eSingleParent
11. Attachment of workers compensation for current and back child support obligations
Workers Compensation is money received by workers from the State for injuries that occurred while on the job, and also includes monies paid by private companies who have disability insurance plans.
States are required to have laws to seize lump sums from worker's compensation, lottery winnings, judgments, settlements. 42 U.S.C. § 666(c)(1)(G).
12. Audit
requirements
Federal law also requires the Office of Child Support, Division of Health & Human Services, to audit state child support enforcement Agencies. Audits are done once every 3 years.
42 U.S.C. § 652 (4)(C).
The Code of Federal Regulations outlines results and methods to determine if penalties can be assessed against the state for poor program performance. Audit failure first time---state files corrective action plan. Re-audit following year. If state fails same areas of audit, penalty is assessed for 5-10% of funding state receives for TANF, re-audit following year. If failure, penalty is 10-15% of TANF funding, re-audit following year; penalty is 15-20% of TANF funding. 45 C.F.R. § 305.10.
13. Bankruptcy and child support enforcement law
Federal law prohibits child support (even if arrearage are in judgment form) from being discharged in Bankruptcy Chapter 7. Federal laws allow child support arrearages to be placed in Chapter 13 to be paid off over a period of time (this process is called Trusteeship, debtor's court procedures, etc.). 42 U.S.C. § 656 , 11 U.S.C. § 523 (a) (5)
14. Bench warrants, capias, or body attachments in child support cases
Federal law: no requirements.
State law: Child support warrants are the same as any other kind of warrant. (Some Domestic Relations Courts have specific rules.) State law allows judges to issue Bench Warrants, capias, or body attachments for non-payors who have been legally notified of a court hearing but fail to attend. The law requires the plaintiff and/or the plaintiff's attorney to request a warrant before it is issued. Warrants are executed by the local police and/or sheriff's department. Warrants are signed by the judge and recorded at the Clerk of Courts' Office before being sent to the police or sheriff for execution. After a non-payor is arrested, a hearing is held by the Court to determine punishment. Sometimes a non-payor is released on his/her own reconnaissance (O.R. bond), or is required to post a bond to ensure that he/she will show up for the next court hearing on the case. The date of the hearing is set at the time of the warrant hearing. Sometimes the warrant hearing and the child support hearing are one in the same and held immediately upon arrest of the payor. Other types of warrants: felony charges for non-support and arrest warrants issued by the Prosecutor's Office and signed by the judge when misdemeanor non-support charges are filed.
15. Case Closure Criteria, 45 CFR Section 303.11
Federal regulations allow case closure for the following:
1. Child has reached age of majority and there is no longet a current order for support and there is no arrearage; the child has not reached the age of majority and there is no current order for support and the arrearage is less the $500; or the order is unenforceable under state law.
2. Death of an absent parent, alleged father occurs and there is no further action that can be taken such as levy against the estate.
3. Child has reached age 18 and action to establish paternity is prohibited by state law or blood tests have excluded an alleged father or the alleged father can not be identified. Case may also be closed if birth is a result of incest, rape, or an adoption is pending or a finding of good cause by IV-A has been made.
4. If IV-D has been unable to locate an absent parent after making repeated location attempts via state and federal parent locator over a three year period. If the state has no social security number and has been unable to find a social security number.
5. If the absent parent is in jail, a psychiatric institution or has a verifiable medical total permanent disability with no evidence of support potential. The state must determine that there is no income or assets available to the absent parent which can be attached for support.
6. If the absent parent is a citizen of a foreign country, lives in the foreign country, does not work for the US government or a US company and has no US sources of income or assets and the state can not get an reciprocal agreement with country where the non-payor lives to collect the support.
7. If the case was opened for location only services, it is closed once the location services have been provided.
8. If a non-TANF client requests closure and there are no arrearages owed to the state.
9. If there has been a finding by the IV-A agency (Welfare Deptartment) against the custodial parent for failure to cooperate.
10. In a non-TANF case, IV-D is unable to contact the custodial parent for at least 30 calendar days. Attempts to contact must include phone, letter and at least one registered letter.
45 C.F.R. § 303.11
Federal regulations also require states to notify families 60 calendars days prior to case closure in writing. The case may be left open if the custodial parent supplies information which gives the agency further leads to establish paternity, or a support order or to enforce the support order. If a case is closed a custodial parent may request that it is reopened. If there is a change in circumstances which could lead to establishment of paternity or a support order or enforcement of an order. IV-D agencies are required to keep cases on file after closure for three years.45 C.F.R. § 303.11(c).
16. Case opening by IV-D
Case must be opened within 20 calendar days of application or referral. Case opening includes: establishing a case record, assessment of case to determine action needed, solicitation of needed information from custodial parent and other relevant sources. Also includes: initial verification of information such as, employer etc.. 45 C.F.R. § 303.2(b). If location information about the payor is known, IV-D must proceed with enforcement/ establishment action, if location is unknown they must refer case for location attempts as specified in C.F.R. Section 303.3.
17. State Central Case (Order) Registry
In addition to the New Hire Registry, there are Federal and State Case Registries that must also be established. The idea is that the Case Registries will contain all the data about each child support case, such as names, birth dates and social security numbers of parents and children, amount of orders, amount of arrearages, distribution amounts, amounts of liens, etc. This information will then be used in conjunction with the other computer components (i.e. the New Hire Directory) to quickly and easily match non-custodial parents’ financial and employment data with the case information. This information can then be tied together and income-withholding can begin in an optimum amount of time and with a minimum of effort on the part of the IV-D agency. This will allow a large number of cases to be processed almost automatically, leaving resources to the IV-D agency so that they can go after those cases that require more time and effort.
Abstracts of information contained in the State Registry will be sent to and entered into the Federal Case Registry of Child Support Orders. In addition, information in each State Registry will be shared with the Federal Parent Locate Service (FPLS), IV-A (welfare agency) and Medicaid agencies in the state and in other states, and with other state agencies and interstate information networks involved in child support enforcement.
The Federal law mandates include:
Requirements for each state to establish a State Registry of Child Support Orders.
The
registry must contain records on all IV-D cases and all other orders
established or modified in the state
after
States must send abstracts to and match data with Federal Case registry.
The State Registry must contain uniform data elements such as each parent's name, social security number, date of birth and case number.
The State Registry records must indicate the amount of current support, arrears, interest, fees, or penalties owed; the amounts collected and how they were distributed; birth date(s) for the children owed support; and whether any liens are in place.
The State Registry is responsible for keeping the records in IV-D cases up to date.
The State Registry may be one entity or it may be created by linking local case registries through an automated network.
42 U.S.C. § 654A (e) (1), Action
Transmittal 98-08
Best Practice: It is
better to have one entity rather than linking local registries. The linking mechanisms must be developed, and
it is not certain that they will be effective or cost efficient.
The most important issue is that the state places new hire registry,
central order registry and central payment registry in the same government
agency, the IV-D agency. This practice will maximize efficiency and minimize
data transfer and storage problems.
Best Practice: In light of documented problems states have had in setting up and running centralized, computerized systems states should:
Include all child support orders-- not just IV-D orders and new orders-- in the central registries. The federal law sets a minimum for what must be contained in the Registry of Child Support Orders but there is no reason for a state to limit itself. Ultimately, the State Registry will be more useful to parents within the state and to track down parents in interstate cases if everyone's order is in the Registry. A State Registry containing all orders will also be better for employers who are administering incomewithholding as they will only have to deal with one entity in each state.
Make all orders, once issued, IV-D orders. By making all orders IV-D orders, the state will be able to obtain federal funding to enter and update the records for each child support order. Moreover, since the federal law requires updating of information only for IV-D orders, unless all orders are IV-D orders, no one will be responsible for updating the non IV-D orders. As a result, those orders will have inadequate/incorrect information and be less useful in tracking down parents in both intrastate and interstate cases.
Create one central State Registry, rather than trying to link up local registries. Independently developed local registries may not be easily linked together. The computer interface issues are enormous. In addition, local registries will not be amenable to uniform quality control, can easily result in duplicate cases, and will cost more to operate over time as new technological advances will have to be bought and paid for several times over, not just once.
18. Child support agencies must provide equal services to TANF and Non-TANF applicants
The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunities Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) abolishes the AFDC and AFDC-UP programs and authorizes a new program called Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF). Under TANF, states are free to create public assistance systems with policies more supportive of two- parent families.
Federal
law and regulations require equal services and awards equal federal incentive
money for state to collect and enforce child support laws for IV-A (TANF) and
non-TANF cases. The state may only impose fees for services for services
performed on behalf of non-TANF families. 42 U.S.C. § 654(4), 45 C.F.R. §
305.98.
Best Practices: Among the policies states should adopt in their TANF program are:
coverage to low income two-parent as well as single parent families.
adoption of policies which clarify that fathers and/or mothers who do not live with their children can have regular (even daily) contact with those children without affecting the children's eligibility for TANF assistance.
abolition of or limitation on the state's share in any state debt or child support arrears owed to the state by non-custodial parents who reunite with their families.
elimination of step-parent deeming whenever a parent in a family receiving TANF marries a person who is not the parent of the child(ren) in the family.
Each of these policies would further TANF's goals of promoting two-parent families and help low income parents who want to raise their children in a two-parent family.
19. Child support enforcement agencies payment distribution system
Federal law and regulations require that Child Support Enforcement Agencies distribute payments within 2 business days. 42 U.S.C. § 654 (B)(c)(1), 45 C.F.R. § 302.51.
All support collected for TANF families must first be divided into a "federal share" and a "state share" and given to the respective government entities. The shares are based on each government's proportionate contribution to Medicaid. For most states, this means the federal government will receive at least 50 percent of each child support collection. In no case is the total paid to the government entities to exceed the total paid to the family in assistance. 42 U.S.C. § 657(a)1).
The exception to this sharing requirement applies to "fill-the-gap" states. Federal Law allows "fill-the-gap" states to continue their old policies without fiscal consequences. 45 C.F.R. § 302.31(a)(3)(ii).
Pre-assistance arrears-limits the amount of child support kept by the government as recoupment of welfare benefits to the amount of welfare given to the family or the amount of child support that should have been paid while the family received welfare, which ever is less. 42 U.S.C. § 657(a)2)(B)(ii).
Family first distribution states
that when child support is collected for a family which formerly received
assistance, it must first be attributed to current months support and paid to
the family. Other amounts collected must first be attributed to post-assistance
arrears (if any exist) and be paid to the family. Only after these arrears are
fully paid may the state keep the collection to reimburse itself for assistance
paid to the family. If the state does obtain such a payment, it must divide it
with the federal government using the Medicaid reimbursement rate then in
effect. By
Family first distribution also makes a
distinction regarding arrearages between those families who received assistance
before
States
are free to decide whether they want to “pass-through” or “disregard” any
of the support money collected onto welfare families. 45 C.F.R. §
233.20(a)(3)(v).
Best Practices: States should maximize the availability of child support pass-throughs and disregards. Social science research shows that policies under which child support payments provide a tangible benefit to the child:
(1) encourage non-custodial parents to pay their support;
(2) allow children to see that their non-custodial parent takes an interest in them; and
(3) encourage custodial parents to aggressively pursue support. Depending on the state's willingness to make a commitment of resources in this area, the following options are available:
increase the
pass-through/disregard to the same amount the states allow in earned
income. For example,
at least continue the $50 pass-through/disregard. This can be funded from the state share of collections plus the incentive payments states will continue to receive for making a child support collection. In addition, most states will receive more in TANF block grant funds than they would have from AFDC. These "bonus" monies could be used to expand or maintain the pass-through/disregard.
Less generous, but better than nothing, would be a pass-through/disregard of less than $50. This could be funded out of the state share of support collections.
Less comprehensive, but still possible, would be to allow TANF families to exclude children in the family who receive child support from the TANF unit. Child support collected for these children would not be TANF support (which has to be shared with the federal government), but would go directly to the children. Since they would not be members of the TANF unit, it would not have to count as TANF income. (A short-hand way to describe this option is “abolish sibling deeming.”) This option would be useful for families where there is more than one absent parent, one (or more) of whom pays support and one (or more) of whom doesn't. Before the early 1980's most states did follow this route and allowed caretakers to decide who was and who was not in the TANF unit. States adopted “sibling deeming” only because they were required to do so by federal law. They are now free to go back to the old policy.
In short, states which wish to do so can use the new distribution rules to provide additional income to TANF families for whom support is collected. In doing so, they encourage non-custodial parents to pay support (since it actually benefits their children) and encourage custodial parents to aggressively pursue support (for the same reason). They also set a model of responsible behavior for children to clearly see. Even in states with severe fiscal concerns, abolishing sibling deeming and enacting a smaller pass-through/disregard than the one under the old federal law would be good policy choices with minor (if any) fiscal cost.
The law prescribes the last date on
which the distribution changes for post-assistance families must be made.
States are free to implement these changes earlier. In addition to the obvious
benefit to children, there are two other reasons states might want to do this.
First,
states are now in the process of
implementing new computerized systems to track payments and disbursements. It
will be much easier to enter clean data based on the rules applicable in the
year 2000 and to program these computers using the new rules now than it will
be to have to adjust the data and the programs several times between now and
October 1, 2000.
Second, states will receive a fixed amount of money under the block grant program. The fewer families they have to serve, the more “savings” they will have and the greater their ability to provide intensive help to those most in need. Families leaving assistance with regular child support income have a much lower rate of return to assistance than those who do not. Maximizing the number of people who leave assistance and remain free of need thus helps families and enhances the states fiscal position. Moreover, giving the money to the families maximizes federal resources. So long as the money is kept to reimburse the state for past assistance, it must be shared with the federal government. If it goes to the family, it does not need to be shared. In a sense, the “federal share” substantially funds the policy.
States should implement the post-assistance child support distribution requirements as soon as possible. In so doing, they will help families and the state.
20. Collection
of medical support
Federal Regulations require that the IV-D agency identify whether the custodial parent and
children have satisfactory health insurance, and if not then the agency is to petition the courts
to include health insurance in the child support order if it is available to the non-custodial
parent at a reasonable cost. 45 C.F.R. § 303.31(b)(1).
Health insurance is considered reasonable in cost if it is employment-related or other group health insurance. 45 C.F.R. § 303.31(a)(1).
If health insurance is available to the non-custodial parent at a reasonable cost and has not been obtained for the children, the IV-D agency must take steps to enforce the order. 45 C.F.R. § 303.31(b)(7)
Federal regulations require IV-D agencies to monitor cases and to be able to identify delinquencies of one month or more. This monitoring includes child support payments and health insurance. 45 C.F.R. § 303.6.
The state must develop procedures under which all IV-D orders include a provision for the health care coverage of the children. All IV-D orders must include health coverage and if the non-custodial parent changes employment, a notice to new employer is sufficient to enroll the child in absent parents health plan unless they contest it. 42 U.S.C. § 666(a)(19).
If the employee terminates employment, the employer is requested to inform the IV-D agency. 45 C.F.R. § 303.31(b)(9).
|
Child Support CollectionState by State Child Support LawsChild Support Collection Statue of LimitationsFederal Child Support Laws
Federal Child Support Laws and Codes Explained |
© 2006-2010 eSingleParent.com a division of Smarter Changes, Inc. Contact Us Advertise