(NOTE: Includes Findings from the Final Report)

This 17-month 1115 demonstration grant responded to 2003 Priority Area 4: Projects Which Demonstrated Improved Partnerships Between the Child Support Enforcement Office and Workforce Investment and Other Department of Labor and/or TANF Work Programs. Involvement of Faith and Community-Based Service Providers Is Particularly Welcomed." The project, titled "JobSource Resource Center," (JSRC) was a collaborative effort between Kern County Department of Child Support Services (KCDCSS), Employers’ Training Resource (ETR), Community Action Partnership of Kern, Family to Family Mentoring and LOVE, INC. of Greater Bakersfield. The project mission was to provide services, support and encouragement to noncustodial parents (NCPs) in their pursuit of sustainable employment.

The project’s main objectives were to: (1) increase compliance by NCPs with court-ordered child and medical support and (2) ensure child support orders reflect the true earnings of NCPs. These objectives were achieved by providing employment services and training opportunities through JSRC (such services are not an allowable IV-D expense).

JSRC was located in KCDCSS’ building. It had seven workstations with computers, Internet access, and software pertinent to gaining employment. NCPs visiting their KCDCSS case manager completed an assessment survey, which included background questions about the client’s education, work experience and level of interest in services available through the program. On an as-needed basis, case managers referred the NCPs to JSRC. Within JSRC there were Counselors who navigated noncustodial parent seeking employment through the Employers Training Resource. (NB: employment and training and related case management activities are not eligible for title IV-D program Federal financial participation.)

Findings (From the Final Report)

Overall, JSRC use had increased steadily due to easy access and a central location. However, use of the JSRC by KCDCSS clients has decreased since its inception. A reduction in referrals can be attributed to California’s mandated migration to a different automated case management system. This migration required 18,000 staff hours in preparation, a complete reorganization of the KCDCSS and a retraining of the entire staff. In addition, California implemented an automation change which centralized support disbursements in Sacramento, CA. These changes led to an increase in staff turnover and organizational focus shifted from projects such as JSRC to core child support activities.

Based on the information gained from the implementation and outcome evaluations and through the creation of tables, graphs and other data collected, the following findings were obtained:

• JSRC recorded 3,030 visitors from October 2003 - September 2004. The total increased to 4,024 from October 2004 - September 2005 (994 or 32.81%).
• KCDCSS recorded 1,502 clients used JSRC from October 2003 - September 2004. The total decreased to 1,334 from October 2004 to September 2005 (168 or 11.19%). Seventy-six percent of the 11% decline in visits to JSRC by KCDCSS clients is directly related to the decline in the case manager referrals.
• KCDCSS Case Managers’ referrals to JSRC were 271 from October 2003 - September 2004. The total decreased to 143 from October 2004 - September 2005 (128 or 52.77%).
• The lag between referral of clients for participation with JSRC and collections was about three months.
• Between 2003 and 2005, the average number of KCDCSS referrals per month was 16. The average number of KCDCSS clients using JSRC was 102.
• KCDCSS changed database systems twice since the start of JSRC. These databases were incompatible which hindered the collection of comprehensive data and analysis.
• Given average referrals to JSRC of 16 per month and 102 KCDCSS JSRC participants per month, the total effect of JSRC on collections was over $200,000 per month, about 3.6% of all child support collections.
• Information was not provided to demonstrate the project addressing the second objective which was to ensure child support orders reflected the true earnings of NCPs.

Lessons Learned/Recommendations:

Based on the problems the project faced, it was determined that a recommendation-based evaluation was more suited for JSRC. Many of these recommendations came from KCDCSS personnel.

• Case manager buy in. Case managers reported that JSRC was a one-dimensional answer to a multi-dimensional problem and that the program was more effective for clients who wanted to find a job and make support payments. The case managers recommended that program mangers need to get case managers excited about the program by providing an incentive - perhaps small prizes for a specific number of clients referred in a month.
• Create a better tracking system. Staff suggested that there should have been a computer program that tracked clients through JSRC. This would have allowed case managers access to the data that supported both clients and case managers in feeling successful about achieving employment goals. Staff also suggested that requiring all JSRC participants to complete the survey created by the evaluation team as part of the new tracking system would have helped, too.
• Obtain commitment to participate. Providing incentives to clients, based on participation in workshops and other training services provided by JSRC, had some positive effects, but perhaps requiring a commitment from participants would have been more effective. Once that commitment was given, attendance to workshops and trainings would become mandatory until the client found employment.
• Assign a case manager that deals with employment issues only. It was a difficult task to keep track of all clients’ issues unrelated to employment and make sure that they were taking part in JSRC, if that is what they chose. Having a case manager knowledgeable about employment and employment issues would have allowed clients to have more confidence in the help they were receiving and would have freed up case managers to deal with other issues.

Post Grant

KCDCSS created JSRC with the intent to develop a program to help unemployed NCPs find jobs. The execution of JSRC was designed to be a pilot program that could be replicated by other organizations.

In replicating JSRC, the following is recommended:

• Outline attainable goals and measurable objectives for your new program
• Include staff members in the development of program parameters to encourage "buy-in" and support of program
• Create an in-depth tracking system to monitor participants’ successes
• Include follow-up procedures on referrals by case managers in the tracking system
• Encourage client participation with voluntary sign-up, with the understanding that participation is a commitment until employment is found
• Conduct regular surveys and data evaluations to ensure program is meeting established goals

(NOTE: Includes Findings from the Final Report)

This 17-month 1115 grant responded to 2003 Priority Area 4: Projects Which Demonstrate Improved Partnerships Between the Child Support Enforcement Office and Workforce Investment and Other Department of Labor and/or TANF Work Programs. Under this project, Iowa’s Bureau of Collections, the State’s Child Support Enforcement Program, proposed that Black Hawk County, Iowa, be the site of an innovative program. This program intended to demonstrate the effectiveness of child support agencies building new partnerships with co-located workforce, faith-based and other community-based organizations to foster responsible fatherhood, including regular payment of child support. Funds awarded through this grant were used to plan, implement, and promote a Fatherhood Improvement Resource and Support Team (FIRST). Team members were located in a "one-stop shop" to address multiple needs of non-custodial parents (NCPs) in a convenient, supportive manner. A broad spectrum of agencies provided services to NCPs to help strengthen families in their community.

Findings (from the Final Report):

Through FIRST, working in partnership with other agencies, Iowa was able to establish various components to improve responsible fatherhood in Waterloo, Iowa. Below are some of the major components of the project:

• "Empowering Dads" - This support group, run by a team of professional social workers and a former Empowering Dads participant, was expanded to include project FIRST participants. During the term of the grant, a total of 462 men attended the weekly support group and a monthly educational presentation including such topics as child support, co-parenting and financial management for fathers in Black Hawk County. The program continues, funded by its host organization.
• "Man to Man" - The Project Coordinator of FIRST designed a structured curriculum to provide education and motivation covering parenting responsibilities and personal accountability. The component "Man to Man" was added as a twice-per-week offering to those fathers who wanted to learn specific skills and tools for improving their ability to succeed as a responsible father. A total of 112 men attended these sessions.
• "Young Parents Together" - The YWCA Young Parents Together program for teenage mothers was made available to fathers who met at the same time as mothers to encourage participation of both parents. This program served 25 young fathers, ranging in age from 16 to 24. Two married the mother of their child.

(NB: employment, training, education, fatherhood education and teen parent education activities are not eligible for title IV-D program Federal financial participation.)

The FIRST major project partners, included the following:

• Judge Thomas Bower, of the 1st Judicial District of Iowa, was a strong supporter and member of the FIRST advisory committee. During the last few months of the grant after FIRST components were firmly established, Judge Bower began ordering fathers who were in contempt of court due to non-payment of child support to FIRST as an alternative to jail. The judge also encouraged other judges of the 1st Judicial District to utilize the FIRST program.
• Employers - Three local employers, Tyson Fresh Meats, Bertch Cabinets, and Sedona Staffing, partnered with FIRST and hired 7 men with minimal job skills and other barriers to employment during the grant period. (The project did not offer employment incentives or child support debt reduction to encourage participation.)
• Educators - Hawkeye Community College and the University of Northern Iowa’s Center for Urban Education (UNICUE) made education coordinators and counselors available to individual FIRST participants as well as for presentations to groups such as Empowering Dads. As a result of this partnership and the information and assistance readily available to program participants, 12 men pursued educational programs at Hawkeye Community College.
• Agencies and Organizations -- Throughout the term of the grant, the FIRST Project Coordinators invited many potential community partners to hear about the project’s mission and goals. They made efforts to reach out and educate organizations, businesses, and agencies about the need for a united community partnership, and the benefits of improving the well being of children and families. Partners such as Head Start, YWCA and Waterloo Community Schools were important to the success of the project.

Results and Lessons Learned:

• The largely voluntary nature of the FIRST program presented a challenge to the collection of personal information that is critical to measuring child support payment results. Of the nearly 600 participants in the three main components of the FIRST initiative, less than 20% of them voluntarily provided enough personal identification information to confirm the existence of a child support case from which to gather payment data. Of the 120 participants who provided identifying information, Child support case records showed that 26% had no IV-D case, 11% were not making payments in any amount, 11% were making sporadic payments, 29% were making regular payments, 18% had not been making payments and began making payments during the term of this grant, and 5% were custodial parents. Of the 6 fathers who were mandated by the court to participate in the program, 3 made some payments toward their child support obligation, and 1 obtained full-time employment and began paying the full monthly child support obligation through income withholding.
• This data suggests that the fathers who seek out and choose to participate in non-mandated fatherhood programs are those who are actively making child support payments, or are most likely to do so, when connected with available resources. The minimal data available indicates the need for more diligent data collection techniques, even when fathers are voluntarily participating in the program.
• Since fatherhood programs attract men with a wide range of needs and goals, meetings would be more productive if designed to address similar needs, such as child support and related issues. Also, some fathers have more emotional issues, which would be better addressed by individualized sessions.
• A community partnership can be successful in offering an array of services to improve responsible fatherhood. However, there is a need for multiple funding sources to support the various components needed.
• There is a real need for preventive programming for teenage fathers as well as young mothers.

(NOTE: Includes Findings from the Final Report)

This grant responds to 2002 Priority Area IV:  "Projects which further the national goals of the Child Support Program."  The Child Support Enforcement Division of the Massachusetts Department of Revenue (DOR) was concerned with the rate at which arrears owed by child support obligors in Massachusetts continued to grow even though DOR set new collection highs each year.  The goals of this project, which only applies to arrears that have been permanently assigned to the Commonwealth, were to better understand this problem and to develop strategies that would help manage arrears.  A key part of the demonstration project was a detailed data analysis of delinquent child support obligors in Massachusetts.  DOR also conducted a pilot program to develop eligibility criteria for equitably adjusting arrears under an arrears management regulation that was promulgated at the time of the demonstration project.

The project was based on a review of all of the obligated IV-D cases, whether current support or arrears-only, that were open on May 31, 2003; this population remained static and IV-D cases that were opened after that date were not included in the analysis.  The data analysis included a comparison of reported income of obligors as reflected in state and federal tax returns as well as quarterly wage reports submitted by employers to the Massachusetts Department of Revenue.  Although reported income data has some inherent limitations because it does not necessarily reflect the true financial circumstances of obligors who have income sources not reported to federal or state tax agencies, it is the only data easily available for study and it provided some valuable information that can be used to develop successful strategies for preventing the accrual of arrears and collecting arrears once they have accrued.

Project Findings (from Final Report)

More than half of the total arrears owed by obligors in Massachusetts are owed by just 10 percent of all obligors and the minimum amount owed by any of these obligors was more than $44,000.  In contrast, more than half of the obligors in Massachusetts owe less than 3 percent of the total arrears and the most any of these obligors owe is less than $3,900.

There were four major factors that contributed to the growth of arrears:  the introduction of the assessment of interest and penalty in January 1998; the amount of some child support orders which appeared too high in relation to the reported income of obligors, although it is important to note that these orders were established by judges who would not have been limited to looking at reported income alone; cases remaining open that appeared to meet federal case closing criteria; and some lack of non-compliance by all obligors, regardless of their income levels.

The pilot program involved selecting cases that might qualify for DOR’s equitable adjustment regulation.  A sample of 411 cases was selected and the noncustodial parents were contacted by case workers assigned to the project.  The response rate of 25 percent was higher than anticipated.  Out of the 103 obligors who responded to DOR’s pilot program, almost three-fourths of the obligors had received some form of government benefits or had been incarcerated.

The pilot program resulted in very little collection activity, although DOR did issue income withholding orders for a number of obligors.  The two most common actions taken in the pilot project cases were to enter exemptions from interest and penalty for any periods obligors met any exemption criteria and to make participants aware of DOR’s program to waive interest and penalty.  Under this program, DOR will waive all interest and penalty owed to the Commonwealth if the obligor pays all principal owed to the other parent and the Commonwealth and any interest owed the other parent.  Other actions taken in pilot cases were referral for equitable adjustment, filing a complaint for modification of a current obligation, or closing the case because it met federal case closing criteria. 

Twenty nine percent of the respondents were receiving Social Security Disability Insurance or Supplemental Security Income, 23 percent indicated that they were unemployed or underemployed, 14 percent had received General Relief or Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF), and 9 percent were or had been in jail. Thus, most of these obligors had circumstances that might warrant equitable adjustments of their arrears.  Nonetheless, 29 percent of the respondents had a good or fair credit rating, suggesting that some of them had the ability to pay something toward their arrears.  Given these mixed findings, DOR has continued case-by-case reviews and has identified the following category of cases that can be referred on a fast-track for the possible equitable adjustment of arrears:  If all arrears are assigned to the Commonwealth and the arrears accrued while the obligor received means-tested benefits, the obligor currently receives these benefits and is likely to continue to receive these benefits, DOR may adjust to zero the arrears owed to the Commonwealth and close the case, on grounds that there is no past, present or future ability to pay based on the particular circumstances in the case.

Lessons Learned

This demonstration project provided DOR with valuable information regarding the arrears owed by obligors in Massachusetts and about the obligors themselves.  DOR gained better insight into how arrears grow and areas to focus on to help prevent the arrears from growing and to address those arrears that have accrued.  DOR has used the information from this grant to develop different strategies to manage arrears for different obligor populations.   

Two key points emerged from this demonstration project that will help DOR as it continues to develop its arrears management strategy:  first, a large percentage of obligors owe a very small percentage of arrears and second, a small percentage of obligors owe a large amount of arrears.  Although the total owed by obligors is slightly more than $2 billion, it is important to note that more than half of this is owed by only 10 percent of the obligors and that most obligors owe $3,800 or less.

As for the small group who owe significant arrears, many of these are older arrears-only cases and only a portion of these arrears may ever be collected.  DOR initiated its Top Ten Arrears project, where caseworkers regularly review the ten cases in their caseloads owing the highest amount of arrears to see what could be done about the arrears.  The first group of Top Ten Arrears obligors owed more than $68 million in arrears when the project began, but this amount was reduced by 14 percent in the first eight months of the project.  The reduction resulted from closing eligible cases, aggressive enforcement resulting in increased collections, and correction of DOR’s records, as many of these were older cases that had not been reviewed in years.  Continuous updating of the Top Ten lists allows a systematic way to address this small group of obligors. 

DOR’s main focus going forward will be to prevent obligors who are in the large group who owe little arrears from becoming members of that second group.  To do this, DOR is working to improve its early intervention techniques, use aggressive enforcement in cases of noncompliance and equitably adjust arrears when appropriate.  DOR also began a program that focused enforcement case owners on cases where obligors owed $5,000 or less.  Enforcement caseworkers received lists of these obligors to contact about paying their child support debts before they become unmanageable amounts.  Caseworkers were encouraged to use different methods of communication to see which methods were most effective in generating payments or bringing obligors into compliance.  It is too early to determine the results of this project but the initial reports appear encouraging.

DOR continues to develop creative ways to deal with the assessment of interest and penalties.  For example, obligors who have paid 125 percent of their orders for the last three years but still owe arrears, interest and penalty will be contacted to inform them that DOR will waive a portion of the penalty that they owe for prior years.  DOR’s goal in this project is twofold:  generate additional lump sum payments from obligors who want to take advantage of the full waiver of interest and penalty program and encourage continued compliance with current support payments. With these and other initiatives, DOR hopes to make significant progress in the on-going battle to slow the growth of arrears.

(NOTE: Includes Findings from the Final Report)

This 17-month 1115 demonstration grant responded to 2003 Priority Area 4: Projects Which Demonstrate Improved Partnerships Between the Child Support Enforcement Office and Workforce Investment and Other Department of Labor and/or TANF Work Programs. Involvement of Faith and Community-Based Service Providers is Particularly Welcomed. The Tennessee Department of Human Services proposed that the Child Support Employment and Parenting Partnership (CSEPP) of Knox County provide employment assistance for noncustodial parents (NCPs) to obtain a subsidized or unsubsidized job so they could begin paying or become current on their child support obligations.

CSEPP sought to improve not only the employment services available to these NCPs, but also to provide support services. To this end, the grantee identified and worked with a wide range of government agencies and faith-based groups to: screen and refer parents to drug, alcohol and mental health treatment; housing, transportation, domestic violence, anger management, and parenting classes. (N.B.: Federal title IV-D funds are not available for these activities nor are they available for work activities.)

Objectives of CSEPP Program Were to:

• Help parents gain and sustain employment;
• Improve parents’ compliance with child support obligations; and
• Increase parents’ positive involvement in their children’s lives

Socio-demographic Profile of the 207 Program Participants (at time of participation):

• 70.5 percent male, 29.5 percent female.
• 58 percent black, 40.6 percent white, 1.4 percent "other."
• 23.2 percent divorced, 7.7 percent married, 22.7 percent separated, 45.4 percent single.
• 59.5% were high school graduates/GED.
• 40.5% did not graduate from high school.
• 77.8% of these parents were not employed; 22.2% were employed but three fourths of the employed group had reported incomes of $1,000 or less per month. No participants reported incomes over $2,000 per month. Only two of the employed CSEPP parents received health benefits and paid leave from their employers.
• Unemployed CSEPP parents fell into three categories: 41% listed “no jobs” or were laid off; 31% had personal health problems and 29% had no transportation.
• 17.3% of parents had no barriers to employment and were referred to Tennessee Career Center only; 64.4% had some barriers and were referred to support services in addition to career services; 18.3% of the parents had multiple, significant barriers and were referred to local service agencies, but not career services.

Project Findings (From the Final Report)

• A total of 359 referrals were made and 207 men and women NCPs participated within the first 11 months of program operation. Unemployment and underemployment were the primary reasons for participant inability to pay child support. Consequently, the majority of service referrals were for employment assistance and education.
• The program also made some referrals for mental health counseling and assistance with basic needs (e.g., housing, food, and transportation). However, the limited availability of these services hampered efforts to address these needs.
• Program participants (involved in activities for the 17-month project duration) were satisfied with CSEPP program and counselors and attributed personal changes in their lives to participation in CSEPP. These changes included securing a job and improving their parenting abilities and relationships with their children.
• CSEPP participants were significantly more likely to make child support payments than those in the comparison group of Chattanooga residents.
• There were some significant differences in gender and race between the two groups. CSEPP participants were 29% female, about twice the national rate of NCP mothers.
• The data comparing child support payments before and after the program participation did not reveal significant positive findings. In fact, the participants actually had a better record of paying child support prior to participation than after. While the factors contributing to this phenomenon are not clear, it is thought that barriers/instability in individual’s lives and the small amount of time to impact them might be factors.

Lessons Learned/Replication Advice:

• Build a solid foundation of community support for the program.
• Hire dedicated coordinators who work together as a team in the best interests of their clients.
• Develop positive working relationships and effective communication methods.

(NOTE: Includes Findings from the Final Report)

Project Plan

This grant responded to 2003 Priority Area V: An Innovative Approach Testing Strategies to Increase Paternity Knowledge, Paternity Establishment, and the Utilization of Child Support Services by Teens and Young Parents.

The demonstration project tested delivery by teen parents of the Parenting and Paternity Awareness (P.A.P.A) curriculum. P.A.P.A. had previously been a formal, educational curriculum presented by trained teachers in all secondary schools in Texas. The evaluation component of the project was focused on three measures: 1) an anticipated increase in knowledge regarding the legal aspects of parenting and paternity; 2) retention of this information based on a defined time period (i.e., short-term post-test and long-term post-test approximately – one to three months after completion of the curriculum); and 3) changes in attitude about the desirability and feasibility of having a baby as a teenager.

Following the test period, the program continued appropriately without IV-D funding. A replication site was established in El Paso through foundation funds and cooperation with the Local Workforce Board (Upper Rio Grand at Work). Subsequently competitive discretionary funding was awarded through the ACF fatherhood grant program under the Deficit Reduction Act of 2006.

Resources Available

A seven-minute marketing video (named after the project) was produced under this grant to promote the program. A copy of the video (DVD format) can be obtained by contacting Gilbert Chavez at: gilbert.chavez@cs.oag.state.tx.us

Project Findings

The OAG collaborated with Austin-based non-profit YouthLaunch to adapt selected P.A.P.A. program content into a format that could be presented in the classroom by peer educators who were themselves teen parents. The "No Kidding" teen interns typically presented three 50-minute sessions on consecutive days in school settings.

Approximately 387 students (Grades 6-12) were evaluated in the "No Kidding" program in four schools. The program included three sessions (I: Telling Our Stories; II: Paternity; and III. Child Support and Money Matters) delivered over the course of three days. Surveys were administered to students as the basis for collecting data for the project evaluation. However, the presentations were given to almost 10 times more students (3,800) during the project period.

Texas posited that students might be more receptive to the parenting and paternity message if it came from someone like themselves who could speak first-hand about the challenges a teen faces raising a child.

The results of this demonstration project tend to support this hypothesis.

1. Teen parents felt they benefited (emotionally and financially) from the opportunity to serve as trained interns and remained optimistic about their own future potential. Most anticipated completing their education and developing professional careers before having more children.
2. Students in school settings increased their knowledge about paternity and parenting (from 35.2% baseline data to 60% short-term post-test) after completing the "No Kidding" program. Students also scored high on the knowledge retention scale (3 to 6 months post-test).
3. Overall, positive attitudes about the importance and responsibility of parenting were reinforced via student participation in this program. "Total Attitude Change" improved from 77.1 percent positive scale score before the No Kidding intervention to 80 percent at the short-term post-test.

Lessons Learned

The program’s use of trained teen parents in schools to deliver presentations on parenting, paternity, and child support is an effective intervention.

A longitudinal study would be required to determine the program’s potential impact on reducing teen pregnancy rates or improving the use of paternity establishment and child support among teen parents.

Not anticipated was the delay and difficulty Texas encountered in obtaining the necessary clearances from education officials to implement this project in the four schools. Part of the delay was attributed to the time it took to negotiate agreements with school officials after the grant was awarded to Texas (nearly 10 months). To smooth the start-up process at sites considering replication of the "No Kidding" program, Texas recommends that school representatives from the administrative and classroom levels should be involved in the planning from the earliest phases. School administrators had concerns that the curriculum would lead to conversations about potentially controversial topics such as sexual behavior. The program was delivered without such discussion.

This 2003 project, the Employment Partnership Project, addressed Priority Area 4: Projects which demonstrate improved partnerships between the child support enforcement office and workforce investment and other Department of Labor and TANF work programs to increase employment and child support payments among noncustodial parents (NCPs). The project was conducted by the Texas Office of the Attorney General (OAG), Child Support Division and the Tarrant County Workforce Board (Work Advantage). The project aimed to (1) identify unemployed NCPs when they first establish child support orders, as well as when they are delinquent in their child support payments; and (2) refer NCPs to a special career counselor at the workforce agency who would assist them with job search and employment. The goal of the project was to increase employment and child support payments. The referral process began in one Tarrant County child support office and was subsequently expanded to two additional offices. At all three offices, child support workers identified and referred to the project unemployed, male NCPs who came to the agency to establish orders using administrative procedures. Child support workers and attorneys also flagged and referred unemployed NCPs at order establishment and enforcement proceedings in court. The recruitment procedure was later amended to include mass mailings to delinquent NCPs.

538 NCPs were enrolled in the project. NCPs were randomly assigned to experimental and control groups based on the last digit of their Social Security numbers. 126 NCPs were assigned to the control group, which was slated to receive normal treatments at the local workforce agency. The remaining 412 NCPs were enrolled in the experimental group, which was targeted to receive enhanced services by a dedicated staff member at Work Advantage. These services included transportation assistance, work clothes or equipment, short- and long-term job training, apprenticeships, job referrals, and education, child support information, and a non-mandatory referral to FOCUS, a faith-based entity that offered a 10-week fatherhood, parent education, and mentorship program. Members of the experimental group who participated in the Employment Partnership Project were exempt from enforcement actions for non-payment of child support (such as driver’s license suspension and contempt proceedings).

Findings (From the Final Report):

• It was difficult to identify unemployed NCPs and get them to participate in an employment program. Courts and child support agencies were equally effective in generating participants, but mass mailings were ineffective. More than half (57 percent) of the NCPs assigned to the experimental group failed to meet with the career counselor for an intake and assessment. Another 17 percent came for the intake and assessment but never returned for additional services. The most common reasons cited by NCPs for not participating more fully were that the initial visit did not translate into employment and skepticism that the program would be able to help. Ultimately, only 26 percent of those assigned to the experimental group appeared more than once and received some measure of assistance and case management from the specialized worker.
• Nearly all (89.9 percent) the noncustodial parents who met with the project career counselor for an intake and assessment were interested in finding a job. A majority (53.3 percent) wanted job training, and many (42.7 percent) wanted additional education. They also wanted help with child support payments or debts (43.2 percent). There was less interest in getting help with visitation (19.1 percent) or parenting skills (7.5 percent).
• According to the project’s career counselor, most participants who saw him more than once received some form of help with employment (87 percent), most typically a job referral (68 percent). Only 15 and 9 percent received job training and/or education, respectively. There was little interest in pursuing non-mandatory referrals to FOCUS, a faith-based program offering 10-week parent education and mentorship opportunities, and only four individuals (3.4 percent) ultimately participated. Nearly a quarter (23.6 percent) of the NCPs who saw the career counselor more than once reported becoming employed during project participation. These 30 individuals comprised 7 percent of the experimental group and 15 percent of those who completed an intake and assessment.
• Employer-reported wage reports for the 12 months prior to and following assignment to the project suggest that the rate of unemployment remained high and unchanged, with approximately 40 percent of NCPs in the control and experimental groups not appearing in the wage database. Among those who showed some earnings, earnings were extremely low, ranging from $6,557 to $11,077 in the 12 months prior to project participation and $6,243 to $12,084 in the 12 months following. The group with the highest earnings was NCPs who appeared for the intake and assessment but did not continue to receive additional services, although they only earned a few thousand dollars a year more than their counterparts in the other treatment groups.
• Child support payments increased significantly for those in the experimental group but not for members of the control group. In the 12 months prior to and following assignment to the project, NCPs in the control group paid approximately 25 percent of their child support obligations. Payments for members of the experimental group during comparable time periods rose significantly, from approximately 25 percent to 33 to 42 percent. Improvement patterns were identical for all members of the experimental group: NCPs who failed to appear for services, NCPs who appeared only once for intake, and NCPs who appeared multiple times and showed several months of project activity. The most plausible explanation for these improvement patterns is that experimental cases were more visible to and more actively worked by child support workers.

Lessons Learned/Recommendations:

• Strong Marketing: Effective programs must do an excellent "sales job" on the front end to motivate NCPs to participate. Child support workers who make referrals have to be familiar with the program and confident of its effectiveness.
• Program and Staff Quality: Effective programs must offer an excellent "product" so that those who appear have some hope that they will be helped and find a job quickly. Staff has to be accessible and energetic. The outreach effort has to be backed up with tangible resources. Programs need to cultivate sympathetic employers who will employ NCPs with limited education and criminal backgrounds, and provide transportation assistance, concrete job leads, and access to job training.
• Performance Expectations: The Employment Partnership Program lacked objective performance measures and outcome requirements. The child support agency should consider structuring future contracts with workforce agencies to identify performance goals and reward achievement.
• Responsive Child Support Policies: Noncustodial parents who cooperate should experience some debt relief or payment adjustment so that they see a way of managing their child support obligations.
• Consequences for Non-Compliance: Alternatively, those who do not cooperate need to experience stiff and swift consequences from the court. This requires that the judiciary be engaged in the process of requiring parents to attend the program and to participate in prescribed employment activities. Minimally, judges must routinely issue orders to parents to compel attendance or face serious consequences. For greater impact, they should manipulate the threat of jail to improve compliance and if NCPs still fail to adhere to program requirements, they should be incarcerated.

Project Post-Grant

Texas has incorporated many of the lessons learned from this demonstration to design a more successful initiative "NCP Choices" which uses State TANF funds for employment-related services. One of the major changes under "NCP Choices" is having the cooperation of the courts to enforce consequences, such as incarceration, if NCPs fail to comply with program requirements.

See Compendium of Best Practices for 2007 (IM-08-02):http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cse/pubs/2007/best_practices/tx_ncp_choices_project.html