Section 11. Child Support Enforcement Program BACKGROUND The enactment of the Child Support Enforcement (CSE) program in 1975 represented a major new commitment on the part of the Congress to address the problem of nonsupport of children. Although prior to that time the Social Security Act had included provisions which were aimed at improving the collection of support on behalf of children, these provisions had not proved to be effective. The 1975 amendments were aimed at strengthening in a very significant way the efforts of the Federal and State Governments to improve the enforcement of child support obligations. The 1975 legislation (Public Law 93-647) added a new part D to title IV of the Social Security Act. The statute, as amended, authorizes Federal matching funds to be used for enforcing the support obligations owed by noncustodial parents to their children and the custodial parent, locating absent parents, establishing paternity, and obtaining child and spousal support. Basic responsibility for administering the program is left to the States, but the Federal Government plays a major role in funding, monitoring and evaluating State programs, providing technical assistance, and in certain instances, in giving direct assistance to the States in locating absent parents and obtaining support payments from them. The program requires the provision of child support enforcement services for both welfare and nonwelfare families and requires States to publicize frequently, through public service announcements, the availability of child support enforcement services, together with information about the application fee and a telephone number or address to be used to obtain additional information. PROGRAM TRENDS Table 11-1 summarizes child support enforcement program trends since 1978. In 1993, $2.2 billion was spent to collect $9.0 billion. A sum of $3.98 was collected for every $1 of administrative expense. This was up by 38 percent from the low point of only $2.89 per dollar of administrative expense in 1982. Also, 553,000 paternities were established; 4,481,000 absent parents were located; 1,038,000 support obligations were established; collections were made for an average of 2,827,000 cases, 241,880 families were removed from AFDC because of child support collections; and 12.0 percent of AFDC payments were saved as a result of child support enforcement. Table 11-2 compares various measures of the effectiveness of the child support enforcement program between administrative data and census data. The first four rows of table 11-2 are from the Office of Child Support Enforcement and illustrate huge increases in total constant dollar collections, the number of absent parents located, and paternities and awards that were established between 1978 and 1989. The bottom portion of the table based on census data presents an entirely different picture of the effectiveness of the child support enforcement program. For example, rather than having total real collections increase by 165 percent, it shows that total real collections increased by only 26 percent between 1978 and 1989. Other measures of effectiveness from census data illustrate a similar picture. One possible explanation for this different picture is that the official child support enforcement statistics are capturing collections that were being made anyway. Since income from census survey data tends to be underreported on household surveys, the truth may lie somewhere in between. To receive AFDC, mothers must assign their support rights to the AFDC agency. As a result, another problem with survey data is that AFDC mothers included in the CPS survey are asked only to report child support received and are not supposed to report any portion of their AFDC grant as child support, except for the $50 pass-through. The terms in table 11-2 from the Census are defined as follows. The term ``demographically eligible'' includes all women who are living with children under 21 years of age whose natural fathers are not living in the household. This includes ever-divorced (including remarried) or currently separated women. The percent with awards are the women with court-ordered payments. The reason the percent ``supposed to receive payment'' is different from the percent with awards is that some mothers awarded payments were not due them for the year in question. DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS A sizable and growing proportion of American households are families that consist only of a mother and her children. Between 1970 and 1992, the number of female-headed families with children under 18 increased 164 percent; the number of such two-parent families declined by 4 percent. As a result, by 1992 nearly one out of every four children under 18 in the United States lived in a family where the mother was never married or the father was not living with his child or children because of death, divorce, or separation. An unprecedented number of children live in single-parent homes, many without adequate or any support from the other parent. TABLE 11-1.--PROGRAM OPERATIONS, SUMMARY OF NATIONAL (FEDERAL AND STATE) STATISTICS, FISCAL YEARS 1978-93 [Numbers in thousands, dollars in millions] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1978 1980 1982 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total child support collections.... $1,047 $1,478 $1,770 $2,378 $2,696 $3,246 $3,917 $4,605 $5,241 $6,010 $6,886 $7,965 $8,909 In 1993 dollars\1\............. $2,282 $2,574 $2,585 $3,219 $3,523 $4,137 $4,854 $5,483 $5,955 $6,505 $7,095 $7,951 ....... Total AFDC collections\2\.......... $472 $603 $786 $1,000 $1,092 $1,225 $1,349 $1,486 $1,593 $1,750 $1,984 $2,259 $2,417 Federal........................ $311 $246 $311 $402 $341 $369 $413 $449 $458 $533 $626 $738 $777 State.......................... $148 $274 $354 $448 $415 $424 $473 $525 $563 $620 $700 $789 $847 Total non-AFDC collections......... $575 $874 $984 $1,378 $1,604 $2,019 $2,569 $3,119 $3,648 $4,260 $4,902 $5,706 $6,493 Total administrative expenditures.. $312 $466 $612 $723 $814 $941 $1,066 $1,171 $1,363 $1,606 $1,804 $1,995 $2,241 Federal........................ $236 $349 $459 $507 $571 $633 $750 $804 $938 $1,061 $1,212 $1,343 $1,517 State.......................... $76 $117 $153 $216 $243 $308 $316 $366 $426 $545 $593 $652 $724 Federal incentive payments to States and localities............. $54 $72 $107 $134 $145 $158 $185 $222 $266 $264 $278 $299 $339 Average number of AFDC cases in which a collection was made....... 458 503 597 647 684 582 609 621 658 701 755 831 873 Average number of non-AFDC cases in which a collection was made....... 249 243 448 547 654 786 934 1,083 1,247 1,363 1,555 1,749 1,954 Number of parents located.......... 454 643 779 875 878 1,046 1,145 1,388 1,628 2,062 2,577 3,706 4,481 Number of paternities established.. 111 144 173 219 232 245 269 307 339 393 472 516 553 Number of support obligations established....................... 315 374 462 573 669 731 812 871 938 1,022 \4\821 894 1,038 Percent of AFDC assistance payments recovered through child support collections....................... (\3\) 5.2 6.8 7.0 7.3 8.6 9.1 9.8 10.0 10.3 10.7 11.4 12.0 Total child support collections per dollar of total administrative expenses.......................... $3.35 $3.17 $2.89 $3.29 $3.31 $3.45 $3.68 $3.93 $3.84 $3.74 $3.82 $3.99 $3.98 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\Adjusted for inflation using fiscal CPI. \2\AFDC collections are divided into State/Federal shares and incentives are taken from the Federal share thereby reducing the Federal amounts. \3\Not available. \4\Data beginning in 1991 exclude modifications of support orders. Source: Office of Child Support Enforcement. TABLE 11-2.--COMPARISON OF MEASURES OF IV-D EFFECTIVENESS WITH CENSUS CHILD SUPPORT DATA, 1978-89 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Year Percent Measure ----------------------------------------- change, 1978 1983 1985 1987 1989 1978-89 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From program statistics: Total collections (1989 dollars in billions)\1\..... $2.0 $2.5 $3.1 $4.3 $5.3 165 Parents located (thousands)...... 454 831 878 1,145 1,624 258 Paternities established (thousands)...... 111 208 232 269 339 205 Awards established (thousands)...... 315 496 669 812 936 197 From Census surveys: Total collections (1989 dollars in billions)\1\..... $8.9 $8.8 $8.3 $10.9 $11.2 26 IV-D collections as percent of total collections 23 28 37 39 47 104 Of demographically eligible, percent with awards...... 59 58 61 59 58 -2 Of demographically eligible, percent supposed to receive payment.. 48 46 50 51 50 4 Of demographically eligible, percent who received some payment.......... 35 35 37 39 37 6 Of mothers supposed to receive payment, percent who received full amount........... 49 50 48 51 51 4 Percent of poor female-headed families with child support or alimony.......... \2\18. 6 NA NA 26.0 26.9 \3\45 Child support and alimony as a percent of total income received by poor female- headed families.. \2\4.7 NA NA 5.5 5.8 \3\23 Percent of female- headed families with child support or alimony.......... \2\33. 9 NA NA 35.8 37.4 \3\10 Child support and alimony as a percent of total income received by female-headed families......... \2\7.4 NA NA 6.8 7.7 \3\4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ \1\Constant (1989) dollars using CPI. \2\1979 data. \3\Percentage change 1979 to 1989. NA--Not available. Note.--Demographically eligible means women with own children under 21 years of age living with them from an absent father. Sources: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Child Support and Alimony, Current Population Reports, Series P-23, 1978, No. 112; 1983, No. 141; 1985, No. 152; 1987, No. 67; and 1989, No. 173. In 1992, nearly 46 percent of the 8.2 million families maintained solely by the mother with children under 18, had incomes below the poverty threshold. Almost 11 percent of the mothers of these poor children worked full-time, full-year. In 1992, 17.6 million children (under 18) lived with only one parent, 114 percent more than in 1970. Even though the total number of children under 18 years old in the United States declined from 69.2 million in 1970 to 66 million in 1992, the number of children affected by divorce, separation, and unmarried status of mother continued to rise. Almost 27 percent of all children lived in a one-parent family in 1992, compared with 12 percent in 1970. A 1985 current population survey indicated that about 15 percent of children living in two-parent married-coupled families were living with a step- parent. Of the 17.6 million children living with one parent, 88 percent lived with their mothers and 12 percent with their fathers. Between 1970 and 1992 the number of children living with only their fathers grew by 192 percent (from 748,000 to 2,182,000). The proportion of all children who lived with only their fathers rose from 1.1 percent to 3.3 percent. The largest number of children in one-parent families had a parent who was divorced, followed by children whose parents were never married. In 1992, of the children who lived only with one parent, 37 percent had a parent who was divorced, 24 percent had a parent who was separated, and 34 percent had a parent who had never been married. The number of children living with a divorced parent has almost tripled since 1970, but the number with a never-married parent grew nearly elevenfold. THE PROCESS OF CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT Local family and domestic courts and administrative agencies handle the establishment and enforcement of child support obligations according to Federal, State, and local laws. Working with the parents and considering the best interests of the children, the courts decide which parent will have custody of the children, the amount of the child support obligation of the noncustodial parent, the rights of access to the children by the noncustodial parent, and how the support obligation will be enforced. The federally mandated child support enforcement program provides services aimed at locating absent parents, establishing paternity, establishing a support obligation, and enforcing the support obligation. The child support enforcement program does not provide services aimed at other issues between parents, such as property settlement, custody, and access to the children. These issues are handled by local courts with the help of private attorneys. Any parent who needs help in locating an absent parent, establishing paternity, establishing a support obligation, or enforcing a support obligation may apply for services. Parents receiving benefits under the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program, the federally assisted foster care program or the Medicaid program automatically receive services. Services are free to such recipients, but others are charged up to $25 for services. States can charge fees on a sliding scale, pay the fee out of State funds or recover the fees from the noncustodial parent. When a parent applies for child support enforcement services, the following information aids the process: the name and address of the noncustodial parent; the absent parent's Social Security number; children's birth certificates; the child support order; the divorce decree or separation agreement; the name and address of the most recent employer of the noncustodial parent; the names of friends and relatives or organizations to which the noncustodial parent might belong; information about income and assets; and any other information about absent parents that might help the locating process. Once this information is provided, it is used in strictest confidence. If the child support enforcement program cannot locate the noncustodial parent with the information provided by the custodial parent, it must try to locate the noncustodial parent through the State parent locator service. The State uses various information such as telephone directories, motor vehicle registries, tax files, and employment data. The State also can ask the Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS) to locate the noncustodial parent. The FPLS can access data from the Social Security Administration, the Internal Revenue Service, the Selective Service System, the Department of Defense, the Veterans' Administration, and the National Personnel Records Center. Under the Family Support Act of 1988 (P.L. 100-485), States are required to initiate the establishment of paternity for all children under the age of 18, including those for whom an action to establish paternity was previously dismissed because of the existence of a statute of limitations of less than 18 years. The act also sets paternity establishment standards for the States, and encourages them to create simple civil procedures for establishing paternity in contested cases. All parties to a contested case may be required to submit to genetic testing. The Federal Government pays 90 percent of the laboratory costs, and States may charge persons not receiving AFDC for the cost of establishing paternity. Under the Family Support Act of 1988, a State must use its child support award guidelines in establishing the child support obligation of the noncustodial parent. Also, the State must review and adjust individual awards every 3 years under certain circumstances beginning October 13, 1993. Some States base their guidelines on net income and others on gross income. Some States factor in health care, day care, and extraordinary expenses while other States allow for deviation from the guideline if an extraordinary expense is shown. States generally use one of three basic types of guidelines to determine award amounts. ``Income shares,'' which is based on the combined income of both parents is used in 32 States; ``percentage-of-income,'' which is based on the number of eligible children, which is then used to determine a percentage of the noncustodial parents' income to be paid in child support is used in 17 States; and ``Melson-Delaware,'' which provides a minimum self-support reserve for parents before the cost of rearing the children is prorated between the parents to determine the award amount is used in 3 States. Local courts and child support enforcement agencies attempt to collect child support when the noncustodial parent does not pay. Under the Family Support Act of 1988, the State must impose wage withholding on the noncustodial parent in all newly issued or modified child support enforcement program cases. As of October 1, 1990, wage withholding will apply to all other newly issued child support orders beginning in 1994. Other techniques for enforcing support include regular billings, delinquency notices, liens on property, seizure and sale of property, reporting arrearages to credit agencies, garnishment of wages, and offsetting of State and Federal income taxes. States might bring charges of criminal nonsupport against noncustodial parents if they cannot collect, or they might use civil or criminal contempt-of-court charges. These court proceedings usually involve much time because of court backlogs, delays, and continuances. Once a court decides the case, noncustodial parents often have been given probation or suspended sentences, and lower support payments and only partial payment of arrearages. To combat problems associated with court delays, the statute requires States to implement expedited processes under the State judicial system or State administrative processes for obtaining and enforcing support orders and at State option for establishing paternity. The most difficult child support orders to enforce are the interstate cases. States are required to cooperate in interstate child support enforcement, but problems arise from the additional autonomy of the local courts. Family law has been under the jurisdiction of State and local governments, and citizens fall under the jurisdiction of the courts where they live. If the noncustodial parent lives out of State, the primary tool for interstate enforcement is the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (URESA). All States have their own URESA laws. Under these laws, the child support enforcement official or private attorney files a two-State petition with the enforcement agency or a court in another State. Where the URESA provisions in the two States are compatible, the law can be used effectively. However, many of these laws are out of date and incompatible, which makes interstate child support enforcement relatively ineffective. The National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws originally drafted a model URESA in 1950. Since then, amendments have been made in 1952, 1958, and 1968. The Family Support Act of 1988 authorized a commission to study problems in interstate child support enforcement. One of the Commission's recommendations to Congress is to replace URESA with UIFSA, the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act, a model State law for handling child support cases drafted by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. Child support awards In 1989, of the 10.0 million women who had children present under the age of 21 from a noncustodial father, 42 percent never were awarded child support rights (nor had an agreement to receive child support payments) and, thus, were dependent for income on sources other than the father. For poor mothers, the proportion without child support awards was even higher at 57 percent (see table 11-4). TABLE 11-3.--CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENTS IN 1978, 1981, 1983, 1985, 1987, AND 1989 [Women as of spring 1979, 1982, 1984, 1986, 1988, and 1990. Child support payments for women with own children under 21 years of age present from an absent father: alimony payment for ever-divorced women] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Number (thousands) Percent distribution ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1978 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1978 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total............................................. 7,094 8,387 8,690 8,808 9,415 9,955 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Awarded\1\.............................................. 4,196 4,969 5,015 5,396 5,554 5,748 59.1 59.2 57.7 61.3 59.0 57.7 Supposed to receive payments........................ 3,424 4,043 3,995 4,381 4,829 4,953 48.3 48.2 46.0 49.7 51.3 49.8 Not supposed to receive payments.................... 772 926 1,020 1,015 725 795 10.9 11.0 11.7 11.5 7.7 8.0 Not awarded\1\.......................................... 2,898 3,417 3,675 3,411 3,861 4,207 40.9 40.7 42.3 38.7 41.0 42.3 Supposed to receive payments............................ 3,424 4,043 3,995 4,381 4,829 4,953 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Actually received payments.......................... 2,455 2,902 3,037 3,243 3,676 3,725 71.6 71.8 76.0 74.0 76.1 75.2 Received full amount............................ 1,675 1,888 2,018 2,112 2,475 2,546 48.9 46.7 50.5 48.2 51.3 51.4 Received partial amount......................... 779 1,014 1,019 1,131 1,201 1,179 22.8 25.1 25.5 25.8 24.9 23.8 Did not receive payments................................ 969 1,140 958 1,138 1,153 1,228 28.4 28.2 24.0 26.0 23.9 24.8 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\Award status as of spring 1979, 1984, 1986, 1988, and 1990. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census. Current Population Reports, Series P-23, No. 112 Child Support and Alimony 1978, No. 141 Child Support and Alimony 1983 (advance report), No. 152 Child Support and Alimony 1985 (advance report), No. 167 Child Support and Alimony: 1987, and No. 173 Child Support and Alimony: 1989. Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office. TABLE 11-4.--CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENTS FOR ALL WOMEN, WOMEN ABOVE THE POVERTY LEVEL, AND WOMEN BELOW THE POVERTY LEVEL, SELECTED YEARS 1978-89 [Child support payments for women with own children under 21 years of age present from an absent father as of spring 1979, 1982, 1984, 1986, 1988, and 1990] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1978 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All women: Total (in thousands).................................. 7,094 8,387 8,690 8,808 9,415 9,955 Percent awarded\1\.................................... 59.1 59.2 57.7 61.3 59.0 57.7 Percent actually received payment..................... 34.6 34.6 34.9 36.8 39.0 37.4 Percent received full payment......................... 23.6 22.5 23.2 24.0 26.3 25.6 Women above poverty level: Total (in thousands).................................. 5,121 5,821 5,792 6,011 6,224 6,749 Percent awarded\1\.................................... 67.3 67.9 65.3 71.0 66.5 64.6 Percent actually received payment..................... 41.1 41.4 42.6 44.1 44.8 43.1 Women below poverty level: Total (in thousands).................................. 1,973 2,566 2,898 2,797 3,191 3,206 Percent awarded\1\.................................... 38.1 39.7 42.5 40.4 44.3 43.3 Percent actually received payment..................... 17.8 19.3 19.6 21.3 27.7 25.4 Aggregate payment (in billions of dollars):\2\ Child support due..................................... 12.6 13.7 12.5 12.6 15.9 16.3 Child support received................................ 8.1 8.4 8.8 8.3 10.9 11.2 Aggregate child support deficit....................... 4.5 5.3 3.7 4.3 5.0 5.1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\Award status as of spring 1979, 1982, 1984, 1986, 1988, and 1990. \2\In 1989 dollars. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census. Current Population Reports, Series P-60, No. 173 Child Support and Alimony: 1989, Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office. Approximately 5.7 million women with children under age 21 (58 percent) had been awarded child support or had an agreement to receive child support payments, but only 5.0 million (50 percent) of the women were actually ``supposed to receive'' child support in 1989. The rights of the remaining 8 percent were no longer in force because the father who owed payments had died, the children had grown past the age of eligibility for payments, or because of another reason. Many of the women who were awarded child support payments did not receive the full amount they were due. In 1989, about half (51 percent) of the 5.0 million women owed child support payments received the full amount, about 24 percent of the women received less than they were owed, and 25 percent received no payment at all. Table 11-5 shows that average amount of child support for women who received payments in 1989 was $2,995, about 19 percent of their average total income. In 1978, the average amount of child support was $1,800, about 20 percent of the woman's income. TABLE 11-5.--CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENTS AWARDED AND RECEIVED IN 1989--WOMEN WITH CHILDREN PRESENT, BY SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS [Women with own children under 21 years of age present from an absent father as of spring 1990] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposed to receive child support in 1989 Percent ---------------------------------------- awarded Actually received support Characteristics of women Total child in 1989 (thousands) support Total --------------------------- payments\1\ (thousands) Mean Percent child Mean support income ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ALL WOMEN Total................................. 9,955 57.7 4,953 75.2 $2,995 $16,171 Current Marital Status Married\2\.................................. 2,531 79.0 1,685 72.1 2,931 14,469 Divorced.................................... 3,056 76.8 2,123 77.0 3,322 19,456 Separated................................... 1,352 47.9 527 79.7 3,060 14,891 Widowed\3\.................................. 65 (B) 34 (B) (B) (B) Never married............................... 2,950 23.9 583 73.2 1,888 9,495 Race and Spanish Origin White....................................... 6,905 67.5 4,048 76.5 3,132 16,632 Black....................................... 2,770 34.5 791 69.7 2,263 13,898 Spanish origin\4\........................... 1,112 40.6 364 69.8 2,965 14,758 Years of School Completed Less than 12 years.......................... 2,372 36.9 741 66.7 1,754 8,201 High school: 4 years........................ 4,704 62.0 2,470 76.4 2,698 13,535 College: 1 to 3 years............................ 1,988 65.0 1,139 76.6 3,338 18,462 4 years or more......................... 891 74.5 603 77.9 4,850 30,872 WOMEN BELOW POVERTY Total................................. 3,206 43.3 1,190 68.3 1,889 5,047 Current Marital Status Married\2\.................................. 176 72.2 106 67.0 2,275 4,351 Divorced.................................... 820 70.4 525 66.3 2,112 5,581 Separated................................... 612 47.1 221 74.2 1,717 4,917 Widowed..................................... 8 (B) 4 (B) (B) (B) Never Married\3\............................ 1,590 24.5 334 68.6 1,553 4,543 Race White....................................... 1,763 54.6 827 67.8 1,972 5,010 Black....................................... 1,314 29.2 325 69.8 1,674 5,174 Spanish origin\4\........................... 536 33.0 148 63.5 1,824 4,958 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\Award status as of spring 1989. \2\Remarried women whose previous marriage ended in divorce. \3\Widowed women whose previous marriage ended in divorce. \4\Persons of Spanish origin may be of any race. Note.--B base less than 75,000. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census. Series P-23, No. 173, Child Support and Alimony: 1989. Of the 10 million women with children by a noncustodial father, 25 percent were remarried, 45 percent were divorced or separated, and 30 percent were never married. About 32 percent had incomes below the poverty level. Of these poor women, only 43 percent had agreements to receive child support and were due payments in 1989. Another 6 percent had agreements but were not due payments in 1989 (see table 11-5). Of the poor mothers who were supposed to receive child support payments in 1989, 68 percent (813,000) actually received payments, while 32 percent did not. For women who actually received child support payments in 1989, the amount of payment tended to be higher than average for divorced women, white women, and women who had gone to college for at least a year. Those with lower than average payment amounts included never-married women, black women, and women who had not completed 12 years of school (see table 11- 5). Only 24 percent of women who had never married were awarded child support payments; compared with 77 percent of divorced women, 79 percent of remarried women and 48 percent of women who were separated. Moreover, among the 5.0 million women who were supposed to receive child support, the percentages of those who actually received payments were: 73 percent of never- married mothers, 72 percent of remarried mothers, 80 percent of separated mothers, and 77 percent of divorced mothers. Of the 3.7 million women who actually received child support payments in 1989, 44 percent were divorced, 33 percent were remarried, 11 percent were separated, and 11 percent were single (never married). The women who had never married received, on the average, the lowest amount of child support payments. Among women who were poor despite having been awarded child support, the percentages differed. Of the 813,000 poor women who received child support payments in 1989, 43 percent were divorced, 9 percent were remarried, 20 percent were separated, and 28 percent were never married. Black mothers and mothers of Spanish origin living apart from the father of their children were much less likely than their white counterparts to be awarded child support. Almost 68 percent of white mothers were awarded child support payments, compared with 35 percent of black mothers, and 41 percent of mothers of Spanish origin. Further, both black and Spanish- origin mothers received smaller payments, on the average, than did white mothers. Mothers who were not high school graduates were less likely than the average to be awarded child support, and their support payments were on the average much smaller than those of mothers who had completed more than 12 years of school. In addition, the age of the woman was related to the awarding of child support payments. Women aged 30 to 39 were the most likely to be awarded child support. Women 40 years of age and older were the most likely to actually receive payments and they received, on average, higher support payments. Women under age 30 were the least likely to be awarded payments, and those who were awarded support received smaller payments, on average, than older women. Another factor related to child support was the number of children the mother had with her in the absence of their father. Women with two children were the most likely to receive support. SERVICES FOR AFDC AND NON-AFDC CASES Each State's child support plan must provide that the child support agency will undertake to secure support for an AFDC child whose rights to support have been assigned to the State. This includes nearly all AFDC children, since assignment of rights to support is a condition of eligibility for AFDC benefits. The State must also provide in its plan that it will undertake to establish the paternity of an AFDC child who is born out of wedlock. These requirements apply in all cases except where, in accordance with standards established by the Secretary, the State finds that to apply them would be against the best interests of the child. For families whose AFDC eligibility ends due to the receipt of (or an increase in) child support, States must continue to provide child support enforcement services, without imposing the application fee. This policy was established by Public Law 98-378, the Child Support Enforcement Amendments of 1984. With respect to non-AFDC families, the law provides that the State must make available, once an application is filed with the State agency, the child support collection and paternity determination services which are provided under the plan for AFDC families. The State must charge non-AFDC families an application fee of up to $25. The amount of the maximum allowable fee may be adjusted periodically by the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services to reflect changes in administrative costs. States may charge the fee against the custodial parent, pay the fee out of State funds, or recover it from the noncustodial parent. States also have the option of charging a late payment fee equal to between 3 and 6 percent of the amount of overdue support. Late payment fees may be charged to the noncustodial parents of AFDC and non-AFDC families and are to be collected only after the full amount of the support has been paid to the child. In addition, a State may at its option recover costs in excess of the application fee. Such recovery may be from either the custodial parent or the noncustodial parent. If a State chooses to make recovery from the custodial parent, it must have in effect a procedure whereby all persons in the State who have authority to order support are informed that such costs are to be collected from the custodial parent. Finally, child support enforcement services must include the enforcement of spousal support, but only if a support obligation has been established with respect to the spouse; the child and spouse are living in the same household; and child support is being collected along with spousal support. THE FEDERAL ROLE The Federal statute provides that the child support program must be administered by a separate organizational unit under the control of a person designated by and reporting directly to the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS). Under the present organizational structure of the Department, this office is known as the Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE). The Family Support Act of 1988 requires the appointment of an Assistant Secretary for Family Support within HHS to administer a number of programs, including the Child Support Enforcement program under title IV-D of the Act. Currently, this is the Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Children and Families. A primary responsibility of the director is to establish such standards for State programs for locating absent parents, establishing paternity, and obtaining child support and support for the spouse (or former spouse) with whom the absent parent's child is living as he determines to be necessary to assure that the programs will be effective. In addition to this broad statutory mandate, the director is required to establish minimum organizational and staffing requirements for State child support agencies, and to review and approve State plans. The statute also requires the director of the OCSE to provide technical assistance to the States to help them establish effective systems for collecting child and spousal support and establishing paternity. To fulfill this requirement, the OCSE operates a National Child Support Enforcement Reference Center as a central location for the collection and dissemination of information about State and local programs. OCSE also provides, under a contract with the American Bar Association Child Support Project, training and information dissemination on legal issues to persons working in the field of child support enforcement. Special initiatives, such as a recent effort to assist major urban areas in improving program performance, have also been undertaken by the OCSE. The Child Support Enforcement Amendments of 1984 (Public Law 98-378) extend the research and demonstration authority in section 1115 of the Social Security Act to the child support enforcement program. This will make it possible for States to test innovative approaches to support enforcement so long as the modification does not disadvantage children in need of support nor result in an increase in Federal AFDC costs. Public Law 98-378 also authorizes special project grants to promote improvement in interstate enforcement. The authorization is $15 million for each fiscal year after 1986. The director of the OCSE has full responsibility for program evaluation. Audits are required at least every 3 years to determine whether the standards and requirements prescribed by law and regulations have been met. Under the penalty provision, a State's AFDC matching funds must be reduced by an amount equal to at least 1 but no more than 2 percent for the first failure to comply substantially with the standards and requirements, at least 2 but no more than 3 percent for the second failure, and at least 3 but no more than 5 percent for the third and subsequent failures. FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT TOOLS The statute creates several Federal mechanisms to assist the States in performing their paternity and child support enforcement functions. These include use of the Internal Revenue Service, the Federal courts, and the Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS). The statute requires the Secretary of HHS, upon the request of a State, to certify to the Secretary of Treasury for collection by the IRS any amounts identified by the State as representing delinquent child support payments. The Secretary may certify only the amounts delinquent under a court or administrative order, and only upon a showing by the State that it has made diligent and reasonable efforts to collect amounts due using its own collection mechanisms. States must reimburse the Federal Government for any costs involved in making the collections. Collections may be made on behalf of both AFDC and non-AFDC families. Use by the States of this regular IRS collection mechanism (which may include seizure by the IRS of property, freezing of accounts, and other procedures) has been relatively infrequent. Using IRS collection methods, in fiscal year 1993, collections were made in only 329 cases nationwide, for a total collection of $155,677. The availability of the IRS collection mechanism for child support was amplified in amendments enacted as part of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (Public Law 97-35) to allow the collection of past due support from Federal tax refunds upon a simple showing by the State agency that an individual owes at least $150 in past-due support which has been assigned to the State as a condition of AFDC eligibility. Upon receiving this showing, the Secretary of Treasury is required to withhold from any tax refunds due that individual an amount equal to any past-due support. The withheld amount is sent to the State agency, together with notice of the taxpayer's current address. Public Law 98-378 created a similar IRS offset program for non-AFDC families owed child support. States must submit to the IRS for withholding, the names of absent parents who have arrearages of at least $500 and who, on the basis of current payment patterns and the enforcement efforts that have been made, are unlikely to pay the arrearage before the IRS offset can occur. The law establishes specific notice requirements and mandates that the absent parent and any spouse be informed of the procedures which may be taken to protect the unobligated spouse's portion of the refund. The 1988 provision applied to refunds payable after December 31, 1985, and before January 1, 1991. Public Law 101-508 makes permanent the IRS offset program for non-AFDC families. In fiscal year 1993, a total of 925,264 cases were offset, which resulted in child support collections of $609 million. States also may have access to the Federal courts to enforce court orders for support. The director of the Office of Child Support Enforcement must approve a State's application for permission to use the courts of the United States to enforce court orders for support upon a finding that: (1) another State has not undertaken to enforce the court order of the originating State against an absent parent within a reasonable time; and (2) that use of the Federal courts is the only reasonable method of enforcing such order. This mechanism, designed to assist the States in enforcing interstate cases, has gone unused, apparently because the States view it as costly and complex. Finally, the statute also requires the establishment of a Federal Parent Locator Service to be used to find absent parents in order to secure and enforce child support obligations. Upon request, the Secretary of HHS must provide to an authorized person the most recent address and place of employment of any absent parent if the information is contained in the records of the Department of Health and Human Services, or can be obtained from any other department or agency of the United States or of any State. The Secretary must also make available the services of the FPLS to any State that wishes to locate an absent parent or child for the purpose of enforcing any Federal or State law with respect to the unlawful taking or restraint of a child, or making or enforcing a child custody determination. THE STATE ROLE Each State is required to designate a single and separate organizational unit of State government to administer the program. Earlier child support legislation, enacted in 1967, had required that the program be administered by the welfare agency. The 1975 act deleted this requirement in order to give each State the opportunity to select the most effective administrative mechanism. Most States have placed the child support agency within the social or human services umbrella agency which also administers the AFDC program. However, two States have placed the agency in the department of revenue and two States have placed the agency in the office of the attorney general. The law allows the programs to be administered either on the State or local level. Ten programs are locally administered. A few programs are State administered in some counties and locally administered in others. States must have plans, approved by the director of the OCSE, which set forth their functions and responsibilities. Both AFDC and non-AFDC families must be served. States must also enter into cooperative arrangements with appropriate courts and law enforcement officials to assist the child support agency in administering the program. These agreements may include provision for reimbursing courts and law enforcement officials for their assistance. States must operate a parent locator service to locate absent parents, and they must maintain full records of collections and disbursements, and otherwise maintain an adequate reporting system. In order to facilitate the collection of support in interstate cases, a State must cooperate with other States in establishing paternity, locating absent parents, and in securing compliance with an order issued by another State. The law requires the States to use several enforcement tools. They must use the IRS tax refund offset procedure for AFDC and non-AFDC families, and they must also determine periodically whether any individuals receiving unemployment compensation owe child support obligations. The State employment security agency is required to withhold unemployment benefits, and to pay the child support agency any outstanding child support obligations established by an agreement with the individual or through legal processes. Public Law 98-378 mandated that States use a number of other enforcement techniques. These include: (1) imposing liens against real and personal property for amounts of overdue support; (2) withholding of State tax refunds payable to a parent who is delinquent in support payments; (3) making available information regarding the amount of overdue support owed to a consumer credit bureau upon a request; (4) requiring individuals who have demonstrated a pattern of delinquent payments to post a bond or give some other guarantee to secure payment of overdue support; (5) establishing expedited processes within the State judicial system or under administrative processes for obtaining and enforcing child support orders, and, at the option of the State, determining paternity; (6) notifying each AFDC recipient at least once each year of the amount of child support collected on behalf of that recipient; (7) permitting the establishment of paternity until a child's 18th birthday; and (8) at the option of the State, providing for cases not enforced by the State CSE agency, that child support payments must be made through the agency that administers the State's income withholding system if either the custodial or noncustodial parent requests that they be made in this manner. State child support agencies are required to undertake child support collections on behalf of children receiving foster care maintenance payments under title IV-E of the Social Security Act, if an assignment of rights to support has been secured by the foster care agency. In addition, foster care agencies are required to take steps, where appropriate, to secure an assignment to the State of any rights to support on behalf of a child receiving foster care maintenance payments. State agencies are also required, as a result of Public Law 98-378, to petition to include medical support as part of any child support order whenever health care coverage is available to the noncustodial parent at a reasonable cost. And, if a family loses AFDC eligibility as the result of increased collection of support payments, the State must continue to provide Medicaid benefits for 4 calendar months beginning with the month of ineligibility. States also must provide services to medically needy (Medicaid only) families referred to the State IV-D agency from the State Medicaid agency. Finally, the statute requires each State to comply with any other requirements and standards that the Secretary determines to be necessary to the establishment of an effective child support program. PATERNITY ESTABLISHMENT Paternity establishment is a prerequisite for obtaining a child support order. In 1990, 28 percent of children born in the U.S. were born to unmarried women. According to the OCSE, paternity is established in less than one-third of these cases. Without paternity established, these children have no legal claim on their fathers' income. A major weakness of the CSE program is its poor performance in securing paternity for such children. In addition to financial benefits, establishing paternity can provide social, psychological, and emotional benefits and in some cases the father's medical history may be needed to give a child proper care. In 1991, 35 percent of the 14.6 million children living solely with their mothers had a mother who had never married. Inasmuch as the percentage of children born to parents that are not married has been increasing during the last two decades, paternity establishment has become one of the more crucial elements of the CSE program. In the 1980s legislation was enacted that contained provisions aimed at increasing the number of paternities established. P.L. 98-378, the Child Support Enforcement Amendments of 1984, required States to implement laws that permitted paternity to be established until a child's 18th birthday. P.L. 100-485, the Family Support Act of 1988 stipulated the following. States are required to meet Federal standards for the establishment of paternity. States are required to have all parties in a contested paternity case take a genetic test upon the request of any party, and are permitted to charge non- AFDC individuals for the costs of the paternity test. States are encouraged to adopt simple civil processes for voluntarily acknowledging paternity and civil procedures for establishing paternity in contested cases. States are reimbursed at a 90-percent Federal matching rate for laboratory testing to establish paternity. Each State is required, in administering any law involving the issuance of birth certificates, to require each parent to furnish his or her SSN, unless the State finds good cause for not doing so. Retroactive to 1984, any child for whom a paternity action was brought but whose suit was dismissed because of statute of limitations less than 18 years must be allowed to bring a new suit. A 1992 OCSE report on paternity establishment says that paternity establishment has improved because of Federal requirements, improved genetic testing, and innovative State and local programs. Many States now have procedures through which a man may legally admit paternity (by signing a document that legally establishes paternity) without court involvement. Many States contend that voluntary acknowledgement of paternity procedures save money and require less time than paternity establishment procedures that involve the courts. While the number of paternities established through CSE reached a record high in 1991, huge disparities exist among States. OBRA 93 required States to have in effect by October 1, 1993, the following paternity establishment procedures: (1) for a simple civil process for voluntarily acknowledging paternity under which the State must explain the rights and responsibilities of acknowledging paternity and afford due process safeguards. Procedures must include a hospital-based program for the voluntary acknowledgment of paternity during the period immediately preceding or following the birth of a child; (2) under which the voluntary acknowledgment of paternity creates a rebuttable, or at the option of the State, conclusive presumption of paternity, and under which such voluntary acknowledgments are admissible as evidence of paternity; (3) under which the voluntary acknowledgment of paternity must be recognized as a basis for seeking a support order without first requiring any further proceedings to establish paternity; (4) which provide that any objection to genetic testing results must be made in writing within a specified number of days prior to any hearing at which such results may be introduced in evidence, and if no objection is made the test results are admissible as evidence of paternity without the need for foundation testimony or other proof of authenticity or accuracy; (5) which create a rebuttable or, at the option of the State, conclusive presumption of paternity upon genetic testing results indicating a threshold probability of the alleged father being the father of the child; (6) which require default orders in paternity cases upon a showing that process has been served on the defendant and whatever additional showing may be required by State law; and (7) which require States to have expedited processes for paternity establishment in contested cases and to require that a State give full faith and credit to determinations of paternity made by other States. A 1993 Urban Institute report\1\ analyzes national survey data that was obtained to provide a better understanding of how paternity establishment is handled by CSE agencies in counties throughout the U.S. The study found: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\Washington, D.C. The Urban Institute. ``Promising Approaches to Improving Paternity Establishment Rates at the Local Level,'' Sonenstein, Freya L., Pamela A. Holcomb and Kristen S. Seefeldt. Feb. 1993. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- At the local level paternity establishment is usually located in one of three settings: a legal agency like a prosecuting attorney's office or court, a non-legal agency like the human services department responsible for welfare, or a shared situation in which cases with cooperative fathers are handled by the human service agency and contested cases are transferred to a legal agency [35 percent of the counties transferred contested cases from the non-legal agency to the legal agency]. Counties generally use one of four approaches to establish paternity: A no-consent process wherein all paternity cases are handled through the court and there are no opportunities to consent voluntarily outside a court hearing; a one-time consent process: alleged fathers are given one opportunity to consent voluntarily, usually right after notification of the allegation; a multi-consent process: alleged fathers are given at least two opportunities to consent, usually after notification and also after genetic testing; and a court-as-last-resort process: alleged fathers have to respond to a notification by filing with the court their intention to consent to or contest the allegation. The court's role after the initial notification is generally limited to handing contested cases after genetic tests. Multiple opportunities for consent are available. [The most common approach, used by 37 percent of the counties, was the multi-consent approach]. The report found that counties with the highest rate of paternity determinations offer multiple opportunities for voluntary consent and have adopted an organizational approach in which cooperative fathers are handled by the welfare agency and contested cases are transferred to a legal agency. The 27 counties that used these combined approaches show an average paternity rate of 65 percent when other factors are held constant. Given that it is unrealistic that other factors can be held constant (compared to rates between 22 and 45 percent in counties where other approaches were used). The report cautions readers that the findings from the analysis are merely suggestive of possible avenues to follow in seeking improvements in paternity establishment. ENFORCEMENT OF MEDICAL SUPPORT Health care for children can be a major expense for the custodial parent, and can be a burden for the State if public assistance is being provided to the children. Public Law 95- 142, the Medicare-Medicaid Anti-Fraud and Abuse Amendments of 1977 (Section 1912 of the Social Security Act), permits State Medicaid agencies to use the CSE agency to assist in the enforcement of medical support rights due from or through a noncustodial parent, since it was not intended that the Medicaid agency establish a separate system for the enforcement of medical support obligations. On February 11, 1980, the OCSE and the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) published joint regulations to implement section 1912 of the act through optional cooperative agreements between the State Medicaid agency and the State CSE agency. Under these agreements the Medicaid agency reimburses the CSE agency for medical support enforcement activities performed pursuant to the agreement. In 35 jurisdictions the Federal Medicaid reimbursement rate is lower than the 66 percent matching rate for CSE activities (based on fiscal year 1993 rates), and nationwide it averages about 56 percent. Section 16 of Public Law 98-378 requires the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) to issue regulations to require that State CSE agencies petition for the inclusion of medical support as part of any child support order whenever health care coverage is available to the noncustodial parent at reasonable cost. According to the Federal regulations, any employment-related or other group coverage is considered reasonable, under the assumption that health insurance is inexpensive to the employee/noncustodial parent. A 1983 study by the National Center for Health Services Research of the Public Health Service indicated that, for low-wage employees with employer-provided insurance coverage, 72 percent of the premium was paid for by the employer. On October 16, 1985, the OCSE published regulations amending previous regulations and implementing section 16 of Public Law 98-378. The regulations stated that the CSE agency must obtain basic medical support information and provide this information to the State Medicaid agency. Also, if the custodial parent does not have satisfactory health insurance coverage, the CSE agency must petition the court or administrative authority to include medical support in new or modified support orders and inform the State Medicaid agency of any new or modified support orders that include a medical support obligation. The 1985 regulations also required the CSE agency to take steps to enforce medical support that has been ordered by a court or administrative process under State law. In addition, these regulations permit the use of CSE matching funds at the 66 percent rate for required medical support activities. Before these regulations were issued, medical support activities were pursued by CSE agencies only under optional cooperative agreements with Medicaid agencies. Some of the functions that the CSE agency may perform under a cooperative agreement with the Medicaid agency include: receiving referrals from the Medicaid agency, locating absent parents, establishing paternity, determining whether the noncustodial parent has a health insurance policy or plan that covers the child, obtaining sufficient information about the health insurance policy or plan to permit the filing of a claim with the insurer, filing a claim with the insurer or transmitting the necessary information to the Medicaid agency, securing health insurance coverage through court or administrative order (when it will not reduce the noncustodial parent's ability to pay child support), and recovering amounts necessary to reimburse medical assistance payments. A report by the Urban Institute stated that although the practice of including medical coverage provisions in child support orders had increased, the priority and emphasis given such provision was still quite low (as of September 1985). It reported that child support staff were reluctant to go to court just for medical support, and that many judges would not order medical support if it might cause a reduction in cash support payments. The report also said that enforcing medical coverage provisions once they are established is very difficult, and that it requires the agency to monitor continuation of coverage and to act to restore coverage when it lapses.\2\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\Nightingale, Demetra Smith, and others. ``The Inclusion of Medical Coverage in Child Support Cases: Current Status and Options for the Future.'' Draft. Washington, Urban Institute, May 1986. p. vi. [Hereafter cited as Urban Institute, ``The Inclusion of Medical Coverage in Child Support Cases.''] --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Urban Institute study reported that in 1983, 4.6 million children with an absent parent were without public (Medicaid) or private health insurance. This represented 34 percent of all children with an absent parent. Another 4.9 million children with an absent parent were covered solely by Medicaid. The study estimated that including medical coverage in child support orders in 1984 might have benefited 1,353,000 totally uninsured children (those without Medicaid or private insurance) and perhaps another 300,000 to 466,000 children covered only by Medicaid at that time.\3\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\Ibid., p. 24-25. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- According to the Census Bureau data on child support and alimony, 40 percent of the 5.7 million women who had a child support award in 1989 received health insurance coverage in their awards. For white women, the figure was 43 percent; for black women, 28 percent; and for women of Hispanic origin, 21 percent. For divorced women, the figure was 44 percent and for women who had never married, the figure was 26 percent. On September 16, 1988, the OCSE issued regulations amending the medical support enforcement provisions. These regulations require the CSE agency to develop criteria to identify existing child support cases that have a high potential for obtaining medical support, and to petition the court or administrative authority to modify support orders to include medical support for targeted cases even if no other modification is anticipated. In addition, the CSE agency is required to provide the custodial parent with information regarding the health insurance coverage obtained by the noncustodial parent for the dependent child or children. Moreover, the 1988 regulation deletes the condition that CSE agencies may secure health insurance coverage under a cooperative agreement only when it will not reduce the noncustodial parent's ability to pay child support. The purpose of the medical support provisions is to expand the number of children for whom private health insurance coverage is obtained by increasing the availability of third- party resources to pay for medical care and thereby result in Medicaid cost savings to the States and the Federal Government. The Urban Institute report, however, concluded that while there is no doubt that many children could benefit from inclusion of medical insurance, especially those who currently have no public or private health care coverage, Medicaid savings would be relatively modest compared to total annual Medicaid costs.\4\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\Urban Institute, ``The Inclusion of Medical Coverage in Child Support Cases,'' p. vi. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- According to OCSE data, 53 percent of support orders established in fiscal year 1993 included health insurance, whereas only 30 percent of support orders that were enforced or modified in fiscal year 1993 included health insurance. OBRA 93 included the following health insurance support provisions: (1) prohibit an insurer from denying enrollment of a child under the health insurance coverage of the child's parent on the grounds that the child was born out of wedlock, is not claimed as a dependent on the parent's Federal income tax return, or does not reside with the parent or in the insurer's service area; (2) require an insurer and an employer doing business in the State, in any case in which a parent is required by court or administrative order to provide health coverage for a child and the child is otherwise eligible for family health coverage through the insurer, (a) to permit the parent, without regard to any enrollment season restrictions, to enroll such child under such family coverage; (b) if the parent fails to provide health insurance coverage for a child, to enroll the child upon application by the child's other parent or the State child support or Medicaid agency; and (c) with respect to employers, not to disenroll (or eliminate coverage of) the child unless there is satisfactory written evidence that the order is no longer in effect, or the child is or will be enrolled in comparable health coverage through another insurer that will take effect not later than the effective date of the disenrollment; (3) require an employer doing business in the State, in the case of health insurance coverage offered through employment and providing coverage for a child pursuant to a court or administrative order, to withhold from the employee's compensation the employee's share of premiums for health insurance, and to pay that share to the insurer. The Secretary of Health and Human Services may provide by regulation for such exceptions to this requirement (and other requirements described above that apply to employers) as the Secretary determines necessary to ensure compliance with an order, or with the limits on withholding that are specified in section 303(b) of the Consumer Credit Protection Act; (4) prohibit an insurer from imposing requirements upon a State agency, which is acting as an agent or assignee of an individual eligible for medical assistance and covered by the insurer, that are different from requirements applicable to an agent or assignee of any other individual; (5) require an insurer, in the case of a child who has coverage through the insurer of a noncustodial parent, (a) to provide the custodial parent with the information necessary for the child to obtain benefits; (b) to permit the custodial parent (or provider, with the custodial parent's approval) to submit claims for covered services without the approval of the noncustodial parent; and (c) to make payment on claims directly to the custodial parent, the provider, or the State agency; and (6) permit the State Medicaid agency to garnish the wages, salary, or other employment income of, and to withhold State tax refunds to, any person who: (a) is required by court or administrative order to provide health insurance coverage to an individual eligible for Medicaid; (b) has received payment from a third party for the costs of medical services to that individual; and (c) has not reimbursed either the individual or the provider. The amount subject to garnishment or withholding would be the amount required to reimburse the State agency for expenditures for costs of medical services provided under the Medicaid program. However, claims for current or past-due child support shall take priority over any claims for the costs of medical services. These provisions are effective April 1, 1994, or, if the Secretary determines that State legislation is needed, the State plan shall not be regarded as failing to comply with the requirements of title IV-D because it has not met these additional requirements before the first day of the first calendar quarter beginning after the close of the first regular session of the State legislature that begins after August 10, 1993. In the case of a State that has a two-year legislative session, each year of such session shall be deemed to be a separate regular session of the State legislature. TABLE 11-6.--CHILD SUPPORT AWARD STATUS AND INCLUSION OF HEALTH INSURANCE IN AWARD, BY SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS OF WOMEN [Women 15 years and older with own children under 21 years of age present from absent fathers as of spring 1990] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Awarded child support payments ---------------------------------- Health insurance included in child Total support award Characteristic (thousands) Total --------------------- (thousands) Percent Number of (thousands) total awarded ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Total............. 9,955 5,748 2,307 40.1 Current Marital Status\1\ Remarried\2\............ 2,531 1,999 755 37.8 Divorced................ 3,056 2,347 1,038 44.2 Separated............... 1,352 648 298 46.0 Never married........... 2,950 704 186 26.4 Race and Hispanic Origin White................... 6,905 4,661 1,992 42.7 Black................... 2,770 955 271 28.4 Hispanic\3\............. 1,112 452 96 21.2 Age 15 to 17 years.......... 128 23 ........... ....... 18 to 29 years.......... 3,086 1,408 572 40.6 30 to 39 years.......... 4,175 2,685 1,097 40.9 40 years and over....... 2,566 1,632 638 39.1 Years of School Completed Less than 12 years...... 2,372 875 233 26.6 High school: 4 years.... 4,704 2,916 1,218 41.8 College: 1 to 3 years........ 1,988 1,293 575 44.5 4 years or more..... 891 664 281 42.3 Number of Own Children Present from an Absent Father One child............... 5,721 3,274 1,316 40.2 Two children............ 2,873 1,812 739 40.8 Three children.......... 1,030 537 220 41.0 Four children or more... 331 125 33 26.4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ \1\Excludes a small number of current widowed women whose previous marriage ended in divorce. \2\Remarried women whose previous marriage ended in divorce. \3\Persons of Hispanic origin may be of any race. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census. Current Population Reports. Child Support and Alimony: 1989 (Supplemental Report). Series P-60, No. 173, September 1991. Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1991. p. 11. WAGE WITHHOLDING The Family Support Act required immediate income withholding to begin in November 1990 for all new or modified orders being enforced by the State's CSE agency. As of January 1, 1994, States were required to provide for immediate wage withholding for all support orders initially issued on or after that date, regardless of whether a parent has applied for CSE services. Immediate income withholding has been enacted by about half of the States. Public Law 98-378 required that States have in effect two distinct procedures for withholding wages of noncustodial parents. First, for cases enforced through the CSE agency, States were required to use a procedure that imposed wage withholding in child support cases whenever an arrearage accrued that was equal to the amount of support payable for 1 month. Second, for all child support cases, all new or modified support orders issued in the State were required to include a provision for wage withholding when an arrearage occurs. The intent of the second procedure was to ensure that orders not enforced through the CSE agency contain the authority necessary to permit wage withholding to be initiated by someone other than the CSE agency. The Family Support Act of 1988 (P.L. 100- 485) extended the use of mandatory wage withholding to nondelinquent support. In fiscal year 1993, 53 percent of total collections or about $4.7 billion were made through wage withholding. According to the Federal statute, State due-process requirements govern the scope of notice to provide to an obligor (i.e., noncustodial parent) when withholding is triggered. As a general rule, the noncustodial parent is entitled to advance notice of the withholding procedure. This notice, where required, must inform the noncustodial parent of the following: the amount that will be withheld; the application of withholding to any current or subsequent period of employment; the procedures available for contesting the withholding and the sole basis for objection (i.e., mistake of fact); the period allotted the noncustodial parent to contact the State to contest the withholding and the result of failure to contact the State within this timeframe (i.e., issuance of notification to the employer to begin withholding); the steps the State will take if the noncustodial parent contests the withholding including the procedure to resolve such contests. If the noncustodial parent contests the income withholding notice, the State must conduct a hearing, determine if the withholding is valid, notify the noncustodial parent of the decision, and notify the employer to commence the deductions if withholding is upheld. All of this must occur within 45 days of the initial notice of withholding. Whether a State uses a judicial or an administrative process, the only basis for a hearing is a factual mistake about the amount owed (current and/or arrearage) or the identity of the noncustodial parent. When withholding is uncontested or when a contested case is resolved in favor of the withholding, the administering agency must serve a withholding notice on the employer. The employer is required to withhold as much of the noncustodial parent's wages as is necessary to comply with the order. This will include the current support amount plus an amount to be applied toward liquidation of any arrearage. In addition, the employer may retain a fee to offset the administrative cost of implementing withholding. The Federal Consumer Credit Protection Act (FCCPA) determines the maximum portion of an individual's total disposable earnings that is subject to garnishment. The FCCPA limits apply when enforcing an order for support. These limits are 50 percent of disposable earnings for a noncustodial parent who is the head of a household, and 60 percent for a noncustodial parent who is not supporting a second family. These percentages increase by 5 percentage points, to 55 and 65 percent, respectively, when the arrearages represent support that was due more than 12 weeks before the current pay period. Upon receiving the notice, the employer must begin withholding the appropriate amount of the obligor's wages no later than the first pay period that occurs after 14 days following the date the notice was mailed. The 1984 amendments regulate the language in State statutes on the other rights and liabilities of the employer. For instance, the employer is subject to a fine for discharging a noncustodial parent or taking other forms of retaliation as a result of a withholding order. In addition, the employer is held liable for amounts not withheld as directed. In addition to being able to charge the noncustodial parent a fee for the administrative costs associated with wage withholding, the employer can combine all support payments required to be withheld for multiple obligors into a single payment and forward it to the CSE agency or court with a list of the cases to which the payments apply. The employer need not vary from his normal pay and disbursement cycle to comply with withholding orders; however, support payments must be forwarded to the State or other designated agency within 10 days of the date on which the noncustodial parent is paid. When the noncustodial parent changes jobs, the previous employer must notify the court or agency that entered the withholding order and provide specified information. The State must notify the new employer or income source to begin withholding from the obligor's wages. In addition, States must develop procedures to terminate income withholding orders, for example, when all of the children are emancipated and no arrearage exists. PROPERTY LIENS The use of liens for child support enforcement was characterized during congressional debate on Public Law 98-378 as ``simple to execute and cost effective and a catalyst for an absent parent to pay past due support in order to clear title to the property in question.'' (H. Rept. 527, 98th Cong., 1st sess., 1983) The report said that liens would complement the income withholding provisions of the 1984 law and be particularly helpful in enforcing support payments owed by noncustodial parents with substantial assets or income but who are not salaried employees. Public Law 98-378 required States to enact laws and implement ``procedures under which liens are imposed against real property for amount of overdue support owed by an absent parent who resides or owns property in the State.'' This can apply to such things as land, vehicles, houses, antique furniture, livestock, etc. The law provides, however, that States need not use liens in cases where, on the basis of guidelines that generally are available to the public, it determines that lien procedures would be inappropriate. This provision implicitly requires States to develop guidelines about use of liens. Generally, a lien for delinquent child support is a statutorily created mechanism by which an obligee (i.e., custodial parent) obtains a nonpossessory interest in property belonging to the noncustodial parent. The interest of the custodial parent is a slumbering interest that allows the noncustodial parent to retain possession of the property, but affects the noncustodial parent's ability to transfer ownership of the property to anyone else. A child support lien converts the custodial parent from an unsecured to a secured creditor. As such, it gives the custodial parent priority over unsecured creditors and subsequent secured creditors. In some States a lien is established automatically upon entry of a support order and the first incidence of noncompliance by the obligor. Frequently, the mere imposition of a lien will motivate the delinquent parent to do whatever is necessary to remove the lien (i.e., pay past due support). When this is not the case, it may become necessary to enforce the lien. Liens are not self-executory. They merely impede the debtor's ability to transfer property. If a lien exists, a debtor must satisfy the judgment before the property may be sold or transferred. However, it is not necessary for the obligee to wait until the obligor tries to transfer the property before taking action. The obligee may enforce his judgment by execution and levy against the property if he believes that the amount of equity in the property justifies execution. Several States have increased their use of liens by identifying individuals who possess appropriate assets through use of information obtained from Project 1099. Project 1099 is a cooperative effort involving State CSE agencies, the OCSE, and the IRS. It is named after the IRS form on which both earned and unearned income is reported. (Examples of reported earned and unearned incomes include: interest paid on savings accounts, stocks and bonds, and distribution of dividends and capital gains; rent or royalty payments; prizes, awards, or winnings; fees paid directors or subcontractors; and unemployment compensation.) Project 1099 was initiated in 1984 to assist in location efforts. Since fall 1988, Project 1099 routinely provides wage and employer information as well as location and asset information on noncustodial parents. CREDIT BUREAU REPORTING Public Law 98-378 requires that States establish procedures for reporting overdue child support obligations exceeding $1,000 to consumer reporting agencies (generally referred to as credit bureaus), if such information is requested by the credit bureau. States have the option of using such procedures in cases where the noncustodial parent is less than $1,000 in arrears. (Moreover, as in the case of liens, this collection procedure need not be used in cases found inappropriate under State guidelines.) The 1984 law requires States to provide the noncustodial parent an advance notice of its intent to release information regarding his child support arrearage and an opportunity for him to contest the accuracy of the information. The CSE agency may charge the credit bureau a fee for the information. Although some States and counties had agreements in place with credit bureaus to obtain information about the location of absent parents, the 1984 provision authorizes the routine transfer of information concerning overdue child support to credit bureaus on a much broader basis. Moreover, it is in the interest of credit bureaus to request such information because overdue child support adversely affects an obligated parent's ability to pay other debts. Public Law 102-537, the Ted Weiss Child Support Enforcement Act of 1992, amends the Fair Credit Reporting Act to require consumer credit reporting agencies to include in any consumer report information on child support delinquencies provided by or verified by State or local CSE agencies, which antedates the report by 7 years. FEDERAL GARNISHMENT The 1975 CSE legislation included a provision allowing garnishment of wages and other payments by the Federal Government for enforcement of child support and alimony obligations. The 1975 law provides that moneys (the entitlement to which is based upon remuneration for employment) payable by the United States to any individual are subject to legal proceedings brought for the enforcement against such individual of his legal obligation to provide child support or make alimony payments. The law sets forth in detail the procedures that must be followed for service of legal process and specifies that the term ``based upon remuneration for employment'' includes wages, periodic benefits for the payment of pensions, retirement or retired pay (included social security and other retirement benefits), and other kinds of Federal payments. The following Federal income sources may not be garnished: any payment as compensation for death under any Federal program, Federal black lung benefits, veterans' pensions or compensation benefits for a service-related disability or death, and amounts paid to defray employment- related expenses. MILITARY ALLOTMENTS Public Law 97-248, the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982, requires allotments from the pay and allowances of any member of the uniformed service (on active duty) when he fails to make child (or child and spousal) support payments. The requirement arises when the service member fails to make support payments in an amount at least equal to the value of 2 months' worth of support. Provisions of the Federal Consumer Credit Protection Act apply, limiting the percentage of the member's pay that is subject to allotment. The amount of the allotment is the amount of the support payment, as established under a legally enforceable administrative or judicial order. INTERSTATE ENFORCEMENT State laws require parents to be responsible for the financial support of their children. During the 1930's and 1940's, such laws were used to establish and enforce support obligations when the noncustodial parent, custodial parent, and child lived in the same State. But when noncustodial parents lived out of State, enforcing child support was cumbersome and ineffective. Often the only option in these cases was to seek to extradite the noncustodial parent and, when successful, to jail the person for nonsupport. Extradition is the process used to bring an obligor charged with or convicted of a crime (in this case, criminal nonsupport) from an asylum State back to the State where the children are located. This procedure, rarely used, generally punished the irresponsible parent, but left the abandoned family without financial support. A University of Michigan study of separated parents nationwide found that 12 percent lived in different States 1 year after divorce or separation. That proportion increased to 25 percent 3 years after, and to 40 percent 8 years after. Estimates based on the Federal income tax refund offset program and other sources suggest that approximately 30 percent of child support cases involve interstate residency of the custodial and noncustodial parents.\5\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\Weaver, Ray L., and Robert G. Williams. ``Problems With URESA: Interstate Child Support Enforcement Isn't Working But Could.'' Paper prepared for ABA Third National Child Support Conference, May 10-12, 1989. Washington, American Bar Association 1989, p. 510 [Hereafter cited as Weaver and Williams, ``Problems With URESA''] --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (URESA) Since 1950, interstate cooperation has been promoted through the adoption by the States of URESA. This act, which was first proposed by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in 1950, has been enacted, in substance, in all 50 States, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. The act was amended in 1952 and 1958 and revised in 1968. It is generally maintained that the increasing number of children who received AFDC benefits because of the absence of their father, together with the more frequent instances in which the father lived in another State, led many States to quickly adopt URESA. In 1940, 30.3 percent of AFDC children had an able-bodied father who was living away from the home. By 1950, the figure had reached 49.3 percent. About 32 States had enacted the original version of URESA within 5 years of its promulgation by the National Conference. The purpose of URESA was to provide a system for the interstate enforcement of support orders without requiring the person seeking support to go (or have her legal representative go) to the State in which the noncustodial parent resided. Where the URESA provisions between the two States are compatible, the law can be used to establish paternity, locate an absent parent, and establish, modify, or enforce a support order. However, some observers note that the use of URESA procedures often result in lower orders for both current support and arrearages. They also contend that few CSE agencies attempt to use URESA procedures to establish paternity or to obtain a modification in a support order. Long-arm statutes Unlike URESA, interstate cases established or enforced by long-arm statutes use the court system in the State of the custodial parent rather than that of the noncustodial parent. When a person commits certain acts within a State, that person may be subjecting himself to the jurisdiction of that State, even if he does not live in that State. The long-arm of the law of the State where the event happens may reach out to grab the out-of-State person so that issues relating to the event may be resolved where it happened. Under the long-arm procedure, the State must authorize by statute that the acts allegedly committed by the defendant are those that subject the defendant to the State's jurisdiction. An example is a paternity statute stating that if conception takes place in the State and the child lives in the State, the State may exercise personal jurisdiction over the alleged father. Long-arm statute language usually speaks of extending the State's jurisdiction over an out-of-State defendant to the maximum extent permitted by the U.S. Constitution under the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause. Long-arm statutes may be used to establish paternity, establish support awards, and enforce support orders. Federal courts The 1975 CSE law mandated that the State plan for CSE require States to cooperate with other States in establishing paternity, locating absent parents, and securing compliance with court orders and authorized the use of Federal courts as a last resort to enforce an existing order in another State if that State were uncooperative. Federal law allows the U.S. district courts to be used for the enforcement of child support orders in interstate cases. If another State fails to undertake to enforce a child support order on behalf of the requesting State within a reasonable time, the requesting State may ask the OCSE to certify the case for use of the Federal courts. If the application meets certain procedural requirements and it is determined that use of the Federal courts is the only reasonable method of enforcing an order, the case is to be certified for action by the U.S. district court. (OCSE officials say that Federal courts also can establish support orders.) Section 460 of the Social Security Act says that the district courts of the United States shall have jurisdiction, without regard to any amount in controversy, to hear and determine any civil action certified by the Secretary of DHHS under section 452(a)(8) of the act. A civil action under section 460 may be brought in any judicial district in which the claim arose, the plaintiff resides, or the defendant resides. Section 452(a)(8) says that the Secretary of DHHS shall receive applications from States for permission to use the courts of the United States to enforce court orders for support against noncustodial parents and, upon a finding that (A) another State has not undertaken to enforce a court order of the originating State against the noncustodial parent within a reasonable time, and (B) that using the Federal courts is the only reasonable method of enforcing such order, approve such applications. As a condition to obtaining the certification from the Federal OCSE, the CSE agency of the initiating State must give the CSE agency of the responding State at least 60 days after first seeking assistance in enforcing the order, a 30-day warning of its intent to seek enforcement in Federal court. If the initiating State receives no response within the 30-day limit, or if the response is unsatisfactory, the initiating State may apply to the OCSE Regional Office for certification. The application must attest that the above requirements have been satisfied. Upon certification of the case, a civil action may be filed in the U.S. District Court. Although this interstate enforcement procedure has been available since enactment of the CSE program, there has only been one reported case of its use by a State (the initiating State was California, and the responding State was Texas). Interstate income withholding Interstate income withholding is a process in which the State of the custodial parent seeks the help of the State in which the noncustodial parent's income is derived to enforce a support order using the income withholding mechanism. Pursuant to Public Law 98-378, income withholding availability has been universal for all valid in-State or out-of-State orders issued or modified after October 1, 1985, and for all orders in CSE cases regardless of the date the order was issued. Although Federal law requires a State to enforce another State's valid orders through interstate income withholding, there is no Federal mandate that interstate income withholding procedures be uniform. Approaches vary from the Model Interstate Income Withholding Act to URESA registration. The preferred way to handle an interstate income withholding request is to use the interstate action transmittal form from one CSE agency to another. In CSE cases, Federal regulations required that by August 22, 1988, all interstate income withholding requests be sent to the enforcing State's central registry for referral to the appropriate State or local official. The actual wage withholding procedure used by the State in which the noncustodial parent lives is the same as that used in intrastate cases. States decide whether or not to make interstate income withholding available in non-CSE cases. Some States do not allow non-CSE interstate income withholding, insisting that all such requests be channeled through the CSE agency. In those States, it is necessary for a private attorney to refer his client to the local CSE office. 1988 law Public Law 100-485 includes some provisions affecting interstate child support enforcement. The law requires States to establish automated statewide, comprehensive case tracking and monitoring systems, which would improve each State's ability to manage interstate cases. The law also required the establishment of a 15-member commission to study interstate child support establishment and enforcement. The U.S. Commission on Interstate Child Support's report to Congress includes 120 recommendations for improving the CSE program. The report highlights the following recommendations: Establishment of an integrated, automated network linking all the States to provide quick access to locate and income information (which would include new hire information based on W-4 forms); Establishment of income withholding across State lines from the person seeking enforcement directly to the income source in the other State; Identical enactment by States of the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (which would replace URESA); State use of early, voluntary parentage determination for child born outside of marriage and uniform evidentiary rules for contested paternity cases; Universal access to health care insurance for children of separated parents; More emphasis on staff training and increased resources to ensure that all cases can be processed on a more timely basis; and Revision of CSE funding to ensure that action is taken on cases most in need of attention.\6\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\U.S. Commission on Interstate Child Support. ``Supporting Our Children: A Blueprint for Reform.'' 1992. p. xiii. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1992 law Public Law 102-521, the Child Support Recovery Act of 1992, imposes a Federal criminal penalty for the willful failure to pay a past-due child support obligation with respect to a child who resides in another State that has remained unpaid for longer than a year or is greater than $5,000. For the first conviction the penalty would be a fine of not more than $5,000 and/or imprisonment for not more than 6 months; for a second conviction, a fine of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment for up to 2 years. Other procedures that aid interstate enforcement In 1948, the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws and the American Bar Association approved the Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act (UEFJA), which simplifies the collection of child support arrearages in interstate cases. Revised in 1964 and adopted in only 30 States, UEFJA provides that upon the filing of an authenticated foreign (i.e., out-of-State) judgment and notice to the obligor, the judgment is to be treated in the same manner as a local one. A judgment is the official decision or finding of a court on the respective rights of the involved parties. UEFJA applies only to final judgments. As a general rule, child support arrearages that have been reduced to judgment are considered final judgments and thus can be filed under UEFJA. SUMMARY INFORMATION ON COLLECTION TECHNIQUES Table 11-7 shows the percentage of child support collections obtained through the use of selected enforcement techniques. According to the OCSE, most CSE collections come from noncustodial parents who are complying with their support orders. However, the information is not provided in the OCSE annual report, which identifies only collection techniques that are concentrated on delinquent payments. The report for fiscal year 1993 shows that 64 percent of the $8.9 billion in child support payments collected that year was obtained through the more publicized enforcement techniques: wage withholding, Federal income tax refund offset, State income tax refund offset, and unemployment compensation intercept. The remaining 36 percent is listed as collected by other means. Officials said most of these other collections come from noncustodial parents who were complying with their support orders by sending their payments to the CSE agency. The other category also included collections from noncustodial parents who voluntarily sent money for their children even though a support order had never been established for them (less than one percent of all collections), and other enforcement techniques, such as liens against property, by posting of bonds or securities, and use of the full IRS collection procedure. TABLE 11-7.--CHILD SUPPORT COLLECTIONS MADE BY VARIOUS ENFORCEMENT TECHNIQUES, FISCAL YEAR 1989-93 [Dollars in millions] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Child support collections Percent of total collections Enforcement techniques ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wage withholding........... $2,144 $2,636 $3,266 $3,971 4,743 40.9 43.9 47.4 49.9 53.2 Federal income tax offset.. 411 444 476 585 570 7.9 7.4 6.9 7.3 6.4 State income tax offset.... 62 70 72 80 78 1.2 1.2 1.0 1.0 .9 Unemployment compensation intercept................. 54 80 143 269 286 1.0 1.3 2.1 3.4 3.2 Other\1\................... 2,570 2,780 2,929 3,060 3,232 49.0 46.2 42.6 38.4 36.3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Total collections.... 5,241 6,010 6,886 7,965 8,909 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\The OCSE does not designate the source of most of these collections. According to the OCSE, the majority of collections in the other category came from noncustodial parents who were complying with their support orders by sending their payments to the CSE agency. Moreover, the OCSE officials maintain that reliability of collection data lessen when specified by techniques of collection. Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Office of Child Support Enforcement. ``Child Support Enforcement Statistics, Fiscal Year 1993.'' BANKRUPTCY AND CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT The 1975 child support legislation included a provision that stated that an assigned child support obligation was not discharged in bankruptcy (i.e., a person filing bankruptcy was not relieved of his child support obligation). In 1978 this provision was repealed and incorporated into the 1978 uniform law on bankruptcy. The bankruptcy law also listed exceptions to discharge including alimony, maintenance or support due a spouse, former spouse, or child of the debtor in connection with a separation agreement, divorce decree, or property settlement. In 1981, the provision stating that a child support obligation assigned to the State as a condition of AFDC eligibility is not dischargeable in bankruptcy was reinstated. In 1984, a provision was enacted that provided that child support obligations that have been assigned to the State as part of the CSE program may not be discharged in bankruptcy, regardless of whether they are on behalf of an AFDC family or a non-AFDC family and regardless of whether the debtor was married to the child's other parent. LINKAGE BETWEEN AFDC AND CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT The Social Security Act requires every State operating an AFDC program to run a CSE program. Federal law requires applicants for, and recipients of, AFDC to assign their support rights to the State in order to receive AFDC. In addition, each applicant or recipient must cooperate with the State if necessary to (1) establish the paternity of a child born outside of marriage, and (2) obtain child support payments, unless it is found not to be in the best interest of the child to do so. Under the law, AFDC recipients or applicants may be excused from the requirement of cooperation if the AFDC agency determines that good cause for noncooperation exists, taking into consideration the best interests of the child on whose behalf aid is claimed. The determination is made according to standards in Federal regulations, the so-called good cause regulations. If good cause is found not to exist and if the relative with whom a child is living still refuses to cooperate, the relative is to be disqualified from AFDC and the child's benefits are to be sent in the form of a protective payment to a person other than the caretaker relative. (The same is true of refusal to assign to the State support rights: the child will not be disqualified from AFDC, but will receive AFDC benefits only in the form of protective payments.) Circumstances under which cooperation may be found to be against the best interests of the child are defined to include: situations in which cooperation is reasonably anticipated to result in physical or emotional harm to the child, or physical or emotional harm to the caretaker relative, of such nature that it reduces the capacity to care for the child adequately; situations in which the child was conceived as a result of incest or rape; and situations in which legal procedures are underway for the child's adoption. Families who do not receive AFDC assistance also are eligible for CSE and paternity determination services if they apply for services. FUNDING The Federal Government currently reimburses each State 66 percent of the cost of administering its CSE program. When the program began in 1975, the Federal match was 75 percent. In 1982, Public Law 97-248 reduced the Federal match to 70 percent (fiscal years 1983-87). In 1984 Public Law 98-378 reduced the Federal match to 68 percent in fiscal year 1988 and fiscal year 1989, and to 66 percent in fiscal year 1990 and years thereafter. These costs include moneys for locate services, paternity establishment, establishment of child support orders, and enforcement services. The Federal Government also pays 90 percent of State costs of developing and improving management information systems, including expenditures on the hardware (i.e., computers) and 90 percent of laboratory costs incurred in determining paternity. The Federal Government pays most of the costs of State CSE programs. States receive Federal funds to pay a majority share of the costs of operating CSE programs plus Federal incentive payments based on total collections and cost-effectiveness of their programs. State programs receive additional funding from the State government. Although the actual dollars contributed by the Federal Government are greater, the level of funding allocated by the State or local government determines the amount of resources available to the CSE agency. INCENTIVE PAYMENTS TO STATES In most States, the State share of CSE collections made on behalf of AFDC families can be calculated by subtracting the Federal medical assistance percentage from 100 percent (in some States, local governments also are entitled to part of the State's share of collections). In addition, States and localities receive Federal CSE incentive payments that come entirely from the Federal share of child support collections. The revised incentive formula, effective October 1, 1985, was designed to encourage States to develop CSE programs that emphasize collections on behalf of both AFDC and non-AFDC families, and to improve the program's cost effectiveness. Under the incentive formula, each State receives an incentive payment equal to at least 6 percent of the State's total amount of AFDC support collections for the year, plus at least 6 percent of the State's total amount of non-AFDC collections for the year. The amount of the State's incentive payment could reach a high of 10 percent of the AFDC collections plus 10 percent of the non-AFDC collections, depending on the State's ratio of child support collections to administrative costs. (See table 11-8.) There is a limit, however, on the incentive payment for non-AFDC collections. The incentive payments for such collections may not exceed 115 percent of incentive payments for AFDC collections. (This percentage was 100 percent in fiscal year 1986 and fiscal year 1987, 105 percent in fiscal year 1988, 110 percent in fiscal year 1989, and 115 percent in fiscal year 1990 and each year thereafter.) TABLE 11-8.--INCENTIVE PAYMENT STRUCTURE ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Incentive payment received (percent) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Collection-to-cost ratio: Less than 1.4 to 1....................................... 6.0 At least 1.4 to 1........................................ 6.5 At least 1.6 to 1........................................ 7.0 At least 1.8 to 1........................................ 7.5 At least 2.0 to 1........................................ 8.0 At least 2.2 to 1........................................ 8.5 At least 2.4 to 1........................................ 9.0 At least 2.6 to 1........................................ 9.5 At least 2.8 to 1........................................ 10.0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The incentive formula seeks to assure that States provide equitable treatment for both AFDC and non-AFDC families. Under the old system, a State that incurred administrative costs to collect support for a non-AFDC family did not receive an incentive payment since incentives were paid only for AFDC collections. This practice generally resulted in the neglect of non-AFDC cases. The new incentive formula aims to remedy that by making payments for non-AFDC collections. At the same time it has placed a limit on non-AFDC incentive payments so as to lessen the possibility that States would merely transfer to the CSE program child support activities which were previously financed out of State and/or local moneys, with no increase in the level of child support services. At State option, laboratory costs (for blood testing, etc.) to establish paternity may be excluded from the State's administrative costs in calculating the State's collection-to- cost ratios for purposes of determining the incentive payment. In addition, for purposes of calculating these ratios, interstate collections are credited to both the initiating and responding States. Incentives are paid according to the collection-to-cost ratios (ratio of AFDC collections to total administrative costs and ratio of non-AFDC collections to total administrative costs) shown in table 11-8. Before 1984, a State that initiated a successful action to collect child support from another State generally did not receive an incentive payment. Rather, the jurisdiction that made the collection received the incentive payment. Public Law 98-378 provides that both States involved in an interstate collection be credited with the collection for purposes of computing incentive payments. This double-counting is intended to encourage States to pursue interstate cases as energetically as they pursue intrastate cases. States now will pay incentive for interstate cases to themselves out of the Federal share of collections they distribute. In addition to substantial Federal reimbursement, States may use fees and cost recovery to help finance the CSE program (discussed later). Such fees and costs recovered from non-AFDC cases must be subtracted from the State's total administrative cost before calculating the Federal reimbursement amount; however, the lower administrative cost figure may result in greater Federal incentive payments by improving the State's collection-to-cost ratio. PAYMENTS TO AFDC FAMILIES Families receiving AFDC benefits automatically qualify (free of charge) for CSE services. Their cases are referred to the CSE agency. Federal law requires AFDC families (and applicants), as a condition of eligibility for aid, to assign their support rights to the State, to cooperate with the State in establishing the paternity of a child born outside of marriage, and to cooperate with the State in obtaining support payments. The provision requiring the AFDC applicant or recipient to assign to the State her rights to support covers both current support and any arrears which have accrued, and lasts as long as the family receives AFDC. When the family no longer receives AFDC, the mother or caretaker relative regains her right to collect current support, but if there are arrears, the State may claim those arrears up to the amount paid out as AFDC benefits. Child support payments made on behalf of a child receiving AFDC are supposed to be paid to the CSE agency rather than directly to the family. If the child support collection is insufficient to disqualify the family from receiving AFDC payments, the family receives its full monthly AFDC grant plus the first $50 of the child support payment made in the child's behalf for that month. The remainder of that monthly child support payment is distributed to reimburse the State and Federal Governments in proportion to their assistance to the family. If the family's income, including the child support payment, is sufficient to make the family ineligible for AFDC payments, the family's AFDC benefits are ended, and future child support payments are paid directly from the noncustodial parent to the family. Supplemental payments in ``fill-the-gap'' States Notwithstanding the above procedures, some States are required to provide monthly supplemental payments to AFDC recipients who have less disposable income now than they would have had in July 1975 because child support is paid to the CSE agency instead of directly to the family. States required to pay supplemental payment are often referred to as ``fill-the- gap'' States. These States pay less assistance than their full need standard, and allow recipients to use child support income to make up all or part of the difference between the payment made by the State and the State's need standard. Section 402(a)(28) of the Social Security Act requires States that had a fill-the-gap policy in 1975 and currently have such a policy, to add to the AFDC benefit all or part of the child support collection (the amount which would have caused no reduction in the AFDC benefit if it had been paid directly to the family). Information obtained from the Office of Child Support Enforcement (June 1990) indicates that seven States that had fill-the-gap policies in July 1975 also have them now and thus must follow the benefit calculation rules of section 402(a)(28) when taking account of child support collections for AFDC families. They are: Georgia, Maine, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wyoming. Another 13 jurisdictions, which had fill-the-gap policies in July 1975, no longer have them. Were they to resume a fill-the-gap practice, they also would be required to treat child support collections as though they were paid directly to the family. These jurisdictions are: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Indiana, Missouri, New Mexico, Puerto Rico, Texas, Virgin Islands, Washington, and West Virginia. PAYMENTS TO NON-AFDC FAMILIES Families who do not receive AFDC assistance also are eligible if they apply for services, unless they have left the AFDC rolls and are automatically provided continued CSE services. The entire amount of child support payments collected on behalf of a non-AFDC child is paid directly to the family. Even so, the State still receives the Federal reimbursement (currently 66 percent) for the costs of establishing and enforcing child support obligations for these non-AFDC cases. In some States, parents may be ordered by the court to make and receive support payments directly or through a court registry or State child support clearinghouse without any formal application to the CSE agency. When this occurs, the money collected, since it is outside the CSE system, cannot be counted in determining the amount of Federal reimbursement to the State. Non-AFDC families participate in the CSE program on a voluntary basis, except for Medicaid-only cases. Federal funding for services to non-AFDC families was made a permanent part of the program in 1980 by Public Law 96-272. Federal law requires the State to charge an application fee of up to $25 for CSE services for non-AFDC families. Some States charge the full $25, some less, and others use State funds to pay the fee or seek collection from the noncustodial parent. In addition, CSE agencies are allowed to recover the actual costs of their services to non-AFDC families from either the custodial parent or the noncustodial parent, once current support has been covered. In practice, this means that costs are deducted from arrears that otherwise would be paid directly to the non-AFDC client. Recovery of these costs is contingent on payment of the arrears. However, it is the practice of most States not to recover the cost of their services. The amount of fees collected by the States for purposes of processing non- AFDC cases plus the amount of processing costs recovered by the States in excess of the fees charged decreases the amount of States' expenditures eligible for Federal CSE funding. Moreover, any interest earned on money from fees or recovered costs is considered CSE program income and must be used by the States to offset program expenditures. In fiscal year 1992, fees received and costs recovered for non-AFDC cases amounted to $29.2 million. Several States try to recoup costs in non-AFDC cases by deducting their costs from the actual child support payment before sending it to the custodial parent. Because some of these custodial parents are only dollars away from qualifying for AFDC and because it generally is easier to get on welfare than to earn one's way off, some policymakers argue that this practice can result in welfare dependency; others maintain that it is unfair to the children. ARREARAGES To receive AFDC benefits, a custodial parent must assign to the State her right to collect child support payments. This assignment covers current support and any arrears, and lasts as long as the family receives AFDC. When the family stops receiving AFDC, the assignment ends. The mother regains her right to collect current support. However, if there are arrears, the State may claim those arrears up to the amount paid out in AFDC. As described earlier, when a mother receives AFDC and the CSE agency makes a collection on her behalf, it must distribute the collection in accordance with Federal law. First, up to the first $50 collected is given to the family (a disregard that does not affect the family's AFDC benefit or eligibility status). Second, the Federal and State Governments are reimbursed for the AFDC benefits paid to the family in that month. Third, if there is money left, the family receives it up to the amount of the current month's child support obligation. Fourth, if there is still money left, the State keeps it to reimburse itself for any arrears owed to it under the AFDC assignment. If no arrears are owed the State, the money is used to pay arrears owed to the family. Such moneys are considered income under the AFDC program and would reduce the family's AFDC benefit. In the case of non-AFDC families, the sequence is different. First, if the family never received AFDC, all child support collections made on the family's behalf are sent to the family. Second, if the family had received AFDC before, collections go toward payment on the current month's support obligation. If any money is left, and it is considered an arrearage, the State decides whether the arrears will be paid to the family or State first. If the arrears are paid to the State, they are distributed between the Federal and State Governments as reimbursement for past AFDC benefits. Third, if there are no arrears, the collection is forwarded to the family and is credited toward future CSE payments. According to the OCSE 17th annual report, in fiscal year 1992, the amount of total prior year support due, i.e., arrearages, amounted to $23.9 billion; $1.8 billion (8 percent) was paid in fiscal year 1992 on prior years' arrears. Distribution of Collections Collections made on behalf of families receiving AFDC directly offset AFDC benefit costs and (except for the first $50 of current monthly support payments, which go directly to the family, and are disregarded as income for AFDC purposes) are shared between the Federal Government and the States in accordance with the matching formula used for the individual State's AFDC program. In general, the initial determination of the Federal share of CSE collections is based on the rate of Federal financial participation in AFDC benefit costs. The Federal share of AFDC benefit costs generally is determined by the Federal medical assistance percentage. The Federal share of AFDC benefit costs (and, therefore, the Federal share of CSE/AFDC collections) is inversely related to State per capita income; within limits, the lower the State per capita income, the greater the Federal share. Nationally, this figure is about 55 percent. It ranges from a minimum of 50 percent to a statutory maximum of 83 percent. In fiscal year 1993, the highest matching rate was 79.01 percent (the Federal match for AFDC benefit costs in Mississippi). In fiscal year 1994, Mississippi's Federal AFDC matching rate dropped to 78.85 percent. Even though the national average (gross) Federal share of AFDC collections is about 56 percent, Federal funds reimburse States for 66 percent of their CSE administrative costs. This lowers the net Federal share of support collections. USE OF SUPPORT COLLECTIONS The Federal share of child support collections paid by noncustodial parents of children receiving AFDC benefits is used first to pay incentives to States on their AFDC and non- AFDC collections. The remainder is used to offset Federal AFDC benefit costs. In fiscal year 1993, incentive payments amounted to $339 million, 44 percent of the Federal share of CSE collections. Payments made on behalf of non-AFDC families go to the family. Neither Federal law nor regulations dictate the use of the State's share of child support savings; there are no Federal strings attached. However, child support collections in and of themselves can (1) prevent families from qualifying for welfare programs, (2) remove families from welfare rolls when the amount collected is sufficient, (3) partially offset State AFDC payments to families whose monthly child support is insufficient to remove them from welfare rolls, (4) recover or prevent the need for Medicaid payments through reimbursement from private health insurers in cases where the noncustodial parent has coverage, or where coverage is available, and (5) offset AFDC foster care costs. In addition, many States have chosen to reinvest child support savings back into the CSE program to increase the quality and effectiveness of the program. Some States use child support savings in other children and family programs. Others use child support savings wherever the State budget indicates the need. EXTENT TO WHICH FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BEARS COST OF THE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM One of the purposes of the CSE program is to reduce public expenditures on welfare by obtaining support from noncustodial parents on an ongoing basis. The CSE program also provides services to nonwelfare parents who apply for services. One purpose of the non-AFDC component of the program is welfare cost avoidance, that is, preventing families from going on AFDC (or other welfare programs) by collecting child support from noncustodial parents. Even with the reduced Federal matching rate (from 75 percent in 1975 to 66 percent in 1991), the Federal Government has never recovered its costs from the CSE program. Under the current financing arrangement, States can run inefficient programs and still make a profit from the CSE program. The cost of the CSE program to the Federal Government, however, has continued, since 1984, to increase steadily. To illustrate, assume that an inefficient State spends $200 to collect a $300 child support payment from a noncustodial parent whose children are receiving AFDC benefits. Such a State (with a collection-to-cost ratio of 1.5) would qualify for an incentive payment of $19.50 (6.5 percent of AFDC collections, see table 11-9). Since the State pays 34 percent of administrative costs, the collection would cost the State $68, but the State's share of the collection would total $144.50. This means that the State would pay 34 percent of the cost and get 48 percent of the collection. Thus, the net gain to the State would be $76.50.\7\ On the other hand, the collection would cost the Federal Government $132, and its share of the collection would amount to $105.50. Thus, the collection would cost the Federal Government $26.50. In other words, the Federal Government would pay 66 percent of the cost and get 35 percent of the collection. The recipient would get nearly 17 percent of the collection (the $50 passthrough). Table 11-11 shows that although the CSE program is a net gain for the States, it is a significant net cost to the Federal Government. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\This is a simplified example. Actually, the State's share of savings is determined by adding the State's share of AFDC collections to the State's AFDC and non-AFDC incentive payments. Its share of total administrative costs is subtracted from these revenues. The calculations assume a 50-50 matching rate for AFDC benefits. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TABLE 11-9.--STATE AND FEDERAL SHARE OF CHILD SUPPORT COLLECTIONS [AFDC Family] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Cost of Collections collections Net gain ------------------------------------------------------------------------ State share.......... $125+$19.50=$144.50 $68 +$76.50 Federal share........ 125- 19.50= 105.50 132 -26.50 Payment to recipient. 50.00 0 + 50.00 -------------------------------------------------- Total.......... 300.00 200 +100.00 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The point at which a State breaks even (exactly recovers collection costs) in child support payments on behalf of AFDC recipients primarily depends on the share of AFDC benefit costs that it pays, and this, in turn, is related inversely to State per capita income. This can be shown by calculating the approximate breakeven ratios (collections needed per dollar of administrative cost) for States with different Federal AFDC matching rates, but the same collection cost per case. In the following examples, it is assumed that the cost of making a collection is $100 per month per AFDC case. (This figure was the national average cost for fiscal year 1988; it was obtained by dividing total CSE administrative costs of AFDC cases by the average number of AFDC cases in which a collection was made). Example 1.--State that pays 50 percent of AFDC benefit costs--maximum State share. (In fiscal year 1990, 11 States and the District of Columbia were in this position.) Under the existing system, the breakeven collection amount for a State spending $100 per AFDC case to collect child support payments, retaining the maximum State share (50 percent) of AFDC/CSE collections, paying the standard 34 percent of CSE administrative costs, and receiving the minimum incentive payment of 6 percent, is $105.\8\ That is, the State need collect only $1.05 per $1 of total administrative cost in order to recover its share of costs. Conversely, the Federal breakeven ratio for this State's collections is approximately 2.17. That is, the State must collect about $217 in order for the Federal Government to break even.\9\ (See table 11-10 and chart 11-1.) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\State share of collections = State share of costs at breakeven .5(C-$50) + .06[(C-$50)+$50] = .34Y .56C = .34Y + $25 Assume State receives 50-50 matching rate for AFDC benefit costs and assume Y = $100 (national average in fiscal year 1988). C = total collections, Y = cost of collections, and (C-$50) = X, which is the public share of collections. The incentive payment equals 6 percent of total collections. \9\Federal share of collections = Federal share of costs at breakeven .5(C-$50) - .08[(C-$50)+$50] = .66Y .42C = .66Y + $25 Assume State receives 50-50 matching rate for AFDC benefit costs and assume Y = $100 (national average in fiscal year 1988). C = total collections, Y = cost of collections, and (C-$50) = X, which is the public share of collections. The incentive payment, a function of the collection-to-cost ratio, equals 8 percent of total collections in this example where the collection-to-cost ratio is 2.17 (see table 8). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Example 2.--State that pays the minimum share (less than 20 percent) of AFDC benefit costs. This situation is illustrated by the case of Mississippi, which had a Federal matching rate of 80.18 percent (and, thus, a State matching rate of 19.82 percent) for AFDC benefit costs. The breakeven collection amount for Mississippi, assuming it also spent $100 per AFDC case to collect child support payments, would be $164. This is a breakeven ratio of 1.64. Conversely, the Federal breakeven ratio for Mississippi's CSE program is approximately 1.44. (See table 11-10 and chart 11- 1.) These illustrations show that the States that are entitled to a relatively small proportion of child support collections (because of paying a small share of AFDC benefit costs) have to collect more child support payments per administrative dollar than other States to recover their costs (other things being equal). (See table 11-10.) TABLE 11-10.--STATE AND FEDERAL BREAKEVEN POINTS PER DOLLAR OF COLLECTION COSTS\1\ FOR SELECTED FEDERAL AFDC MATCHING RATES ------------------------------------------------------------------------ State Federal breakeven breakeven ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Federal AFDC matching rate: 50 percent................................ $1.05 $2.17 60 percent................................ 1.17 1.83 70 percent................................ 1.36 1.60 80 percent................................ 1.64 1.44 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ \1\The breakeven point is the amount of collections at which the jurisdiction exactly recovers its share of the collection costs. In this table collection costs are assumed to be $100 per month, the fiscal year 1988 national average cost of AFDC collections. This average was obtained by dividing fiscal year 1988 AFDC expenditures by the average number of AFDC cases in which a collection was made that year. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ CHART 11-1. STATE/FEDERAL PROFIT/LOSS AT VARIOUS SUPPORT COLLECTION AMOUNTS, AND AFDC MATCHING RATES Table 11-11 shows that during the period 1979-93, the CSE program has produced new revenue for the States but incurred cost to the Federal Government. The States' share of collections has exceeded their share of administrative costs in each year, but the Federal share of collections has fallen increasingly short of their share of administrative costs. Net Federal costs have risen sharply from $43 million in fiscal year 1979 to $740 million in fiscal year 1993, a real increase of 745 percent (constant fiscal year 1993 dollars). Although net State savings increased in current dollars, from $244 million in fiscal year 1979 to $462 million in fiscal year 1993, there was a 7 percent decrease in constant fiscal year 1993 dollars. In fiscal year 1992, 11 jurisdictions (Alabama, Arizona, Guam, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Mexico, Puerto Rico, Texas, the Virgin Islands, and West Virginia) did not achieve a savings from their CSE program. Moreover, in that same year, in only five States (Indiana, Iowa, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming) was the Federal share of child support savings positive. Despite the discussion above about breakeven points, it is not clear why these 11 jurisdictions did not recover their costs from the CSE program, nor why the Federal Government recovered its costs in the five other States (mentioned above). TABLE 11-11.--FEDERAL AND STATE SHARE OF CHILD SUPPORT ``SAVINGS,'' FISCAL YEARS 1979-93 [In millions] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Federal State share of share of Net child child public support support savings savings\1\ savings ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fiscal year: 1979............................. -$43 $244 $201 1980............................. -103 230 127 1981............................. -128 261 133 1982............................. -148 307 159 1983............................. -138 312 174 1984............................. -105 366 260 1985............................. -231 317 86 1986............................. -264 274 9 1987............................. -337 342 5 1988............................. -355 381 26 1989............................. -480 403 -77 1990............................. -528 338 -190 1991............................. -586 385 -201 1992............................. -605 434 -171 1993............................. -740 462 -278 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ \1\Negative ``savings'' are costs. Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Office of Child Support Enforcement. Annual Reports to Congress, various years. Table 11-11 also shows that the CSE program no longer produces a net public savings ($201 million savings in fiscal year 1979). Instead, in fiscal year 1993, the net cost of the program to the taxpayer was estimated at $278 million, up $107 million from fiscal year 1992. In addition, table 11-11 shows public savings dropping 67 percent from fiscal year 1984 to fiscal year 1985. This sudden decrease in public savings primarily was caused by the provision in 1984 law, first effective in fiscal year 1985, requiring that up to the first $50 received by the CSE agency on behalf of an AFDC family be passed through to the family without affecting their eligibility for AFDC or AFDC benefit payments. In fiscal year 1985, about 3.5 percent of CSE collections, $93.8 million went to AFDC families (pursuant to the $50 passthrough rule). In fiscal year 1993, $364.2 million (about 4.1 percent of CSE collections) was passed through to AFDC families. If these funds had not been spent to increase the incomes of poor children and their parents on AFDC, the net public savings from child support enforcement would have been a positive $86.2 million in fiscal year 1993. Some question whether States have sufficient incentive to minimize costs, most of which are paid by the Federal Government. However, others argue that the intangible benefits of the CSE program make it worthwhile, despite considerations of cost-effectiveness. It is a fact that a large segment of the program, namely the non-AFDC component, by definition, provides no direct savings to the States or the Federal Government. Nevertheless, the non-AFDC component of the CSE program can achieve welfare cost avoidance in the following ways: by providing non-AFDC families with additional income sufficient to make them decide not to apply for public assistance (AFDC, food stamp, or Medicaid), even though eligible; by making non- AFDC families ineligible for public assistance and by continuing to make these families ineligible by reason of income; and by reducing the benefit levels of non-AFDC families who do receive public assistance benefits. A recent study indicated that there was $1 in indirect savings, or welfare cost avoidance, for every $4 in child support collections made on behalf of non-AFDC families. If this were true in fiscal year 1992, the public avoided over $1.6 billion in additional welfare costs, more than paying for the program. It also should be noted that once the CSE system matures (i.e., once the majority of existing cases have child support orders), the cost-effectiveness of the system probably will improve. However, because the benefits of establishing paternity or a child support award occur in future years as well as the current year, a static, point-in-time, analysis of costs and collections fails to account for the complexity and dynamic nature of the CSE system. It is an unfortunate irony that the more effective the program becomes at cost-avoidance, the less effective it will appear in such static calculations of ``savings.'' ROLE OF AUTOMATED SYSTEMS In 1980, Congress authorized 90 percent Federal matching funds on an open-ended basis for CSE automated data systems, instead of the regular program rate (75 percent in 1980, 66 percent in fiscal year 1990 and years thereafter). Funds go to States that elect to establish an automated data processing and information retrieval system designed to assist management in the administration of the State plan, so as to control, account for, and monitor all factors in the support enforcement, collection, and paternity determination process. Funds may be used to plan, design, develop, and install or enhance the system. The Secretary of DHHS must approve the system as meeting specified conditions before matching is available. In 1984, Congress made the 90 percent rate available to pay for the acquisition of computer hardware and necessary software. The 1984 legislation also specified that if a State met the Federal requirement for 90 percent matching, it could use its 90 percent matching funds to pay for the development and improvement of income withholding and other procedures required by the 1984 law. In May 1986, the OCSE established a transfer policy requiring States seeking the 90 percent Federal matching rate to transfer existing automated systems from other States rather than to develop new ones, unless there were a compelling reason not to. In 1988, Congress required States without comprehensive statewide automated systems to submit an advance planning document to the OCSE by October 1, 1991, for the development of such systems. All State systems must be approved as fully operating by October 1, 1995, at which time the 90 percent matching rate is to end. The new law allows many requirements for automated systems to be waived under certain circumstances. For instance, the DHHS Secretary may waive a requirement if (1) a State demonstrates that it has an alternative system enabling it to substantially comply with program requirements or (2) a State provides assurance that additional steps will be taken to improve its program. All States and territories submitted advance planning documents for automated child support systems as required by the Family Support Act of 1988. As of July 1, 1992, OCSE had approved plans for all States and territories. According to an August 1992 GAO report (IMTEC-92-46), the Federal Government had spent $258 million at the end of fiscal year 1991 in enhanced 90 percent matching funds for child support automtion. It is estimated that another $863 million in 90 percent matching funds will be spent by October 1, 1995. According to a February 1989 GAO report entitled, ``Child Support: State Progress in Developing Automated Enforcement Systems,'' States that develop automated systems with regular program funds also must obtain advance approval by the OCSE for expenditures that exceed $200,000. The GAO reported that oversight of system acquisition and operation under the regular program funding is less stringent than that of systems with enhanced funding. IMPACT OF CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT ON AFDC AND POVERTY STATUS For the 5.0 million women due child support payments in 1989 (including the nearly 1.2 million women who did not receive any payment), the average annual amount of child support owed was $2,252. The average annual amount of child support for the 3.7 million women who received child support payments was $2,995. If the full amount of payment due had been made to all women owed child support, the average annual amount would have been $3,292. (The average AFDC benefit per family in 1989 was about $4,600.) In 1989, 1.2 million (37 percent) of the 3.2 million women rearing children alone with incomes below the poverty level were supposed to receive child support payments. If full payment had been made to those 1.2 million women, 140,000 (4.4 percent of the 3.2 million and 11.8 percent of the 1.2 million) of them would have received enough income from child support payments to put them above the poverty level. This assumes that none of those poor women was a recipient of AFDC. For those receiving AFDC, the maximum they usually receive in the form of child support payments (via the CSE agency) is $50 monthly. It is clear from the above illustration that the low level of child support awards due in 1989 limited the CSE program's antipoverty impact. The antipoverty effectiveness of the CSE program might be marginal for some families, given that Census Bureau data indicate that even being a member of a two-parent family is no guarantee against poverty. In 1991, 7.7 percent of white two-parent families with children under age 18 had incomes below the poverty level and 12.4 percent of black two- parent families were poor. This means that being in a two- parent family is not as much of a protection against poverty for blacks as it is for whites. Since the costs of achieving a moderate standard of living are sometimes higher for two households than for one, when a family breaks up, the father may have less money available to contribute to the support of his children. Thus, because the poverty rate of black children is relatively high even in two-parent families, the potential of child support for reducing the poverty rate of black children may be especially limited. In 1989, $16.3 billion in child support payments were due, but actual payments totaled $11.2 billion. In 1985, $10.9 billion in child support payments were due, but actual payments totaled $7.2 billion. This meant that $3.7 billion or 33 percent of collections owed in 1985 went unpaid. While the almost $11 billion owed in child support in 1985 is a substantial amount, two basic studies indicate that fathers have the ability to pay from $24 to $30 billion annually in child support. One study points out that the size of the estimate of the total amount that noncustodial fathers can afford to contribute to their children's maintenance ($26.6 billion annually) says nothing about the distribution of this money by income group. The study indicates that children whose fathers are in the highest income quintile would receive 46 percent of the $26.6 billion and that those whose fathers are in the lowest quintile would receive 3 percent of the $26.6 billion. Another study based on data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics, which covers divorces and separations during the period 1968-1981, indicates that poor children have not necessarily had poor fathers, and that increased child support payments from the absent fathers could substantially reduce their years of poverty. The study states that ``the largest portion of the times when the custodial mother's family is poor are times when the absent father has enough income to keep himself and any new family he has formed out of poverty.'' This report concludes that if increased child support payments merely replace welfare support, many childhood years would remain in poverty. Some of the reasons for this finding are: (1) the absence of support awards in a large number of cases, (2) nonpayment or underpayment of existing awards, and (3) low award levels relative to the income of noncustodial parents. Although the antipoverty potential of the CSE program is limited and difficult to estimate, it is clear that child support payments could have a large impact on AFDC costs. In fiscal year 1992, the sum collected by the CSE agency from AFDC parents equalled 11.4 percent of AFDC benefits. Researchers say that this overstates the impact of the CSE program, inasmuch as AFDC mothers would have collected some support if there were no CSE program and they were not required to give their child support rights to the welfare agency. One researcher estimates that only about 25 percent of the gain can be attributed directly to the CSE program. (This figure, applied to fiscal year 1992, leads to the estimate that if there had been no CSE program that year, mothers would have collected 8.5 percent of AFDC benefits, compared to the actual sum of 11.4 percent collected by the CSE agency.) The researcher said that if a successful system of mandatory wage withholding were adopted and greater efforts made to establish obligations, the CSE program might recover between 15 percent and 20 percent of total AFDC benefit expenditures. The OCSE annual fiscal year 1992 data show 10 States recovering at least 20 percent of total AFDC benefit payments through the efforts of the CSE program (on average, these are relatively smaller States with low AFDC benefit levels). In addition, there is much research that indicates that child support payments could help reduce the severity of poverty for many non-AFDC children even if it did not end their poverty. TABLE 11-12.--ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER AND PERCENT OF AFDC FAMILIES AFFECTED BY $50 PASSTHROUGH: 1985, 1990, 1992,\1\ AND 1993 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Estimated Percent of families affected AFDC families --------------------------------------- State families affected 1993 1993 1985 1990 1992 1993 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alabama......................................... 50,994 18,510 11.7 19.1 33.4 36.3 Alaska.......................................... 10,048 1,889 11.9 20.7 18.8 18.8 Arizona......................................... 68,725 2,695 4.8 4.9 7.3 3.9 Arkansas........................................ 26,098 7,697 15.9 19.7 27.7 29.5 California...................................... 717,181 82,517 13.8 12.7 11.3 11.5 Colorado........................................ 41,152 8,510 14.1 15.1 18.5 20.7 Connecticut..................................... 55,072 11,162 25.6 19.3 18.3 20.3 Delaware........................................ 11,256 2,511 21.7 18.0 21.6 22.3 District of Columbia............................ 24,589 1,872 5.8 7.5 7.9 7.6 Florida......................................... 247,505 37,925 11.4 24.0 15.9 15.3 Georgia......................................... 139,903 26,813 5.3 19.6 17.8 19.2 Guam............................................ 1,363 489 10.5 19.9 34.6 35.9 Hawaii.......................................... 17,452 3,039 20.5 13.2 19.6 17.4 Idaho........................................... 7,436 3,922 46.7 46.6 49.6 52.7 Illinois........................................ 220,972 17,782 5.5 7.9 7.4 8.1 Indiana......................................... 68,904 23,807 25.9 27.8 43.4 34.6 Iowa............................................ 34,443 9,150 22.7 22.8 23.9 26.6 Kansas.......................................... 27,729 9,664 15.2 24.0 31.5 34.9 Kentucky........................................ 73,601 12,534 7.6 13.4 15.5 17.0 Louisiana....................................... 88,712 8,238 6.9 8.5 9.3 9.3 Maine........................................... 21,161 7,339 25.6 39.3 23.0 34.7 Maryland........................................ 79,222 14,347 15.0 10.9 18.6 18.1 Massachusetts................................... 106,962 12,252 20.2 16.3 11.2 11.5 Michigan........................................ 197,796 53,494 17.2 25.3 23.9 27.1 Minnesota....................................... 57,147 20,076 22.5 28.0 29.8 35.1 Mississippi..................................... 59,509 7,931 4.8 9.2 12.4 13.3 Missouri........................................ 84,700 14,833 8.2 18.5 17.9 17.5 Montana......................................... 10,535 1,906 13.9 15.2 18.3 18.1 Nebraska........................................ 15,452 4,512 11.3 20.6 27.5 29.2 Nevada.......................................... 12,614 4,201 33.6 29.8 32.4 33.3 New Hampshire................................... 10,462 3,589 12.6 13.5 27.1 34.1 New Jersey...................................... 121,685 25,361 15.4 15.8 19.9 20.8 New Mexico...................................... 29,500 2,927 7.6 11.8 9.5 9.9 New York........................................ 415,885 48,495 9.2 11.8 13.0 11.7 North Carolina.................................. 127,390 24,211 15.0 19.5 18.9 19.0 North Dakota.................................... 5,974 2,340 25.1 36.7 38.5 39.2 Ohio............................................ 233,965 35,119 11.6 19.9 14.1 15.0 Oklahoma........................................ 47,696 4,626 8.4 13.4 7.5 9.7 Oregon.......................................... 38,662 9,980 16.0 17.6 22.5 25.8 Pennsylvania.................................... 194,826 50,941 16.3 20.8 24.9 26.2 Puerto Rico..................................... 60,709 1,874 4.7 4.2 3.3 3.1 Rhode Island.................................... 21,434 2,728 13.9 17.9 11.1 12.7 South Carolina.................................. 52,110 13,173 8.9 26.3 23.8 25.3 South Dakota.................................... 7,167 1,897 17.6 21.4 24.2 26.5 Tennessee....................................... 102,909 10,988 9.8 15.2 11.4 10.7 Texas........................................... 270,257 18,049 3.1 5.8 6.1 6.7 Utah............................................ 18,229 4,721 26.9 23.7 25.7 25.9 Vermont......................................... 8,570 3,439 21.9 36.5 35.9 40.1 Virgin Islands.................................. 1,083 139 10.2 11.6 11.7 12.8 Virginia........................................ 72,824 17,424 14.9 24.9 24.5 23.9 Washington...................................... 85,259 27,243 18.0 24.8 28.7 32.0 West Virginia................................... 33,042 3,641 6.6 7.1 9.0 11.0 Wisconsin....................................... 71,994 29,193 37.8 38.9 38.7 40.6 Wyoming......................................... 6,324 1,535 8.0 21.7 26.2 24.3 --------------------------------------------------------------- Nationwide total.............................. 4,616,169 775,230 13.2 16.3 16.3 16.8 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NA=Not available. \1\These estimates are based on the number of ``paying'' child support cases and are a low estimate of the number of families affected. Note: These estimates are based on the number of ``paying'' child support cases adjusted for comparability with AFDC families. Source: Office of Child Support Enforcement. TABLE 11-13.--STATE PROFILE OF COLLECTIONS AND EXPENDITURES, FISCAL YEAR 1993\1\ [In millions of dollars] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Child support collections per dollar of total Incentive Total AFDC Non-AFDC Total administrative expenditures payments State collections collections collections expenditures ------------------------------ (estimate) AFDC/FC Non-AFDC Total total total -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alabama.................................................. $113.2 $22.5 $90.7 $34.6 3.27 0.65 2.62 $3.8 Alaska................................................... 39.1 11.7 27.4 10.6 3.71 1.11 2.60 2.2 Arizona.................................................. 66.6 18.6 48.0 37.1 1.79 0.50 1.29 2.2 Arkansas................................................. 49.1 16.2 32.9 15.3 3.20 1.06 2.15 2.1 California............................................... 736.9 335.2 401.6 290.6 2.54 1.15 1.38 48.4 Colorado................................................. 67.7 26.2 41.5 27.4 2.47 0.95 1.51 4.1 Connecticut.............................................. 93.5 41.3 52.2 29.3 3.19 1.41 1.78 5.1 Delaware................................................. 26.7 7.8 18.9 11.1 2.39 0.70 1.69 1.1 District of Columbia..................................... 21.8 5.2 16.6 8.7 2.51 0.60 1.91 1.0 Florida.................................................. 290.0 78.1 211.9 76.7 3.78 1.02 2.76 10.7 Georgia.................................................. 205.6 84.6 120.9 46.0 4.47 1.84 2.63 13.9 Guam..................................................... 5.0 2.3 2.7 2.7 1.89 0.88 1.00 0.4 Hawaii................................................... 37.3 9.1 28.3 9.8 3.79 0.92 2.87 1.2 Idaho.................................................... 32.1 8.7 23.4 9.4 3.43 0.93 2.50 1.5 Illinois................................................. 183.9 55.7 128.1 77.8 2.36 0.72 1.65 8.1 Indiana.................................................. 141.2 52.0 89.1 21.9 6.45 2.38 4.07 10.9 Iowa..................................................... 109.3 36.8 72.5 21.2 5.14 1.73 3.41 5.3 Kansas................................................... 59.6 22.4 37.2 23.2 2.57 0.97 1.61 3.1 Kentucky................................................. 103.6 36.6 67.0 34.0 3.05 1.08 1.97 5.7 Louisiana................................................ 103.1 26.8 76.2 32.3 3.19 0.83 2.36 3.6 Maine.................................................... 45.0 25.7 19.3 13.3 3.39 1.93 1.45 3.0 Maryland................................................. 219.1 51.3 167.8 48.0 4.56 1.07 3.49 5.5 Massachusetts............................................ 195.4 77.3 118.1 45.4 4.30 1.70 2.60 11.6 Michigan................................................. 874.5 169.6 704.9 103.7 8.43 1.64 6.80 24.9 Minnesota................................................ 214.5 56.0 158.5 51.1 4.20 1.10 3.10 6.8 Mississippi.............................................. 53.5 21.6 31.9 24.3 2.20 0.89 1.31 3.0 Missouri................................................. 189.1 51.2 138.0 43.9 4.30 1.16 3.14 7.9 Montana.................................................. 20.1 6.5 13.7 7.3 2.76 0.88 1.87 1.1 Nebraska................................................. 71.7 9.8 61.9 17.2 4.17 0.57 3.60 1.3 Nevada................................................... 37.6 7.0 30.6 15.8 2.39 0.45 1.94 1.7 New Hampshire............................................ 31.5 7.6 23.9 11.0 2.87 0.70 2.17 0.8 New Jersey............................................... 407.8 84.0 323.8 101.4 4.02 0.83 3.19 10.6 New Mexico............................................... 27.1 12.9 14.2 8.8 3.08 1.47 1.61 1.1 New York................................................. 536.4 184.6 351.8 172.9 3.10 1.07 2.03 22.2 North Carolina........................................... 197.3 70.3 127.0 61.7 3.20 1.14 2.06 9.2 North Dakota............................................. 18.7 6.1 12.6 4.6 4.05 1.32 2.73 1.0 Ohio..................................................... 714.1 105.7 608.4 130.4 5.48 0.81 4.67 12.7 Oklahoma................................................. 52.2 18.8 33.4 16.7 3.13 1.13 2.00 2.9 Oregon................................................... 124.9 28.4 96.6 25.2 4.95 1.12 3.83 5.0 Pennsylvania............................................. 814.5 124.5 690.0 89.6 9.09 1.39 7.70 15.5 Puerto Rico.............................................. 97.4 1.3 96.0 8.3 11.73 0.16 11.57 0.5 Rhode Island............................................. 26.7 15.0 11.7 6.1 4.35 2.44 1.91 1.8 South Carolina........................................... 79.3 24.6 54.7 20.4 3.88 1.20 2.68 2.8 South Dakota............................................. 18.1 5.1 13.1 3.7 4.90 1.37 3.53 0.8 Tennessee................................................ 116.2 33.4 82.7 21.4 5.42 1.56 3.86 4.5 Texas.................................................... 309.5 66.2 243.3 134.1 2.31 0.49 1.81 9.8 Utah..................................................... 56.2 19.5 36.7 19.6 2.86 0.99 1.87 2.4 Vermont.................................................. 15.8 7.6 8.2 5.2 3.06 1.48 1.59 1.3 Virgin Islands........................................... 5.0 0.3 4.6 1.1 4.50 0.31 4.19 0.0 Virginia................................................. 151.9 39.6 112.3 49.2 3.09 0.80 2.28 6.0 Washington............................................... 307.3 100.3 206.9 89.8 3.42 1.12 2.30 15.6 West Virginia............................................ 49.0 16.9 32.1 17.7 2.77 0.95 1.82 1.5 Wisconsin................................................ 332.8 65.4 267.4 46.6 7.15 1.41 5.74 9.2 Wyoming.................................................. 13.8 4.3 9.5 5.9 2.34 0.74 1.61 0.8 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- U.S. Totals........................................ $8,909.3 $2,416.2 $6,492.7 $2,241.1 3.98 1.08 2.90 $339.2 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\Totals may not add because of rounding. Source: Office of Child Support Enforcement. TABLE 11-14.--TOTAL CHILD SUPPORT COLLECTIONS, SELECTED FISCAL YEARS 1979-93 [In thousands of dollars] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- State 1979 1983 1987 1990 1991 1992 1993 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alabama............................ 6,854 8,643 39,976 66,174 80,952 98,141 113,273 Alaska............................. 3,844 9,704 17,139 26,788 30,721 35,613 39,148 Arizona............................ 6,411 10,563 20,114 27,837 33,277 46,447 66,580 Arkansas........................... 3,921 7,401 16,267 26,010 32,783 42,065 49,147 California......................... 199,945 254,586 394,882 522,646 591,243 653,681 736,855 Colorado........................... 4,020 17,178 22,376 39,601 46,997 58,030 67,723 Connecticut........................ 23,033 39,227 57,182 66,724 75,778 84,190 93,454 Delaware........................... 5,814 8,097 13,871 20,161 22,692 25,926 26,663 District of Columbia............... 1,086 3,521 5,690 13,598 16,578 19,733 21,798 Florida............................ 10,524 19,080 81,759 176,603 214,153 252,473 289,976 Georgia............................ 5,554 13,439 48,082 113,095 143,014 174,467 205,566 Guam............................... 160 391 627 1,440 3,162 4,697 5,003 Hawaii............................. 5,150 10,087 15,985 27,638 30,096 34,404 37,327 Idaho.............................. 2,501 4,690 13,490 22,909 23,442 27,846 32,127 Illinois........................... 10,740 32,025 89,622 136,019 150,134 183,308 183,889 Indiana............................ 9,073 20,789 60,613 96,145 110,117 124,614 141,164 Iowa............................... 13,017 29,185 48,516 70,982 80,693 96,046 109,278 Kansas............................. 3,975 9,921 22,199 44,958 54,832 66,053 59,601 Kentucky........................... 4,881 19,702 32,456 59,998 73,928 93,902 103,587 Louisiana.......................... 12,678 26,754 40,047 60,527 67,988 84,373 103,054 Maine.............................. 4,574 10,235 22,421 35,741 36,554 38,005 44,963 Maryland........................... 20,856 77,129 97,889 151,352 163,626 194,009 219,085 Massachusetts...................... 36,338 72,319 128,809 176,915 169,545 185,086 195,374 Michigan........................... 248,414 273,799 531,137 644,734 697,634 782,804 874,483 Minnesota.......................... 21,370 44,893 79,467 139,345 160,363 189,495 214,480 Mississippi........................ 1,662 4,887 15,444 30,532 40,277 48,289 53,505 Missouri........................... 5,829 18,118 71,905 129,851 141,372 166,339 189,161 Montana............................ 1,213 2,415 5,328 8,822 12,968 17,436 20,150 Nebraska........................... 2,468 20,044 37,667 52,378 57,055 66,177 71,708 Nevada............................. 3,487 5,556 9,844 16,210 23,346 32,080 37,641 New Hampshire...................... 2,089 11,621 17,542 20,604 22,659 27,360 31,497 New Jersey......................... 94,005 143,225 245,697 281,923 326,879 372,506 407,849 New Mexico......................... 1,680 4,614 8,672 14,416 16,792 19,088 27,117 New York........................... 136,361 174,454 269,218 373,718 437,371 487,738 536,374 North Carolina..................... 9,168 30,830 69,768 120,344 140,222 167,894 197,254 North Dakota....................... 1,723 2,723 5,483 10,414 12,309 15,599 18,693 Ohio............................... 22,832 34,862 180,696 489,515 552,649 665,999 714,132 Oklahoma........................... 1,826 5,233 16,365 32,169 39,922 46,540 52,170 Oregon............................. 88,502 38,052 53,470 78,374 91,252 107,435 124,929 Pennsylvania....................... 186,718 285,829 459,950 614,222 699,676 775,782 814,480 Puerto Rico........................ 1,916 31,985 66,164 74,535 77,252 84,329 97,357 Rhode Island....................... 3,575 7,196 11,823 20,044 21,609 24,880 26,671 South Carolina..................... 3,545 7,461 33,581 52,320 58,857 68,798 79,280 South Dakota....................... 1,407 2,847 6,275 11,024 13,119 15,881 18,112 Tennessee.......................... 8,976 19,077 38,406 71,502 77,032 84,818 116,152 Texas.............................. 8,207 17,941 61,184 132,318 192,797 251,157 309,502 Utah............................... 6,624 13,594 24,766 38,071 43,895 52,610 56,199 Vermont............................ 1,449 2,828 5,682 9,353 11,023 13,518 15,831 Virgin Islands..................... 260 684 3,018 3,131 3,338 4,049 4,992 Virginia........................... 9,197 13,617 58,859 110,560 129,919 145,114 151,919 Washington......................... 27,018 41,643 72,320 175,750 222,409 267,455 307,251 West Virginia...................... 1,592 3,434 9,724 21,658 23,527 35,561 49,016 Wisconsin.......................... 34,267 56,041 154,701 241,272 276,712 293,460 332,814 Wyoming............................ 520 1,017 3,229 7,155 9,079 11,220 13,810 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nationwide total.......................... 1,332,847 2,024,184 3,917,399 6,010,125 6,885,619 7,964,522 8,909,166 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source: Office of Child Support Enforcement. TABLE 11-15.--TOTAL AFDC COLLECTIONS, SELECTED FISCAL YEARS 1979-93 [In thousands of dollars] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- State 1979 1983 1987 1990 1991 1992 1993 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alabama............................ 6,830 7,789 15,050 19,484 22,788 23,001 22,539 Alaska............................. 334 1,780 4,242 8,160 9,940 11,145 11,722 Arizona............................ 642 1,459 4,805 6,102 7,401 12,693 18,616 Arkansas........................... 2,428 4,593 8,771 11,799 13,800 15,766 16,249 California......................... 117,532 136,963 198,152 248,440 286,261 314,232 335,235 Colorado........................... 3,525 9,330 11,155 16,765 19,281 23,287 26,197 Connecticut........................ 11,416 20,628 26,403 27,405 33,816 37,744 41,292 Delaware........................... 1,386 2,276 4,150 5,826 6,661 7,306 7,798 District of Columbia............... 907 2,421 2,912 4,118 4,407 4,927 5,197 Florida............................ 8,598 10,408 33,511 48,364 57,071 69,765 78,081 Georgia............................ 4,772 11,355 25,244 45,937 57,765 74,546 84,627 Guam............................... 159 259 299 520 1,635 2,524 2,344 Hawaii............................. 2,544 4,482 5,698 8,343 7,699 8,161 9,058 Idaho.............................. 2,047 3,806 5,034 6,952 7,482 8,543 8,746 Illinois........................... 9,916 18,971 38,705 44,149 48,968 58,842 55,749 Indiana............................ 8,116 17,646 31,466 38,124 45,030 49,247 52,040 Iowa............................... 10,654 19,978 27,834 28,552 30,585 35,401 36,775 Kansas............................. 3,454 7,807 12,155 15,209 17,454 20,869 22,402 Kentucky........................... 4,615 6,316 11,676 22,286 27,502 34,702 36,565 Louisiana.......................... 5,244 9,641 15,798 20,861 23,089 25,975 26,827 Maine.............................. 4,133 8,402 15,557 21,089 21,063 21,477 25,683 Maryland........................... 10,929 27,773 27,417 42,318 37,162 46,348 51,313 Massachusetts...................... 29,145 40,476 53,962 68,968 66,969 71,784 77,292 Michigan........................... 76,375 97,694 127,508 145,251 153,690 168,317 169,581 Minnesota.......................... 14,510 25,708 35,822 43,950 47,802 53,305 55,961 Mississippi........................ 1,556 4,544 7,596 14,530 19,494 21,523 21,641 Missouri........................... 4,165 11,500 23,525 38,056 37,021 49,653 51,153 Montana............................ 685 1,834 3,365 4,394 5,251 6,413 6,464 Nebraska........................... 2,083 3,675 6,160 6,990 7,431 9,195 9,797 Nevada............................. 517 1,824 2,673 3,311 4,465 6,807 7,021 New Hampshire...................... 2,089 2,649 2,744 3,606 4,385 6,337 7,638 New Jersey......................... 28,622 41,103 58,890 61,473 76,644 83,509 84,020 New Mexico......................... 1,160 2,891 4,120 5,573 6,421 7,850 12,922 New York........................... 56,588 68,622 102,115 134,040 157,582 174,587 184,583 North Carolina..................... 7,714 18,795 33,249 46,176 54,712 64,004 70,304 North Dakota....................... 1,379 2,011 3,517 5,103 5,600 6,016 6,098 Ohio............................... 21,974 33,403 66,866 76,888 84,304 100,833 105,719 Oklahoma........................... 1,260 3,648 7,143 11,875 14,894 17,682 18,784 Oregon............................. 12,977 12,645 14,744 18,877 21,989 25,637 28,357 Pennsylvania....................... 33,190 47,135 77,932 96,328 113,735 123,784 124,490 Puerto Rico........................ 439 917 1,803 1,707 1,600 1,428 1,344 Rhode Island....................... 3,438 4,217 6,064 10,168 10,550 13,486 14,954 South Carolina..................... 3,065 6,015 13,218 15,933 17,779 21,066 24,588 South Dakota....................... 1,137 2,175 3,058 3,717 4,213 4,888 5,056 Tennessee.......................... 3,871 5,567 12,086 22,926 27,865 22,777 33,422 Texas.............................. 6,370 10,879 19,703 39,659 47,255 59,165 66,199 Utah............................... 5,442 11,643 11,733 14,999 16,261 18,939 19,488 Vermont............................ 1,201 2,626 4,079 5,578 6,380 6,649 7,638 Virgin Islands..................... 143 140 241 210 233 282 343 Virginia........................... 9,081 11,758 15,536 27,770 33,910 38,281 39,610 Washington......................... 18,319 26,495 38,429 65,291 77,402 91,083 100,337 West Virginia...................... 1,430 3,311 5,647 4,085 6,859 9,500 16,867 Wisconsin.......................... 26,044 39,582 57,468 59,303 61,179 63,813 65,439 Wyoming............................ 379 790 1,489 2,584 3,226 3,749 4,345 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nationwide total............... 596,532 879,862 1,348,520 1,750,125 1,983,962 2,258,844 2,416,511 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source: Office of Child Support Enforcement. TABLE 11-16.--TOTAL NON-AFDC COLLECTIONS, SELECTED FISCAL YEARS 1979-93 [In thousands of dollars] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- State 1979 1983 1987 1990 1991 1992 1993 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alabama............................. 16 854 24,926 46,691 58,165 75,140 $90,733 Alaska.............................. 3,510 7,924 12,897 18,628 20,781 24,468 27,426 Arizona............................. 5,769 9,104 15,309 21,735 25,875 33,754 47,963 Arkansas............................ 1,494 2,808 7,496 14,211 18,984 26,299 32,899 California.......................... 82,412 117,623 196,730 274,205 304,982 339,449 401,620 Colorado............................ 496 7,848 11,221 22,836 27,715 34,743 41,527 Connecticut......................... 11,617 18,599 30,779 39,319 41,960 46,445 52,161 Delaware............................ 4,428 5,821 9,721 14,335 16,032 18,620 18,865 District of Columbia................ 179 1,100 2,778 9,481 12,171 14,806 16,601 Florida............................. 1,926 8,672 48,248 128,239 157,081 182,707 211,896 Georgia............................. 783 2,084 22,838 67,158 85,249 99,921 120,939 Guam................................ (\1\) 131 327 920 1,527 2,172 2,659 Hawaii.............................. 2,606 5,605 10,287 19,295 22,397 26,243 28,269 Idaho............................... 454 884 8,457 15,957 15,960 19,302 23,381 Illinois............................ 823 13,054 50,917 91,870 101,167 124,467 128,140 Indiana............................. 957 3,142 29,147 58,021 65,087 75,368 89,125 Iowa................................ 2,363 9,701 20,682 42,430 50,109 60,645 72,503 Kansas.............................. 520 2,114 10,044 29,749 37,379 45,183 37,199 Kentucky............................ 266 13,387 20,780 37,711 46,426 59,200 67,022 Louisiana........................... 7,434 16,113 24,250 39,665 44,898 58,398 76,227 Maine............................... 441 1,833 6,864 14,652 15,490 16,528 19,280 Maryland............................ 9,927 49,356 70,473 109,034 126,464 147,660 167,771 Massachusetts....................... 7,193 31,844 74,846 107,948 102,576 113,302 118,082 Michigan............................ 172,039 176,105 403,629 499,483 543,944 614,488 704,903 Minnesota........................... 6,861 19,184 43,645 95,395 112,561 136,190 158,519 Mississippi......................... 106 343 7,848 16,002 20,783 26,766 31,864 Missouri............................ 1,664 6,618 48,380 91,795 104,351 116,686 138,008 Montana............................. 528 582 1,963 4,427 7,718 11,024 13,686 Nebraska............................ 385 16,369 31,507 45,387 49,624 56,983 61,911 Nevada.............................. 2,970 3,731 7,172 12,899 18,881 25,273 30,620 New Hampshire....................... 0 8,972 14,798 16,999 18,274 21,023 23,859 New Jersey.......................... 65,383 102,122 186,808 220,450 250,235 288,997 323,829 New Mexico.......................... 520 1,722 4,552 8,843 10,371 11,239 14,195 New York............................ 79,773 105,831 167,103 239,678 279,289 313,151 351,791 North Carolina...................... 1,454 12,035 36,519 74,167 85,510 103,890 126,951 North Dakota........................ 344 712 1,966 5,312 6,708 9,583 12,595 Ohio................................ 858 1,459 113,830 412,627 468,346 565,166 608,413 Oklahoma............................ 566 1,585 9,222 20,293 25,028 28,858 33,386 Oregon.............................. 75,525 25,406 38,726 59,497 69,263 81,798 96,572 Pennsylvania........................ 153,528 238,694 382,018 517,893 517,893 651,998 689,990 Puerto Rico......................... 1,477 31,068 64,360 72,828 75,652 82,901 96,014 Rhode Island........................ 137 2,979 5,759 9,876 11,059 11,394 11,717 South Carolina...................... 480 1,446 20,363 36,387 41,078 47,732 54,692 South Dakota........................ 270 672 3,217 7,307 8,906 10,993 13,056 Tennessee........................... 5,105 13,510 26,321 48,575 49,167 62,041 82,730 Texas............................... 1,837 7,062 41,481 92,659 145,543 191,993 243,303 Utah................................ 1,183 1,952 13,032 23,073 27,634 33,671 36,712 Vermont............................. 249 202 1,603 3,775 4,643 6,869 8,193 Virgin Islands...................... 116 544 2,777 2,920 3,105 3,767 4,649 Virginia............................ 116 1,858 43,323 82,789 96,008 106,833 112,309 Washington.......................... 8,699 15,148 33,891 110,459 145,006 176,372 206,914 West Virginia....................... 162 123 4,076 17,574 16,668 26,061 32,149 Wisconsin........................... 8,224 16,459 97,233 181,969 215,533 229,647 267,374 Wyoming............................. 141 227 1,739 4,571 5,853 7,471 9,465 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nationwide total.................. 736,315 1,144,322 2,568,880 4,260,000 4,901,657 5,705,678 6,492,655 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\Less than $500. Source: Office of Child Support Enforcement. TABLE 11-17.--AVERAGE NUMBER OF AFDC CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT CASES IN WHICH A COLLECTION WAS MADE, SELECTED FISCAL YEARS 1978-93 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- State 1978 1983 1985 1987 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total............. 458,439 594,679 684,114 608,986 657,585 700,803 755,328 831,172 872,579 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alabama............... 7,966 16,301 9,133 11,572 12,316 10,860 8,347 9,209 9,077 Alaska................ 246 1,154 1,120 1,038 1,213 1,387 1,718 1,949 2,168 Arizona............... 819 1,164 1,851 1,470 2,545 3,128 1,930 2,822 3,343 Arkansas.............. 2,509 3,683 5,207 5,506 6,278 6,372 7,071 8,188 8,301 California............ 92,325 86,277 103,742 74,081 84,367 89,304 104,903 116,118 123,776 Colorado.............. 3,177 4,129 5,687 4,092 4,771 4,437 4,581 5,126 5,210 Connecticut........... 8,002 13,591 15,565 13,337 7,470 6,578 7,128 8,445 9,437 Delaware.............. 1,156 2,254 2,891 2,858 2,111 2,223 2,495 2,663 2,913 District of Columbia.. 708 1,508 1,925 2,138 2,553 1,758 1,940 2,281 2,437 Florida............... 7,376 11,856 16,468 30,114 34,883 38,500 40,687 40,135 44,727 Georgia............... 6,350 7,826 6,657 10,710 14,833 19,310 23,280 24,729 26,676 Guam.................. (\1\) 186 206 197 182 339 573 616 683 Hawaii................ 1,757 2,718 4,622 3,175 3,831 2,658 2,773 4,651 4,551 Idaho................. 1,346 936 4,343 1,245 1,522 1,752 1,992 2,356 2,719 Illinois.............. 9,624 15,551 18,299 14,352 14,986 16,968 23,511 23,639 26,028 Indiana............... 9,488 19,514 22,058 16,188 17,716 20,444 26,344 30,823 31,159 Iowa.................. 8,396 10,135 11,871 7,015 7,241 7,289 7,153 7,681 7,365 Kansas................ 2,859 4,205 4,769 3,798 3,565 4,595 5,268 6,120 6,857 Kentucky.............. 3,083 4,601 6,729 6,853 8,699 10,741 12,513 13,516 15,217 Louisiana............. 5,204 6,944 7,836 9,916 11,582 11,842 12,198 12,510 12,164 Maine................. 2,368 6,141 7,178 4,734 5,200 5,515 5,767 5,287 7,013 Maryland.............. 14,002 15,576 15,861 9,073 5,250 9,237 18,330 19,366 18,684 Massachusetts......... 17,782 22,655 25,350 17,211 16,610 16,029 16,106 17,961 18,378 Michigan.............. 61,985 73,442 59,049 58,364 47,388 51,747 46,647 45,112 45,211 Minnesota............. 9,818 12,891 14,872 12,442 13,822 14,192 12,658 14,563 16,440 Mississippi........... 1,846 3,216 3,742 4,544 6,410 7,237 8,808 9,604 10,157 Missouri.............. (\2\) 2,465 7,716 6,483 9,894 11,178 11,241 13,430 14,135 Montana............... 748 1,178 1,600 849 1,086 1,140 1,298 1,551 1,816 Nebraska.............. 1,509 1,841 2,362 2,555 2,666 2,811 3,255 4,802 4,811 Nevada................ 494 2,261 2,370 1,645 1,917 2,269 2,404 3,096 3,506 New Hampshire......... 1,530 1,512 1,021 981 988 1,091 1,454 2,240 2,703 New Jersey............ 16,243 24,712 27,686 25,182 18,415 17,591 19,728 24,376 26,241 New Mexico............ 1,429 2,027 2,034 2,175 3,147 3,766 4,383 3,865 4,385 New York.............. 36,287 44,168 48,979 30,993 36,695 40,219 46,382 51,290 51,407 North Carolina........ 11,232 12,089 14,216 17,089 19,157 20,381 24,699 28,028 29,649 North Dakota.......... 759 1,193 1,656 1,130 1,338 1,647 1,665 1,597 1,579 Ohio.................. 24,419 28,064 32,582 35,273 40,308 35,973 34,446 38,445 39,857 Oklahoma.............. 1,101 2,487 3,543 1,468 6,605 7,787 3,895 4,794 5,294 Oregon................ 6,761 4,020 6,687 5,935 5,829 6,437 7,437 8,321 9,495 Pennsylvania.......... 15,172 35,405 42,088 49,100 45,772 47,039 52,269 59,514 61,998 Puerto Rico........... 413 2,281 3,736 3,588 3,991 3,696 3,103 3,026 2,811 Rhode Island.......... 2,419 2,441 3,233 3,092 4,141 4,295 3,100 3,346 4,070 South Carolina........ 3,343 4,182 5,785 10,495 13,954 14,614 15,349 16,764 19,026 South Dakota.......... 1,087 1,223 1,532 1,887 1,744 1,234 1,262 1,526 1,642 Tennessee............. 4,705 6,642 8,336 9,430 13,114 16,659 11,625 12,179 11,391 Texas................. 5,446 4,099 5,652 9,167 13,509 15,447 18,229 20,387 23,075 Utah.................. 3,784 5,346 5,209 3,627 3,652 3,333 3,669 3,973 4,033 Vermont............... 953 2,223 2,329 1,984 2,462 2,596 2,826 3,556 4,114 Virgin Islands........ 232 82 199 220 184 133 135 165 193 Virginia.............. 4,729 13,554 13,054 10,813 11,854 14,138 16,761 18,679 19,399 Washington............ 14,860 14,160 15,895 18,110 22,921 27,063 23,263 28,618 27,020 West Virginia......... 1,430 2,044 2,331 2,107 2,426 2,484 2,622 3,347 4,108 Wisconsin............. 16,868 26,106 44,799 26,847 31,438 30,143 30,426 32,693 31,984 Wyoming............... 294 420 453 738 1,034 1,197 1,681 2,094 2,146 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\Data not reported for this item or insufficient data reported to perform indicated computation. \2\Less than $500. Source: Office of Child Support Enforcement. TABLE 11-18.--AVERAGE NUMBER OF NON-AFDC CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT CASES IN WHICH A COLLECTION WAS MADE, SELECTED FISCAL YEARS 1978-93 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- State 1978 1983 1985 1987 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total......................................... 248,590 507,031 653,803 934,177 1,247,228 1,362,821 1,554,740 1,749,427 1,953,580 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alabama............................................. 110 221 5,023 11,583 16,602 19,971 28,512 33,741 39,586 Alaska.............................................. 2,309 3,035 3,205 3,184 3,637 3,947 4,211 4,598 4,997 Arizona............................................. (\1\) 5,525 4,770 4,668 6,740 7,333 9,144 11,107 10,283 Arkansas............................................ 764 2,803 3,613 5,074 7,241 8,473 11,232 15,088 18,449 California.......................................... 69,696 66,164 64,686 77,448 91,029 96,101 101,913 97,597 104,864 Colorado............................................ 1,017 3,647 3,976 4,537 6,054 7,281 9,008 10,492 11,360 Connecticut......................................... (\1\) 7,826 9,392 9,884 10,606 11,289 13,289 14,441 15,721 Delaware............................................ 3,210 3,611 4,395 5,073 6,380 6,770 8,058 8,303 9,191 District of Columbia................................ 93 478 1,007 1,264 2,653 4,252 4,964 5,704 6,278 Florida............................................. 1,200 8,002 7,593 25,573 50,995 56,329 66,748 67,948 77,734 Georgia............................................. 1,207 4,091 5,487 14,883 24,992 30,217 34,545 35,419 40,698 Guam................................................ (\1\) 63 65 114 207 378 495 616 803 Hawaii.............................................. (\1\) 308 352 2,804 6,682 8,103 10,398 15,305 16,299 Idaho............................................... 455 591 1,047 2,529 5,540 6,493 7,403 8,689 9,889 Illinois............................................ 196 6,433 10,030 14,479 21,781 26,184 36,363 36,246 40,744 Indiana............................................. 450 1,784 2,881 12,759 17,990 25,586 27,111 34,855 36,865 Iowa................................................ 671 4,192 4,913 3,441 10,807 12,400 14,103 16,352 19,266 Kansas.............................................. 210 1,449 758 5,260 9,308 11,520 13,855 16,003 18,846 Kentucky............................................ 255 3,657 3,647 15,549 13,686 17,473 20,489 23,531 28,950 Louisiana........................................... 6,866 9,517 10,636 11,695 14,883 16,739 20,001 24,194 28,146 Maine............................................... 638 296 1,496 3,862 5,774 6,425 6,510 5,479 7,630 Maryland............................................ 130 27,384 26,154 12,685 15,969 27,339 49,380 52,024 54,989 Massachusetts....................................... (\1\) 0 0 26,549 27,950 22,921 14,264 24,605 25,899 Michigan............................................ (\1\) 51,304 88,675 126,187 120,969 115,081 129,461 133,652 141,489 Minnesota........................................... 2,766 10,263 12,615 16,137 23,502 26,712 27,174 35,791 43,272 Mississippi......................................... 81 320 1,319 4,348 6,937 7,917 10,077 12,997 16,007 Missouri............................................ (\1\) 1,631 5,362 14,676 22,802 26,994 32,317 38,492 41,022 Montana............................................. 444 348 344 800 1,012 1,448 2,208 2,748 3,750 Nebraska............................................ 176 4,942 7,874 10,540 13,464 14,748 14,883 15,185 17,771 Nevada.............................................. 4,026 4,084 5,360 3,212 4,085 4,451 5,327 6,676 7,819 New Hampshire....................................... (\1\) 5,433 4,939 5,474 5,809 5,260 5,875 7,077 7,870 New Jersey.......................................... 20,000 38,557 45,868 51,706 65,947 66,885 68,753 78,789 84,267 New Mexico.......................................... 286 1,806 2,249 2,462 4,490 5,360 5,758 5,947 5,849 New York............................................ 39,623 54,296 63,829 67,460 78,638 83,651 94,031 103,924 108,419 North Carolina...................................... 1,715 5,910 10,137 15,323 22,584 27,632 31,810 37,172 43,884 North Dakota........................................ 154 171 266 865 1,427 1,911 2,357 3,320 4,026 Ohio................................................ 1,430 4,594 10,853 39,114 100,069 101,553 107,806 135,535 149,104 Oklahoma............................................ (\1\) 1,269 1,968 4,867 8,635 10,509 8,558 8,479 10,707 Oregon.............................................. 17,957 16,262 19,331 20,620 23,747 25,657 19,754 21,810 25,063 Pennsylvania........................................ 49,621 92,084 108,498 123,248 140,750 147,885 171,525 182,098 190,671 Puerto Rico......................................... 710 17,908 26,873 30,490 35,346 35,295 36,731 33,075 41,130 Rhode Island........................................ 57 1,407 1,969 2,750 3,559 3,705 3,017 3,060 3,291 South Carolina...................................... 203 1,198 2,777 3,165 4,671 4,896 10,393 25,764 27,771 South Dakota........................................ 297 512 502 2,175 3,154 2,739 3,262 3,881 4,607 Tennessee........................................... 6,360 10,271 12,156 14,957 21,649 28,174 31,554 35,358 40,003 Texas............................................... 2,861 4,224 8,833 15,079 26,643 37,741 51,039 65,152 79,037 Utah................................................ 400 698 1,068 4,008 5,437 6,738 8,605 9,704 10,573 Vermont............................................. 181 194 393 967 1,459 1,659 1,870 2,433 3,154 Virgin Islands...................................... 1 262 1,288 1,252 1,499 1,247 1,301 1,348 1,538 Virginia............................................ 38 1,554 876 19,273 26,638 31,492 34,242 38,267 46,760 Washington.......................................... 4,822 7,422 9,802 13,656 24,331 34,791 46,930 55,788 64,929 West Virginia....................................... 130 186 288 1,953 5,246 8,045 7,555 9,513 11,971 Wisconsin........................................... 4,685 6,719 20,288 41,953 63,554 56,769 65,718 70,780 88,601 Wyoming............................................. 89 125 77 563 1,669 2,352 2,853 3,275 1,738 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\Data not reported for this item or insufficient data reported to perform indicated computation. Source: Office of Child Support Enforcement. TABLE 11-19.--SUPPORT ORDERS ESTABLISHED, ENFORCED, AND MODIFIED TO INCLUDE HEALTH INSURANCE, FISCAL YEAR 1993 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Total number Total Total Percent number of enforced Percent number of number with orders or with State orders with health enforced modified health established health insurance or with insurance insurance modified health insurance ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alabama..................................... 13,671 3,127 22.87 296,358 5,351 1.81 Alaska...................................... 1,259 1,217 96.66 1,207 870 72.08 Arizona..................................... 3,898 3,405 87.35 156,764 10,789 6.88 Arkansas.................................... 6,954 5,811 83.56 4,702 3,990 84.86 California.................................. 104,092 80,317 77.16 594,850 363,218 61.06 Colorado.................................... 7,355 5,735 77.97 29,463 14,497 49.20 Connecticut................................. 20,448 10,001 48.91 104,204 37,691 36.17 Delaware.................................... 1,634 1,632 99.88 3,693 3,682 99.70 District of Columbia........................ 1,428 660 46.22 4,510 NA 0 Florida..................................... 11,892 NA 0 46,388 NA 0 Georgia..................................... 33,303 33,303 100.00 474,018 9,581 2.02 Guam........................................ 380 358 94.21 578 499 86.33 Hawaii...................................... 2,553 2,553 100.00 1,060 1,060 100.00 Idaho....................................... 2,630 2,630 100.00 69,399 6,246 9.00 Illinois.................................... 21,479 7,548 35.14 7,770 2,124 27.34 Indiana..................................... 34,882 NA 0 NA NA 0 Iowa........................................ 10,345 8,903 86.06 228,412 77,990 34.14 Kansas...................................... 6,627 6,053 91.34 117,887 32,802 27.82 Kentucky.................................... 36,589 3,564 9.74 43,530 128 0.29 Louisiana................................... 17,345 16,649 95.99 103,682 59,051 56.95 Maine....................................... 4,243 2,528 59.58 10,080 1,096 10.87 Maryland.................................... 17,139 13,416 78.28 69,111 10,715 15.50 Massachusetts............................... 12,106 6,077 50.20 13,102 6,349 48.46 Michigan.................................... 36,121 36,121 100.00 925,860 39,269 4.24 Minnesota................................... 15,966 11,948 74.83 32,975 23,533 71.37 Mississippi................................. 8,726 NA 0 7,779 NA 0 Missouri.................................... 24,647 16,926 68.67 86,297 38,578 44.70 Montana..................................... 20,438 288 1.41 6,187 3,601 58.20 Nebraska.................................... 3,728 836 22.42 855 150 17.54 Nevada...................................... 4,189 2,259 53.93 36,363 1,393 3.83 New Hampshire............................... 2,759 4,024 145.85 14,420 1,238 8.59 New Jersey.................................. 28,064 14,425 51.40 194,291 23,189 11.94 New Mexico.................................. 4,377 3,025 69.11 1,294 843 65.16 New York.................................... 34,433 13,770 39.99 42,884 17,151 39.99 North Carolina.............................. 33,313 21,730 66.23 9,200 1,868 20.30 North Dakota................................ 1,608 1,483 92.23 2,186 108 4.94 Ohio........................................ 38,166 19,329 50.64 232,759 47,212 20.28 Oklahoma.................................... 7,541 4,195 55.63 7,333 1,403 19.13 Oregon...................................... 13,049 10,659 81.68 51,173 19,086 37.30 Pennsylvania................................ 105,333 59,590 56.57 369,348 165,558 44.82 Puerto Rico................................. 13,716 NA 0 1,941 91 4.69 Rhode Island................................ 2,820 1,604 56.88 9,910 4,080 41.17 South Carolina.............................. 10,439 7,837 75.07 22,068 14,900 67.52 South Dakota................................ 1,533 1,449 94.52 10,764 8,876 82.48 Tennessee................................... 98,464 3,296 3.35 32,843 11,183 34.05 Texas....................................... 34,463 34,483 100.00 64,537 18,258 28.29 Utah........................................ 7,080 5,376 75.93 204,877 128,339 62.64 Vermont..................................... 1,124 1,124 100.00 3,969 3,969 100.00 Virgin Islands.............................. 412 157 38.11 1,049 329 31.35 Virginia.................................... 41.496 17,887 43.11 68,550 15,321 22.36 Washington.................................. 35,897 26,374 73.47 467,001 306,612 65.66 West Virginia............................... 2,568 2,428 94.55 4,561 1,442 31.62 Wisconsin................................... 28,378 9,095 32.05 88,485 49,526 55.97 Wyoming..................................... 4,583 3,178 69.34 4,333 322 7.43 ------------------------------------------------------------------- Nationwide totals..................... 1,037,683 550,363 53.04 5,386,860 1,595,157 29.61 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source: Office of Child Support Enforcement. TABLE 11-20.--PERCENTAGE OF AFDC ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS RECOVERED THROUGH CHILD SUPPORT COLLECTIONS, SELECTED FISCAL YEARS 1979-93 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- State 1979 1985 1987 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total............... 5.8 7.3 9.1 10.0 10.3 10.7 11.4 12.0 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alabama................. 8.5 21.0 23.2 30.8 31.7 33.7 27.0 23.8 Alaska.................. 1.5 4.6 8.3 12.6 13.7 14.6 12.7 11.9 Arizona................. 2.0 2.5 5.1 3.8 4.4 4.2 5.4 7.1 Arkansas................ 4.8 15.2 17.6 21.0 20.7 23.6 26.5 28.0 California.............. 6.5 4.5 6.1 6.0 5.9 6.3 6.5 7.1 Colorado................ 4.8 9.3 9.5 11.4 12.3 13.0 15.0 16.7 Connecticut............. 6.5 10.1 12.2 12.7 9.5 10.2 10.5 11.2 Delaware................ 4.4 14.6 17.3 21.2 20.3 20.6 19.7 19.8 District of Columbia.... 1.0 3.3 3.8 4.7 4.9 4.5 4.7 4.6 Florida................. 5.5 10.0 11.5 11.9 11.6 11.1 9.9 9.6 Georgia................. 4.3 9.8 10.4 12.4 14.3 15.4 18.2 20.1 Guam.................... 5.3 6.4 9.1 11.9 10.8 32.7 34.6 28.7 Hawaii.................. 2.9 6.6 8.9 7.3 8.8 7.4 6.9 6.7 Idaho................... 8.9 22.6 25.0 33.2 35.7 34.7 36.5 35.3 Illinois................ 1.5 3.2 4.8 5.0 5.6 5.7 7.0 6.6 Indiana................. 7.2 16.1 21.5 23.0 22.4 23.8 24.0 24.5 Iowa.................... 9.0 15.0 19.3 19.2 20.1 20.6 23.2 24.3 Kansas.................. 5.0 11.6 14.1 13.4 15.9 17.8 19.4 19.7 Kentucky................ 3.8 6.8 8.5 12.0 12.4 15.0 18.8 20.0 Louisiana............... 5.2 8.4 9.1 10.5 11.1 12.4 14.2 15.3 Maine................... 7.3 13.4 20.6 26.1 22.9 21.5 18.8 24.5 Maryland................ 6.1 11.6 11.2 13.0 14.5 11.4 14.2 16.9 Massachusetts........... 6.6 11.3 10.7 12.0 11.8 10.4 10.5 11.4 Michigan................ 9.0 9.7 12.5 13.0 13.9 15.1 15.7 16.6 Minnesota............... 7.8 10.5 12.7 14.2 14.4 14.6 16.3 17.3 Mississippi............. 2.9 7.9 9.4 13.7 16.8 22.3 24.2 24.9 Missouri................ 2.8 9.6 12.0 15.0 17.8 15.6 19.0 18.9 Montana................. 4.4 10.7 8.6 9.9 11.1 12.9 16.0 15.0 Nebraska................ 5.4 10.0 11.5 12.9 13.0 13.2 16.0 16.9 Nevada.................. 6.3 14.9 16.4 12.4 12.2 14.1 17.1 16.6 New Hampshire........... 9.4 12.4 15.2 12.4 11.3 10.1 12.3 14.4 New Jersey.............. 5.9 9.7 12.5 14.4 14.0 16.4 16.5 16.4 New Mexico.............. 3.4 7.3 7.4 9.4 9.2 7.8 8.0 11.6 New York................ 3.5 4.0 5.0 5.6 6.4 6.7 7.2 7.0 North Carolina.......... 5.6 15.0 17.4 18.9 18.8 18.4 19.6 20.5 North Dakota............ 9.6 14.7 16.8 17.4 21.0 23.4 24.0 24.1 Ohio.................... 4.8 6.2 10.1 9.9 10.0 10.3 11.7 12.2 Oklahoma................ 1.6 7.5 6.4 8.0 9.0 9.9 10.7 11.1 Oregon.................. 9.0 13.3 13.0 13.0 13.5 13.5 12.5 13.4 Pennsylvania............ 4.6 8.4 11.0 13.2 12.6 13.7 14.0 13.7 Puerto Rico............. .7 2.4 2.7 2.3 2.4 2.1 1.8 1.7 Rhode Island............ 6.1 7.0 7.6 8.9 10.4 9.2 10.8 11.6 South Carolina.......... 5.4 8.6 13.1 15.9 16.8 16.8 17.9 21.1 South Dakota............ 6.5 12.9 14.4 17.9 17.1 18.1 18.8 19.5 Tennessee............... 5.0 6.5 10.3 14.1 13.7 14.3 11.2 15.7 Texas................... 5.4 6.9 6.2 9.4 9.5 10.2 11.8 12.9 Utah.................... 13.7 22.7 19.6 22.1 23.4 23.2 25.6 26.2 Vermont................. 4.1 8.4 11.1 13.4 12.7 13.0 12.7 14.7 Virgin Islands.......... 8.5 7.6 8.3 7.9 7.3 7.1 8.5 10.2 Virginia................ 6.3 8.3 9.0 13.5 15.7 17.2 17.3 17.3 Washington.............. 12.5 9.8 10.9 14.4 17.1 18.1 20.0 20.8 West Virginia........... 2.6 5.1 7.8 6.1 5.1 8.1 10.6 18.2 Wisconsin............... 9.5 8.8 12.4 15.4 15.5 15.7 16.2 17.0 Wyoming................. 5.6 5.5 8.2 10.0 13.5 13.3 14.3 17.0 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note: Payments to AFDC Unemployed Parent (UP) families have been excluded from the maintenance assistance payments totals in those States having AFDC-UP programs. Source: Office of Child Support Enforcement. TABLE 11-21.--FEDERAL INCOME TAX REFUND OFFSET PROGRAM COLLECTIONS, FISCAL YEARS 1983-93 [In thousands of dollars] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- State 1983 1985 1987 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alabama......................... 1,555 3,208 5,135 7,450 8,009 8,827 20,586 17,321 Alaska.......................... 212 364 891 995 1,208 1,387 1,711 1,357 Arizona......................... 385 1,062 2,049 2,592 2,605 2,876 4,007 8,049 Arkansas........................ 1,104 1,886 3,770 4,490 4,669 5,575 7,106 6,631 California...................... 35,034 34,926 46,287 50,472 57,624 57,098 67,569 60,173 Colorado........................ 3,016 2,393 3,020 4,947 5,604 6,179 7,614 7,430 Connecticut..................... 4,455 4,224 6,140 12,132 9,907 9,250 10,190 8,863 Delaware........................ 166 1,284 1,319 1,812 1,966 2,467 2,683 2,223 District of Columbia............ 567 747 779 1,202 1,942 1,606 1,788 1,646 Florida......................... 1,980 3,938 7,318 21,294 21,038 24,880 31,569 29,354 Georgia......................... 1,526 3,711 7,258 11,566 13,032 15,693 22,016 21,778 Guam............................ 13 14 44 26 13 11 51 42 Hawaii.......................... 817 846 1,122 1,511 1,573 1,976 2,328 3,496 Idaho........................... 1,183 1,204 1,594 1,959 2,173 2,270 2,690 2,473 Illinois........................ 4,525 9,019 15,415 13,887 19,307 18,876 26,631 19,924 Indiana......................... 4,940 8,975 11,390 15,642 15,860 16,853 21,169 18,882 Iowa............................ 5,526 6,784 7,798 8,990 8,828 9,439 11,240 9,941 Kansas.......................... 2,525 2,905 3,704 4,947 5,300 6,101 7,525 6,782 Kentucky........................ 1,165 2,299 3,262 6,812 6,680 7,891 12,919 11,390 Louisiana....................... 1,536 2,487 4,722 5,797 6,582 6,519 8,438 9,182 Maine........................... 1,844 2,126 3,377 4,866 5,383 4,925 5,477 4,611 Maryland........................ 5,688 6,118 9,646 17,039 14,343 14,182 15,542 14,867 Massachusetts................... 3,325 4,225 5,269 10,101 11,899 10,936 13,077 10,841 Michigan........................ 18,250 20,013 25,893 30,246 29,854 32,776 44,968 42,748 Minnesota....................... 5,576 5,904 6,762 7,936 8,096 8,831 9,904 8,734 Mississippi..................... 1,019 1,976 2,252 4,147 4,958 6,392 8,270 8,389 Missouri........................ 4,289 4,849 8,482 12,438 14,205 10,189 17,711 15,498 Montana......................... 431 858 1,209 1,366 1,301 1,374 1,636 1,597 Nebraska........................ 502 1,205 1,395 2,598 2,485 2,548 3,121 3,068 Nevada.......................... 354 389 433 630 768 1,363 2,449 2,184 New Hampshire................... 757 662 1,284 1,137 1,177 1,350 2,028 1,906 New Jersey...................... 9,458 11,449 14,268 16,201 16,171 18,266 20,132 17,253 New Mexico...................... 533 1,315 2,278 2,279 2,585 2,863 3,259 2,905 New York........................ 9,945 11,996 27,991 23,472 24,763 31,307 33,734 29,445 North Carolina.................. 4,235 4,291 7,229 11,359 11,270 12,718 16,410 16,971 North Dakota.................... 352 534 848 773 1,302 1,501 1,767 1,586 Ohio............................ 2,886 7,229 11,186 14,346 16,514 21,027 27,476 27,305 Oklahoma........................ 703 2,179 2,218 4,197 4,647 5,803 7,575 6,752 Oregon.......................... 3,782 3,567 4,863 5,113 5,381 5,622 6,259 5,364 Pennsylvania.................... 6,112 13,550 17,123 21,332 24,354 27,946 32,560 27,636 Puerto Rico..................... 2 13 13 47 6 63 231 208 Rhode Island.................... 838 775 880 1,401 1,548 1,522 1,799 1,359 South Carolina.................. 368 832 1,789 2,788 3,233 3,449 4,678 5,091 South Dakota.................... 374 623 998 1,465 1,498 1,648 2,110 1,925 Tennessee....................... 642 1,592 3,025 7,110 7,539 8,341 16,033 12,126 Texas........................... 3,906 5,928 11,316 17,934 19,926 24,133 34,346 35,816 Utah............................ 2,540 2,765 2,991 3,730 4,066 4,297 5,604 5,184 Vermont......................... 611 748 887 1,154 1,017 1,074 1,294 1,031 Virgin Islands.................. ........ ........ 37 34 7 25 44 62 Virginia........................ 1,674 3,532 6,840 8,913 9,761 10,298 12,594 12,108 Washington...................... 4,278 6,201 10,510 12,537 13,732 13,957 17,417 16,447 West Virginia................... 1,038 1,823 2,013 2,944 3,066 3,265 3,705 3,378 Wisconsin....................... 6,266 7,973 10,029 12,902 13,290 14,384 17,486 17,117 Wyoming......................... 222 280 503 534 684 1,131 1,190 888 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nationwide total............ 175,021 229,798 338,853 443,594 474,748 515,279 661,711 609,336 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source: Office of Child Support Enforcement. TABLE 11-22.--ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURES FOR THE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM, SELECTED FISCAL YEARS 1979-93 [In thousands of dollars] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- State 1979 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alabama................................................... 4,633 14,878 17,839 23,101 23,802 30,212 31,572 34,594 Alaska.................................................... 2,137 5,625 5,751 5,699 6,464 8,450 9,084 10,559 Arizona................................................... 2,014 9,096 10,052 13,212 18,744 21,675 29,555 37,121 Arkansas.................................................. 2,385 5,532 6,870 6,724 9,284 10,931 13,341 15,336 California................................................ 75,579 156,472 160,416 176,209 201,823 225,008 252,868 290,648 Colorado.................................................. 3,861 11,806 13,746 15,160 14,043 14,590 21,494 27,450 Connecticut............................................... 5,463 19,682 22,097 24,412 27,135 28,465 28,363 29,288 Delaware.................................................. 852 4,519 5,924 6,006 6,448 7,988 9,007 11,133 District of Columbia...................................... 1,652 5,876 5,745 7,116 7,630 8,825 8,455 8,697 Florida................................................... 7,047 41,385 46,094 55,167 66,445 74,947 83,228 76,721 Georgia................................................... 3,238 15,200 22,588 29,030 36,927 39,586 40,954 45,968 Guam...................................................... 108 411 465 641 1,163 1,808 2,509 2,652 Hawaii.................................................... 1,408 5,157 4,170 5,417 7,598 7,419 8,739 9,837 Idaho..................................................... 1,063 3,321 4,320 4,822 5,697 7,309 7,691 9,360 Illinois.................................................. 6,930 35,746 39,467 40,719 52,073 57,029 63,146 77,820 Indiana................................................... 4,269 11,601 13,119 14,458 15,643 15,626 19,006 21,897 Iowa...................................................... 4,239 7,925 8,733 11,043 14,227 16,063 16,591 21,241 Kansas.................................................... 1,819 8,609 11,037 16,256 16,290 15,970 17,708 23,166 Kentucky.................................................. 4,027 12,533 15,621 19,460 23,519 31,727 31,637 33,985 Louisiana................................................. 7,079 17,587 17,108 17,970 19,408 27,101 30,756 32,263 Maine..................................................... 1,229 5,986 6,306 7,917 9,351 11,729 12,838 13,274 Maryland.................................................. 8,177 32,384 33,791 38,281 39,805 43,013 43,254 48,042 Massachusetts............................................. 6,710 37,266 37,083 51,432 46,587 50,618 44,298 45,445 Michigan.................................................. 24,614 55,775 65,825 71,196 82,380 86,420 94,058 103,693 Minnesota................................................. 9,273 22,656 27,480 33,242 38,947 42,877 44,399 51,081 Mississippi............................................... 1,574 4,590 6,230 10,883 19,551 22,943 21,717 24,272 Missouri.................................................. 5,355 15,811 20,797 22,814 27,577 29,766 34,096 43,941 Montana................................................... 943 1,685 1,865 1,669 3,223 4,659 7,327 7,306 Nebraska.................................................. 1,378 7,242 8,559 10,312 11,698 14,125 18,683 17,201 Nevada.................................................... 1,891 4,285 5,537 5,912 7,654 9,247 10,493 15,759 New Hampshire............................................. 847 3,292 3,825 5,042 5,558 7,912 8,401 10,971 New Jersey................................................ 21,677 54,968 65,428 69,957 77,113 93,525 92,697 101,411 New Mexico................................................ 1,437 4,347 5,608 6,258 7,213 8,376 8,307 8,808 New York.................................................. 61,665 136,254 126,133 119,132 146,468 153,007 151,589 172,888 North Carolina............................................ 5,721 18,234 25,951 32,113 37,868 44,495 52,514 61,668 North Dakota.............................................. 702 2,071 2,256 2,541 2,879 3,432 3,971 4,619 Ohio...................................................... 11,581 32,001 28,784 64,637 67,891 92,006 124,551 130,380 Oklahoma.................................................. 2,771 7,384 8,651 11,450 14,073 16,532 17,284 16,682 Oregon.................................................... 7,475 13,267 13,985 15,164 17,457 20,364 21,078 25,229 Pennsylvania.............................................. 19,639 60,842 60,040 62,328 70,542 87,180 83,729 89,583 Puerto Rico............................................... 862 3,495 4,156 5,789 10,795 5,476 8,084 8,302 Rhode Island.............................................. 1,079 3,570 4,052 4,413 7,945 7,507 10,750 6,124 South Carolina............................................ 1,777 11,150 12,522 15,379 20,127 19,539 19,148 20,437 South Dakota.............................................. 1,060 2,118 2,358 2,588 2,785 2,963 3,292 3,700 Tennessee................................................. 3,046 12,507 12,389 16,482 16,709 18,050 21,904 21,430 Texas..................................................... 11,733 23,522 29,733 45,563 68,709 77,055 99,077 134,053 Utah...................................................... 3,094 10,379 10,453 11,307 12,317 15,689 17,072 19,626 Vermont................................................... 649 1,956 2,116 2,897 2,588 3,229 4,794 5,168 Virgin Islands............................................ 483 730 824 990 749 1,613 969 1,109 Virginia.................................................. 4,787 24,399 31,738 31,573 47,061 41,482 49,972 49,212 Washington................................................ 10,733 28,293 35,926 47,853 56,189 65,314 81,400 89,812 West Virginia............................................. 1,676 4,870 6,740 6,201 7,869 9,238 11,952 17,677 Wisconsin................................................. 7,562 24,959 31,512 35,719 41,906 41,404 42,982 46,552 Wyoming................................................... 160 696 901 1,552 2,121 2,592 2,306 5,897 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nationwide total........................................ 383,163 1,065,942 1,170,714 1,363,209 1,606,065 1,804,106 1,994,690 2,241,094 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source: Office of Child Support Enforcement. TABLE 11-23.--TOTAL CHILD SUPPORT COLLECTIONS PER DOLLAR OF TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURES, SELECTED FISCAL YEARS 1978-93 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- State 1978 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- U.S. ratio............ 3.35 3.31 3.45 3.68 3.94 3.85 3.75 3.82 3.99 3.98 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alabama............... .75 2.00 2.45 2.69 2.50 2.46 2.78 2.68 3.11 3.27 Alaska................ 3.19 2.26 2.61 3.05 3.46 4.06 4.14 3.64 3.92 3.71 Arizona............... .88 2.15 1.46 2.21 2.11 1.84 1.49 1.54 1.57 1.79 Arkansas.............. 1.00 1.90 2.62 2.94 2.94 3.38 2.80 3.00 3.15 3.20 California............ 2.15 2.32 2.37 2.52 2.75 2.66 2.59 2.63 2.59 2.54 Colorado.............. 1.78 2.08 1.89 1.90 1.99 2.21 2.82 3.22 2.70 2.47 Connecticut........... 4.20 3.38 3.49 2.91 2.73 2.76 2.46 2.73 2.97 3.19 Delaware.............. 7.14 5.62 2.46 3.07 2.62 3.01 3.13 2.87 2.88 2.39 District of Columbia.. .73 1.06 .92 .97 1.21 1.33 1.78 1.88 2.33 2.51 Florida............... 1.20 2.10 2.12 1.98 2.28 2.58 2.66 2.86 3.03 3.78 Georgia............... 2.22 2.23 2.59 3.16 2.88 3.06 3.06 3.61 4.26 4.47 Guam.................. ....... 1.46 1.39 1.53 1.62 1.28 1.24 1.98 1.87 1.89 Hawaii................ 1.71 2.38 2.26 3.10 3.62 3.62 3.64 4.06 3.94 3.79 Idaho................. 2.10 1.93 3.58 4.06 3.79 3.95 4.02 3.21 3.62 3.43 Illinois.............. 2.10 2.14 2.40 2.51 2.68 2.77 2.61 2.63 2.90 2.36 Indiana............... 2.42 3.79 4.82 5.22 5.49 5.34 6.15 7.27 6.56 6.45 Iowa.................. 3.49 5.92 6.77 6.12 6.36 5.66 4.99 5.02 5.79 5.14 Kansas................ 3.01 2.05 2.15 2.58 2.51 2.00 2.76 3.43 3.73 2.57 Kentucky.............. 1.14 2.68 2.52 2.59 2.44 2.63 2.55 2.33 2.97 3.05 Louisiana............. 1.82 2.13 1.99 2.28 2.60 2.85 3.12 2.51 2.74 3.19 Maine................. 3.40 3.98 3.74 3.75 4.01 4.14 3.82 3.06 2.84 3.39 Maryland.............. 2.14 3.86 3.77 3.02 3.31 3.36 3.80 3.80 4.49 4.56 Massachusetts......... 5.12 3.57 3.50 3.46 4.09 3.24 3.80 3.41 4.18 4.30 Michigan.............. 9.50 7.62 8.33 9.52 8.80 8.58 7.83 8.07 8.20 8.43 Minnesota............. 2.15 2.91 3.02 3.51 3.59 3.65 3.58 3.74 4.27 4.20 Mississippi........... .87 2.02 2.29 3.36 3.06 2.23 1.56 1.76 2.22 2.20 Missouri.............. .89 3.24 3.89 4.55 4.22 4.45 4.71 4.75 4.88 4.30 Montana............... 1.58 2.46 2.59 3.16 2.97 4.21 2.74 2.78 2.38 2.76 Nebraska.............. 2.10 6.32 5.44 5.20 5.02 4.69 4.48 3.83 3.54 4.17 Nevada................ 1.83 2.04 2.10 2.30 1.95 2.22 2.12 2.52 3.06 2.39 New Hampshire......... 4.05 4.96 4.39 5.33 4.93 3.18 3.71 2.86 3.26 2.87 New Jersey............ 4.16 4.67 4.64 4.47 4.12 3.85 3.66 3.49 4.02 4.02 New Mexico............ 1.17 1.90 2.27 1.99 1.76 1.96 2.00 2.00 2.30 3.08 New York.............. 1.75 1.96 1.83 1.98 2.36 2.74 2.55 2.81 3.22 3.10 North Carolina........ 1.50 2.94 3.26 3.83 3.32 3.20 3.18 3.15 3.20 3.20 North Dakota.......... 1.83 2.29 2.46 2.65 3.14 3.31 3.62 3.59 3.93 4.05 Ohio.................. 2.50 3.38 4.41 5.65 10.83 6.07 7.21 6.01 5.35 5.48 Oklahoma.............. .76 1.46 1.78 2.22 2.48 2.28 2.29 2.41 2.69 3.13 Oregon................ 9.48 4.05 4.47 4.03 4.27 4.45 4.49 4.48 5.10 4.95 Pennsylvania.......... 9.14 6.68 7.78 7.56 8.52 8.97 8.71 8.03 9.27 9.09 Puerto Rico........... .92 11.95 14.02 18.93 17.60 13.61 7.84 15.68 10.43 11.73 Rhode Island.......... 3.51 3.52 3.90 3.31 3.65 3.67 2.52 2.22 2.31 4.35 South Carolina........ 2.38 1.70 2.37 3.01 3.23 3.01 2.60 3.01 3.59 3.88 South Dakota.......... .99 2.36 2.74 2.96 3.50 3.99 3.96 4.43 4.82 4.90 Tennessee............. 2.49 2.88 3.31 3.07 4.09 3.57 4.28 4.27 3.87 5.42 Texas................. .74 2.17 2.01 2.60 2.81 2.41 1.93 2.50 2.53 2.31 Utah.................. 1.99 1.95 2.21 2.39 2.86 2.92 3.09 2.80 3.08 2.86 Vermont............... 2.24 2.58 2.34 2.95 3.31 2.93 3.61 3.77 2.82 3.06 Virgin Islands........ .40 3.27 2.14 4.13 4.16 3.11 4.18 2.07 4.10 4.50 Virginia.............. .72 1.85 1.57 2.41 2.39 3.03 2.35 3.13 2.91 3.09 Washington............ 2.96 2.48 2.42 2.56 2.48 2.66 3.13 3.41 3.29 3.42 West Virginia......... .74 1.66 1.98 2.00 2.16 2.95 2.75 2.55 2.98 2.77 Wisconsin............. 3.80 3.73 4.78 6.20 6.01 6.18 5.76 6.68 6.83 7.15 Wyoming............... 3.18 1.64 3.27 4.64 4.91 3.50 3.37 3.50 4.87 2.34 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source: Office of Child Support Enforcement. TABLE 11-24.--AFDC CHILD SUPPORT COLLECTIONS PER DOLLAR OF TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURES, FISCAL YEARS 1980-93 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- State 1980 1983 1985 1987 1989 1990 1991 1992 993 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alabama................................. 1.22 0.85 1.16 1.01 0.81 0.82 .75 .73 .65 Alaska.................................. .26 .44 .43 .75 1.21 1.26 1.18 1.23 1.11 Arizona................................. .27 .25 .27 .53 .34 .33 .34 .43 .50 Arkansas................................ .75 1.01 1.20 1.59 1.73 1.27 1.26 1.18 1.06 California.............................. 1.05 1.08 1.17 1.27 1.29 1.23 1.27 1.24 1.15 Colorado................................ .68 1.17 1.06 .94 .98 1.19 1.32 1.08 .95 Connecticut............................. 2.05 1.73 1.66 1.34 1.24 1.01 1.26 1.33 1.41 Delaware................................ 1.68 .69 2.02 .92 .88 .90 .83 .81 .70 District of Columbia.................... .48 .49 .59 .50 .51 .54 .50 .58 .60 Florida................................. 1.11 .66 1.21 .81 .76 .73 .76 .84 1.02 Georgia................................. 1.38 1.38 1.63 1.66 1.23 1.24 1.46 1.82 1.84 Guam.................................... .79 .82 .95 .73 .55 .45 .92 1.01 .88 Hawaii.................................. 1.41 1.21 1.05 1.10 1.14 1.10 1.04 .93 .92 Idaho................................... 1.99 1.77 1.43 1.52 1.27 1.22 1.02 1.11 .93 Illinois................................ 1.07 1.16 1.09 1.08 .92 .85 .86 .93 .72 Indiana................................. 1.66 2.61 2.77 2.71 2.58 2.44 2.93 2.59 2.38 Iowa.................................... 2.69 3.29 4.11 3.51 2.41 2.01 1.90 2.13 1.73 Kansas.................................. 1.35 1.50 1.75 1.41 .79 .93 1.09 1.18 .97 Kentucky................................ .82 .82 1.01 .93 .96 .95 .87 1.10 1.08 Louisiana............................... .86 .75 .81 .90 1.08 1.07 .85 .84 .83 Maine................................... 2.78 2.86 2.97 2.60 2.63 2.26 1.74 1.53 1.93 Maryland................................ 1.27 1.70 1.30 .85 .88 1.06 .86 1.07 1.07 Massachusetts........................... 3.12 2.04 1.68 1.45 1.35 1.57 1.32 1.62 1.70 Michigan................................ 2.91 2.36 2.50 2.29 1.94 1.76 1.78 1.74 1.64 Minnesota............................... 1.36 1.48 1.52 1.58 1.27 1.13 1.11 1.20 1.10 Mississippi............................. 1.14 1.55 1.41 1.65 1.07 .74 .85 .99 .89 Missouri................................ .78 1.27 1.69 1.49 1.35 1.38 1.24 1.46 1.16 Montana................................. .83 1.63 2.01 2.00 2.35 1.36 1.13 .88 .88 Nebraska................................ 1.56 1.04 1.24 .85 .65 .60 .53 .49 .57 Nevada.................................. .28 .53 .48 .62 .51 .43 .48 .65 .45 New Hampshire........................... 2.09 1.21 .98 .83 .60 .65 .55 .75 .70 New Jersey.............................. 1.24 1.14 1.19 1.07 .88 .80 .77 .90 .83 New Mexico.............................. .76 .90 1.13 .95 .82 .77 .77 .94 1.47 New York................................ .75 .79 .78 .75 .99 .91 1.02 1.15 1.07 North Carolina.......................... 1.29 1.53 1.54 1.82 1.29 1.22 1.23 1.22 1.14 North Dakota............................ 1.68 1.61 1.67 1.70 1.65 1.77 1.63 1.51 1.32 Ohio.................................... 1.65 1.68 1.94 2.09 1.09 1.13 .92 .81 .81 Oklahoma................................ .40 .60 1.04 .97 .87 .84 .90 1.02 1.13 Oregon.................................. 1.40 1.15 1.44 1.11 1.11 1.08 1.08 1.22 1.12 Pennsylvania............................ 1.35 1.10 1.13 1.28 1.49 1.37 1.30 1.48 1.39 Puerto Rico............................. .62 .27 .34 .52 .28 .16 .30 .18 .16 Rhode Island............................ 2.52 1.97 2.09 1.70 1.72 1.28 1.08 1.25 2.44 South Carolina.......................... 2.04 2.08 1.19 1.19 .93 .79 .91 1.10 1.20 South Dakota............................ 1.29 1.81 1.73 1.44 1.49 1.33 1.42 1.48 1.37 Tennessee............................... .92 .79 .72 .97 1.21 1.37 1.54 1.04 1.56 Texas................................... .49 .72 1.14 .84 .76 .58 .61 .60 .49 Utah.................................... 1.45 1.71 1.33 1.13 1.24 1.22 1.04 1.11 .99 Vermont................................. 1.87 2.74 2.21 2.14 1.78 2.16 2.33 1.39 1.48 Virgin Islands.......................... .28 .44 .29 .33 .23 .28 .14 .28 .31 Virginia................................ 1.33 1.53 1.58 .64 .72 .59 .82 .77 .80 Washington.............................. 1.51 1.56 1.40 1.36 1.11 1.16 1.19 1.12 1.12 West Virginia........................... .96 1.30 1.61 1.16 .77 .52 74 .79 .95 Wisconsin............................... 2.34 1.92 2.21 2.30 1.68 1.42 1.48 1.48 1.41 Wyoming................................. 2.29 2.12 1.06 2.14 1.19 1.22 1.24 1.63 .74 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Nationwide total.................... 1.30 1.27 1.34 1.27 1.17 1.09 1.10 1.13 1.08 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source: Office of Child Support Enforcement. TABLE 11-25.--NON-AFDC CHILD SUPPORT COLLECTIONS PER DOLLAR OF TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURES, FISCAL YEARS 1980-93 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- State 1980 1983 1985 1987 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alabama................................. 0.00 0.09 0.83 1.68 1.65 1.96 1.93 2.38 2.62 Alaska.................................. 1.82 1.97 1.83 2.29 2.86 2.88 2.46 2.69 2.60 Arizona................................. 1.81 1.55 1.87 1.68 1.50 1.16 1.19 1.14 1.29 Arkansas................................ .68 .62 .70 1.35 1.65 1.53 1.74 1.97 2.15 California.............................. 1.10 .92 1.15 1.26 1.38 1.36 1.36 1.34 1.38 Colorado................................ .40 .98 1.01 .95 1.23 1.63 1.90 1.62 1.51 Connecticut............................. 1.99 1.56 1.73 1.56 1.52 1.45 1.47 1.64 1.78 Delaware................................ 4.71 1.76 3.60 2.15 2.12 2.22 2.04 2.07 1.69 District of Columbia.................... .14 .22 .47 .47 .82 1.24 1.38 1.75 1.91 Florida................................. .16 .55 .90 1.17 1.82 1.93 2.10 2.20 2.76 Georgia................................. .18 .25 .59 1.50 1.83 1.82 2.15 2.44 2.63 Guam.................................... .01 .42 .51 .80 .74 .79 1.06 .87 1.00 Hawaii.................................. 2.02 1.51 1.32 1.99 2.48 2.54 3.02 3.00 2.87 Idaho................................... .52 .41 .49 2.55 2.68 2.80 2.18 2.51 2.50 Illinois................................ .11 .80 1.04 1.42 1.85 1.76 1.77 1.97 1.65 Indiana................................. .26 .46 1.02 2.51 2.77 3.71 4.34 3.97 4.07 Iowa.................................... .69 1.64 1.81 2.61 3.25 2.98 3.12 3.66 3.41 Kansas.................................. .31 .41 .30 1.17 1.21 1.83 2.34 2.55 1.61 Kentucky................................ 2.26 1.74 1.67 1.66 1.67 1.60 1.46 1.87 1.97 Louisiana............................... 1.07 1.25 1.32 1.38 1.76 2.04 1.66 1.90 2.36 Maine................................... .38 .62 1.01 1.15 1.51 1.57 1.32 1.31 1.45 Maryland................................ 1.28 3.02 2.56 2.18 2.48 2.74 2.94 3.41 3.49 Massachusetts........................... 1.16 1.61 1.89 2.01 1.89 2.32 2.09 2.56 2.60 Michigan................................ 7.96 4.26 5.12 7.24 6.64 6.06 6.29 6.45 6.80 Minnesota............................... .72 1.11 1.39 1.93 2.38 2.45 2.63 3.07 3.10 Mississippi............................. .10 .12 .61 1.71 1.16 .82 .91 1.23 1.31 Missouri................................ .74 .73 1.55 3.06 3.11 3.33 3.51 3.42 3.14 Montana................................. .69 .52 .45 1.17 1.86 1.37 1.66 1.50 1.87 Nebraska................................ .30 4.62 5.08 4.35 4.04 3.88 3.30 3.05 3.60 Nevada.................................. .98 1.09 1.55 1.67 1.71 1.69 2.04 2.41 1.94 New Hampshire........................... .08 4.08 3.98 4.50 2.58 3.06 2.31 2.50 2.17 New Jersey.............................. 2.90 2.83 3.47 3.40 2.97 2.86 2.73 3.12 3.19 New Mexico.............................. .34 .54 .77 1.05 1.14 1.23 1.24 1.35 1.61 New York................................ 1.47 1.22 1.18 1.23 1.75 1.64 1.79 2.07 2.03 North Carolina.......................... .28 .98 1.40 2.00 1.91 1.96 1.92 1.98 2.06 North Dakota............................ .43 .57 .62 .95 1.66 1.84 1.95 2.41 2.73 Ohio.................................... .06 .07 1.43 3.56 4.98 6.08 5.09 4.54 4.67 Oklahoma................................ .19 .26 .42 1.25 1.41 1.44 1.51 1.67 2.00 Oregon.................................. 8.15 2.30 2.61 2.92 3.34 3.41 3.40 3.88 3.83 Pennsylvania............................ 6.70 5.56 5.55 6.28 7.48 7.34 6.72 7.79 7.70 Puerto Rico............................. 1.56 9.21 11.61 18.42 13.32 6.75 15.38 10.25 11.57 Rhode Island............................ .10 1.39 1.43 1.61 1.95 1.24 1.14 1.06 1.91 South Carolina.......................... .39 .50 .51 1.83 2.08 1.81 2.10 2.49 2.68 South Dakota............................ .38 .56 .64 1.52 2.50 2.62 3.01 3.34 3.53 Tennessee............................... 1.55 1.92 2.16 2.10 2.36 2.91 2.72 2.83 3.86 Texas................................... .19 .47 1.03 1.76 1.65 1.35 1.89 1.94 1.81 Utah.................................... .31 .29 .62 1.26 1.68 1.87 1.76 1.97 1.87 Vermont................................. .35 .21 .37 .82 1.15 1.46 1.44 1.43 1.59 Virgin Islands.......................... .46 1.70 2.97 3.80 2.88 3.90 1.92 3.81 4.19 Virginia................................ .08 .24 .27 1.78 2.31 1.76 2.31 2.14 2.28 Washington.............................. .85 .89 1.08 1.20 1.55 1.97 2.22 2.17 2.30 West Virginia........................... .07 .05 .05 .84 2.18 2.23 1.80 2.18 1.82 Wisconsin............................... .65 .80 1.52 3.90 4.50 4.34 5.21 5.34 5.74 Wyoming................................. .96 .61 .58 2.50 2.31 2.16 2.26 3.24 1.61 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Nationwide total...................... 1.88 1.66 1.97 2.41 2.68 2.65 2.72 2.86 2.90 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source: Office of Child Support Enforcement. TABLE 11-26.--TOTAL NUMBER OF PATERNITIES ESTABLISHED, SELECTED FISCAL YEARS 1979-93 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- State 1979 1983 1987 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total....................... 137,645 208,270 269,161 339,243 393,304 472,105 515,857 553,135 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alabama......................... 6,161 4,833 6,998 7,839 6,517 6,612 7,942 10,779 Alaska.......................... 3 105 364 797 767 673 906 1,070 Arizona......................... 154 595 1,009 1,327 1,237 2,674 3,056 5,007 Arkansas........................ 2,586 1,489 5,326 4,453 3,191 4,703 5,175 6,580 California...................... 19,364 21,714 28,570 35,193 41,065 56,912 65,062 77,324 Colorado........................ 1,046 1,033 1,291 1,939 1,864 2,887 4,135 5,258 Connecticut..................... 3,029 4,563 3,908 3,888 4,499 5,309 6,196 5,368 Delaware........................ 205 1,346 1,867 1,641 801 728 1,573 1,395 District of Columbia............ 386 811 1,021 2,079 2,791 3,895 2,792 2,884 Florida......................... 7,078 10,679 12,136 13,399 19,534 17,907 16,119 10,879 Georgia......................... 3,642 6,102 14,112 18,198 24,615 28,015 30,181 29,329 Guam............................ NA 173 122 109 563 884 642 440 Hawaii.......................... 854 1,181 1,061 1,295 1,843 1,672 1,419 1,746 Idaho........................... 287 84 384 1,100 1,310 1,551 1,722 1,509 Illinois........................ 3,025 7,339 20,848 29,926 25,496 21,157 18,900 19,017 Indiana......................... 1,644 3,036 3,570 4,943 5,309 6,291 5,631 4,950 Iowa............................ 575 922 1,664 1,980 3,045 1,904 4,416 4,952 Kansas.......................... 696 682 1,119 2,101 3,644 3,125 3,198 4,445 Kentucky........................ 784 2,986 3,881 4,498 6,092 6,816 7,951 7,979 Louisiana....................... 1,304 3,195 2,926 4,451 5,525 11,098 11,764 13,272 Maine........................... 382 604 951 1,609 1,381 1,376 3,189 1,370 Maryland........................ 13,307 8,211 6,671 9,995 7,538 12,081 11,259 9,993 Massachusetts................... 2,096 3,766 7,025 6,194 6,339 5,742 8,195 6,234 Michigan........................ 7,529 17,374 18,274 23,142 25,574 27,955 29,087 28,076 Minnesota....................... 1,786 2,994 3,856 6,098 5,661 7,695 5,348 3,749 Mississippi..................... 932 1,797 1,824 7,929 10,740 11,950 8,978 8,588 Missouri........................ NA 17,522 14,308 11,146 16,242 21,976 23,982 24,292 Montana......................... 92 37 179 388 429 677 1,155 413 Nebraska........................ NA 410 710 759 885 1,280 1,628 2,019 Nevada.......................... 233 409 531 664 1,033 1,655 1,702 1,602 New Hampshire................... 35 30 195 518 614 645 580 604 New Jersey...................... 8,242 10,616 13,938 13,182 12,243 10,595 10,314 7,453 New Mexico...................... 322 1,141 412 1,571 1,992 1,601 1,591 2,491 New York........................ 17,503 15,884 18,239 18,056 20,492 30,197 34,434 42,748 North Carolina.................. 6,592 7,368 9,916 11,663 14,504 18,186 19,308 21,371 North Dakota.................... 293 440 1,134 820 784 935 1,446 1,386 Ohio............................ 4,808 7,767 9,133 11,637 15,823 20,857 23,672 28,151 Oklahoma........................ 43 1,811 512 1,361 2,710 4,939 2,721 2,764 Oregon.......................... 1,521 2,173 1,902 3,131 4,081 3,836 4,942 5,830 Pennsylvania.................... 4,450 11,906 15,277 18,921 20,231 23,063 24,239 23,246 Puerto Rico..................... 22 19 6 144 216 264 198 206 Rhode Island.................... 347 451 601 673 868 764 1,425 2,001 South Carolina.................. 1,378 2,552 3,994 5,243 5,273 6,066 6,996 8,331 South Dakota.................... 60 172 552 504 509 687 916 1,333 Tennessee....................... 5,003 6,592 7,666 9,647 8,976 10,309 10,902 11,463 Texas........................... 202 1,085 684 6,465 12,623 19,627 24,890 30,002 Utah............................ 487 1,546 1,292 1,801 2,087 2,484 2,957 3,496 Vermont......................... 44 349 1,091 468 533 438 800 1,065 Virgin Islands.................. 4 104 235 270 160 215 344 492 Virginia........................ 1,452 2,351 2,667 8,471 13,647 15,971 18,038 21,506 Washington...................... 656 1,700 4,066 5,762 6,985 8,601 10,540 12,539 West Virginia................... 156 467 288 820 997 1,324 2,373 2,790 Wisconsin....................... 4,803 5,688 8,750 8,695 10,808 12,931 15,435 17,678 Wyoming......................... 44 66 105 340 618 370 3,493 3,670 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NA=Not available. Source: Office of Child Support Enforcement. TABLE 11-27.--OUT-OF-WEDLOCK BIRTHS AND IV-D PATERNITIES: 1987-91 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Births to unmarried women Paternities/births (percent) State --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alabama................................................... 15,955 16,934 18,640 19,131 20,000 43.9 44.5 42.1 34.1 33.05 Alaska.................................................... 2,564 2,627 2,869 3,113 3,148 14.2 22.9 27.8 24.6 21.38 Arizona................................................... 17,227 18,815 20,708 22,532 23,899 5.9 3.8 6.4 5.5 11.19 Arkansas.................................................. 8,498 9,273 9,944 10,713 10,601 62.7 63.7 44.8 29.8 44.36 California................................................ 136,785 152,607 171,189 193,559 204,229 20.9 23.6 20.6 21.2 27.87 Colorado.................................................. 10,171 10,431 10,787 11,374 12,684 12.7 14.8 18.0 16.4 22.76 Connecticut............................................... 11,045 11,460 13,005 13,330 13,581 35.4 30.4 29.9 33.8 39.09 Delaware.................................................. 2,742 2,819 3,125 3,222 3,559 68.1 56.2 52.5 24.9 20.46 District of Columbia...................................... 6,094 6,507 7,580 7,692 7,806 16.8 16.2 27.4 36.3 49.90 Florida................................................... 48,200 52,867 58,305 63,169 64,101 25.2 28.1 23.0 30.9 27.94 Georgia................................................... 28,647 31,348 34,926 36,979 38,116 49.3 68.0 52.1 66.6 73.50 Hawaii.................................................... 3,968 4,222 4,609 5,088 5,195 26.7 34.2 28.1 36.2 32.18 Idaho..................................................... 2,073 2,216 2,561 2,738 2,924 18.5 26.6 43.0 47.8 53.04 Illinois.................................................. 50,677 54,436 58,867 62,148 63,225 41.1 49.3 50.8 41.0 33.46 Indiana................................................... 17,260 18,543 19,898 22,562 24,294 20.7 27.7 24.8 23.5 25.90 Iowa...................................................... 6,147 6,736 7,575 8,282 8,657 27.1 28.1 26.1 36.8 21.99 Kansas.................................................... 6,633 7,025 7,577 8,397 8,746 16.9 21.4 27.7 43.4 35.73 Kentucky.................................................. 10,658 11,206 12,048 12,829 13,796 36.4 38.4 37.3 47.5 49.41 Louisiana................................................. 23,594 24,752 25,692 26,601 27,694 12.4 14.0 17.3 20.8 40.07 Maine..................................................... 3,338 3,489 3,806 3,931 4,180 28.5 50.9 42.3 35.1 32.92 Maryland.................................................. 22,866 24,716 22,607 23,789 24,292 29.2 37.4 44.2 31.7 49.73 Massachusetts............................................. 17,616 19,559 21,798 22,886 22,873 39.9 41.4 28.4 27.7 25.10 Michigan.................................................. 28,724 30,195 36,441 40,289 40,941 63.6 66.9 63.5 63.5 68.28 Minnesota................................................. 11,114 12,235 13,142 14,192 14,984 34.7 35.0 46.4 39.9 51.35 Mississippi............................................... 14,499 15,824 16,958 17,627 18,317 12.6 18.5 46.8 60.9 65.24 Missouri.................................................. 17,823 19,124 21,123 22,643 23,736 80.3 40.9 52.8 71.7 92.59 Montana................................................... 2,379 2,430 2,539 2,757 2,898 7.5 13.0 15.3 15.6 23.36 Nebraska.................................................. 4,006 4,333 4,662 5,056 5,181 17.7 17.7 16.3 17.5 24.71 Nevada.................................................... 2,740 3,432 4,607 5,480 7,016 19.4 18.4 14.4 18.9 23.59 New Hampshire............................................. 2,511 2,503 2,797 2,967 2,996 7.8 13.8 18.5 20.7 21.53 New Jersey................................................ 26,647 28,580 29,364 29,756 31,972 52.3 45.6 44.9 41.1 33.14 New Mexico................................................ 8,067 8,711 9,447 9,704 10,445 5.1 11.2 16.6 20.5 15.33 New York.................................................. 80,939 84,381 92,996 98,110 99,738 22.5 20.3 19.4 20.9 30.28 North Carolina............................................ 23,262 25,622 28,315 30,718 32,340 42.6 43.8 41.2 47.2 56.23 North Dakota.............................................. 1,429 1,578 1,615 1,699 1,952 79.4 64.8 50.8 46.1 47.90 Ohio...................................................... 39,237 42,448 45,921 48,289 50,826 23.3 19.7 25.3 32.8 41.04 Oklahoma.................................................. 9,892 10,600 11,258 11,998 12,973 5.2 9.9 12.1 22.6 38.07 Oregon.................................................... 8,672 9,435 10,436 11,041 11,324 21.9 18.9 30.0 37.0 33.87 Pennsylvania.............................................. 41,143 43,919 47,093 49,258 51,360 37.1 36.7 40.2 41.1 44.90 Rhode Island.............................................. 3,064 3,262 3,684 3,997 4,073 19.6 24.6 18.3 21.7 18.76 South Carolina............................................ 15,333 16,722 18,116 19,148 20,000 26.1 34.0 28.9 27.5 30.33 South Dakota.............................................. 2,225 2,334 2,415 2,515 2,720 24.8 24.6 20.9 20.2 25.26 Tennessee................................................. 17,897 19,511 21,281 22,662 24,026 42.8 43.1 45.3 39.6 42.91 Texas..................................................... 57,464 59,820 60,303 55,435 56,528 1.2 1.7 10.7 22.8 34.72 Utah...................................................... 3,929 4,221 4,504 4,910 5,196 32.9 35.0 40.0 42.5 47.81 Vermont................................................... 1,459 1,510 1,685 1,666 1,811 74.8 115.0 27.8 32.0 24.19 Virginia.................................................. 20,562 22,126 24,410 25,874 27,125 1.3 26.0 34.7 52.7 58.88 Washington................................................ 14,629 16,150 17,638 18,746 19,861 27.8 28.8 32.7 37.3 43.31 West Virginia............................................. 4,722 4,948 5,212 5,743 6,040 6.1 16.0 15.7 17.4 21.92 Wisconsin................................................. 14,698 15,528 16,815 17,656 18,235 59.5 55.8 51.7 61.2 70.91 Wyoming................................................... 1,189 1,229 1,276 1,383 1,546 8.8 6.4 26.7 44.7 23.93 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- U.S. total.......................................... 933,013 1,005,299 1,094,169 1,165,384 1,213,769 28.8 30.5 31.0 33.7 38.78 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sources: National Center for Health Statistics. Monthly Vital Statistics Report, vol. 41, no. 9, Supplement, Feb. 25, 1993, page 36, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Child Support Enforcement. TABLE 11-28.--STATE SHARE OF SAVINGS FOR FIVE CONSECUTIVE FISCAL YEARS [In thousands of dollars] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- State 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alabama.................................................. 380 -518 -1,982 -3,053 -2,529 Alaska................................................... 2,264 2,469 2,982 3,431 3,797 Arizona.................................................. -1,219 -2,899 -3,125 -3,320 -4,242 Arkansas................................................. 1,574 1,013 1,830 1,009 530 California............................................... 79,779 76,552 88,584 98,465 101,406 Colorado................................................. 4,552 4,991 5,954 5,661 6,064 Connecticut.............................................. 11,330 7,310 10,332 11,711 13,396 Delaware................................................. 797 812 923 902 455 District of Columbia..................................... -3,145 -89 -574 144 757 Florida.................................................. 5,601 2,932 7,179 11,482 14,368 Georgia.................................................. 2,861 1,299 3,930 7,937 12,856 Guam..................................................... -87 -227 -293 -450 -305 Hawaii................................................... 1,648 1,622 1,502 1,655 1,873 Idaho.................................................... 1,029 895 751 955 922 Illinois................................................. 10,935 5,159 5,785 9,767 3,716 Indiana.................................................. 14,027 11,731 16,134 20,359 20,257 Iowa..................................................... 11,767 11,631 10,840 11,765 11,000 Kansas................................................... 1,170 2,229 3,694 4,041 3,711 Kentucky................................................. 207 207 -475 1,958 3,467 Louisiana................................................ 696 150 -1,049 -1,845 -1,241 Maine.................................................... 5,236 4,229 3,852 3,890 5,877 Maryland................................................. 6,860 8,631 6,120 10,366 12,037 Massachusetts............................................ 23,373 23,391 21,789 25,917 29,957 Michigan................................................. 57,413 54,088 58,032 53,107 52,078 Minnesota................................................ 13,969 12,083 11,468 12,377 12,274 Mississippi.............................................. -232 -2,987 -2,549 -1,243 -1,065 Missouri................................................. 8,046 9,002 7,846 11,772 10,303 Montana.................................................. 1,093 769 454 532 618 Nebraska................................................. -252 -572 -582 -2,093 -1,054 Nevada................................................... -32 -417 -334 608 -172 New Hampshire............................................ 362 185 271 826 443 New Jersey............................................... 15,081 6,836 9,100 13,551 11,876 New Mexico............................................... 305 -148 -361 -224 1,278 New York................................................. 24,201 22,865 30,313 41,091 41,790 North Carolina........................................... 5,857 3,598 4,257 6,343 6,962 North Dakota............................................. 955 1,074 1,231 973 989 Ohio..................................................... 21,558 12,040 6,054 445 3,453 Oklahoma................................................. 705 69 380 1,110 2,457 Oregon................................................... 3,703 2,658 3,358 4,863 5,935 Pennsylvania............................................. 22,018 19,846 21,226 27,102 29,234 Puerto Rico.............................................. -1,075 -3,121 -2,165 -2,008 -2,171 Rhode Island............................................. 2,999 3,439 3,940 4,375 5,427 South Carolina........................................... 490 -1,639 91 437 1,309 South Dakota............................................. 969 1,254 820 672 1,048 Tennessee................................................ 1,278 3,432 5,989 1,578 5,915 Texas.................................................... 2,163 -4,832 -4,774 -6,111 13,969 Utah..................................................... 1,362 1,111 892 980 343 Vermont.................................................. 1,440 1,957 1,918 1,621 2,066 Virgin Islands........................................... -223 -184 -459 -227 -256 Virginia................................................. 2,567 -1,113 4,292 4,324 6,347 Washington............................................... 15,386 14,053 22,038 19,695 24,875 West Virginia............................................ -59 -1,214 -722 -1,047 16 Wisconsin................................................ 21,306 18,451 16,740 15,553 15,386 Wyoming.................................................. 574 363 340 589 226 ------------------------------------------------------ Nationwide total................................... 403,400 338,469 384,691 433,317 462,092 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note.--Numbers may not sum to total due to rounding. Source: Office of Child Support Enforcement. LEGISLATIVE CHANGES IN THE 103D CONGRESS 1. State Paternity Establishment Programs Public Law 103-66, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, increases the percentage of children for whom the State must establish paternity and requires States to adopt laws requiring civil procedures to voluntarily acknowledge paternity (including hospital-based programs). 2. Enforcement of Health Insurance Support Public Law 103-66, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, requires States to adopt laws to ensure the compliance of health insurers and employers in carrying out court or administrative orders for medical child support and includes a provision that forbids health insurers to deny coverage to children who are not living with the covered individual or who were born outside of marriage. TABLE 11-29.--CBO FEDERAL BUDGET COST ESTIMATES FOR CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT AMENDMENTS IN THE OMNIBUS BUDGET RECONCILIATION ACT OF 1993 (PUBLIC LAW 103-66) [In millions of dollars] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fiscal years --------------------------------------------- Total 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paternity establishment programs.......................... 0 0 -30 -70 -110 -210 Medical child support..................................... 0 -15 -20 -20 -25 -80 ----------------------------------------------------- Total............................................... 0 -15 -50 -90 -135 -290 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source: Congressional Budget Office. LEGISLATIVE CHANGES IN THE 102D CONGRESS 1. Criminal Penalties for Willful Failure to Pay Child Support in Interstate Cases Public Law 102-521, the Child Support Recovery Act of 1992, imposes a Federal criminal penalty for the willful failure to pay a past-due child support obligation with respect to a child who resides in another State that has remained unpaid for longer than a year or is greater than $5,000. For the first conviction the penalty would be a fine of up to $5,000 and/or imprisonment for not more than 6 months; for a second conviction, a fine of not more than $250,000 and/or imprisonment for up to 2 years. 2. Inclusion of Child Support Debt Information By Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Public Law 102-537, the Ted Weiss Child Support Enforcement Act of 1992, amends the Fair Credit Reporting Act to require consumer credit reporting agencies to include in any consumer report information on child support delinquencies provided by or verified by State or local CSE agencies, which antedates the report by 7 years. LEGISLATIVE CHANGES IN THE 101ST CONGRESS 1. Extension of IRS Intercept for non-AFDC Families The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (P.L. 101- 508) permanently extends the Federal provision that allows States to ask the IRS to collect child support arrearages of at least $500 out of income tax refunds otherwise due to noncustodial parents. The minor child restriction is to be eliminated for adults with a current support order who are disabled, as defined under OASDI or SSI. In addition, the offset can be used for spousal support when spousal and child support are included in the same support order. 2. Extension of Interstate Child Support Commission The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (P.L. 101- 508) extends the life of the Interstate Child Support Commission from July 1, 1991, to July 1, 1992, and requires it to submit its report no later than May 1, 1992. Also, the provision authorizes the Commission to hire its own staff. 3. Medicaid Transition in Child Support Cases The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989 (P.L. 101- 239) made permanent the requirement that Medicaid benefits continue for 4 months after a family loses AFDC eligibility as a result of collection of child support payments. LEGISLATIVE CHANGES IN THE 100TH CONGRESS During the second session of the 100th Congress, The Family Support Act of 1988 (P.L. 100-485) was enacted. It emphasized the duties of parents to work and support their children. The Act emphasized child support enforcement as the first line of defense against welfare dependence. It contained these provisions: 1. Guidelines for Child Support Award Amounts Judges and other officials are required to use State guidelines for child support unless they are rebutted by a written finding that applying the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate in a particular case. States must review guidelines for awards every 4 years. Beginning 5 years after enactment, States generally must review and adjust individual case awards every 3 years for AFDC cases. The same applies to other IV-D cases, except review and adjustment must be at the request of a parent. 2. Establishment of Paternity States are required to meet Federal standards for the establishment of paternity. The standard relates to the percentage obtained by dividing the number of children in the State who are born out of wedlock, are receiving cash benefits or IV-D child support services, and for whom paternity has been established by the number of children who are born out of wedlock and are receiving cash benefits or IV-D child support services. To meet Federal requirements, this percentage in a State must: (1) be at least 50 percent; (2) be at least equal to the average for all States; or (3) have increased by 3 percentage points from fiscal years 1988 to 1991 and by 3 percentage points each year thereafter. States are mandated to require all parties in a contested paternity case to take a genetic test upon request of any party. The Federal matching rate for laboratory testing to establish paternity is set at 90 percent. 3. Disregard of Child Support The child support enforcement disregard authorized under the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 is clarified so that it applies to a payment made by the noncustodial parent in the month it was due even though it was received in a subsequent month. 4. Requirement for Prompt State Response The Secretary of Health and Human Services is required to set time limits within which States must accept and respond to requests for assistance in establishing and enforcing support orders as well as time limits within which child support payments collected by the State IV-D agency must be distributed to the families to whom they are owed. 5. Requirement for Automated Tracking and Monitoring System Every State that does not have a Statewide automated tracking and monitoring system in effect must submit an advance planning document that meets Federal requirements by October 1, 1991. The Secretary must approve each document within 9 months after submission. By October 1, 1995, every State must have an approved system in effect. Federal matching rates of 90 percent for this activity will expire after September 30, 1995. 6. Interstate Enforcement A Commission on Interstate Child Support is established to hold one or more national conferences on interstate child support enforcement reform, and to report to Congress no later than October 1, 1990 on recommendations for improvements in the system and revisions in the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act. 7. Exclude Interstate Demonstration Grants in Computing Incentive Payments Amounts spent by States for interstate demonstration projects are excluded from calculating the amount of the States' incentive payments. 8. Use of INTERNET System The Secretaries of Labor and HHS are required to enter into an agreement to give the Federal Parent Locator Service prompt access to wage and unemployment compensation claims information useful in locating absent parents. 9. Wage Withholding With respect to IV-D cases, each State must provide for immediate wage withholding in the case of orders that are issued or modified on or after the first day of the 25th month beginning after the date of enactment unless: (1) one of the parties demonstrates, and the court finds, that there is good cause not to require such withholding; or (2) there is a written agreement between both parties providing for an alternative arrangement. Present law requirements for mandatory wage withholding in cases where payments are in arrears apply to orders that are not subject to immediate wage withholding. States are required to provide for immediate wage withholding for all support orders initially issued on or after January 1, 1994, regardless of whether a parent has applied for IV-D services. 10. Work and Training Demonstration Programs for Noncustodial Parents The Secretary of HHS is required to grant waivers to up to 5 States to allow them to provide services to noncustodial parents under the JOBS program. No new power is granted to the States to require participation by noncustodial parents. 11. Data Collection and Reporting The Secretary of HHS is required to collect and maintain State-by-State statistics on paternity determination, location of absent parent for the purpose of establishing a support obligation, enforcement of a child support obligation, and location of absent parent for the purpose of enforcing or modifying an established obligation. 12. Use of Social Security Number Each State must, in the administration of any law involving the issuance of a birth certificate, require each parent to furnish his or her social security number (SSN), unless the State finds good cause for not requiring the parent to furnish it. The SSN shall not appear on the birth certificate, and the use of the SSN obtained through the birth record is restricted to child support enforcement purposes except under certain circumstances. 13. Notification of Support Collected Each State is required to inform families receiving AFDC of the amount of support collected on their behalf on a monthly basis, rather than annually as provided under present law. States may provide quarterly notification if the Secretary of HHS determines that monthly reporting imposes an unreasonable administrative burden. This provision is effective 4 years after the date of enactment. TABLE 11-30.--CBO FEDERAL BUDGET COST ESTIMATES FOR CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT AMENDMENTS IN THE FAMILY SUPPORT ACT OF 1988 (PUBLIC LAW 100- 485) [In millions of dollars] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fiscal years-- -------------------------------------------- 1990 1991 1992 1993 Total ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mandate income withholding. ....... -25 -55 -90 -170 Mandate child support guidelines................ -25 -70 -115 -160 -370 Mandate increases in paternity establishment... ....... 40 25 15 80 Mandate ADP for most States 2 7 7 7 23 Other...................... 10 9 6 8 33 -------------------------------------------- Total................ -13 -39 -132 -220 -404 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Source: Congressional Budget Office. The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987 (P.L. 100- 203) required States to provide child support enforcement services to all families with an absent parent who receives Medicaid and have assigned their support rights to the State, regardless of whether they are receiving AFDC. LEGISLATIVE CHANGES IN THE 99TH CONGRESS During the second session of the 99th Congress, Public Law 99-509 was enacted. Titled the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986, the new law included one child support enforcement amendment prohibiting the retroactive modification of child support awards. Under this new requirement, State laws must provide for either parent to apply for modification of an existing order with notice provided to the other parent. No modification is permitted before the date of this notification. LEGISLATIVE CHANGES IN THE 98TH CONGRESS In November 1983, the House of Representatives adopted H.R. 4325, the Child Support Enforcement Amendments, which had been developed by the Subcommittee on Public Assistance and Unemployment Compensation and approved by the Committee on Ways and Means. In August 1984, the amendments were signed into law. The new law strengthens the child support enforcement and paternity establishment program. It requires States to implement effective enforcement tools and provides incentives to the States to make available services to both AFDC and non- AFDC families. The main provisions of the Child Support Enforcement Amendments of 1984 (P.L. 98-378) are summarized below: 1. Improved child support enforcement through requiring State laws and procedures.--States are required to enact laws establishing the following procedures with respect to their IV- D cases: A. Mandatory wage withholding for all families (AFDC and non-AFDC) if support payments are delinquent in an amount equal to 1 month's support. States must also allow absent parents to request withholding at an earlier date. B. Imposing liens against real and personal property for amounts of overdue support. C. Withholding of State tax refunds payable to a parent of a child receiving IV-D services, if the parent is delinquent in support payments. D. Making available information regarding the amount of overdue support owed by an absent parent, to any consumer credit bureau, upon request of such organization. E. Requiring individuals who have demonstrated a pattern of delinquent payments to post a bond, or give some other guarantee to secure payment of overdue support. F. Establishing expedited processes within the State judicial system or under administrative procedures for obtaining and enforcing child support orders and, at the option of the State, for determining paternity. G. Notifying each AFDC recipient at least once each year of the amount of child support collected on behalf of that recipient. H. Permitting the establishment of paternity until a child's 18th birthday. I. At the option of the State, providing that child support payments must be made through the agency that administers the State's income withholding system if either the custodial or noncustodial parent requests that they be made in this manner. 2. Federal matching of administrative costs.--The Federal matching share is gradually reduced from 70 percent as follows: 68 percent in fiscal years 1988 and 1989, and 66 percent in fiscal year 1990 and each year thereafter. 3. Federal incentive payments.--The prior incentive formula which gave States 12 percent of their AFDC collections (paid for out of the Federal share of the collections) is replaced with a new formula that is designed to encourage States to develop programs that emphasize collections on behalf of both AFDC and non-AFDC families, and to improve program cost effectiveness. The basic incentive payment will be equal to 6 percent of the State's AFDC collections, and 6 percent of its non-AFDC collections. States may qualify for higher incentive payments, up to a maximum of 10 percent of collections, if their AFDC or non-AFDC collections exceed combined administrative costs for both AFDC and non-AFDC components of the program. The total dollar amount of incentives paid for non-AFDC families may not exceed the amount of the State's incentive payment for AFDC collections for fiscal years 1986 and 1987. However, thereafter the incentive paid for non-AFDC collections will be capped at an amount equal to 105 percent of the incentive for AFDC collections in fiscal year 1988, 110 percent in fiscal year 1989, and 115 percent in fiscal year 1990 and any fiscal year thereafter. 4. Matching for automated management systems used in income withholding and other procedures.--The Act specifies that the 90 percent Federal matching rate that is currently available to States that elect to establish an automatic data processing and information retrieval system may be used, at the option of the State, for the development and improvement of the income withholding and other procedures required in the new law through the monitoring of child support payments, the maintenance of accurate records regarding the payment of child support, and the provision of prompt notice to appropriate officials with respect to any arrearages that occur. Also, the Act specifies that the 90 percent matching is available to pay for the acquisition of computer hardware. 5. Fees for services to non-AFDC families.--States will be required to charge an application fee for non-AFDC cases not to exceed $25. The amount of the maximum allowable fee may be adjusted periodically by the Secretary to reflect changes in administrative costs. The State may charge the fee against the custodial parent, pay the fee out of State funds, or recover the fee from the noncustodial parent. In addition, at the option of the State, a late payment fee equal to between 3 and 6 percent of the amount of overdue support may be charged to the noncustodial parents of AFDC and non-AFDC families. The State may not take any action which would have the effect of reducing the amount of support paid to the child and will collect the fee only after the full amount of the support has been paid to the child. The late payment fee provision is effective upon enactment. 6. Continuation of support enforcement for AFDC recipients whose benefits are being terminated.--States must provide that families whose eligibility for AFDC is terminated due to the receipt of (or an increase in) child support payments will be automatically transferred from AFDC to non-AFDC status under the IV-D program, without requiring application for IV-D services or payment of a fee. 7. Special project grants to promote improvement in interstate enforcement.--The Secretary is authorized to make demonstration grants to States which propose to undertake new or innovative methods of support collection in interstate cases. The authorization is $7 million in FY 1985, $12 million in FY 1986, and $15 million in FY 1987 and years thereafter. 8. Periodic review of State programs; modification of penalty.--The Director of the Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement is required to conduct audits at least every 3 years to determine whether the standards and requirements prescribed by law and regulations have been met. Under the penalty provision, a State's AFDC matching funds must be reduced by an amount equal to at least 1 but no more than 2 percent for the first failure to comply substantially with the standards and requirements, at least 2 but no more than 3 percent for the second failure, and at least 3 but no more than 5 percent for the third and any subsequent consecutive failures. 9. Extension of sec. 1115 demonstration authority to the child support program.--The sec. 1115 demonstration authority is expanded to include the child support enforcement program under specified conditions. 10. Child support enforcement for certain children in foster care.--State child support agencies are required to undertake child support collections on behalf of children receiving foster care maintenance payments under title IV-E, if an assignment of rights to support to the State has been secured by the foster care agency. In addition, foster care agencies are required to take steps, where appropriate, to secure an assignment to the State of any rights to support on behalf of a child receiving foster care maintenance payments under the title IV-E foster care program. 11. Collection of spousal support.--Child support enforcement services must include the enforcement of spousal support, but only if a support obligation has been established with respect to the spouse, the child and spouse are living in the same household, and child support is being collected along with spousal support. 12. Modification in content of annual report by the Secretary.--The present annual report information requirements are expanded to include data needed to evaluate State programs. 13. Requirement to publicize the availability of child support services.--States must frequently publicize, through public service announcements, the availability of child support enforcement services, together with information as to the application fee for such services and a telephone number or postal address to be used to obtain additional information. 14. State commissions on child support.--The Governor of each State is required to appoint a State Commission on Child Support. The Commission must include representation from all aspects of the child support system including custodial and non-custodial parents, the IV-D agency, the judiciary, the Governor, the legislature, child welfare and social services agencies, and others. Each State commission is to examine the functioning of the State child support system with regard to securing support and parental involvement for both AFDC and non-AFDC children, including but not limited to such specific problems as: (1) visitation; (2) establishment of appropriate objective standards for support; (3) enforcement of interstate obligations; and (4) additional Federal and State legislation needed to obtain support for all children. 15. Requirement to include medical support as part of any child support order.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services is required to issue regulations to require State agencies to petition to include medical support as part of any child support order whenever health care coverage is available to the absent parent at a reasonable cost. The regulations must also provide for improved information exchange between the State IV-D agencies and the medicaid agencies with respect to the availability of health insurance coverage. 16. Increased availability of Federal parent locator services to State agencies.--The prior law requirement that the States exhaust all State child support locator resources before they request the assistance of the Federal Parent Locator Service is repealed. 17. Extension of medicaid eligibility when support collection results in termination of AFDC eligibility.--If a family loses AFDC eligibility as the result (wholly or partly) of increased collection of support payments under the IV-D program, the State must continue to provide medicaid benefits for 4 calendar months beginning with the month of ineligibility. (The family must have received AFDC in at least 3 of the 6 months immediately preceding the month of ineligibility.) 18. Guidelines for determining support obligations.--Each State must develop guidelines to be used at the discretion of the court or administrative entity in determining support obligations. 19. Availability of social security numbers for purposes of child support enforcement.--The absent parent's social security number may be disclosed to child support agencies both through the Federal Parent Locator Service and by the IRS. 20. Collection of overdue support from Federal tax refunds.--Prior law requires the Secretary of the Treasury, upon receiving notice from a State child support agency that an individual owes past due support which has been assigned to the State as a condition of AFDC eligibility, to withhold from any tax refunds due that individual an amount equal to any past due support. The act extends this requirement to provide for withholding of refunds on behalf of non-AFDC families, under specified conditions. 21. Wisconsin child support initiative.--The Secretary of HHS is required to grant waivers to the State of Wisconsin to allow it to implement its proposed child support initiative in all or parts of the State as a replacement for the AFDC and child support programs. The State must meet specified conditions and give specific guarantees with respect to the financial well-being of the children involved. 22. Sense of the Congress that State and local governments should focus on the problems of child custody, child support, and related domestic issues.--The act incorporates the language of S. Con. Res. 84 urging State and local governments to focus on the vital issues of child support, child custody, visitation rights, and other related domestic issues that are within the jurisdictions of such governments. Cost estimates for the major provisions of Public Law 98- 378 appear below: TABLE 11-31.--CBO FEDERAL BUDGET ESTIMATES FOR CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT AMENDMENTS OF 1984 (PUBLIC LAW 98-378) [In millions of dollars] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fiscal year-- --------------------------------------- 1984 1985 1986 1987 Total ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Alter incentive payments to States......................... ...... ...... 15 15 30 Reduce Federal matching to 68 percent in fiscal year 1988; 66 percent in fiscal year 1990.... ...... ...... ...... ...... 0 Require application fees; optional late payment fees..... ...... -5 -10 -10 -25 Mandate State enforcement techniques..................... ...... -15 -25 -25 -65 Require IRS tax intercept for non-AFDC families thru fiscal year 1989...................... ...... 25 20 10 55 Authorize funds for interstate projects....................... ...... 7 12 15 34 Provide Medicaid for 4 months for families losing AFDC due to child support collection through fiscal year 1988....... 5 25 25 30 85 Other provisions................ ...... 15 20 10 45 Impact of H.R. 4325 on CSE case levels: CSE expenditures............ ...... 10 30 55 95 Offsetting effects on public assistance................. ...... -5 -20 -30 -55 --------------------------------------- Total..................... 5 57 67 70 199 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Note: The cost of disregarding the first $50 of child support payments is shown in the AFDC section. Source: Congressional Budget Office. The Tax Reform Act of 1984 (Public Law 98-369) was also enacted during the 98th Congress and included two tax provisions pertaining to alimony and child support. Under prior law, alimony was deductible by the payor and includible in the income of the payee. The 1984 law revises the rules relating to the definition of alimony. Generally, only cash payments that will terminate on the death of the payee spouse will qualify as alimony. Alimony payments, if in excess of $10,000 per year, generally must be payable for at least 6 years and must not decline by more than $10,000. The prior law requirement that the payment be based on a legal support obligation has been repealed and payors are now required to furnish to the IRS the social security number of the payee spouse. A $50 penalty for failure to do so will be imposed. The provision is effective for divorce or separation agreements or orders executed after 1984. The 1984 law also provides that the $1,000 dependency exemption for a child of divorced or separated parents generally will be allocated to the custodial parent unless the custodial parent signs a written declaration that he or she will not claim the exemption for the year. Each parent may claim the medical expenses that he or she pays for the child, for purposes of computing the medical expense deduction. The provision is effective for taxable years beginning after 1984.