Child Support Report XXVI, No. 4, 20040401

HHS Assistant Secretary for Children and Families, Wade F. Horn, Ph.D., announced on March 31, 2004, that OMB had given the Federal Child Support Enforcement program the highest rating among all social services and block grant/formula programs reviewed government-wide.

The reviews are being conducted as part of budget process reforms under the President's Management Agenda aimed at ensuring that government programs provide results that justify the public's investment. Programs are evaluated using the program assessment rating tool (PART) to develop program performance ratings for use in budget decisions.

"The PART evaluation confirms this is a program with a clear and unambiguous purpose, is well managed and provides results. It is not only beneficial to the children and families it helps, but the taxpayers as well," Dr. Horn said.

In Fy 2002, over $20.1 billion was collected at a combined state/Federal cost of about $5.2 billion.

Commissioner Sherri Z. Heller is proud of the child support enforcement program. "Welfare reform is about getting families to where they can be self-sufficient. Child support is crucial to making that happen."

Commissioner Sherri Z. Heller, as a former state official, is well aware of the significant efforts that states and territories have put forth to being certified as meeting the automation requirements of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996.

As of April 30, 2004, 52 states and territories are FSA '88 certified and 49 states are PRWORA certified.

Commissioner Heller has traveled to Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Hampshire, Ohio, and Tennessee to make the presentations of the official certifications.

Automation has enabled the states and territories to exchange referral information between different state programs, to use a variety of state, local, Federal, and private automated sources to locate individuals, their assets and their employment, better, faster and more accurately. These tools enable state caseworkers to concentrate on the most difficult cases as their automated systems proactively match against new hire databases for employment, state licensing and motor vehicle databases, bank and other financial institution databases; and automatically generate wage withholding orders and certification for passport denial and state and Federal tax offset.

OCSE is working closely with States, Territories and Tribal grantees to investigate new ways to ensure children fast, secure, and reliable financial support. States are improving customer service by posting information about the payment status and recent case activity on secure websites, and are experimenting with pro-active outbound interactive voice response to remind clients of upcoming hearings, genetic testing and appointments as one way of improving customer service.

Robin Rushton is Director, Division of State and Tribal Systems

Goal: To provide quality assurance tools to all staff to ensure that all performance data is at least 95% accurate (reliable).

Description: Launched in January 2003, the Quality Incentives Operational Team (QIOT) will continue until all objectives have been met. The team, headed by the Project Manager of Service Quality Management, includes representatives from legal services, casework, systems and automation and audit. Staff from all areas were provided to assist in the development of the objectives. A Steering Committee composed of management level staff from all areas, provides guidance and support to the QIOT.

For further information contact Susan Tunks, Service Quality Management Administrator at stunks@de.state.az.us

When a noncustodial parent in Hennepin County, MN, misses a payment, a child support enforcement caseworker can quickly intervene, thanks to case segmentation.

The county began experimenting with case segmentation two and half years ago by dividing cases into two categories, paying and nonpaying, to allow caseworkers to take the most appropriate action on each type of case more quickly.

Hennepin found that, when caseworkers had a full spectrum of cases, the nonpaying cases were most likely not to be worked because the paying cases generate an extremely high level of activity, according to Lynne Auten, who oversees the handling of the child support enforcement cases.

By segmenting or categorizing cases, caseworkers are able to work on all cases. Caseworkers for the nonpaying cases can be proactive in ways that were not possible before, says Auten.

Paying cases receive an automated notice if a payment has not been made in the last 30 days. Caseworkers then contact the employers and noncustodial parents by phone to find out why the payment was missed. This allows cases to return to paying status more quickly.

"We're able to monitor changing situations faster by segmenting the case types," says Auten. "It allows caseworkers to focus on specific activities, so we get to be experts at it. It's gratifying that we can be more proactive," instead of being reactive to every case.

The Hennepin County CSE was one among nine county child support programs, five OCSE Regional Offices and OCSE's Central Office represented in a conference call on "Early Intervention and Case Management" last November.

This "reunion call" was the second in a series of conference calls sponsored by the Urban Academy, a joint Federal and Regional OCSE project whose members from large and urban jurisdictions also hold conferences to help identify issues and effective practices leading to increased child support collections.

Academy members select the topics for the reunion calls that are designed to keep the momentum going following the conferences, and to improve performance in child support agencies by engaging the participants in periodic discussions.

Counties represented at the November reunion call were Allegheny, PA; Cuyahoga, OH; Douglas, NE; Hennepin, MN; Milwaukee, WI; St. Louis, MO; Wayne, MI; Alameda, CA; Dallas, TX; Essex, NJ; and Monroe, NY.

During the call, Bob David and Peggie Brown of the Oregon CSE detailed the Oregon's Service Delivery Model that starts with focusing on cases with no orders, and uses extensive communication on the phone and "upfront discoveries," says Brown.

The priority is on adopting "a more holistic approach," stresses Brown, "by looking at everything, not just how much [the noncustodial parent] can afford to pay ... getting an order that's fair, and getting them to understand."

Understanding is key, Brown adds, in that this approach encourages workers to educate the customers about how the calculations work so they understand the amount the noncustodial parent is ordered to pay. Workers often refer noncustodial parents to a calculator on the agency's website that shows the portion they are responsible for paying.

"And with that understanding often comes the willingness to pay," says Brown. Also through the model, workers can differentiate between those willing and able to pay, willing and unable, or able and unwilling, and, depending on the case, can refer them to employment services, counseling agencies, and so on. "Some are chronically underemployed, don't have an opportunity in their field of work, and might need to retrain. Some are not bitter so I don't want to contempt them," says Brown.

"Differentiating and gearing cases as much as we can ends up getting better orders or getting paid. The end result is better."

Paul Legler of Policy Studies, Inc. spoke during the reunion call about his publication "Low-Income Fathers and Child Support: Starting Off on the Right Track."

In his presentation, Legler noted practices in New Zealand and Australia where early intervention during the first few months of case processing includes communication techniques such as front-end interviews with both custodial parents and noncustodial parents and sending literature about child support to both parents.

Legler noted that special enforcement teams apply different enforcement techniques to sorted cases: A special team handles beginning cases; after three to nine months, cases move to one of two enforcement teams, the "paying regularly" team or the "nonpayment" team.

Also, child support workers receive relationship training to better understand the emotions parents experience when they must pay child support. Also, they refer parents to mediation and other community services.

Child Support Report plans to feature summaries of other reunion calls, in future issues, on the topics of "IV-A/IV-D Coordination and Conditioning: Benefits of CSE Cooperation" and "Review and Adjustment: Expedited and Automated Approaches."

For further information about the Urban Academy and its reunion calls, contact Bob Clifford at (215) 861-4047.

Elaine Blackman is a writer in the Division of Consumer Services

We've all experienced this, sitting in a meeting or conference with people we've just met and we begin using abbreviations and acronyms left and right until someone stops us and says, "Could you tell us what XYZ means?"

But what about when you are in a group of your own kind, child support people? You would think our language would be the same. And for the most part it is. We have, after all, the same basic functions-locate, establishment, enforcement, etc. and we all have similar business practices so that we speak the same basic language. But there is little doubt that we have different dialects for that same language. Take for example, the process or term for "income withholding." We all know what income withholding is, yet there is a breathtaking array of what states call that process.

Recently, a Federal agency that processes several thousand child support orders asked for a list of all the terms and abbreviations used for income withholding. An odd request-income withholding is income withholding, right? But to provide good customer support to our Federal employer, we posted the question on our network. We gathered sixty terms and abbreviations in use-which is a lot, considering 16 of the 54 states and jurisdictions didn't provide an answer (some states have not one term, but two or a handful of terms).

The most "common" term/abbreviation for income withholding was IWO-income withholding order. With only 11 states using this term, however, one can hardly claim it's "common." IW, income withholding, came in second with five states using that term. But everything else was different. Literally, no two were alike.

Imagine the confusion of the employer who sees every term and abbreviation known to the child support world.

Karen Anthony is a Child Support Employers Relations Specialist

Having been the first two States in the nation to successfully complete an interstate reconciliation with each other using the CSI format, the staffs of the Iowa and Nebraska Child Support programs decided to move into uncharted territory.

In August 2003, a meeting was convened between the two IV-D Directors, Carol Eaton (IA) and Daryl Wusk (NE), and other members of their respective staffs to discuss an innovative approach in dealing with border interstate cases. Both States wanted to explore a cooperative effort that would provide for more effective enforcement and also improve the timeliness of collections for child support when one parent lives in Iowa and the other in Nebraska. They came up with the concept of an office staffed with employees from both Iowa and Nebraska to handle all Child Support cases in common to both States. Employees from both States would work side by side, not only sharing case information, but having access to the other State's system and working interstate cases together.

The location of Omaha, Nebraska (Douglas County) and Council Bluffs, Iowa (Pottawattamie County), directly across from one another on the state line, represents two large urban areas presenting special challenges for enforcement. Coordination of efforts would make it easier to track parents who try to elude child support responsibilities by frequently moving back and forth across the state line. Of the approximately 3,000 child support cases in common to both States, about 1,500 are in those two counties along the state line.

In order to get started, a team worked for several months looking at any potential state or Federal barriers that needed to be addressed. After a series of meetings between both IV-D Directors, and their staffs representing Policy, Personnel, Information Technology, Training, Central Registry, Legal, and Customer Service, as well as a Region VII CSE representative, a core team of staff was selected to work out the details prior to implementation.

Once the implementation plan was approved and an agreement was signed, the decision was made to start with one employee from Nebraska and two from Iowa working cases from the two urban counties. The office opened in the Omaha area April 5, 2004, preceded by a joint press release.

During this first phase, staff are undertaking a total review of each case as well as performing cross training activities. After the initial start up phase has been completed, it is anticipated other counties from both States will be added gradually and the responsibilities within the unit expanded.

Although it's clearly too early to project results, if measured by the enthusiasm of both States and the onsite staff, the success of this project would certainly appear likely.

Sherri Larkins is an OCSE Program Specialist in Region VII

Through the windows of her office, Donna Bonar can see-and hear, and feel-the trains rushing along the tracks just a few steps away from OCSE headquarters.

Meanwhile, inside the office, soft, classical music sets a different mood, one more in tune with her temperament.

Reaching her inner workroom requires a walk past more than a dozen plaques and awards. Among them is a crystal Commissioner's Group Award (September 2003) engraved with "Donna Bonar" at the top of the list-a reminder that OCSE's Associate Commissioner of Automation and Program Operations has been the spearhead for many of the agency's high-tech accomplishments over the past 25 years.

On May 19, Bonar added yet another award to her collection when Government Computer News (GCN) honored her with a Management Leadership Award at its leadership conference in Washington, D.C. Bonar was one of 10 chosen for the award, the first of its kind sponsored by GCN, part of Post Newsweek Tech Media Group.

"Donna Bonar's considerable accomplishments, especially in cross-agency collaboration before it was fashionable, clearly impressed our panel of judges-as it did me personally," says Tom Temin, GCN's selection panel chair. "Her leadership has directly improved the lives of countless children."

"Working in a county gave me a local perspective," says Bonar of her days in the County Prosecutor's Office in Indianapolis before moving to OCSE in 1980. In OCSE, starting at the ground of automation and getting involved in the Tax Offset program under the Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS) showed Bonar "how it gave states the ability to improve."

OCSE Commissioner Sherri Z. Heller says, "The FPLS works because of the way that state systems use it. And Donna's management of the program is being recognized not only because it's clever and cost-effective, but because of the way she partners with state officials."

Maybe the rushing trains rattle Bonar's ever-growing collection of awards, but they don't appear to shake her calm, or her focus on continuing to improve child support's automated systems.

Elaine Blackman is a writer in the Division of Consumer Services

Doubletree Hotel Crystal City
Arlington, VA.
For more information, contact Anne Gould
(202) 401-5437 or agould@acf.hhs.gov