Child Support Enforcement: Program Basics
Carmen Solomon-Fears
Specialist in Social Policy
September 12, 2013
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
RS22380
CRS Report for Congress
Pr
epared for Members and Committees of Congress

---

Child Support Enforcement: Program Basics

Summary
The Child Support Enforcement (CSE) program was enacted in 1975 as a federal-state program
(Title IV-D of the Social Security Act) to help strengthen families by securing financial support
for children from their noncustodial parent on a consistent and continuing basis and by helping
some families to remain self-sufficient and off public assistance by providing the requisite CSE
services. Over the years, CSE has evolved into a multifaceted program. While cost-recovery still
remains an important function of the program, its other aspects include service delivery and
promotion of self-sufficiency and parental responsibility. In FY2012, the CSE program collected
$27.7 billion in child support payments and served nearly 15.7 million child support cases.
However, the program still collects only 63% of current child support obligations for which it has
responsibility and collects payments for only 59% of its caseload.
Congressional Research Service

---

Child Support Enforcement: Program Basics

Contents
Background ...................................................................................................................................... 1
Program Elements ............................................................................................................................ 2
Locating Absent Parents ............................................................................................................ 2
Paternity Establishment ............................................................................................................. 3
Establishment of Child Support Orders ..................................................................................... 4
Review and Modification of Support Orders ............................................................................ 4
Enforcement .............................................................................................................................. 4
Financing ................................................................................................................................... 5
Collection and Disbursement..................................................................................................... 5
Distribution of Support .............................................................................................................. 5
Visitation Grants and Responsible Fatherhood Programs ............................................................... 6

Tables
Table 1. Child Support Data—FY2012 (Preliminary) ..................................................................... 2

Contacts
Author Contact Information............................................................................................................. 7

Congressional Research Service

---

Child Support Enforcement: Program Basics

Background
The CSE program, Part D of Title IV of the Social Security Act, was enacted in January 1975
(P.L. 93-647). The CSE program is administered by the Office of Child Support Enforcement
(OCSE) in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and funded by general
revenues. All 50 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands
operate CSE programs and are entitled to federal matching funds.1 Families receiving Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) benefits (Title IV-A of the Social Security Act), foster
care payments (Title IV-E of the Social Security Act), or Medicaid coverage (Title XIX of the
Social Security Act) automatically qualify for CSE services free of charge.2 Collections on behalf
of families receiving cash TANF block grant benefits are used, in part, to reimburse state and
federal governments for TANF payments made to the family. Other families must apply for CSE
services, and states must charge an application fee that cannot exceed $25.3 Child support
collected on behalf of nonwelfare families goes to the family, usually through the state
disbursement unit.
Between FY1978 and FY2012, child support payments collected by CSE agencies increased from
$1 billion in FY1978 to $27.7 billion in FY2012, and the number of children whose paternity was
established or acknowledged increased from 111,000 to 1.658 million. However, the program still
collects only 19% of child support obligations for which it has responsibility if arrearage
payments are taken into account (otherwise, 63%)4 and collects payments for only about 59% of
its caseload. OCSE data indicate that in FY2012, paternity had been established or acknowledged
for 95% of the 11.1 million children on the CSE caseload without legally identified fathers.5 The
CSE program is estimated to handle 50%-60% of all child support cases; the remaining cases are
handled by private attorneys, collection agencies, or through mutual agreements between the
parents.

1 States were historically required to provide CSE services to Indian tribes and tribal organizations as part of their CSE
caseloads. In contrast to the federal matching rate of 66% for CSE programs run by the states or territories, pursuant to
the 1996 welfare reform law (P.L. 104-193), the CSE program provides direct federal funding equal to 100% of
approved and allowable CSE expenditures during the start-up period, provides 90% federal funding for approved CSE
programs operated by tribes or tribal organizations during the first three years of full program operation, and provides
80% federal funding thereafter. As of June 2013, 51 Indian tribes or tribal organizations operated comprehensive tribal
CSE programs and 9 Indian tribes or tribal organizations operated start-up tribal CSE programs
(http://www.supporttribalchildren.org/Tribal%20Program%20Directory/Tribal%20Program%20Directory.pdf ). For
additional information, see CRS Report R41204, Child Support Enforcement: Tribal Programs, by Carmen Solomon-
Fears.
2 In addition, families who are required by the state Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to cooperate
with the CSE agency automatically qualify for CSE services free of charge.
3 P.L. 109-171, effective October 1, 2006, requires families who have never been on TANF to pay a $25 annual user
fee when child support enforcement efforts on their behalf are successful (i.e., at least $500 annually is collected on
their behalf). For more information on the CSE annual user fee, see CRS Report RS22753, Child Support Enforcement:
$25 Annual User Fee, by Carmen Solomon-Fears.
4 In FY2012, $148.3 billion in child support obligations ($33.7 billion in current support and $114.6 billion in past-due
support) was owed to families receiving CSE services, but only $28.9 billion was paid ($21.2 billion current, $7.7
billion past-due).
5 For more information regarding FY2012 data on the CSE program, see http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/css/
resource/fy2012-preliminary-report#tables.
Congressional Research Service
1

---

Child Support Enforcement: Program Basics

Table 1. Child Support Data—FY2012 (Preliminary)
Total CSE caseload
Total, 15.8 million; TANF, 1.9 million; former-TANF, 6.8 million; never-TANF, 7.0 million
Total CSE col ections
Total, $27.719 billion; TANF families, $0.961 billion; former-TANF, $8.889 billion; never-
TANF, $11.759 billion (plus $6.111 billion on behalf of Medicaid-only families)
Payments to families
Total, $25.6 billion; TANF, $164 mil ion; former-TANF, $7.8 billion; never-TANF,
$11.6 billion (plus $5.9 billion on behalf of Medicaid-only families)
Federal share of TANF
$923 million
col ections
State share of TANF
$640 million
col ections
Medical support
$423 million
payments
Total CSE expenditures
$5.661 billion; federal share, $3.407 billion, state share, $2.254 billion
Incentive payments to
$450 million
states (estimated)
Paternities established and
1,658,287
acknowledged
Support orders established
1,204,644 (includes only new orders; excludes modifications)
Col ections made
For 9,215,021 total families; TANF families, 659,678; former-TANF families, 3,934,848;
never-TANF families, 4,620,495
Source: Table prepared by the Congressional Research Service, based on data from the Office of Child Support
Enforcement, Department of Health and Human Services.
Note: Some totals are imprecise because of rounding.
Program Elements
The CSE program provides seven major services on behalf of children: (1) parent location, (2)
paternity establishment, (3) establishment of child support orders, (4) review and modification of
child support orders, (5) collection of child support payments, (6) distribution of child support
payments, and (7) establishment and enforcement of medical support.6
Locating Absent Parents
To improve the CSE agency’s ability to locate absent parents, states are required to have
automated registries of child support orders that contain records of each case in which CSE
services are being provided and all new or modified child support orders. The state registry

6 A noncustodial parent may be ordered to provide health insurance if available through his or her employer, pay for
private health insurance premiums, or reimburse the custodial parent for all or a portion of the costs of health insurance
obtained by the custodial parent. Federal law requires every child support order to include a provision for health care
coverage. The CSE program is required to pursue private health care coverage when such coverage is available through
a noncustodial parent’s employer at a reasonable cost. P.L. 109-171 required that medical support for a child be
provided by either or both parents and that it must be enforced. It authorizes the state CSE agency to enforce medical
support against a custodial parent whenever health care coverage is available to the custodial parent at reasonable cost.
Moreover, it stipulates that medical support may include health care coverage (including payment of costs of
premiums, co-payments, and deductibles) and payment of medical expenses for a child.
Congressional Research Service
2

---

Child Support Enforcement: Program Basics

includes a record of the support owed under the order, arrearages, interest or late penalty charges,
amounts collected, amounts distributed, the child’s date of birth, and any liens imposed; and also
includes standardized information on both parents, such as name, Social Security number, date of
birth, and case identification number. States also must establish an automated directory of new
hires containing information from employers, including federal, state, and local governments and
labor organizations, for each newly hired employee, that includes the name, address, and Social
Security number of the employee and the employer’s name, address, and tax identification
number. This information generally is supplied to the state new hires directory within 20 days
after the employee is hired. Moreover, federal law required the establishment of a federal case
registry of child support orders and a national directory of new hires.7 The federal directories
consist of information from the state directories and federal agencies (located in the Federal
Parent Locator Service, or FPLS).
Federal law allows all states to link up to an array of databases, and permits the FPLS to be used
for the purpose of establishing parentage; establishing, setting the amount of, modifying, or
enforcing child support obligations; and enforcing child custody or visitation orders.8 Federal law
requires that a designated state agency, directly or by contract, conduct automated comparisons of
the Social Security numbers reported by employers to the state directory of new hires and the
Social Security numbers of CSE cases that appear in the records of the state registry of child
support orders. Federal law requires the HHS Secretary to conduct similar comparisons of the
federal directories.9 Automation is critical to the operation and success of the CSE program.10
Paternity Establishment
Legally identifying the father is a prerequisite for obtaining a child support order. Federal law
requires TANF applicants and recipients to cooperate in establishing paternity or obtaining
support payments. Moreover, a penalty for noncooperation exists. If it is determined that an
individual is not cooperating and the individual does not qualify for any good cause or other
exception, then the state must reduce the family’s TANF benefit by at least 25% and may
eliminate it entirely. Federal law also (1) requires that paternity be established for 90% of the
CSE cases needing such a determination, (2) requires a simple civil process for establishing
paternity, (3) requires an affidavit to be completed by men voluntarily acknowledging paternity

7 Within three business days after receipt of new hire information from the employer, the state directory of new hires is
required to furnish the information to the national directory of new hires. (For additional information, see CRS Report
RS22889, The National Directory of New Hires, by Carmen Solomon-Fears.)
8 P.L. 104-193 permitted both custodial and certain noncustodial parents to obtain information from the FPLS. P.L.
105-33, however, prohibited FPLS information from being disclosed to noncustodial parents in cases where there is
evidence of domestic violence or child abuse, and the local court determines that disclosure may result in harm to the
custodial parent or child.
9 When a match occurs, the state directory of new hires is required to report to the state CSE agency the name, address,
and Social Security number of the employee, and the employer’s name, address, and identification number. Within two
business days, the CSE agency then instructs appropriate employers to withhold child support obligations from the
employee’s paycheck, unless the employee’s income is not subject to income withholding.
10 Federal law requires suspension of all federal CSE funding to the state when its CSE plan, after appeal, is
disapproved. Moreover, states without approved CSE plans could lose funding for the TANF block grant. P.L. 105-200
imposed substantially smaller financial penalties on states that failed to meet the automated data systems requirements.
The HHS Secretary is required to reduce the amount the state would otherwise have received in federal CSE funding by
the penalty amount for the fiscal year in question. The penalty amount percentage is 4% in the case of the first year of
noncompliance (FY1998); 8% in the second year (FY1999); 16% in the third year (FY2000); 25% in the fourth year
(FY2001); and 30% in the fifth or any subsequent year.
Congressional Research Service
3

---

Child Support Enforcement: Program Basics

and entitles the affidavit to full faith and credit in any state, (4) stipulates that a signed
acknowledgment of paternity be considered a legal finding of paternity unless it is rescinded
within 60 days, and thereafter may be challenged in court only on the basis of fraud, duress, or
material mistake of fact, (5) provides that no judicial or administrative action is needed to ratify
an acknowledgment that is not challenged, and (6) requires all parties to submit to genetic testing
in contested paternity cases.
Establishment of Child Support Orders
A child support order legally obligates noncustodial parents to provide financial support for their
children and stipulates the amount of the obligation and how it is to be paid. It is usually
established at the time of divorce or when an unmarried couple dissolves their relationship or
when a welfare case is initiated. P.L. 100-485 required states to use their state-established
guidelines in establishing child support orders. States decide child support amounts based on the
noncustodial parent’s income or based on both parents’ income; other factors include the age of
child, whether a stepparent is in the home, whether the child is disabled, and the number of
siblings.
Review and Modification of Support Orders
Without periodic modifications, child support obligations can become inadequate or inequitable.
Under current law, states generally must review child support orders every three years to
determine if the order should be adjusted to reflect the parent’s financial circumstances.11
Enforcement
Collection methods used by state CSE agencies include income withholding,12 intercept of federal
and state income tax refunds, intercept of unemployment compensation, liens against property,
reporting child support obligations to credit bureaus, intercept of lottery winnings, sending
insurance settlement information to CSE agencies, authority to withhold or suspend driver’s
licenses, professional licenses, and recreational and sporting licenses of persons who owe past-
due support, and authority to seize assets of debtor parents held by public or private retirement
funds and financial institutions. Moreover, federal law authorizes the Secretary of State to deny,
revoke, or restrict passports of debtor parents. All jurisdictions also have civil or criminal
contempt-of-court procedures and criminal nonsupport laws. In addition, federal criminal
penalties may be imposed in certain cases. Federal law also requires states to enact and
implement the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA), and expand full faith and credit
procedures. Federal law also provides for international enforcement of child support.13

11 If a noncustodial parent cannot pay his or her child support payments because of unemployment, imprisonment, and
so forth, then the noncustodial parent should immediately contact the court in order to have the child support order
modified. Pursuant to federal law (section 466(a)(9) of the Social Security Act), the court will not be able to
retroactively reduce the back payments (i.e., arrearages) that a noncustodial parent owes.
12 There are three exceptions to the immediate income withholding rule: (1) if one of the parties demonstrates, and the
court (or administrative process) finds that there is good cause not to require immediate withholding, (2) if both parties
agree in writing to an alternative arrangement, or (3) at the HHS Secretary’s discretion, if a state can demonstrate that
the rule will not increase the effectiveness or efficiency of the state’s CSE program.
13 The CSE program has reciprocating agreements regarding the enforcement of child support with 15 countries:
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
4

---

Child Support Enforcement: Program Basics

Financing14
The federal government reimburses each state 66% of the cost of operating its CSE program.15 In
addition, the federal government pays states an incentive payment to encourage them to operate
effective programs.16 Federal law requires states to reinvest CSE incentive payments back into the
CSE program or related activities.17
Collection and Disbursement
All states are required to have a centralized automated state collection and disbursement unit to
which child support payments are paid and from which they are distributed. Federal law generally
requires employers to remit to the state disbursement unit (SDU) income withheld within seven
business days after the employee’s payday. Further, the SDU is required to send child support
payments to custodial parents within two business days of receipt of such payments.
Distribution of Support
Distribution rules determine which claim is paid first when a child support collection occurs. The
order of payment of the child support collection is important because in many cases arrearages
are never fully paid. While the family receives TANF cash benefits, the states and federal
government retain any current support and any assigned arrearages18 collected up to the
cumulative amount of TANF benefits paid to the family. While states may pay their share of
collections to the family, they must pay the federal government the federal government’s share of
child support collections collected on behalf of TANF families. This means that the state, and not
the federal government, bears the entire cost of any child support passed through to families (and
disregarded by the state in determining the family’s TANF cash benefit).19 Based on February

(...continued)
Australia, Canada, Czech Republic, El Salvador, Finland, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Netherlands, Norway, Poland,
Portugal, Slovak Republic, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
14 For additional information on the financing of the CSE program, see CRS Report RL33422, Analysis of Federal-
State Financing of the Child Support Enforcement Program, by Carmen Solomon-Fears.
15 P.L. 109-171 stipulated that the 90% federal matching rate for laboratory costs associated with paternity
establishment would be reduced to 66% beginning October 1, 2006.
16 The CSE incentive payment—which is based in part on five performance measures related to establishment of
paternity and child support orders, collection of current and past-due child support payments, and cost-effectiveness—
was statutorily set by P.L. 105-200. In the aggregate, incentive payments to states may not exceed $458 million for
FY2006, $471 million for FY2007, and $483 million for FY2008 (to be increased for inflation in years thereafter).
Aggregate incentive payments to states are capped at $526 million for FY2012 and estimated to amount to $465
million. For additional information on CSE incentive payments, see CRS Report RL34203, Child Support Enforcement
Program Incentive Payments: Background and Policy Issues, by Carmen Solomon-Fears.
17 P.L. 109-171, effective October 1, 2007, prohibited federal matching of state expenditure of federal CSE incentive
payments. However, P.L. 111-5 required HHS to temporarily provide federal matching funds (in FY2009 and FY2010)
on CSE incentive payments that states reinvest back into the CSE program. Thus, CSE incentive payments that are
received by states and reinvested in the CSE program are no longer eligible for federal reimbursement.
18 The child support assignment covers any child support that accrues while the family receives cash TANF benefits, as
well as any child support that accrued before the family started receiving TANF benefits. Pursuant to P.L. 109-171
(effective October 1, 2009, or at state option, October 1, 2008), the assignment only covers child support that accrues
while the family receives TANF.
19 P.L. 109-171 helps states pay for the cost of their CSE pass-through and disregard policies by requiring the federal
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
5

---

Child Support Enforcement: Program Basics

2012 data, 19 states and the District of Columbia have a CSE pass-through and disregard policy
and 31 states (and the 3 territories of Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands) do not.20
States must distribute to former TANF families the following child support collections first before
the state and the federal government are reimbursed (the “family-first” policy): (1) all current
child support, (2) any child support arrearages that accrue after the family leaves TANF (these
arrearages are called never-assigned arrearages), plus (3) any arrearages that accrued before the
family began receiving TANF benefits. An exception to this rule occurs when child support
arrearages are collected via the federal income tax refund offset program—those collections are
divided between the state and federal government.21 (Any child support arrearages that accrue
during the time the family is on TANF belong to the state and federal government.)
Visitation Grants and Responsible
Fatherhood Programs
Historically, Congress has agreed that visitation and child support should be legally separate
issues, and that only child support should be under the purview of the CSE program. Both federal
and state policymakers have maintained that denial of visitation rights should be treated
separately, and should not be considered a reason for stopping child support payments. However,
in recognition of the negative long-term consequences for children associated with the absence of
their father, P.L. 104-193 provided an annual entitlement of $10 million from the federal CSE
budget account for grants to states for access and visitation programs, including mediation,
counseling, education, and supervised visitation.
P.L. 109-171 provided $50 million per year for five years (FY2006-FY2010) in competitive
grants (under Title IV-A of the Social Security Act) for responsible fatherhood programs to states,
territories, Indian tribes and tribal organizations, and public and nonprofit organizations,
including religious organizations.
P.L. 111-291 (enacted December 8, 2010) extended funding for the Title IV-A Healthy Marriage
and Responsible Fatherhood grants through FY2011. For FY2011, P.L. 111-291 appropriated $75
million for awarding funds for healthy marriage promotion activities and $75 million for
awarding funds for activities promoting responsible fatherhood. The result is that the Title IV-A
Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood grants, which were funded at $150 million
annually from FY2006 through FY2010, were funded for an additional year (FY2011) on an
equal basis.

(...continued)
government to share in the costs of the entire amount (up to $100 per month for one child; up to $200 per month for
two or more children) of child support collections passed through and disregarded by states (effective October 1, 2008).
20 National Conference of State Legislatures, State Policies Regarding Pass-Through and Disregard of Current
Month’s Child Support Collected for Families Receiving TANF-Funded Cash Assistance, Updated February 2012.
21 P.L. 109-171 gives states the option of distributing to former TANF families the full amount of child support
collected on their behalf (i.e., both current support and all child support arrearages—including arrearages collected
through the federal income tax refund offset program). This provision took effect on October 1, 2009, or October 1,
2008, at state option.
Congressional Research Service
6

---

Child Support Enforcement: Program Basics

Pursuant to P.L. 112-78 (enacted December 23, 2011), the Healthy Marriage and Responsible
Fatherhood grant programs were extended at their FY2011 funding level (on a pro rata basis)
through February 29, 2012. Pursuant to P.L. 112-96 (enacted February 22, 2012), the Healthy
Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood grant programs were extended (at their FY2011 funding
level) through the end of FY2012 (on a pro rata basis). Pursuant to P.L. 112-175 (enacted
September 28, 2012), the Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood grant programs were
extended (at their FY2011 funding level) through March 2013 (on a pro rata basis). Pursuant to
P.L. 113-6 (enacted March 26, 2013), the Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood grant
programs were extended (at their FY2011 funding level) through the end of FY2013 (on a pro
rata basis). (For more information on responsible fatherhood programs, see CRS Report
RL31025, Fatherhood Initiatives: Connecting Fathers to Their Children, by Carmen Solomon-
Fears.)

Author Contact Information

Carmen Solomon-Fears

Specialist in Social Policy
csolomonfears@crs.loc.gov, 7-7306


Congressional Research Service
7

---