Achieving Better Results for Families: A Customer-Oriented Approach to Meeting Child Support...

8/13/2019 Achieving Better Results for Families: A Customer-Oriented Approach to Meeting Child Support Enforcement Goals

1/31

Achieving Better Results for FamiliesA Customer-Oriented Approach to Meeting Child SupportEnforcement Goals

By Joy Moses November 2013

WWW.AMERICANPROGRESS.ORG


2/31

Achieving Better Resultsfor FamiliesA Customer-Oriented Approach toMeeting Child Support Enforcement Goals

By Joy Moses November 2013


3/31

1 Introduction and summary

6 Background: American families are changing,existing systems are not keeping up

11 Moving forward: A role forchild support enforcement

24 Conclusion

25 About the author

26 Endnotes

Contents


4/31

1 Center for American Progress | Achieving Better Results for Families

Introduction and summary

In many ways, he coun ry is a much differen place han i was when PresidenLyndon B. Johnson ini ially declared he War on Pover y on January 8, 1964. Ashe 50 h anniversary o his monumen al even approaches in early 2014, somechallenges have lessened, new ones have emerged, and, hrough rial and error, hena ions policymakers and o her exper s have since iden ied a mul i ude o besprac ices or allevia ing and reducing pover y. Tese ac ors should be a par ohe na ions 50 h anniversary reec ions while also ligh ing a pa h orward in key

areas ha are relevan o modern an i-pover y effor s. One o hese areas is childsuppor and visi a ion assis ance or paren s who have separa ed rom one ano herand no longer live under he same roo .

During he early 1960s, 88 percen o children were living in wo-paren house-holds.1 By 2012, ha number had dropped drama ically o 68 percen .2 Paren s wi h he mos -limi ed educa ion and here ore earnings capaci y are evenmore likely o be separa ed rom heir childs o her paren . Clearly, imes havechanged. Shifing amily arrangemen s, along wi h popula ion grow h, sug-ges ha more and more amilies will a some poin need assis ance wi h issuesrela ed o co-paren ing.

Un or una ely, many amilies are no geting he help hey need. November 2013da a released by he U.S. Census Bureau sugges ha governmen effor s haveno evolved sufficien ly o appropria ely respond o changing amily rends anddynamics. Only 53 percen o cus odial mo hers have a child suppor order.3 TeCensus numbers, which accoun or amilies wi h and wi hou access o public bene s programs, are mos dismal or hose cus odial mo hers wi h charac eris-ics associa ed wi h pover y limi ed educa ion and never-married s a us. Wha s

more, a growing number o more-well-off women also do no have child suppororders. When i comes o visi a ion, 35 percen o cus odial paren s repor haheir child has no con ac wi h heir o her paren largely a hers.


5/31


Tis is an under-addressed issue in public policy even hough i lies in plain sighand affec s he 20.9 million children living wi h only one o heir paren s.4 oomany amilies live wi h he norms o no having ormal suppor arrangemen s, while hey are a he same ime in he dark abou heir legal righ s and responsibil-i ies and no able o afford legal assis ance even i hey are aware o heir righ s.

For some paren s, i may be hard o imagine a change in his s a us quo. Bu givenhe s akes involved, change mus occur. Cus odial mo hers wi hou child suppororders lose ou on nancial assis ance ha , on average, represen s 17 percen ohe income o hose who receive i .5 For poor cus odial mo hers who receive childsuppor , hese paymen s represen more han hal 52 percen o heir income,making nonpaymen o suppor a cri ical issue or he mos disadvan aged chil-dren and amilies.6 Compounding he si ua ion, oo many noncus odial a hershave insufficien employmen or child suppor orders ha assume hey can affordo pay more han hey ac ually can limi ing heir abili y o con ribu e o mo h-

ers incomes. Tey also have limi ed o no con ac wi h heir children, deprivingchildren o a paren s love and guidance. And all amily members could be unnec-essarily involved in or exposed o conic arising ou o cons an back-and- or h,in ormal nego ia ions abou money and visi a ion.

Peace ul conic resolu ion is he responsibili y o he na ions cour s; however,mul iple en i ies, such as he American Bar Associa ion, have declared ha s a ecour s are under unded and in crisis, wi h such concerns exis ing even be ore heGrea ecession o 2007 o 2009. A recen survey ound ha cour adminis ra orsin 15 s a es believe ha hey are less able o provide access and imely jus ice hanhey were jus our years ago. Given compe ing priori ies public educa ion andpublic sa e y, or example in he public sphere, various avenues or addressinghe problem o adequa e unding and access o jus ice mus be explored, and hisincludes ederal governmen in erven ions.

Te Child Suppor En orcemen , or CSE, program, a par nership be ween heederal and s a e governmen s, is curren ly he mos relevan exis ing programconcerned wi h addressing hese issues. Crea ed as a means o reimbursing hegovernmen or i s expendi ures on public bene s programs, CSEs mission

needs o evolve o have a grea er ocus on he bes in eres s o amilies. Manys a es, or s ar ers, have implemen ed pass- hrough policies ha dis ribu egrea er collec ions o low-income women and children ra her han keepinghem or governmen coffers.7


6/31


CSE could ake several more s eps in his evolu ion by re-envisioning i sel whollyas an agency ha ac s in he bes in eres o amilies, aking a cus omer-orien edapproach, and aiming o provide services ha help wi h amily-law needs rela edo child suppor and visi a ion. In signican ways, his would no subs an iallychange CSEs work; i would s ill be in he business o es ablishing suppor orders

and doing collec ions. Bu i would opera e wi h he addi ional mission o providing a service or amilies, requiring a new emphasis on cus omer service andevalua ing success based on he ou comes achieved by amilies, including reachingeconomic securi y and children spending more ime wi h a noncus odial paren ,ra her han how much money is cap ured by he s a e.

No only would his new ocus help reduce he pressure on he cour s, evidencerom model CSE programs sugges s ha shifs o more cus omer-orien edapproaches improve compliance, increase he amoun o child suppor moneycollec ed on behal o children, increase he amoun o ime a hers spend wi h

children, and promo e posi ive co-paren ing rela ionships. Finally, a cus omer-ori-en ed CSE wi h more-atrac ive services may be able o secure grea er volun arypar icipa ion ra her han have o rely on par icipa ion requiremen s ied o public bene s programs.

Policy change aimed a a more cus omer-orien ed approach should include:

Universally available mediation or o her orms o al erna ive dispu e resolu ion, which suppor bo h paren s in reaching heir own agreemen s abou child sup-por and visi a ion

Visitation assistance ha ex ends he reach o CSE beyond i s curren ocus onpa erni y es ablishmen s and child suppor orders

Making customer satisfaction a priority by providing s a es wi h he ools oimprove cus omer rela ions and regularly adminis er cus omer-sa is ac ion surveys. Good resul s should be rewarded and cen ral o he mission o CSE.

Addressing fairness concerns by ensuring ha more o collec ed unds reach

amilies requiring pass- hrough policies in he s a es and ha men are nopunished or being oo poor o pay ra her han jus unwilling

Fulfilling talent-management needs by alloca ing resources or he re rainingha will be necessary o implemen cus omer-orien ed approaches


7/31


Creating and implementing a public relations campaign designed o in orm hepublic abou he changes o CSE and he value o es ablishing ormal child supporand visi a ion orders and encourage compliance and volun ary par icipa ion

Tis would be a common-sense policy change designed o reec he needs o

amilies and o our na ion, bo h o which have experienced signican rans or-ma ion over he pas ve decades. Al hough some o hese approaches wouldalso resul in cos savings o s a es, s ar -up cos s will be needed. Te ederalgovernmen should help wi h hese cos s by emporarily increasing he amouno i s CSE- unding ma ch over a period o six years while expec ing s a es omain ain heir curren levels o inves men . Te ma ch should be 70 percenduring he rs our years $665 million per year in addi ional ederal inves -men s and hen s ar o phase ou , amoun ing o 68 percen or an addi ionalwo years, or $312 million per year in addi ional ederal inves men s, be orere urning o he curren level o 66 percen .

January 8, 2014, marks he 50 h anniversary o he War on Pover y. On ha da e,Presiden Johnson spelled ou his vision o Congress, ushering in a period osweeping legisla ive changes ha ul ima ely led o an 8 percen age poin drop inpover y in he 15-year period be ween 1963 and 1978.8

Cer ainly, major anniversaries are a good ime or reec ion, bu while looking backi is impor an o consider he u ure and o use hose reec ions o in orm he nexera o ac ion. We begin his new era in he shadow o wel are re orm in he 1990sand he s eady increases in pover y over more han a decade. Tese and o her soci-e al changes over he pas hal -cen ury sugges he need or bold ac ion in areas suchas employmen , amily s reng hening, cash assis ance, and social services.

e orms o his na ure should be considered in andem wi h re orms o heemporary Assis ance or Needy Families, or ANF, program. Since he ime o

wel are re orm, ANF a provider o cash assis ance and o her services has beensignican ly ocused on caseload reduc ion. Given ANFs role as one o he largesederal programs arge ing amilies living in pover y, his ack does no make muchsense. Ins ead, ANF should be ocused on pover y reduc ion and re ormed in con-

junc ion wi h o her nex -genera ion re orms ha advance ha goal.


8/31


Child suppor re orm s per ec ly in his conversa ion or he ollowing reasons:

Te drama ic grow h in non radi ional amilies, including unwed bir hs anddivorces, over he pas 50 years and he accompanying ineffec ive response ogovernmen sys ems

CSEs proven abili y o lif women and children ou o pover y, especially hoseamilies in which a hers have s able employmen and income

CSEs his ory o being considered by Congress in andem wi h ANF and child- wel are services in legisla ion, such as he Personal esponsibili y and WorkOppor uni y econcilia ion Ac o 1996, or P WOR

As we consider he nex genera ion o CSE services in he upcoming ex , le s rsexplore how we arrived in he place we are now.

Since he War on Pover y was declared in he early 1960s, he s ruc ure o he American amily has signican ly changed. Te socie al response has no sufficien lykep up wi h he changes, wi h cer ain indica ors sugges ing ha more amilies could bene rom help wi h child suppor and visi a ion. Te po en ial consequences o alack o ac ion include less income or childrearing, severed or hindered paren -childrela ionships, and unnecessary conic . Un or una ely, while he issue generally alls wi hin he jurisdic ion o s a e amily cour s, hey are experiencing unding and prose represen a ion challenges ha limi heir abili y o respond.


9/31


Background: American familiesare changing, existing systemsare not keeping up

Changes in the American family

Over he pas couple o decades, here has been remendous grow h in divorcera es and in he number o unwed bir hs; curren ly, 35 percen o amilies wi hchildren are headed by a single paren . (see Figure 1)9 Te rend is even more pro-

nounced in poor amilies 69 percen and in A rican American amilies 63percen . Tese circums ances equa e o an eleva ed need or child suppor and visi a ion help a need ha is unlikely o subside any ime soon, even i gains arerealized in he areas o amily orma ion, marriage, and keeping amilies oge her.

Families not served

Wi h more paren s separa ing in recen decades,here are a growing number o amilies ha may

bene rom help wi h child suppor and visi a-ion issues. Bu only 53 percen o all cus odialmo hers have a child suppor order, wi h henumbers being signican ly lower or never-married women, women o color, and hose wi h limi ed educa ion. Bu here is an emerg-ing new rend. (see able 1) Growing numberso whi e women and women belonging oca egories more indica ive o working- and

middle-class s a us divorced, college edu-ca ed, and ull- ime, year-round workers alsodo no have orders. In 2011, or example, 46

FIGURE 1

Growth in single-parent families, 19822012

0%

20%

34

40

62

68

40%

60%

80%

1982 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 2009

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Income, Poverty and Health Insurance in the United States (Historic Tables), available at http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/historical/families.html(last accessed November 2013).

Families generallyAfrican American

Living in poverty Hispanic


10/31


percen o mo hers working ull- ime, year round jobs did no have child sup-por orders.10 Tere are varying reasons why his is occurring, including he ac sha some mo hers believe suppor orders are unnecessary and ha some a herscanno afford o pay.11 Bu such circums ances also sugges ha more low-incomeamilies, and even some amilies wi h grea er means, would s and o bene rom

he ypes o services ha a cus omer-orien ed child suppor en orcemen sys emcould provide.

TABLE 1

Mothers with child support orders by category, selected years*

1995 2001 2007 2009 2011

Mothers generally 61% 63% 57% 55% 53%

Marital status

Never married

Divorced

44%

76%

52%

72%

44%

68%

46%

67%

44%

64%

Race

Black

Hispanic

White

46%

48%

72%

54%

52%

71%

47%

46%

66%

48%

48%

62%

41%

50%

59%

Education

High school

Associates degree

College

62%

66%

73%

63%

69%

70%

54%

59%

65%

51%

60%

61%

51%

59%

56%

Full-time, year-round worker 67% 66% 61% 58% 54%* U.S. Census data are inclusive of all families, including those with and without connections to public benets programs.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau,Custodial Mothers and Fathers and Their Child Support (U.S. Department of Commerce, 19952013)..

When i comes o visi a ion, 35 percen o cus odial paren s repor ed o heCensus Bureau ha heir child has no con ac wi h heir o her paren largelya hers. For amilies living in pover y, ha number is 44 percen . Tis means asignican ly large number o poor children have no con ac wi h heir a hers.More in orma ion is needed o de ermine how many a hers are absen rom heirchildrens lives or preven able reasons, including lack o access o conic -resolu-ion services or co-paren ing suppor s, he shame ied o no being able o providenancial suppor , and o her reasons, as opposed o absence ha is unpreven ableeven wi h he availabili y o suppor s, such as legal de ermina ions o being unor a simple unwillingness o main ain con ac .


11/31


Te s akes associa ed wi h his issue are high, impac ing a signican source oincome or amilies wi h children, as well as paren -child rela ionships. Considersome key ac s direc ly rela ed o child suppor :

Significance to family income. Child suppor , on average, represen s 17 percen

o a mo hers income.12

For some subca egories o mo hers, child suppor meanseven more. (see able 2)

Informal agreements are unlikely. Nine y-one percen o mo hers who receivechild suppor have a legal agreemen .13 Tus, very ew amilies gure i ou byhemselves and success ully manage suppor in an in ormal manner.

Noncustodial parents who have contact with their children are more likely topay full support. In 49 percen o cases where he child has con ac wi h heirnoncus odial paren , he ull amoun o child suppor is paid. Where here is no

con ac , only 31 percen o noncus odial paren s pay in ull.14

In shor , child suppor and visi a ion increase he economic securi y o womenand heir amilies. Tis is especially impor an or single-mo her-headed ami-lies, he amily ype mos likely o experience pover y and near pover y. Sincesingle-mo her-headed amilies are signican ly represen ed wi hin public bene sprograms, improvemen s in his groups economic securi y are likely o ransla ein o less reliance on hose programs.

When i comes o visi a ion assis ance, evalua ions o he minimally unded ed-eral Access and Visi a ion Program have demons ra ed ha helping amilies reachormal visi a ion arrangemen s is associa ed wi h mul iple bene s, includingincreased paren ing ime or a hers, more posi ive co-paren ing rela ionships, andincreased child suppor paymen s.

Tus, i is impera ive o amilies ha our na ional policies ge child suppor and visi a ion righ . o ensure his happens, here mus be an ongoing na ional conversa ion abou he value o hese services and he impor ance o having ormalagreemen s in place.


12/31


TABLE 2

Some subcategories of mothers have greater-than-average reliance onchild support*

Average child supportincome**

Child support as percent oftotal income

Mothers overall $5,160 17%

Less than high school graduate

High school graduate or GED

Some college

Associates degree

College degree or more

$3,838

$5,191

$5,768

$4,637

$6,678

32%

24%

19%

15%

12%

Full-time, year-round workers

Workers overall

$5,098

$5,107

11%

14%

Below poverty $3,822 52%

* Census data are inclusive of all f amilies, including those with and without connections to public benets programs.

** Child support income is tied to the employment stability and earnings levels of the fathers responsible for suppor t. Bettering the workoutcomes of the fathers of low-income children would increase the amounts paid to families in support.Source: U.S. Census Bureau,Custodial Mothers and Fathers and Their Child Support: 2009(U.S. Department of Commerce, 2011).

Court challenges

Cour s help main ain a civil socie y by akingon he responsibili y o peace ully resolvingdispu es among heir ci izens, including hosedispu es and legal ques ions ied o paren alsepara ions. Bu or some ime, he cour s have been experiencing impor an challenges in car-rying ou heir du ies.

Te mos signican challenge is unding. In2011, he American Bar Associa ion passed aresolu ion declaring ha s a e jus ice sys emsare under unded and in crisis.15 Over he pas

ew years, he issue o under unding has causednearly hal o he s a es o reduce servicesoffered o he public, while many also repor edincreased delays and backlogs, s aff layoffs, and

Since the mid-1990s, when Congress reformed welfare ansupport enforcement, CSE has exhibited success in its corof responsibility. Paternity establishments grew by more th60 percent, rising from nearly 1.1 million in 1996 to a peamillion in 2009. The number of child support orders estableach year has largely remained stable, with a large majoritthe caseload81 percenthaving an established child suporder in 2011. Collections have also steadily increased, grby 127 percent between 1996 and 2011.

Sources: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Annual Report to Congress ( 2009

Child support enforcement:

A history of success


13/31


delays in lling judicial and cour s aff vacancies.16 Looking ahead o he nex hree years, 31 s a es repor ha he level o cour services will remain rela ively hesame, while an addi ional ve s a es projec ha heir cour unc ions will become worse.17 In general, he cour s ofen ge he shor end o he s ick in undingdeba es. Public condence in he judicial branch is low, and o her issues such as

public educa ion and heal h care are viewed as higher priori ies.18

Fur her complica ing maters has been he rise in pro se represen a ion individu-als represen ing hemselves in cour over he pas ew decades.19 In Grounds orObjec ion, a 2011 Cen er or American Progress paper, he au hor poin ed o herising cos s o atorneys ees as a primary reason why more and more low-incomeand middle-class amilies were represen ing hemselves in cour and, par icularly,in amily-law maters.20 Pro se li igan s mus learn o naviga e some imes-complexcour processes wi hou a lawyer, which can be rus ra ing or hem and mean hai akes longer o resolve dispu es. Large numbers o hese cases can clog he sys em,

causing everyone o wai longer o have heir issues heard.


14/31


Moving forward: A role forchild support enforcement

Tere is clear value o be gained rom addressing he child suppor and visi a ionneeds o more o Americas amilies increased economic securi y in single-mo her amilies, po en ially reduced reliance on governmen , and improvedamily well-being hrough main aining paren -child connec ions and reducingunnecessary conic . o help advance hese gains, signican ly s epped-up gov-ernmen effor s are necessary. A he ederal level, he mos relevan program hacurren ly exis s is he a oremen ioned CSE.

CSE was crea ed in 1975 as a means o reimbursing he governmen or amoun sspen on public bene s. Since ha ime, he program has developed an impres-sive success record, effec ively es ablishing pa erni ies and child suppor orders while con inuously improving collec ion ra es. Bu his ini ial mission could andshould evolve o include more o an express aim o improving amily ou comesand aiding s a es in addressing he child suppor and visi a ion needs o heirci izens. Te change would leave he basic unc ions and curren successes ohe program in ac , including pa erni y and child suppor order es ablishmen sand collec ions. Bu a ocus on serving he needs o amilies and improving heirou comes does sugges more cus omer-orien ed approaches and some s ra egicservice expansions.

A more cus omer-orien ed approach would:

Improve he sa is ac ion, compliance, and ou comes o amilies who are alreadyrequired o par icipa e

Encourage new amilies o volun arily par icipa e, reducing he number o ami-

lies going wi hou help or placing demands on overburdened cour sys ems

Exis ing and emerging bes prac ices, de ailed nex , sugges a solid way orward indeveloping good cus omer-orien ed approaches buil on posi ive in erac ions wi hpar icipan s and he offering o s reamlined, desirable, and atrac ive services.


15/31


Mediation and other forms of alternative dispute resolution More amilies should have access to services that help them make their own decisions ortheir amilies while reducing conict in co-parenting relationships.

Legisla ion should guaran ee ha all CSE amilies are offered media ion

accompanied by appropria e domes ic violence pro ec ions or some o herorm o al erna ive dispu e resolu ion ha allows bo h paren s o have a say inhe decisions being made abou heir amilies, as well as he oppor uni y o haveamily-specic orders developed around he unique needs and circums ances oindividual amilies.

Wi hin he con ex o visi a ion or paren ing- ime arrangemen s, he ideal isde ailed paren ing plans ha aim o improve co-paren ing rela ionships by iden-i ying and addressing po en ial sources o u ure conic ahead o ime. Tere ispo en ial or child suppor orders o accoun or noncash orms o suppor ha

are so common among amilies bu curren ly no coun ed as a orm o suppor byCSE agencies; 57 percen o cus odial paren s bene rom having he o her par-en provide i ems such as child care, medical expenses, clo hes, and gifs.21

Available evidence suppor s he ransi ion oward media ion and o her orms oal erna ive dispu e resolu ion or CSE par icipan s. When compared o he adver-sarial cour process, various s udies have associa ed amily-law media ion wi h ahos o posi ive ou comes,22 including:

Speedier resolu ions educed cos s o proceedings Higher ra es o paren al sa is ac ion Grea er likelihood o coopera ive paren ing rela ionships Higher levels o a her-child con ac Grea er compliance wi h child suppor orders

In addi ion o his general research, limi ed ederal inves men s in media ionhrough he ederal Access and Visi a ion Program have had similar resul s orhe popula ions already being served by CSE. Tis was demons ra ed in a pair o

Heal h and Human Services s udies ha were published in 2002 and 2006 one by he Office o Child Suppor En orcemen , or OCSE, and ano her by he Officeo Inspec or General, or OIG. Tese wo agencies ound he ollowing:


16/31


Parenting time increases. For y-one percen o paren s who reached an agree-men in he OCSE s udy and 42 percen in he OIG s udy repor ed haa hers had increased visi s wi h heir children afer media ion.23

Co-parenting relationships show signs of improvement. Fa hers in he OCSE

s udy who repor ed ha heir rela ionships wi h he o her paren were hos ileand angry dropped rom 39 percen o 17 percen afer media ion.24 Similarly,cus odial paren s who are largely mo hers repor ing hos ile and angry rela-ions wi h he o her paren dropped rom 36 percen o 14 percen .25

Parents are more likely to pay support. For y- our percen o a hers in heOCSE s udy and 61 percen in he OIG s udy increased heir child sup-por paymen s afer par icipa ing in media ion o develop visi a ion arrange-men s.26 Grea er gains were made by a hers who were never married o hemo hers o heir children and by hose a hers who were no making ull pay-

men s prior o media ion.27

Evidence rom exas also suppor s he use o a hird par y o help paren s reachheir own agreemen s abou suppor and visi a ion.

In 2002, Texas instituted a statewide collaborative negotiation modelwhen it comes to support and visitation agreements, which is similarin concept and practice to mediation. Parents are invited to a meet-ing with a specially trained child support professional. That individualeducates parents about their rights and responsibilities and then worksto help them reach an agreement about child support and visitation.

For many child support workers, transitioning to this approach wasa challenge. They were accustomed to interacting with parents byphone or online and had to learn the people skills necessary to workand meet with parents in person.

Despite this challenge, the results have been overwhelmingly posi-tive. In 2011, the following was demonstrated:

Increased payments. Cases resolved through collaborativenegotiation resulted in an order compliance, or support payment,

rate that was about 18 percentage points higher than those gothrough the judicial system.

Quicker resolutions. Negotiated cases took an average of days to complete, while cases resolved through traditional maveraged 105 days.

Lower costs. The state estimates that the negotiated cases cslightly less than half the cost to resolve other child support visitation cases.

More efficient use of court time . Negotiated resolutions

up space on court dockets, allowing judges to focus on morelenging and complicated cases.

Sources: Cynthia Bryant, phone interview with author, April 23, 2013; Cynthia Bryant, Case ConEngaging Parents to Improve Performance (McLean, VA: National Child Suppor t Enforcement As2011); Cynthia Bryant, Case Conferences: A Better Way to Reach Agreements (Washington: U.S.Department of Health and Human Services, 2012).

The Texas model: Collaborative negotiation


17/31


Expanded visitation Advance legislation to expand CSEs mission to include visitation, allowing every amilyto be presented with the option o creating an order that outlines both child support andvisitation or parenting-time arrangements.

CSE agencies generally do no provide visi a ion help o amilies. OCSE doesadminis er a small Access and Visi a ion Gran ha has exis ed since 1997, bu i sna ionwide budge has never increased above $10 million per year despi e bipar-isan suppor rom bo h Presiden s George W. Bush and Barack Obama o growhe effor .28 Over ime, i s value has eroded wi h ina ion. ecen ly, he Obamaadminis ra ion wen a s ep ur her, recommending he incorpora ion o visi a ionarrangemen s in all new child suppor orders.29

Much could be gained rom his change. eplacing he curren bi urca ed sys em, which requires paren s o pursue wo separa e processes or child suppor and

visi a ion, wi h one pa hway ha simul aneously resolves bo h issues would bemore efficien . I would help wi h he cour s crisis by elimina ing rom heir dock-e s some cases solely ocused on one issue. Finally, i would help ar more amiliesachieve some o he posi ive resul s discussed above associa ed wi h he cur-ren ederal Access and Visi a ion Program, including more a her-child visi a ionime and increased paymen o child suppor , which increase he economic secu-ri y o single-mo her amilies and decrease heir reliance on governmen bene s.

Addi ionally, his change would reec good cus omer service. I saves par icipan she ime and effor ha would have been required o pursue separa e avenues or

visi a ion. I also communica es ha he sys em respec s a hers, acknowledgingha hey are valuable o heir children in ways o her han how much hey canafford o pay in child suppor .


18/31


19/31


20/31


CSE impressively serves he majori y o Americas separa ed amilies 62 per-cen bu here may be addi ional amilies who could bene rom assis ance.34 For y percen o separa ed amilies living below 200 percen o he pover y line areno served by CSE; some may be geting help elsewhere, while o hers may be ge -ing no help a all. Posi ive cus omer-service experiences and cus omer-orien ed

services have he po en ial o atrac he volun ary par icipa ion o hese ami-lies no required o engage in CSE, amilies ha as a resul o par icipa ion may become more economically secure and rely less on public bene s. Tis may beespecially rue o amilies on he brink or whom he added child suppor incomeequa es o no needing bene s such as ANF or SNAP ood assis ance. Previouss udies have documen ed such savings, bu more up- o-da e analysis is needed,including ha which accoun s or varying CSE program charac eris ics.35 Teseac ors sugges ha volun ary par icipa ion is an impor an i em o rack.

In order o suppor he s a es in heir racking effor s and learn rom cus omer-

sa is ac ion levels, Congress should ake he ollowing ac ions:

Appropria e new resources o pay or surveys, racking, and he implemen a iono model prac ices

Build he resul s o cus omer surveys in o he curren ly exis ing incen ive s ruc-ure. S a es ha consis en ly pos solid numbers or demons ra e progress should

be appropria ely rewarded or heir effor s. I s a es wan ed o collec heseincen ive dollars, agencies would have o draw upon exis ing resources and heirown crea ivi y o improve he experiences o heir clien s wi hin he sys em.


21/31


Improved talent managementContinued shifs to customer-oriented approaches will require a ocus on adequately preparing and supporting agency staff.

Effec ively implemen ing al erna ive dispu e-resolu ion s ra egies and innova-ive orms o ou reach and in orma ion dissemina ion would al er he way manyagencies do business. Caseworkers will need o develop new nego ia ion and

cus omer-service skills or in-person mee ings, phone conversa ions, and writenma erials. Impor an ly, hey will also have o learn new pro ocols, wi h leadershiprom HHS, or ensuring he sa e y o women and children involved in domes ic

violence and child-abuse si ua ions his is especially cri ical when implemen -ing al erna ive dispu e-resolu ion and visi a ion services ha may os er grea erin erac ions be ween a hers and amilies.

States and localities can pursue an array of approaches to informationand outreach that reect good customer service, helping improve theimage of CSE and attracting families to their offerings.

Here are some state and local examples:

San Franciscos EPIC project. The Enhanced Parental Involve-ment Collaboration, or EPIC, project employs a common-sense ap-proachsimplifying all correspondence sent to fathers, improvingone-on-one engagement over the phone and in person, providinginformation about rights and responsibilities, and engaging fathersin the establishment of their child support orders. The results: adrop in unusually high default rates, which fell from 61 percent to

14 percent in just three years.

Texass Access and Visitation Hotline. With a subgrant fromthe Texas child support program, Legal Aid of NorthWest Texasestablished a hotline to provide information and referrals for ad-ditional assistance to Texans with concerns related to access, visita-tion, and child support. The attorneys at Legal Aid handle calls fromboth mothers and fathers. In an evaluation of the program, morethan half of the parents said the hotline had been denitely or

probably helpful. About one-quarter of hotline users said pchild contact increased following their calls to the hotline.

Arizonas CSE. The state formed a special outreach unit thatmoves child-support employees out of the support office andcommunities and, sometimes, outside of traditional work houchild support staffers provide information to parents in placeas community centers, job fairs, homeless shelters, and food Although initially apprehensive, many parents walk away aptive of having their questions answered.

Other types of outreach and information provisions could impcustomer service, including courthouse assistance programs, e

tive uses of technologyincluding websites and social networingand effective partnerships with other entities in contact wthe service population.

Sources: Cynthia Bryant, phone interview with author, April 23, 2013; Michael Hayes, phone interwith author, June 4, 2013; Marjorie Clark, phone interview with author, April 24, 2013; U.S. Depaof Health and Human Services, Establish Realistic Child Support Orders: Engaging Non-Custodia(2012); Center for Family Policy and Practice, Federal Report Summarizes Program and Researchto Assist Non-Custodial Parents, CFFPP Policy Brieng 11 (8) (2009): 14, available athttp://www.corg/briefs/2009/brief_0910.pdf; Karen Roye, Enhanced Parental Involvement Collaboration (EPIFrancisco, CA: San Francisco Department of Child Support Services, 2007); Center for Policy ResEvaluation of the Texas Access and Visitation Hotline (2008).

An array of outreach and information options
http://www.cffpp.org/briefs/2009/brief_0910.pdfhttp://www.cffpp.org/briefs/2009/brief_0910.pdfhttp://www.cffpp.org/briefs/2009/brief_0910.pdfhttp://www.cffpp.org/briefs/2009/brief_0910.pdf


22/31


New raining oppor uni ies and ongoing pro essional developmen o CSE s aff will be needed o ge he bes possible resul s. Te exas example is in orma-ive. CSE s aff here had largely communica ed wi h program par icipan s via hecompu er and he elephone wi h he goal o garnering in orma ion and pursu-ing collec ions. Some had o make he shif o simul aneously working wi h bo h

paren s and nego ia ing agreemen s be ween hem wi hin he con ex o in-personmee ings. (see he exas model ex box)

alen managemen is crucial o he success o all o her re orms. I caseworkersnever appropria ely learn how o implemen new requiremen s and expec a ions,i will be impossible or agencies o succeed on behal o amilies, and any newinves men s in re orms will have been was ed. A he ex reme o bad resul s, hesa e y and well-being o amilies could be pu a risk.

New s ar -up unds or alen managemen are an appropria ions priori y requir-

ing a dedica ed line i em. HHS mus ake leadership in helping s a es wi h hisask, assis ing in developing curricula and in orma ive ma erials while also dis-ribu ing bes -prac ices in orma ion. HHS should also consider using ools suchas ederal agency-based na ional-service programs as a compe i ive recrui mens ra egy or placing emerging pro essionals in agencies hroughou he coun ry,as ou lined in a recen CAP repor , Te Grea Public-Service alen Search:Using Na ional Service o Grow and Develop Human esources or An ipover yPrograms and O her Public Needs.

Enhanced perceptions of fairness Adjusting policies that are un air to customers should be part o any customer-orientedapproach.

Cer ain CSE policies crea e si ua ions ha are un air o cus omers. Some mo h-ers, many o hem low income and s ruggling o make ends mee , may no receiveall or par o he money ha is collec ed on heir behal , as s a es can re ain undsin order o recoup public assis ance dollars expended on a amily.36 Since childsuppor , on average, represen s 30 percen o he income o mo hers on public

assis ance,37

governmen re en ion o he unds is cer ainly el by amilies.


23/31


Ano her signican concern is ied o dead-broke dads, a play on he phrasedeadbea dads ha was popularized o describe a hers who seem o un airlysuffer nega ive consequences or being oo poor o pay child suppor .38 Accordingo he U.S. Census Bureau, 16 percen o a hers paying child suppor have am-ily income below he pover y line and 21 percen have no worked in he pas

mon h.39

esearch has demons ra ed ha 80 percen o unpaid child suppordeb is owed by he lowes -income paren s.40 A signican cause o his problemis ha some low-income a hers are expec ed o pay more han hey can afford.Mos s a es have his orically engaged in a prac ice o seting de aul orders, whichassume a cer ain level o income and may be es ablished in a a hers absence, or aa her may experience a loss o income hrough ei her a job loss or pay cu bunever go hrough he process o having his order adjus ed.41

Impor an ly, he agencies are aware o hese issues and over he pas several yearshave been making progress in hese areas. Curren ly, 26 s a es have a pass- hrough

policy, meaning ha hey dis ribu e some or all collec ed dollars o amilies associ-a ed wi h ANF.42 Te Obama adminis ra ion and various s a e leaders have also been ac ively promo ing models or es ablishing and modi ying orders o beter wha men can afford o pay, as well as incorpora ing employmen help wi hinprogram offerings.43

More research is needed o evalua e how well s a es are progressing on hese ron s.Bu ederal legisla ive xes would ul ima ely resolve some o hese ques ions.

Congress should require all s a es o develop pass- hrough policies, allowing ami-lies o receive a minimum o 25 percen o he mon hly child suppor paymenha is collec ed on heir behal and eligible o be re ained by he governmenas repaymen or he ANF bene s being received by he amily. wen y-vepercen is a litle more han wha is curren ly offered by s a es ha have he leasgenerous pass- hrough policies.44 S a es should con inue o be encouraged o dis-regard all or some child suppor as amily income or he purpose o de erminingamilies ANF bene levels.

Fa hers should no experience nega ive consequences i hey are oo poor o

pay heir child suppor obliga ions. In developing heir child suppor plans orsubmission o he ederal OCSE, s a es should be required o include de ailedin orma ion abou how hey will ensure ha orders are correc ly es ablished andappropria ely modied when nancial circums ances change.


24/31


25/31


Federal ma ch unds elimina ed by he DR should be res ored in order os reng hen programs and allow hem o proceed wi h he DRs goal o improvingpass- hrough policies.

Bu here is s ill more work o do. Tis paper poin s o o her needs ha promo e

posi ive amily ou comes while advancing he goal o improving collec ions,including expanding access o al erna ive dispu e-resolu ion approaches and visi a ion, measuring and improving cus omer sa is ac ion, developing quali yalen -managemen ools, ensuring ha more a hers have orders ha reec whahey can afford o pay, and working o improve he image o CSE in communi ies.Tere is also ano her signican issue ha will be discussed in u ure CAP prod-uc s CSE employmen assis ance or a hers who nd i difficul o pay suppor .Tese new ini ia ives will require s ar -up unds.

During a previous round o signican CSE re orms in he 1980s, he ederal

governmen provided an adminis ra ive- unds ma ch o 70 percen ha wasdecreased over a period o six years o he curren ra e o 66 percen .48 Tena ion should reins i u e his s ruc ure, emporarily increasing i s CSE ma ch o70 percen and slowly decreasing ha amoun back down o 66 percen . S a esshould be expec ed o main ain he curren levels o spending coming rom heircoffers and produce plans or how hey will implemen re orms and spend newederal unds. I all s a es ake ull advan age o his oppor uni y, he addi ionalcos o he ederal governmen would be $665 million annually during he ini ialour years o he effor and $312 million annually or an addi ional wo yearsan amoun ha would be accompanied by he approxima ely $500 million per year associa ed wi h permanen ly reins i u ing he incen ive- unds ma ch ha was elimina ed in he DR.49

Tis approach does no reduce he s a es curren unding responsibili ies. Sincemany o he re orms sugges ed will likely reduce program cos s and/or only beemporary in na ure, increasing unding or s ar -up purposes only seems appro-pria e. Shifs rom judicial o al erna ive dispu e-resolu ion approaches are gener-ally associa ed wi h reduced cos s. exass collabora ive nego ia ion approach, orexample, reduced he amoun o ime spen on cases; he s a e es ima es program

cos s a sligh ly less han hal he price ag o es ablishing suppor orders hroughhe cour s.50 Adding visi a ion o CSEs offerings s reamlines processes by requir-


26/31


ing only one process, ra her han wo separa e processes, o de ermine visi a ionand es ablish suppor . Finally, some re orms aimed a addressing men who are oopoor o pay are also more cos effec ive. Sou h Carolina, or example, es ima esha i s effor s o provide nonpayers wi h employmen services ra her han jailinghem saved i s axpayers $7,500 per a her.51

O her sugges ed re orms likely will have s eeper cos s in he early years hendecrease over ime. alen managemen aimed a orien ing s aff o new prac icesin areas such as cus omer service requires more resources on he ron end, asnew ma erials are developed and all s aff mus be engaged. Bu ewer resourcesare required as ime progresses because developed ma erials are reused, andonly new s aff mus learn he basics. Likewise, public rela ions effor s aimed arecrea ing an agencys image should also be a heir mos resource in ensive inhe early years afer re orm.


27/31


28/31


About the author

Joy Moses is a Senior Policy Analys wi h he Pover y and Prosperi y program ahe Cen er or American Progress. Her work ocuses on s ra egies or preven ingand ending pover y, and her curren ocus areas include amily s reng hening poli-

cies, sa e y ne programs, race and pover y, and access o jus ice.


29/31


Endnotes

1 U.S. Census Bureau, Families and Living Arrangements:Historical Time Series, available at http://www.census.gov/hhes/families/data/historical.html (last accessedNovember 2013).

2 Ibid.

3 U.S. Census Bureau,Custodial Mothers and Fathers and

Their Child Support: 2011 (U.S. Department of Com-merce, 2013).

4 U.S. Census Bureau, Americas Families and LivingArrangements: Detailed Tables, available at http://www.census.gov/hhes/families/data/cps2012.html (lastaccessed November 2013).

5 U.S. Census Bureau,Custodial Mothers and Fathers andTheir Child Support: 2011 .

6 Ibid.

7 National Conference of State Legislatures, State Poli-cies Regarding Pass-Through and Disregard of CurrentMonths Child Suppor t Collected for Families Receiving TANF-Funded Cash Assistance, available athttp://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/state-policy-pass-through-disregard-child-support.aspx (last accessedNovember 2013).

8 U.S. Census Bureau, Historical Poverty Tables, availableat http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/historical/index.html (last accessed November 2013).

9 Ibid.


11 Ibid.

12 Ibid.

13 Ibid.

14 U.S. Census Bureau, Census Bureau Report Shows Morethan $14 Billion in Payments to Custodial Parents NotReceived, Press release, November 20, 2013, availableat http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/ar-chives/children/cb13-191.html .

15 Peter T. Grossi Jr., Jon L. Mills, and Konstantina Vagenas,Crisis in the Courts: Reconnaissance and Recommen-dations (Washington: National Center for State Courts,2012).

16 National Center for State Courts, Fiscal Year 2013COSCA Budget Survey Analysis (2013).

17 Ibid.

18 National Center for State Courts and Justice at Stake,Funding Justice: Strategies and Messages for RestoringCourt Funding (2012).

19 Joy Moses, Grounds for Objection: Causes and Con-sequences of Americas Pro Se Crisis and How to Solvethe Problem of Unrepresented Litigants (Washington:Center for American Progress, 2011), available at http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/06/pdf/objec-tion.pdf.

20 Ibid.


22 See Andrew I. Schepard, Children, Courts, and Custody:Interdisciplinary Models for Divorcing Families (UnitedKingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2004); R.E. Emeryand others, Child custody mediation and litigation:

custody, contact and coparenting 12 years after initialdispute resolution, Journal of Consulting and ClinicalPsychology 69 (2) (2001): 323332; Office of Child Sup-port Enforcement, Child Access and Visitation Programs:Participant Outcomes (U.S. Department of Health andHuman Services, 2006).

23 Office of Child Support Enforcement, Child Access andVisitation Programs: Participant Outcomes ; Office ofInspector General, Effectiveness of Access and VisitationGrant Programs (U.S. Department of Health and HumanServices, 2002).

24 Ibid.

25 Ibid.

26 Ibid.

27 Ibid.

28 Joy Moses, Parenting with a Plan: How TANF CanSupport Positive Parenting Relationships and FosterFather Involvement (Washington: Center for AmericanProgress, 2009), available at http://www.american-progress.org/issues/poverty/news/2009/11/17/6887/parenting-with-a-plan/ .

29

Office of Child Support Enforcement, Child Support andFatherhood Initiative in the Administrations FY 2014Budget, April 15, 2013, available athttp://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/css/resource/child-support-and-fatherhood-initiative-in-the-administrations-fy-2014 .

30 Office of Inspector General,Child Support EnforcementCustomer Service: Parent Perceptions of Telephone andOffice Visit Experiences in Four States (U.S. Department ofHealth and Human Services, 2003).

31 Ibid.

32 Karen Roye, Enhanced Parental Involvement Collabora-tion (EPIC) (San Francisco, CA: San Francisco Depart-ment of Child Support Services, 2007).

33 Office of Child Support Enforcement, FY2012 Prelimi-nary Report to Congress (U.S. Department of Health andHuman Services, 2013).

34 Kye Lippold and Elaine Sorensen, Characteristics ofFamilies Served by the Child Support (IV-D) Program:2010 Census Survey Results (Washington: UrbanInstitute, 2013).

35 See Burt S. Barnow and others, The Potential of theChild Support Enforcement Program to Avoid Costs toPublic Programs: A Review and Synthesis of the Litera-ture (Falls Church, VA: The Lewin Group, 2000); Centerfor Law and Social Policy, The Child Support ProgramBenets the Public by Reducing Public AssistanceCosts (date not indicated).

36 42 U.S.C. 657.
http://www.census.gov/hhes/families/data/historical.htmlhttp://www.census.gov/hhes/families/data/historical.htmlhttp://www.census.gov/hhes/families/data/cps2012.htmlhttp://www.census.gov/hhes/families/data/cps2012.htmlhttp://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/state-policy-pass-through-disregard-child-support.aspxhttp://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/state-policy-pass-through-disregard-child-support.aspxhttp://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/state-policy-pass-through-disregard-child-support.aspxhttp://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/historical/index.htmlhttp://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/historical/index.htmlhttp://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/children/cb13-191.htmlhttp://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/children/cb13-191.htmlhttp://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/06/pdf/objection.pdfhttp://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/06/pdf/objection.pdfhttp://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/06/pdf/objection.pdfhttp://www.americanprogress.org/issues/poverty/news/2009/11/17/6887/parenting-with-a-plan/http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/poverty/news/2009/11/17/6887/parenting-with-a-plan/http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/poverty/news/2009/11/17/6887/parenting-with-a-plan/http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/css/resource/child-support-and-fatherhood-initiative-in-the-administrations-fy-2014http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/css/resource/child-support-and-fatherhood-initiative-in-the-administrations-fy-2014http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/css/resource/child-support-and-fatherhood-initiative-in-the-administrations-fy-2014http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/css/resource/child-support-and-fatherhood-initiative-in-the-administrations-fy-2014http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/css/resource/child-support-and-fatherhood-initiative-in-the-administrations-fy-2014http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/css/resource/child-support-and-fatherhood-initiative-in-the-administrations-fy-2014http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/poverty/news/2009/11/17/6887/parenting-with-a-plan/http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/poverty/news/2009/11/17/6887/parenting-with-a-plan/http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/poverty/news/2009/11/17/6887/parenting-with-a-plan/http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/06/pdf/objection.pdfhttp://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/06/pdf/objection.pdfhttp://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/06/pdf/objection.pdfhttp://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/children/cb13-191.htmlhttp://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/children/cb13-191.htmlhttp://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/historical/index.htmlhttp://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/historical/index.htmlhttp://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/state-policy-pass-through-disregard-child-support.aspxhttp://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/state-policy-pass-through-disregard-child-support.aspxhttp://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/state-policy-pass-through-disregard-child-support.aspxhttp://www.census.gov/hhes/families/data/cps2012.htmlhttp://www.census.gov/hhes/families/data/cps2012.htmlhttp://www.census.gov/hhes/families/data/historical.htmlhttp://www.census.gov/hhes/families/data/historical.html


30/31



38 See Blaine Harden, Dead Broke Dads Child SupportStruggle, The New York Times, January 29, 2002,available at http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/29/us/dead-broke-dads-child-support-struggle.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm; Silja J. A. Talvi,Deadbeat dads - or just dead broke?, The ChristianScience Monitor , February 4, 2002, available at http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0204/p20s01-wmgn.html; Keith L. Alexander, Report Faults Handling of Fathers,The Washington Post , August 23, 2007, available athttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/22/AR2007082202680.html.

39 U.S. Census Bureau, Support Providers: 2010, Table 3, available at http://www.census.gov/people/childsup-port/data/providers2010.html (last accessed November2013).

40 Jacquelyn Boggess, Low-Income Fathers and ChildSupport Debt (Madison, WI: Center for Family Policyand Practice, 2010).

41 Ibid.; Office of Inspector General,The Establishment ofChild Support Orders for Low Income Non- custodial Par-ents (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,2000).

42 National Conference of State Legislatures, State Poli-

cies Regarding Pass-Through and Disregard of CurrentMonths Child Support Collected for Families Receiving TANF-Funded Cash Assistance.

43 See Office of Child Support Enforcement, FactSheet Series (U.S. Department of Health and Hu-man Services, 20112013), available at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/css/resource-library/search?tag=5432#?tag=5432.

44 According to the National Council of State Legislatures,most participating states pass through $50 to 100 permonth. Census Bureau data indicate that the averagecustodial parent living in poverty receives $326 permonth based on national-level averages. This meansthat pass-through amounts represent between 15percent and 31 percent of child support funds receivedby parents living in poverty. Policymakers should aimto create a percentage-of-payment standard, sincedollar-amount standards lose value with ination. See National Conference of State Legislatures, State Poli-cies Regarding Pass-Through and Disregard of CurrentMonths Child Suppor t Collected for Families Receiving TANF-Funded Cash Assistance; U.S. Census Bureau,Custodial Mothers and Fathers and Their Child Support:2011.

45 Government Accountability Office, Child SupportEnforcement: Departures from Long-term Trends inSources of Collection and Caseloads Reect RecentEconomic Conditions, GAO-11-196 (2011).

46 Ibid.

47 Ibid.

48 42 U.S.C. 655(a).

49 Authors estimates; Government Accountability Office,Child Support Enforcement: Departures from Long-term Trends in Sources of Collection and Caseloads

Reect Recent Economic Conditions; Office of ChildSupport Enforcement, FY2012 Preliminary Report toCongress .

50 Moses, Parenting with a Plan; Cynthia Bryant, CaseConferences: A Better Way to Reach Agreements, ChildSupport Report 34 (3) (2012): 67, available athttp://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/les/ocse/csr1203.pdf .

51 Irene Luckey and Lisa Potts, Alternative to incarcerationfor low-income non-custodial parents, Child and FamilySocial Work 16 (1) (2011): 2232.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/29/us/dead-broke-dads-child-support-struggle.html?pagewanted=all&src=pmhttp://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/29/us/dead-broke-dads-child-support-struggle.html?pagewanted=all&src=pmhttp://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/29/us/dead-broke-dads-child-support-struggle.html?pagewanted=all&src=pmhttp://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0204/p20s01-wmgn.htmlhttp://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0204/p20s01-wmgn.htmlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/22/AR2007082202680.htmlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/22/AR2007082202680.htmlhttp://www.census.gov/people/childsupport/data/providers2010.htmlhttp://www.census.gov/people/childsupport/data/providers2010.htmlhttp://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/css/resource-library/search?tag=5432#?tag=5432http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/css/resource-library/search?tag=5432#?tag=5432http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/css/resource-library/search?tag=5432#?tag=5432http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/ocse/csr1203.pdfhttp://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/ocse/csr1203.pdfhttp://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/ocse/csr1203.pdfhttp://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/ocse/csr1203.pdfhttp://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/css/resource-library/search?tag=5432#?tag=5432http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/css/resource-library/search?tag=5432#?tag=5432http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/css/resource-library/search?tag=5432#?tag=5432http://www.census.gov/people/childsupport/data/providers2010.htmlhttp://www.census.gov/people/childsupport/data/providers2010.htmlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/22/AR2007082202680.htmlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/22/AR2007082202680.htmlhttp://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0204/p20s01-wmgn.htmlhttp://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0204/p20s01-wmgn.htmlhttp://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/29/us/dead-broke-dads-child-support-struggle.html?pagewanted=all&src=pmhttp://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/29/us/dead-broke-dads-child-support-struggle.html?pagewanted=all&src=pmhttp://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/29/us/dead-broke-dads-child-support-struggle.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm


31/31

The Center for American Progress is a nonpartisan research and educational institute

dedicated to promoting a strong, just, and free America that ensures opportunity

for all. We believe that Americans are bound together by a common commitment to

these values and we aspire to ensure that our national policies reflect these values.

We work to find progressive and pragmatic solutions to significant domestic and

international problems and develop policy proposals that foster a government that

is of the people, by the people, and for the people.

Date post:	04-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	center-for-american-progress
View:	215 times
Download:	0 times

Achieving Better Results for Families: A Customer-Oriented Approach to Meeting Child Support...

Documents