April 2024 CSQ

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Through its public hearings around the country, testimony before Congress, appearances on national television shows, and news media campaign, it highlighted the critical importance of timely financial support as a way to raise children out of poverty. Its report to Congress resulted in laws and processes that are now quite familiar. Many focused on automation—the establishment of federal and state case registries, federal and state directories of new hires, automated income withholding, expanded automated locate resources, and financial institution data matches. In order to use automated enforcement, Congress also enacted laws to make past due child support payments vested judgments not subject to retroactive modification. As a result, child support collections increased. In 1990, only about 56% of IV-D cases had orders and only about 18% of IV-D cases had payments. ii In 2010, about 79% of IV-D cases had orders and about 56% of IV-D cases had payments. iii But the pendulum swing with its heavy emphasis on enforcement—needed at the time—was extreme. As enforcement became increasingly automated, research highlighted that many support orders exceeded people’s ability to pay. And automated enforcement didn’t offer avenues to address parenting time, non-adversarial agreements, or fears of increased domestic violence due to the enforcement.
Rightfully, the child support program has sought a greater balance. It continues to provide the core services of locate, establishment, enforcement, and review and adjustment. But we also strive to be more holistic in working with families. We encourage consent procedures. More than 30 states operate a child support-led employment program for noncustodial parents. And Congress has highlighted the importance of establishing parenting time arrangements, accompanied by strong family violence safeguards, when obtaining child support orders. The most visible signal of the program’s evolution is the change of the federal agency’s name from the Office of Child Support Enforcement to the Office of Child Support Services. Of course, the program will continue to evolve. The demographics and desires of our workforce as well as the families we serve—and could be serving—will continue to change. There will be an ongoing need for interagency collaboration, tribal and state cooperation, and review of laws and policies to ensure they have an equitable impact and balance enforcement with family-centered practices. Systems need to be nimbler. We need to continue to address barriers to effective processing of
Page 2 and 3: Table of Contents April 2024 Execut
Page 4 and 5: innovative solutions. I attended se
Page 7: Balancing Act: The Shifting Focus o
Page 11 and 12: Moving the Program Forward: Final R
Page 13 and 14: to protect and enhance Tribal lands
Page 15 and 16: now has “an important tool to hel
Page 17 and 18: of the Tax Reduction Act of 1975. O
Page 19 and 20: Income of both parents: $15,000 Par
Page 21 and 22: From Customer to Commissioner by Vi
Page 23 and 24: Employment Demonstration (CSPED). I
Page 25 and 26: support. Better-off fathers, on the
Page 27 and 28: ACF meet with stakeholders to reexa
Page 29 and 30: communications strategy and conduct
Page 31 and 32: Creation of the Child Support Reent
Page 33 and 34: incarcerated parent with a copy of
Page 35 and 36: NCSEA 2024 Policy Forum Wrap-up:
Page 37 and 38: employment on the various programs
Page 39 and 40: Carla West Connie Chesnik Corrinne

April 2024 CSQ

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?