INSIGHTi

Employment and Training Services for
Noncustodial Parents in the Child Support
Program: Background and Summary of
Proposed Rule
June 14, 2024
All 50 states, the District of Columbia (DC), Guam, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and certain
tribal nations operate Child Support Enforcement (CSE) programs pursuant to Title IV-D (§§451-469) of
the Social Security Act (SSA). The program is federally administered by the Office of Child Support
Services (OCSS) in the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) of the U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS). Program services include parent location and the establishment,
modification, and enforcement of child support orders. CSE is estimated to handle the majority of all
child support cases; the remaining cases are handled by private attorneys, by collection agencies, or
through mutual agreements between parents. State CSE program financing is primarily provided through
a 66% federal reimbursement (federal financial participation [FFP]) of approved IV-D program activities
under the SSA (§455).
Title IV-D of the SSA does not explicitly address whether employment and training services for
noncustodial parents are allowable CSE program activities; federal CSE funding for such activities has
only been allowed in limited circumstances to date. However, on May 31, 2024, HHS issued a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that would make available FFP for this purpose pursuant to general
program authorities in SSA Section 452(a)(1) and Section 454(13). This Insight provides background on
these issues and a summary of the NPRM. For further information on this topic, see CRS Report R46365,
Child Support Enforcement-Led Employment Services for Noncustodial Parents: In Brief.
Background
SSA Section 466(a)(15) was enacted as part of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA; P.L. 104-193). It requires that states have procedures to order
noncustodial parents who owe past-due support on cases where the custodial family receives cash
assistance under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program (TANF) to participate in work
activities. HHS previously provided guidance that this provision would allow FFP to reimburse limited
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN12379
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress

---

Congressional Research Service
2
employment support referral services and tracking for CSE purposes, but would not allow federal
reimbursement for the administration of “work activity programs.”
In the years since PRWORA, numerous states have experimented with providing work-oriented services
for noncustodial parents through their CSE programs. There are limited federal funding streams—both
within the CSE program and via other federal programs—available specifically for noncustodial parents.
A 2014 HHS study identified a total of 77 such programs operated by 30 states and DC; many of these are
not currently in operation due to a lack of stable financial resources.
Also in 2014, HHS released an NPRM (November 17, 2014) that would have made FFP available, at state
option, to provide “job services for eligible noncustodial parents” that met certain criteria. The authority
cited by HHS specific to that proposal was SSA Section 454(13), which requires that state plans certify
compliance “with such other requirements and standards as the Secretary determines to be necessary to
the establishment of an effective program.” Ultimately, HHS decided not to include this state option in the
final rule (December 22, 2016), stating “we think allowing for federal IV–D reimbursement for job
services needs further study and would be ripe for implementation at a later time.” Subsequently, a 2018
information memorandum (IM-18-02) encouraged states to seek HHS approval to use their CSE incentive
funds (SSA §458(f)) for noncustodial parent work activities, but reaffirmed that FFP was not available for
this purpose.
Several policy demonstrations have investigated whether providing CSE-led employment and training
services for noncustodial parents might increase program effectiveness through measures such as earnings
and child support payments. While some of these evaluations found these services had positive effects on
one or more child support-related measures (e.g., NCP Choices), other, more recent evaluations with more
rigorous research designs found limited child support impacts (e.g., Child Support National Parent
Employment Demonstration, Enhanced Transitional Jobs Demonstration). Analyses of different
employment-related interventions also generally show that impacts vary across programs, and may be
related to the types of services offered.
May 31, 2024, NPRM
The NPRM would create a state option to provide employment and training services via their IV-D
programs that would be eligible for FFP as approved program activities. OCSS’s rationale for this
proposal is that studies (such as those discussed above) have shown, in OCSS’s judgement, that providing
these services can increase CSE program effectiveness. Additionally, most child support is collected
through wage withholding attached to formal employment, and the program has an interest in preventing
cases from accumulating unpaid child support. In citing the general program authorities in SSA Sections
452(a)(1) and 454(13) as its authority for this rule, OCSS notes that it continues to follow its prior
interpretation of SSA Section 466(a)(15) (summarized above).
Under this NPRM, those eligible for employment and training services are noncustodial parents with an
open CSE case who (1) have either a current order or are fully cooperating with the CSE agency to
establish such an order and (2) are “unemployed or underemployed or at risk of not being able to comply
with their current support order.” Eligible individuals cannot be receiving the same services under other
specified federal programs, such as TANF, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Employment
and Training program, the Federal Pell Grant, and the DOL Title I Workforce Innovation and Opportunity
Act programs. (States may add additional eligibility criteria.) The NPRM would limit allowable services
to
• job search assistance;
• job readiness training;
• job development and job placement services;

---

Congressional Research Service
3
• skills assessments to facilitate job placement;
• job retention services;
• work supports, such as transportation assistance, uniforms, and tools; and
• occupational training and other skills training directly related to employment.
FFP would not be available for subsidized employment or cash payments to program participants.
The NPRM suggests CSE agencies utilize existing employment and training providers as they seek to
provide these services to noncustodial parents.
OCSS estimates the annual federal fiscal impact of the NPRM as $15.5 million in FY2025, increasing to
$75.9 million in FY2034.
Comments about the NPRM are due to ACF on July 30, 2024, after which it will consider whether to
finalize this proposal.


Author Information

Jessica Tollestrup
Patrick A. Landers
Specialist in Social Policy
Analyst in Social Policy





Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff
to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of
Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of
information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.
CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United
States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,
as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the
permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

IN12379 · VERSION 1 · NEW

---