Office of Child Support Enforcement
FY 2006 Annual Report to Congress

Department of Health and Human Services
Administration for Children and Families
Office of Child Support Enforcement

Table of Contents

• Foreword by Secretary Leavitt
  • Background
  • Introduction
• Automation
  • Federal Parent Locator Service System
  • Support of OCSE, ACF, and HHS Goals
  • Outcomes Attributed to the FPLS
  • Federal Parent Locator Service Continuing Service Improvement Project
  • President’s Management Agenda
  • Federal Oversight and Funding of State Automation Programs
• Training and Technical Assistance
  • Overview
  • Collaboration
    • Collaborative Initiative – IV-D and Courts
    • Military Collaboration
  • Training Curricula
    • Training Course on Child Support Distribution in Tribal IV-D Cases
    • Training Courses on CSE for Tribal IV-D Programs
    • Customer Service Training
    • 16^th National OCSE Training Conference
    • Peer-to-Peer
• Program Improvements
  • Undistributed Collections
  • Understanding the Child Support Debt
    • Who Owes the Arrears
    • Arrears Management Strategies
    • Manage Existing Arrears
  • Medical Support
  • Grants to States and Other Organizations
    • Section 1115 Demonstration Grants
    • Special Improvement Project Grants (SIPs)
    • Child Access and Visitation Grants
  • Healthy Marriage Initiative Waivers
  • Technology Transfers
  • Consumer Services
• Focusing on Results
  • Budget and Performance Integration
  • Performance-Based Incentives and Penalties
  • Audits and Data Reliability
  • Cost Audits
  • Self-Assessment
  • Deficit Reduction Act of 2005
  • Coordination Council
• Project Save Our Children (PSOC)
• Tribal Program
• International Program
• FY 2006 Charts and Graphs
  • List of Charts
  • Figures 1-15
• Nationwide, Regional, and State Box Scores
• Summary Tables
  • List of Tables
  • Tables 1-93
• Glossary of Financial and Statistical Terms
• Appendix
  • Appendix I – HHS Strategic Goals
  • Appendix II – ACF Goals
  • Appendix III – OCSE Goals

Foreword

I am pleased to present the 27^th Annual Report to Congress on the Child Support Enforcement (CSE) Program, which outlines the status of the program and highlights the impressive accomplishments made during fiscal year (FY) 2006.

The conclusion of FY 2006 marked the culmination of the second year of the FY 2005-2009 National CSE Strategic Plan. The program has made steady progress achieving the goals and objectives of the Plan. Foremost among these is ensuring that child support payments are collected and distributed quickly and appropriately to children and families and that these payments continue to serve as a reliable source of income for those who depend upon them to meet their daily needs. During this fiscal year, almost $24 billion in child support was collected and distributed, a 4 percent increase over the amount collected and distributed during FY 2005. Enhanced automation, improved effectiveness of the Federal Parent Locator Service, increased collaboration between the CSE Program and the court/judicial communities, increased effectiveness of training and technical assistance in key program areas, and other similar efforts contributed to this notable progress.

As we maintain our strong commitment to the children in the Child Support caseload, we will continue our efforts to ensure that parents are held responsible for the support of their dependent children. We look forward to continuing our partnership with States, jurisdictions, Tribes, and others who share this commitment to improving the lives and well-being of children.

Michael O. Leavitt

Background

The Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) is part of the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) within the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). The mission of ACF is to promote the economic and social well-being of children, families, and communities.

The Child Support Enforcement (CSE) Program is a Federal/State/Tribal/local partnership that operates under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act. The program functions in all States and several territories through State or county Social Services Departments, Attorneys General Offices, or Departments of Revenue. Its mission is to enhance the well-being of children by assuring that assistance in obtaining support, including financial and medical support, is available to children through: locating parents; establishing paternity and support obligations; and monitoring and enforcing those obligations. This mission has remained the same since the program’s inception. However, in recent years the program has shifted its primary focus from reimbursing the government’s welfare program to maximizing the amount of support passed on to the families and to pursuing new opportunities to improve the program’s effectiveness.

Child support services are available to any parent or any other person with custody of a child who has a parent living outside of the home. These services are automatically available to families receiving assistance under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Program, the Medicaid Program, and the Title IV-E Foster Care Program. Families seeking government child support services who are not recipients of aid under the public assistance programs may apply for child support services through their State, local, or Tribal child support agency. Child support collected on behalf of families receiving TANF is used to reimburse the State and Federal governments for TANF payments made to the families; excess collections are sent to the TANF and former-TANF families. Child support collected on behalf of families who are not recipients of aid is forwarded to those families.

Introduction

In FY 2006, the CSE Program continued to demonstrate a solid commitment to the financial well-being of dependent children through strong enforcement of the financial obligations owed by their noncustodial parents. This commitment included expanded efforts to enforce parental obligations in medical support and in Tribal and international cases. Accordingly, in spite of a slight decrease in the child support caseload during FY 2006, almost $24 billion in child support payments was collected and distributed, an increase of 4 percent from FY 2005; 1.7 million paternities were established or acknowledged, an increase of 3.8 percent from 2005; and 1.2 million new child support orders were established, a slight decrease from FY 2005 levels which reflects the decreased caseload.

The sections of this report provide specific details on the many activities and accomplishments achieved in the CSE program during FY 2006.

Automation

Automation is critical to the operation and success of the Child Support Enforcement Program. Without a comprehensive, reliable, flexible, and secure system, case workers in the States would not have the means to locate noncustodial parents efficiently or to increase collections when circumstances warrant.

Federal Parent Locator Service System (FPLS)

One key element of automation in the child support enforcement program was the creation of the Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS). In 1996, OCSE was charged with the responsibility of developing the initial FPLS which has been continually refined and expanded since that time. The FPLS now includes several mission-critical systems supporting OCSE business processes. FPLS systems that support OCSE in achieving its goals include the following:

• The National Directory of New Hires (NDNH), containing approximately 1.36 billion individual records of employment and unemployment claimant information from 54 States and territories and all Federal agencies. This claimant information is used to: locate child support case participants; verify their employment; and facilitate the collection of financial support through income withholding and medical support enforcement through enrollment of children in health care coverage.
• The Federal Case Registry (FCR), consisting of child support case and participant information from 54 States and territories. At the end of FY 2006, the FCR contained nearly 19 million cases and included participant information on almost 43 million individuals.
• The Intergovernmental Referral Guide (IRG), providing child support case processing procedures and information from each of the 54 State and territorial jurisdictions that can be used to increase the efficiency of interstate case processing.
• Child Support Enforcement Network (CSENet), the application that supports transmission of interstate transactions over a private, closed network. This network supports processing of case requests from one State to another State, and the submission of electronic income withholding orders (IWOs) by States directly to the Department of Defense (DOD), the largest single employer in the United States.
• The Federal Offset System, containing data certified by States regarding the amount of past-due child support owed by noncustodial parents. The Offset System interfaces with: the Department of Treasury’s Financial Management Service (FMS) to offset tax refunds and other Federal payments up to the amount certified by State CSE agencies; the Department of State to deny issuance of passports to delinquent obligors; and over 4,500 multi-state financial institutions to identify and levy assets to collect past-due child support.
• Query Interstate Cases for Kids (QUICK), providing child support enforcement personnel real-time access to view selected case information in other States through a standard and secure user interface.

Support of OCSE, ACF and HHS Goals

The FPLS fully supports the achievement of many HHS and ACF strategic goals and objectives. It provides essential support in the achievement of OCSE strategic goals and is critical to the mission of the Child Support Enforcement Program. FPLS supports the goals of OCSE, ACF, and HHS through:

• Locating noncustodial parents (NCPs) and their assets to identify, establish, modify, and/or enforce child support orders, employment, and assets held by multi-state financial institutions; and supporting Social Security Administration (SSA) on Prescription Drug Match in support of HHS FY 04-09 goals 1 and 3, ACF goals 1, 2, and 4, and OCSE FY 05-09 goals 1-5 (See Appendixes I-III).
  
  
• Comparing information in the FCR with information maintained by the DOD’s Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC), and to provide States with information on medical support coverage and eligibility of children receiving IV-D services in support of HHS FY 04-09 goals 3 and 6, ACF goal 2, and OCSE FY 05-09 goal 3 (See Appendixes I – III).
• Transmitting locate requests to external agencies; conducting matches between FCR and NDNH data; identifying the location, income, and assets of parents; and facilitating State-to-State communication via CSENet and the QUICK project to promote parental responsibility and expedite the establishment of paternity and the collection and enforcement of child support in support of HHS FY 04-09 goals 3, 6, and 8, ACF goals 1, 2, and 4, and OCSE FY 05-09 goals 1-5 (See Appendixes I-III).
• Comparing information in the NDNH and FCR with data maintained by authorized Federal and State agencies to prevent and recoup erroneous payments in public assistance and benefits programs and to collect debts owed to the Federal Government in support of HHS FY 04-09 goal 8, ACF goals 2 and 4, and OCSE FY 05-09 goal 5 (See Appendixes I-III).

Outcomes Attributed to the FPLS

The FPLS plays a crucial role in helping the Administration for Children and Families’ Office of Child Support Enforcement fulfill its mission in assisting States to secure the financial support upon which millions of our nation’s children depend. The FPLS enables OCSE and State CSE agencies to locate parents who have financial obligations and to collect and distribute money to children who depend on parental financial support for food, shelter, education, medical care, and other needs. In addition, the FPLS data are used across Federal and State agencies to reduce erroneous payments and overall program costs in public assistance and benefit programs.

To quantify the effectiveness of these tools and States’ use of them to collect interstate child support, OCSE’s Economic Analysis Team conducted studies of the benefits of NDNH W-4[1] data in 16 States. The studies used a random sample of noncustodial parents’ matches resulting from new hire information submitted to the NDNH that were returned to the States under study in FY 2005. The results of each study were reported to each individual State and compiled to project national numbers. These studies found that:

• 33 percent of the sample NDNH new hire matches that had child support orders in place resulted in the issuance of an Income Withholding Order (IWO) directly from a State CSE agency to an employer;
• 41 percent of those IWOs resulted in a collection directly attributable to the new hire match; and
• the median monthly child support payment in these cases was $240.

It is estimated that over $125 million is collected annually in these 16 States because of these matches. By projecting the above results nationally, an estimated $475 million in additional child support would be collected annually as a result of matching applicable databases.[2]

During tax year 2006, a total of 7.4 million child support cases with arrearages of $87.7 billion were certified for Federal offset. The Federal Offset Program collected $1.6 billion in delinquent child support by offsetting tax refunds and other administrative payments to delinquent child support obligors. Of this total, approximately 58 percent was collected for non-public assistance child support debt, i.e., distributed directly to custodial parents; the remaining 42 percent was targeted for reimbursement of TANF payments.

The State Department is currently denying over 80 passports per day through the Passport Denial Program, a component of the Federal Offset System that identifies delinquent obligors for denial of issuance of passports, resulting in $19 million in payments during FY 2006.

During FY 2006, account matches for over 1 million obligors identified through the Multistate Financial Institution Data Match were returned to States each quarter. States reported $99 million in collections as a result of these matches. Since the program began in FY 1999, cumulative collections total over $476 million.[3]

Over 11 million interstate transactions occurred in FY 2006 through the Child Support Enforcement Network (CSENet). This is an increase of 11 percent over FY 2005 and is essential to the efficient processing of interstate cases. In about 25 percent of the child support caseload, the parents live in two different States.

In addition, the FPLS has generated savings to other Federal agencies by providing data, as authorized by statute, to help them prevent and recoup erroneous payments in public assistance and benefits programs.

Federal Parent Locator Service Continuous Service Improvement Project

The vision for the FPLS Continuous Service Improvement (CSI) Project is to create dynamic, integrated information systems that connect people and processes to serve children, families, and the general public. The FPLS CSI project increases and enhances the ability of State CSE agencies to promote the CSE mission, goals, and objectives by providing: improved access to locate sources, greater support for enforcement of support obligations at the Federal level, and an efficient and effective means of communication between States and Federal agencies.

CSI Outcomes. OCSE successfully achieved the following CSI outcomes in FY 2006:

• enhanced the Multistate Employer Registry to capture e-mail addresses and improve editing, resulting in reduced costs and timeframes for communications with Multistate Employers;
• added Closed Locate Indicator to Project Save Our Children (PSOC) report, providing indication that all locate sources have been polled and responses have been sent thus allowing the PSOC staff to know that locate requests have been satisfied with all available information so that cases can be moved to the next step in a more timely manner;
• developed a workable plan for the migration of CSENet to SSA’s National Computer Center (NCC), in a joint effort with the Social Security Administration (SSA), resulting in improved security, enhanced processing capability, and reduced duplication of network resources; and
• finalized discontinuation of 1099 locate requests because these data were not found to be useful, resulting in reduced processing for FPLS and State systems.

FPLS CSI allows OCSE to more effectively manage its IT costs and associated risks by reducing development time and maintenance costs and using more flexible and expandable data exchange capabilities. Ensuring FPLS data are available for cross-Federal agency purposes reduces redundant investments in Federal Information Technology (IT) resources and provides a single source of data for multiple purposes. FPLS CSI also provides for improved program performance through the efficient and effective use of newer technologies and industry wide standards. FPLS CSI continues to evaluate and improve the CSE Program business processes and the functionality of the FPLS that supports these processes.

President’s Management Agenda

OCSE provides strong support to the objectives outlined in the President’s Management Agenda. This support is reflected both in strategic goals and objectives developed by OCSE in its National Child Support Enforcement Strategic Plan 2005–2009, and in tangible results demonstrated within the program and the FPLS, as outlined below:

Improved Financial Performance. The FPLS supports this Government-wide initiative by: providing NDNH match results to State and Federal programs to help them prevent and recoup improper payments in public assistance and benefit programs; collecting debt owed to the Government; and facilitating compliance with the Improper Payments Information Act, OMB Memorandum 03-13, and agencies’ preparation of their Performance and Accountability Reports.

Currently, comparisons between FPLS data and data maintained by Federal and State programs improve the financial performance of Federal agencies as follows:

• Higher Education Loan and Grant Collections – More than $1.3 billion was collected in FY 2006 by the Department of Education from student loan defaulters because of matches against data maintained in the FPLS’ NDNH (based on information reported to OCSE by the Department of Education). These matches also support the President’s Management Agenda program-specific initiative Elimination of Fraud and Error in Student Aid Programs and Deficiencies in Financial Management.
• Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) Collections – $713 million in tax refunds were frozen by the IRS on the basis of combined data from the FCR and SSA and analysis of EITC claims by 269,000 taxpayers for tax year 2005, the most recent year for which data is available (based on information reported to OCSE by IRS EITC Department).[4]
• Supplemental Security Income (SSI) Payment Corrections – The SSA recovered and prevented benefits overpayments of approximately $403 million with a benefit-to-cost ratio of 11.4 to 1 (based upon SSA analysis conducted every three years).[5]
• Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) – A pilot project overseen by OCSE and the Office of Family Assistance compared data in the FPLS’ NDNH with TANF data maintained by the District of Columbia’s Income Maintenance Administration. The pilot resulted in the identification and verification of over 8,000 TANF recipients who were employed but did not report, or underreported, earnings, as required as a condition of TANF eligibility. Independent verification of the results of the data comparison resulted in case actions generating annualized savings of over $14 million. Recognizing the efficacy of this match, the District of Columbia will become a regular TANF match partner. OCSE and ACF’s Office of Family Assistance work with State TANF agencies that opt to participate in data matches with the NDNH. A nationwide match of TANF adult participants against the NDNH to determine eligibility for TANF benefits and to track work participation for TANF participants began in July 2005. Since the beginning of the nationwide match, 40 State TANF agencies have participated, including 39 in FY 2006. Results for FY 2006 are not available.

Expanded Electronic Government. The FPLS supports this goal by fully implementing e-government solutions to streamline government-to-government, government-to-business, and citizen-to-government communications.

Government-to-Government – The FPLS streamlines government-to-government communication in the following ways:

• Electronic Transmission of Child Support through the E-Payroll Initiative. OCSE participates in the standardization and consolidation of the Federal civilian payroll services to promote the electronic transmission of child support payments owed by Federal employees from the payroll center to State CSE programs.
• Identification of Health Coverage for Children. OCSE has implemented a nationwide match with the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) to identify children in IV-D child support cases who are currently enrolled or eligible for enrollment in its Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS)/Tricare. This nationwide match followed a successful pilot conducted by OCSE between the child support cases from Ohio and New York with DMDC.
  
  In FY 2006, OCSE conducted three matches with the medical records maintained by DMDC in the DEERS database. Each match resulted in approximately 450,000 responses returned to States. On average, each match identified 276,000 children already enrolled in DEERS and 108,000 children eligible for enrollment by virtue of one or both of the parents being in the military and, therefore, capable of sponsoring the child. Each match also identified approximately 65,000 children who were previously enrolled in DEERS, but whose coverage had terminated. Dates of medical coverage were provided. Per policy instructions provided to State CSE agencies, use of the DMDC match eliminates the need for sending the National Medical Support Notice (NMSN) to DMDC. Projected cost savings to States are $1 to $10 per NMSN that no longer has to be sent.
  
  
• Real-Time Electronic Access to Child Support Enforcement Financial and Case Information. OCSE, State CSE programs, and other stakeholders are collaborating on the Query Interstate Cases for Kids (QUICK) application, designed to provide authorized child support personnel in one State with real-time access to financial and case information in another State for purposes of processing the case and providing customer service to parents receiving child support services. As of June 2006, six pilot States were in production and this pilot phase of the project successfully ended in September 2006. Information gleaned from the pilot will be used as the project is implemented in additional States in the future.
• Electronic Reporting of New Hires and Wage Data by Federal Agencies. Federal law requires Federal employers to report newly hired employees and the quarterly wages of their employees to the NDNH, (42 U.S.C. 653(n) and 653A(b)). The FPLS provides Federal employers with an electronic option to comply with these reporting requirements.
• Electronic Transmission of Data via CONNECT:Direct. Data is transmitted electronically via SSA’s CONNECT:Direct between the FPLS and the State Directories of New Hires and State CSE agencies, including their State Case Registries. This reduces redundancies in IT investments for both the State and Federal Governments while ensuring the security of the data.
• E-Training for State and Local Child Support Personnel. OCSE has developed a training tool called “Making the Most of the FPLS” using Web-streaming technology to provide State and local child support managers and case workers with useful information about the FPLS. This training is available at http://videocast.nih.gov/sla/acf/. A second Web-streaming tool, entitled “Processing Interstate Cases/UIFSA” has also been developed. Both courses are available on the OCSE website.

Government-to-Business – The FPLS streamlines government–to–business communication in the following ways:

• Electronic Income Withholding Order. OCSE has implemented an electronic income withholding process. A workgroup consisting of representatives from States and employers designed and developed the layouts, workflow, and business rules for the exchange of income-withholding orders and related communications. OCSE’s evaluation of the pilot, which was completed on December 31, 2005, concluded that the electronic exchange of IWO files is efficient because the e-IWO process resulted in increased child support collections and reduced administrative and processing costs for States and employers. There are seven States and over 20 employers exchanging e-IWO documents, using the layouts developed by OCSE and the e-IWO Workgroup. OCSE is now developing a “portal” which will enable all States and employers to more efficiently and effectively transmit and receive electronic income withholding orders.
• Electronic Registration for Multistate Employers. The FPLS investment allows an employer conducting business in more than one State to comply with Federal law by designating, and registering electronically with the FPLS, the single State to which the employer will report data on newly hired employees, 42 U.S.C. 653A(b)(1)(B) and 653(i)(4). This electronic option provides employers with a one-stop point of service and eliminates the need to report information to multiple States.

Government-to-Citizens – The FPLS streamlines government-to-citizen communication by implementing a redesign of the FPLS section of the OCSE Web site to make it easier for parents and other individuals to access information about the Child Support Enforcement Program. In FY 2006, the FPLS web pages received almost 1.7 million hits.

Federal Oversight and Funding of State Automation Programs

During FY 2006, OCSE continued to provide technical assistance and independent validation and verification of quarterly reviews to the two remaining States, California and South Carolina, that do not yet have certified statewide child support enforcement systems. Federal law requires every State to have in place a single, statewide automated system to address all Family Support Act of 1988 and Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 requirements.[6]

Because the majority of States and Territories have certified statewide CSE systems, OCSE refocused its technical assistance to States to encourage them to enhance their level of automation. As part of this initiative, OCSE invited States and Tribes to send their systems staff to an Interstate and Systems Symposium on June 6-9, 2006. A summary of the symposium was released as Dear Colleague Letter 06-35.

To assist the approximately 16 States which were either replacing or doing substantial enhancements to their Statewide CSE legacy systems, OCSE initiated a series of teleconferences to provide training and facilitate information sharing among the interested States. OCSE issued Action Transmittal (AT) 06-03 which consolidated and updated systems policy in the same format as a previously issued AT in 1990, AT 90-11. AT 06-03 provided updated systems policy in the following areas:

• alternatives analysis and consideration of the transfer of other States’ systems;
• acquiring a system through transfer of other States' automated systems;
• automated features beyond specified Federal functional requirements;
• cost allocation for equipment and systems;
• depreciation of hardware/individual and unit acquisition cost;
• free and open competition/organizational conflict of interest;
• hardware installation during development of new systems;
• interim software development during development of a new system;
• allowability of Federal Financial Participation (FFP) in failed State system projects;
• two-tiered system certification review process;
• prompt action on State requests for prior approval;
• independent verification and validation; and
• office automation, planning, development, implementation, and maintenance and operations – expanded definitions.

OCSE also continued its initiative to develop guidance documents to promote an enhanced level of automation for specific functional areas in a statewide CSE system. Dear Colleague Letter 06-22, Release of Automated Systems for Child Support: A Guide for Enhancing Review and Adjustment Automation was issued on July 17, 2006. Information Memorandum 06-03, Social Security Administration (SSA) National Garnishment Database titled, “Court Order Garnishment System (COGS)” was issued on March 23, 2006. CSE-TANF recommended data elements, definitions, and format specifications to facilitate better data exchange between State child support and TANF agencies were also released on October 5, 2006.

Training and Technical Assistance

Overview

OCSE provides technical assistance and training services to State, Tribal, Federal, and non-profit organizations to facilitate and promote the most effective techniques among the child support community and collaborating agencies. In FY 2006, technical assistance and training were provided in a variety of key operational areas, as described below:

Collaboration

Collaborative Initiative – IV-D and Courts

In 2006, the National Judicial/Child Support Enforcement Task Force took an active role in support of increased child support collections through enhanced collaboration between the IV-D and court/judicial communities. The Task Force met as a committee on three occasions during the year and produced a number of products throughout the year, including a judicial/child support business case template which provides an analysis of–and justification for – automated data exchanges between agencies as a mechanism for improved consumer service. The Task Force also developed an electronic repository for committee work and pertinent child support collections material, along with a first edition collaborative training guide and best practices compendium. Task Force members also published a number of articles and informational pieces which appeared in national trade and association publications on the importance of collaborative initiatives related to child support enforcement. Additionally, the Task Force examined the application of a problem solving technique in a child support venue. It produced reports on assessment techniques, outcome measurement, and measurement criteria for problem solving courts, as well as a flow chart and several articles supportive of this emerging methodology for dealing with difficult recidivist child support cases. Early data analysis suggests this type of intervention to be both cost effective and successful in improving collections in these hardened cases.

Military Collaboration

OCSE initiated dialogue with the Department of Defense (DOD) in response to a change by DOD in accepting voluntary acknowledgement of paternity forms as a prima facie showing of dependency when a custodial parent applied for military medical services through TriCare (a privatized military health care provider for the DOD, formerly CHAMPUS). In FY 2006, these discussions resulted in a proposed course of action which both agencies believe will bring about a positive resolution to the situation and bring needed medical support to affected children. The thrust of the planned action will consist of collecting all existing State and/or Tribal voluntary acknowledgement of paternity forms and posting them on a central OCSE website to aid military officials to more easily identify, and therefore validate, forms presented to them through their Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) offices world-wide.

Training Curricula

Training Course on Child Support Distribution in Tribal IV-D Cases

OCSE designed training on distribution of child support collections that is targeted to start-up Tribal IV-D programs and comprehensive Tribal IV-D program staff, Tribal caseworkers, members of the National Tribal Child Support Association, and anyone interested in learning about Tribal distribution. This one-day interactive training course contains a Trainer's Guide, a Participant's Guide, PowerPoint presentations, and handouts which are available on the OCSE website at:

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cse/resources/tribal/

Training Courses on Child Support Enforcement for Tribal IV-D Programs

In FY 2006, a contract was awarded to develop computer-based training on child support enforcement for Tribal IV-D workers. The training also can be used by State Child Support Enforcement workers to make them aware of the unique characteristics of Tribal Child Support Enforcement Programs. The training consists of the following five courses:

• Orientation;
• Locate;
• Paternity Establishment;
• Enforcement; and
• Processing Intergovernmental Cases.

The design of the five courses uses the latest technology for web-based training and takes into account internet users who do not have high-speed connections.

Customer Service Training

In April 2006, OCSE conducted two training sessions on “Customer Service Training for Child Support Enforcement Workers” in North Carolina. Each session consisted of about 25 participants including caseworkers, supervisors, and trainers from across the State.

16^th National OCSE Training Conference

OCSE’s 16th National Child Support Enforcement Training Conference was held September 11-13, 2006 at the Marriott Crystal Gateway Hotel in Arlington, Virginia. The theme of the conference was “Opening Doors for Children.” Consisting of numerous workshops and plenary sessions that addressed the challenges of the CSE program, the conference reinforced the interrelationship of the program with many other service programs and organizations. The concept was to "open the doors" that lead to:

• more financial child support and better medical support for children;
• new opportunities for the development of strong and healthy family units; and
• better relationships among child support program partners.

This conference was designed for all State, local, Tribal, and Federal child support professionals, and approximately 355 people attended. In addition, OCSE’s State Child Access and Visitation (AV) Program Coordinators’ Meeting was held in conjunction with the CSE conference. The Coordinators’ Meeting offered a separate, full agenda that focused on the needs and activities of the AV community.

Peer-to-Peer

In FY 2006, OCSE sponsored a peer-to-peer technical assistance and training conference that focused on two of the core child support program performance indicators: (1) the percent of cases with arrears collections and (2) the percent of current support collections paid. The conference was well attended with staff from 48 States and several Tribal child support programs. Representatives from 19 States presented innovative strategies and practices used to improve performance in these areas. Each session included a question and answer period that produced a great deal of discussion among State representatives. A summary report of the conference proceedings was prepared and made available to States and other interested parties as DCL-06-40.

Program Improvements

Undistributed Collections

Undistributed Collections (UDC) are child support payments that have been collected by State child support offices which have not been sent to custodial parents. These payments, collected on behalf of individual recipients, cannot be disbursed immediately because of the lack of identifying information, unknown whereabouts of the intended recipient, need for determination of welfare status, dispute resolution, or other reasons.

States are required to report any unresolved or pending issues that are preventing the distribution and disbursement of child support collections on the financial reporting form, Schedule UDC. This form was created to help States differentiate and highlight the various factors that lead to an Undistributed Collection.[7]

In FY 2006, States reported over $486 million in child support payments that were collected on behalf of families but remained undistributed at the end of the year, a 0.02 percent decrease from FY 2005. Ensuring that the money collected on behalf of children is actually distributed to them continues to be a national priority for the CSE program.

Also, in FY 2006, OCSE remained focused on many related issues pertaining to UDC. OCSE continued to conduct meetings and hold quarterly conference calls with the Federal and regional staff responsible for monitoring UDC. These calls provide an opportunity for regional staff to meet and discuss which States have improved or need technical assistance with their data and to share ideas leading to improved outcomes.

Understanding the Child Support Debt

Despite record collections by State CSE programs, considerable sums of child support go unpaid every year. As of September 30, 2006, States reported that the total national unpaid child support debt that has accumulated since the program began in 1975 is $105 billion. This large accumulation of child support arrears is a serious concern for a number of reasons. First, if these arrears could be collected, the additional income would clearly benefit the children and families who are owed this child support. Second, some of these arrears are owed to the government. Finally, large arrears balances give the impression that State CSE programs are not doing their job, when, in fact, the situation is much more complicated.

In order to gain a better understanding of the child support debt, OCSE and the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE) contracted with the Urban Institute to conduct a detailed study of child support arrears in nine large States: Arizona, Florida, Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas. This study was completed in FY 2006. As a result of this study we have learned much about the composition of the debt, its causes, and what can be done to curb future arrears growth.

Who Owes the Arrears?

The study found that most of the arrearage was owed by a relatively small number of noncustodial parents. In the nine States studied, 11 percent of the noncustodial parents with an obligation to pay child support (obligors) owed 54 percent of the past-due child support held by these States. Each obligor was over $30,000 in arrears and was more likely than other obligors to have the following characteristics:

• no or low reported income;
• arrears-only cases;
• current support orders that were high relative to their reported income;
• older current support orders;
• multiple current support orders;
• a IV-D case opened at least a year after their order was established;
• no support paid in the last year;
• no address or an out-of-state address; and
• an interstate case.

Arrears Management Strategies

The nine study States have undertaken numerous actions to manage their arrears. Some of their efforts are summarized below:

• all of the study States are attempting to prevent arrears from accruing in the first place;
• all of the study States have moved to varying degrees toward utilizing quarterly wage data to help set realistic orders;
• all of the study States are trying to increase parental participation in the order process by making documents easy to understand;
• two of the study States, Texas and Michigan, revised their retroactive support statutes in the past two years;
• all of the study States have adopted a variety of early intervention strategies after the order is established to prevent delinquency from occurring through direct customer contact; and
• most of the study States have programs that provide employment services and case management to unemployed or under-employed NCPs who are unable to pay their child support.

Manage Existing Arrears

There are three provisions of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 that should help States collect more arrears:

• the threshold for denying passports was reduced from $5,000 to $2,500;
• the Federal Tax Offset Program can be used to collect child support arrears owed to adult children in non-TANF cases; and
• OCSE can match cases with arrears to information maintained by insurance companies.

Some States have revised their regulations concerning interest. Michigan recently reduced its interest rate from 8 percent to a variable rate tied to the 5 year U.S Treasury Notes and Texas reduced its interest rate from 12 percent to 6 percent. Several States have implemented Arrears Amnesty programs and Arrears Compromise programs.

It is important to note that many factors contribute to the creation of high arrearages and thus, multiple strategies are needed to address those factors. Although there are common factors affecting the existence of arrears, the study found there also was a great deal of variation among the States. Therefore, it is important for each State to determine the factors that are contributing most to arrears in that State and to design an arrears management program accordingly.

Medical Support

The Child Support Performance and Incentive Act of 1998 (CSPIA) mandated the establishment of the Medical Child Support Working Group (MCSWG) to identify impediments to the effective enforcement of medical support. The medical support provisions in the regulations, published September 20, 2006, addressed recommendations of the MCSWG. CSPIA also mandated establishment of the Medical Support Incentive Workgroup (MSIW) to develop a performance measure of the effectiveness of States in establishing and enforcing medical support obligations. In FY 2006, State CSE programs began collecting information that allows OCSE to determine their performance in establishing and enforcing medical support orders for children, as recommended by the workgroup.

The OCSE Employer Outreach team continued to provide extensive technical assistance to employers on the National Medical Support Notice (NMSN) through articles in publications, presentations at conferences and teleconferences, and explanatory material on its Web site. In addition, the OCSE Web site has an electronic version of the NMSN that can be downloaded for use by State workers. The Employer Outreach team continued to work with States based on individual requests.

OCSE provided guidance to States and localities on the submittal of the NMSN to the Defense Manpower Data Center regarding how to assist children of active duty military personnel and military retirees in obtaining health care coverage.

The National OCSE Strategic Plan for 2005–2009 includes the establishment and enforcement of medical support as a stand-alone goal. OCSE acknowledges that the provision of medical coverage by the custodial parent (or step-parent) may be a better option for many children. In addition, the program recognizes its role in assisting States to control their Medicaid expenditures by placing the financial responsibility for health care on the family, not the taxpayer, to the greatest extent possible. The OCSE Strategic Plan includes indicators for both establishment and enforcement of medical support, as well as the percentage of IV-D children with health care coverage from any source, and the Medicaid cost savings attributable to OCSE medical support efforts.

ACF hosted two regional meetings in May 2006. These meetings brought together State Directors from Medicaid, State Child Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), Child Welfare (IV-E), Child Support Enforcement (IV-D), and Tribal Child Support Enforcement to collaborate on ways to increase medical support for children and cost savings through collaboration between these agencies at the State level. These meetings also were attended by Federal staff from the Office of Child Support Enforcement, Children’s Bureau, and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Regions VI/VIII/IX/X met May 2-3 in Salt Lake City, Utah while Regions I/II/III/IV/V/VII met May 23-24 in Kansas City, Missouri.

A summary of the Medical Support Collaboration Meetings held in June-August 2005, which included proposals to create multi-agency task forces; improve cross-program communication and collaboration; investigate data sharing and other automated system enhancements; and improve policy coordination, was used as a reference at the 2006 meetings.

Grants to States and Other Organizations

Section 1115 Demonstration Grants

Section 1115(a) of the Social Security Act provides OCSE the authority to fund demonstration

project grants.[8] In FY 2006, OCSE awarded $696,005 in Section 1115 grants to the following five State agencies:

• Maryland was awarded $135,000 for timely review and adjustment of child support orders associated with incarcerated parents.
• The District of Columbia was awarded $135,000 to develop court and other business practices for quick review and adjustment of child support orders for parents who are about to be incarcerated.
• A project in Colorado was awarded $150,000 to develop an electronic filing process for the exchange of information between the courts and the child support agency.
• California was awarded $150,000 to test if mediation and alternative dispute resolution services provided by the child support agency and courts could result in more stipulated orders.
• Nebraska and North Dakota were awarded $51,005 and $75,000, respectively, for collaboration projects between Child Support and Child Welfare to test whether the collaboration would improve outcomes for children in shared caseloads.

These projects will help improve child support enforcement in six States. The grants are designed to help families achieve self-sufficiency and promote stability for children, mothers, and fathers.

Special Improvement Project Grants

The Special Improvement Project (SIP) grant program provides funding for projects that further the national child support mission and goals and help improve program performance.[9] In FY 2006, the SIP Grants provided nearly $800,000 in funding for five grants, including four non-profit organizations and a local agency to advance the performance of the nation’s child support enforcement system.

Three grants are designed to promote healthy relationships for unwed couples to improve their children’s financial security, including the following:

• The Center for Policy Research in Denver received $198,664 to collaborate with local clinics and child support agencies in San Francisco and Saint Louis to present information about paternity, child support and healthy relationships to low-income, unmarried parents in trusted, medical settings.
• The Child and Family Resource Council of Grand Rapids received $199,323 to provide parenting and life-skills sessions, as well as mediation services to promote healthy relationships for low-income, single-parent families with young children. The project evaluated what services and outreach best ensure that children received financial and medical support.
• The Family Service Association of San Antonio received $200,000 to test strategies that enhance the understanding of unmarried, new parents concerning the importance of paternity establishment and the value of family stability and healthy relationships. The project evaluated the effectiveness of providing unwed parents with both parenting/marriage educational materials and services as compared to only receiving educational materials.

Two grants were awarded to improve child support by encouraging parents and CSE agencies to work together for better results:

• The Christian Community Council in Albany, Louisiana, received $100,000 to partner with the local CSE agency and the 21^st Judicial District Court to help non-custodial parents find employment and increase their understanding of the court process and their knowledge of child support so they are better able to meet their parental obligations.
• The Philadelphia Housing Authority received $100,000, in partnership with the Department of Public Welfare and Family Court, to provide noncustodial parents with child support and housing eligibility services and referral to job training and placement to help them meet their child support responsibilities.

Child Access and Visitation Grants

The Grants to States for Access and Visitation Program (42 U.S.C. 669b) was authorized by Congress through passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996.

The goal of the program, as set in statute, is to “…enable States to establish and administer programs to support and facilitate noncustodial parents’ access to and visitation of their children.” Services include, but are not limited to:

• mediation (mandatory and voluntary);
• counseling;
• education (e.g., parent education);
• development of parenting plans;
• visitation enforcement (monitored or supervised visitation);
• neutral drop-off and pick-up; and
• development of guidelines for visitation and alternative custody arrangements.

Since its inception in 1996, a total of $10 million has been appropriated each year to be allocated among the States for the Access and Visitation Program, with each State required to contribute 10 percent of total program costs. The Administration has submitted a proposal to Congress that would phase in a doubling of the Federal appropriation to $20 million over a four year period. This proposal would allocate the funds to each State under the following statutory funding formula, with a minimum allocation of $100,000 per State:

“The allotment of a State for a fiscal year is the amount that bears the same ratio to $10,000,000 for grants under this section for the fiscal year as the number of children in the State living with only one biological parent bears to the total number of such children in all States.”

Federal law requires that each State monitor, evaluate, and report on services funded through access and visitation. This requirement is satisfied through the annual submission of the “State Child Access Program Survey,” which includes:

• State agency contact information;
• services funded;
• provider agency contact information;
• number of parents served;
• socio-economic and demographic information on families served; and
• outcome data (i.e., increase in noncustodial parenting time with children).

From FY 1998 through FY 2006, over a half million parents were recipients of services through State-administered Access and Visitation Grant Programs.

Parents Served Annually

* Preliminary State Data for 2006

Based on OCSE’s most recent data, States provided services to an estimated 70,409 parents in FY 2006. Nearly equal numbers of fathers (32,732) and mothers (35,285) were served in addition to 2,392 grandparents and/or legal guardians. The majority of parents served were unmarried and poor with annual incomes less than $20,000. Over 75,789 children were associated with the total number of parents served.

Recipients of Access and Visitation Services by Type (FY 2006)

*Others include grandparents and/or legal guardians
Source: Preliminary State Data for 2006

On average, States continue to fund a range of access and visitation services, with parent education, mediation, and developing parenting plans ranked among the most frequently provided programs, as shown on the table below.

Number of Clients by Services Provided (FY 2006)

Service Type	Number of Parents Served**
** Parents often receive multiple services
Preliminary State Data for FY 2006
Mediation	17,650
Counseling	4,469
Parent Education	47,994
Parenting Plans	17,400
Supervised Visitation	10,978
Neutral Drop-Off	5,025

Healthy Marriage Initiative Waivers

The Healthy Marriage Initiative is aimed at helping couples and individuals who wish to gain greater access to marriage education services acquire the skills and knowledge necessary to form and sustain a healthy marriage. Under Section 1115 of the Social Security Act, OCSE is able to provide funding for projects that may benefit and complement the Child Support Enforcement Program, but which would not otherwise meet the requirements for regular program funding. A number of “Section 1115 waivers” were approved in FY 2006. These waivers allowed States and approved sites to provide healthy-marriage education integrated with Child Support Enforcement and to conduct a media campaign pointing out the advantages of marriage, especially for low-income populations. These services to parents are intended to strengthen relationships and foster marriage, when appropriate. This education is designed to be voluntary, gender neutral, and require domestic violence protocols. Federal funds for these projects provide 66 percent of total project costs while State and local funds provide the remaining 34 percent.

FY 2006 waivers were awarded to the following:

• Michigan (Grand Rapids) – 1,730 persons have received marriage education (unduplicated count). Seventy-one percent have completed the course.
• Idaho (Nampa) – 678 persons have received marriage education.
• Illinois (Chicago) – 324 individuals attended a marriage class.
• Louisiana (New Orleans) – Marriage classes were resumed after Hurricane Katrina. A time extension will be required as well as an expansion to Jefferson Parish due to delays caused by the hurricane.
• Massachusetts (Boston) – 203 persons received marriage education.
• Minnesota (Minneapolis and St. Paul) – 39 couples have been enrolled in this mentoring program.
• Kentucky (Lexington) – This project is in the planning stage.
• Texas (Houston and San Angelo) – 282 couples attended marriage education classes in both sites.
• Georgia (Atlanta, Columbus, Duluth-Norcross, Lithonia, Macon, and Thomasville and other sites) – This project is in the implementation stage.
• Florida (Jacksonville) – 959 individuals and couples received marriage education under this grant. Another 400 received marriage education before the grant started under the same organization using local funding only.
• Washington (Lakewood) – This project is in the early implementation stage.
• Washington (Yakima) – This project is in the planning stage.
• Colorado (Denver, LaPlata, Montezuma, Durango, Conifer Health Resource Centers) – This project is in the implementation stage. Thirty-four individuals have been served to date.
• Ohio (Clarke County) – This project is in the planning stage.

Technology Transfers

The Technology Transfer (TT) Program enables a State or local child support agency to transfer existing knowledge, skills, and expertise from one IV-D agency to another. It usually involves a proven technology or practice that is anticipated to improve performance in States that adapt such practices from other jurisdictions.

Arizona staff visited the Massachusetts State Disbursement Unit (SDU) as part of Arizona’s research into new technology options. Arizona has plans for enhancements to its SDU aimed at improving effectiveness and cost efficiency in payment processing. Arizona expressed an interest in the Massachusetts SDU because the two States’ child support programs are of similar size and because of Arizona’s particular interest in document imaging practices, such as those carried out by Massachusetts.

Key aspects of Massachusetts’ SDU operations considered for possible replication in Arizona included: expanded use of up-front scanning; enabling imaged checks to be used in payment processing; and scanning envelopes, in addition to checks and source documents to capture additional information on employers and expanded information from imaged documents that might be used for employer outreach and education programs.

The information gathered from the site visit will be considered for possible use as Arizona develops a possible new request for proposals in connection with planned SDU enhancements.

The Los Angeles County IV-D Agency Director and Chief Attorney, the County IV-E Agency Interim Director, and a Supervising Judge from the Los Angeles Superior Court met with staff from the Wisconsin Bureau of Child Welfare, the Milwaukee Children’s Court, and others to examine IV-D and IV-E inter-program referral, case planning, and information sharing practices. Of particular interest was Milwaukee’s reported success in establishing paternity in child welfare cases as a result of their collaboration efforts.

Information on some aspects of collaboration efforts in Milwaukee will be used as part of ongoing coordination among the Los Angeles IV-D and IV-E agencies and the Superior Court. For Milwaukee’s part, the discussion with Los Angeles highlighted the importance of developing written protocols, procedures, and memoranda of understanding.

The Iowa Bureau of Collections (CSE) and a community partner traveled to Baltimore to observe the Center for Fathers, Families and Workforce Development (CFFWD) working with low-income families and offenders. CFFWD has a longstanding fatherhood program and is also working on marriage-related activities.

The Iowa CSE agency looked at ways to work with new customers to avoid a pattern of non-payment of child support. Their proposed model uses employment training of low-income obligors with a focus on attitude, job coaching, and monitoring accompanied by work on healthy relationships. During the visit to Baltimore, the Iowa visitors were able to view a STRIVE Program that is designed as a 3-week “boot camp” for men and women focusing on attitude and skill development. The Center also offers a fatherhood program that teaches parental responsibility. The Bureau of Collections plans to replicate the program in the Des Moines area and met with their community partners to determine their next steps.

Nevada staff visited Colorado to understand how that State uses data reports to work cases proactively and monitor case worker’s performance; works with its Department of Vital Statistics in reporting its Paternity Establishment Percentage (PEP); uses an administrative process to establish paternity; and views the benefits of imaging/operating in a paperless environment. Based on the visit, Nevada will pursue support in a future legislative session to implement imaging, use administrative hearing officers, and seek funding alternatives to incorporate imaging.

Nevada visited Sacramento County, CA, to study that jurisdiction’s Customer On-Line Storage and Retrieval System (Costars), the document imaging and retrieval system used by 54 of 58 counties in California. Nevada staff also met with Informatix, Inc., California’s document imaging vendor. Based on that visit, Nevada will pursue funding for this effort.

Nevada staff visited North Dakota to gain a sense of that jurisdiction’s strategic planning process and its procedures for creating reports to analyze performance measures. Staff also wanted to view the North Dakota organizational structure and its Customer Services and State Collection Distribution Unit. Based on that visit, Nevada pursued legislative action and appropriations to implement and/or support the recommendations of the comprehensive study of the State’s CSE program conducted by a private contractor, which included strategic planning, developing more robust reports to measure performance, restructuring the program, and enhancing customer service.

The legislature approved funding for the Welfare Division to obtain a strategic plan facilitator and a consultant to work with the State and counties in developing a report detailing the status of progress and the manner in which the Division and the district attorneys will carry out the specific audit recommendations. The Division will be coordinating with North Dakota to establish a date their strategic plan facilitator can assist Nevada in developing its CSE strategic plan.

Consumer Services

OCSE operates an Internet Web site which provides child support professionals and the public with easy access and search capability to a significant amount of information about the child support program. OCSE also responds to thousands of customer, congressional, and White House case inquiries and requests for program information; operates the National Reference Center which responds to requests for child support publications, provides services to customers and child support professionals in the international community; and publishes the CSE national newsletter, Child Support Report.

The following examples demonstrate some of the consumer services provided in FY 2006:

• OCSE continued to improve its Web site to make it easier for customers to access information on research and demonstration grants. On one Web link, customers could find information on how to write grants, construct logic models, complete standard financial forms, and file applications electronically. Also, OCSE developed a means for the public to submit questions on any of the grants awarded.
• OCSE continued to provide citizens with access to on-demand answers to frequently asked child support questions via its Web site. Approximately 201,000 people visited its questions and answers on the CSE program Web page in FY 2006. In addition, 5,600 individual questions were answered.
• In recognition of the national child support enforcement community’s affirmation of the importance of working toward healthy parental relationships, OCSE updated its video “The Power of Two: Voluntarily Acknowledging Paternity.” The video was originally developed to help States comply with the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), which requires that all unwed mothers and fathers be provided an oral, as well as written, explanation of their legal rights, responsibilities, and consequences of voluntarily signing a paternity acknowledgment. Both the English and Spanish versions of the video were updated to include the positive aspects for children of healthy marriage and to inform those who think they might be interested in learning more, that marriage education services are available.

Focusing on Results

The Child Support Enforcement (CSE) Program is measured through the use of specific performance indicators that further the goals of the National Child Support Enforcement Strategic Plan for 2005–2009 (the Plan) in five areas:

• all children have established parentage;
• all children in IV-D cases have financial and medical support orders;
• all children in IV-D cases receive financial and medical support from parents, as ordered;
• the IV-D program will be efficient and responsive in its operations; and
• all children in IV-D cases have medical coverage.

Budget and Performance Integration

OCSE supports the Budget and Performance Integration goal of the President’s Management Agenda. In 2003, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) completed its evaluation of the effectiveness of the CSE program using the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART). The program received a rating of 90 percent, making it the highest rated social services program among all programs reviewed government wide.

Since that evaluation, OCSE has acted to improve the performance of the program even further. For instance, in FY 2006, OCSE developed a new medical support indicator to measure the extent to which medical support is not only ordered, but also provided in child support cases; and improved interstate communication of financial and case participant information through the use of QUICK (Query Interstate Cases for Kids), an electronic application that allows case workers to view interstate case information in real time.

Performance-Based Incentives and Penalties

Since 1975, the Federal Government has paid incentives to State child support enforcement programs to encourage improved child support collections through adhering to efficient establishment and enforcement techniques. These incentive payments are a key source of funding for State programs.

The method for calculating payments changed with the adoption of the Child Support Performance and Incentive Act (CSPIA) in 1998. An Incentive Funding Workgroup composed of State and Federal partners made recommendations to the Secretary to develop this system. Four key elements of the performance-based incentive system include:

• incentive payments based on performance in the five measures: paternity establishment, order establishment, current collections, cases paying toward arrears, and cost-effectiveness;
• reliable and complete data (as determined by annual data reliability audits and reviews);
• annual legislated amounts from which States are paid; and
• incentives that must be reinvested into State child support programs.

In FY 2006, 51 States/Territories received an incentive for all five measures and three States received an incentive for four measures. Comparatively, FY 2005 results show that 50 States/Territories received an incentive for all five measures and four States for four measures.

Penalties may also be assessed when the calculated level of performance for any of the three penalty measures (paternity establishment, support order establishment, current collections) fail to achieve a specified level, or if States’ data used to compute incentive measures are found to be incomplete or unreliable, or when States are not in compliance with certain child support requirements. There is an automatic corrective action year. The corrective action year is the immediately succeeding fiscal year following the year of the deficiency. If the State’s data are determined complete and reliable and the related performance is adequate for the corrective action year, the penalty is not imposed.

If the corrective action was unsuccessful, the financial penalty is a reduction to the State’s Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant. The penalty amount is calculated as one to two percent of the adjusted State Family Assistance Grant (SFAG) for the TANF program for the first year of the deficiency. The penalty amount increases each year, up to five percent, for each consecutive year the State’s data are found to be incomplete, unreliable, or the State’s performance on a penalty measure fails to attain the specified level of performance. In 2006, three States received a penalty after the FY 2004 corrective action year for the FY 2005 performance period.

Audits and Data Reliability

The passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) changed the direction and emphasis of audits of State child support enforcement programs conducted by OCSE. Legislative requirements now emphasize performance and outcomes rather than the pre-PRWORA requirements of processing and taking actions on child support cases. Beginning in FY 2000, as required by CSPIA , States began receiving financial incentives based on meeting or exceeding standards for each of five performance measures related to paternity and order establishment, collecting child support, and cost-effectiveness.

The incentives are paid based on performance data that States report to the Federal Government. OCSE Office of Audit performs Data Reliability Audits (DRAs) to evaluate the completeness, accuracy, security, and reliability of these data reported and produced by State reporting systems. The DRAs help ensure that incentives are earned and paid only on the basis of verifiable data and that the incentive payment system is fair and equitable.

In FY 2004, OCSE and State partners developed two possible incentive measures addressing medical support. While not subject to incentives or penalty, data reported on Form OCSE-157, the “Child Support Enforcement Annual Data Report,” that will be used for the proposed medical support establishment measure and the medical support enforcement measure was subject to FY 2006 data reliability audits. We are not reporting Medical Support results when we discuss DRA results below because the medical support data was audited for management purposes only.

Fiscal Year 2006 was the seventh year OCSE calculated and paid incentives to States for meeting performance standards in the five performance measure areas. Fifty-two States and jurisdictions passed the DRA/MDR[10] in FY 2006. Fifty States passed in FY 2005. In FY 2006, one State did not meet the standard for reporting paternity information on the OCSE-157[11] report and another State did not meet the data reliability standards for the arrearage collections measure. In fiscal years 2004 and 2005, four States did not meet the data reliability standard for the paternity measure. All States passed the DRA for cost-effectiveness in fiscal years 2002–2006.

Cost Audits

OCSE also is required by PRWORA to evaluate the adequacy of the financial management of a State’s program. Specifically, OCSE is mandated to perform reviews of expenditures claimed by States for Federal reimbursement. The primary objectives of a cost audit are to determine whether costs claimed by the State for Federal reimbursement are allowable, allocable, and reasonable to the child support program and to ensure that States bear their fair share of child support costs. Financial audits are performed after the DRAs are completed to the extent that time and resources are available before beginning the next fiscal year’s DRAs. Audit findings from cost audits performed or reported in FY 2006 included unallowable non-IV-D costs claimed for reimbursement and for the failure to report the receipt of program income that States are required to use to offset program expenditures.

Self-Assessment

During FY 2006, the annual State CSE Program Self-Assessment Process was emphasized as an effective management tool to identify and analyze the root causes of deficiencies in program performance and to formulate specific corrective actions designed to eliminate identified deficiencies.

Section 454(15)(A) of the Social Security Act requires States to perform annual assessments of their respective CSE programs and to report the findings to the U.S. Department of Health and Humans Services. The annual self-assessments, which cover a 12-month period, must include the following mandatory sections: Executive Summary of Review Findings, Description of Optional Review Criteria Included in the Report, Description of Sampling Methodology Used, and Results of the Self-Assessment Review. The self-assessments may also include the following two optional review criteria: (1) Program Direction, which allows States to describe the relationship between program compliance with respect to self-assessment review criteria and program performance based upon the Child Support Program incentive measures and (2) Program Service Enhancement, which provides a description of innovative activities put into practice that led to improved program performance and customer service.

The mandatory performance measures include:

• Case Closure;
• Establishment of Paternity and Support Orders;
• Enforcement of Orders; Disbursement of Collections;
• Securing and Enforcement of Medical Support Orders;
• Review and Adjustment of Support Orders;
• Interstate Services; and
• Expedited Processes.

Each performance measure has a corresponding Federal performance standard, but there is no Federal financial penalty for the failure of States to measure up to these standards. However, the annual self-assessment report must include a description of the corrective action taken or planned by States for every mandatory self-assessment review criteria for which they fail to achieve the corresponding Federal standard.

Deficit Reduction Act of 2005

The Deficit Reduction Act (DRA) of 2005, Public Law 109-171, was signed by the President on February 8, 2006. Following is a summary of the 11 sections of the law that are relevant to the Child Support Enforcement Program:

• provides each State an option to pass-through to TANF families, collected child support of up to $100 for one child or $200 for two or more children (effective FY 2009 or FY 2010 at State option);
• provides each State an option to distribute more support to former TANF families (effective FY 2009 or FY 2010 at State option);
• ends Federal matching of State expenditures using incentive payments effective FY 2008;
• requires medical support for children from either parent with optional enforcement against custodial parents (effective FY 2006);
• provides for matching of insurance settlement data with the Federal Parent Locator Service (effective FY 2006);
• requires mandatory review and adjustment of child support orders for families receiving TANF (effective FY 2008);
• decreases the threshold amount for passport denial from $5,000 to $2,500 in unpaid support (effective FY 2007);
• imposes a mandatory annual $25 collection fee for non-TANF families in cases exceeding $500 in collections per year (effective FY 2007);
• reduces FFP for paternity laboratory costs from 90 percent to 66 percent (effective FY 2007); and
• requires tax offset to collect past-due support on behalf of children whether or not they are minors (effective FY 2008).

OCSE will be issuing regulations, and other guidance as necessary, on the child support-related sections of the DRA. Sections to be addressed through a proposed regulation include the use of Tax Refund Intercept Program to collect past-due child support on behalf of children who are not minors; mandatory review and adjustment of child support orders; reduction of Federal matching rate for laboratory costs incurred in determining paternity; and mandatory fee for successful child support collection for family that has never received TANF.

The requirements that State child support enforcement agencies seek medical support for children from either parent will be implemented through separate medical support regulations.

OCSE also established a workgroup of State and Federal representatives to assist States in implementing the distribution provisions of the DRA. The workgroup met in May and September of 2006 and plans to continue its work in the new fiscal year.

Coordination Council

In 2006, the OCSE Coordination Council was established for the purpose of coordinating strategic and ongoing activities across OCSE Divisions and Regional Offices that support the National Child Support Enforcement Strategic Plan for FY 2005 – 2009. More specifically, the Coordination Council tracks the activities and projects OCSE staff undertake by relating the activities to the Strategic Plan objectives. This enables OCSE management to identify cross-cutting activities, eliminate any duplicate efforts by merging activities where appropriate, and determine any gaps in OCSE activities.

In addition, the Coordination Council, in consultation with the National Council of Child Support Directors, determines national initiatives. Strategies that result in increased collections will also avoid increases in delinquencies. OCSE is renewing its emphasis on areas that have been a priority since the start of the program, and ensuring OCSE resources are supporting States in getting results. OCSE is placing special emphasis on activities that result in increasing the collection of both current child support and arrears.

Project Save Our Children

Project Save Our Children (PSOC) is a child support enforcement initiative that targets criminally delinquent parents who willfully fail to take responsibility for their children, owe large sums of past-due child support and who are very skillful in hiding assets. By prosecuting parents who will not provide support, a pointed message of responsibility is sent that may help to give their children a better chance in life.

In FY 2006, the PSOC task force units had received over 10,000 cases from the States. As a result of the work of the task forces, 986 arrests have been executed nationwide and 872 individuals have been sentenced. Federal investigations resulted in a total of $39.6 million in restitution being ordered with $35.8 million actually collected in FY 2006.

During FY 2006, PSOC task force units continued to access the online Child Support Enforcement Tracking System 5 (CSETS 5), a redeveloped system that is available at all screening sites used to track cases, including restitution payments. This allows faster and more accurate reporting of case and payment history.

Between January 1, 1997 and December 31, 2006, there have been 110 convictions in South Dakota alone, which has resulted in $611,235 being collected. One significant statistic related to these 110 convictions is that 88 NCPs (80 percent of the total) are making monthly payments.

In addition, PSOC provided ongoing Web-based training required for all Investigative Analysts on the law enforcement data system, as well as other private systems; and contributed several articles to various newspapers throughout the nation and in the Child Support Report about results that involved investigations which resulted in the arrest and recovery of restitution ordered by the court for nonpayment of child support.

Tribal Program

In FY 2006, the total number of Tribal Child Support Programs operating under the Tribal Child Support Final Rule increased from 9 to 32 Tribes, operating either a fully funded or start-up Child Support Program in accordance with Federal regulations.

To receive full funding, a Tribe must provide full child support services based on meeting Federal regulations including the following objectives: establishment of paternity; establishment of support orders; modification and enforcement of support orders; collection and distribution of support; and locating noncustodial and custodial parents and their assets.

There are nine Tribal Programs operating fully funded, comprehensive IV-D Tribal Programs under the Tribal Child Support regulations:

• Chickasaw Nation, OK
• Navajo Nation, AZ & NM
• Puyallup Tribe, WA
• Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate Sioux Tribe, SD
• Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians, WI
• Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin, WI
• Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribe, WA
• Lummi Nation, WA
• Forest County Potawatomi Community, WI

These Tribes participated in numerous national child support meetings and conferences which included: National Child Support Interstate and Systems Symposium; Region X Tribal/State Summit; National Tribal Child Support Directors Association; National Tribal Child Support Enforcement Association Conference; Tribal Medical Support Meeting; OCSE Peer to Peer Training; National Child Support Enforcement Association Conference; the 16^th National Child Support Training Conference; and Western Interstate Child Support Enforcement Conference. The Tribes also continue to provide on-site technical assistance to both fully funded and start-up Tribal applicants upon request.

A total of $12.9 million was collected during FY 2006 from the nine Tribal comprehensive programs, a 50 percent increase from the $8.6 million of collections reported in FY 2005.

There were 18 new Tribal start-up programs during FY 2006:

• Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation
• Three Affiliated Tribes – Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arickara Nation
• Oneida Nation
• Winnebago Tribe
• Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians
• White Earth Nation
• Keweenaw Bay Indian Community
• Pueblo of Zuni
• Muscogee (Creek) Nation
• Kickapoo Tribe of Kansas
• Ponca Tribe of Oklahoma
• Penobscot Nation
• Mescalero Apache Tribe
• Kaw Nation
• Comanche Nation of Oklahoma
• Klamath Tribes
• Tulalip Tribes
• Nooksack Indian Tribe

The following Tribal start-up programs began their second year of funding during FY 2006:

• Central Council of Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes, Alaska
• Osage Nation, OK
• Cherokee Nation, OK
• Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, OR
• Quinault Indian Nation, WA

International Program

In June 2006, OCSE, Department of State, and State child support agency officials attended the Hague Conference on Private International Law and participated in meetings of the Special Commission on Family Maintenance. While the United States has not been a signatory to previous conventions, U.S. participation in the current Special Commission offers the possibility that a new multilateral instrument might provide U.S. families with the benefits of an expanded international system of cooperation. The goals of the new Convention are to create procedures for international cases that are results-oriented, accessible, prompt, efficient, cost-effective, and fair.

As part of OCSE’s efforts in support of the Hague Special Commission, the U.S. has taken a leadership role in organizing and coordinating the Administrative Cooperation Working Group (ACWG). The stated goals of the ACWG are to improve administrative cooperation among participating countries and to develop possible recommendations on administrative cooperation for the language and implementation of the new Child Support Convention. Approximately 60 individuals representing 15 countries and organizations participated in the work of the ACWG during 2006. The ACWG and its subcommittees (Country Profile and Monitoring and Review of the Operation and Implementation of the Convention), along with the Forms Committee, met and prepared reports for the June 2006 Special Commission. The U.S. delegation is committed to ensuring a results-oriented, effective Convention and the U.S. child support system serves as the model for performance-based measurement and monitoring of child support efforts.

OCSE also participated in a conference on “Guaranteeing the Effective Recovery of Maintenance, in Europe and in the World,” organized jointly by the European Commission and the Hague Conference on Private International Law. The purpose of this conference was to exchange ideas and information on child support practices, and to consider issues surrounding the development of the new Hague Convention.

OCSE provided training for State case workers through a series of teleconferences on the topic of International Child Support Case Processing. Representatives from Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Norway gave presentations and responded to inquiries from State CSE case workers who handle international cases.

OCSE also hosted the International Heads of Child Support Agencies meeting during 2006. Officials from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, United Kingdom, and the U.S. used this forum to share innovative practices and to discuss collaborative efforts to improve international case processing.

FY 2006 Charts and Graphs

List of Charts

Cases

• Figure 1 Total IV-D Caseload for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Figure 2 IV-D Cases With and Without Support Orders Established and Percent Change for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Figure 3 Number of IV-D Cases for Which a Collection Was Made for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Paternities Acknowledged

• Figure 4 IV-D and Statewide Paternities Established or Acknowledged for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Collections

• Figure 5 Percent of Total Distributed Collections for Current, Former, Never Assistance, and Medicaid Cases, FY 2006
• Figure 6 Total Collections Received by Method of Collection, FY 2006
• Figure 7 Total Distributed Collections of TANF/Foster Care and Non-TANF Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Figure 8 Undistributed Collections (UDC) by Category and Age, FY 2006
• Figure 9 Interstate Collections: Cases Sent to Other States for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Expenditures

• Figure 10 Total Administrative Expenditures for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Figure 11 Total ADP Expenditures for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Number of Children

• Figure 12 Number of Children in the IV-D Program for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Federal Parent and Locator Service (FPLS)

• Figure 13 Number of Unique Persons Matched and Number of Persons in the FCR by Participant Type for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Figure 14 Federal Offset Collections and Percent Change for Seven Processing Years

Nationwide, Regional and State Boxscores

Note: The Medicaid assistance category was recently added to the OCSE-34A form. This caused some of the percentage changes to appear unusually large. These data previously were to be reported in the current assistance category.

Nationwide Boxscores

Nationwide

		% change from FY 05
6 Cost Effectiveness remained unchanged in FY 2006.
Collections Distributed	$23,933,384,257	4.0%
Current Assistance	$985,416,539	-5.5%
Former Assistance	$9,238,893,026	-0.2%
Never Assistance	$10,970,140,163	5.0%
Medicaid Assistance	$2,738,934,529	21.0%
Total Expenditures	$5,561,444,218	3.9%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.58	$0.006
Paternities & Acknowledgements	1,701,019	3.8%
Orders Established	1,158,866	-1.8%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	60,417	1.2%
Total Caseload	15,844,238	-0.1%
Current Assistance	2,334,137	-6.5%
Former Assistance	7,269,813	-0.3%
Never Assistance	6,240,288	2.8%
Net Undistributed Collections	$485,491,812	-2.2%
Arrears Amounts Due	$104,406,015,371	-2.0%

Following is a listing of each regional office and the associated states

Region	States
Region I	Connecticut New Hampshire Maine Rhode Island Massachusetts Vermont
Region II	New Jersey Puerto Rico New York Virgin Islands
Region III	Delaware Pennsylvania District of Columbia Virginia Maryland West Virginia
Region IV	Alabama Mississippi Florida North Carolina Georgia South Carolina Kentucky Tennessee
Region V	Illinois Minnesota Indiana Ohio Michigan Wisconsin
Region VI	Arkansas Oklahoma Louisiana Texas New Mexico
Region VII	Iowa Missouri Kansas Nebraska
Region VIII	Colorado South Dakota Montana Utah North Dakota Wyoming
Region IX	Arizona Hawaii California Nevada Guam
Region X	Alaska Oregon Idaho Washington

Regional Boxscores

Region I

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$1,005,797,004	2.3%
Current Assistance	$73,909,873	-4.6%
Former Assistance	$497,010,418	1.5%
Never Assistance	$368,331,118	-0.8%
Medicaid Assistance	$66,545,595	50.1%
Total Expenditures	$229,225,087	6.2%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.65	-$0.18
Paternities & Acknowledgements	72,516	30.5%
Orders Established	50,598	7.9%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	2,070	3.1%
Total Caseload	660,061	-0.5%
Current Assistance	109,462	-6.4%
Former Assistance	358,843	0.3%
Never Assistance	191,756	1.5%
Net Undistributed Collections	$21,702,073	-20.7%
Arrears Amounts Due	$4,736,861,445	0.4%

Region II

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$2,695,894,992	4.4%
Current Assistance	$89,481,890	0.3%
Former Assistance	$758,259,825	-2.7%
Never Assistance	$1,837,202,764	7.7%
Medicaid Assistance	$10,950,513	41.5%
Total Expenditures	$607,810,649	7.2%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.72	-$0.13
Paternities & Acknowledgements	176,469	0.8%
Orders Established	67,777	-2.3%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	6,202	1.2%
Total Caseload	1,511,777	-0.3%
Current Assistance	263,207	-2.9%
Former Assistance	622,991	-2.3%
Never Assistance	625,579	3.0%
Net Undistributed Collections	$85,713,677	-10.9%
Arrears Amounts Due	$7,556,092,388	3.0%

Region III

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$2,736,733,723	2.4%
Current Assistance	$111,155,528	-0.7%
Former Assistance	$755,512,908	2.8%
Never Assistance	$1,757,772,523	2.3%
Medicaid Assistance	$112,292,764	4.7%
Total Expenditures	$504,265,983	0.9%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$5.75	$0.09
Paternities & Acknowledgements	174,253	7.9%
Orders Established	94,457	-11.8%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	5,774	1.6%
Total Caseload	1,415,321	-1.7%
Current Assistance	215,646	-7.9%
Former Assistance	594,074	0.3%
Never Assistance	605,601	-1.3%
Net Undistributed Collections	$34,544,957	-3.6%
Arrears Amounts Due	$6,830,869,883	-4.6%

Region IV

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$3,742,731,491	5.1%
Current Assistance	$136,542,272	-7.3%
Former Assistance	$1,692,260,477	2.9%
Never Assistance	$1,277,185,550	5.0%
Medicaid Assistance	$636,743,192	15.0%
Total Expenditures	$758,509,239	2.1%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$5.40	$0.14
Paternities & Acknowledgements	340,401	0.0%
Orders Established	298,042	-0.8%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	9,739	1.1%
Total Caseload	3,082,348	1.5%
Current Assistance	401,013	-7.6%
Former Assistance	1,451,337	1.6%
Never Assistance	1,229,998	4.7%
Net Undistributed Collections	$99,954,592	7.1%
Arrears Amounts Due	$17,590,788,883	1.3%

Region V

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$5,414,385,718	3.1%
Current Assistance	$132,856,841	-0.5%
Former Assistance	$1,859,025,984	-7.9%
Never Assistance	$2,727,001,779	3.5%
Medicaid Assistance	$636,743,192	49.5%
Total Expenditures	$1,039,704,627	4.9%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$5.39	-$0.10
Paternities & Acknowledgements	255,016	3.4%
Orders Established	254,569	6.0%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	12,266	0.1%
Total Caseload	3,482,029	-0.9%
Current Assistance	429,050	-3.5%
Former Assistance	1,530,498	-2.2%
Never Assistance	1,522,481	1.3%
Net Undistributed Collections	$128,131,738	3.4%
Arrears Amounts Due	$22,562,669,081	-3.7%

Region VI

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$2,741,305,928	10.9%
Current Assistance	$34,495,958	-10.9%
Former Assistance	$1,055,218,645	5.3%
Never Assistance	$1,029,546,713	13.0%
Medicaid Assistance	$622,044,612	19.6%
Total Expenditures	$490,259,458	1.5%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$6.01	$0.48
Paternities & Acknowledgements	198,755	-5.6%
Orders Established	152,481	-1.8%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	5,433	0.9%
Total Caseload	1,629,683	4.8%
Current Assistance	159,189	-6.9%
Former Assistance	704,390	2.4%
Never Assistance	766,104	10.0%
Net Undistributed Collections	$26,937,417	-4.0%
Arrears Amounts Due	$13,017,123,241	2.9%

Region VII

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$1,110,052,470	3.8%
Current Assistance	$48,190,767	-0.5%
Former Assistance	$509,965,452	4.1%
Never Assistance	$256,232,026	-1.4%
Medicaid Assistance	$295,664,225	9.1%
Total Expenditures	$245,580,909	1.8%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.83	$0.10
Paternities & Acknowledgements	77,902	0.3%
Orders Established	43,895	2.3%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	2,582	-4.1%
Total Caseload	787,934	-1.1%
Current Assistance	114,010	-7.3%
Former Assistance	402,463	1.9%
Never Assistance	271,461	-2.6%
Net Undistributed Collections	$18,754,843	5.4%
Arrears Amounts Due	$4,125,395,048	-4.3%

Region VIII

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$642,685,709	6.3%
Current Assistance	$28,254,537	-4.0%
Former Assistance	$281,800,396	5.1%
Never Assistance	$245,578,021	7.3%
Medicaid Assistance	$87,052,755	11.6%
Total Expenditures	$155,758,483	0.7%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.55	$0.21
Paternities & Acknowledgements	40,850	4.5%
Orders Established	26,254	-1.2%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	1,893	0.3%
Total Caseload	382,159	1.5%
Current Assistance	41,930	-12.6%
Former Assistance	197,306	1.1%
Never Assistance	142,923	7.3%
Net Undistributed Collections	$9,511,045	-1.7%
Arrears Amounts Due	$2,100,356,402	-5.5%

Region IX

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$2,694,550,367	-0.1%
Current Assistance	$280,790,654	-11.0%
Former Assistance	$1,379,950,838	-0.4%
Never Assistance	$932,607,730	6.5%
Medicaid Assistance	$101,201,145	-16.1%
Total Expenditures	$1,273,011,190	4.2%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$2.25	-$0.10
Paternities & Acknowledgements	287,734	7.3%
Orders Established	113,338	-16.6%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	11,670	3.9%
Total Caseload	2,141,441	-3.7%
Current Assistance	501,559	-8.5%
Former Assistance	1,046,643	-2.7%
Never Assistance	593,239	-1.1%
Net Undistributed Collections	$48,371,778	-6.8%
Arrears Amounts Due	$22,145,467,059	-4.4%

\

Region X

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$1,149,246,855	3.2%
Current Assistance	$49,738,219	-2.9%
Former Assistance	$449,888,083	0.0%
Never Assistance	$538,681,939	2.6%
Medicaid Assistance	$110,938,614	15.3%
Total Expenditures	$257,318,593	9.0%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.82	-$0.27
Paternities & Acknowledgements	77,123	18.7%
Orders Established	57,455	3.0%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	2,788	0.3%
Total Caseload	751,485	1.8%
Current Assistance	99,071	-5.4%
Former Assistance	361,268	1.0%
Never Assistance	291,146	5.7%
Net Undistributed Collections	$11,869,692	-5.0%
Arrears Amounts Due	$3,740,391,941	-11.7%

State Boxscores

ALABAMA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$246,440,868	3.8%
Current Assistance	$5,817,059	1.6%
Former Assistance	$97,432,779	4.6%
Never Assistance	$143,188,690	3.4%
Medicaid Assistance	$2,340	-12.8%
Total Expenditures	$61,582,475	0.7%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.38	$0.12
Paternities & Acknowledgements	7,626	5.5%
Orders Established	19,782	1.8%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	748	0.3%
Total Caseload	226,838	-3.6%
Current Assistance	30,585	8.3%
Former Assistance	99,247	-6.9%
Never Assistance	97,006	-3.4%
Net Undistributed Collections	$11,827,946	0.5%
Arrears Amounts Due	$2,227,552,621	-12.0%

ALASKA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$86,408,926	1.5%
Current Assistance	$4,325,455	-20.2%
Former Assistance	$41,389,604	0.4%
Never Assistance	$40,526,828	5.8%
Medicaid Assistance	$167,039	37.8%
Total Expenditures	$22,959,136	8.0%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.27	-$0.27
Paternities & Acknowledgements	3,677	-6.4%
Orders Established	2,175	-24.4%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	247	0.0%
Total Caseload	44,989	-0.6%
Current Assistance	4,266	-6.4%
Former Assistance	25,521	-0.7%
Never Assistance	15,202	1.3%
Net Undistributed Collections	$2,188,518	-3.7%
Arrears Amounts Due	$551,364,744	-12.6%

ARIZONA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$283,504,310	6.4%
Current Assistance	$11,834,544	-14.5%
Former Assistance	$173,422,153	7.1%
Never Assistance	$97,456,711	8.1%
Medicaid Assistance	$790,902	35.1%
Total Expenditures	$73,908,598	15.1%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.35	-$0.37
Paternities & Acknowledgements	57,924	7.1%
Orders Established	7,497	-12.4%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	1,082	9.0%
Total Caseload	211,039	-9.9%
Current Assistance	39,358	-29.2%
Former Assistance	123,635	-3.2%
Never Assistance	48,046	-5.6%
Net Undistributed Collections	$11,112,336	-38.1%
Arrears Amounts Due	$1,583,050,306	-17.3%

ARKANSAS

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$166,999,427	7.7%
Current Assistance	$3,154,359	-17.7%
Former Assistance	$61,485,870	5.9%
Never Assistance	$41,669,828	-1.6%
Medicaid Assistance	$60,689,370	19.2%
Total Expenditures	$44,971,941	-2.9%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.08	$0.40
Paternities & Acknowledgements	11,706	6.2%
Orders Established	5,767	3.4%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	803	-1.4%
Total Caseload	122,667	-0.9%
Current Assistance	14,691	7.3%
Former Assistance	48,645	-4.6%
Never Assistance	59,331	0.5%
Net Undistributed Collections	$1,908,076	-28.7%
Arrears Amounts Due	$606,371,224	-15.4%

CALIFORNIA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$2,187,632,783	-1.5%
Current Assistance	$261,003,802	-11.1%
Former Assistance	$1,128,908,854	-2.1%
Never Assistance	$718,348,617	6.0%
Medicaid Assistance	$79,371,510	-20.0%
Total Expenditures	$1,129,067,703	4.1%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$2.03	-$0.12
Paternities & Acknowledgements	213,250	7.3%
Orders Established	98,010	-18.2%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	9,873	3.2%
Total Caseload	1,705,561	-3.3%
Current Assistance	425,750	-6.3%
Former Assistance	829,977	-3.1%
Never Assistance	449,834	-0.4%
Net Undistributed Collections	$26,211,026	17.7%
Arrears Amounts Due	$19,187,770,046	-2.3%

COLORADO

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$251,838,691	6.6%
Current Assistance	$14,216,683	-2.7%
Former Assistance	$104,832,702	4.6%
Never Assistance	$128,564,950	9.9%
Medicaid Assistance	$4,224,356	-6.3%
Total Expenditures	$72,140,413	-0.9%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$3.94	$0.26
Paternities & Acknowledgements	15,399	2.2%
Orders Established	8,037	-5.6%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	702	-1.4%
Total Caseload	142,154	0.9%
Current Assistance	14,040	-13.2%
Former Assistance	80,813	1.5%
Never Assistance	47,301	4.7%
Net Undistributed Collections	$2,582,288	-12.4%
Arrears Amounts Due	$1,173,160,239	0.4%

CONNECTICUT

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$238,378,851	1.3%
Current Assistance	$18,270,579	-6.1%
Former Assistance	$139,756,954	1.6%
Never Assistance	$47,066,265	-2.6%
Medicaid Assistance	$33,285,053	10.7%
Total Expenditures	$68,602,962	-0.5%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$3.74	-$0.06
Paternities & Acknowledgements	42,331	72.4%
Orders Established	7,773	-1.5%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	513	13.2%
Total Caseload	202,174	-3.9%
Current Assistance	25,276	-11.1%
Former Assistance	112,702	-4.7%
Never Assistance	64,196	0.8%
Net Undistributed Collections	$1,927,805	-7.9%
Arrears Amounts Due	$1,506,187,438	-5.9%

DELAWARE

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$69,753,316	4.9%
Current Assistance	$3,778,406	4.9%
Former Assistance	$27,540,586	4.7%
Never Assistance	$31,246,303	4.2%
Medicaid Assistance	$7,188,021	9.4%
Total Expenditures	$29,016,784	20.0%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$2.70	-$0.40
Paternities & Acknowledgements	7,706	7.2%
Orders Established	2,846	17.7%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	223	1.4%
Total Caseload	56,971	2.0%
Current Assistance	7,805	-6.7%
Former Assistance	28,407	3.1%
Never Assistance	20,759	4.0%
Net Undistributed Collections	$3,308,403	14.3%
Arrears Amounts Due	$265,701,229	6.0%

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$48,433,723	1.0%
Current Assistance	$3,886,923	3.7%
Former Assistance	$18,168,572	4.1%
Never Assistance	$17,498,311	-4.8%
Medicaid Assistance	$8,879,917	5.8%
Total Expenditures	$21,631,784	-3.7%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$2.55	$0.10
Paternities & Acknowledgements	8,123	26.8%
Orders Established	1,950	2.5%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	205	2.0%
Total Caseload	77,651	-8.8%
Current Assistance	21,131	-16.1%
Former Assistance	33,657	-7.5%
Never Assistance	22,863	-2.9%
Net Undistributed Collections	$1,215,463	-0.7%
Arrears Amounts Due	$393,964,160	4.1%

FLORIDA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$1,130,847,009	5.0%
Current Assistance	$19,829,342	-14.0%
Former Assistance	$569,880,545	0.6%
Never Assistance	$185,871,576	2.6%
Medicaid Assistance	$355,265,546	16.0%
Total Expenditures	$275,695,896	9.1%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.60	-$0.20
Paternities & Acknowledgements	94,891	-1.5%
Orders Established	52,164	-9.8%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	3,129	-0.4%
Total Caseload	742,584	4.0%
Current Assistance	60,287	-10.3%
Former Assistance	346,557	2.5%
Never Assistance	335,740	8.7%
Net Undistributed Collections	$30,719,094	17.1%
Arrears Amounts Due	$5,128,716,969	11.0%

GEORGIA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$525,393,042	5.3%
Current Assistance	$14,719,898	-18.9%
Former Assistance	$259,923,682	4.7%
Never Assistance	$176,192,246	7.3%
Medicaid Assistance	$74,557,216	9.5%
Total Expenditures	$95,603,833	-11.4%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$6.18	$0.98
Paternities & Acknowledgements	54,364	4.6%
Orders Established	28,293	-5.3%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	1,514	9.5%
Total Caseload	482,495	0.0%
Current Assistance	64,728	-13.2%
Former Assistance	229,526	2.0%
Never Assistance	188,241	3.0%
Net Undistributed Collections	$7,023,286	9.1%
Arrears Amounts Due	$3,364,493,598	6.7%

GUAM

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$8,965,653	1.0%
Current Assistance	$1,122,381	6.3%
Former Assistance	$2,229,700	5.4%
Never Assistance	$5,613,572	-1.7%
Medicaid Assistance	$0	0.0%
Total Expenditures	$5,305,063	17.9%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$1.78	-$0.33
Paternities & Acknowledgements	950	6.7%
Orders Established	987	-27.1%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	48	11.6%
Total Caseload	11,560	-8.0%
Current Assistance	792	-11.9%
Former Assistance	6,932	-10.6%
Never Assistance	3,836	-2.1%
Net Undistributed Collections	$2,749,574	11.0%
Arrears Amounts Due	$89,360,603	-5.8%

HAWAII

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$87,502,455	4.7%
Current Assistance	$4,816,807	1.0%
Former Assistance	$41,061,344	5.7%
Never Assistance	$39,694,583	3.5%
Medicaid Assistance	$1,929,721	18.0%
Total Expenditures	$18,710,564	-8.2%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$5.00	$0.61
Paternities & Acknowledgements	10,940	4.2%
Orders Established	3,384	10.7%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	205	2.5%
Total Caseload	102,023	2.2%
Current Assistance	27,917	1.0%
Former Assistance	47,818	3.3%
Never Assistance	26,288	1.4%
Net Undistributed Collections	$5,385,046	-5.9%
Arrears Amounts Due	$587,208,898	2.3%

IDAHO

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$121,483,643	5.1%
Current Assistance	$1,288,765	-1.5%
Former Assistance	$30,369,669	0.2%
Never Assistance	$53,602,398	7.1%
Medicaid Assistance	$36,222,811	6.9%
Total Expenditures	$24,832,024	10.0%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$5.35	-$0.24
Paternities & Acknowledgements	8,243	-5.1%
Orders Established	6,228	19.9%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	162	-1.8%
Total Caseload	110,112	7.7%
Current Assistance	4,414	1.6%
Former Assistance	37,306	5.5%
Never Assistance	68,392	9.5%
Net Undistributed Collections	$771,440	-13.1%
Arrears Amounts Due	$461,153,360	8.2%

ILLINOIS

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$621,004,002	10.5%
Current Assistance	$14,190,110	-3.7%
Former Assistance	$214,817,759	7.4%
Never Assistance	$391,996,133	13.0%
Medicaid Assistance	$0	0.0%
Total Expenditures	$175,105,677	5.9%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$3.84	$0.15
Paternities & Acknowledgements	81,543	9.7%
Orders Established	62,304	13.8%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	1,591	2.9%
Total Caseload	602,533	0.1%
Current Assistance	80,269	-5.2%
Former Assistance	257,193	4.8%
Never Assistance	265,071	-2.5%
Net Undistributed Collections	$13,112,930	11.6%
Arrears Amounts Due	$3,257,259,530	15.4%

INDIANA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$507,821,721	5.5%
Current Assistance	$13,745,001	-14.3%
Former Assistance	$188,422,830	-9.7%
Never Assistance	$305,653,890	19.2%
Medicaid Assistance	$0	0.0%
Total Expenditures	$57,885,252	-0.1%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$8.92	$0.39
Paternities & Acknowledgements	15,431	-23.3%
Orders Established	56,754	3.1%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	953	5.5%
Total Caseload	355,757	4.3%
Current Assistance	43,874	-7.4%
Former Assistance	163,791	3.7%
Never Assistance	148,092	9.1%
Net Undistributed Collections	$19,171,735	17.3%
Arrears Amounts Due	$2,389,750,299	-36.5%

IOWA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$298,238,365	2.9%
Current Assistance	$12,978,970	-8.1%
Former Assistance	$149,746,176	1.5%
Never Assistance	$63,110,511	1.3%
Medicaid Assistance	$72,402,708	9.6%
Total Expenditures	$54,024,580	3.0%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$5.79	-$0.02
Paternities & Acknowledgements	12,625	2.2%
Orders Established	11,273	10.4%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	613	-0.8%
Total Caseload	184,197	0.3%
Current Assistance	23,055	-8.6%
Former Assistance	104,960	0.7%
Never Assistance	56,182	3.7%
Net Undistributed Collections	$2,411,637	18.6%
Arrears Amounts Due	$1,044,639,849	0.3%

KANSAS

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$157,720,315	3.4%
Current Assistance	$10,430,195	-0.2%
Former Assistance	$85,402,414	4.4%
Never Assistance	$25,840,796	-5.0%
Medicaid Assistance	$36,046,910	8.9%
Total Expenditures	$52,923,770	4.3%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$3.38	-$0.01
Paternities & Acknowledgements	22,432	-6.1%
Orders Established	10,604	2.6%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	605	0.2%
Total Caseload	130,845	-0.6%
Current Assistance	26,194	-4.1%
Former Assistance	64,364	1.4%
Never Assistance	40,287	-1.3%
Net Undistributed Collections	$3,127,445	0.2%
Arrears Amounts Due	$610,819,512	2.2%

KENTUCKY

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$356,470,107	5.9%
Current Assistance	$19,344,670	6.7%
Former Assistance	$181,370,712	4.1%
Never Assistance	$117,641,707	8.4%
Medicaid Assistance	$38,113,018	6.8%
Total Expenditures	$60,852,966	2.2%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$6.16	$0.21
Paternities & Acknowledgements	24,224	4.3%
Orders Established	42,712	0.3%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	905	-6.9%
Total Caseload	320,412	1.5%
Current Assistance	45,970	-10.0%
Former Assistance	167,741	5.7%
Never Assistance	106,701	0.9%
Net Undistributed Collections	$8,576,625	12.6%
Arrears Amounts Due	$1,460,578,085	4.0%

LOUISIANA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$292,527,410	1.1%
Current Assistance	$5,614,207	-10.1%
Former Assistance	$132,501,961	-2.4%
Never Assistance	$64,536,993	-1.5%
Medicaid Assistance	$89,874,249	9.9%
Total Expenditures	$68,120,443	3.9%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.58	-$0.13
Paternities & Acknowledgements	9,567	-28.7%
Orders Established	16,027	-16.7%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	838	1.6%
Total Caseload	284,244	0.9%
Current Assistance	28,415	-11.5%
Former Assistance	146,315	1.4%
Never Assistance	109,514	3.9%
Net Undistributed Collections	$4,954,654	41.3%
Arrears Amounts Due	$980,237,364	-2.7%

MAINE

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$101,111,420	0.3%
Current Assistance	$16,378,860	-4.5%
Former Assistance	$54,416,605	2.3%
Never Assistance	$25,825,266	-2.2%
Medicaid Assistance	$4,490,689	12.5%
Total Expenditures	$25,652,591	3.3%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.16	-$0.11
Paternities & Acknowledgements	1,888	-61.8%
Orders Established	1,330	-0.7%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	290	3.6%
Total Caseload	67,045	1.4%
Current Assistance	14,576	-0.7%
Former Assistance	35,430	1.0%
Never Assistance	17,039	3.9%
Net Undistributed Collections	$1,777,330	5.0%
Arrears Amounts Due	$460,484,571	1.4%

MARYLAND

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$461,979,714	1.9%
Current Assistance	$9,057,260	-10.5%
Former Assistance	$100,679,415	-0.1%
Never Assistance	$352,243,039	2.9%
Medicaid Assistance	$0	0.0%
Total Expenditures	$95,216,218	-4.5%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$5.20	$0.32
Paternities & Acknowledgements	26,525	4.6%
Orders Established	16,298	-7.1%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	1,023	-1.8%
Total Caseload	265,146	-4.0%
Current Assistance	26,547	-12.7%
Former Assistance	116,381	-3.1%
Never Assistance	122,218	-2.7%
Net Undistributed Collections	$7,481,143	-3.4%
Arrears Amounts Due	$1,539,476,184	3.2%

MASSACHUSETTS

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$482,694,886	3.6%
Current Assistance	$22,851,604	-5.7%
Former Assistance	$206,780,671	1.4%
Never Assistance	$246,559,503	5.7%
Medicaid Assistance	$6,503,108	38.8%
Total Expenditures	$90,663,307	9.9%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$5.59	-$0.34
Paternities & Acknowledgements	22,317	9.0%
Orders Established	28,072	9.7%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	842	-2.7%
Total Caseload	273,213	1.7%
Current Assistance	43,847	-5.8%
Former Assistance	152,044	4.4%
Never Assistance	77,322	1.2%
Net Undistributed Collections	$12,644,654	-20.3%
Arrears Amounts Due	$2,288,397,902	4.7%

MICHIGAN

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$1,399,561,029	1.3%
Current Assistance	$39,050,238	3.7%
Former Assistance	$448,000,763	3.0%
Never Assistance	$633,274,048	-1.1%
Medicaid Assistance	$279,235,980	3.9%
Total Expenditures	$271,307,400	28.3%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$5.29	-$1.41
Paternities & Acknowledgements	49,458	4.7%
Orders Established	24,552	16.3%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	2,441	-3.1%
Total Caseload	958,128	-8.2%
Current Assistance	115,799	-8.5%
Former Assistance	429,477	-8.3%
Never Assistance	412,852	-7.9%
Net Undistributed Collections	$53,064,626	11.6%
Arrears Amounts Due	$9,098,206,817	1.9%

MINNESOTA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$584,188,523	2.7%
Current Assistance	$16,967,842	-29.2%
Former Assistance	$292,117,621	4.1%
Never Assistance	$195,615,744	-1.1%
Medicaid Assistance	$79,487,316	19.6%
Total Expenditures	$149,229,219	6.9%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.05	-$0.17
Paternities & Acknowledgements	25,644	1.2%
Orders Established	16,068	-5.0%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	1,606	1.0%
Total Caseload	249,944	0.8%
Current Assistance	35,079	-12.3%
Former Assistance	138,397	-10.7%
Never Assistance	76,468	44.6%
Net Undistributed Collections	$7,516,078	-5.2%
Arrears Amounts Due	$1,605,585,524	5.4%

MISSISSIPPI

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$206,634,659	5.8%
Current Assistance	$3,321,362	-8.3%
Former Assistance	$64,520,083	6.4%
Never Assistance	$124,456,823	11.7%
Medicaid Assistance	$14,336,391	-27.1%
Total Expenditures	$23,014,584	-4.7%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$9.45	$0.92
Paternities & Acknowledgements	41,584	84.5%
Orders Established	15,154	-0.2%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	438	2.6%
Total Caseload	301,355	0.9%
Current Assistance	20,131	-10.4%
Former Assistance	113,562	0.6%
Never Assistance	167,662	2.7%
Net Undistributed Collections	$12,341,017	8.4%
Arrears Amounts Due	$808,333,101	4.1%

MISSOURI

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$489,006,349	4.6%
Current Assistance	$18,916,008	5.6%
Former Assistance	$207,551,618	5.6%
Never Assistance	$127,322,015	-1.6%
Medicaid Assistance	$135,216,708	9.4%
Total Expenditures	$92,297,034	1.7%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$5.58	$0.17
Paternities & Acknowledgements	35,264	3.9%
Orders Established	15,754	2.2%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	930	-10.7%
Total Caseload	367,918	-2.5%
Current Assistance	53,751	-9.3%
Former Assistance	181,407	2.0%
Never Assistance	132,760	-5.4%
Net Undistributed Collections	$10,285,315	5.8%
Arrears Amounts Due	$1,868,327,946	-8.4%

MONTANA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$49,925,528	6.7%
Current Assistance	$2,158,997	12.3%
Former Assistance	$25,142,114	3.0%
Never Assistance	$20,114,126	8.6%
Medicaid Assistance	$2,510,291	27.6%
Total Expenditures	$13,817,422	2.0%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.19	$0.17
Paternities & Acknowledgements	1,229	3.5%
Orders Established	2,156	-2.8%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	168	1.8%
Total Caseload	40,048	0.1%
Current Assistance	4,899	-2.7%
Former Assistance	24,992	-1.9%
Never Assistance	10,157	7.0%
Net Undistributed Collections	$217,321	-21.5%
Arrears Amounts Due	$135,036,762	-30.9%

NEBRASKA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$165,087,441	3.7%
Current Assistance	$5,865,594	-1.3%
Former Assistance	$67,265,244	4.9%
Never Assistance	$39,958,704	-2.6%
Medicaid Assistance	$51,997,899	8.1%
Total Expenditures	$46,335,525	-2.1%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$3.78	$0.21
Paternities & Acknowledgements	7,581	1.8%
Orders Established	6,264	-9.6%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	434	1.2%
Total Caseload	104,974	0.9%
Current Assistance	11,010	-1.9%
Former Assistance	51,732	4.6%
Never Assistance	42,232	-2.7%
Net Undistributed Collections	$2,930,446	0.2%
Arrears Amounts Due	$601,607,741	-4.6%

NEVADA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$126,945,166	9.9%
Current Assistance	$2,013,120	-3.8%
Former Assistance	$34,328,787	11.6%
Never Assistance	$71,494,247	12.5%
Medicaid Assistance	$19,109,012	-0.1%
Total Expenditures	$46,019,262	-2.8%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$3.34	$0.36
Paternities & Acknowledgements	4,670	19.3%
Orders Established	3,460	8.1%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	462	6.9%
Total Caseload	111,258	-2.8%
Current Assistance	7,742	-19.7%
Former Assistance	38,281	2.2%
Never Assistance	65,235	-3.1%
Net Undistributed Collections	$2,913,796	-15.7%
Arrears Amounts Due	$698,077,206	-25.8%

NEW HAMPSHIRE

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$82,334,492	1.9%
Current Assistance	$4,859,397	-4.2%
Former Assistance	$36,596,116	2.1%
Never Assistance	$27,096,249	-32.0%
Medicaid Assistance	$13,782,730	0.0%
Total Expenditures	$18,858,094	3.2%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.70	-$0.06
Paternities & Acknowledgements	1,672	43.0%
Orders Established	3,190	5.6%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	176	4.8%
Total Caseload	36,747	-1.8%
Current Assistance	6,471	-2.7%
Former Assistance	17,160	-0.9%
Never Assistance	13,116	-2.5%
Net Undistributed Collections	$1,207,103	-35.8%
Arrears Amounts Due	$191,750,430	1.8%

NEW JERSEY

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$962,286,549	5.1%
Current Assistance	$32,838,666	0.1%
Former Assistance	$262,842,287	1.8%
Never Assistance	$666,605,596	6.8%
Medicaid Assistance	$0	0.0%
Total Expenditures	$222,360,091	9.1%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.56	-$0.18
Paternities & Acknowledgements	41,269	13.5%
Orders Established	23,255	-0.8%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	2,108	0.2%
Total Caseload	359,530	-1.0%
Current Assistance	67,092	-8.9%
Former Assistance	158,549	-0.7%
Never Assistance	133,889	3.0%
Net Undistributed Collections	$8,271,174	-10.9%
Arrears Amounts Due	$2,436,276,932	3.7%

NEW MEXICO

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$74,411,789	8.7%
Current Assistance	$3,310,251	-1.3%
Former Assistance	$38,997,434	9.5%
Never Assistance	$25,462,033	7.5%
Medicaid Assistance	$6,642,071	14.3%
Total Expenditures	$35,567,717	-2.6%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$2.36	$0.26
Paternities & Acknowledgements	5,111	7.1%
Orders Established	4,047	-34.4%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	371	1.9%
Total Caseload	68,210	-2.9%
Current Assistance	12,193	-9.7%
Former Assistance	30,422	-1.5%
Never Assistance	25,595	-0.9%
Net Undistributed Collections	$3,584,150	5.5%
Arrears Amounts Due	$586,705,054	-12.9%

NEW YORK

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$1,457,168,830	4.1%
Current Assistance	$55,238,194	0.7%
Former Assistance	$484,065,097	-5.2%
Never Assistance	$906,923,522	9.6%
Medicaid Assistance	$10,942,017	41.5%
Total Expenditures	$328,800,464	4.9%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.75	-$0.04
Paternities & Acknowledgements	106,579	-3.1%
Orders Established	40,408	-3.5%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	3,157	3.1%
Total Caseload	893,768	-0.4%
Current Assistance	137,214	1.8%
Former Assistance	448,705	-3.4%
Never Assistance	307,849	3.3%
Net Undistributed Collections	$66,661,319	-14.6%
Arrears Amounts Due	$4,205,377,486	5.2%

NORTH CAROLINA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$591,558,146	4.7%
Current Assistance	$15,203,181	-16.0%
Former Assistance	$307,301,722	2.3%
Never Assistance	$133,749,063	5.8%
Medicaid Assistance	$135,304,180	12.5%
Total Expenditures	$128,675,913	7.3%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.97	-$0.13
Paternities & Acknowledgements	28,920	-48.0%
Orders Established	39,700	-4.2%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	1,691	3.0%
Total Caseload	410,399	1.2%
Current Assistance	44,508	-6.1%
Former Assistance	223,701	-0.7%
Never Assistance	142,190	6.9%
Net Undistributed Collections	$11,799,699	6.2%
Arrears Amounts Due	$1,561,228,731	-8.9%

NORTH DAKOTA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$68,450,313	8.7%
Current Assistance	$2,291,625	1.3%
Former Assistance	$25,703,961	10.7%
Never Assistance	$16,470,847	5.3%
Medicaid Assistance	$23,983,880	9.7%
Total Expenditures	$12,776,758	12.1%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$5.86	-$0.17
Paternities & Acknowledgements	8,660	1.4%
Orders Established	2,897	-22.9%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	156	2.0%
Total Caseload	41,029	0.9%
Current Assistance	4,282	-13.6%
Former Assistance	12,895	-4.7%
Never Assistance	23,852	7.6%
Net Undistributed Collections	$2,138,876	-7.2%
Arrears Amounts Due	$165,769,197	-7.5%

OHIO

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$1,694,575,743	2.2%
Current Assistance	$32,012,511	14.6%
Former Assistance	$488,805,486	3.6%
Never Assistance	$1,041,399,437	1.0%
Medicaid Assistance	$132,358,309	4.5%
Total Expenditures	$277,484,643	-7.9%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$6.29	$0.63
Paternities & Acknowledgements	62,301	2.1%
Orders Established	53,685	5.6%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	4,527	-2.1%
Total Caseload	956,541	1.6%
Current Assistance	122,977	-1.8%
Former Assistance	384,718	3.2%
Never Assistance	448,846	1.3%
Net Undistributed Collections	$27,055,522	-16.8%
Arrears Amounts Due	$4,001,086,493	-4.7%

OKLAHOMA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$204,527,099	15.2%
Current Assistance	$4,801,355	2.0%
Former Assistance	$90,611,960	8.6%
Never Assistance	$46,899,462	11.8%
Medicaid Assistance	$62,214,322	31.4%
Total Expenditures	$56,246,532	9.4%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$3.99	$0.20
Paternities & Acknowledgements	18,168	3.0%
Orders Established	11,135	3.8%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	650	7.3%
Total Caseload	174,065	4.7%
Current Assistance	22,502	-0.5%
Former Assistance	76,440	1.6%
Never Assistance	75,123	9.7%
Net Undistributed Collections	$3,470,732	-6.3%
Arrears Amounts Due	$1,583,608,848	5.0%

OREGON

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$314,467,562	3.5%
Current Assistance	$11,641,211	2.4%
Former Assistance	$100,792,808	1.8%
Never Assistance	$176,567,714	1.4%
Medicaid Assistance	$25,465,829	32.1%
Total Expenditures	$58,092,605	4.7%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$5.86	-$0.07
Paternities & Acknowledgements	17,836	1.8%
Orders Established	17,363	3.1%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	709	-1.5%
Total Caseload	251,412	0.8%
Current Assistance	39,140	-4.6%
Former Assistance	112,099	-0.3%
Never Assistance	100,173	4.5%
Net Undistributed Collections	$3,518,222	-8.5%
Arrears Amounts Due	$958,200,809	-21.0%

PENNSYLVANIA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$1,441,881,350	2.0%
Current Assistance	$66,640,875	3.3%
Former Assistance	$359,311,387	2.7%
Never Assistance	$1,015,929,088	1.6%
Medicaid Assistance	$0	0.0%
Total Expenditures	$230,950,799	0.9%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$6.45	$0.07
Paternities & Acknowledgements	89,977	9.8%
Orders Established	47,558	-3.9%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	2,787	3.9%
Total Caseload	550,150	-1.6%
Current Assistance	100,110	-2.0%
Former Assistance	209,464	-0.3%
Never Assistance	240,576	-2.5%
Net Undistributed Collections	$11,947,880	-2.2%
Arrears Amounts Due	$1,914,896,720	-9.1%

PUERTO RICO

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$267,815,777	3.7%
Current Assistance	$1,313,380	-8.6%
Former Assistance	$10,228,479	6.7%
Never Assistance	$256,273,918	3.6%
Medicaid Assistance	$0	0.0%
Total Expenditures	$51,842,048	15.0%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$5.43	-$0.58
Paternities & Acknowledgements	28,566	-0.5%
Orders Established	3,637	3.0%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	886	-2.6%
Total Caseload	246,718	1.2%
Current Assistance	57,343	-6.0%
Former Assistance	12,965	18.7%
Never Assistance	176,410	2.7%
Net Undistributed Collections	$10,057,076	21.8%
Arrears Amounts Due	$868,106,180	-7.2%

RHODE ISLAND

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$55,199,480	-3.0%
Current Assistance	$7,653,606	-10.3%
Former Assistance	$33,854,292	-0.1%
Never Assistance	$9,546,701	1.2%
Medicaid Assistance	$4,144,881	18.0%
Total Expenditures	$12,736,331	38.0%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.70	-$1.76
Paternities & Acknowledgements	2,819	-14.1%
Orders Established	2,834	18.8%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	120	0.0%
Total Caseload	58,171	-0.5%
Current Assistance	12,505	-8.9%
Former Assistance	30,968	1.6%
Never Assistance	14,698	3.0%
Net Undistributed Collections	$3,268,997	20.7%
Arrears Amounts Due	$188,376,926	1.0%

SOUTH CAROLINA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$243,280,928	3.0%
Current Assistance	$8,598,498	13.6%
Former Assistance	$32,092,123	-0.9%
Never Assistance	$201,076,915	2.6%
Medicaid Assistance	$1,513,392	673.7%
Total Expenditures	$34,466,043	-1.8%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$7.40	$0.33
Paternities & Acknowledgements	15,315	-8.6%
Orders Established	10,083	-3.9%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	257	-1.2%
Total Caseload	212,085	-7.0%
Current Assistance	32,776	-8.6%
Former Assistance	109,914	-5.8%
Never Assistance	69,395	-8.1%
Net Undistributed Collections	$7,662,758	-17.3%
Arrears Amounts Due	$1,181,830,710	-1.7%

SOUTH DAKOTA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$61,483,282	5.2%
Current Assistance	$1,351,149	-4.9%
Former Assistance	$34,432,743	4.4%
Never Assistance	$13,472,547	-5.6%
Medicaid Assistance	$12,226,843	25.2%
Total Expenditures	$8,286,834	-0.7%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$8.23	$0.47
Paternities & Acknowledgements	3,769	2.0%
Orders Established	3,338	3.3%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	109	3.8%
Total Caseload	45,746	7.7%
Current Assistance	5,510	-7.5%
Former Assistance	25,620	7.4%
Never Assistance	14,616	15.6%
Net Undistributed Collections	$883,424	5.3%
Arrears Amounts Due	$144,837,651	3.9%

TENNESSEE

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$442,106,732	6.6%
Current Assistance	$49,708,262	-6.2%
Former Assistance	$179,738,831	6.4%
Never Assistance	$195,008,530	2.9%
Medicaid Assistance	$17,651,109	423.9%
Total Expenditures	$78,617,529	-4.6%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$6.08	$0.64
Paternities & Acknowledgements	73,477	10.2%
Orders Established	90,154	7.9%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	1,057	-0.2%
Total Caseload	386,180	7.8%
Current Assistance	102,028	-5.0%
Former Assistance	161,089	11.0%
Never Assistance	123,063	16.5%
Net Undistributed Collections	$10,004,167	5.1%
Arrears Amounts Due	$1,858,055,068	-5.2%

TEXAS

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$2,002,840,203	12.4%
Current Assistance	$17,615,786	-14.4%
Former Assistance	$731,621,420	6.2%
Never Assistance	$850,978,397	15.4%
Medicaid Assistance	$402,624,600	20.4%
Total Expenditures	$285,352,825	0.8%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$7.52	$0.70
Paternities & Acknowledgements	154,203	-5.8%
Orders Established	115,505	1.7%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	2,771	-0.1%
Total Caseload	980,497	7.3%
Current Assistance	81,388	-8.6%
Former Assistance	402,568	4.1%
Never Assistance	496,541	13.4%
Net Undistributed Collections	$13,019,805	-11.9%
Arrears Amounts Due	$9,260,200,751	5.9%

UTAH

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$157,604,724	6.0%
Current Assistance	$7,782,814	-11.8%
Former Assistance	$70,749,884	7.3%
Never Assistance	$46,747,992	5.9%
Medicaid Assistance	$32,324,034	8.5%
Total Expenditures	$39,350,395	-0.5%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.28	$0.25
Paternities & Acknowledgements	9,899	12.7%
Orders Established	7,819	13.8%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	559	2.8%
Total Caseload	78,083	0.9%
Current Assistance	10,845	-20.1%
Former Assistance	38,944	3.1%
Never Assistance	28,294	8.5%
Net Undistributed Collections	$2,478,050	14.1%
Arrears Amounts Due	$276,511,871	-14.9%

VERMONT

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$46,077,875	3.5%
Current Assistance	$3,895,827	27.2%
Former Assistance	$25,605,780	0.9%
Never Assistance	$12,237,134	-12.6%
Medicaid Assistance	$4,339,134	108.9%
Total Expenditures	$12,711,802	5.2%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$3.80	-$0.11
Paternities & Acknowledgements	1,489	30.7%
Orders Established	7,399	11.0%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	129	5.7%
Total Caseload	22,711	1.2%
Current Assistance	6,787	-1.0%
Former Assistance	10,539	-3.1%
Never Assistance	5,385	14.6%
Net Undistributed Collections	$876,184	-71.8%
Arrears Amounts Due	$101,664,178	0.3%

VIRGIN ISLANDS

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$8,623,836	1.6%
Current Assistance	$91,650	-13.0%
Former Assistance	$1,123,962	13.6%
Never Assistance	$7,399,728	0.1%
Medicaid Assistance	$8,496	830.6%
Total Expenditures	$4,808,046	0.7%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$2.13	$0.03
Paternities & Acknowledgements	55	223.5%
Orders Established	477	-8.8%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	51	-5.6%
Total Caseload	11,761	0.2%
Current Assistance	1,558	4.4%
Former Assistance	2,772	1.7%
Never Assistance	7,431	-1.2%
Net Undistributed Collections	$724,108	15.5%
Arrears Amounts Due	$46,331,790	-12.9%

VIRGINIA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$539,893,786	4.0%
Current Assistance	$22,458,058	-6.3%
Former Assistance	$169,284,823	5.1%
Never Assistance	$294,435,067	4.9%
Medicaid Assistance	$53,715,838	0.7%
Total Expenditures	$90,195,726	2.9%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$6.58	$0.06
Paternities & Acknowledgements	33,119	3.4%
Orders Established	16,608	-37.1%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	1,014	0.9%
Total Caseload	351,930	0.8%
Current Assistance	47,385	-14.3%
Former Assistance	150,367	6.4%
Never Assistance	154,178	1.0%
Net Undistributed Collections	$5,184,159	6.6%
Arrears Amounts Due	$1,949,878,145	-8.7%

WASHINGTON

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$626,886,724	2.9%
Current Assistance	$32,482,788	-2.0%
Former Assistance	$277,336,002	2.6%
Never Assistance	$267,984,999	2.0%
Medicaid Assistance	$49,082,935	14.2%
Total Expenditures	$151,434,828	10.8%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$4.41	-$0.33
Paternities & Acknowledgements	47,367	35.9%
Orders Established	31,689	2.7%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	1,670	1.3%
Total Caseload	344,972	1.1%
Current Assistance	51,251	-6.5%
Former Assistance	186,342	1.2%
Never Assistance	107,379	5.2%
Net Undistributed Collections	$5,391,512	-1.9%
Arrears Amounts Due	$1,769,673,028	-9.9%

WEST VIRGINIA

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$174,791,834	2.1%
Current Assistance	$5,334,006	-11.4%
Former Assistance	$80,528,125	0.8%
Never Assistance	$46,420,715	0.1%
Medicaid Assistance	$42,508,988	9.4%
Total Expenditures	$37,254,672	0.2%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$5.00	$0.10
Paternities & Acknowledgements	8,803	2.5%
Orders Established	9,197	-0.9%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	522	-1.7%
Total Caseload	113,473	-1.1%
Current Assistance	12,668	-0.2%
Former Assistance	55,798	-1.7%
Never Assistance	45,007	-0.5%
Net Undistributed Collections	$5,407,909	-21.7%
Arrears Amounts Due	$766,953,445	-4.0%

WISCONSIN

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$607,234,700	1.0%
Current Assistance	$16,891,139	28.0%
Former Assistance	$226,861,525	-46.4%
Never Assistance	$159,062,527	-1.4%
Medicaid Assistance	$204,419,509	5889.0%
Total Expenditures	$108,692,436	-5.6%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$5.79	$0.37
Paternities & Acknowledgements	20,639	11.5%
Orders Established	41,206	-0.6%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	1,148	7.3%
Total Caseload	359,126	6.6%
Current Assistance	31,052	49.8%
Former Assistance	156,922	-4.8%
Never Assistance	171,152	13.2%
Net Undistributed Collections	$8,210,847	5.4%
Arrears Amounts Due	$2,210,780,418	0.6%

WYOMING

		% change from FY 05
Collections Distributed	$53,383,171	4.2%
Current Assistance	$453,269	9.7%
Former Assistance	$20,938,992	-2.4%
Never Assistance	$20,207,559	4.8%
Medicaid Assistance	$11,783,351	16.8%
Total Expenditures	$9,386,661	3.8%
Cost Effectiveness ($ Change)	$5.86	-$0.39
Paternities & Acknowledgements	1,894	4.8%
Orders Established	2,007	1.8%
Full Time Equivalent Staff	199	-4.8%
Total Caseload	35,099	0.4%
Current Assistance	2,354	2.3%
Former Assistance	14,042	-6.1%
Never Assistance	18,703	5.5%
Net Undistributed Collections	$1,211,086	6.6%
Arrears Amounts Due	$205,040,682	-4.5%

Summary Tables

List of Tables

Program Overview

• Table 1: Financial Overview for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 2: Statistical Overview for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 3: Program Trends for Five Consecutive Fiscal Year
• Table 4: Total Distributed Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 5: Total Distributed Collections by Current, Former, Medicaid, and Never Assistance, FY 2006
• Table 6: Distributed Current Assistance Collections
• Table 7: Distributed Former Assistance Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 8: Distributed Medicaid Never Assistance Collections for Three Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 9: Distributed Never Assistance Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 10: Distributed TANF/Foster Care Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 11: Distributed TANF Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 12: Distributed Foster Care Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 13: Distributed Non-TANF Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 14: Federal Share of TANF/Foster Care Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 15: State Share of TANF/Foster Care Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 16: Gross Undistributed Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Undistributed Collections

• Table 17: Net Undistributed Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 18: Percent of Undistributed Collections for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 19: UDC Distribution by Category, FY 2006 (4th quarter)
• Table 20: Percentage of Itemized UDC, FY 2006 (4th quarter)
• Table 21: Net UDC by Age, FY 2006 (4th quarter) Collections Remaining Undistributed
• Table 22: Percentage of Net UDC by Age, FY 2006 (4th quarter)

Other Collections

• Table 23: Collections Forwarded to Non-IV-D Cases for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 24: Collections Sent to Other States, FY 2006
• Table 25: Total Wage Withholding for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 26: Total Collections Received by Method of Collection, FY 2006

Payments to Families

• Table 27: Total Payments to Families for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 28: TANF/Foster Care Payments to Families for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 29: Interstate Collections Forwarded to Other States for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 30: Interstate Cases Sent to Another State for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 31: Interstate Cases Received From Another State for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Cost-Effectiveness

• Table 32: Cost-Effectiveness Ratio for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 33: Incentive Payment Estimates for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 34: Incentive Payment Actuals for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Medical Support

• Table 35: Medical Support Payments to Families for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 36: Health Insurance Provided as Ordered for Two Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 37: Percent of Cases with Orders (Minus Arrears Only Cases) in which Medical Support is Ordered for Two Consecutive Fiscal Years

Program Expenditures

• Table 38: Total Administrative Expenditures for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 39: Federal Share of Administrative Expenditures for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 40: State Share of Administrative Expenditures for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 41: Non-IV-D Costs for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 42: ADP Expenditures for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Functional Costs

• Table 43: Expenditures for Laboratory Tests for Paternity Establishment for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Fees

• Table 44: Fees and Costs Recovered, FY 2006
• Table 45: Fees Retained by Other States for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Program Savings/Costs

• Table 46: Total Program Costs for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 47: State Share of Program Savings or Costs for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 48: Federal Share of Program Savings or Costs for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Cases and Caseloads

• Table 49: Cases for which the State Has No Jurisdiction for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 50: Cases Open at the End of the Fiscal Year for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 51: Total Caseload for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 52: Total Caseload by Current Assistance for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 53: Total Caseload by Former Assistance for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 54: Total Caseload by Never Assistance for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Orders Established

• Table 55: Total Cases With Orders Established for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 56: Cases With Orders Established by Current, Former, and Never Assistance, FY 2006

Paternities

• Table 57: Total Number of Paternities Established or Acknowledged for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 58: Paternity Establishment for Two Consecutive Fiscal Years

Services Provided

• Table 59: IV-A Cases Closed Where a Child Support Payment Was Received for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 60: Number of Support Orders Established During the Fiscal Year for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 61: Number of IV-D Cases in Which a Collection Was Made on an Obligation for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 62: Cases Sent to Another State for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 63: Cases Received from Another State for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Services Required

• Table 64: Cases Requiring Services to Establish an Order for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 65: Children Requiring Paternity Determination Services for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Staff

• Table 66: Full-Time Equivalent Staff by State and Local, Cooperative Agreements, and Privatized Offices, FY 2005 and FY 2006
• Table 67: Total Full-Time Equivalent Staff for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 68: Costs and Staff Associated with the Office of Child Support Enforcement for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Current Support

• Table 69: Amount of Current Support Due for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 70: Amount: of Support Distributed as Current Support for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Arrears

• Table 71: Total Amount of Arrearages Due for All Fiscal Years for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 72: Total Amount of Support Distributed as Arrears for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 73: Cases with Arrears: Due for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 74: Certified Federal Offset Caseload and Arrearage Totals, FY 2006
• Table 75: Cases Paying Towards Arrears for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Non-Cooperation and Good Cause

• Table 76: Cases with Determination of Non-Cooperation for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 77: Cases with Good Cause Determinations for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Children

• Table 78: Children with Paternity Resolvedfor Five Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 79: Total Number of Children for Five Consecutive Fiscal Years

Federal Parent Locator Service

• Table 80: Tax Offset and Administrative Offset Programs (TANF and Non-TANF Combined), PY 2006
• Table 81: Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS), FY 2006
• Table 82: Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS), PY 2006
• Table 83: Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS) National Directory of New Hires (NDNH), FY 2006
• Table 84: Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS) Number of Cases in the Federal Case Registry (FCR), FY 2006
• Table 85: Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS) Number of Unique Persons in the FCR by Participant Type
• Table 86: Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS) Number of Unique Persons in the FCR Matched by Data Type
• Table 87: Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS) Net Collections - Federal Offset Program, PY 2006
• Table 88: Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS) Number of Offsets - Federal Offset Program, PY 2006

Tribal Program

• Table 89: Tribal CSE Program Total Collections for Four Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 90: Tribal CSE Program Total Expenditures for Four Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 91: Tribal CSE Program Total Caseload for Four Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 92: Tribal CSE Program Total Support Orders Established for Four Consecutive Fiscal Years
• Table 93: Tribal CSE Program Total Paternities Established for Four Consecutive Fiscal Years

Glossary

Financial and Statistical Terms

Program Collections

Table 4 - Total Distributed Collections (Form OCSE-34A, line 8E; beginning in FY 2004, line 8, column G)

Total amount of collections distributed during the year on behalf of both TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) and non-TANF families. Total collections are calculated as the sums of Current IV-A and IV-E Assistance, Former IV-A and IV-E Assistance, Medicaid Never Assistance, and Other Never Assistance.

Table 8 - Distributed Medicaid Never Assistance Collections (Form OCSE-34A, line 8, column E)

The amount of collections received and distributed on behalf of children who are receiving CSE services under title IV-D of the Social Security Act (SSA), and who are either currently receiving or who have formerly received Medicaid payments under title XIX of the SSA, but who are not currently receiving and who have never formerly received assistance under either Title IV-A (TANF or AFDC) or Title IV-E (Foster Care) of the SSA.

Table 10 - Distributed TANF/Foster Care Collections (Form OCSE-34A, line 8, columns (A+B) + line 7a, column C; beginning in FY 2004, line 8, columns (A+B) + line 7a, columns (C+D))

The portion of total collections received on behalf of families receiving assistance under the TANF program plus children placed in foster care facilities. These collections are divided between the State and Federal governments to reimburse their respective shares of either Title IV-A assistance payments or Title IV-E Foster Care maintenance payments.

Table 13 - Distributed Non-TANF Collections (Form OCSE-34A, lines 7b, column C + 7c, column C + 8, column D; beginning in FY 2004, lines 7b, columns (C+D) + 7c, columns (C+D) + 8, columns (E+F))

The portion of total collections received on behalf of families not receiving assistance under the TANF/Foster Care programs and distributed to those families during the year.

Federal and State Share of Collections

Table 14 - Federal Share of TANF/Foster Care Collections (Form OCSE-34A, line 12a + 10, column B; beginning in FY 2004, lines 10a, column G + 10b, column G)

The portion of child support collections used to reimburse the Federal government for its share of past assistance payments under Title IV-E and IV-A of the Social Security Act.

Table 15 - State Share of TANF/Foster Care Collections (Form OCSE-34A, line 7a, column E - line 10, column E; beginning in FY 2004, lines 7a, column G - (line 10a, column G + 10b, column G))

The portion of child support collections used to reimburse the State government for its share of past assistance payments under Title IV-E and IV-A of the Social Security Act.

Undistributed Collections

Table 17 - Net Undistributed Collections (Form OCSE-34A, line 9b, column E; beginning in FY 2004, line 9b, column G - 4^th quarter)

The amount of collections that remains available for distribution in a future quarter.

Other Collections

Table 23 - Collections Forwarded to Non-IV-D Cases (Form OCSE-34A, line 4, column E; beginning in FY 2004, line 4, column G)

Those collections received through income withholding and processed through the State Disbursement Unit on behalf of Non-IV-D cases that were forwarded to the custodial parent during the quarter.

Payments to Families

Table 27 - Payments to Families (Form OCSE-34A, line 7c, column E; beginning in FY 2004, line 7c, column G)

The collections that are distributed either to the family or to the foster care agency to be used on the child’s behalf.

Table 28 - TANF/Foster Care Payments to Families (Form OCSE-34A, line 7c, columns (A+B))

The total amount of collections that are distributed either to the family or to the foster care agency to be used on the child’s behalf.

Interstate Activity

Table 29 - Interstate Collections Forwarded to Other States (Form OCSE-34A, line 5, column E; beginning in FY 2004, line 5, column G)

Amounts received in response to a request for assistance from another State and forwarded during the quarter to that State for distribution, including interstate cases and Administrative Enforcement in Interstate (AEI) collections.

Cost-Effectiveness

Table 32 – Cost Effectiveness Ratio (Form OCSE-34A, lines 5+8+13 divided by OCSE-396A, line 9, columns (A+C) minus 1b, columns (A+C))

The total of collections forwarded to other States, plus total collections distributed, plus fees retained by other States, divided by total current quarter claims and total prior quarter adjustments minus Non IV-D cost.

Incentives

Tables 33 and 34 - Incentive Payment Estimates and Actuals (Form OCSE-34A, line 11, column E; beginning in FY 2004, line 11, column G)

The amount of money States earn for running an efficient child support program. This amount is estimated prior to the start of the fiscal year and is reported by the State on a quarterly basis. Actual incentive amounts are computed after the end of the fiscal year and appropriate adjustments are made in State grant awards.

Medical Support

Table 35 - Medical Support Payments to Families (Form OCSE-34A, line 7b, column E; beginning in FY 2004, line 7b, column G)

The portion of any collection that corresponds to any amount specifically designated in a support order for medical support. To the extent that medical support has been assigned to the State, medical support collections should be forwarded to the Medicaid agency for distribution in accordance with current regulations. Otherwise, the amount should be forwarded to the family.

Program Expenditures

Table 38 - Administrative Expenditures (Form OCSE-396A, line 9, columns (A+C))

Total amount of expenditures eligible for Federal funding that is claimed by the State during the year for the administration of the Child Support Enforcement program. Including all amounts claimed during the year, whether expended during the current or a previous fiscal year. The amounts being reported have been reduced by the amount of program income (fees and costs recovered in excess of fees and interest earned and other program income) received by the States.

Table 39 - Federal Share of Administrative Expenditures (Form OCSE-396A, line 9, columns (B+D))

Net Federal Share of current quarter claims plus prior quarter adjustments.

Table 40 - State Share of Administrative Expenditures (Form OCSE-396A, line 16(B+D) minus line 11, column B)

Total State share of current quarter expenditures plus prior quarter adjustments minus Federal FPLS fees.

Table 41 - Non-IV-D Costs (Form OCSE-396A, line 1b, columns (A+C))

The amount of administrative expenditures attributable to the collecting, entering, maintaining, and processing information relative to non-IV-D child support cases in the State Case Registry and to the processing of non-IV-D child support collections through the State Disbursement Unit. Non-IV-D cases are those for which there is no assignment of support rights to the State or where the State has not received an application for Title IV-D services.

Functional Costs

Table 42 - ADP Expenditures (Form OCSE-396A, lines 4, 5, and 6)

Expenditures made in accordance with the terms of an approved ADP for the planning, design, development, implementation, enhancement, or operation of an automated Statewide Child Support Enforcement System (CSES).

Table 43 - Expenditures for Laboratory Tests for Paternity Establishment (Form OCSE-396A, line 8, columns (A+C))

The amount expended for laboratory costs associated with the process of determining paternity. This amount is the “net” amount of expenditures, reduced by any fees collected by the State to recoup the cost of these services.

Program Savings/Costs

Table 46 - Total Program Costs (Form OCSE-34A, line 7a minus OCSE-396A, line 9, columns (A+C))

Collections that will be divided between the State and Federal governments to reimburse their respective shares of either Title IV-A assistance payments or Title IV-E Foster Care maintenance payments minus total amount of current quarter administrative expenditure and prior quarter adjustment of administrative expenditure.

Cases and Caseloads

Table 49 - Cases for Which the State Has No Jurisdiction (Form OCSE-157, line 3)

Open cases on the last day of the fiscal year over which the State has no jurisdiction. This includes cases that involve an individual over whom the IV-D agency has no civil jurisdiction available to pursue or effectuate any child support actions.

Table 51 – Total Caseload (Form OCSE-157, lines 1 and 3)

The number of IV‑D cases open on the last day of the fiscal year, including the number of open cases at the end of the fiscal year as a result of requests for assistance received from other states.

Orders Established

Table 55 – Total Cases with Orders Established (Form OCSE-157, line 2)

The number of IV‑D cases open on the last day of the fiscal year that have support orders established. Includes cases with orders entered prior to the case becoming an IV‑D case, as well as cases with orders established by the IV‑D agency. Judgments for arrears, regardless of whether there is a payment schedule or an order for ongoing support are, also included.

Paternities

Table 57 - Total Number of Paternities Established or Acknowledged (Form OCSE-157, lines 10a and 16, columns (b+c+d))

The number of children born out-of-wedlock in the reporting state for which paternity has been acknowledged during the fiscal year. Include children with paternity acknowledged through the State’s voluntary in‑hospital acknowledgment program and other acknowledgment processes. Also reported is the number of children in cases in the IV‑D caseload for whom paternity was established or acknowledged during the fiscal year.

Table 58 - Paternity Establishment (Form OCSE-157, lines 5, 6, 8 and 9)

The number of children in the IV-D caseload in cases open at the end of the current fiscal year who were born out-of-wedlock. Also the number of children born out of wedlock in the IV-D caseload in cases open at the end of the fiscal year who have paternity established or acknowledged.

The total number of children who were born out of wedlock in the State during the fiscal year. Also included is the number of minor children who were born out of wedlock in the State for whom paternity has been established or acknowledged during the fiscal year.

Services Provided

Table 59 - IV-A Cases Closed Where a Child Support Payment was Received (Form OCSE-157, line 14)

Includes all cases terminated from TANF during the fiscal year in which there was any child support collection in the month of termination.

Table 60 - Number of Support Orders Established During the Fiscal Year (Form OCSE-157, line 17)

The number of cases in which support orders were established by the IV‑D agency during the fiscal year. Includes support orders established for medical support or health insurance.

Table 61 - Number of IV-D Cases in Which a Collection Was Made on an Obligation (Form OCSE-157, line 18)

The number of cases for which one or more collections were made during the fiscal year. Included are cases where no support order is established but a voluntary payment was made.

Table 62 - Cases Sent to Another State (Form OCSE-157, line 19)

The number of interstate cases the reporting State sent to other States during the fiscal year. Includes cases submitted for location, establishment of paternity or support order, enforcement of support, or any other IV‑D activity.

Table 63 - Cases Received from Another State (Form OCSE-157, line 20)

The number of interstate cases received from another State during the fiscal year.

Services Required

Table 64 - Cases Requiring Services to Establish an Order (Form OCSE-157, line 12, columns (b+c+d))

Total number of IV‑D cases open at the end of the fiscal year that need services to establish a support order

Table 65 - Children Requiring Paternity Determination Services (Form OCSE-157, line 13)

The number of children in cases that are open at the end of the fiscal year who required paternity establishment. This includes all children whose paternity has not been established and children in the process of having paternity established. If there is more than one putative father for a child, this child is only counted once.

Staff

Table 66 – Full-Time Equivalent Staff by State and Local, Cooperative Agreements, and Privatized Offices (Form OCSE-157, lines 30, 31, and 32)

The total number of FTE staff employed by the State and local IV‑D agencies.

The total number of FTE staff employed by an agency (public or private) working under a cooperative agreement with the IV‑D agency.

The total number of FTE staff employed by privatized IV‑D agencies.

Current Support

Table 69 - Amount of Current Support Due (Form OCSE-157, line 24)

The total amount of current support by current, former and never assistance for the fiscal year for all IV-D cases includes total voluntary collections.

Table 70 - Amount of Support Distributed as Current Support (Form OCSE-157, line 25)

The total amount of support distributed as current support during the fiscal year for all IV-D cases. Voluntary payments are considered current support and should be included even though there is no order to require payment.

Arrears

Table 71 – Total Amount of Arrearages Due (Form OCSE-157, line 26)

The total amount of arrears due and unpaid as of the end of the fiscal year for all fiscal years, including the fiscal year covered by the report. Interest and penalties on arrearages may be included.

Table 72 - Total Amount of Support Distributed as Arrears (Form OCSE-157, line 27)

The total amount of support distributed this fiscal year as arrearages. This amount includes judgments ordered and paid this fiscal year for prior year support.

Tables 73 and 75 - Cases with Arrears Due and Paying Towards Arrears (Form OCSE-157, lines 28 and 29)

The number of cases with arrears due during the fiscal year, including cases closed during the fiscal year with arrearages.

The number of cases in which there was at least one payment toward arrears

during the fiscal year and the total number of IV‑D cases in which payments of past‑due child support were received during the fiscal year. Part or all of the payments were distributed to the family to which the past‑due child support was owed.

Non-Cooperation and Good Cause

Table 76 - Cases with Determination of Non-Cooperation (Form OCSE-157, line 37)

The number of IV‑D TANF cases open at the end of the fiscal year in which a determination was made that the custodial parent refused to cooperate with state agencies in identifying and locating the non-custodial parent.

Table 77 - Cases with Good Cause Determinations (Form OCSE-157, line 38)

The number of cases open during the fiscal year in which it was determined by the State that the custodial parent has a good cause for refusing to cooperate with state agencies in identifying and locating the non-custodial parent.

Children

Table 78 - Children with Paternity Resolved (Form OCSE-157, line 7)

The number of children in the IV‑D caseload open at the end of the fiscal year with paternity resolved. Include all children born within a marriage, legitimized by marriage or adoption and children with paternity established or acknowledged.

Table 79 - Total Number of Children (Form OCSE 157, line 4)

The number of children in the IV‑D caseload in cases open at the end of the fiscal year. This includes those children who are under age 18.

Tribal Program

Table 89 – Tribal Program Collections (Distributed and Forwarded) (Form OCSE-34A, lines 8 and 5)

Collections distributed by the Tribe during the quarter, itemized by case designation. Amounts received in response to a request for assistance from another Tribe and forwarded during the quarter to that Tribe for distribution.

Table 90 – Tribal Program Expenditures (Form OCSE 269A, lines 10a and 10g)

The number of total outlays and the amount of total federal share.

Table 91 – Tribal Program Total Caseload (Narrative reports submitted by Tribes)

The total number of IV-D cases open on the last day of the fiscal year. Include cases open at end of the fiscal year as a result of requests for assistance received from other Tribes or States, as well as cases open in the reporting Tribe referred to another Tribe or State.

Table 92 – Tribal Program Support Orders Established (Narrative reports submitted by Tribes)

The total number of IV-D cases that have support orders established. Include cases with orders entered prior to the case becoming a IV‑D case, as well as cases with orders established by the IV‑D agency. Include judgments for arrears, regardless of whether there is a payment schedule or an order for ongoing support.

Table 93 – Tribal Program Paternities Established (Narrative reports submitted by Tribes)

Report the number of children in cases open during or at the end of the fiscal year for whom paternity was established or acknowledged. This includes acknowledgments after genetic testing, but before adjudication, if applicable.

Include children with paternity acknowledged through a voluntary in‑hospital acknowledgment program and other acknowledgment processes.

Appendix

Appendix I

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (HHS)

FY 04-09 STRATEGIC GOALS

GOAL 1: Reduce the Major Threats to the Health and Well-Being of Americans

GOAL 2: Enhance the Ability of the Nation’s Health Care System to Effectively Respond to Bioterrorism and Other Public Health Challenges

GOAL 3: Increase the Percentage of the Nation’s Children and Adults Who Have Access to Health Care Services, and Expand Consumer Choices

GOAL 4: Enhance the Capacity and Productivity of the Nation’s Health Science Research Enterprise

GOAL 5: Improve the Quality of Health Care Services

GOAL 6: Improve the Economic and Social Well-Being of Individuals, Families, and Communities, Especially Those in Need

GOAL 7: Improve the Stability and Healthy Development of Our Nation’s Children and Youth

GOAL 8: Achieve Excellence in Management Practices

Appendix II

ADMINISTRATION FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES (ACF) GOALS

GOAL 1: Increase Economic Independence and Productivity for Families

GOAL 2: Improve Healthy Development, Safety, and Well-Being of Children and Youth

GOAL 3: Increase the Health and Prosperity of Communities and Tribes

GOAL 4: Manage Resources to Improve Performance

Appendix III

FEDERAL OFFICE OF CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT (OCSE)

FY 05-09 GOALS

GOAL 1: All Children Have Established Parentage

GOAL 2: All Children in IV-D Cases Have Support Orders

GOAL 3: All Children in IV-D Cases Have Medical Coverage

GOAL 4: All Children in IV-D Cases Receive Financial Support from Parents as Ordered

GOAL 5: The IV-D Program Will Be Efficient and Responsive in Its Operations

---

[1] IRS form W-4, Employee’s Withholding Allowance Certificate, indicates the Federal income tax to be withheld from an individual’s paycheck based on the number of withholding allowances claimed.

[2] The methodology for estimating collections attributable to the NDNH data can be found in “A Guidebook for a Common Methodology for Determining NDNH-Attributable Child Support Collections” on the ACF Web site at: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cse/pubs/2002/guides/ndnh_guide.html

[3] These figures are based on voluntary reporting from a number of States; actual totals may be higher. This statement also applies to the Passport Denial Program.

[4] New data were not reported for FY 2006 and are therefore identical to data reported in FY 2005.

[5] New data were not reported for FY 2006 and are therefore identical to data reported in FY 2005.

[6]California applied for and received a “waiver of statewideness,” allowing it to tie four distinct county and State systems together into a unified, albeit not single, system that will address all functional requirements.

[7]See Tables 19-22 and Chart 8 of this report.

[8] Only State IV-D agencies or the State umbrella agencies of which they are a part can receive the grants. The agencies can contract with other agencies, universities, or private consultants to join in these efforts. States must apply for these funds in response to an OCSE grant announcement.

[9] Under the authority of Section 452(j) of the Social Security Act, SIP grants provide Federal funds for research and demonstration programs and special projects of regional or national significance. Eligible applicants include State and local public agencies, nonprofit agencies (including faith-based organizations), and Tribal organizations.

[10] Modified Data Reliability audit (MDR) - In September of 2006, States were informed that because of the medical support reporting requirements and the changes, primarily to the paternity lines, resulting from the implementation of the revised OCSE-157, “Child Support Enforcement Annual Data Report,” the medical support and paternity data for each State had to be audited. This resulted in States that would normally be subject to a Data Reliability Review (DRR) to undergo a MDR audit. The DRR is a method used instead of a full-scope DRA when States have demonstrated the ability to consistently report accurate and reliable data over a period of at least 2 years and have passed all performance standards. Under the MDR, data reported on Lines 1, 2, 2e, 5 and 6, or 8 and 9, 21 and 21a of the OCSE-157 was audited. The limited review of the supporting detail for the performance indicator data reported on Lines 24, 25, 28 and 29 of the OCSE-157 that is normally done in a DRR also was performed.

[11] The form that States use to report statistical information to the Federal Government.

---

Download FREE Adobe Acrobat® Reader™ to view PDF files located on this site.

OCSE Home | Press Room | Events Calendar | Publications | State Links
Site Map | FAQs | Contact Information
Systems: FPLS | FIDM | State and Tribal | State Profiles
Resources: Grants Information | Información en Español | International | Federal/State Topic Search (NECSRS) | Tribal | Virtual Trainer's Library