Manila physician agreeing to draw blood for the tests. CSS made arrangements with Lab Corp., one of its contract laboratories, to send a paternity testing kit to the doctor in Manila.

By July, 1999, DNA testing was completed. The results: the Utah man was the boy's biological father (99.87%). Although indicating his willingness to stipulate paternity, he resisted paying support based on Utah's guidelines, arguing for a deviation from Utah's guidelines because the cost of living in the Philippines was significantly lower than in the United States.

The father secured an attorney, and for months the case dragged on over the support amount as well as over jurisdictional issues. At one point, the defense claimed that given the mother's foreign residence, Utah lacked jurisdiction in the case, but eventually withdrew that claim.

After more than two years of legal maneuvering, CSS succeeded in obtaining a paternity judgement and a temporary child support order. To get paternity established, the court agreed to temporarily deviate from Utah's guidelines and a lower amount was ordered until the matter could be further explored. Motions are currently on file in the Utah courts addressing the temporary child support order issue. In the meantime, the father is paying his child support.

In retrospect, this was a case that could easily have been unsuccessful, given the facts - an old address, mother and father half a world apart, two states involved. But, the case was a success because child support enforcement workers cared enough about the boy in the picture to follow through on his behalf.

Charles Kenher is a Children and Families Program Specialist in OCSE's Regional Office in Boston.

What's real today about Child Support Enforcement? We know about its long history as one of the nation's largest debt collection programs. It has attained goals that the states and the Federal government can be proud of. But what distinguishes its current reinvention?

If you'll join us at the 12th National Child Support Enforcement Training Conference this September, you can experience for yourself the Child Support Enforcement program of the 21st century.

A perusal of the conference agenda reveals it all. You'll see workshops on customer service because today, more than ever, we recognize that by serving the child, the custodial parent, and the noncustodial parent, we do what's best for the family. There are workshops highlighting child support in partnership with a wide array of agencies, institutions, and organizations, because we know that collaboration produces results that matter. You'll see workshops that feature practical solutions to on-going problems and workshops that help to redefine problems when traditional solutions fail to work.

The conference also features a selected series of workshops in three areas of special interest: the State Child Access and Visitation Program, Child Support Research, and Training for Child Support Trainers. The workshops have been scheduled to ensure that interested individuals will be able to attend all workshops of a particular track.

There will be four Tribal Child Support Enforcement program workshops, two of which will be videoconferenced to numerous reservations across the country.

In addition, all conference participants are encouraged to attend OCSE's 2nd Annual Research Meeting on Wednesday afternoon, September 25. Tentative topics for discussion include reducing undistributed collections, improving collections in interstate cases, and increasing regular payments by noncustodial parents. There is no additional cost for this meeting, which includes a working lunch.

Finally, Dr. Sherri Z. Heller will share with you her experiences during her first year as OCSE's Commissioner. She will discuss her ideas for change and innovation and analyze current managerial and budgetary issues facing child support enforcement agencies.

The conference will be September 23-25, 2002 at the Hyatt Regency Crystal City in Arlington, VA. Information and a registration form is provided in DCL-02-12 which is available on the National Electronic Child Support Enforcement Resource System (NECSRS). NECSRS is located on OCSE's web site at www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cse/. Ms. Bertha Hammett of OCSE's National Training Center can be contacted for assistance. Her telephone number is (202) 401-5292; her email address is bhammett@acf.hhs.gov.

Dr. Sherri Z. Heller, Commissioner, OCSE, participated in a ceremony in the historic Treaty Room of the Department of State on June 10, 2002. The occasion was the signing of a reciprocal child support agreement with Norway. The signatories to the agreement were William Howard Taft, IV, Legal Advisor to the Secretary of State, and Knut Vollebaek, Ambassador of the Kingdom of Norway.

The agreement formalized years of partnership between the two countries. In the past, Norway has had reciprocity with many states in the United States. Norway assisted states in the enforcement of maintenance obligations by establishing paternity and obtaining Norwegian orders for support. However, Norwegian law stipulated that direct recognition and enforcement of existing U.S. orders was not possible without a Federal-level reciprocal agreement.

For the past five years, U.S. delegations have been meeting with representatives from Norway to work on the details of this agreement. The agreement contains provisions which satisfy all of the required elements of the U.S. legislation and are consistent with the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act.

In her remarks at the signing ceremony, Commissioner Heller said, "While I am pleased that so many technical issues were successfully addressed, what really matters is the difference this will make for children."

The Norway reciprocal agreement is the 6th agreement signed this year. Other agreements concluded this year include the Netherlands, and the Canadian Provinces of Alberta, Ontario, New Brunswick and Newfoundland. This summer, the Department of State and representatives from the Federal OCSE conducted negotiations with a number of European countries, including Switzerland and Germany, as well as the Central American countries of Costa Rica, Honduras and El Salvador.

Richard Sternowski is an International Specialist for OCSE.

Interesting Fact - Languages into which UIFSA-like Forms have been translated

Croatian	Polish
Czech	Portuguese
Finnish	Russian
French	Romanian
German	Slovak
Greek	Slovenian
Hebrew	Spanish
Hungarian	Turkish
Italian

On May 24, 2002, the U.S. DHHS Office of the Secretary, Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE) published a notice in the Federal Register regarding innovation grants. The notice can be found on ASPE's web site at http://aspe.hhs.gov/state-innov-grants.htm. The purpose of the grants is to allow state agencies to submit competitive grant applications for financial assistance in order to plan for, or implement, innovative approaches for the delivery of health and human services.

This announcement has 2 tracks. Track 1 is for demonstration grants; track 2 is for planning grants. States may submit applications to either or both tracks. There is no limit on the number of applications that a state may submit. The closing date for submitting applications under this announcement is July 23, 2002.