 |
| OCSE Home . Program Information . News . Publications . Policy . State Links . OCSE Search . Help |
| Child Support Report | Vol. XXVI, No. 2, Feb 2004 |
|
Child Support Report is a publication of the Office of Child Support Enforcement, Division of Consumer Services. CSR is published for information purposes only. No official endorsement of any practice, publication, or individual by the Department of Health and Human Services or the Office of Child Support Enforcement is intended or should be inferred. |
Child Support Progress and Challenges An Interview with NCCSD President Cindi Chinnock Program Leadership and Our Changing Customer Base |
Child Support Progress and Challenges
Developing state and Federal Partnerships was the objective of the 2004 NCSEA Mid-Year Policy Forum & Training Conference held in Washington, DC. on January 26-28, 2004. Representatives of U.S. Congress and State Legislatures shared their perspective on TANF reauthorization and child support legislation. Workforce Investment Act panelists discussed innovative state workforce development programs to create one-stop system delivery to serve child support customers. Executive leaders from OCSE presented their insights on child support triumphs and challenges for the New Year. There were workshops to discuss child support guidelines, paternity disestablishment and incarceration for child support debt. States discussed the implementation of medical support. Among others, there were sessions on Cultural Diversity and Domestic Violence issues. The forum was well-rounded with partners presenting from a variety of perspectives.
Commissioner Sherri Z. Heller began her keynote address by discussing the successes of international child support. She used Canada as an example of foreign policy and noted that Canada has adopted a new Interjurisdictional Support Orders Act. Dr. Heller continued, "Recently, our focus has been on Latin America and the Caribbean; we're exploring negotiations with Costa Rica, El Salvador, and Honduras."
She talked about the "Meeting of the Americas" in Orlando at the NCSEA annual training conference, and how child support will be bringing together 17 countries from the Western Hemisphere to work on practical problem-solving for paternity establishment and currency exchange. "We're taking a practical approach to international work and insisting that the focus be on results, making clear that parents take responsibility for supporting their children and that children can rely on their parents."
Dr. Heller went on to commend the child support program for its progress. However she made it clear "that there are a lot of families out there who haven't gotten what they need from child support, and we cannot stop and rest."
She spoke of two major stages that the child support program has gone through. The third one is just beginning to come into focus.
The first stage began in the 1970's when there was a growing concern about how much the welfare program was costing the U.S. and state governments. She stated, "If non-custodial parents didn't meet their child support obligations, the unpaid support remained a debt to the government." The government was spending tax dollars supporting families that parents should have supported. Dr. Heller continued, stating that during the '80s, the program expanded to serve families who weren't receiving welfare subsidies and the caseload grew. New Federal laws required the withholding of child support from the wages of parents who owe child support, and the tax offset program began during this period.
"Stage 2 was a revolution made possible by automation." Commissioner Heller recalled how the national and state directories of new hires increased the effectiveness of wage attachment that now brings in 65% of total collections - $15 billion last year. States created their own automation systems during Stage 2, helping to locate parents and their assets all over the country. Federal/state partnership enabled financial institution data matches, bringing in $200 million from seized accounts. The passport denial program netted more than 11 million last year for state/Federal government and families. Also, during Stage 2, OCSE began auditing the reliability of performance data, ensuring that states are accountable for their programs.
Dr. Heller stated with pride that the national child support enforcement program partnership between the Federal office and state programs has achieved the highest rating ever given by the White House Office of Management and Budget to any block grant or formula grant program in the entire government. She congratulated the child support enforcement program for the success of the partnership and informed them they have a lot to be proud of.
Commissioner Heller sketched some of the features that she believes will characterize Stage 3. She described how the success of wage-withholding is an example of a more proactive approach toward customer service that reduces the number of high child support debts. She urged the use of automation to match available income information to court-order amounts to detect orders that are too high for the NCP to pay. She stressed using early intervention to detect a change in regular payment patterns which could be a possible sign that an individual has lost a job and needs assistance finding another.
Thinking futuristically, Commissioner Heller believes that Stage 3 will be about automation tools providing information and data in a timely manner, enabling child support professionals and their partners to establish and modify orders that are paid consistently - and, when they're not, those data will enable child support professionals to detect problems early and act promptly to re-establish reliable payment.
Another thought that the Commissioner offered is prevention of child support debt in the first place. "We know from research evidence that children's well-being can be affected dramatically by the presence of two committed parents. Government officials and community leaders all over the country are experimenting with ways to enable low-income couples to get access to services that help them make good choices about marriage and gain the skills they need to form and sustain healthy marriages."
An Interview with NCCSD President Cindi Chinnock
CSR recently spoke with Oregon IV-D Director Cindi Chinnock, President of the National Council of Child Support Directors, to ask what she and NCCSD think are the big issues in child support - those that are important to get resolved.
CC: "Let me answer that in two ways. First, the focus of the organization is on building and continuing to improve our partnerships with not only OCSE, but with the other players in the child support program both at the state and federal level and with the advocates. That's a big emphasis for us because the issues that are important to us are not issues we can solve alone. Secondly, we are giving a lot of time and attention to a number of issues, including, the (legislative) proposals and TANF reauthorization. They are going to provide some opportunities, but also add some complications, to the work of the program."
Ms. Chinnook went on to discuss a few issues NCCSD is most specifically interested in: Federal MSFIDM processing, a possible medical support performance indicator and undistributed collections.
MSFIDM
CC: "We're interested in MSFIDM being processed at the national level. We've had a lot of discussion about concerns and issues because we want it to be an effective process. This is so important because it may be a good way to get collections in those cases where we have non-custodial parents who are not cooperating and have resources in other states."
"However, you have states at different levels of development in their own match process. For those not very far down this road, this is an excellent way to get them further along quickly. On the other hand, for those who have had a very effective program for a number of years now, there is concern that we proceed in a way that we don't make the process less effective for those states. To do this, we have to work together. We need to know specifically what financial institutions are concerned aboutÂ…and what states, at all development levels, are concerned aboutÂ…so we can work together with OCSE to get the best process to meet the interests of both financial institutions and the states. This is a big issue."
Medical Support Performance Indicator
CC: "Obviously, another concern and major issue for the states is the medical support indicator. Again, there is agreement that we have to work together to get to an indicator that is workable and meaningful. It must meet not only the needs of the program but those outside the program who are watching to determine our effectiveness in the area of medical support."
"We are also interested in making sure that states are given enough time to implement systems so they can effectively prepare and be able to get the data they need to make this measure effective. There are states with old legacy systems and those with newer technology. We find it's easier for those who have the newer technology to add data elements because of the flexibility of the new systems. But, for those with the legacy systems to make the required changes it could, I would guess, take anywhere from a minimum of eight or nine up to maybe 18 months. We want to be sure that we are all going into this, or any other change that requires system changes, with open eyesÂ…to say 'it's a good idea,' but let's plan for it in a way that's going to help the states be successful."
Undistributed Collections
CC: "As for the recent changes to the (federal reporting) form 34A, I think we have worked together effectively. UDC is an issue needing our attention. The changes to the form and the way in which we report information will help us all in the future. We will eventually have the information we need to be able to tell "the story behind the numbers." The information will help inform the advocates and the customers who are concerned about the amount of money that is not distributed at any point in time. We will be able to more clearly distinguish the collections in process from undistributed dollars requiring more effort on the part of the program to be distributed. States have already developed a number of best practices for managing and minimizing the amount of UDC."
Accumulation of Arrears
CC: "Arrears accumulation and management is something that states are approaching from a variety of perspectives. There are a number of studies going on that will help further define the arrears and the customers who owe back child support. Knowing the demographics will help us focus limited resources in the right areas. We have also developed some best practices and are sharing those across the states to leverage the good ideas. We need to determine which processes to use to reduce the arrears both by collections and by identifying amounts that are never going to be collected."
"We have more information than in the past but there is more work to be done. I say that because it is not an issue we have all defined fully in our states. I think an initial study of arrears showed that 70% of the arrears is owed by people who make less than $10,000 a year. This raises a lot of questions not only about how to collect the money but also about how to prevent the future accumulation of arrears."
"Certainly, some of the work we are doing now in being more proactive about appropriate orders will have an effect. Some early intervention will do two things: It will hopefully increase the rate of payment and reduce the accumulation of arrears. I think we have to really focus on the front end and be more proactive."
"I look forward to continuing the partnership with OCSE and seeing the results we can achieve by working together."
By: Gale Quinn
The issue of confidentiality often becomes a source of conflict for third parties, especially Legal Aid organizations seeking information. Legal Aid representatives often ask questions about confidentiality and are sometimes focused on the release of information rather than the customer expectation of confidentiality.
All information that both parties provide to the Child Support Enforcement Agency is kept confidential. In order to abide by the confidentiality laws of Ohio, specific case information is provided only to the parties directly involved unless a third party release form has been completed. A third party release form is a witnessed written statement that documents a party's request of the CSEA to release specific information to a specific person. Court documents require an address, and a customer may request the CSEA to use the agency address instead of a residential address on court filings. This request is often made in cases of domestic violence.
Conducting Mini-Seminars and Communicating with Partners
In order to train staff on policy and in order to resolve conflict with third parties, the Fairfield County CSEA management conducted mini-seminars about the CSEA confidentiality policy, and procedures were put in place to ensure compliance.
Given the volume of questions, it was important to include Legal Aid in the in-service efforts. The in-services not only included Legal Aid as participants, just like the child support workers, but also included a section on the Legal Aid mission and services.
Different types of requests for information were identified. Expectations of legal aid, as well as child support staff, were clarified.
During the in-service, the importance of confidentiality and customer expectations were discussed. A copy of the third-party release form was distributed and discussed. An attorney presented a general overview, designed for case management staff and related to confidentiality laws of CSEA records.
Role-playing with three different types of requests was conducted.
- TYPE 1 A request for specific information, such as a payment history.
- TYPE 2 A request for a case manager prepared status update, with "bullet statements" describing the activity accomplished.
- TYPE 3 A request not for a specific document but for an opportunity to review the file with appropriate reactions.
The objective of the in-service was to raise legal aid and CSEA staff awareness about confidentiality of cases. Third parties and legal aid representatives became more aware of procedures. Staff was trained on procedures. Conflict has been resolved.
The Results
- Legal Aid representatives became aware that the agency will also ensure that parties have appropriate access to case information. Trust with the agency increased.
- It is important to keep the lines of communication open about the issue of confidentiality. Staff expressed satisfaction with the in-service and found the information to be helpful.
- It was noted that customer complaints regarding confidentiality are rare, and adhering to the case confidentiality policies protects obligees, obligors and the CSEA.
- During the First Quarter of 2003, a written test for all staff was administered.
- Team averages for the test ranged from 84% to 96% - with all staff reporting positive feedback regarding the test as a learning tool. (A copy of the test and a key are available for review by contacting the CSEA, (740) 687-6788.)
- It was important for Legal Aid representatives to understand the expectations and reasons behind the rules. Following the in-service, the questions and potential turmoil ended as understanding increased. The increased understanding was viewed as an improvement to the child support program in the county.
- Staff and third parties became aware of and developed an understanding of expectations and procedures, as well as the reasons behind the procedures.
- The BAR Association has also been communicated the procedures and understands the reasons behind the confidentiality focus.
- The customer expectations of confidentiality and access to records have been met.
- Staff has reported confidence in confidentiality procedures and is empowered to address questions at the first point of contact.
The Fairfield County CSEA received a 2003 Best Practice Award from the Ohio Family Support Association for the management practice of Focusing on Confidentiality and Communicating Procedures.
Gale Quinn is Region V State Specialist for Ohio
Program Leadership and Our Changing Customer Base
By: Frank Fajardo
Commissioner Sherri Heller continues to commend our program achievements and to challenge us to seek to have child support be a "reliable source of income" for families. The CSE program will continue to be one of the best managed Federal state programs, as we seek to optimize our program goals. In doing so, we continually ask what we can do to improve our performance measures with our customer base. We see enormous changes in our communities bringing dramatic new trends with language and cultural differences becoming a significant and rapidly growing part of our overall caseloads.
Possible challenges in the horizon: We know that our program leadership requires an ability to work with a rapidly changing customer base. But will these population increases create increases in caseloads? How are we to understand each group's needs? Should we try to understand how ethnic minorities view the roles of mothers/fathers and their financial independence and responsibility? How do we approach planning for these differences and continue moving forward with the goal of optimizing our program goals for everyone?
Harder to reach populations predict some states possibly having difficulty in maintaining the same level of success with overall program performance measures. We therefore continue seeking Special Improvement Project (SIP) and Sec.1115 Demonstration grantees to design and demonstrate new models for reaching our changing communities. Our prior SIP grants and expert advice give us indications of what seems to help:
- obtaining buy-in from community and religious leaders, including improved partnerships with faith-based and community organizations,
- educating family advocates to improve understanding of services/resources;
- bi-lingual advertisement in community radio stations;
- reaching out and learning about how child support collection/enforcement is viewed among ethnic, cultural, and language minority populations,
- encourage input from national and local community leaders;
- work with court system (including administrative process); and
- support capacity of state/local offices in serving communities with language/cultural issues (e.g. outreach material for language differences).
A workshop on "Cultural Diversity - How States are Meeting the Needs of our Diverse Population." was offered at NCSEA Policy Forum. Panelist Alfred Ramirez, advised that we need to "first seek to understand the community we serve. Mr. Ramirez suggested steps to develop a relationship and obtain input from groups who have made progress in improving the life situation of the people they represent, including:
- what are the concerns of this community related to our program services;
- would they like to work on a plan or advisory group (Alfred advised that "folks join up if two things are true: First, they must see a potential for either benefit or harm to themselves if the group succeeds or fails. Second, they must see that their personal involvement has an impact on the whole effort.");
- sponsoring programs such as fairs, information and education sessions; and
- what would they like to see from addressing this? (and consequences of not addressing it?)
Anticipated future changes in our customer base may have already arrived in some communities: The UCLA Center for the Study of Latino Health and Culture did a recent study which indicated that more than 50% of births in California are to Hispanics/Latinos. Additionally, other studies reflect our overall traditional customer base trending downward (please see "Getting to Know the Future Customers of the Office of Child Support: Projections for 2004-2009" at: http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cse/pubs/reports/projections/index.html ).
For conducting your own local demographic analysis, you may try the steps below. You'll first need to decide at what level to search for demographic data.
Step 1: Census website: www.census.gov
Step 2: Click on "American Fact Finder" from menu on the left;
Step 3: Click on "Data Sets"
Step 4: Select data set you want: e.g. SF3
Step 5: From the options on the pop up menu, select "Detailed Tables."
Step 6: Select your "geographic type", "state", click "Add", then "Next."
Frank Fajardo is Minority Initiatives Coordinator, OCSE
Some CSE Experiences with Early Intervention
By: Jessica Pearson
Oregon uses early intervention techniques in all new TANF cases with a verified address. Case managers contact NCPs to identify potential barriers to payment prior to the promulgation of child support orders. Workers make appropriate employment, training and social services referrals to ensure that the NCP has the capacity to pay child support when it is ordered.
Hennepin County, Minnesota divides its cases into payers, irregular payers and nonpayers (although the last two have been merged due to budgetary constraints). CSE feels that case segmentation affords CSE the opportunity to quickly intervene when payment stops. Staff find that phone contact with nonpayers is most effective and believe that fast, personal contact leads to better payment.
Wayne County, Michigan is just beginning a new 1115 demonstration grant (Dads From Day One) that will emphasize front-end interventions with new parents including paternity establishment activities, counseling about marriage, education about child support, and employment referrals.
Dallas County, Texas is augmenting a state-wide effort to quickly establish wage withholding orders, provide positive reinforcement to paying NCPs and harshly pursue nonpayers. Dallas CSE workers will telephone employers to verify that wage withholding orders are in effect within 7 days of a court order. They will send a "thank you" letter to NCPs who make payment within the first 30 days. Those who fail to make payment will be telephoned to find out why. Court hearings in nonpayment cases will be scheduled within 60 days of the court order.
Suffolk County, Massachusetts uses early intervention techniques to flag non-paying cases within 2-3 months of order promulgation. If there is evidence of employment, the enforcement team generates a wage attachment. If there is no employer information, CSE attempts to contact the nonpaying NCP by telephone to find out why and make appropriate referrals and/or order modifications. If the agency is unable to reach the NCP or he refuses to comply, he is referred for license suspension and other enforcement actions.
Eastern Regional Interstate Child Support Association (ERICSA)
41st Annual Conference
May 16-20, 2004
Westin Peachtree Plaza Hotel
Atlanta, Ga.
