October 2021 CSQ

ChildSupportCommuniQue

Table of Contents
October 2021
President’s Message…………………………………………….…………….….…..3
Community Corner: Absence Makes the Heart Grow Fonder….........................5
NCSEA Responds to Strengthing Families for Success Legislation………........8
Collaboration is Key……………………………………..………….……………….14
Tribal Child Support Legislation Moves Through the Senate …………………..17
Workplace Tools for Responding to a Mental Health Crisis…………………….21
Evolving Child Support Awareness into the Future………………………………28
2021 Leadership Symposium Wrap-Up…………………….….………………….31
NCSEA U Spotlight………………………………………………………………….35

Lori Bengston
NCSEA President
Greetings! It is an honor and a privilege to serve as this
year’s NCSEA president! To say I have big shoes to fill is
an understatement, following my friend Lisa Skenandore.
Lisa not only handled the business of NCSEA with passion
and energy, but also had the extra challenge of navigating
us through a pandemic. I hoped navigating the pandemic would not carry
over to this year, but I fear we may be facing those challenges a bit longer.
With the passing of the gavel, Lisa assured me she will continue to support
NCSEA and me as we move into a new program year.
In my previous role as president-elect, I was fortunate to sit in on many
committee calls, and learned so much from those encounters. One of the
key takeaways was that we all come from various backgrounds and
experiences, and how we move forward impacts each of our programs in a
variety of ways. I am grateful for the lively conversations! While at times not
everyone agrees, in the end all views are considered, and we come away
with a direction that benefits the child support program as a whole. I believe
in our vision that NCSEA is the voice of the child support community, and I
admire the passion that is evident as we not only share our voice, but also
listen to the voices of others to promote the best outcomes for the families
we serve. My goal this year is to embrace those differences to make us a
stronger organization and ultimately, a stronger program.
As I begin my new role, one of the first and arguably most important jobs of
the NCSEA president is selecting committee chairs. The response to the
call for volunteers was outstanding. Every time I reached out for committee
assignments, I received a warm and enthusiastic “YES”! The volunteer
spirit is alive and well in this organization and it is truly amazing to see all of
the work done at the committee level each year. This year will be no
exception. The Policy and Government Relations Committee (PGR) will
continue monitoring new and pending legislation and advocating for
effective program policy. There is a lot happening right now and the PGR

committee work never really stops but flows from one year to the next as
they stay abreast of what is happening legislatively. The finalization of
NCSEA’s strategic plan will set the stage for the work of all committees
going forward. The final steps include charging the appropriate committees
with carrying out the initiatives in the plan. It will be another busy year, and
as we kick off committee meetings, I am confident we have the right people
in place to get the job done!
I am especially excited to announce that we plan to move forward with two
in-person conferences: the Policy Forum February 3-5 in Washington, D.C.,
and the Leadership Symposium August 7-10 in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Work is already underway for the Policy Forum under the leadership of cochairs
Margot Bean and Connie Chesnik. The theme for this year’s Policy
Forum is “Focusing on our Vision – Recognizing our Various Perspectives”
and will offer an abundance of interesting, timely and thought-provoking
topics. Watch for registration information in late October. Please be
assured that NCSEA will continue to monitor all safety protocols to ensure
the well-being of those who attend and will communicate every step of the
way.
I hope you will take advantage of as many learning opportunities as you
can this year. In addition to our conferences, NCSEA provides Web-Talks,
Idea Exchanges, and NCSEA Connects, as well as the quarterly Child
Support CommuniQué (CSQ) journal and weekly Rapid Read. If you would
like to receive more information, please reach out to me or to NCSEA staff,
Ann Marie Ruskin or Gillyn Croog.
I look forward to the year ahead as we work together to promote and
influence child support policy, as well as to educate, connect, and inspire
those who work in the child support program.
Print article here
_________________________________________
In addition to serving as NCSEA President, Lori Bengston is a Project Manager for
Young Williams and has been active in the child support enforcement program for over
16 years. She has direct supervision of the Nebraska Child Support Call Center,
including the Early Intervention Project. Lori has been a speaker at many child support
conferences on the topics of customer service, call centers, and early intervention. Lori
has been active in NCSEA for many years, previously serving on the Board from 2007-
2013. She is a Past President of the Western Intergovernmental Child Support
Engagement Council (WICSEC) and the Nebraska Child Support Enforcement
Association Board of Directors.

Absence Makes the Heart Grow Fonder
by James C. Fleming, North Dakota DHS/CSE
528 days. That is how long it had been from the end of the
last in-person national child support conference (NCSEA
Policy Forum 2020) to the opening of the 2021 annual
meeting and conference of the National Council of Child
Support Directors (NCCSD) on July 20. For a group used to
getting together five or six times a year, 528 days is a LONG
time to wait to see such good friends and colleagues.
Many attendees mentioned that the NCCSD conference felt like a family
reunion, except with folks you LIKE to spend time with. That would
probably be true regardless of the conference location, but it didn’t hurt the
mood of the conference that it was held in such a relaxed and scenic
location as Medora, North Dakota in the summertime. And with an equally
relaxed dress code.
The relief of returning to in-person conferences was not just about a break
in the monotony of telework and virtual meetings. It was also confirmation
of the good will and common interest that is shared by child support leaders
in both the government and private sectors. Turnout was smaller among
federal and state participants due to travel restrictions, but there was
unprecedented attendance from the private sector in terms of the total
number attending and the number of companies represented. How exciting
to see new interest in child support service delivery!
With over half of the state directors not able to attend or send a designee, a
new challenge faced by NCCSD was coming up with a way to support
virtual presenters and attendees. NCCSD was very lucky to find a local
audio-video company who made the transition from on-site to virtual
presenters look nearly seamless. Video conferencing sure seems to have

come a long way since the beginning of the pandemic. The option of
presenting virtually also helped a lot in recruiting speakers for a given topic.
It is ironic that we are having difficulty meeting in person at a time when our
training conferences are needed the most. The pandemic continues to
prompt the child support community to re-evaluate nearly everything we do,
even things like distribution that may have been dormant since enactment
of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. The discussion at NCCSD and other
similar conferences is extremely valuable when considering how we
change the program moving forward.
One of the frequent discussion
topics for the “Rushmore” group
of association presidents is the
future of virtual attendance at
national conferences. On one
hand, a virtual option greatly
expands the number of child
support professionals who can
participate, which is one of the
main reasons we exist as organizations. Attending virtually is a lot cheaper
in the long run than traveling to attend in person. On the other hand, as
with the increased use of telework in our company or agency, collaborating
remotely lacks an aspect of human connection. Virtual meetings are fine to
a point, but are not a complete substitute for sitting face to face with a new
friend and colleague from another company or agency and brainstorming
how we can do things better. What kind of in-person attendance can we
expect in the future if virtual attendance becomes a permanent option?
Unfortunately, the prevalence of the Delta variant of COVID-19 may once
again cause conferences to change to virtual only, and the 2021 meeting in
Medora may be a brief window in time to see each other in person for a few
more months. I hope we don’t have to wait another year or more to see
each other again, but at least we had Medora.
James C. Fleming is the director of the Child Support Division of the North Dakota
Department of Human Services, Immediate Past President of the National Council of

Child Support Directors (NCCSD), President-Elect of the National Child Support
Enforcement Association (NCSEA), and member of the Board of Directors for the
Western Intergovernmental Child Support Engagement Council (WICSEC). Jim is a
member and former co-chair of NCSEA’s Policy and Government Relations Committee
and NCCSD’s Policy and Practice Committee, and a member of the editorial committee
for the NCSEA Child Support CommuniQue. Jim also chairs NCCSD’s Employer
Collaboration Workgroup.
A second-generation attorney, Jim earned his Bachelor of Arts degree from the
University of North Dakota and his Juris Doctorate from Notre Dame Law School. He
has been an assistant attorney general for North Dakota for 27 years, following a
clerkship with the North Dakota Supreme Court.
Print article here
Save the Date – Registration opens soon!

NCSEA’s Congressional Letter to
Improve the Strengthening Families for
Success Act
by Diane Potts, Public Knowledge
NCSEA PGR Committee Co-chair
Introduced last year in both the Senate (S. 4844) and House (H.R. 8704),
the Strengthening Families for Success Act (SFSA 2020) proposed
sweeping changes to the child support program. The most significant
change would phase out Title IV-A cost recovery and require states to
pass-through all collected current support and arrearage payments to
families who currently and formerly received TANF. In addition, SFSA 2020
would have required states to disregard current support collected in
determining a family’s TANF eligibility and benefit levels. Other sections of
SFSA 2020 proposed further impactful changes to the child support and
foster care programs.
Work by the Policy & Government Relations Committee
Immediately after SFSA 2020 was introduced, NCSEA’s Policy and
Government Relations Committee (PGR) began its work to examine and
understand all the key provisions and their impact. PGR divided the work,
with one group focusing on the changes to TANF cost recovery and
another studying the Title IV-E foster care provisions. The last group looked
at SFSA 2020’s ban on the recovery of Medicaid costs for births.
Each group developed a paper with key information that informed PGR’s
extensive discussions on recommendations. After months of work, PGR
presented its preliminary recommendations to the NCSEA Board and the
Directors provided their feedback. On August 1, 2021, the Board approved
the letter to Congress on SFSA 2020 [found here]. While it voiced support
for many of the provisions, NCSEA urged the sponsors of SFSA 2020
(Senators Wyden and Van Hollen and Representative Davis) to make key
changes before reintroducing the legislation later this year.

Title IV-A Cost Recovery
SFSA 2020 proposed that, effective October 1, 2023, states would be
required to pay all of the current support and arrearage payments collected
by the state on behalf of a TANF family to the TANF family. In addition,
states would be required to disregard the current support amount for
purposes of determining Title IV-A eligibility and the amount and type of
assistance. For former TANF families, states would be required effective
October 1, 2025, to pay all of the current support and arrearage payments
collected by the state to the former TANF family and to treat the amounts
collected pursuant to an assignment as if the amounts had never been
assigned. Recognizing that states will need to undergo significant system
changes to effectuate these requirements, SFSA 2020 provided for 90%
federal financial participation (FFP) for expenditures related to the planning,
design, development, installation, or enhancement of a system for federal
fiscal years 2022 and 2023.
In addressing these monumental proposed changes to the child support
program, NCSEA first acknowledged the benefit of expanded state passthrough
and disregard
policies to families and
programs. Passed-through
support helps families
become economically selfsufficient
more quickly and
“However, states should have the option,
as opposed to a mandate, to eliminate
TANF cost recovery from their programs”
permanently. State child support programs benefit from pass-through and
distribution policies that are more closely aligned with the mission of
promoting familial self-sufficiency, and eliminating cost recovery would
vastly simplify program administration.
However, states should have the option, as opposed to a mandate, to
eliminate TANF cost recovery from their programs. NCSEA explained that
a federal mandate would have widely varying impacts across states given
the diversity of their child support program funding structures as well as
TANF and child support policies. Because many states use retained
collections as a source of state funding for their child support program and
draw federal matching funds that triple the value of the recoveries, there is

a significant fiscal impact at stake that could harm the child support
program and the millions of families it serves.
NCSEA also pointed out that there is wide variation in the extent to which
states have acted on existing pass-through and disregard options currently
in federal law. As of May 2020, half of states, as well as the District of
Columbia and Puerto Rico, pass through some or all child support without
reducing the family’s cash assistance grant.
And under the TANF block grant, states have
wide latitude to set TANF income criteria and
benefits levels. A state option allows states
discretion to develop a pass-through and
disregard policy that is congruent with its TANF
program.
NCSEA urged additional funding to support those states choosing to pass
through all collected current support and arrearage payments. Although
SFSA did contain some fiscal relief to states, namely 1) forgoing the federal
share of retained collections and 2) temporarily increasing to 90 percent
FFP on states’ costs to adapt their systems for the changes in distribution,
more financial incentives will allow most states to move forward out of cost
recovery. The incentives could include:
• Backfilling the loss of state IV-A recoveries to help states manage
the negative revenue impact on state child support programs and
state services
• Increasing federal child support performance incentive funding
• Allowing states to pilot expanded pass-through and disregard
policies and to defray the loss of state-retained collections with
Section 1115 waivers
• Expanding allowable IV-D program expenditures to include
employment services for parents who owe support
Finally, NCSEA asked that states have the option to maintain distribution
provided by the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA distribution). In SFSA 2020, states
were required to distribute support in accordance with the Deficit Reduction
Act (DRA) of 2005, which would mean that 49 of the 54 states and
territories that currently use PRWORA distribution would have had to
implement a new distribution method. While DRA distribution is more
advantageous to families because federal income tax refund intercepts go

to the family instead of state assigned arrears, NCSEA urged that the
method of distribution under PRWORA remain a state option due to the
enormous impact the change would have on almost every state.
Foster Care Referrals
SFSA 2020 also contained proposed changes to cost recovery for foster
care. Instead of using current support collected to reimburse the cost of
foster care, the support would either be paid to the foster parent or kinship
caregiver, or deposited into a savings account to be used for the child’s
future needs in the event of reunification with the family, including
reunification services. Collections on arrears would be deposited into a
savings account for the child’s future needs.
NCSEA expressed support for the inclusion of foster care provisions and
asked that they be expanded to align with NCSEA’s recent resolution on
foster care referrals. That resolution recognized that some studies have
found that child support orders may actually prolong the period of time a
child spends in a foster care placement and add to, rather than recoup,
program costs. NCSEA also explained that many foster care referrals are
not cost effective, particularly against a struggling intact family or a former
custodial parent (“removal parent”) with whom reunification is planned.
Eliminating referrals from removal parents seeking reunification helps to
keep financial resources in the home and is consistent with the draft
legislation’s aim to reduce the recovery mission of the child support
program.
NCSEA urged the bill sponsors to provide in the
reintroduced legislation that foster care referrals
from the Title IV-E program to the Title IV-D child
support program be guided by the best interests
of the child. Under that standard, there will be
fewer referrals or closure of cases against
removal parents or in cases where both parents
reside together.
Although the authority to make referrals selectively already exists at the
state level, it would benefit programs and families to include this authority in
the new legislation. If reunification stops becoming a realistic goal for the
family, the child welfare agency can consider referring the case to the child
support program.

NCSEA also weighed in on SFSA 2020’s proposal for a foster care study
and report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), and suggested
that the study would be more productive if conducted by a joint federalstate
workgroup of representatives from the IV-E and IV-D programs. This
joint federal-state workgroup of subject matter experts could develop badly
needed recommendations on referral criteria (in more depth than
addressed here), the desirability and feasibility of child savings accounts,
data sharing, and other issues concerning the most effective means of
coordinating between the IV-D and IV-E programs. Such an approach
would still yield an informative and much-needed policy- and procedurallyoriented
report, but would also leverage the existing expertise of program
professionals at the federal and state levels. After recommendations are
implemented, it may be desirable at that point to have a GAO study to
assess the implementation status and effectiveness of the recommended
changes.
Finally, NCSEA also suggests that consideration of child saving accounts
be assigned to the workgroup for further analysis. As with TANF cost
recovery, NCSEA strongly supports states examining retained collections in
foster care cases. However, while depositing collected child support into a
savings account for a child in foster care could benefit the child long-term, it
also creates several challenges. These include ownership of the account,
accrual of interest, income tax responsibilities for the account holder or
child, and potential implications of turning over potentially large sums of
money to a child at the age of 18. If the workgroup looks at and addresses
those issues and recommends child savings accounts for collected support,
the creation and management of these savings accounts for children
receiving services should be placed with the IV-E program and not the IV-D
program.
Medicaid Birth Costs
Current law allows states to recover birth
expenses paid by Medicaid through child
support obligations, which reduces the support
provided to children and families. SFSA 2020
would ban Medicaid-cost recovery for births
beginning in federal fiscal year 2026 and would
provide an option for states to implement
earlier.

Although NCSEA typically does not support mandates on state child
support programs, it supported SFSA 2020’s ban on the recovery of
Medicaid costs for births. Forty-eight states have shifted away from and no
longer recover Medicaid birth costs through the IV-D program, while the
two that still do have seen a 35%-38% decline in the amount of recovery
since 2011. In these two states, eliminating the practice will have negative
budget impacts to both the Medicaid program ($12-$14M annually) and the
child support program. However, the amount recovered by the child support
program is a small fraction of the millions paid out by Medicaid in birth
costs each year.
NCSEA recognizes that recovery of Medicaid costs associated with the
birth of a child disproportionally affects low-income families and takes
money away from the children in those families. Instead of recouping
government costs, the primary purpose of the child support program should
be to work towards reliable, consistent financial support for children.
Conclusion
The bill’s sponsors have indicated that a bill similar to SFSA 2020 will be
reintroduced in 2021. NCSEA is hopeful that its advocacy efforts will result
in better legislation for the child support program and families. Many thanks
to the 2020-2021 PGR Committee for their work on the letter and PGR:
Tish Keahna Kruzan, Lara Webb Fors, Paul Gehm, Michele Ahern,
Elizabeth Morgan, Jane Venohr, Jolie Sheppick, Kate Cooper Richardson,
Amy Roehrenbeck, Connie Chesnik, Jim Fleming, Mary Johnson, Lisa
Skenandore, Margot Bean, Nicholas Palos, Kay Farley, Erin Frisch, Robbie
Endris, and Lori Bengston.
_______________________________________
Diane Potts is the Vice President of Child Support and Workforce Services at Public
Knowledge®, a national consulting firm that recently merged with the Center for the
Support of Families (CSF), a Division of SLI Government Solutions. Diane is a Past-
President of NCSEA, its past Secretary, and an Honorary Lifetime Member. She served
on NCSEA’s Board of Directors from 2013-2019, and as co-chair of the Policy Forum in
2015, 2016, and 2019. She currently is the co-chair of the Policy and Government
Relations Committee and a frequent presenter for NCSEA at both its Policy Forum and
Leadership Symposium, as well as NCSEA webinars and Idea Exchanges.
Print article here

Collaboration is Key!
by Corrinne Flores, ADP, Inc.
Collaboration is key when stakeholders work together to make a program
or process a success! The National Council of Child Support Directors
(NCCSD) Employer Collaboration Workgroup is a great example of
collaboration and partnership between the employer community and the
child support program. NCCSD established the first workgroup in 2018 to
improve lump sum reporting and withholding. Workgroup members
included state child support agency directors or their designees, members
of the American Payroll Association, representatives from many of the
nation’s largest employers, and the federal Office of Child Support
Enforcement’s (OCSE) Employer Services Team. The workgroup
successfully drafted model legislation that states can adopt to address
lump sum reporting and withholding and addressed standardizing
timeframes for employer reporting and state responses. In states with
existing mandatory lump sum reporting laws, provisions in the model
legislation may be used to create or update regulations and/or guidelines.
Drafting the model legislation resulted in both employers and child support
agencies seeing the process from a different perspective, including
identifying challenges and recommending solutions.
In addition to drafting model legislation, the workgroup recommended
enhancements to OCSE’s portal for lump sum reporting. OCSE acted on
these recommendations, and now employers receive a match notification
when they report employees who are eligible to receive a lump sum
payment. In the fall of 2021, Communication Center will be available on the
OCSE portal to facilitate secure message and document exchange
between employers and child support agencies and OCSE staff.
Based on the success of the Employer Lump Sum Collaboration
Workgroup, attendees of the 2019 Employer Symposium recommended
establishing another workgroup to address ways to improve overall
processes between child support agencies and employers. In December

2019, NCCSD established the Employer Collaboration Workgroup to
identify tasks and develop a strategy to accomplish those tasks, to improve
shared employer and child support agency processes to establish and
enforce child support orders. Since 2020, workgroup activities include:
• discussing potential changes to the Income Withholding for Support
Order form to be considered during the next Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) renewal in 2023, such as reducing the number of identifiers
on the form
• reviewing mock-ups for the upcoming Communication Center on
OCSE’s portal
• gathering information about automating the electronic National
Medical Support Notice (e-NMSN) and providing periodic updates
• developing a standard response to verification of employment (VOE)
requests
• conceptualizing a national employer database
The workgroup spent a significant amount of
time on improving the VOE process by working
together to develop a standard response to
child support agency requests. While
recognizing that states have some different
VOE response requirements, the workgroup’s
first step was to identify the information that
states need to establish and modify orders.
Nearly all child support agencies have agreed to accept the standard VOE
response developed by the workgroup. This means when employers
receive a VOE request, they can return the standard VOE response.
Employers’ ability to provide a standard VOE allows for automation in
responding to the requests, resulting in states receiving timely responses at
higher volumes.
These are all examples of employers working with the child support
community to understand different perspectives, capabilities, and
limitations, and using that information to create efficiencies and processes
that benefit all stakeholders and ultimately ensure children and families
receive child support.
Corri Flores is the Director of Government Affairs for ADP, LLC. Corri manages the
relationships between ADP and Wage Garnishments agencies to gather information
and cultivate positive relationships. She has been with ADP for over twenty-six years

and has spent much of her career within the Agency Relations organization. She has
participated on the American Payroll Association’s Government Relations Task Force
(GRTF) for Child Support and Wage Garnishments workgroups for the past eight years
and is the current Chair of both the GRTF Child Support and Garnishment workgroups.
She is a member of the National Child Support Enforcement Association and currently
serves on its Board of Directors.
Print article here

A Decade in the Making: Tribal Child
Support Legislation Moves Through
the Senate
The Tribal Child Support Enforcement Act passed the Senate on
July 13th, 2021 by unanimous consent
by Lisa Skenandore, Vice President, SMI
After more than a decade of hard work and consistent advocacy by the
tribal child support community, critical legislation for the tribal child support
program has been passed unanimously by the United States Senate. This
legislation—perhaps most importantly—grants the tribal child support
program access to the Federal Tax Refund Offset Program (FTROP).
When the tribal child support program was first authorized by the passage
of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of
1996, tribes were not given access to the Offset Program. In that same
year, existing state child support programs were authorized to use FTROP
by the Debt Collection Improvement Act and Executive Order 13019,
neither of which provided FTROP access to the tribes. These missed
opportunities to include the tribes in an effective collection program created
a significant service barrier for the tribes.
The journey to change this issue began in 2010 when I was then president
of the National Association of Tribal Child Support Directors. During one of
our biannual meetings, staff from both the Office of Child Support
Enforcement (OCSE) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Office of
Safeguards were present and shared the work and discussions, explaining
how we came to this point. Ultimately, they encouraged us to take a strong
advocacy position and work on the needed fix. Both agencies
acknowledged that they could not in their capacity assist us with advocacy,
and in order for the tribes to access the offset program or data share with
our state counterparts, a change in legislation was necessary. This should
be simple, right? One would think so; however, we soon found that it was
more complicated because a legislative change would affect both the
Social Security Act and the Internal Revenue Code. This was a double-

edged sword that most did not want to tackle for fear that it could open the
door to other unanticipated changes in either the Act or the Code.
Despite these challenges, we knew we had to persevere. Seeking the
legislative change would not only provide parity to the tribes in enforcement
resources, but also remedy another issue concerning the tribes’ use of
state child support case management systems. Many of the tribal
programs, including my own, use the states’ automated systems. During
the states’ triennial IRS audits, it was determined that tribal child support
programs were not permitted access to IRS data, although they were (and
still are) subject to the same rules and regulations of IRS Publication 1075.
As a result of that audit, states were issued findings related to tribal access
to their state systems.
Fortunately, most findings were
held in abeyance, as the IRS
recognized that a larger solution
was needed, and ultimately the
states were not at fault. As a
temporary fix, the Office of
Safeguards started performing
in-person audits at tribal offices,
and the tribes themselves very
Despite these challenges, we knew we
had to persevere. Seeking the legislative
change would not only provide parity to
the tribes in enforcement resources, but
also remedy another issue concerning
the tribes’ use of state child support case
management systems.
rarely had findings. More recently in order to address the problem, the
states’ tribal agreements were required to contain language specifying that
the tribes are state contractors. Again, a temporary fix to a perpetual
problem that needed to be changed.
After meeting with OCSE and IRS staff at the directors’ meeting, a small
team consisting of four tribal directors and one tribal agency attorney took
up the challenge. We organized ourselves with little to no idea of how we
would proceed or what advocacy truly meant. It was a blessing of sorts, as
we all got to know each other better after spending countless hours working
together on such an important project. We were fortunate that our team’s
attorney had numerous connections in Washington D.C. who helped us
forge a path forward. These connections provided much-needed advice
and guidance to our team of unknowing yet passionate child support
professionals. We truly were learning as we went. We knew we supported
the cause, but we did not know how to proceed and make change happen.
One of our earliest connections was made in the House of Representatives
through the Ways and Means Committee with a majority staffer from the

Human Resource Subcommittee. This subcommittee had jurisdiction over
the child support program (it still does to this day, although it has been
renamed the Subcommittee on Worker and Family Support). Thankfully,
this staffer found commonality with us, being from the same home state,
and bought into our mission so much so that she took it upon herself to
draft legislative language for us. This was just one of the many kindnesses
we were lucky to receive early on from those we contacted on the Hill.
We were advised to garner support for our issue from across the entire
child support community as we were often asked what our state
counterparts thought about tribes having direct access to FTROP. As a
result, we sought letters of support from the National Council of Child
Support Directors (NCCSD), as well as countless support letters from tribal
leaders, state IV-D directors, and other state leaders. We also focused on
gathering support from the child support associations and found that
ERICSA and NCSEA were very quick to sign on. ERICSA was kind enough
to do a white paper in support of the effort, and NCSEA engaged the
services of its advocate.
We then found ourselves meeting
with both houses of Congress,
including staff from committees with
jurisdiction over child support and
taxation. Along the way we met
many wonderful staff who guided
and assisted us wherever possible.
They often provided names of
offices we should visit, and
suggestions on how to approach the conversation with others. A personal
highlight for me was bumping into Senator John McCain after I exited the
ladies’ room while on the Hill. He joked with us and said that was usually
where he hung out to meet people. Through all the countless visits and
knocking on doors, we grew in knowledge and were blessed to meet many
fascinating people.
Full speed ahead and countless hours later, we were fortunate to gain
support from Senator John Thune in South Dakota, who agreed to sponsor
our legislation. We reached across the aisle and asked a colleague in
Oregon, IV-D Director Kate Cooper-Richardson, to assist us in obtaining
support from then Ranking Chairman, Oregon Senator Ron Wyden. Many
meetings and hours later, we did receive his support and agreement to

cosponsor the important legislation. During these conversations, we
included NCCSD President Jim Fleming to assist with some of the more
complicated questions that we could not answer merely because we did not
have access to, or experience with, the offset program.
This collaborative effort also provided an opportunity to make a legislative
change benefitting all child support agencies, not just the tribes. Under
current law, agents of a child support agency--including private contractors
and other government agencies--may receive only a taxpayer’s address,
social security number, and amount of offset. The Tribal Child Support
Enforcement Act removes this artificial barrier for all entities and allows all
Federal Tax Information to be shared with agents of the child support
agency, as long as the information remains protected and is used only for
purposes of establishing and enforcing child support.
The legislation was first introduced in the 116 th Congress in 2020 and then
again in the 117 th Congress, where it successfully passed the Senate on
July 13 th , 2021, by unanimous consent. Now we must circle back and carry
our message and legislation forward to the House, where we hope to
encounter the same great collaboration we received in the Senate. This will
ultimately lead to full passage of the Act and, as a result, a new age of
service in our program.
View the full bill here: Tribal Child Support Enforcement Act
_____________________________________
Lisa Skenandore joined Systems and Methods Inc. as the Vice President of Business
Development in January of 2016. Prior to joining SMI, Lisa led the Oneida Nation Child
Support Department as IV-D Director which became a comprehensive tribal child
support program in April of 2008. She is Immediate Past President of NCSEA, serving
as President 2020-2021. Along with child support she has also led other human service
programming in the areas of child welfare, domestic violence, prevention and foster
care. She has served as President of the National Tribal Child Support Association and
National Association of Tribal Child Support Directors. She holds a Bachelor of Science
degree in Public Administration from the University of Wisconsin at Green Bay.
Print article here

Workplace Tools for Responding to a
Mental Health Crisis
by Dr Wendy Anson, Engaged CTC LLC
Mental health of U.S. workers has steadily declined since the onset of the
COVID-19 pandemic. A 2020 article by McKinsey suggests an estimated
35 million people could develop a new behavioral health condition as a
result of the pandemic. A study by Lyra Health found 40% of workers
surveyed in early 2020 reported they are dealing with an acute mental
health condition, up 20.6% from pre-pandemic numbers. Acute mental
health conditions were described as anxiety, depression, or post-traumatic
stress disorder. Less acute mental health conditions such as stress,
burnout, and relationships issues also increased. Burnout, officially
recognized by the World Health Organization in 2019 as an occupational
phenomenon, has consistently been reported at higher levels for caring
professionals, such as caseworkers. Despite the headlines and reports,
research has provided insights into how we can supportively respond to the
mental health crisis in the workplace. Please note that this information is
not intended or implied to be a substitute for professional medical advice,
diagnosis, or treatment.
Social Support
Social support has been linked to lower degrees of burnout (Ye et al.,
2021); as a protective factor in terms of mental health (Szkody & McKinney,
2019); and as a contributor to a) emotional resilience, b) a mechanism that
may decrease loneliness, and c) increased hope (Bareket-Bojmel et al.,
2021). Social support consists of feelings of being cared for, the ability to
attain assistance from others, and being part of a supportive network.
Creating meaningful opportunities for social support in the midst of a
pandemic is challenging but not impossible.
Social support comes in different shapes and sizes. It may include a brief
check-in call with a colleague on a weekly basis. It may be confirming

emote workers have the necessary tools and resources to perform their
work in a virtual environment. Or it may mean creatively working out an
alternative work schedule with the single parent who is struggling to find
daycare. When the type of support needed is unclear, ask, “What support
can I provide?” Using a “what” question conveys an assumption that help is
needed so the recipient of the question is more likely to provide a
response.
Process Loss is a term used to define time spent by group members on
tasks unrelated to team goals or accomplishments. Process Loss supports
group maintenance functions such as conflict resolution and, more
importantly for purposes of this article, social activities. Social activities
such as team building may be viewed as unnecessary or costly. However,
social activities among team members strengthen feelings of social
support. Team building in the midst of COVID-19 has presented a
challenge for many. Creative leaders have implemented time for social
interaction using technology for virtual meetings, lunches, happy hours,
book clubs, or even virtual fitness sessions. One company initiated virtual
networking events for new hires to meet existing employees on a monthly
basis throughout the pandemic. These types of events are most successful
when they are voluntary and are offered during normal working hours.
In-person social activities may still be a possibility for teams in warmer
climates or locations that permit social distancing and other COVID-19
mitigation efforts. Meet up with colleagues in the park for a team lunch or
socially distanced meeting. Go old school by sending a co-worker a
handwritten note at home.
Destigmatize Mental Health
Destigmatizing mental health in the workplace has become so critical that
the Society of Human Resource Management (SHRM) introduced a new
Workplace Mental Health Ally Certification program in September of this
year. Social stigma may result in individuals not seeking needed help
(Bharadwaj, 2017). Talking about mental health isn’t easy. A Lyra Health
study found that 42% of workers are not comfortable talking about their
mental health with a manager and 36% were uncomfortable discussing
their mental health with a peer. One way we can cultivate a safe
environment for colleagues and peers is to be vulnerable about our own
mental health challenges. A second Lyra Health study suggests that
displaying empathy, promoting casual wellness check-ins, and reminding
employees of available resources are all key to preventing burnout.

Athletes like Michael Phelps, Naomi Osaka, and Simone Biles received an
outpouring of support when they discussed their challenges with mental
health issues. It’s important to provide support to individuals who speak up
about their challenges with burnout, depression, or other mental health
challenges.
Tools for Responding
There are many tools we can utilize to help ourselves when dealing with
mental health challenges. The Anxiety & Depression Association of
America (ADAA) provides a helpful infographic with several reminders and
insights on how to deal with stress and anxiety. Cognitive restructuring is a
useful framework for challenging negative automatic thoughts (NATs).
Cognitive restructuring includes identifying, disputing, and rebutting NATs.
A quick way to recall these steps is the use of the Trap It, Map It, Zap It
model from meQuilibrium. Trap the emotion, Map its origin, and Zap it by
testing its validity.
Developing resilience is another useful way to respond to the ongoing
challenges that spark stress, burnout, and other mental health challenges.
Resilience incorporates various mental processes that help an individual
bounce back from harmful stressors. These mental processes include life
satisfaction, optimism, positive affect, self-efficacy, self-esteem, and social
support.
• Life Satisfaction: Gratitude is a powerful means of cultivating life
satisfaction and well-being. Link the practice of gratitude to an
existing daily routine like waiting for your morning coffee to brew or
brushing your teeth. (For more on habit stacking, check out Atomic
Habits by James Clear.)
• Optimism: Reframing our view of our goals or identity can help us
shift to a more optimistic mindset. Rather than saying “I need to read
more,” try “I am a reader.” Again, if this is a new activity, anchor it to
an existing habit or routine. For example, place a book on your pillow
after making your bed in the morning to help you remember to read a
few minutes each night. (Of course, making your bed in the morning
is already part of your routine!)
• Positive affect: Positive affect refers to a person’s propensity to
experience positive emotions and interact with others and with life’s
challenges in a positive way. While we have a strong bias towards a
negative affect, it is possible to shift our perspective towards a more

positive affect. Identify a positive mentor, someone that consistently
focuses upon the positive. Follow that person’s example. Begin
intently looking for and relishing experiences of joy, hope, pride,
inspiration, awe, and love (Frederickson, 2010).
• Self-efficacy: Reflect upon and list the skills you developed to achieve
former accomplishments and successes.
• Self-esteem: Leary and Baumeister (2000) found that recognizing
and living in congruence with core values is essential in appraising
your value. Another way to build self-esteem is to cultivate a growth
mindset. Instead of telling yourself, “I’m not good at XY or Z,” tell
yourself, “I am learning XY or Z and I’ll figure it out!”
• Social support: In addition to cultivating social support at work, build
and nurture close friendships. Being intentional about our
relationships, investing in others, and volunteering are all ways to
cultivate social support.
Final Thoughts
For many, the COVID-19 pandemic has provided time for reflection and
reassessment of what is important in life (Bussien et al., 2020). For others,
it has exacerbated feelings of loneliness and isolation (Bussien et al.).
Individual experiences and responses to the pandemic are just that—
individual. There is no one way to respond to the unique and complex
experiences individuals have faced as a result of the pandemic.
For those struggling with a mental health challenge, suggesting they look
on the bright side is not helpful. Reappraisal, the process of reconstruing a
minor setback into an opportunity, works well at times; at others, it can be
viewed as toxic positivity. Reappraising the inconvenience of a broken
escalator as an opportunity to use the stairs and get some exercise may
help one respond to an inconvenience. The pandemic has not been a
minor inconvenience; for many it has resulted in life-altering circumstances
and challenges.
If you or a loved one needs help, one positive outcome from the COVID-19
pandemic is the ready availability of telehealth providers. The American
Psychological Association (APA) offers these suggestions for locating a
mental health provider:
• Ask your physician or health care professional for a referral
• Check with your local or state psychological association
• Check your local university or college department of psychology

• Ask friends and family for recommendations
• Check your area community health center
• Ask your church or synagogue
• Use the APA’s Psychologist Locator service
Many providers offer a complimentary intake meeting to ensure
provider/client fit. In addition, the APA suggests asking the following:
• Are you a licensed psychologist? How many years have you been
practicing psychology?
• I have been feeling (anxious, tense, depressed, etc.) and I'm having
problems (with my job, my marriage, eating, sleeping, etc.). What
experience do you have helping people with these types of
problems?
• What are your areas of expertise—for example, working with children
and families?
• What kinds of treatments do you use and have they been proven
effective for dealing with my kind of problem or issue?
• What are your fees? (Fees are usually based on a 45-minute to 50-
minute session.) Do you have a sliding-scale fee policy?
• What types of insurance do you accept? Will you accept direct billing
to or payment from my insurance company? Are you affiliated with
any managed care organizations? Do you accept Medicare or
Medicaid insurance?
Providing resources and tools to support those struggling with stress,
burnout, or other mental health challenges may help reduce attrition and
costly turnover. Recognizing these challenges and offering support shows
that we value the contributions of caseworkers and team members who are
committed to the care and support of children and parents across the
country.
References
American Psychological Association. (2019, October 17). How to choose a
psychologist. American Psychological Association.
https://www.apa.org/topics/psychotherapy/choose-therapist
Bareket-Bojmel, L., Shahar, G., Abu-Kaf, S. and Margalit, M. (2021). Perceived social
support, loneliness, and hope during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Testing a
mediating model in the UK, USA, and Israel. British Journal of Clinical
Psychology, 60, 133-148.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8013849/

Bharadwaj, P., Pai, M. M., & Suziedelyte, A. (2017). Mental health stigma. Economics
Letters, 159, 57-60.
https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/5990611/mod_resource/content/1/el_me
ntal_health_2017.pdf
Büssing, A., Recchia, D. R., Hein, R., & Dienberg, T. (2020). Perceived changes of
specific attitudes, perceptions and behaviors during the Corona pandemic and
their relation to wellbeing. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 18, 1-17.
https://hglo.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12955-020-01623-6
Coe, E., Enomoto, K., & Finn, P. (2020). Understanding the hidden costs of COVID-19’s
potential impact on US healthcare. McKinsey & Company. Retrieved September
16, 2021, from https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/healthcare-systems-andservices/our-insights/understanding-the-hidden-costs-of-covid-19s-potentialimpact-on-us-healthcare
Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). What Good Are Positive Emotions? Review of General
Psychology (3), 300-319. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.300.
Leary, M. R., & Baumeister, R. F. (2000). The nature and function of self-esteem:
Sociometer theory. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social
psychology (Vol. 32, pp. 1–62). Academic Press.
Lyra Health. (2021). The state of mental health at work 2021.
https://www.lyrahealth.com/resources/
Lyra Health. (2021). A manager’s guide to preventing employee burnout in 2021.
https://www.lyrahealth.com/resources/
Ratliff, N. (1988). Stress and burnout in the helping professions. Social Casework,
69(3), 147–154.
Rosso, B. D., Dekas, K. H., & Wrzesniewski, A. (2010). On the meaning of work: A
theoretical integration and review. Research in Organizational Behavior, 30, 91-
127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2010.09.001
Society of Human Resource Management. (2021). Workplace mental health and
wellness initiative launched. https://www.shrm.org/about-shrm/news-aboutshrm/pages/workplace-mental-health-and-wellness-initiative-launched.aspx
Szkody, E., & McKinney, C. (2019). Stress-buffering effects of social support on
depressive problems: Perceived vs. received social support and moderation by
parental depressive problems. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 28, 2209-
2219. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10826-019-01437-1
World Health Organization. (2019). Burn-out an "occupational phenomenon":
International Classification of Diseases. https://www.who.int/news/item/28-05-
2019-burn-out-an-occupational-phenomenon-international-classification-ofdiseases

Ye, Y., Huang, X., & Liu, Y. (2021). Social Support and Academic Burnout Among
University Students: A Moderated Mediation Model. Psychology Research and
Behavior Management, 14, 335-344.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7987309/
_________________________________________
Dr. Wendy Anson is the owner of Engaged CTC LLC. Engaged CTC offers researchbased
techniques and documented best practices from the field of positive psychology
that have been demonstrated to help clients achieve their unique goals. Engaged CTC
provides consulting, training, and coaching in the areas of strategic alignment,
development, and talent optimization. Dr. Anson has a PhD in Industrial &
Organizational Psychology from Capella University and a Master’s in Education Human
Resource Development from George Washington University. She holds a Senior
Certified Professional (SPC) certification from the Society for Human Resource
Management and a Senior Professional in Human Resources (SPRH) certification from
the Human Resource Certification Institute. Dr. Anson is a member of the International
Coaching Federation, the Society of Human Resource Management, and the World at
Work.
Print article here
“Don’t Stand Up if You Aren’t Wearing Pants”
Now that we have your attention, the CSQ is gathering tips and personal
experiences for video conferencing. Since most everyone has moved to
Zoom, GotoMeeting, MicrosoftTeams, GoogleMeet or other video
conferencing formats, the CSQ Team thought it would be a good time to
include some recommendations and best practices from child support
workers to ensure teleconferences are professional, effective, and
engaging. Just for fun, we’d also like to hear about humorous or bizarre
experiences, as well as experiences that taught you a valuable
lesson. Please respond by completing this survey.
Contributors will remain anonymous!

Evolving Child Support Awareness
into the Future…
by Gilbert M. Burgos
Arizona Division of Child Support Services
Like any good sci-fi fanatic, I like to think of the future as ever evolving. I
still picture a world filled with flying cars, robotic assistants, and artificial
intelligence constantly a step ahead of our everyday needs. However, how
many times do we stop and think if that evolving reality can affect our social
service programs? In 1975, the first federal child support enforcement
program was enacted and established as part of the Title IV-D of the Social
Security Act. This was done in an effort for federal and state programs to
help build a foundation for those parents who needed to be held
accountable and responsible for supporting their children. Because of the
original intention to enforce and drive accountability, the words “child
support” can create discomfort and feelings of fear, anger, and even
embarrassment for some parents. Most child support services aim to
establish a good foundation that many parents cannot provide or who might
not understand the importance of having a proper foundation. On August 5,
1995, President Clinton declared August to be national Child Support
Awareness month to highlight the importance of establishing a necessary
foundation for providing support and ensuring parents take responsibility for
their children.
At this point, you might be asking yourself, “Why the history lesson?” Well,
that’s an excellent question, particularly for the child support community.
Not sure if many of you have realized how many states have walked away
from carrying the name “Enforcement” in their programs’ titles and have
adopted the word “Services” instead? Our child support programs have
continued to evolve over the years, from being a zero-tolerance
enforcement program where accountability drove many actions, to what
has recently become a less punitive service that provides education and
guidance to parents. As generations have evolved, so have the child
support programs to provide more education, support, and mediation. Many
may say that the program has become soft and lenient and that the focus
of collecting child support is no longer the goal, but the fact is that child

support enforcement remains high on the priority list. However, like any
good parenting skill, the more you push your children, the further they may
walk astray. That same logic has become the new understanding for many
child support programs. I have countless memories of courtroom judges
stating that an incarcerated parent does not benefit the children and, if
anything, it interferes with the parent-to-child relationship.
What does this mean for the future of child support programs? How do you
target awareness for future generations? Of course, these are heavily
loaded questions, but it is something that we must consider in the times to
come. Across the states, caseloads have been changing and dropping; the
question remains, why? Is there some type of generational gap? As a
thirty-plus-year-old myself, if you were to ask me if I ever needed child
support services, would I seek the assistance? My immediate answer
would be no. As a member of the child support community, and even after
working in state government for
So, how do you target a generation that
believes it is self-reliant and relies highly
on online reviews?
16+ years, you would think I
would immediately say, YES!
However, that’s not the case,
and that’s not because of my
understanding of how child support programs work, but because I come
from a generation that believes all knowledge comes from the good grace
of the almighty “Google” search engine! Frankly put, I don’t feel I would
need the assistance, and I could manage it independently. The ability to
find things online has made our lives a lot easier. For newer generations, it
has even helped us determine what life decisions to make next.
So, how do you target a generation that believes it is self-reliant and relies
highly on online reviews? I think those two key ingredients are simplicity
and sincerity—simplicity in understanding the benefits of having a
functional, mediated relationship between parents, and the sincerity that
child support programs are genuinely focused on building a healthy
relationship between parents, providing the understanding that child
support is a financial foundation and a gateway to creating the necessary
connection between parent and child. With the shift in mindsets of child
support programs to adapt to a new generation, the constant change needs
to continue to focus on providing more self-driven services, low complexity,
and a less bureaucratic approach. If we pay attention to what new
generations seek, the need for instant gratification is primary. Our services
need to be concise and self-selecting, yet educational and as simple as a
Google search. Programs such as Procedural Justice-Informed Alternatives

to Contempt (PJAC) and other forward-thinking initiatives are paving the
way to close that missing link within those newer generational gaps. The
more we continue to pivot our approach to provide services such as a
private entity would, the more responses and family success gaps will be
closed.
As we modernize and update our systems and processes, keep in mind
who our future target audience will be and remain mindful of how we speak
to those new families that are walking through our doors. Are we having
heartfelt, caring, and sincere conversations? Or are we simply processing
another application? The future is exciting for all child support programs,
and this is only the start. To my fellow comrades in the child support
community, continue to be proud of the daily services and hard work you
deliver. Your countless dedicated hours and well-intended efforts to help
others do not go unnoticed!
_________________________________________
Gilbert Burgos is Acting Business Development Manager with the Arizona Division of
Child Support Services, and has been with the Department of Economic Security (DES)
since 2006. He has served in different capacities within the agency, including Field
Liaison to the Director of DES, but mostly tenured with the Child Support Services
Division. Most recently, he is serving on a Special Assignment as the new Business
Development Manager for DCSS. Before that, Gilbert has served in numerous roles,
such as the acting administrator for the Specialized Operations Administration and Debt
Program Manager within the child support division. Gilbert has a Bachelor of Science in
Communications from the Arizona State University and is a Knight of Magistral Grace
with the Western Association of the Order of Malta - Knights of Malta.
Print article here
Have you listened to an NCSEA Podcast today?
NCSEA’s 2021 Innovative Partnership / Collaboration Award (20:03)
NCSEA’s 2021 Program Awareness Award (16:29)
A New Take on the Child Support Pass-Through Payment (45:37)
Continuing the Leadership: An interview with NCSEA Presidents—Lisa
Skenandore and Lori Bengston (27:40)
An Engaging Conversation with ERICSA’s Presidents (36:30)
Getting In on Incentives: Perspectives on Performance Measures (35:56)
See the full list of NCSEA Podcasts here

NCSEA’S 2021 Leadership Symposium
“Lead Forward”
by Ashley Dexter and Charles Smith
Co-chairs, Leadership Symposium
After a year and a half of uncertainty, NCSEA’s annual Leadership
Symposium was the in-person summer destination for child support
professionals August 1-4, 2021! Over 500 practitioners met at the
Downtown Marriott Hotel in Austin, Texas for plenaries and sessions
focused on leadership and professional development. Every plenary and
session provided stimulating and provocative content, along with invaluable
networking opportunities. Conference sessions focused on various
challenges child support leaders and those served by the child support
program face, lessons learned, and best practices to lead forward postpandemic.
Because of the pandemic, NCSEA took every precaution to ensure
attendees had a safe and memorable conference experience. Each
attendee received in their welcome bag facemasks and color-coded
buttons to wear on their lapel or lanyard indicating their comfort level with
social distancing or contact. To facilitate social distancing, attendees
enjoyed longer breaks and the benefit of a larger exhibit hall with kiosks.
Sponsors also had the option to host corporate partner showcases during
the breaks.
The Leadership Symposium opened Sunday evening by welcoming
attendees to a reception in the exhibit hall. Attendees were able to network
with friends and colleagues while discovering symposium offerings and
gathering up swag from the generous vendor community.

On Monday morning, David Daniels delivered a heartwarming plenary on
what it means to lead with compassion and to have a heart that cares. The
conference continued with sessions from this year’s tracks including
Connecting with Health and Human Service Partners, Providing Data
Insights for Leaders at all Levels, Leading with the Brain in Mind, and A
Conversation in Leadership Development.
Historically, the Leadership Symposium has one plenary per day. This year
we shifted to provide two plenaries each day. Monday’s second plenary
featured Diane Potts interviewing Dr. Wendy Anson about the emotional
and mental health challenges brought on by the COVID pandemic. The
afternoon continued with workshops and learning labs that covered the
topics of Empathizing with Purpose, Leading in Ambiguity, and Leading in
the Big City (Urban Jurisdiction Challenges).
Monday evening conference goers were
invited to the President’s reception for further
networking and interaction with exhibitors.
Tuesday opened with a thought-provoking
plenary titled Perspectives Matter, where we
heard fathers and fatherhood advocates share their experiences interacting
with the child support program, and expressing their desire for more
inclusion. While many child support organizations are attempting to be
more open to father issues, the session helped underscore how small
gestures, like father pictures in lobbies, can go a long way toward creating
a father-friendly environment. The sessions following Perspectives Matter
covered the topics of Designing the Future State of Child Support, Case
Closure, Family-Centered Equitable Child Support Policies, and How to
Identify and Minimize Microaggression.

The second plenary on
Tuesday afternoon
included IV-D Directors
discussing “Pandemic
Decisions Impacting
Future Service Delivery.”
The afternoon
workshops included a
second discussion on
designing the future
state of child support, as
well as dynamic discussions entitled After the Pandemic: Court Lessons
Learned, Procedural Justice Alternatives, and Innovations Worth Keeping.
Tuesday was another day of dynamic discussions.
The Leadership Symposium ended Wednesday with two thought provoking
and information filled plenaries. In the first plenary, we heard from four child
support leaders who provided their perspectives on key elements of the
Strengthening Families for Success Act of 2020, and how it would impact
their state programs. The second plenary focused on the Future of Work,
discussing pre-, during, and post-pandemic work data and trends, and
examining what the future holds for the child support workforce.
From the post-conference surveys, the respondents unanimously
expressed satisfaction with the session content and speakers selected this
year. Don’t forget that attendees are still able to access the conference
materials and watch the plenary recordings through the conference app!
Ashley and Charles extend many thanks to all
of you who submitted session proposals and
suggested speakers. We also cannot thank
enough the tremendously talented and
accomplished child support professionals on
the Leadership Symposium Planning
Committee for all their hard work, from reading
every proposal submission, to transforming
them into an engaging professional
development and leadership conference, all
while working remotely. We also send a special thank you to NCSEA’s

Director of Professional Development, Gillyn Croog, for her dedication to
attendees’ health and safety, her keen attention to detail, her leadership,
and overall conference organization that resulted in an in-person
Leadership Symposium all could enjoy from their own comfort level. Finally,
a special thank you to Ruth Anne Thornton and the Texas Child Support
Program, and neighboring state and county programs, for your support and
help in making this year’s conference so successful.
We look forward to seeing all of you next year in Charlotte, North Carolina
August 7-10, 2022!
Ashley Dexter is a Specialist Senior with Deloitte Consulting LLP. Prior to joining
Deloitte, Ashley began her career over 19 years ago in the Kansas child support
program and served most recently as the Kansas Deputy IVD Director. Ashley served
as a member of NCSEA’s Board of Directors from 2018 to 2021 and served as the cochair
of the 2019 Leadership Symposium, 2020 Inspire Event, and 2021 Leadership
Symposium. She has spoken at several Leadership Symposiums and at other national
events, including annual conferences for WICSEC and ERICSA. As an NCSEA U
alumna, Ashley is excited to co-chair the 2021-2022 NCSEA U committee.
Charles Smith is President/CEO of Charles R. Smith Consulting, LLC. He started his
consulting practice after retiring from Texas state government in 2018. Charles has
more than 27 years of child support experience and previously served as the Texas IV-
D Director. Charles is a frequent speaker at state, regional and national conferences
and is a past instructor of NCSEA U. He is a member of NCSEA’s Board of Directors
and served as the co-chair of the 2021 Leadership Symposium. Charles is a WICSEC
past-President and Honorary Life Member.

Is NCSEA U For You?
NCSEA U was chartered in 2013 and currently has
more than 135 alumni. NCSEA U provides a unique
premier educational and professional development
opportunity. It is structured for learning leaders in the
child support community and it complements NCSEA’s
other educational initiatives and strategies. The
program is taught by nationally recognized child
support leaders, offering a variety of informative and
strategic topics. Classes are structured with an
emphasis on group discussions that include work/life balance and best practice initiatives
with real-time work environment scenarios.
Whether for yourself or your staff, NCSEA U offers a transformative learning experience
and is a catalyst for networking opportunities. NCSEA U alumni would love for you to
become a part of this unique group. Because we are proud of NCSEA U, we will be
featuring Alumni in upcoming CSQ articles. Their stories will highlight why NCSEA U is for
you.
Meet Our NCSEA U Alumni
Sarah Hurst - Class 2015
Georgia Department of Human Services, Division of Child Support
Deputy Director of Administration
What was the most valuable aspect of the NCSEA U experience?
I had the pleasure of attending NCSEA U in both 2015 and 2018. I feel the most valuable aspect of the
experience was getting to hear about best practices utilized in other states, as well as challenges that other
child support leaders had been through and how they addressed them.
Since attending NCSEA U, what opportunities (personal and professional) have you experienced?
Since first attending NCSEA U in 2015, I have had the pleasure of serving in a variety of positions with the
Department of Human Services Division of Child Support Services (DCSS) in the GREAT State of Georgia,
including Region Manager, Business Resolution Team Lead and Deputy Director of Administration. In 2021,
I also started serving as a mentor with the University of Georgia Mentor Program (Go Dawgs!).
What is a key leadership attribute that you appreciate in others? Why? Responsiveness. Oftentimes,
as child support professionals, we are asked to respond quickly to various challenging situations with limited
information. Working with incredibly responsive team members, like the leaders in our organization, allows
us to get to the root of the problem and brainstorm solutions to resolve the issue.

Petrina Travers - Class 2019
Ramsey County Attorney's Office, Human Services Division
Child Support Supervisor
What was the most valuable aspect of the NCSEA U experience?
Making contacts with child support professionals across the state.
What would you like others to know about NCSEA U? It is a fantastic opportunity to gain insight from
leaders in the child support program, both in a professional and casual setting.
Why would you recommend NCSEA U to others? This is a great opportunity to stretch your leadership
qualities and learn from professionals across the nation.
Since attending NCSEA U, what opportunities (personal and professional) have you experienced?
I have had the opportunity to present at a number of national and state child support conferences since
attending NCSEA U.
What is a key leadership attribute that you appreciate in others? Why?
I appreciate honesty and straightforwardness in those that lead.
Linda Rhyne-Mckinley - Class of 2017
Mecklenburg County Child Support Services
Quality and Training Manager/Supervisor
NCSEA U @ Leadership Symposium focuses on the emerging and learning leader. How do you
define leadership? Leadership is influence, empowerment and inspiring others to be more and do more
than they thought was possible. Leadership is helping others look inward and find their passion that will
guide them to their purpose in life.
Do you believe that attending NCSEA U helped shaped this definition? How or how not? Yes. It
helped to streamline and define leadership (and that a title doesn't define leadership). You can
lead/influence from where you are now.
Do you have a favorite quote that you refer to periodically? I love quotes and have several. However,
just sharing a couple:
"Your eyes are useless, when your mind is blind". "Leadership is not about being in charge. Leadership is
about taking care of those in our charge." Simon Sinek
"The only thing worse than being blind is having sight but no vision." Helen Keller