**FLORIDA**

**LOW-INCOME NONCUSTODIAL OUTREACH SERVICE**

**(LINOS)**

**Goal:** Reach incarcerated and formerly incarcerated noncustodial
parents who historically, as a group, made no or very sporadic payments
toward their child support obligations, and assist them in making child
support a regular and reliable source of income for their children.

**Strategic Plan:** Supports strategies 1, 2, 8 of the National Child
Support Strategic Plan.

**Description**: Low-income Noncustodial Parent Outreach Service (LINOS)
began June 2004 with weekly visits to the Orange County Jail in Orlando
to present educational sessions regarding child support. This was done
so attendees could make informed decisions once they were released.
Attendance at the sessions was voluntary.

Close working relationships have developed with Orange County Workforce
Development, Orange County Community Action, Orange County Probation,
Department of Corrections Probation and Parole Office, the judiciary of
the Ninth Judicial Circuit, Orange County Legal Aid, Head Start, Healthy
Families, and the Department of Children and Families. In addition, Jobs
Partnership of Florida will soon join this network of community
partners. Two of the strongest relationships forged to date are with
Central Florida Workforce Development and the Orange Country Jail. Both
of these relationships will be crucial to the long-range success of the
outreach efforts.

**Results**: As of March 2006, 2320 inmates have been provided with
general child support and LINOS information. The weekly educational
sessions have 310 enrollees. Each group grows progressively larger as
word (and trust in the program) continues to spread throughout the jail.
Initial results are very encouraging. Of these traditionally non-paying
cases, 159 of them, or 51.3 percent have received a current support
payment within the last 30 days. Initial numbers show the long-range
positive potential of this program, and there are plans to expand the
program to an even broader segment of clients and community partners in
the coming year.

**Location**: Orange County (Orlando), Florida, an urban environment. It
is an

Orange County developed program and has not yet been adapted elsewhere
in the state or other states but could be.

**Funding**: Regular IV-D matching funds.

**Replication Advice**: Stress to inmates that the sessions are only for
educational purposes so they can make informed decisions once they leave
jail. Make the sessions voluntary. Provide enough staff to handle
questions from inmates. Provide contact information for the liaison once
they leave jail. Develop a tracking system that can monitor when clients
enroll in the program, payment history, scheduled appointments with
community partners, and job referral information. In addition to the
tracking database, develop internal referral forms to refer cases
directly into the program if the NCP meets designed criteria.

**Contact**:

David Gillen

Revenue Service Manager

Phone: (407) 245-0103

Email: <gillend@dor.state.fl.us>

**MASSACHUSETTS**

**LICENSE SUSPENSION PROJECT**

**Goal:** The goal of the Massachusetts Department of Revenue Child
Support Enforcement Division's (DOR/CSE) License Suspension Project is
to encourage noncustodial parents who have not made timely and
consistent payments toward current and/or past-due child support to make
payments.

**Strategic Plan**: Supports strategies 2, 8, 9, 10 of the National
Child Support Strategic plan.

**Description:** Our streamlined License Suspension Project implemented
in January 2002 focuses on professional and drivers' licenses and car
registrations. DOR/CSE notifies individuals who have not paid their
court-ordered child support that they will lose their driver's and
professional licenses and/or car registration if they do not immediately
begin to pay past-due and ongoing current support. The threat of license
suspension often produces dramatic results. However, if after 30 days,
the threat of suspension alone doesn't prompt payment, the noncustodial
parent is eligible for suspension of any license, permit, certificate,
or registration issued by the Commonwealth.

A second and final letter is sent to the noncustodial parents indicating
that any license they have will be suspended immediately. Since 2002,
DOR/CSE has developed a close working partnership with the Registry of
Motor Vehicles (RMV). DOR staff has on-line access to RMV's system to
suspend driver's licenses and registrations. If the noncustodial parent
has a professional or recreational license, a Notice to Suspend is sent
to the appropriate licensing authority.

Additionally, DOR/CSE has developed a working relationship with the
Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association (MCOPA) in an effort to
locate delinquent obligors and enforce child support orders. The MCOPA
has posted on its secured web site the names of individuals in their
cities and towns whose licenses have been suspended. Local police chiefs
can log onto the site and obtain the information. Sharing the
information with local police departments means that officers will be
better able to prevent unlicensed drivers from operating a motor vehicle
and encourage them to comply with their support orders.

DOR/CSE has also initiated a pilot program with the regional Veterans
Administration (VA). The program allows veterans who have an arrears
balance to avoid license suspension and certain other enforcement
actions as long as they comply with a repayment agreement with DOR.
Compliance is monitored by DOR/CSE and VA staff. Since VA benefits
cannot be garnished, the program allows DOR/CSE to collect money that
would likely be uncollectible while allowing veterans to maintain their
driving privileges and become competitively employed.

In addition, DOR/CSE has a program to work with inmates who have child
support arrears. Inmates are allowed to maintain their driver's licenses
while incarcerated as long as they comply with the terms of an agreement
with DOR. That agreement provides that inmates will notify DOR/CSE of
their whereabouts and income upon release or work-release. Inmates have
a greater chance of obtaining employment when they are released if they
have kept their driving privileges. After release, DOR/CSE continues to
work with these individuals - -

directing them to employment resources, assisting them with
modifications or current support orders when appropriate, and revising
repayment agreements to reflect the obligor's ability to pay.

**Results:** The License Suspension program has been an extraordinarily
powerful, timely, and inexpensive enforcement tool. It is a key
component of our early intervention strategy. Because of its overall
effectiveness -- and because it produces faster results and is less
costly -- license suspension precedes a judicial contempt process. The
threat alone of license suspension often produces dramatic results.
Noncustodial parents have often responded to DOR's initial notice by
coming forward with lump-sum payments to maintain their license. In one
recent week, staff in our offices collected \$82,000 from customers who
came in to make a payment in order to keep their licenses. Additionally,
noncustodial parents who come forward to make a full payment may be
eligible for a waiver of any interest and penalty owed to the
Commonwealth.

As of March 2005, DOR/CSE has contacted or sent suspension notices to
over 50,000 noncustodial parents. Over 24,000 drivers' licenses, 770
registrations, and close to 800 professional licenses have been
suspended. But the most important outcome is that through February 2006,
over \$63 million -- most owed directly to custodial parents and their
children -- has been collected.

**Location:** The License Suspension Program is practiced statewide.

**Funding:** The License Suspension Program is a state-funded program.

**Replication Advice:** This practice is based on statute. Should you be
interested in replicating this program, we recommend referring to
Massachusetts General Laws, chapter 119A, in full.

**Contact:**

Lisa Perfetuo Miller

License Suspension Program Coordinator

Phone: (617) 626-4209

Email: [MILLERLI@MASS.DOR.STATE.US](mailto:MILLERL@MASS.DOR.STATE.US)

**MINNESOTA**

**CPAT WEB REPORT DELIVERY SYSTEM**

**Goal:** To improve child support enforcement performance at the state
and county level through the use of tools that allow users to analyze
real-time performance data. This tool will allow counties to adjust
their resources, attention, energy and planning to address their
specific needs, as identified by the data.

**Strategic Plan:** Supports Strategies 1, 2, regarding performance
improvement on Federal measures of the National Child Support Strategic
Plan.

**Description:** The County Performance Analysis Tool (CPAT) is an
interactive management information reporting system that allows state
and county personnel to analyze performance data in a real-time
environment. The program uses a Graphical User Interface (GUI) that
provides for easier retrieval of reports and viewing of trend data not
previously available to county and state managers. The performance data
included in these reports directly relate to the five Federal
performance measures used to measure the state's effectiveness in
delivering the program's services to families. This is a graphic/visual
means of reviewing data that allows users to pull specific information
about their county and other counties for comparison purposes via maps
or text lists. Minnesota continues to expand the features of this tool.

CPAT also provides county and state managers easy download and sorting
capability and "drill down" features to see detail behind county-wide or
team level performance data. The use of this program relates back to one
of the goals of Minnesota's Strategic Plan - - to manage by results.
Making better performance data available to county and state managers
enables them to readjust their service delivery to improve outcomes to
families.

The first of several CPAT report series were issued to counties in late
2002. These reports contained different levels of summaries of
performance data on four of the five Federal incentive measures. The
summary levels include a statewide summary, summaries for each
individual county, and summaries for child support workers and their
respective teams.

In 2003, the web-based report system was launched. The web-based report
system allows state and county supervisors to view the data through
customized views that best suit their particular needs. Counties may
compare their performance to other counties or to the statewide average.
They can also compare individual worker performance or create trend
charts from historical data.

**Results:** By offering worker level views of performance, CPAT
empowers county supervisors to manage allocation of staff more
effectively to improve overall outcomes on the five Federal incentive
measures. Self-assessment results are the perfect complement to the CPAT
reports and report delivery system due to the emphasis on work process
efficiencies and successful attainment of performance goals.

**Location**: This project was initiated at the state level and utilized
by state and county level staff.

**Funding**: Regular Federal matching funds are used in combination with
state and county funds.

**Replication Advice:** Invite input from users during development of
the program and after it has been released for use. Allow flexibility in
the design and utilization of data analysis tools to achieve optimal
results.

**Contact:**

Brenda St. Sauver

Management Analyst

Phone: (651) 282-3964

Email: <Brenda.St.Sauver@state.mn.us>

**MINNESOTA**

**ENFORCING CURRENT SUPPORT ORDERS**

**CARLTON, CHIPPEWA, ISANTI, KITTSON & ST. LOUIS COUNTIES**

**Goal:** To improve initial and ongoing compliance with child support
orders and prevent cases from going to arrears, to ensure that children
get the consistent financial support to which they are entitled.

**Strategic Plan:** Supports Strategies 1, 2, 8, 10 of the National
Child Support Strategic Plan.

**Description:**

-   **Carlton County** has approximately 2,100 child support cases and a
    staff of 12 people as of April 2004. They place a high priority on
    enforcing current support. Cases are monitored closely and when
    payments do not resume after a written request from a worker, they
    are referred for contempt. Support enforcement aides identify
    potential contempt actions via phone calls and work lists generated
    by PRISM, Minnesota's automated system for the establishment of
    child support and medical support. They prepare a contempt referral
    and refer the matter to a child support officer who handles all
    contempt actions for the unit.

> The county's goal is to refer cases for contempt within 90 days of
> non- payment. If there are court ordered medical support provisions
> that are not in compliance, those matters are combined into the
> contempt action. Ninety percent of the contempt actions settle prior
> to the court hearing. The typical settlement provisions are for
> current support payments to resume and an additional 20 percent to be
> paid on the arrears. Arrears are generally reduced to judgment in the
> agreement. Noncustodial parents are required to agree to the provision
> in writing. Contempt conditions expire after one year of compliance by
> the noncustodial parent.

-   **St. Louis County** had approximately 10,600 child support cases
    and 45.5 FTE staff members across 3 offices as of February 2003.
    They place a high priority on ensuring that noncustodial parents
    comply with new orders for support soon after the orders are issued.
    These cases get special attention and monitoring from the date of
    entry of the order until regular payments are coming in. The county
    processes cases with new orders as follows:

    -   The county transfers cases with new orders for support to a
        child support officer who monitors whether payments are being
        made.

    -   If no payment has been received by the time the court order is
        30 days old, the child support officer sends a letter to the
        noncustodial parent. If the noncustodial parent does not make a
        payment within 30 days of that letter, the County Attorney's
        Office sends a second letter. If that letter doesn't generate
        payment, the case is referred for contempt.

    -   When payments are received for three consecutive months, the
        case transfers to the ongoing enforcement worker.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Isanti County** had approximately 2,000 child support cases and
    9.8 FTE staff members as of January 2004. They proactively seek to
    establish and maintain orders that are consistent with noncustodial
    parents' ability to pay in the following ways:

    -   Review dates are automatically set in orders when there is a
        known change of circumstances on the horizon for the
        noncustodial parent (e.g., temporary disability, contested
        paternity, military deployment, release from a penal
        institution, etc.). These review hearings are set to occur
        within sixty days of the anticipated change.

    -   In addition to initiating modifications at the request of either
        party, the county initiates modifications when a change in
        circumstance occurs (e.g., incarceration of six months or more
        and not as a result of a criminal non-support action, opening of
        a public assistance case and the language makes the order
        unenforceable or inconsistent with guidelines, receipt of
        Retirement, Survivors, Disability Insurance (RSDI) for a
        disability).

    -   Establishment cases are set up for hearing when the only source
        of income that the county has is unreliable or the information
        is incomplete.

    -   Child support officers provide extensive education to
        noncustodial parents when new orders are set. They fully explain
        what will happen if payments are missed. Noncustodial parents
        are strongly encouraged to keep in touch with their child
        support officer and to report all changes. The county
        aggressively and promptly pursues enforcement when payments are
        missed, including initiating criminal non-support actions.

-   **Chippewa County** had approximately 555 child support cases and
    3.1 FTE staff members as of March 2004. They are in compliance with
    federal self-assessment requirements for processing cases needing
    orders. The following are some of the procedures they believe keep
    them in compliance:

    -   Within 3-5 days of receiving a case in need of an order, the
        support enforcement aide will open the case; send out a
        pertinent verification request; complete Technical Quality
        Review; check MAXIS, a master computer system that determines
        public assistance under Minnesota's TANF program, medical
        assistance, food support, etc; check other resources for
        relevant information; and refer the case to the child support
        officer.

    -   The child support officer reviews the case to determine what has
        to be done to obtain an order. Also at that time, an informal
        case plan is devised that takes into account what needs to be
        done on the case to meet Federal timelines.

    -   Files on cases needing an order are kept in a separate location
        and reviewed weekly.

    -   A chart is kept on cases so workers can tell at a glance the
        status of the case.

    -   Turn-around times for requests for information are short but
        reasonable (usually about 7 working days).

    -   Workers strive to work with clients to settle the cases that can
        be settled.

    -   The county's goal is to get orders within 60 days of case
        opening.

-   **Kittson County** had 140 child support cases and one child support
    officer as of January 2004. To ensure payment of current support,
    the child support officer is responsible for the following
    functions:

> \- Reviews nonpayment work lists monthly and takes appropriate action
> on non-paying cases.
>
> \- Sends a letter about cases that were previously current in their
> obligation noting the missed payment and requesting that the person
> resume payments.
>
> \- Negotiates repayment arrangements on a case-by-case basis with
> noncustodial parents.
>
> \- Initiates modifications when the reason for nonpayments is that the
> amount is no longer appropriate.
>
> \- Refers matters in which the noncustodial parent is unresponsive to
> the county attorney for contempt; most are referred within a month of
> the first missed payment.
>
> \- Encourages noncustodial parents to communicate with her and to
> report all changes.

**Results:**

-   **Carlton County --** Improved compliance with enforcement of
    current support requirements, orders more in line with noncustodial
    parent's ability to pay, increased customer service, improved
    cooperation by noncustodial parent, increased collections, and
    decreased complaints by custodial parents.

-   **St. Louis County --** Stresses the importance of complying with
    court orders early in the life of the support order; educates new
    payers about their responsibilities, consequences of nonpayment, and
    other resources available to assist noncustodial parents with their
    various issues; cases going forward for contempt have only
    short-term arrears, and therefore are more easily brought
    up-to-date; increases collections and increases consistency of
    payments.

-   **Isanti County --** Improved results on the Federal performance
    measure for collections on current support, increased collections
    base, noncustodial parents feel more buy-in and are more likely to
    comply with their court order, all customers are treated
    consistently and fairly, and the scheduling of review hearings
    improves efficiency and reduces paperwork. There is improved
    compliance with enforcement of support as measured in
    self-assessment (94%).

-   **Chippewa County -** Reduced conflict between the child support
    officer and the customers, improved customer service, faster money
    to families, manageable arrears for noncustodial parents with new
    obligations, about average number of cases with orders (89%),
    increased incentives, and increased cooperation by the customer for
    the life of the case.

-   **Kittson County -** Cases are easier to manage because arrearage
    amounts are low. There are increased consistency of payments to
    families, and improved relationships between custodial parents and
    noncustodial parents.

**Location:** These programs are currently in place in their respective
counties and some replication has occurred in other counties throughout
Minnesota.

**Funding:** Regular Federal matching funds, in combination with state
and county dollars, were the source of funding for staff time.

**Replication Advice:**

-   **Carlton County --** Involve court administration, district court,
    magistrates and your county attorney when setting policies, develop
    and use a good referral form, and have all contempt actions
    specialized. It is beneficial if the assigned worker(s) can relate
    effectively to this case population.

-   **St. Louis County -** The staff person assigned to this duty should
    have above-average customer service skills.

-   **Isanti County --** Specialize the modification function, match
    staff to their area of interest, start small -- pick one aspect and
    add more as time permits.

-   **Chippewa County -** Work first to eliminate backlog, prioritize
    work to be done, use support enforcement aides whenever possible,
    set a goal for the number of new actions to start per week and stick
    to it, determine time needed to concentrate on establishment of
    orders and designate time to do so, be aware of court dates and work
    the cases so they are ready to go before the court date, strive to
    provide good customer service, determine magistrate's preferences
    about what materials to receive and be sure to include them, and
    develop a good working relationship with your county attorney.

**Contact:**

Cindy Steinberg

Self-Assessment Coordinator

Child Support Division

Phone: (320) 529-6511

Email: <Cindy.Steinberg@state.mn.us>

**MINNESOTA**

**STRATEGIC PLAN -- STATE LEVEL PROJECTS**

**Goal:** Direct comprehensive statewide improvement of child support
enforcement in Minnesota by using the strategic plan as a guide for
county and state office staff planning.

**Strategic Plan:** Supports performance improvement on Federal
incentives, which is a focus of the National Child Support Strategic
Plan.

**Description:** The Minnesota Child Support Division initiated a
comprehensive strategic plan in June 2002 to better serve Minnesota's
families and children.

It allows for variation and creativity throughout the state and can be
adjusted for individual circumstances to meet the same goal. The plan
shifts the focus of the child support enforcement program to a more
performance-based model. It is periodically reviewed by state and county
staff and then updated to reflect current trends. The plan was revised
in December 2004 to add new initiatives which made the state plan
conform to the Federal strategic plan issued in July 2004.

Over a period of six months, the following steps were taken to develop
the initial strategic plan:

-   Obtained support from upper management within the Department

-   Formed a planning group to determine if the environment was right
    for a new strategic plan

-   Developed a statement of work for the project

-   Enlisted facilitator assistance from Minnesota Department of
    Administration

-   Conducted stakeholder focus group meetings to identify our program's
    strengths, weaknesses, barriers and opportunities

-   Formed a team to develop the strategic plan

-   Developed the strategic plan

-   Initiated rollout of the plan statewide

The plan includes a mission statement, a five-year vision, and three
strategies to fulfill the mission and vision. Specific objectives and
outcomes were identified to carry out each strategy.

**Results:** Several initiatives have been developed to improve
performance, such as:

-   increased automation to ensure data integrity; and

-   development of responsive policies and services, e.g., forming peer
    groups in all counties to share successes and failures as counties
    work to improve their performance as compared to the Federal
    performance measures.

**Location:** The strategic plan was initiated at the state level with
input from state and county level staff. The plan has been used to
develop specific implementation details by individual offices. This
method promotes variation in methods to achieve the same performance
goals, allowing state and county offices to find what works best for
their particular set of circumstances.

**Funding:** Regular Federal matching funds were used in combination
with state and county funds for staff time.

**Replication Advice:** Collaborate at the state and county level to
produce a comprehensive plan that directs the goals of the state to meet
Federal performance standards and encourages variation in
implementation.

**Contact:**

Anne Lauer

Supervisor, Federal Reports and Compliance Unit

Child Support Enforcement Division

Phone: (651) 215-6281

Email: [Anne.Lauer@state.mn.us](mailto:Anne.Lauer@stae.mn.us)

**MISSOURI**

**REVIEW AND MODIFICATION**

**Goal:** Give high priority to review and modification of child support
orders due to income change of custodial and noncustodial parents called
to active duty for a period of more than 30 days.

**Strategic Plan:** Supports Strategies 1, 4, 8 of the National Child
Support Strategic Plan.

**Description:** Since September 11, 2001, many reservists have been
called to active duty. When called to active duty, men and women leave
their civilian employers and are assigned to military duty both at home
and abroad. As a result, these individuals may see an increase or
decrease in their income.

When a custodial or noncustodial parent is called to active duty for a
period of more than 30 days, upon request, a review and modification is
conducted because it is likely that there was a change in income. The
income change is considered a substantial change in circumstances for
purposes of review and modification. That is, the child support
enforcement staff will complete a review of the order regardless of the
age of the order and complete a modification even though the amount
differs by 20 percent from the existing obligation. The statute can be
found at <http://www.moga.state.mo.us/statutes/C400-499/4520000416.HTM>

Parents may obtain information about this policy via the Missouri
website at: <http://www.dss.mo.gov/cse/index.htm>. Additionally, the
Federal OCSE website highlights information for recently activated
parents and directs parents to contact their state child support agency.
Parents also receive a notice every three years which addresses their
right to request a review and adjustment.

Prior to completing the review, the child support enforcement
investigator (CSEI) will require the person called to active duty and
requesting the review to provide:

-   A copy of his/her latest leave and earnings statement

-   A copy of his/her orders to appear for active duty

Child support enforcement staff is encouraged to give these requests
high priority.

[Income Withholding:]{.underline}

For some custodial and noncustodial parents, being called to active duty
may mean a reduction in monthly income. If a custodial or noncustodial
parent called to active duty requests a reduction or increase in his/her
periodic arrearage

payment, the child support enforcement staff will review the income
withholding order to determine if a change in the arrearage payment is
warranted.

[Medical Support:]{.underline}

Child support enforcement staff will also review whether a noncustodial
parent's access to health care coverage has changed. If a noncustodial
parent is called to active duty for more than 30 days, his/her
dependents are eligible for health benefit plan coverage through the
military. Additional information about this practice is available on the
Child Support Enforcement website at
[www.dss.mo.gov/cse/index.htm](http://www.dss.mo.gov/cse/index.htm)

**Results:** Approximately 15-20 noncustodial parents request a
modification review annually.

**Location:** Statewide

**Funding:** Regular IV-D funds are used.

**Contact:**

Nancy Crocker

Program Development Specialist

Phone: (573) 526-5356

Email: <Nancy.J.Crocker@dss.mo.gov>

**NORTH CAROLINA**

**NCP WALLET CARD PROJECT**

**Goal:** To give noncustodial parents a *personalized* pocket reference
of important information about paying their child support and obtaining
information about their child support cases.

**Strategic Plan:** Supports Strategies 2, 8 of the National Child
Support Strategic Plan.

**Description**: North Carolina developed a *personalized* wallet sized
card to provide a pocket reference for noncustodial parents,
particularly those with new child support orders. The card contains the
following information:

-   address of the North Carolina Centralized Collections Operation

-   telephone number of the NC CSE Customer Service Center

-   URL of the CSE child support website

-   amount of child support due each month

-   date the first payment is due

-   NCP's participant Identification number

-   court docket number

The reverse of the card states, "Child Support Enforcement is not
permitted to address custody or visitation. Should you have questions
about custody or visitation issues, please contact an attorney."

The project is a new one so results are not yet available. All child
support offices, both state-operated and non state-operated, were
offered a supply of NCP wallet cards and all but one office requested
cards. The intention is that the Child Support Agent will give the
wallet card to the NCP when the child support order is entered and ask
that he/she keep the card in his/her wallet. The card will be on hand
whenever the NCP needs to know how child support should be paid or how
case information may be obtained.

**Results**: It is anticipated that the wallet card will reduce the
number of NCP calls to the child support offices and will increase child
support payments, particularly for new payers. Often new payers must
make one or two payments before income withholding begins to flow. The
card will provide the reminder and be an informational resource for
these payments.

**Location:** The practice of distributing NCP wallet cards will be
carried out statewide in North Carolina.

**Funding**: Regular Federal matching funds are used.

**Replication Advice:** The child support amount due, the first date
due, the NCP's participant number and the court document number fields
should be printed so that the child support agent may fill in that
information before giving the card to the NCP.

**Contact:**

Beth Amos

Assistant Chief for Local Operations

North Carolina Child Support Enforcement

Phone: 919-255-3805

Email: <beth.amos@ncmail.net>

**NORTH DAKOTA**

**ARREARS REGISTRY**

**Goal:** To reduce child support arrears through early intervention,
effective use of administrative enforcement tools and payment plans that
fit the obligor's ability to pay.

**Strategic Plan**: Supports strategies 1, 2, 8 of the National Child
Support Strategic Plan.

**Description:** Recently passed legislation will make uniform the
criteria that trigger the various enforcement remedies typically used in
arrears collection. Examples of these enforcement remedies are liens,
levies and license suspension. The intention is to set the "trigger" at
a level that is low enough for the child support enforcement program to
take action before obligors get so far behind that they may never get
caught up. Obligors who owe at least two times the monthly support
obligation or \$2,000, whichever is less, will be placed on an arrears
registry.

Under prior law, several administrative tools for collecting arrears had
different triggers and some of the most effective tools often could not
be used until an obligor owed at least six months of arrears. In North
Dakota's experience, by the time an arrears collection action could be
taken, the obligor was often too far in debt for a voluntary repayment
agreement to be a realistic option. In addition, the different triggers
for each tool made it difficult for child support caseworkers to use the
right tool at the right time for a particular obligor.

Once an obligor is on the arrears registry, the caseworker will be
alerted to consider any or all arrears collection actions. Many actions
may be suspended or prevented if an obligor signs up for the plan, even
if the arrears are not paid in full.

[Payment Plan]{.underline}

North Dakota established a payment plan strategy in 2003 that requires
the obligor with arrearages to make all current support payments on
time, along with a specific amount due on arrears that is based on the
obligor's actual ability to pay. In addition, for payment plans to avoid
license suspension or reinstate a license, a down payment of \$500 or 5%
of the total arrears, whichever is greater, is required. The down
payment is often waived for the obligor's first payment or if the
obligor's monthly obligation is less than \$500.

As an incentive for making sustained payments, the accrual of judgment
interest is suspended on all arrears (assigned and unassigned) as long
as the obligor complies with the payment plan. Interest that accrued
prior to the payment plan on assigned arrears and on some unassigned
arrears is forgiven if the obligor complies with the payment plan for
one year. Any breach of the payment plan agreement results in immediate
suspension of any previously reinstated licenses and in renewed efforts
to collect arrears.

[Measuring Effectiveness]{.underline}**:** A major benefit of early
intervention is preventing delinquency. North Dakota plans to measure
the effectiveness of the uniform trigger criteria by monitoring the
number of IV-D cases in which the obligor is current or less than two
months behind in payments. Also to be monitored are the number of
current payment plans, breached payment plans and total number of down
payments.

**Results**: Initially in 2003, the payment plan concept was applied to
the suspension of recreational licenses and produced a 50 percent
increase in collections from obligors who signed the plans.

It is expected that the uniform enforcement remedy will provide an early
intervention method which should increase the number of arrears balances
paid in full, reduce the overall length of payment plans, and increase
arrears collections.

**Location:** Statewide

**Funding:** Regular IV-D funds are used.

**Replication Advice:** It is imperative to have legislative recognition
of the need to manage arrears and the benefit of early intervention.
This may mean that changes are needed in the state law. It is possible
to have a few pilot projects without system support, but widespread
implementation would require system support, including document
generation, and clear parameters for negotiating payment plans.

Payment plans often require a payment on arrears that is larger than the
amount currently due for purposes of income withholding. When
incorporating a payment plan strategy, be sure that the amount under
income withholding can be increased. Otherwise, the obligor may have to
supplement the income withholding with a separate payment. In the case
of North Dakota, new legislation was needed to allow for the amount of
withholding to be increased.

**Contact:**

James C. Fleming

Deputy Director/General Counsel

Phone: (701) 328-3582

Email: <sojfle@state.nd.us>

**NORTH DAKOTA**

**PARENT EMPLOYMENT PILOT PROGRAM (PEPP)**

**Goal:** Promote parental responsibility by addressing unemployment and
underemployment of noncustodial parents.

**Strategic Plan**: Supports Strategies 1, 2, 6, 8 of the National Child
Support Strategic Plan.

**Description:** The Parental Employment Pilot Project (PEPP) is a
cooperative effort between the Job Service of North Dakota (JSND) and
the District Court, and the Department of Human Services' Badlands Human
Service Center along with its TANF and CSE divisions. The project began
operation in March 2005.

The Court and the CSE program refer unemployed/underemployed obligors to
JSND where the case manager assesses each for job readiness and
identifies impediments to employment. The assessment will determine
whether referrals will be made to employers and/or to the Badlands Human
Services Center for appropriate assessment and treatment in alcohol,
drug, mental health or vocational rehabilitation.

Additionally, the case manager monitors and informs the court about
treatment undertaken or referrals to employment that were made in the
case.

**Results:** In July 2005, the local CSE administrator met with the
local employment security agency (JSND) to review the PEPP program
implementation during the program's first four months of operation. It
was determined that a solid communication base was in place between the
participating programs and with the local court.

The referral process from the court to the CSE program and to the JSND
program is working well. As of July, 2005, 20 individuals were referred
to PEPP, 19 by the court and one by CSE. Of these, ten are or have been
employed since the referral. When the caseworker at JSND thinks that an
individual is not cooperating, a referral is made back to the CSE
office. There were 9 referrals for noncompliance, including one for the
second time. This is a higher rate on noncompliance than we expected.
Once the word gets out that one must participate or go to jail for
contempt of court, it is expected that the compliance rate will improve.

The local court suggested that a compliance hearing be scheduled as soon
as CSE becomes aware of a noncompliant individual. This would emphasize
the consequences of noncompliance.

Ultimately, we expect a case manager to oversee a caseload of about 40
obligors. The obligors are expected to either find or improve their
employment, thereby increasing the frequency and number of payments made
in support of their children. Additionally, the courts will have another
option for working with recalcitrant obligors, thereby reducing
confinement time from contempt findings.

**Location:** PEPP is operational in a rural part of the state where a
pool of 900 obligors owe arrears. After four months of operation, the
results are so encouraging that PEPP will be instituted in another
judicial district.

**Funding**: PEPP is funded by the TANF program, although WIA funding is
also potentially available.

Assessment and treatment by the Badlands Human Service Center would be
supported by a mix of Federal and state funds. These would include
Vocational Rehabilitation funds, Medicaid, and Alcohol and Mental Health
Block Grant and Social Service Block Grant funds.

**Replication Advice:** It is very important for all entities (WIA, TANF
and CSE) and the local offices for each program to understand the
purpose and the intended gain for each of their customers. The initial
project was developed in Dickerson. A similar project began in Grand
Forks in January, 2006 utilizing the materials developed in the initial
project.

**Contact:**

Mike Schwindt,

Child Support Director

Phone: (701) 328-3582

Email: [soschm@state.nd.us](mailto:soschm@stae.nd.us)

**OHIO**

**CASE MANAGEMENT IN CRIMINAL NON-SUPPORT CASES**

**DELAWARE COUNTY**

**Goals:**

-   To provide intensive case management of those obligors convicted of
    criminal non-support.

-   To improve coordination and communications among the Child Support
    Agency (CSEA), the Adult Parole Authority (APA), Adult Court
    Services, the County Prosecutor's office and the Courts.

**Strategic Plan**: Supports Strategy 2 of the National Child Support
Strategic Plan.

**Description:** Delaware County CSEA has initiated a practice in which
all criminal non-support cases (felonies and misdemeanors) are monitored
and enforced by one case manager. This caseload has typically contained
cases where enforcement of the order has been a challenge and
establishing a reliable pattern of payment from the obligor has been
difficult.

The probation case manager receives cases from the CSEA's case managers
upon receipt of the court order of sentencing in the criminal matter.
From that point, cases are monitored on a regular basis, with extensive
follow-up and consultation with the APA and Adult Court Services. In
addition to intense monitoring of the obligor's terms of probation,
Adult Court Services provides job readiness classes to improve the
employability potential of the probationary obligors. In addition, the
criminal court sets these cases for "status hearings" every three to six
months. This practice furthers communication with the obligors regarding
the Court's, the CSEA's, the APA's and Adult Court Services'
expectations about payment of child support. The CSEA also insures that
the APA and Adult Court Services have current obligor payment history
records by sending payment histories once a month.

**Results**: Collections in this caseload have grown steadily since the
practice started in June, 2002. In the month of May, 2002, the CSEA
collected 39.5% of the total monthly obligation due (current and
arrears) in the caseload. Two and a half years later, in February, 2005,
the CSEA collected 59% of the total monthly obligation due. This
collection percentage varies from month to month.

When this practice began in June, 2002, the caseload was 134. In
February 2005, the caseload count for the criminal caseload was 231.

**Location:** Delaware County is a semi-rural county.

**Funding:** Funding is accrued through IV-D expenditures and a IV-D
contract with Adult Court Services.

**Replication Advice:** Consult Delaware County CSEA for information to
be included in the IV-D contract.

**Contacts:**

Susan Brown

Director

Wendy Shannon

Enforcement Supervisor

Phone: (740) 833-2720

1-(800) 490-9534

**OHIO**

**A CUSTOMIZED APPROACH TO ARREARS COLLECTIONS**

**FAIRFIELD COUNTY**

**Goal:** Increase collections through the management of child support
arrearages by implementing an approach to arrears management which was
developed by employee's suggestions.

**Strategic Plan**: Supports Strategies 1, 2, 8, 10 of the National
Child Support Strategic Plan.

**Description:** The Fairfield County Child Support Enforcement Agency
(CSEA) created a work group with the goal of increasing collections and
managing child support arrearages. The approach was customized based on
elements of the cases with arrears. This is an innovative approach, as
governments sometimes apply a single enforcement method, based on
computerized or legalistic processes.

The county set a goal to collect \$200,000 annually from the special
measures implemented from the project. The project sought to develop
creative enforcement techniques from employees' suggestions.

[Early Education & Outreach Tools Used to Increase
Collections]{.underline}**:** In addition to the typical agency
education and outreach events, the work group suggested more proactive
measures for outreach to child support obligors.

The three projects initiated to increase awareness and empower new
obligors are hearing labels, payment reminder letters and customer care
calls.

> [Hearing Labels:]{.underline} These are labels placed upon entry
> copies of paperwork provided at the time the hearing is held to
> establish or modify a child support order. These labels are brightly
> colored and a quick read. The main objective of the label is to
> provide information that would alleviate potential delays in child
> support payments prior to the income withholding taking effect.
>
> A recent customer service survey showed that information about the
> child support program is helpful in increasing compliance, especially
> long-term compliance with court orders for child support. This
> includes basic child support agency information and the
> responsibilities of new obligors.
>
> [Payment Reminder Letters]{.underline}: The CSEA uses an enforcement
> tracking system for cases known as SETS -- the Support Enforcement
> Tracking System. As soon as a SETS Specialist enters a new order into
> SETS, a payment reminder letter is sent to the obligor. This letter
> provides additional information to the "Welcome to SETS" letter. The
> letter explains the average time that it takes for an income
> withholding to be initiated, a definition of default and actions that
> can be taken as a result of default, the total obligation on a monthly
> or bi-weekly basis for informational purposes, and specific
> instructions about mail and drive-thru payment options. The letter
> specifically states the information that must be included with the
> payment.
>
> [Customer Care Calls]{.underline}: Within 15 days of receiving a child
> support order, case managers make contact with new obligors. Customer
> Care Calls are intended to introduce the obligor to his or her case
> manager and to provide an additional opportunity to answer any
> questions about the child support program. The calls also provide an
> opportunity to gather information needed for the case and serve as a
> reminder that payments need to begin promptly. At the point of the
> Customer Care Call, several fact sheets are sent if there are
> questions about the Guidelines, Enforcement Techniques, Arrearages,
> the Agency Legal Services or the Pro Bono Legal Clinic. If phone
> contact is not successful, another letter is sent for the initial
> contact.

[Creative Enforcement Techniques]{.underline}: Creative enforcement
techniques were suggested by the group members. Such measures included a
letter campaign, stepped-up use of special enforcement techniques,
increased publication on the Internet and notification of potential
publication in the media, and additional private investigation efforts
for location.

-   [The Letter Campaign, Publication and Enforcement
    Activities]{.underline}: A letter campaign to encourage compliance
    and to gather information was conducted with obligors and obligees.
    Cases were identified from the cumulative Default Report. The
    criteria were that the case had no current employment information
    and no payments or contact with the agency for the last three
    months.

> More than 500 letters were sent to obligors asking for employer
> information. The letters included a specific contact at the CSEA. The
> Fairfield County Sheriff posted search lists and warrant lists on
> their website. The website asks for anonymous tips and provides
> telephone numbers for contact. More than 500 additional letters were
> sent to obligees. These letters asked for location information or any
> other information that would be helpful in enforcing the case.
>
> The mass mailing resulted in phone calls from obligors, some of whom
> had never contacted the agency before. In many cases, employer
> information and social security information were obtained from either
> obligees or obligors.
>
> Collections of more than \$25,000 were achieved within three months of
> the initial mailing. The letters to obligors were also used as
> supporting correspondence with hearing notices and emancipation
> recommendations. A single caseload resulted in increased collections
> of over \$13,000 using this method.
>
> Case managers reviewed cases in more depth and applied special
> enforcement actions, including criminal non-support, financial
> institution account seizure, and drivers' license suspension in
> greater numbers, as compared to the twelve months prior to the
> existence of the work group. There was also a more detailed
> identification of cases that needed additional location or private
> investigation efforts.
>
> More than 35 cases were identified for additional review with a
> private investigator under contract. More than 50 cases were
> identified for criminal non-support referrals. In addition, a special
> enforcement log tracked the success of collections by individual case
> manager and team, in order to motivate the employees in achieving
> additional collections.

-   [Prison Cases and Stepped Up Efforts to Coordinate with Probation
    Officers]{.underline}: A review of all cases where a parent was
    imprisoned was conducted. This review confirmed if an income
    withhold (even from commissary income) had been initiated. In
    addition, the agency initiated increased contact with Municipal
    Court and local probation officers. The Municipal Court Judges in
    Lancaster have a heavy prosecutorial background and have made
    compliance with a child support order an important probation
    condition. Several meetings were held with local probation officers.

-   [Referrals to Job Coaching and Training Programs and Connection with
    Workplace Development and Other Partners]{.underline}: As part of
    Child Support Awareness Month, the office opened its doors in the
    evening to obligors who desired an additional opportunity to make a
    good faith effort of a payment, or to provide information regarding
    employment circumstances, prior to the agency pursuing additional
    enforcement actions through traditional legal processes. Letters
    were sent to delinquent obligors announcing the date and time of the
    event. Obligors were advised they would not be arrested at the
    conference. A good faith payment in cash or money order was
    requested. Thirty obligors participated. Nine provided additional
    employment information and about \$3,200 in payments were collected
    based on this initiative. Thirty referrals were made to job training
    programs, which resulted in increased payments over the next six
    months as compared to the six months prior to the contact.

-   [Connection with Workforce Development:]{.underline} The work group
    included workforce development partners in its plans to increase
    collections on arrears. The CSEA maintains a close relationship with
    Workforce Development Coordinators in order to stay abreast of local
    job opportunities and job trainings. CSEA managers and employees
    attend local job fairs sponsored by Workforce Development to ensure
    that accurate information about child support is available to those
    who are looking for employment. As part of a review process
    involving contempt hearings or criminal non-support proceedings, the
    court will order obligors to attend workforce trainings and to use
    their resources for job searches.

-   [Communication about Modifications and Workforce
    Development]{.underline}**:** The agency created a fact sheet about
    Administrative Adjustment and Review to help support the telephoning
    efforts to the parties to the cases. In addition, inserts and fact
    sheets were created about the number of different options available
    for job training and job searches. E-mails are sent throughout the
    combined agency to inform all staff of job fairs and new employment
    opportunities.

**Results:** The Fairfield County CSEA achieved the highest performance
measurement for collections on arrears as of October 2004 for large Ohio
counties with a workload between 4,000 and 19,999 cases. Overall,
collections specifically attributed to the three-pronged approach
exceeded \$200,000.

A foundation was established to focus on collections of arrears and help
to avoid the accumulation of debt.

-   The creative enforcement techniques came from employees'
    suggestions, and it was motivating to see the collections on
    arrearages increase. Employees gained knowledge and job confidence.

-   The strategies implemented allowed for a more customized approach to
    customer service. By making additional personal contacts with
    letters and telephone inquiries, the agency was building trust with
    the parties to cases for long-term success.

-   By communicating more information about the procedures for
    administrative modifications and by connecting with workforce
    development, the agency was helping to avoid the build-up of
    arrearages.

-   Early intervention activities can help prevent the build-up of
    arrearages. The earlier the contact with the parent about child
    support procedures and responsibilities, the better chance there is
    for compliance and payment.

**Location:** Fairfield County is the third fastest growing county in
Ohio. It is contiguous to metropolitan Franklin County, yet agriculture
remains an important part of its economy.

**Funding:** Regular IV-D funds were used. Approximately 200 hours of
training were provided in an in-house training program which costs about
\$2,600 annually. The training is an on-going activity.

**Replication Advice**: Employees were encouraged to consider each step
that could be implemented in order to improve performance. A
twelve-month committee met every other week and provided an update to
all-staff meetings monthly. At each step of the way, successes, no
matter how small, were celebrated with a recognition of individuals and
teams. Participants included management, case managers, assistants,
clerical staff, computer specialists, and local government partners. The
strategies were developed from the bottom up and the top down to ensure
a broad point of view.

**Contact**:

Carri Brown

CSEA Director

Phone: (740) 687-6788

Email: <brownc10@odjfs.state.oh.us>

**OHIO**

**ARREARS MANAGEMENT STRATEGY**

**HAMILTON COUNTY**

**Goals:**

-   Educate and encourage obligors to start paying as soon as their
    order is put onto the state automated system (SETS) and, as a
    result, increase our incentives in the collections areas.

-   Enhance customer service and establish rapport in order to make
    obligors feel comfortable with our agency so that they will report
    any changes in their status as the changes occur.

**Strategic Plan**: Supports strategies 1, 2, 10 of the National Child
Support Strategic Plan.

**Description:** It has been found that obligors who do not pay at the
beginning of their cases are less likely to pay throughout the life of
their cases. A special caseload was created for all new child support
cases. A dedicated technician with superb customer service skills and
extensive child support knowledge was assigned to these cases. The
technician reviews the cases as they are assigned to her and she
attempts to contact the obligor, either by phone or by mail. The obligor
is informed of the duty to pay, and of the fact that an income
withholding takes 4-6 weeks to become active, and is given the payment
options as well as told about the hours of operation of the CSEA county
office and other contact information.

-   If no payment after one month: The technician again attempts to
    contact the obligor with a contact letter to explain enforcement
    actions that can be taken and a license suspension warning letter.

-   Once payments begin, the case is transferred to a regular
    enforcement district.

-   If payments do not begin, the technician takes enforcement actions
    on the case (contempt, income withholdings, etc.). After three
    months, if there is still no payment, the case is transferred to a
    monitoring caseload so that we can continue to build rapport with
    the obligor and monitor the case through the first year.

**Results:** Some 90% of the cases started with arrears. At least 40% of
the cases had arrears payments made within the first month.

**Location:** Hamilton County is an urban/metro county but this practice
could benefit any county. Other counties in Ohio have instituted similar
projects.

**Funding**: Regular IV-D funds were used. This practice was
incorporated into the technician's daily duties, so no additional
funding was needed.

**Replication Advice:** For informational purposes, develop a way to
track success as the practice is implemented.

**Contact:**

LaShanna Smith

Child Support Team Leader

Phone: (513) 946-7317

Email: <smithl25@jfs.hamilton-co.org>

**OKLAHOMA**

**INCREASE COLLECTIONS ON DELINQUENT ACCOUNTS**

**Goals:**

-   As a cost-saving measure, reduce the number of cases referred to
    outside Collection Agencies for noncustodial parents more than 60
    days in arrears.

-   Educate noncustodial parents about payment options available to
    them, and provide some general information regarding child support.

-   Assist caseworkers with basic locate searches and information
    gathering regarding non-paying noncustodial parents.

-   Monitor responses of both noncustodial parents and child support
    caseworkers after initial contact has been made to assure case
    follow-up.

**Strategic Plan:** Supports Strategies 1, 2, 8 of the National Child
Support Strategic Plan.

**Description**: The Alert System to Activate Payment (ASAP) was a
demonstration project created to augment the Oklahoma Child Support
Enforcement Division's (OK-CSED) efforts in collecting delinquent child
support. The project was also implemented in order to save OK-CSED the
cost of referring cases to an outside collection agency. The program
provides early intervention in cases that otherwise would be referred to
a collection agency.

[Delinquent Letter:]{.underline} An essential piece of the program is
the mailing of a "delinquent letter" to noncustodial parents who are at
least 60 days in arrears. The letter is designed to invoke recipients to
take action regarding their child support responsibility and to
encourage them to begin making voluntary payments. The letter mentions
the possibility of several enforcement actions that could occur if
payments are not made. The noncustodial parent is instructed to contact
the OK-CSED within a 10-day period and is provided a toll-free telephone
number to facilitate this contact.

The foundation of the program relies on three highly skilled Customer
Service Representatives (CSR's) who are trained to utilize flexible
methods of response. The CSR must balance the task of emphasizing
collection of payment while serving as a customer advocate with
understanding and empathic listening skills.

The ASAP team's collection strategy offers more of an opportunity to
learn about the noncustodial parent's situation and help with payment
solutions rather than applying demands.

At the conclusion of each call, a notation is made in the Oklahoma Child
Support Mainframe Database and an e-mail is immediately forwarded to the
relevant Child Support Office and/or caseworker. The email informs the
caseworker that a response was received from the noncustodial parent and
contains any information collected. Such information can be, but is not
limited to, the examples listed below:

-   Telephone number via caller identification system

-   New mailing address

-   Employer information

-   Filing of disability, unemployment, etc.

-   Brief description of conversation

[Quality Assurance Process]{.underline}: An in-house database is used to
track calls and ensure pertinent information is recorded. A tickler was
created to alert the ASAP team to perform a quality control procedure on
each call 14 days following the original call. The ASAP team then
reviews the Oklahoma Child Support Mainframe Database for any new
activity resulting from the initial contact. Once the search for new
activity and information is completed, the results are entered in the
ASAP database. During the Quality Assurance Process, the ASAP team notes
if information previously provided to the district office that could
have facilitated collections (per case log and other applicable screens)
has no acknowledgement or identifiable actions. This inaction is
forwarded to the ASAP supervisor for further action.

[Returned Letter and Locate Processes]{.underline}: All delinquent
letters returned by the U.S. Postal Service are updated with any new
information. Searches are made for any new case information and/or
updates using the Oklahoma Child Support Mainframe Database. In
addition, the team also searches the Department of Corrections (DOC)
website. If the noncustodial parent has an active status, an email is
sent to the caseworker with the noncustodial parent's DOC number. Any
other new noncustodial parent information found is entered into the
Oklahoma Child Support Mainframe Database so that it can be verified and
appropriate action taken.

**Results**: The number of cases sent to an outside collection agency
has been reduced. Since October 2003, the project has collected well
over \$2.5 million and is projected to collect more than \$3 million by
June 2005.

+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **Date**    | **Number of | **Number of | **Number of | **Dollars   |
|             | letters     | Calls       | Cases with  | Collected** |
| **(Q        | sent**      | Taken**     | Voluntary   |             |
| uarterly)** |             |             | Payment**   |             |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| 10/03 to    | 4395        | 589         | 312         | \$93,384    |
| 12/03       |             |             |             |             |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| 01/04 to    | 3715        | 661         | 541         | \$164,019   |
| 03/04       |             |             |             |             |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| 04/ to      | 7580        | 1128        | 938         | \$298,481   |
| 06/04       |             |             |             |             |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| 07/04 to    | 8019        | 1223        | 1955        | \$584,237   |
| 09/04       |             |             |             |             |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| 10/04 to    | 4451        | 597         | 2306        | \$610,402   |
| 12/04       |             |             |             |             |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| 01/05 to    | 4322        | 722         | 2897        | \$808,192   |
| 03/05       |             |             |             |             |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **Total**   | **32,482**  | **4920**    | **8947**    | **\$        |
|             |             |             |             | 2,558,715** |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+

**Location**: The Oklahoma Child Support Enforcement Division teamed
with the University of Oklahoma - OUTREACH -- Center for Public
Management to implement this project. The call center is physically
located in an off-campus location at the University of Oklahoma in
Norman, Oklahoma.

**Funding**: Regular IV-D funds are used.

**Replication Advice**:

The key factors are:

1.  the quality of the CSRs' interaction with the callers, using a
    combination of active listening skills, advocacy and great customer
    service;

2.  the CSRs' extensive training in CSED policies, procedures and
    state-wide database activities;

3.  a supportive partnership with state-wide CSED caseworkers and
    offices;

4.  a close working relationship with CSED data services; and

5.  a steady number of letters generated and disseminated each week,
    which ensures the ability to provide quality service to every caller
    and minimizes, if not eliminates, the hold time.

**Contact**:

Victoria Harrison

Phone: (405) 522-0032

Email: <Victoria.Harrison@okdhs.org>

**PENNSYLVANIA**

**CHILD SUPPORT AND TANF COORDINATION MEETINGS**

**Goal:** To improve the coordination between the local TANF agency and
the local child support agency.

**Strategic Plan**: Supports strategies 6 and 7 of the National Child
Support Strategic Plan.

**Description:** Pennsylvania has 67 counties. The TANF program is
centralized and the state-administered child support program is
county-based.

In early 2003, the relationship between the local TANF program (County
Assistance Office) and local Child Support Directors varied from
tremendous cooperation to no interaction. The problems were compounded
by system interface issues and misunderstandings between child support
and TANF workers. To address cooperation issues, all of the partners
initiated a series of meetings statewide. The partners included the
Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare, Bureau of Child Support
Enforcement (BCSE) and Bureau of Operations, Domestic Relations
Association of Pennsylvania (DRAP) and the ACF Region III office.

The meetings were rooted in the participants' vision of welfare reform:
to have the county Assistance Office help a family at the front end when
they apply for assistance. Child support helps a family sustain
self-sufficiency at the back end when cash assistance is terminated.

ACF Region III convened the meetings of county directors for both
programs and provided an overview of both programs to every part of the
state. TANF County offices were told about how much child support can
accomplish with the name and social security number of an alleged
noncustodial parent. Child support directors were shown the type of
information required by the TANF program about the noncustodial parent.
Such information relates to medical insurance, child care, and
transportation. Additionally, training and food stamp eligibility must
be assessed. System interfaces between TANF and Child Support were
explained to participants so that they would understand that a coding
error could prevent a TANF referral from ever reaching the Child Support
office.

At the conclusion of the meeting, the County Directors met to develop a
customized plan for improving cooperation in the particular county.
These plans included joint training, establishing liaisons, and
providing "real," not automated response phone numbers, for each
program. The re-determination process was a focus. This TANF semi-annual
assessment process is an excellent opportunity for reviewing the status
of the child support case and determining whether any additional action
can be taken to establish and/or enforce a child support order.

TANF workers were provided with systems training so they could access
the child support system. TANF staff training focused on the statewide
coding system. Before the training, many TANF workers had no idea what
happened to their referral once it was sent to child support.

In the spring and summer of 2004, a second set of meetings was held that
involved the County Directors of Child Support and the County Assistance
Office Directors. These meetings focused on recent systems issues,
updates and employment issues for both custodial and noncustodial
parents.

**Results:**

[Coding:]{.underline} Since 2002, there has been a 55% statewide
reduction in the number of cases coded incorrectly. In counties where
individual training was conducted, the number of cases coded incorrectly
was reduced by over 74%.

[Paternity Establishment on IV-A Cases:]{.underline} The Pennsylvania
Bureau of Child Support Enforcement compared performance on IV-A cases
before and after the meetings were held. The first measurement was taken
in March 2003. Paternity Establishment was 66%. After the meetings were
held, the March 2004 measurement showed Paternity Establishment rose to
71%.

[Support Order Establishment on IV-A Cases:]{.underline} Similarly,
support order establishment rose from 54% in March 2003 to 58% in 2004.

These percentage increases translate to approximately 5,000 more TANF
children having paternity established and 4,000 more having support
orders established in Pennsylvania as a direct result of these
collaboration meetings.

[Collections:]{.underline} In 2003, before the IV-A/IV-D meetings began,
the average collection on all TANF cases was \$547. In 2005, after two
meetings were held around the State, the average collection on all TANF
cases was \$625. Additionally, in 2003 the average TANF collection on
cases with orders was \$957. After the meetings were held, the average
collection on TANF cases with child support orders increased to \$1,000.

**Status and Location:** Six Child Support/TANF collaboration meetings
were held in central locations in 2003. Five meetings were conducted in
2004. On October 1, 2005, a cooperative agreement between the Bureau of
Child Support and the local Domestic Relations Offices went into effect
to provide for additional meetings to be held.

**Funding:** Cost is minimal. The central location chosen for the
meetings has minimized travel costs and travel time. The maximum travel
time for any County Director is one hour. Most meetings were conducted
in state training facilities. These facilities were provided at no cost
and were equipped with audio visual equipment and other items necessary
for training meetings.

**Replication Advice:**

1.  An extensive analysis of the system interface between IV-A and IV-D
    is essential. This analysis in Pennsylvania revealed that referral
    from TANF to child support did not occur in some cases.
    Additionally, domestic violence issues were uncovered.

2.  Access to child support information by TANF workers can improve
    referrals to child support. The access enables TANF workers to
    monitor their referrals and correct any problems that may occur.
    TANF workers can see how an effective referral can result in
    financial support for children.

3.  The "Power of Two" video was used as a resource. Many TANF County
    Directors found the video made an effective argument for
    establishing paternity. All County Assistance offices in the state
    were provided with a copy of the video.

4.  An overview of TANF for Child Support Directors and an overview of
    child support for TANF Directors were provided as a basis of
    discussion. All participants found this useful.

5.  The re-determination of TANF eligibility also offers the chance to
    review the status of the child support case and request additional
    information from the custodial parent.

6.  Providing an opportunity for each county to meet separately and
    develop a county action plan is an effective technique. These
    county-specific action plans have improved collaboration and take
    into account the size, demographics and economics of each county.

7.  An attitude of problem solving rather than "finger pointing"
    provides the most effective environment to solve issues between the
    programs.

**Contact:**

John Clark

ACF Region III Office

Phone: 215-861-4067

Email: <jclark@acf.hhs.gov>

**SOUTH DAKOTA**

**PAYMENT VIA AUTOMATIC WITHDRAWAL/DEBIT AUTHORIZATION**

**Goal:** To offer obligors and employers an alternative to the income
withholding process.

**Strategic Plan**: Supports Strategy 3 of the National Child Support
Strategic Plan.

**Description:** State-determined criteria now give obligors an
alternative to the usual income withholding process. When
state-determined criteria are met, the obligor signs an authorization
form which allows the child support agency to withdraw an amount equal
to the current monthly child support obligation, plus an appropriate
amount for arrears (if any exists), from his or her checking or savings
account. In instances when the obligor is not self-employed, the child
support agency continues to track the obligor's employment and in the
event there are insufficient funds in the bank account, an income
withholding order is generated immediately.

The Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement was consulted before the
state legislation was introduced and a Policy Interpretation Question
was issued (PIQ-03-10), which cleared the way for the bill's passage.
The withdrawal/debit authorization in lieu of income withholding is
considered to be a "pro-obligor/pro-business" measure, which both
employers and State legislators supported. They believed the South
Dakota child support agency's efforts to "think outside the box" could
potentially relieve employers of some of their administrative burdens
related to child support.

The debit authorization in lieu of the income withholding process was
designed to reduce some of the lapses in payments that occur when
obligors change employers; reduce the number of payments that would have
to be processed and mailed to custodial parents (CP) due to multiple
monthly payroll periods; facilitate making the full monthly child
support payment on a "date certain" and, in turn, reduce CP customer
service calls checking on the status of payments; improve payment
processing efficiencies by increasing the number of electronic payments
received and processed; and make some efficient alternative payment
methods available to self-employed obligors. All of these outcomes
lessen administrative burdens and costs for the State and Federal
Government.

While the actual income withholding order and the garnishment of wages
are no longer required when an obligor qualifies for this process, it
should be noted that the National Medical Support Notice must still be
generated and sent to the employer.

**Results:** A little over 200 obligors, representing about \$80,000 per
month in payments, have signed up for this program. This is significant
for a state with a small caseload. Initial outreach about this option
was targeted to obligors who paid cash, check or money order. Currently,
when new cases are set up, all obligors are offered this option.
Enrollment is not as high as anticipated. One reason may be that under
standard income withholding procedures, the monthly child support
payment is split among or between pay periods. Obligors may find it
financially difficult to pay the full amount with a single debit that
occurs on a set date in the month.

**Location:** This practice is available to obligors statewide.

**Funding:** Regular IV-D funds are used.

**Replication Advice:** When an obligor with an income withholding order
changes to the debit authorization, care must be taken with the first
automatic withdrawal and the timing of terminating the income
withholding order to ensure the obligor will have sufficient funds in
his or her account when the new process is implemented. In the event of
insufficient funds, steps have to be taken to recoup the funds that were
distributed as well as make certain an income withholding is issued on
appropriate cases.

**Contact:**

Rocco Konop

Program Specialist

Phone: (605) 773-3641

Email: <Rocco.Konop@state.sd.us>

**UTAH**

**MAXIMIZING USE OF CRIMINAL NON-SUPPORT TOOLS**

**Goal:** Maximize the use of Criminal Non-Support (CNS) tools by
providing more direction and greater resources to Utah's CNS program.

**Strategic Plan**: Supports Strategy 10 of the National Child Support
Strategic Plan.

**Description:** In October 2000, staff from the Utah Office of Recovery
Services/Child Support Services (ORS/CSS) attended a conference in
Columbia, South Carolina which focused on maximizing the use of Criminal
Non-

Support (CNS) tools. The CNS program had been in operation in various
forms in Utah and with varying degrees of success since the early
1980's. However, after October 2000, Utah increased the commitment and
attention to that program.

In order to increase efficiency and expedite CNS referrals, problems
with the existing program were identified. The next step was to identify
the critical partners and determine their roles as a way to help detect
the barriers to be eliminated or minimized.

Based on a shared analysis of the processes, ORS/CSS and the Office of
the Attorney General (AGO) negotiated and entered into a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU). The MOU clarified roles for participants in both
organizations, formalized criteria for future referrals for prosecution,
and established new reporting procedures. More specifically, the MOU:

-   Designated types of cases for referral for criminal prosecution

-   Identified functions which could be assigned to ORS/CSS agents and
    thereby free up AG time for trial preparation and prosecution

-   Determined information to be included in the monthly tracking report

While specific details of the MOU were still being negotiated,
participants implemented as many of the processes as possible.

An ORS/CSS Criminal Specialist position was created by reassigning a
child support worker full-time to the CNS program. The Criminal
Specialist's duties included:

-   Identifying cases for prosecution

-   Preparing cases for hearing

-   Creating computations and tracking historical payments

-   Preparing documents for discovery

-   Testifying in court

There was a crucial need to improve the reporting of case status and
payment monitoring in the CNS program. Previously, paralegals assigned
to the AGO had logged and tracked restitution payments manually. This
often resulted in inaccurate reporting even though much AGO staff time
(and therefore costs) was spent in tracking payments.

Using query management function (QMF) software designed to query the
database of the state's automated child support system (ORSIS), reports
were created which could track payments, case status, and other
information in CNS cases automatically. These reports are now accessible
both to the AGO and to ORS/CSS on a monthly basis. Compliance with
restitution orders, payment frequency and amounts are all tracked
rapidly and accurately.

**Results:** Results achieved through these efforts have been
impressive. A total of 323 cases were referred to the AGO as of the year
2000, and collections on these cases totaled \$547,585. During the first
year of this project (2001), while the number of active CNS cases
dropped to 294, collections totaled \$952,215. Collections per case
increased significantly. In the calendar year 2004, 473 cases were
referred to the AGO, setting a new record for collections of
\$1,732,701.

Results included marked improvement in the time between case referral to
the CNS/AGO and court filing. A logjam was cleared. The average time
from case referral date to court filing date decreased from
approximately 6 months to the current 30 days.

As a result of improved reporting, the AGO paralegals have increased
time for:

-   Monitoring CNS cases for compliance after conviction

-   Improved follow-up on missed payments to keep convicted parents from
    violating the terms of the restitution

-   Improved partnering with probation officers, who previously ignored
    CNS convictions but now recognize the importance of criminal
    non-support restitution payments to families

Most of these efficiencies have been achieved with a minimal increase in
financial resources. However, in 2004, an additional attorney and
paralegal were added to the CNS program.

A shared willingness to engage in a critical analysis of processes and
to implement and formalize changes through an MOU have resulted in a
productive joint effort between ORS/CSS and the AGO in the Utah Criminal
Non-Support program.

**Location:** The CNS program is in operation statewide.

**Funding:** Regular IV-D funding is used.

**Replication Advice:** Critically analyze processes and roles of key
players. Automate performance reports.

**Contact:**

Mark Brasher

Acting Director,

Office of Recovery Services

Phone: (801) 536-8968

Email: <mbrasher@utah.gov>

**VIRGINIA**

**LOCATING NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS THROUGH CELL PHONE RECORDS**

**Goal:** Convince cellular telephone providers to conduct automated
data matches with the Division of Child Support Enforcement (DCSE) as a
tool to assist in locating addresses and cell phone numbers of
noncustodial parents.

**Strategic Plan**: Supports Strategy 9 of the National Child Support
Strategic Plan.

**Description:** In a coordinated effort between the Office of the
Attorney General and DCSE, a project began in early 2005 to enlist the
voluntary cooperation of cell phone companies in conducting data match
processes between their customer records and DCSE. Although the project
had support from staff at the Federal Communications Commission, and
despite the backing of Federal and state law, DCSE's attempts at written
and verbal communications with the companies proved fruitless.

Therefore, DCSE is issuing subpoenas to seven of the largest cell phone
providers in Virginia, in an attempt to track down some of the hardest
to locate offenders for nonpayment of child support. In all of these
cases, other resources such as banks and employers have been exhausted.
In addition, most of these parents change jobs and addresses frequently.

**Results:** The results to date have been positive, with an over 40
percent success rate in obtaining such information as addresses and cell
phone numbers from companies. As of early August 2005, almost 1,000
subpoenas have been issued.

Cell phone companies responding to the subpoenas generally cite customer
privacy concerns about data sharing with a subpoena or court order as
the reason for not agreeing to data matches. A few companies also state
that they do not have the automation necessary to conduct matches.

Although labor-intensive, the project will continue indefinitely until
the cell phone companies recognize the mutual benefit of automated data
matches. DCSE currently conducts data matches with multiple state
agencies, financial institutions and utility companies to locate
noncustodial parents. Voluntary data matches are more efficient and less
time-consuming than preparing and answering individual subpoenas.

**Location**: DCSE district offices statewide.

**Funding:** Regular IV-D funds are used.

**Replication Advice:** The project lends itself to adaptation by other
states.

**Contact:**

Cindy Coiner

Policy Specialist

Phone: (804) 726-7433

Email: <cindy.coiner@dss.virginia.gov>

**VIRGINIA**

**BARRIERS PROJECT**

**Goal:** Increase the collection rate for court-ordered child support
in Spotsylvania, Virginia by identifying and addressing barriers to
noncustodial parents' (NCPs) payment of support.

**Strategic Plan**: Supports Strategies 2, 8 of the National Child
Support Strategic Plan.

**Description**:

[Objectives:]{.underline}

-   Identify common barriers affecting nonpayment of child support

-   Develop prototypes of "common" nonpayers in the Spotsylvania area

-   Compare these prototypes with "common" nonpayers in other
    jurisdictions

-   Develop workable strategies to lower nonpayment through existing
    community agencies

-   Refine the community-based strategies working with clients from a
    similar pilot project in Spotsylvania County

[Key Partners]{.underline}:

-   Local Juvenile and Domestic Relations District (J&DRD) Courts

-   Rappahannock Area Community Services Board

-   Local Department of Social Services

-   Fredericksburg District Child Support Enforcement Office

-   Local Commonwealth's Attorney

-   Local Sheriff

-   Area Jails

-   Regional Adult Education

-   Community Programs/Resources/Services

[Target Population:]{.underline} NCPs who appeared before participating
J&DRD Courts for nonpayment of child support and who could generally be
characterized as "willing, but unable to pay" because of certain
barriers to regular payment.

NCP's who are Barrier Project participants are provided job leads by
Barriers staff who will call a prospective employer and inform the
employer of the participant's situation in advance. The staff helps
participants with resume writing and will submit the resume for the
participant via computer or fax. Barriers Project staff are available
outside of normal work hours to discuss issues of importance to the
participant. The Barriers Project encourages the participant to pay some
amount on a weekly basis so that the participant gets into the habit of
paying child support. Monthly statements are provided to participants so
they know the status of their child support account. Staff follow up on
a participant's life situation, whether it is a job interview or a
doctor's appointment that is being discussed. Participants are
acknowledged by the Barriers Staff for getting a job, completing their
GED, finishing school or having a birthday.

**Results**: The final evaluation of this project is not complete. The
following preliminary data is encouraging:

-   Four out of five of the 495 NCPs enrolled in the Barriers Program
    (BP) since 2000 are currently enrolled.

-   NCPs who entered the BP between 2000 and June 2003 made payments
    which were 55.8 percent greater in the six months after entering the
    program compared to an equal period before entering it; this
    represents an additional \$107,949 in payments.

-   More recently, NCPs who entered the BP during the interval of
    January to June 2004 increased their payments 823 percent in the six
    months after entering the program compared to the six months before
    entering it; the additional payments were \$96,262.

-   Thirty-six (29.7 percent) of the 121 NCPs made sufficient payments,
    so their arrearages declined 20.2 percent.

-   If the 495 NCPs had been incarcerated for six months, in lieu of
    assignment to the BP, approximately \$412,000 in payments for the
    support of their children would have been lost.

-   The work release unit at the Rappahannock Regional Jail has few
    available beds. The jail, which was built to house 592 inmates, now
    has 930. The operating cost for one inmate at the jail is \$49.53
    per day. Incarcerating 50 NCPs for six months would cost
    approximately \$450,000.

-   Converting the BP to permanent status would cost \$98,240 in staff
    costs. At the existing caseload, NCPs are making \$386,000 in annual
    payments beyond what they would have paid if not enrolled in BP. The
    annual net benefit in increased payments would be \$287,760.

> **Location**:

-   The program is in place in Spotsylvania County and the City of
    Fredericksburg, a mixed rural and suburban area halfway between
    Richmond, VA and Washington, D.C.

-   The program was the brainchild of the Spotsylvania J&DRD Court
    Judge, and has not been adapted elsewhere in the state or by another
    state.

**Funding:** Section 1115 Demonstration Grant funds were used. This
grant provides 95% Federal funds and requires a 5% state match.

**Replication Advice**: Any child support office willing to assign staff
to handle case management functions and to establish working relations
with other agencies (such as those listed above) would be able to
realize overall cost savings in the courts and jails/prisons as well as
significantly increase the amount of support paid by a traditionally
"hard to collect" NCP population.

A new research project called Right Track was started in 2004 in
Richmond and the Tidewater area of Virginia using much the same approach
as in the Barriers Project, but it addresses arrearages in
administrative as well as court-ordered child support cases.

**Contacts**:

Bob Owen

Project Manager -- Central Office, Richmond

Phone: (804) 726-7434

<Bob.owen@dss.virginia.gov>

Bob Rodenski

Fredericksburg District Office Manager

Phone: (540) 899-4780

Email: <Robert.rodenski@dss.virginia.gov>

**WEST VIRGINIA AND PENNSYLVANIA**

**DEBIT CARDS**

**Goal:** Provide full child support payments to the custodial parent
quickly and reduce state payment processing costs and undistributed
collections.

Several guiding principles were identified as the two states implemented
the debit card program. These principles are:

-   All customers should have the ability to withdraw funds without
    charge.

-   All customers should have reasonable access to their funds in their
    local community.

-   The cost to disburse funds through debit cards should be less than
    the cost of disbursement by check.

-   The card design should not be unique, so as not to stigmatize
    customers.

-   Disbursement by check will not be an option, but customers may
    choose between a debit card and direct deposit.

**Strategic Plan**: Supports Strategy 3 of the National Child Support
Strategic Plan.

**Description:** In 2004 and 2005, Pennsylvania and West Virginia
adopted a debit card process for disbursement of child support payments.
With very few exceptions, custodians receive child support payments
through either a posting to their debit card or a direct deposit to
their bank account.

Both states identified four major problems with their original child
support payment process:

-   In many cases, the family was not receiving the full child support
    payment due to issues involved in negotiating checks. For example,
    in some jurisdictions, 50% of all customers do not have a bank
    account. These "unbanked" custodial parents were often required to
    use check cashing agencies which charge as much as 30% of the
    check's value for their services.

-   Both states experienced mail service disruption during natural
    disasters and terrorist attacks. The service disruption resulted in
    child support agencies being unable to send child support payments
    to the custodial parents that were experiencing the mail
    disruptions.

-   The problem of undistributed collections affects many child support
    programs. One factor in the accumulation of undistributed
    collections can involve locating the custodial parent.

-   States are facing substantial pressure to reduce costs. State
    budgets are getting tighter as states struggle to "do more with
    less." Both states were confronted with high payment processing fees
    and costs associated with fraud and lost child support checks.

In order to address these issues, Pennsylvania and West Virginia decided
to provide custodial parents with two choices. Custodial parents could
either have child support payments posted to their own bank account or
they could have a posting to a debit card that was issued to them by the
state. Before implementation, all significant partners were informed of
the payment processing changes.

West Virginia's fee structure is listed below:

-   Free Visa branded support debit card

-   Unlimited free POS (Point of Service) purchases (signature and PIN)

-   2 free ATM cash withdrawals per month

-   8 free ATM balance inquiries per month

-   Unlimited free online balance inquiries

-   Unlimited Voice Recognition Unit/Interactive Voice Response calls

-   2 free CSR (Customer Service Representative) calls per month to the
    company administering debit cards

**Results:** Pennsylvania and West Virginia debit card payment
processing is fully operational statewide. Debit cards have helped solve
all four problems listed above.

-   In both states, the family receives the full child support payment.
    For example, an "unbanked" family receiving a \$200 child support
    payment would have paid up to \$60 in check cashing fees. Since the
    debit card system was established, the family receives the full
    \$200 payment which can be used as needed by the family. Some
    families are using the debit card payments for savings or
    accumulating funds for a particular purpose such as buying school
    clothing.

-   Payments are posted immediately. Custodial parents no longer depend
    on mail delivery service.

-   Undistributed collections are substantially lower. For example, in
    Pennsylvania, UDC for address holds are down by 85%. In Philadelphia
    address holds were reduced by \$37,000 and that category of UDC is
    falling.

-   Payment processing costs are substantially lower. In West Virginia,
    postage costs for checks were reduced by 90%. Pennsylvania is saving
    \$2 million annually in printing, postage and fraud reduction.

**Location**: The Pennsylvania and West Virginia Debit Card programs are
both implemented statewide.

**Funding**: Minimal IV-D funding was used. Much of the cost of the
program was absorbed by the vendors.

**Replication Advice:**

-   Strong leadership to keep Project on task

-   Weekly conference calls with vendor/agency staff with written
    feedback/notes from conference calls

-   Identify right personnel/decision makers for team

-   Outreach to custodial parents and legislative office staff

-   Timely answers to the many implementation questions

-   PATIENCE

-   Weekly review of task list

-   Avoid having critical work due during the holidays

-   Do not roll out new programs during the State Legislative Session

-   Avoid whole-state roll-out at one time

-   Re-verify addresses prior to card mailing

-   Make card mailing packet eye-catching

-   Customer and staff education early in the process

-   Major publicity (newspapers, etc.) is very important

**Contact**:

Pennsylvania: Jody Pender,

Financial Programs Manager

Phone: 717-705-5106

Email: <jodypender@pacses.com>

West Virginia: Hal Pendell

Chief Financial Officer

> Email: <hpendell@wvdhhr.org>

**WISCONSIN**

**CHILD SUPPORT/PUBLIC ASSISTANCE COLLABORATION**

**MILWAUKEE COUNTY**

**Goal**: To increase access to Child Support Services.

**Strategic Plan:** Supports Strategy 6 of the National Child Support
Strategic Plan.

**Description:** Previously, TANF recipients could not have their
applications fully processed until cooperation with the child support
office was complete. The W2 Outstations project moved Child Support
staff to the front end of the TANF application process (CSE staff were
relocated to the TANF agency site) to ensure that IV-A/IV-D cooperation
was immediately determined.

The W2 Outstations project began in 1998 and continues to the present.
The project involves Maximus, United Migrant Opportunity Services (UMOS)
and the YMCA as key partners. Outstationing began as a one-site pilot.
The pilot looked at how cases could be screened for Child Support
services. The initial data (see results) were positive. A refinement of
the workflow followed and then the pilot was replicated in seven
additional locations in Milwaukee.

In Milwaukee County, private vendors process TANF/cash assistance (W2)
and the Milwaukee County Department of Human Services processes food
stamp, medical assistance and child care applications. The introduction
of Child Support into the process is demonstrated in the diagram below:

Error: Reference source not found

Anecdotal Information:

-   Individuals prefer to be seen in community-based facilities and not
    at the Courthouse which houses the Child Support main office. The
    Courthouse atmosphere is intimidating and parking is expensive and
    hard to find.

-   Interviewing individuals at the front end of the process decreases
    non-cooperation and sanctions.

-   Gathering and entering information at the front end (front loading
    data) prevent bad data in the IV-A/IV-D interface, provide accurate
    case numbers, and decrease duplicate individuals/cases in the child
    support data system.

-   Individuals understand the benefits of the Child Support program
    better when it is presented in this setting.

-   When NCPs apply for food stamps, the interview includes an
    assessment of their child support status. A case review can be
    performed to determine if the order is appropriate to their current
    circumstances. Cooperation is achieved since during the interview
    the payer's employment status is on record. Any employability plan
    is communicated to Child Support and a contempt action is avoided.
    The paralegal working for Child Support and the Food Stamp case
    manager can coordinate to help the client with job placement
    services.

**Results:** The Paternity and Order Establishment rates improved
dramatically. Currently, over 50% of legal actions are initiated from
outstation locations.

Milwaukee County

+----------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
| #### **PATERNITY ESTABLISHMENT RATE**  |                             |
+----------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 1999                                   | 59.29%                      |
+----------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 2000                                   | 68.62%                      |
+----------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 2001                                   | 73.24%                      |
+----------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 2002                                   | 79.25%                      |
+----------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 2003                                   | 89.95%                      |
+----------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 2004                                   | 92.03%                      |
+----------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 2005                                   | 93.25%                      |
+----------------------------------------+-----------------------------+

+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| # ORDER ESTABLISHMENT RATE      |                                    |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| 1998                            | 57.94%                             |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| 1999                            | 59.89%                             |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| 2000                            | 65.91%                             |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| 2001                            | 66.84%                             |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| 2002                            | 71.58%                             |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| 2003                            | 73.76%                             |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| 2004                            | 75.15%                             |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| 2005                            | 78.11%                             |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+

**Location:** The project is located in the urban jurisdiction of
Milwaukee County, Wisconsin. The practice was modified and adopted in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

**Funding:** The project is funded with regular Federal matching funds.
Additionally, each TANF vendor pays Milwaukee County Child Support
\$20,000 per site for an on-site staff person.

**Replication Advice:**

-   Understand the business requirements of your key partners to create
    a win-win proposal.

-   Test and measure for desired results.

-   Do not be afraid to fail.

-   Assess both the successes and failures. Keep the successful parts of
    the approach and stop doing what does not work.

-   Continue to enhance standard operating procedures to improve
    services.

**Contact:**

Lisa J. Marks, Deputy Director

Milwaukee County Child Support Enforcement

Phone: (414) 278-5239

Email: <lmarks@milwcnty.com>