The Child Support Enforcement Program

This report provides summary information on the child support enforcement program, established under title IV-D of the Social Security Act. It includes basic program statistics and a description of the administrative structure and major characteristics of the program.

Report No. 82-168 EPW THE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM by Carmen D. Solomon Analyst in Socfal Legislation Education and Public Welfare Division December 24, 1981 Updated October 5, 1982 I-lie Congressional Research Service works esclusivelv f'or the ( h n g r e s s . conducting research. anal! zing legislation, and proiiding intormation at the request of' co~nmittees..\ternhers, and their staff's. The Ser\.ice makes such research a d a b l e . r+.ithout partisan bias. in man\- tol-ms ir-icl~ldingstudies, reports, compilations. digests. m d background briefings. L p o n I-equest.C:KS assists comrnittees in atialyring 1egislatii.e pmposals and issues, and in assessitig the possible ef'tects o t these pr.oposals aricl their alternatiies. I-he Set-1-ice's senior specialists nriti subject arialvsts are ; ~ l s oa\.ailable t01- p e ~ w r i a lc.orisult;~tiori~ in their respectiie fields of'espe~.tist.. ABSTRACT This report provides summary information on the child support enforcement program, established under title IV-D of the Social Security Act. It includes basic program statistics and a description of the administrative structure and major characteristics of the program. CONTENTS ................................................................... iii I . OVERVIEW .............................................................. 1 11. BACKGROUND ............................................................ 5 A . Basic Program Statistics .......................................... 6 B . Administrative Structure .......................................... 6 C . Program Characteristics .......................................... 7 1. Reimbursement of AFDC Expenditures ............................ 7 2 . The Requirement of Cooperation ................................ 10 3 . The Parent Locator Services ................................... 12 4 . Federal-State Financial Provisions ............................ 14 5 . The IRS Collection Mechanism .................................. 16 6. Garnishment ................................................... 18 7. Inter-State Cooperation ....................................... 18 8. State-Local Interaction ....................................... 19 9. Fees Charged to Nonrecipients of AFDC ........................ 20 10. Establishment of Paternity .................................... 21 11. Child Support Intercept of Unemployment Benefits .............. 21 12 . Child Support Obligations Not Discharged by Bankruptcy ........ 21 13. Allotments for Child and Spousal Support by Members of the Armed Forces .................................................. 22 APPENDIX A: CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT STATISTICS .......................... 25 ABSTRACT LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1. TABLE 2. TABLE 3. Total Child Support Collections, by State Since Program Inception ................................... Child Support Collections on Behalf of Families Receiving AFDC, by State Since Program Inception ................................... Child Support Collections on Behalf of Families Not Receiving AFDC, by State Since Program Inception ................................... TABLE 4. Total Child Support Collections, Child Support Collections on Behalf of Families Receiving AFDC, and Child Support Collections on Behalf of Families Not Receiving AFDC (by State, FY 1981) TABLE 5. TABLE 6. TABLE 7. TABLE 8. TABLE 9. ................. Administrative Expenditures for the Child Support Enforcement Program by State Since Program Inception ........................... Administrative Expenditures for the Child Support Enforcement Program (by State, FY 1981) ........................................ Child Support Enforcement Caseload (by State, FY 1981) ............. Number of Support Obligations Established, Parents Located, and Paternities Established (by State, FY 1981) ........................ Number of Families Removed from AFDC Due to Child Support (by State, FY 1981) .................................................... ' I. THE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM OVERVIEW Title IV-D of the Social Security Act was enacted in 1975 (P.L. 93-647) to -establisha program of child support enforcement. The program provides services to locate absent parents, establish paternity, and assist in the establishment and collection of court-ordered, administratively ordered, and voluntary child and spousal support payments. The program was enacted in an effort to require absent parents to support their children and thereby reduce spending for cash welfare under the Federal-State program of Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). The program covers both AFDC recipients and non-AFDC recipients. Applicants for, and beneficiaries of, AFDC are required to assign their support rights to the State in order to receive AFDC. In addition, each appli- cant or recipient must cooperate with the State if necessary to establish paternity and secure child support. The support payments made on behalf of AFDC children are paid to the State for distribution rather than directly to the family. If the child support col- lection is insufficient to lift the family's income above the State's AFDC elfgibility limit the family receives its full welfare grant and the child support is distributed to reimburse the State and Federal Governments in proportion to their assistance to the family. If the recipient's income, including the child support payments, exceeds the State's AFDC standard of "need," the recipient's benefits are ended. Non-AFDC families participate in the program on a voluntary basis. Federal funding for services to non-AFDC families was made a permanent part of the program in 1980. The Tax Equity Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248) allows States to provide child support enforcement services to non-AFDC families without charge or to recover costs of serving such families by charging the custodial parent or the absent parent an application fee of up to $20, and by retaining a portion of any child support payments which were collected. The Federal administration of title IV-D is in the Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) (formerly the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (DHEW)). OCSE reviews and approves State IV-D plans, establishes standards for effective State child support programs, provides technical assistance to the States, assists them with reporting procedures, maintains records of program operations and child support expenditures and collections, and audits State programs. The Federal Parent Locator Service within OCSE obtains and transmits to State and local child support agencies information contained in the files of the Federal Government to assist in locating absent parents. Each State must designate a single and separate organizational unit to administer the IV-D program within the State. In most States, the child support agency is located within the "umbrella" social services or human resources department, which also houses the State's AFDC program. State child support agencies also must have cooperative arrangements with law enforcement officials such as district attorneys, friends of the court, and attorneys general. Effective October 1, 1982, P.L. 97-248 reduced from 75 percent to 70 percent the Federal matching rate for administrative costs incurred by the State in providing child and spousal support services. This includes costs incurred by law enforcement officials pursuant to cooperative agreements with the IV-D agency and costs of supportive or administrative personnel of courts in the performance of IV-D functions. (P.L. 97-248, repeals reimbursement for costs of court personAs of July 1, 1981, Federal matching was avail- nel effective October 1, 1983.) able to cover 90 percent of the cost of developing and implementing child support management information systems. A 15 percent incentive payment, (reduced by P.L. 97-248 to 12 percent effective October 1, 1983) financed entirely from the Federal share of collections, is paid to States that enforce and collect child support for AFDC families within the State and on behalf of other States and to political subdivisions that enforce and collect child support intrastate. If a State is unsuccessful in obtaining child and spousal support, it may apply to the OCSE for a certification of the delinquent amount to the Internal Revenue Service for collection on behalf of AFDC recipients. Further, the wages or retirement benefits of Federal employees can be garnished to provide child support. Under P.L. 97-35, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1982, the Secretary of the Treasury is required to withhold from any tax refunds due an individual that owes past-due support and whose family is receiving APDC an amount equal to any past-due support. / The withheld amount is to be sent to the State agency, together with notice of the taxpayer's current address. In addition, bank- ruptcy no longer discharges a parent from child support obligations. 11 P.L. 95-272 extended eligibility for the incentive payment to a State that collects support payments on its own behalf. As a result all States qualify for the bonus for all child support collections they make. 21 "Past-due Support" is defined as the amount of a delinquency determined under'court order or an order of an administrative process established under State law for support and maintenance of a child, or of a child and the parent with whom the child is living (spousal support). If a State is found by an annual audit not to have an effective child support enforcement program that meets the requirements of title IV-D, the State's AFDC reimbursement is to be reduced by 5 percent. January 1 to September 30, 1977. The first audit period was However, Congress prohibited the imposition of any penalties until October 1, 1981. 11. BACKGROUND The need f o r F e d e r a l involvement i n c h i l d s u p p o r t enforcement e f f o r t s a r o s e from changes i n t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e AFDC c a s e l o a d . The AFDC program pro- v i d e s w e l f a r e payments t o f a m i l i e s i n which one p a r e n t i s deceased, a b s e n t , d i s a b l e d , o r unemployed. When t h e program began i n 1935, d e a t h of a p a r e n t was t h e major c a u s e of e l i g i b i l i t y and by 1940 i t accounted f o r 42 p e r c e n t of t h e AFDC caseload. I n 1979, however, c h i l d r e n e l i g i b l e due t o d e a t h o f a p a r e n t accounted f o r o n l y 2 . 2 p e r c e n t of t h e t o t a l c a s e l o a d ; 44.3 p e r c e n t were e l i g i b l e on grounds of a p a r e n t ' s c o n t i n u e d absence from home. S t a t i s t i c s show t h a t t h e l a r g e s t s i n g l e f a c t o r a c c o u n t i n g f o r t h e i n c r e a s e i n AFDC r o l l s h a s been t h e i n c r e a s e i n t h e number o f f a m i l i e s i n which t h e pare n t s were never married. I n 1979, 37.5 p e r c e n t of AFDC r e c i p i e n t c h i l d r e n were d e p r i v e d of f a t h e r ' s s u p p o r t o r c a r e because t h e f a t h e r was n o t m a r r i e d t o t h e mother. A Census Bureau s t u d y e n t i t l e d "Child Support and Alimony: - 1978" 3/ s a y s t h a t of 7.1 m i l l i o n women who had c h i l d r e n p r e s e n t l y under 21 y e a r s of a g e from a n a b s e n t f a t h e r , o n l y a b o u t 59 p e r c e n t were awarded o r had a n agreement t o r e c e i v e c h i l d s u p p o r t payments. The a v e r a g e amount o f c h i l d s u p p o r t r e c e i v e d was $1,800 and r e p r e s e n t e d 20 p e r c e n t of t h e t o t a l income of t h e mothers i n v o l v e d . Of t h e women who were supposed t o r e c e i v e c h i l d s u p p o r t i n 1978, 49 p e r c e n t rec e i v e d t h e f u l l amount t h e y were due. -31 Department of Commerce. R e p o r t s , S p e c i a l S t u d i e s . S e r i e s I?-23, U.S. Bureau of t h e Census. C u r r e n t P o p u l a t i o n no. 112. C h i l d Support and Alimony: 1978. A. Basic Program Statistics o $670.6 million in collections on behalf of AFDC recipients in FY 1981, o $958.3 million in collections on behalf of non-AFDC recipients in FY 1981, o $1.6 billion in total child support collections in FY 1981, and o $512.5 million in total administrative expenditures in FY 1981, the Federal Government paid 75 percent of total administrative expenditures and the States paid 25 percent. o In FY 1981, 705,000 parents were located. o A support obligation was established in 420,000 cases. o Paternity was established in approximately 163,500 cases. o In FY 1981, almost 46,000 cases (families) were removed from the AFDC rolls due to child support collections. An expanded set of data is to be found in appendix A. B. Administrative Structure Title IV-D provides for the establishment of State child support agencies (referred to as IV-D agencies), State and Federal Parent Locator Services, and a Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement. The fundamental activities of the IV-D programs are carried out at the State level, although some States allow local administration under State supervision. It is the State unit, the IV-D agency, that has the responsibility of establishing paternity and securing support. The Parent Locator Services of the States are organized within the IV-D agencies. The Federal unit, OCSE, plays primarily a supervisory role. It establishes requirements for the States in the areas of organization and staffing, and it develops general program standards. Each year OCSE is required to review all State programs, checking for effectiveness and compliance with the law, in its annual audit. Additional audits are made of State program operations. The Office of Child Support Enforcement also provides informational assistance. cedures. OCSE gives States technical aid and assists them in their reporting proMore importantly, though, through its Parent Locator Service it pro- vides States with information to lead to the location of absent parents. OCSE serves as a certifying authority to which IV-D agencies must appeal before they may take two particular actions: Before a State may invoke the use of the collection mechanism of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to collect overdue child support, it must appeal to OCSE for certification of the delinquent amount. And before a State may utilize the Federal courts in a IV-D case, OCSE must certify the action. 41 A last function of OCSE is to maintain program records. The OCSE is within the Department of Health and Human Services, its Director reporting directly to the Secretary. The Commissioner of Social Security is the 51 Director of OCSE at the present time. - C. Program Characteristics 1. Reimbursement of AFDC Expenditures As a condition of eligibility for aid, every AFDC applicant or recipient must assign the State his or her rights to support. The State is hence entitled to any child support obligations ordered to be given on behalf of AFDC recipients, 41 The OCSE has delegated the certification authority to DHHS child support regio<al representatives. 5 1 Prior to the March 1977 reorganization of HHS, the Administrator of the ~ociaBand Rehabilitation Service was the Director of the office. including such obligations as have accrued at the time of support rights assignments. A related provision requires that child support payments made by a parent on behalf of AFDC children be sent to the State. Acting in concert, these two provisions enable the State to regain portions of its AFDC expenditures. In cases where child support payments are made to the State, as required, the State continues to send out AFDC benefits, unchanged in amount. The actual support money goes to offset Federal and State AFDC expendi- tures. 61 The amount reimbursed to the Federal and State Governments is determined according to the extent of financial participation of each in AFDC payments. (One of two formulas may be used to determine State and Federal AFDC financial participation levels; the matching percentages are adjusted biennially and vary from State to State.) If the amount of child support payment received exceeds the monthly AFDC payment (thus making the family ineligible for AFDC), the State sends the difference on to the family, up to a limit: the level established by the court or adminis- 71 as the parent's support obligation for the current month. trative procedure The Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982, P.L. 97-248, requires that child support payments collected which are sufficient to make the family ineligible for AFDC will be paid to the family in months after the first month of ineligibility. Thus, the family would not be able to receive double payment for 61 In the first 14 months of the IV-D program, through September 30, 1976, 40 percent of the first $50 of the current month's child support payment collected (to a maximum of $20) was required to be paid to the AFDC family. 71 Title IV-D allows States to set up procedures and formulas for determining c%ld support amounts. In FY 1981, the following States had enacted legislation providing for administrative procedures to be used: Alaska, Connecticut, Georgia, Hawaii, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington. the same month, once in the form of AFDC, and once as a result of the child support collection. This provision took effect October 1, 1982. When the amount of support received exceeds the court-ordered support obligations for the month (such as at times when arrears are being settled), the additional amounts are retained by the State for reimbursement of past AFDC expenditures, to be distributed between the State and Federal Governments in the same way as above. Any excess, above amounts needed to reimburse the Federal and State Governments, goes to the family. The child support law authorizes each State to continue to collect child support payments for 3 months after a family becomes ineligible for AFDC. 81 (Each State sets its own eligibility standards with respect to income and assets.) An amendment to title IV-D enacted in the 95th Congress specifically provides that * during the 3-month period a State may take support amounts paid in excess of the absent parent's support obligation for reimbursement of prior APDC expenditures. If there is no excess or if there are no unreimbursed AFDC payments, the total support payment is paid to the family. After the end of the 3-month period, the State may continue to collect the current monthly support payments, but this time only if the person on whose behalf the collections would be made applies for collection as a non-recipient of AFDC. This time the State may subtract from the support payment its costs in handling the support collections, no matter how much the payment is. When a family ceases receiving AFDC, the assignment of support rights terminates, except with respect to the amount of any unpaid support obligation. The State is required to attempt to collect the unpaid obligation. 81 In FY 1981, all States but 13 had opted to collect for the 3-month periox, the 13 being : Alabama, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia. Georgia had opted to collect for 2 months, Kentucky for 1. Six States opted to collect child support payments for up to 5 months after the family became ineligible for AFDC benefits, the 6 States were: District of Columbia, Idaho, Maryland, New Mexico, Ohio, and Oklahoma. 2. The Requirement of Cooperation Each recipient of, or applicant for, AFDC is required to cooperate with the State if need be in its efforts to locate the absent parent, establish paternity, and collect support. Again, this is a condition of eligibility for cash assistance, contained within title IV-A- Under the law, AFDC recipients or applicants may be excused from the requirement of cooperation if the IV-A (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 set forth 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 child's benefits will not be suspended, but the relative's will. Additionally, the child's benefits will be sent in the form of a protective payment to a person not the relative. (The same is true of refusal to assign the State support rights: if an APDC applicant or recipient refuses to make an assignment of support rights, the child will not be disqualified from AFDC. The applicant or recipient will be disqualified, however, and the child will be able to receive benefits only in the form of protective payments.) The requirement that applicants and recipients cooperate in establishing paternity and obtaining support from an absent parent has been the subject of controversy since it was first enacted as part of the original child support legislation. The provision was modified by P.L. 94-88, enacted August 1, 1975, to allow noncooperation on the part of individuals whom the State determined had good cause for refusal, such determinations to be made on the basis of standards established by the Secretary of HEW. The requirement that the Secretary establish standards turned out to be difficult to fulfill because of continuing controversy over their content. Proposed regulations were published August 13, 1976, a year after the good cause legislation was enacted. Final regulations were not published until nearly 1-112 years later, on January 16, 1978. The final regulations generated further controversy and were subsequently revised and published on October 3, 1978. The revised set of final good cause regulations became effective on December 4, 1978. The revised set is specific with respect to the circumstances under which State welfare (IV-A) agencies may find good cause. According to tMS analysis of the comments received on the first set of final regulations, some individuals, for the most part district attorneys and representatives of State and local IV-D agencies, argued that the regulations placed an unreasonable burden on the IV-D program, in terms of administrative effort and by permitting unjustified noncooperation. Others, in the main from legal services organiza- tions and other advocate groups, either supported the current regulations or argued that they were inadequate to insure against emotional or physical harm to the child or caretaker relative. As the result of public comments, the Department of HHS promulgated the revised set of final regulations, which are stricter and more specific than those issued earlier. A summary of these revised final good cause regulations follows. Circum- stances 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 forcible rape; and situations in which legal procedures are underway for the child's adoption. According to the regulations, physical harm and emotional harm must be of a serious nature. A finding of good cause for emotional harm may only be based on a demonstration of an emotional impairment that substantially affects the individual's functioning. The factors of incest, rape, and pending adoption do not automatically excuse noncooperation; in such cases, also, a determination that cooperation would be detrimental to the child must be made for cooperation to be excused. Payments to an AFDC recipient cannot be denied, delayed, or discontinued because a good cause claim is pending. (In the case of applicants, however, a judgment on eligibility for the AFDC program will be held up if corroborative evidence of the good cause claim is not provided.) Eligibility for exemption from cooperation is to be reviewed periodically. States may choose to allow their IV-D agencies to pro- ceed with collection efforts after a claim of good cause has been proved, without the cooperation of the caretaker relative, only in instances where the IV-A agency believes that pursuing collection efforts independently would not result in harm to the child or caretaker relative. Lastly, certain procedures of the good cause determination process are specified. 3. The Parent Locator Services The State IV-D agency is required to attempt to locate all absent parents when their location is unknown. In doing this, States must use what are described in the regulations as "appropriate local locator sources," such as officials and employees administering public assistance, general assistance, medical assistance, food stamps and social services, relatives and friends of the absent parent, current or past employers, the local telephone company, the U.S. Postal Service, financial references, unions, fraternal organizations, and police, parole, and probation records if appropriate. They must also use appro- priate State agencies and departments, including the departments which maintain records of public assistance, unemployment insurance, income taxation, drivers license, vehicle registration, and criminal records. Regulations that became effective July 31, 1978, permit State child support agencies to submit requests for location information regarding absent parents to the Federal Parent Locator Service (FPLS) from two child support offices in the State in addition to the central office of the State child support agency and allow a State to submit these requests at the same time that it attempts to locate an absent parent using location sources within the State. only the State IV-D agency could transmit requests. Previously, The change was aimed at shortening the turnaround time for location requests of large cities. Earlier, it took at least 60 days in many States to search all State location sources; and if these efforts were unsuccessful and a request then was submitted to the FPLS, it took another 60 days for the FPLS to process most location requests. During FY 1980, the FPLS reduced the average monthly backlog of address requests by 52 percent and the average monthly processing costs by $10,000. The OCSE says that these results were due in part to the major technical improvements to the FPLS, of which the aforementioned provision was one. The FPLS is supported by a telecommunications network which gives States and selected local jurisdictions with remote computer terminals a direct communications link with the FPLS. As of September 1981, 48 States, the District of Columbia and 4 local jurisdictions were using the telecommunications network. States lacking terminals use FPLS services through magnetic tape or paper documents. POL. 96-265, the Social Security Disability Amendments of 1980, requires Federal funding at the 90 percent rate for costs attributable to the planning, design, development, installation or enhancement of approved computerized management information systems for both the child support enforcement and AFDC programs, effective July 1, 1981. The FPLS is organized within OCSE. An interface with the Social Security Administration (SSA) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) provides the FPLS with last known home and employer addresses. When the social security number is not known, it is acquired from SSA. The FPLS regularly receives address infor- mation from the five branches of the armed services, from the Veterans Administration (VA), from the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) of the General Services Administration (GSA) (the NPRC keeps records on Federal Government civilian employees, records not kept by SSA). Contacted on an exceptional basis are the Civil Service Commission and other Federal agencies, the information transfer sometimes taking place between a State PLS and a local office of the Federal agency rather than between the FPLS and the agency staff. In addition to the above-mentioned interface with the IRS and SSA, the FPLS has established a computer interface with the NPRC, and other computer interfaces are planned. The DHHS reimburses agencies for costs they incur pursuant to FPLS requests. 4. Federal-State Financial Provisions Effective October 1, 1982, the Federal Government pays 70 percent of the administrative costs incurred by the State in providing child support enforcement services. This level of Federal financial participation is substantially higher than is provided for administration of the AFDC program, which is 50 percent. Prior to P.L. 97-248, the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982, Federal matching for State administrative costs was 75 percent. Beginning July 1, 1980 Federal matching funds for child support administrative costs included expenditures by courts (in excess of 1978 costs and exclusive of judge's salaries) in performing child support enforcement activities. However, P.L. 97-248 repealed Federal matching for the costs of court personnel, effective October 1, 1983. Financial incentives are provided to political subdivisions which enforce and collect child support obligations on behalf of State IV-D agencies as well as to the State as a whole if it collects child support payments on its own behalf. Under P.L. 96-272, a State that administers its own child support enforcement program (without county participation) was made eligible to receive an incentive payment for child support collections. Where the program is State supervised but administered by political subdivisions, the political subdivision collecting and enforcing is entitled to receive the incentive. Where various program activities are carried out by both the State and the political subdivision, the entity to receive the incentive could be controlled by the cooperative agreement, purchase of service agreement or possibly State law. The incentive amount - is 15 percent of such child support payments as are collected by the localities. 9 / The same 15 percent incentive payments are given to States enforcing and collecting child support obligations on behalf of other States. When more than one jur- isdiction is involved, the incentive payment is allocated among the jurisdictions. Thus, for any one collection of assigned child support, only one 15 percent incentive payment is made. Incentive payments come out of the portion of child support collections sent to the Federal Government, thus costing the State nothing. P.L. Under 97-248, child support incentive payments were reduced from 15 percent to 12 percent, effective October 1, 1983. Financial penalties may be imposed on the States. If in the annual audit a State's program is found not to be effective and not to meet the requirements of - 91 Until October 1, 1977, the incentive payments amounted to 25 percent in the first year of collections and 10 percent thereafter. title IV-D, the Federal share of that State's total AFDC expenditures could be reduced by 5 percent. A specific authorization of Federal matching funds for IV-D service provided to nonrecipients of AFDC, which originally expired September 30, 1978, but was subsequently extended retroactively (P.L. 96-178), has been made permanent (P.L. 96-272). The Federal matching rate for administering such services like those for AFDC families, was reduced to 70 percent, effective October 1, 1982, by POL. 97-248. 5. The IRS Collection Mechanism A State IV-D agency may request the OCSE to use the Internal Revenue Service collection mechanism to collect delinquent child support obligations established by court order or administrative procedure on behalf of an AFDC recipient. To use the IRS mechanism, a State must show OCSE that it has made diligent and reasonable efforts to collect the delinquent amount using its own collection mechanisms. The IRS may give the amount and type of income received and the number of dependents claimed by the absent parent as reflected on the latest return; the IRS also furnishes address information based on the latest income tax return filed by the absent parent to the FPLS. To improve the capacity of the State child support enforcement agencies to acquire accurate wage data, P.L. 96-265 authorizes and requires SSA to disclose wage and self-employment information directly to State and local child support enforcement agencies. this information could be obtained only from the IRS. P.L. Previously, 96-265 also requires States to disclose wage information from unemployment compensation records to CSE agencies for the same purpose. As was stated earlier, IRS can collect delinquent child support when a State has been unable to collect. However, before the 1981 change in law, the IRS could collect only when the delinquency was under a court order. P.L. 97-35 permits IRS to collect child support that is delinquent under an administrative order, and also allows the IRS to collect support obligations with respect to - the parent with whom the child is living and who is receiving AFDC. 101 In addition, new law provides that IRS is to collect delinquent child support from income tax refunds of the offending parent. States will be allowed to submit to the Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement AFDC cases in which there is a child support arrearage. to the IRS. The OCSE will consolidate the requests and send them Before a tax refund is sent to any taxpayer, the IRS will first check to see if there is a child support arrearage and send the refund, up to the amount of the arrearage, to the State child support agency. 111 Before the IRS mechanism may be used, OCSE must certify the delinquent amount; only delinquent amounts may be collected through the IRS mechanism. States must pay the Federal Government a fee for costs involved in making the collection. Public Law 96-265 strengthened the child support enforcement powers of the States by extending to the States the authority to request the IRS collection of delinquent child support payments for non-AFDC families. This change was effective as of July 1, 1980. 101 A current population reports study (cited in footnote 3 page 5) states that of the 14.3 million ever divorced or separated women, in 1978, only about 14 percent were awarded or had an agreement to receive alimony or maintenance payments. The average amount of alimony received was $2,850, or 26 percent of the total income of the women who received alimony. 111 Over a half million cases were submitted by 46 States and the District of ~ o G m b b afor collection during FY 1981. 6. Garnishment Under title IV-D, persons receiving remuneration for employment by the United States Government, including members of the armed services, are made subject to garnishment proceedings as if their employer were a private citizen, for collection of child support and alimony obligations. The law defines remuneration as including compensation for personal services; whether severance pay, sick pay, or incentive pay. It also includes periodic benefits such as social security benefits or other Federal pensions, retirement, annuities, dependents or survivors' benefits, black lung benefits, and veterans' pension and compensation. Extensive amendments to the garnishment provisions of Title IV-D were made in the 95th Congress. The procedures for service of garnishment orders upon the United States were specified. specifically included under the law. District of Columbia employees were Issuance of garnishment regulations was authorized on behalf of the three branches of the Federal Government and on behalf of the Government of the District of Columbia. And certain terms used in the garnishment sections of the law were further defined. 7. Inter-State Cooperation Title IV-D requires that States cooperate to secure collections of support on each other's behalf. The primary mechanism of interstate child support action is the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (URESA), which predated title IV-D. By 1955, URESA had been adopted by all States. It allows any person owed child support payments to file a petition in the home State and receive a hearing in the State where the obligor resides. This procedure pro- vides for enforcement or modification of an existing support order as well as initial determination of support payments. One drawback to URESA's effectiveness is that it is not uniform among all States. States have adopted various amendments to URESA or dropped whole sec- tions from the original version. Therefore, before filing a URESA petition, one must assess the responding State's law. of individual States prevent prosecution. In many cases, differences in the laws For example, while the initiating State may allow suits for arrearages, the responding State may not have a provision for collecting arrearages. In that case, an action to collect arrearages would be blocked. In addition, prosecutorial indifference in the responding State may cause undue delay. Even after the hearing is scheduled, a prosecutor may not ade- quately represent the absent petitioner, even though URESA provides that the prosecuting attorney shall prosecute the case diligently. Title IV-D itself requires cooperation between States in matters of paternity determination, parent location, and child support collection. The Federal courts may be used as a mechanism of child support action in cases involving two States. To use the Federal courts, a State seeking action must apply to OCSE for certification of the case for the courts, which OCSE gives if it finds the other State to have been remiss and finds the use of the Federal courts to be the only solution to the problem. 8. State-Local Interaction The child support law requires State IV-D agencies to enter into cooperative arrangements with appropriate court and law enforcement officials in order to promote effectiveness in the IV-D program. States may choose to have their IV-D program administered at the local level, under State supervision. Fees Charged to Nonrecipients of AFDC Before October 1, 1981, States were allowed to provide federally-subsidized child support enforcement services to non-AFDC families without charge or to recover costs of servicing such families by charging the custodial parent an application fee of up to $20 (a limit set by regulation), and by retaining a portion of any child support payments which were collected. The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981, P.L. 97-35, replaced this optional provision with a requirement that States impose a fee equal to 10 percent of the support owed, to be charged against the absent parent and added to the amount of the collection. The Congress, in passage of the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982, P.L. 97-248, repealed the Reconciliation Act provision and restored the fee provisions of prior law under which States had an option as to whether or not to charge for the cost of non-AFDC child support collection. P.L. 97-248 gives the States the additional option of allowing them to recover cost either from the absent parent or from the custodial parent. If a State elects to collect from the custodial parent (by deducting the costs from the amount of child support which is collected) the State must have in effect a procedure under which the court or other entity which determines the amount of the support obligation will be notified of the amount by which any support collection will be reduced to reimburse the costs of collection. This provision took effect August 13, 1981. 10. Establishment of Paternity Paternity may be established by court order or by other legal procedures (for instance, by acknowledgement) as State law dictates. Each State IV-D agency is required to create a list of laboratories which perform acceptable tests usable for paternity determinations purposes, including blood tests, and to make this list available to appropriate courts and law enforcement officials, and to the public on request. Under the good cause regulations referred to earlier, the welfare agency may determine that it is against the best interests of the child to seek to establish paternity in cases involving incest, forcible rape, or pending procedures for adoption. 11. Child Support Intercept of Unemployment Benefits Public Law 97-35 requires that past-due child support obligations be withheld from the unemployment benefits or trade adjustment benefits of a delinquent parent. The law requires the child support enforcement agency to collect any outstanding child support obligations owed by an individual receiving unemployment benefits--through an agreement with the individual or, in the absence, the legal processes of the State--by having a portion of the individual's employment benefits withheld and forwarded to the State child support agency. State plan requirements for this provision take effect October 1, 1982. 12. Child Support Obligations Not Discharged by Bankruptcy Public Law 97-35 provides that a child support obligation assigned to a State as a condition of AFDC eligibility can no longer be discharged in bankruptcy. 13. Allotments for Child and Spousal Support by Members of the Armed Forces The Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 added a new section to title IV-D of the Social Security Act to require allotments from the pay and allowances of any member of the uniformed service on active duty when he fails to make child or spousal support payments. The requirement would arise when the servicemember failed to make support payments in an amount at least equal to the value of 2 month's worth of support. Provisions of the Consumer Credit Protection Act would apply so that the percentage of the member's pay which could be subject to allotment would be limited. The amount of the allotment would be the amount of the support payment, as established under a legally enforceable administrative or judicial order. In addition, the servicemember must be given an opportunity (within a 30-day limit) to consult a judge advocate or other law specialist. This provision took effect October 1, 1982. CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT CASE FUNCTIONS Cease Locate absent parents Activity <2 Oh1 i gat no 1 Establish obligation 1 I I I t V , I I APPENDIX A: CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT STATISTICS The f o l l o w i n g m a t e r i a l s have been e x c e r p t e d from "Child Support Enforcement; 6 t h Annual Report t o Congress f o r t h e p e r i o d ending September 30, 1981," U.S. Department of H e a l t h and Human S e r v i c e s . December 31, 1981. O f f i c e of C h i l d Support Enforcement. Table I T o t a l Child Support C o l l e c t i o n s by S t a t e S i n c e Program I n c e p t i o n STATE Totals Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Color ado Connecticut Delaware D i s t . Columbia Flor ida Georgia Guam Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missour i Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New J e r s e y New Mexico New York North Carolina N o r t h Dakota Ohio Oklahama Oregar Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode I s l a n d South Carolina S o u t h Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Verrnart Virgin Islands Virginia Washington West V i r g i n i a Wisconsin Womf ng F i s c a l Year 1976 Transition Quarter F i s c a l Year 1977 F i s c a l Year 1978 511,676,067 15,327 0 11,684 31,055 53,763,648 1,790,888 l6,288,l64 4,713,197 454,771 602,117' 2,558,764 1,326 28,622 l,Ol3,O37 4,373,715 180,873,718 30,587 0 11,158 69,986 19,491,667 607,990 4,095, 031 l,5lOlOl3 80,016 322,813 686,524 2,474 59,642 376,385 1,630,736 0 1,745,762 700,566 115,670 1,555,848 688,359 0 8,852,579 23,043,410 3,335,537 2,638 0 172,752 36,013 215 375,282 20,616,790 80,781 25,718,235 229,712 150,063 4,689,113 256,101 11,328,611 34,028,971 0 619,417 7,417 140,977 174,807 1,975,309 796,969 261,993 42,460 1,151,864 4,605,591 79,732 4,242,322 76,830 863,704,311 255,631 4,507,963 178,318 844,828 148,915,171 3,723,852 18,154,664 6,167,490 578,622 3,149,257 3,951,917 13,412 1,062,439 1,847,056 7,945,565 8,067,833 7,866,142 3,375,777 605,152 7,568,070 2,799,020 6,139,711 24,342,352 79,264,222 14,046,924 664,688 0 522,524 1,290,422 1,919,094 1,912,907 86,004,231 1,093,325 107,067,563 3,105,804 973,549 19,590,865 1,488,540 58,516,284 155,953,521 17,546 3,106,362 568,523 754,612 4,763,397 5,419,220 3,244,373 1,090,972 127,023 5,271.435 20,951,013 745,974 21,811,491 357.665 1,047,981,403 2,806,154 5,051,198 l,959,l85 2,143,414 148,913,297 5,992,729 20,384,011 5,634,977 777,083 5,828,362 4,985,224 0 1,648,076 1,942,419 10,312,726 8,415,782 9,842,140 3,802,791 2,739,200 9,777,384 3,514,719 12,186,658 26,524,871 210,649,033 17,596,407 1,135,083 3,429,532 1,061,249 2,227,886 2,464,211 2,004,138 79,826,858 1,531,252 77,007,283 7,696,676 1,017,517 21,176,234 1,767,274 71,282,099 165,023,632 926,563 3,170,530 2,362,987 1,018,696 6,385,357 6,865,757 5,473,663 1,202,487 186,842 3,968,584 25,042,837 1,229,035 27,664,049 405,252 ox 5,699,722 2,048,333 153,168 5,587,396 l,Oll,699 5,949,692 16,329,037 76,551, 305 8,311,028 ox ox 202,328 90,250 ox 644,965 29,362,451 534,256 71,616,950 167,080 417,558 16,298,566 620,146 17,209,385 135,871,790 0 2,214,185 0 408,551 434,488 4,121, 358 1,653,349 694,644 38,536 3,694,024 14,558,645 0 3,371,400 163,467 * F l o r i d a 1976 non-AFDC c o l l e c t i o n s n o t r e p o r t e d . 'state (AFDC) under w a i v e r . F i s c a l Year 1979 1,333,259,009 6,853,876 3,844,282 6,410,979 3,921,146 199,944,512 4,020,280 23,033,132 5,813,466 1,.086,071 10,523,480 5,553,493 159, 504 5,149,982 2,500,834 10,739,169 9,072,561 13,017,219 3,974,734 4,881,202 12,678,610 4,573,543 20,855,841 36,338,406 248,413,880 21,370,446 1,661,889 5,828,799 1,212,812 2,468,446 3,867,873 2,088,882 94,004,689 1,680,126 136,360,884 9,168,228 1,722,685 22,832,342 1,825,755 88,502,227 186,718,425 1,916,054 3,575,277 3,638,942 1,406,861 8,975,697 8,207,082 6,624,231 1,386,390 260,133 9,l96,592 27,017,546 1,592,146 34,267,377 519,971 F i s c a l Year lr8.C Table 2 Child Support C o l l e c t i o n s on Behalf o f F a m i l i e s R e c e i v i n g AFDC, by S t a t e S i n c e Program I n c e p t i o n STATE F i s c a l Year 1976 203,551,344 Totals 12,829 Alabama -0Alaska 11,684 Arizona 30,855 Arkansas 10,997,242 California 1,787,384 Colorado 6,529,535 Connecticut 676,487 Delaware 454,771 D i s t . Columbia 602,117 Plot ida 2,508,829 Georgia 1,326 Guam 28,622 Hawaii 995,512 Idaho 4,365,497 Illinois X Indiana 5,615,744 Iowa 2,045,244 Kansas 148,097 Kentucky 907,970 Louisiana 961,355 Maine 5,949,692 Maryland 16,329,037 Massachusetts 53,682,197 Michigan Minnesota 6,265,030 'Mississippi X Missouri X 177,204 Montana Nebraska 85,782 X Nevada New Hampshire 644,965 13,890,835 New J e r s e y 522,948 New Mexico New Yor k 7,795,067 105,793 ~ o r t hC a r o l i n a 397,650 North. D a k o t a 16,285,843 Ohio 545,557 Oklahoma 2,027,931 Oregar 12,663,781 ~ e n n s y l v a ina -0Puerto Rico 2,214,185 Rhode I s l a n d South Carolina -0396,000 South Dakota 340,621 Tennessee 3,803,242 Texas 1,603,145 Utah 664,991 Vermont 33,611 Virgin Islands 3,694,024 Virginia 11,233,761 Washington -0West V i r g i n i a 3,366,782 Wisconsin 150,570 Wyoming X S t a t e under w a i v e r . Transition Quarter 82,730,770 21,886 -0-069,121 7,735,115 607,693 1,762,296 279,573 80,016 295,200 622,181 2,474 59,642 353,027 1,606,730 -01,706,744 700,316 107,541 440,960 664,127 -08,852,579 17,163,603 2,686,418 2,638 -0151,232 34,845 215 375,282 4 ,607 ,658 75,675 7,450,359 193,939 123,635 4,677,849 215,101 1,155,531 5,095,184 -0619,417 7,417 128,317 129,059 1,796,232 665,800 243,311 33,602 1,151,864 3,594,983 79,732 4,237,220 67,431 F i s c a l Year 1977 F i s c a l Year 1978 422,562,514 244,384 172,110 97,669 812,234 76,149,525 3,509,055 8,175,769 1,191,346 564,060 2,790,013 3,412,962 13,412 1,062,439 1,617,143 7,784,424 7,938,518 7,411,677 3,361,477 578,747 2,684,901 2,691,354 6,091,107 24,342,352 66,394,202 11,293,369 663,748 -0362,234 1,128,398 343,760 1,912,907 19,901,563 938,610 43,985,591 2,671,072 854,524 19,469,782 1 , 2 4 0 519 8,285,339 24,318,446 12,097 3,106,362 525,066 725,031 2,167,920 4,473,690 2,752,434 955,142 125,520 5,271,195 15,555,311 745,974 19,381,736 304,294 471,567,464 2,770,374 384,822 796,504 1,585,907 72,614,076 2,930,156 9,721,690 1,301,273 687,149 4,711,891 4,217,620 -01,648,076 1,583,594 9,837,571 7,785,649 8,988,869 3,589,867 2,587,532 3,680,076 3,280,556 9,843,748 26,524,871 73,084,263 13,032,825 1,062,760 3,190,701 672,802 1,909,592 424,557 2,004,138 20,079,835 1,174,187 39,662,436 6,661,130 860,925 20,748,708 1,260,179 10,844,592 29,2Ol,46O 23 3,514 3,110,821 2,119,898 950,307 2,652,237 5,456,916 4,580,172 978,860 143,791 3,886,258 17,362,879 1,105,258 21,733,735 305,857 , F i s c a l Year F i s c a l Year 1980 CRS-28 Table 3 C h i l d S u p p o r t C o l l e c t i o n s on B e h a l f of F a m i l i e s N o t R e c e i v i n g AFW by S t a t e S i n c e Program I n c e p t i o n STATE Totals Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Color ado Connecticut Delaware ~ i s t Columbia . Florida Georgia Guam Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada N e w Hampshire New J e r s e y New Mexico New York North Carolina N o r t h Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Osegcm Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode I s l a n d South Carolina S o u t h Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virgin Islands Virginia Washington West V i r g i n i a Wisconsin Wyoming F i s c a l Year 1976 308,124,723 2,498 -0-0200 42,766,406 3,504 9,758,629 4,036,710 -0- * 49,935 -0-017,525 8,218 -083,978 3,089 5,071 4,679,426 50 ,344 -0-022,869,108 2,045,998 -0-025,124 4,468 -0-015,471,616 11,308 63,821,883 61,287 19,908 12,723 74,589 15,181,454 123,208,009 -0-0-012,551 93,867 318,116 50 ,204 29,653 -04,925 3,324,884 -04,618 12,897 Information not reported. Transition Quarter 98,142,948 8,701 -011,158 865 11,756,552 297 2,332,735 1,230,440 -027,613 64,343 -0-023,358 24,006 -039,018 250 8,129 l,ll4,888 24,232 -0-05,879,807 649,119 -0-021,520 1,168 -0-016,009,132 5,106 18,267,876 35,773 26,428 11,264 41,000 10,173,080 28,933,787 -0-0-012,660 45,748 179,077 131,169 18,682 -08,858 1,010,608 -05,102 9,399 F i s c a l Year 1977 F i s c a l Year 1978 441,141,797 11,247 4,335,853 80,649 32,594 72,765,646 214,797 9,978,895 4,976,144 14,562 359,244 538,955 -0-0229,913 161,141 129,315 454,465 14,300 26,405 4,883,169 107,666 48 ,604 -012,870,020 2,753,555 940 -0160,290 162,024 1,575,334 -066,102,668 154,715 63,081,972 434,732 119,025 121,083 248,021 50,230,945 131,635,075 5,449 -043,457 29,581 2,595,477 945,530 491,939 135,830 240 1,503 5,395,702 -02,429,755 53,371 576,413,939 35,780 4,666,376 1,162,681 557,507 76,299,221 3,062,573 10,662,321 4,333,704 89,934 1,116,471 767,604 -0-0358,825 475,155 630,133 853,271 212,924 151,668 6,097,308 234,163 2,342,910 -0137,564,770 4,563,582 72,323 238,831 388,447 318,294 2,039,654 -059,747,023 357,065 37,344,847 1,035,546 156,592 427,526 507,095 60,437,507 135,822,172 693,049 59,709 243,089 68,389 3,733,120 1,408,841 893,491 223,627 43,051 82,326 7,679,958 123,777 5,930,314 99.395 F i s c a l Year 1979 736,632,568 16,032 3,510,224 5,768,925 1,493,576 82,412,308 495,681 11,616,898 4,427,879 179,462 1,925,728 782,9 19 408 2,606,229 453,987 822,741 956,929 2,363,175 520,308 266,153 7,434,444 440,981 9,927,024 7,193,188 172,038,798 6,860,788 105,942 1,663,991 528,246 385,124 3,350,784 -065,383,004 52O,llO 79,772,980 1,454,154 343,558 857,949 565,510 75,524,966 153,528,494 1,476,883 137,475 479,987 269,543 5,lO4,836 1,837,465 1,182,755 185,552 116,932 116,130 8,699,058 161,839 8,223,848 140.669 F i s c a l Year 1380 874,490,970 9 10 4,077,041 6,147,349 2,179,941 99,665,814 2,173,400 12,830,267 4,760,197 367,743 1,553,832 759,382 900 4,098,325 606,341 1,176,161 1,449,635 3,262,401 1,001,343 10,789,304 8,347,721 590,501 13,245,662 11,621,441 212,557,738 8,628,838 172,128 4,738,352 693,779 470,909 2,390,479 78,361 71,865,471 631,247 96,319,601 2,029,339 341,743 903,611 710,417 82,353,521 165,563,842 1,589,105 146,062 729,748 370,203 6,975,946 2,721,624 1,316,837 275,808 215,426 484,194 10,170,161 133,296 8,010,429 197,144 TABLE 4. Total Child Support Collections, Child Support Collections on Behalf of Families Receiving AFDC and Child Support Collections on Behalf of Families Not Receiving AFDC (By State, FY 1981) State Total Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California C o l o r ado Connecticut Delaware D i s t . of Col. Florida Georgia Guam Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana I ow a Kansas Kentucky Lou i s i a n a Maine nary 1 and Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi M l ssour i Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New J e r s e y New H e x l c o New York North C a r o l i n a N o r t h Dakota Ohio O k l ehoma Oregon Pennsylvania P u e r t o Rico Hhode I s l a n d South Carolina S o u t h Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Virgin I s l a n d s Uasbington 'dest Virginia U i sconsin 'd yo m i nu Nationwide T o t a l s 1,6?8,fI94,466 AFDC CFS-30 TABLE 5 A h i n i s t r a t i v e Expenditures for the C h i l d S u p p o r t Program by S t a t e Since Program I n c e p t i m Trans1t i o n Quarter Tot a 1 s Alabara Alaska Arizma Arkansaa California Colaado Connecticut Delaware Dint. Coluabia ?lor i& Ccorgia Guam R m a ii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Itansas Kentucky Louisiana Uaine )hr y l a n d Ilarssachuaetts nichigan W i ~ e m t a Wisnisaippi nissour i kmtana Nebraska Nevada Ncw B w n h i r e New J e r n e y Ucw n e x i w Ncw York Rorth Carolina Worth Dakota Ohio Oklahoma OKegQl Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rho& I s l a n d South C ~ K O ~ ~ M S o u t h Dakota Tenneasn Texas Utah Ver m a l t Virgin Islands Virginia Washington Went V i r g i n i a Wisomsin W d n g - 49,686,232 463,259 84,270 164.886 113,787 13,083,986 (61,587 1,002,432 132.007 196,932 133,518 258,111 11,755 187,866 100,345 815,585 273,018 264,369 189,353 155,310 970,909 182,836 375,141 88 3,809 4,559,986 1,706,251 94,145 -061,977 173,701 62,642 30,352 2,792,608 275,272 8,417,568 652,336 56,983 lr271,MI 373,408 1,043,335 757,525 61,359 157,715 100,996 216,890 68,861 1,756,497 (08,848 131,849 103,588 506,584 1,312,980 300,795 1,(03,599 18,144 F i s c a l Year 1978 F i s c a l Year 1979 317,943,686 3,749,742 1,582,131 2,238,271 2,140,946 69,114,126 3,361,784 4,851,112 789,114 1,068,262 4,842,778 2,248,028 69,350 963,893 923,438 4,920,449 3,471,781 2,818,195 1,263,808 2,396,780 5,375,768 1,033,710 5,681,704 5,180,978 22,166,080 8,186,740 1,301,303 3,840,548 673,213 1,062,590 1,363,634 494,722 19,202,577 1,307,070 43,933,520 4,872,423 557,258 8,477,487 2,330,799 7,518,730 18,049,067 1,012,110 902,570 994,146 1,030,759 2,562,797 9,228,864 2,746,394 536,478 471,232 5,502,154 8,456,709 1,660,604 7,281,585 127,343 359,859,585 4,633,637 1,935,367 2,040,661 2,456,960 71,913,955 3,872,531 5,247,884 758,812 1,614,280 7,126,205, p,245,069 107,710 944,262 1,099,519 6,907,651 4,021,177 3,798,545 1,825,049 3,926,969 6,715,874 1,229,348 8,161,825 6,247,927 21,403,343 8,827,178 1,574,017 5,318,482 970,512 1,369,974 1,540,233 846,662 21,521,747 1,436,626 56,874,939 5,800,373 702,400 11,420,116 2,750,669 7,481,088 12,915,466 846,191 1,060,982 1,531,979 1,056,023 2,885,789 11,132,948 3,083,286 641,496 447, U 4 5,996,625 9,186,951 1,675,790 7,562,355 168,564 F i s c a l Year 1980 450,570,696 5,369,632 2,241,811 3,125,199 3,011,225 86,225,657 5,339,853 6,439,958 1,010,638 2,649,798 9,718,379 4,200,802 142,929 1,363,254 1,157,440 10,421,174 4,790,754 4,766,353 3,146,930 1,859,720 7,921,577 1,548,557 9,954,829 9,304,957 26,361,677 10,971,672 1,740,215 6,507,782 1,048,481 1,621,589 2,114,023 1,063,560 25,737,702 1,809,313 60,434,113 7,320,370 786,740 15,545,871 3,784,170 10,120,679 25,297,902 921,897 1,272,756 1,788,790 981,963 4,507,265 14,089,890 4,155,481 714,976 444,953 6,194,471 10,868,421 1,932,622 11,531,674 185,252 TABLE 6. Administrative Expenditures for the Child Support Enforcement Program ( b y State, F Y 1 9 8 1 ) State Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California C o l o r ado Connecticut Delaware Dist. o f C o l . Florid a Georgi a Guam Hauali Idaho I1 l i n o i s Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine n a r y 1and Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota M i ssissippi M i ssouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New' H a m p s h i r e New J e r s e y New H e x i c o New York North C a r o l i n a North Dakota Ohio . Okl ahoma Oregon Pennsylvania P u e r t o Rico Rhode I s l a n d South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texa? Utah Vermont Virginia V i r g i n I sl a n d s Uashington West V i r g i n i a d l sconsin M yomi ng Natlonuide T o t a l s Total APDC Non-AFDC TABLE 7 . Child Support Enforcement Caseload (by State. by FY 1981) State .......... Alabama .................... Alaska ..................... Arizona .................... Arkansas ................... California ................. Colorado ................... Connecticut ................ Delaware ................... District of Columbia ....... Florida .................... Georgia .................... Guam ....................... Hawaii ..................... Idaho ...................... Illinois ................... Indiana .................... Iowa ....................... Kansas ..................... Kentucky ................... Louisiana .................. m i n e ...................... Maryland ................... Massachusetts .............. Michigan ................... Minnesota .................. M i ~ ~ i ~ s i ................ ppi Missouri ................... Montana .................... Nebraska ................... Nevada ..................... New Rampshire .............. New Jersey ................. New Mexico ................. New York ................... North Carolina ............. North Dakota ............... Ohio ....................... Oklahoma ................... Oregon ..................... Pennsylvania ............... Puerto Bico ................ Rhode Island ............... South Carolina ............. South Dakota ............... Nationwide totals .................. ...................... ....................... .................... ............. ................... ................. .............. .................. .................... Tennessee Texas Utah Venont Virgin Islands Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Total (Average) AFDC (Average) Non-AFDC (Average) TABLE 8 . Number of Support Obligations Established. Parents Located. and Paternities Established (By State. F Y 1981) Number of Support Obligations Established State Nationwide totals . Number of Parents Located Number of Paternities Established .......... .................... ................... ................. ................... ................ ................... ....... .................... ....................... ..................... ...................... ................... .................... ....................... ..................... ................... .................. ...................... ................... .............. ................... .................. ................ ................... .................... ................... ..................... .............. ................. ................. ................... ............. ............... kizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia.................... Guam Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa KBnsas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Bampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico m o d e Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virgin Islands Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming ....................... ................... ..................... ............... ................ ............... ............. ............... .................. ...................... ....................... .................... ............. ................... ................. .............. .................. .................... a/ Connecticut's figures represent only those support obligations e s t a b h h e d for AFDC cases . . b/ Massachusettr'e number of parents located includes AFDC data only; n o n - E D C data were not reported . cf Nebraska's figures include only those non-APDC parents located as AFDC ;ate is not yet available from the counties