November 2022 CSQ

ChildSupportCommuniQue

Internal use
Table of Contents
October 2022
President’s Message…………………………………………………..… 3
Community Corner: Bounce Back From Burnout………………..…….7
Five Components of Customer Service……………………………….11
Child Support Across Countries………………………………………..16
NCSEA International Roundtable………………………………………22
National Child Support Market Research Survey Launched ………..26
Creating Safe Access to Child Support…...........................................31
Introducing NCSEA U @ Policy Forum………………………………...35
NCSEA U Alumni Spotlight………………………………………………37
Leadership Symposium Wrap Up……………………………………….39

Internal use
Jim Fleming
NCSEA President
Hello, NCSEA! I am very excited to serve as NCSEA’s president this year,
but I admit feeling challenged to match the success of our organization in
the last year under Lori Bengston’s leadership. I have served with Lori on
various NCSEA committees for the last ten years, and she has a rare talent
for drawing out the best in the work of others toward a common goal.
Thankfully, she will continue serving NCSEA as our Immediate Past
President. As I begin my term, I would also like to acknowledge the
examples set by the four NCSEA presidents with whom I served on the
NCSEA Executive Committee as Treasurer: Lisa Skenandore, Tanguler
Gray, Craig Burshem, and Diane Potts.
NCSEA already has an exciting agenda for the next year. At its August
2022 meeting, the NCSEA Board of Directors endorsed continued
development of a set of legislative proposals to Congress. In early 2022, a
member of NCSEA’s Policy and Government Relations (PGR) Committee
suggested that NCSEA go beyond adopting resolutions or responding to
legislative proposals and put together its own legislative proposals for
modernizing child support. PGR members strongly supported that
suggestion and broke into small groups to develop these proposals for
presentation to the Board in August.
Although the legislative proposals are still being refined and will need final
approval by the NCSEA Board, it appears likely that NCSEA will propose
revisions to the federal performance measures, creation of new or
improved collection tools, financial incentives for states to forward
collections to families instead of retaining those collections, and expansion
of program activities eligible for federal financial participation. If you want to

Internal use
know more about these proposals, visit www.ncsea.org, open the link to
Advocacy & Public Policy, and review NCSEA’s resolutions and policy
statements.
NCSEA’s legislative proposals will increase awareness of the many ways
the child support program has matured over the last several decades.
Hopefully, we will be able to maintain Congress’ historic bi-partisan support
of child support as a vital program for serving America’s families and
promoting parental responsibility.
The evolving services offered by the child support program have also
motivated a second NCSEA initiative. In August, the NCSEA Board of
Directors committed to moving forward with a plan to change the name of
our organization to the National Child Support Engagement Association.
Enforcement, along with establishment of paternity and child support
obligations, will always be at the core of the child support program. But
singling out enforcement in our corporate title detracts from the multitude of
other services offered by today’s child support programs. I congratulate
WICSEC for recently updating its corporate name and look forward to
NCSEA doing the same.
In addition to the legislative package and name change, we can also look
forward to a new offering in conjunction with the 2023 Policy Forum.
NCSEAU @ Policy Forum is a new educational opportunity for child
support professionals to hone their skills in advocating for the program. The
NCSEAU @ Policy Forum professors need no introduction to most: Margot
Bean and Lisa Skenandore! For more details, I encourage you to read the
article in this issue of CSQ from our instructors.
One reason I support using the word “engagement” in our new corporate
name is that it fits how NCSEA tries to meet the professional development
and education needs of its members. I strongly dislike social media, so you
won’t see this dinosaur on Facebook, Instagram, or Twitter. When
PodMaster Tim Lightner first asked me to join him for an NCSEA On
Location podcast episode, I was tempted to schedule a root canal instead.
But I am now a convert and look forward to these engaging conversations
on trending child support topics. I encourage all of you to do what I do:
save the weekly Rapid Read as a reminder to listen to the week’s new
podcast while you enjoy that first cup of coffee and clear up the morning e-
mail. And while you’re reading the Rapid Read, make sure to note

Internal use
NCSEA’s Corporate Partners, whose innovation and expertise are
instrumental to NCSEA’s success.
I encourage you to engage with other NCSEA members through the many
NCSEA educational opportunities. In addition to our podcasts, our Web-
Talks and the Child Support CommuniQue are free with membership.
NCSEA Connects offers several chances to engage with NCSEA members
who share similar interests. And at the end of the NCSEA membership
year, we look forward to engaging at the Leadership Symposium in
Anaheim, California.
A consistent theme for new NCSEA presidents is the responsibility of
selecting committee chairs and appointing members of the many NCSEA
committees. I am so grateful to the NCSEA Board members and other
leaders who have agreed to serve as committee and subcommittee chairs.
Once again this year, NCSEA is blessed with a strong spirit of
volunteerism, and every committee had more volunteers than we could
accommodate.
In addition to our many volunteers, I would like to express my sincere
thanks to NCSEA’s outstanding team of Ann Marie Ruskin and Katie
Kenney and extend a welcome to our new team member Amalia Paul.
Thank you for making child support your calling.
I’m not a big one for quotes, but there is one that has stuck with me since I
was a kid visiting the site of Teddy Roosevelt’s cattle ranch in Medora,
North Dakota: “Far and away the best prize that life has to offer is the
chance to work hard at work worth doing.” Whether you work in the public
or private sector, this quote describes so well the satisfaction we all can
draw from working in the child support program and taking advantage of
NCSEA’s professional development opportunities.
My theme for the next year has two parts that can be found in the quote.
Work hard: let’s all continue to develop and improve our skills, both in
terms of innovations in delivery of family-friendly services and in our more
traditional enforcement and establishment work. Work worth doing: let’s not
lose sight that we provide our services to improve the quality of life for
America’s children and we should continually monitor the impact of our
services on those families.

Internal use
I look forward to the year ahead as we engage with NCSEA members and
other partners to shape the future of child support. With your participation, I
know it will be a great year.
Jim
_________________________________________
James C. Fleming is the director of the Child Support Section of the North Dakota
Department of Health and Human Services, President of the National Child Support
Enforcement Association (NCSEA), member of the Board of Directors for the Western
Intergovernmental Child Support Engagement Council (WICSEC), and former President
of the National Council of Child Support Directors (NCCSD). Jim is a member and
former co-chair of NCSEA’s Policy and Government Relations Committee and
NCCSD’s Policy and Practice Committee, and a member of the editorial committee for
the NCSEA Child Support CommuniQue. Jim also co-chairs NCCSD’s Employer
Collaboration Committee. Jim was named the 2022 recipient of the American Payroll
Association’s Government Partner Award. He has also received the 2009 Family
Support Council Program Awareness Award and the 2004 Freedom Award from the
North Dakota Newspaper Association.
A second-generation attorney, Jim earned his Bachelor of Arts degree from the
University of North Dakota and his Juris Doctorate from Notre Dame Law School. He
has been an assistant attorney general for North Dakota for 28 years, following a
clerkship with the North Dakota Supreme Court. Jim and his wife Terri are the proud
parents of four daughters and were recently blessed with a perfect granddaughter.

Internal use
Bounce Back from Burnout
by Mary Johnson, YoungWilliams
In 2021, I was asked to participate on a panel to remind managers to take care
of themselves. Since then, I have presented to groups of managers, entire
government departments, and for attorneys as part of continuing legal education
programs. I am not a burnout expert, but I believe it’s a problem and needs to be
addressed. In fact, I’m sure some of you have read articles about the Great
Resignation and more recently, quiet quitting. Burnout factors into both.
WHAT IS BURNOUT?
In 2019, the World Health Organization classified burnout as an occupational
phenomenon in the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). Burnout is
a syndrome caused by chronic workplace stress that has not been successfully
managed. It is characterized by:
• “[F]eelings of energy depletion or exhaustion;
• increased mental distance from one’s job, or feelings of negativism or
cynicism related to one's job; and
• a sense of ineffectiveness and lack of accomplishment.” 1
WHY SHOULD WE CARE?
As employers, we should care a lot. Burnout costs billions in healthcare 2 and
leads to disengaged employees and turnover 3 . As humans, we should care
because our people are hurting–their health, well-being, finances, and family
relationships.
Gallup devotes an entire section of its website to burnout 4 , which I would
strongly encourage you to review, including Gallup's Perspectives on Employee
Burnout: Causes and Cures (2020) report, which I highly recommend. Gallup
does a great job of breaking topics into easily digestible chunks of information.
For instance, 76% of employees experience burnout at work at least sometimes.
Remember, burnout is more than “I’m stressed out about this project.” It’s about
being totally exhausted, having negative feelings about your work, or feeling a
lack of fulfillment/accomplishment.

Internal use
SO, WHAT DO WE DO?
The following are five tips to avoid (or bounce back from) burnout 5 :
1. Tell yourself the truth.
Self-awareness is KEY. The better you know yourself, the better you’ll be able to
identify your workplace stress triggers. It’ll take time and work on your part. The
following are some suggested exercises with linked resources to get you started.
These are by no means all-inclusive, and if you have other suggestions, please
share.
• Create a personal mission
statement.
How To Write A Personal Mission
Statement (With Examples)
• Think about a motto or mantra you
say or check out these articles.
Famous Mottos: 10 ways short life
quotes can help you succeed or 32
Career Mantras That Will Inspire You
at Any State of Your Career
• Take a free personality type
assessment.
16 Personalities
• Identify your strengths.
Gallup - CliftonStrengths
• Determine how you communicate.
Which of These 4 Communication
https://olgaphoenix.com/self-care-wheel/
Styles Are You?
• Understand what you value and make decisions based on your values.
My Self Values Exercise or How To Discover Your Personal Core Values
(And Why You Must!)
• Use the Self-Care Wheel to identify different areas of your life. Choose a
couple of options on the list and try them.

Internal use
2. Be Assertive.
It is important to set boundaries and the Assertive Bill of Rights can help you get
started. Choose one or two actions from the Bill to try out. Personally, saying
“no” without feeling guilty was hard at first but VERY freeing.
3. Figure out what makes you happy.
Think about your favorite moments at work. For me, it’s all about relationships,
helping people, and connecting with colleagues. This can be as easy as thinking
about my favorite football team (the Wyoming Cowboys), one of my favorite
series (Star Wars . . . not Star Trek), and my absolute love for Michael Scott.
4. Identify energy vampires.
Energy vampires are everywhere. These vampires don’t take responsibility, are
involved in office drama, diminish your problems and play up their own, criticize,
and often try to intimidate. When dealing with an energy vampire, set
boundaries, adjust your expectations (lower them), don’t overreact, say no,
delegate, avoid contact, or postpone a meeting until you have the energy or plan
on how to respond.

Internal use
5. Participate in the world at large.
There is so much out there. I’d suggest these: (1) find your work-life balance; (2)
try something new; and (3) be spontaneous. As a planner, this last one is hard
for me, but over the years, my husband has pushed me into spontaneity. I’ve
enjoyed more than 50% of those times.
If you want any specific resources for attorneys or have a burning desire to see
how burnout affects our ethical obligations, let me know. If you have any
questions or other ideas, please contact me. I’d love to chat!
_________________________________________
As Vice President of Special Projects for YoungWilliams, Mary Johnson supports or directly
manages proposal writing, company branding, professional development for managers and
attorneys, training development, social media, and YoungWilliams’ internal and external
portal. Mary has been a part of the child support program since 1995 when she started as a
staff attorney in a local office. Her passion for making a difference and desire to help others
learn and grow determines where she spends her time. Besides volunteering within the child
support program, she volunteers closer to home for organizations such as Equal Justice
Wyoming, the University of Wyoming Alumni Association, the Wyoming Bar – Diversity, Equity
& Inclusion Section, and more.
Both her undergraduate and law degrees are from the University of Wyoming.
1
https://icd.who.int/browse11/l-m/en#/http://id.who.int/icd/entity/129180281
2
https://hbr.org/2017/04/employee-burnout-is-a-problem-with-the-company-not-the-person
3
https://www.forbes.com/sites/karlynborysenko/2019/05/29/burnout-is-now-an-officially-diagnosable-conditionheres-what-you-need-to-know-about-it/?sh=50ebb6632b99
4
https://www.gallup.com/topic/burnout.aspx
5
In collaboration with Jonell Sullivan, Child Support Operations Administrator (AZ), and Karen Winkler, Director
of Bucks County Domestic Relations (PA) – they are the BEST.

Internal use
The Five Components of Customer
Service: A Journey in Washington
by Mary Cooper, Washington DCS
The Washington State Division of Child Support (DCS) embraces the value
of providing great customer service. One of our most recent developments
has been what we call the Five Components of Customer Service. This
article describes how we developed these components and how we’re
deploying the concepts to staff.
Our Customer Service History
Before we get to the five components, it’s helpful to look back at some of
the steps in Washington DCS’ customer service evolution. An early step
was to survey customers and consider their feedback. DCS also formed an
employee workgroup called the Customer First Workgroup. This workgroup
assessed our current state of customer service, identified areas of growth,
and researched available customer service training. Former DCS Director
Wally McClure then visited each field office with his Customer Service
Road Show. His message? Providing excellent customer service is more
than collecting child support; it benefits the agency and the families we
serve. From that groundwork, current DCS Director Sharon Redmond
offered a new customer service promise: “We provide respect and
resources to every person every day.”
While those were positive steps, agency leadership recognized some
inconsistencies between customer service expectations and statewide
procedures. Sometimes these inconsistencies hurt our ability to meet
customers’ needs. Other times, inconsistencies hurt our staff’s ability to
understand their expectations. It was clear that we needed to specifically
define what good customer service looked like. The end goal was to
provide better service while also increasing our collections.
Our Journey – Developing the Five Components of Customer Service
In early 2018, we formed the Commitment to Service Workgroup to support
two DCS strategic plan goals:
(1) Deliver services adapted to individual customer needs and
circumstances; and
(2) Continually improve DCS operations and performance.

Internal use
To be inclusive, the project team invited staff from across the state to
participate. Program managers identified employees who would serve as
change agents for their individual offices. Because the group’s work would
likely lead to more culture shift for the organization, project leads
incorporated change management from the beginning.
During an in-person kick-off meeting, the group talked about the current
state and the future of customer service. Each member of the group
completed pre-work that included describing what customer service looked,
felt, and sounded like. Then the team participated in a card-sorting activity
to identify the top Five Components of Excellent Customer Service:
• Accessibility
• Good communication
• Honesty and integrity
• Owning the customer service experience
• Respect
Identifying these components was a milestone,
but the team recognized that staff across the
organization might still have different ideas of
what respect or accessibility look like. The group
divided into subgroups to develop detailed definitions of each component.
Members of the project team initially used a Lean tool called the “Voice of
the Customer” to gather input from employees. This encouraged agencywide
participation in the process and generated buy-in from staff.
Workgroup representatives attempted to engage every employee in their
office by forming focus groups and attending team meetings where they
asked the following questions:
• If you could change one thing about the component, what would it
be?
• What is unclear about this component?
• How can we measure the positive impact of the component?
• What is the most important component?
• What questions do you have for the project team?
The feedback from those meetings played a big part in developing detailed
definitions for each component. Those definitions described the behavior of
the component as it might appear to both internal and external customers.
For instance, the definition of good communication is “the ability to

Internal use
communicate effectively to others while using active listening skills,
showing empathy, and giving your undivided attention to ensure that the
person you are speaking with feels important and comfortable.”
The Commitment to Service Workgroup brought these Five Components of
Excellent Customer Service before the statewide leadership team for
approval in January 2019. The leadership team approved implementation
of the Five Components of Customer Service in June 2019.
Our Journey – Deploying the Five Components of Customer Service
The project team used the ADKAR (awareness, desire, knowledge, ability,
and reinforcement) model of change management to guide them in
incorporating the five components into DCS’ values and culture. Using a
coordinated, cascading communication plan over the next several months,
the workgroup started with agency leaders, then managers across the
state, followed by front-line supervisors across the state. Supervisor
support was instrumental to successful implementation. At this point, we
paused and gave supervisors an opportunity to ask questions before rolling
out the five components to front-line staff. Supervisors expressed that they
felt they did not yet have enough information to discuss the five
components with their staff. It was clear that we needed more support to
prepare for the change.
Additional communication came from
some key players. First, DCS Director
Sharon Redmond sent a message to
staff in which she stated, “When we
focus on customer service we can
positively impact more families and
children because our customers have
access to all the services we offer….
Let’s build on our strengths and the work of the dedicated staff of the
Commitment to Service Workgroup to create better relationships, improve
our performance, and help more families and children.”
For the next five weeks, each member of the Executive Leadership Team
wrote an article that focused on one component to create a more concrete
sense of what customer service meant as defined by the workgroup and
supported by agency leadership. We then found ourselves in March 2020.
With attention focused toward responding to the pandemic, we hit pause on
our rollout plan.

Internal use
Our Journey – Post-Pandemic Re-deployment of the Five
Components of Customer Service
We came back to the plan in October 2020 when the project team and
sponsors revisited implementation of the Five Components of Excellent
Customer Service. Because we had lost momentum, we decided to
backtrack and once again have agency leadership affirm the five
components and express how they intersect with providing excellent
customer service. We adjusted the communication plan to accommodate
our new situation, a common occurrence during the implementation of the
project.
The first communication came from then Chief of Field Operations Andrew
Chin, who produced a video for staff reintroducing the Commitment to
Service Workgroup and the five components. As Andrew remarked during
the video, the pandemic made the five components “increasingly relevant in
society.” He encouraged staff to identify one tangible thing they could do to
improve their customer service, emphasizing that “You’re important. Your
actions matter. How you show up every day matters.”
After this video, Sharon addressed supervisors statewide. She reiterated
the value the agency places on providing excellent customer service.
Integrating the five components would make the concept of customer
service more tangible. We provided a one-page summary for supervisors to
use as talking points with their teams as they resumed discussions.
The next phase was to host workshops for every management team in the
state. These workshops helped the office management teams develop
culture change plans specifically for their staff. They also created an action
plan for implementing the Five Components of Excellent Customer service
in their offices.
We equipped supervisors to support the five components by identifying
current behaviors and beliefs that they wanted to keep as well as behaviors
and beliefs they wanted to stop. To take the discussion one step further,
supervisors identified behaviors and beliefs they wanted to create in place
of the items they would like to stop. They then discussed ways to recognize
staff that would reinforce and support these behaviors. These workshops
resulted in concrete plans with specific action items local management

Internal use
teams could use to help encourage staff’s understanding of, and reliance
on, the five components when providing internal and external customer
service.
Conclusion and Next Steps
The process of integrating the Five Components of Excellent Customer
Service is still evolving. Our leaders continue to
stress the importance of providing excellent
customer service and point to the five
components as concrete ways staff can do so.
We have added the five components to the
agency’s strategic planning documents. The
next steps will be to create an accountability
mechanism by adding expectations for staff in the annual performance
evaluation process.
The Commitment to Service Workgroup first convened almost five years
ago. Developing and implementing the Five Components of Excellent
Customer Service has required a lot of flexibility. Of course some situations
were beyond the workgroup’s control. But the workgroup also listened to
managers and supervisors who would play a key role in the success of the
initiative and adapted the plans to include their feedback.
Collection of child support is the primary focus of child support agencies.
However, this approach often doesn’t account for paying parents’ capacity
to comply. Like many other child support agencies across the country, DCS
is expanding the ways in which we fulfill our mission of providing excellent
child support services to include considering the situation and needs of the
whole family. A key factor of this holistic approach is providing excellent
customer service that educates both parties about resources and options.
Washington DCS’ Commitment to Service Workgroup provided a concerted
effort to change our culture. Developing and defining the Five Components
of Excellent Customer Service not only educated staff about the importance
of providing excellent customer service, it also showed them how to do it,
and then recognized their efforts and accomplishments.
Mary Cooper is a Child Support Program Manager for the Washington State Division of
Child Support. She began her child support career in 1992 for the State of Montana
before joining Washington in 1994. In addition to countless other responsibilities and
projects over her career, Mary served as a co-lead for the Commitment to Service
Workgroup. She holds a Bachelor’s Degree in Business from the University of Great
Falls and a Master’s Degree in Theology from Whitworth University. She lives in
Spokane, Washington, with her husband of 38 years. She has two adult children and
one spoiled cat.

Internal use
Child Support Policy Around the World:
Similar Problems, Different Approaches
by Mia Hakovirta, Department of Social Research, University of
Turku, Finland; Laura Cuesta, Rutgers, The State University of
New Jersey; Mari Haapanen, Department of Social Research,
University of Turku; Daniel R. Meyer, University of Wisconsin–
Madison.
Globally, single mothers are among the most likely to live in poverty, even
in wealthy countries. Not only is the proportion of single-mother-headed
households increasing in many countries, but single mothers often face a
triple bind of inadequate household resources, limited job opportunities,
and social policies offering limited support (Nieuwenhuis & Maldonado,
2018).
Child support programs have multiple
purposes, including alleviating financial
precarity for single parents. Child support,
in its most general sense, is an effort to
fairly distribute the financial demands of
childrearing. While all high-income
countries have child support policies, their
systems vary.
Below, we compare child support policies across several high-income
countries. Our sample includes mostly European countries but also
Australia, Canada, Chile, New Zealand, the United States, and Uruguay. In
nations where child support policy varies by jurisdiction, such as Canada,
Spain, and the United States, a unit within each country was selected (i.e.,
Ontario, Catalonia, and Wisconsin, respectively). Because most singleparent
households are headed by women, our focus is primarily on singlemother
families and the nonresident fathers of their children.
Of the countries examined in our article (see Hakovirta, et al., 2022), three
types of institutional systems are primarily involved in determining child
support orders: court-based; agency-based; and hybrid models, in which a
combination of courts and agencies determine child support obligations.

Internal use
Courts are primarily responsible for determining obligations in Austria,
Belgium, Canada (Ontario), Chile, Estonia, France, Germany, Spain
(Catalonia), and Uruguay. Governmental agencies are primarily
responsible in Australia, Denmark, Norway, New Zealand, and the UK.
Both courts and agencies are involved in Finland, Iceland, Netherlands,
Sweden, and the United States (Wisconsin).
Court and agency-led systems have different affordances and constraints.
Due to judicial discretion, court arrangements sometimes consider
individual factors in a deliberative process. This can lead to similar cases
being treated differently, however, and some view courts as more
adversarial than cooperative. In contrast, agencies often apply formulaic
determinations. This may increase the efficiency of processing cases, but
deviations based on important individual family circumstances may be less
likely. In some countries, parents can also develop their own agreements,
often in cooperation with an agency or other institutional support. Parents
determining their own child support arrangements can result in more
realistic orders and, as such, may be more likely to be paid.
Agencies can also be used to collect and distribute support, monitor
payments, or institute enforcement actions if payments do not occur. Courtbased
systems, however, do not generally collect or distribute support.
Parents tend to make their own arrangements for cash transfers, and
responsibility for alerting the court in cases of nonpayment falls to the
custodial parent.
Child Support Obligations
While no universal methods exist for calculating child support, and
determinations range from full discretion to formulaic, there are four general
factors used to determine support: resources of the noncustodial parent
and/or custodial parent; children’s needs and age; considerations for other
children of the parent(s); and the distribution of time a child spends with
each parent (Skinner, et al., 2007). An extant model in many countries is to
try to match the contributions each parent would have made had they lived
together in a household (see Cancian & Meyer, 2018). In most countries
the resources of both parents are counted. In others, only the non-custodial
parent’s income is explicitly considered; these include Iceland,
Netherlands, the UK, New Zealand, and Canada as well as a minority of
U.S. American states (including Wisconsin in some cases).

Child support in US$ppp/month
Internal use
We used a vignette method to gather data on the amount expected in child
support. Country-level experts were identified and offered hypothetical
family scenarios to evaluate. Given each vignette, these experts reported
on what typical child support orders might be, given existing policies. See
Hakovirta and Haapanen (2020) for further details on this method. Figure 1
shows the order amounts determined by country informants given two
hypothetical median-income family vignettes each, across 13 countries.
1200
1100
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Separated parents with one child
Separated parents with two children
FIGURE 1: Amount of child support due in median-income families,
2017.
In the one-child scenario, order amounts differ dramatically despite
noncustodial parents being expected to pay child support in all countries.
Child support orders tend to be lowest in Sweden, Denmark, and France
while Estonia, the USA, and Spain have the highest expected order
amounts for both one-child and two-children scenarios. In Sweden, Iceland,
Belgium, and Estonia, order amounts per child for two-child families are
about twice that of one-child family scenarios; in other countries orders
consider economies of scale.
Shared physical custody (the proportions of time spent with each parent)
strongly influences order determinations, yet can create challenges for
policy implementation (Claessens & Mortelmans, 2018). Among the 13
countries examined here, shared custody is often met with reduced child
support order amounts. In vignettes from Estonia and Iceland, however, no
reduction was made in the case of shared custody and in Denmark,

Internal use
France, Sweden, and the UK, no support was required in the two-child
shared-custody arrangements (Hakovirta, et al., 2021).
Contingent challenges also arise when parents re-partner and start other
families. If all children are to be treated equally, multi-child parents
navigating multi-partner relationships (current or former) offer challenges
for courts or agencies to determine orders that are affordable, operationally
feasible, and do not disadvantage older children (Claessens & Mortelmans,
2018; Meyer, et al., 2011).
Other challenges include noncustodial parents with low income, particularly
if the custodial parent also has low-income. Alternate formulas for lowincome
cases, which may include allowing noncustodial parents to maintain
a higher level of net income for their own living expenses before child
support is assessed, are among the possible approaches for such cases
(Hodges & Vogel, 2020).
Child Support Payments and Noncompliance
Noncompliance with the ordered amount is an issue across countries. For a
fuller accounting of whether child support is received, and its level, see
Harkovirta, et al. (2022). When parents do not pay the amount ordered, in
many countries the amount of child support can be withheld from
paychecks, credit bureau referrals can occur, and passports or drivers’
licenses can be suspended. Although there is similarity across countries in
the possible types of actions taken, very little research has considered how
often this actually occurs in different countries.
An alternative approach when nonpayment occurs in some countries is a
minimum public guarantee of support. In this type of program, the
government will pay up to the guaranteed amount if the noncustodial parent
does not. This gives custodial parents more certainty in their monthly
budget. Programs of guaranteed child support, when they exist, vary
widely. For example, individual circumstances are accounted for in
Norway’s guarantee, and include the custodial parent’s income, number
and age of children, and whether the eligible parent is otherwise partnered.
Other countries follow a more standard schedule. Figure 2 compares
typical orders for a median-income, one-child couple to the amount of the
guarantee; in most countries, the public guarantee is less than the amount
ordered for these couples. In Spain and Estonia, for example, the public

Amount in US$ppp/month
Internal use
guarantee is less than half the amount due from the other parent. In
Norway, Finland, and France, the public guarantee is about 50% to 70% of
the order for a typical couple. In Denmark, Iceland, and Belgium,
guaranteed child support is about the same as the order for a typical couple
(over 85%). In Sweden, the public guarantee is actually higher than a
typical order.
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Child support
Guaranteed child support
Figure 2: Child support due for one child for a median-income family
compared to the amount of public guaranteed child support, 2017.
What can countries with no guaranteed child support (like the United
States) learn from these examples? Two central lessons are the
importance of clear goals and the benefits of broad support programs. A
goal of increasing economic security could be met by a program that
guaranteed all or part of the amount ordered. However, if the goal is also to
decrease poverty, then the program may need to not just guarantee the
amount of the order, but “top up” the order to a minimum level. This would
provide support to children even if the order is low because the
noncustodial parent has low income.
Most countries provide some guaranteed child support for families who are
not low income, which can simplify program administration and allow the
program to function as poverty prevention, rather than only poverty
alleviation. Focusing too much on income-testing often results in less
generous support, which also limits the potential for anti-poverty
effectiveness (Aerts, et al. 2022). Child support amounts guaranteed by
other wealthy countries (outside of the UK, USA, Australia, and New
Zealand) typically range from about $100 to $200 per month. The U.S.

Internal use
National Academies (2019) has proposed a guarantee at this level as an
important component of a package of reforms designed to cut the child
poverty rate in half (Cancian and Meyer, 2018).
REFERENCES
Aerts, E., Marx, I. & Parolin, Z. 2022. Income Support Policies for Single Parents in Europe and
the U.S.: What works best? The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social
Science. Special volume on Single-Parent Families and Public Policy, (forthcoming November
2022).
Cancian, M. & Meyer, D. R. 2018. Reforming policy for single-parent families to reduce child
poverty. The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences, 4(2): 91-112.
Claessens. E. & Mortelmans, D. 2018. Challenges for child support schemes: Accounting for
shared care and complex families. Journal of European Social Policy, 28(3): 211-223.
Hakovirta, M, Cuesta, L., Haapanen, M. & Meyer, D. 2022. Child Support Policy Across High-
Income Countries: Similar Problems, Different Approaches. The ANNALS of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science. Special volume on Single-Parent Families and Public
Policy, (forthcoming November 2022).
Hakovirta M. & Haapanen M. (2020, Feb 25). Vignette data in a comparative child maintenance
study. Turku: University of Turku. Invest Working Paper 2.
https://www.utupub.fi/handle/10024/148975
Hakovirta, M., Meyer, D. R., Skinner, C. 2021. Child support in shared care cases: Do child
support policies in 13 countries reflect family policy models? Social Policy and Society,
1-30. DOI: 10.1017/S14747464210003000.
Hodges, L. & Vogel, L. K. 2020. Too much, too little, or just right? Recent changes to state child
support guidelines for low-income noncustodial parents. Journal of Policy Practice and
Research, 2(3): 146-177.
Meyer, D. R., Skinner, C., & Davidson, J. 2011. Complex families and equality in child support
obligations: A comparative policy analysis. Children and Youth Services Review, 33:
1804-1812.
Nieuwenhuis, R. & Maldonado, L. 2018. The Triple Bind of Single-Parent Families: Resources,
Employment, and Policies to Improve Well-Being. Bristol: Policy Press.
Skinner, C. B., Bradshaw, J, & Davidson, J. 2007. Child Support Policy: An International
Perspective. Leeds: Corporate Document Services.
U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. A Roadmap to
Reducing Child Poverty. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Mia Hakovirta is a senior research fellow at the Invest Flagship, Department of Social
Research, University of Turku, Finland.
Laura Cuesta is an assistant professor of social work at Rutgers, The State University
of New Jersey.
Mari Haapanen is a doctoral student at Invest doctoral program, Department of Social
Research, University of Turku.
Daniel R. Meyer is a professor emeritus of social work at the University of Wisconsin–
Madison.

Internal use
NCSEA International Roundtable 2022
by Chris Beresford, Former Director of Maintenance
Enforcement for the Province of British Columbia,
Canada
In years past, NCSEA has supported international roundtables at both its
annual Leadership Symposium and Policy Forum conferences. The 2018
and 2019 roundtable meetings were hosted in Washington, D.C., at the
Swiss and German embassies, respectively, with the strongest turnout of
international participants ever. In 2021, the meeting was conducted in a
virtual format with great success, following a pause in 2020 because of the
COVID-19 pandemic. Well over 100 participants joined the meeting,
conducted in three-hour segments over several days. The stage was set for
a return in 2022.
For five days, representatives from 24 countries and the European Union
met virtually in March 2022. The number of participants, and the breadth of
participating countries, reflect the importance of this annual event.
The focus of the international roundtable has been country updates, at both
the in-person and virtual meetings. This year the updates were bookended
by two plenary sessions, starting with an update on the implementation of
the 2007 Convention (on the International Recovery of Child Support and
Other Forms of Family Maintenance). i The presenters also gave a prelude
to the upcoming Special Commission, hosted by the Permanent Bureau,
which is the Secretariat of the Hague Conference. Following presentations
from Mary Helen Carlson, Tracy Morrow, Vernon Drew, and Jean-Marc
Pellet, the 2022 Roundtable saw and heard 25 state, country, and regional
updates.
The country updates were delivered over the course of four three-hour
sessions. From Australia through Uruguay, the impacts of COVID-19 and
the challenges of managing international cases were highlighted. Many
countries are now operating under the 2007 Hague Convention, and
related implementation issues were discussed. From the United States,
presentations from California, Colorado, Michigan, Texas, and Washington

Internal use
State familiarized the participants with service delivery structures, as well
as the challenges and successes that have been experienced over the past
year. Summary notes and
various presentations were
circulated to the participants
following the sessions. The
breadth and depth of the
presentations cannot be
So, what are the benefits to participants
who attend the NCSEA International
Roundtable? There are at least three.
adequately summarized in this article, and it is strongly recommended that
the circulated summary be obtained by those who have not yet had the
benefit of reviewing it.
The final plenary session was one of the most thought-provoking. Kay
Cook is a professor at Swinburne University of Technology in Australia.
Kay is well known in the international community. Kay’s research has
culminated in her book The Failure of Child Support. Well supported by a
variety of sources from around the world, the research sets out the
shortcomings of current processes from establishing support obligations
through the collection and disbursement of support. The picture that results
is not what we collectively want it to be, and challenges many of the
approaches that we have taken over the past 30 years. This should be
essential reading to all those responsible for making policy and procedures
to serve child support customers. Kay’s book is commercially available
through several sources.
In addition to the informative presentations, a fifth day was set aside for
bilateral meetings between countries. These meetings were a hallmark of
the in-person meetings in Washington D.C., and it is a great credit to the
organizers that they were both included and expanded at the virtual
meetings in 2021 and this year. Discussions ranged from policy to
individual case examples, often resulting in better understanding and the
removal of service impediments.
So, what are the benefits to participants who attend the NCSEA
International Roundtable? There are at least three.
First, participants obtain a picture of how services are delivered around the
world. This helps at the case management level, as we have a better
understanding of how programs operate and what various countries can
and cannot do with respect to the establishment, variation, or modification

Internal use
of support amounts and the enforcement components. International cases
can be amongst the most challenging for our case workers, not least
because access to both parents is not possible due to geography,
jurisdiction, and, in some cases, language. Having the opportunity to hear
from our colleagues around the world, or to meet directly through bilateral
meetings, breaks down barriers and provides important contact resources
for us all.
This knowledge also helps us as we develop our services. While it is not
always the case that what works in one country will
work in another, the detailed presentations and
discussions help us understand the challenges and
the remedies that have been put in place to
address those challenges. Although we have great
variation in our legal structures and social supports,
the dynamics of assisting parents as they go
through separation and divorce have more in
common than not. In short, we can and do learn
from each other for the betterment of our programs.
Beyond the benefits at the case level and the
program level, the NCSEA International Roundtable provides the
opportunity to expand our research into what works and what doesn’t work.
We all strive for research-based or data-driven solutions. Research on
international cases can help us manage some of the more difficult cases
efficiently and effectively. At the 2013 Heidelberg Conference, research on
payment rates clearly showed that cases fell into two categories–they were
either fully paid or never paid. This was apparent from the graph showing
relatively few cases in the partially paid category. We now have access to
more data from around the world and that means greater opportunities to
conduct research.
The number of participants at both the 2021 and 2022 International
Roundtable and the quality of the presentations delivered went beyond
initial expectations. Such success is due to a number of factors including
the technology used. The collaborative tool, Remo, provides the means to
feature speakers while also facilitating small group chats during the times
set aside for such discussions. Remo is simply a better solution for a large
group gathering than some of the other online collaboration solutions.
Efforts are being made to see if Remo can be used again in the future.

Internal use
As with any successful event, there are several people to thank. First and
foremost, all of the presenters produced excellent, informative
presentations and were the collective stars of the show. It is not easy to
step forward and present, especially in a language that may be your
second or third.
Many behind-the-scenes people ensured that the technology and logistics
worked for all. Katie Kenney, NCSEA’s Senior Manager, Professional
Development, managed the Remo application very skillfully while also
working on the overall coordination before and during the meetings. Meg
Haynes, who attended the Special Commission on behalf of NCSEA, and
Dr. Thomas Meysen, NCSEA’s International Commissioner, performed
their usual magic as planners and facilitators. Hannah Roots, NCSEA’s
Director of International Reciprocity, oversaw the coordination of the entire
program that made everything work as planned. The behind-the-scenes
team worked hard to ensure that the “in front of the camera” scenes went
smoothly.
The 2022 International Roundtable also marked a bit of a change in the
international child support community. Donna Hengeveld planned,
managed, and hosted in her wonderful style while on the eve of her
retirement from OCSE. The participants and broader national and
international community wished Donna the very best in the times to come
and are most pleased to know that she will remain an integral part of the
NCSEA International Subcommittee and the extended NCSEA family.
NCSEA’s past and ongoing support for the international child support
community is greatly appreciated. Through that support, the standards
have now been established by the 2021 and 2022 Roundtables. Further
information on the next event will be shared in early 2023.
Chris Beresford is the former Director of Maintenance Enforcement for the Province of
British Columbia in Canada. Chris chaired the Canadian Maintenance Enforcement
Director’s Committee for several years and has been an NCSEA conference presenter
and a member of the NCSEA Board of Directors. He received an honorary lifetime
membership in NCSEA, one of his most cherished professional awards. Chris makes
his home in Victoria, British Columbia, and remains a member of the NCSEA
International Subcommittee.
i
The full text of the Convention is available at: https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/fulltext/?cid=131)

Internal use
National Child Support Market
Research Survey Launched
by Nicole Darracq, California Child Support
Services
In September 2021, the Digital Media Marketing Grant cycles funded by the
federal Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) drew to a close, with
mixed results across the grantees. While everyone testing digital
advertising found that there are successful channels to reach potential non-
IV-D case participants, the majority of the contacts did not result in
increased case openings—meaning that target audiences saw or heard the
ads and many clicked, but very few took the next step and opened a case.
The messaging the grantees hoped was compelling was not sufficient to
inspire action.
So, how to inspire action? As child support caseloads decline across the
nation, what are single parents doing? The average length of a marriage in
the United States is 8.2 years, and divorce rates are declining but only
because fewer couples marry in the first place. 1 In 2020, 25% of all children
in the United States were living in single-parent families, the world’s highest
rate and three times the worldwide level of 7%. 2 It is logical to surmise that
at least some of these single parents could benefit from child support
services, yet they do not open cases.
Why aren’t more single parents opening child support cases? The NCSEA
Public Relations Committee would like to answer that question. Who are
these parents? Where are they? Are co-parents working out child support
issues for themselves? Is that successful? If not, what do they do then—go
without? Why avoid child support services when they are virtually free?
Market research performed in 2017 by the California Department of Child
Support Services (CA DCSS) and Ogilvy Public Relations discovered that
chief among the reasons why parents don’t open cases are: lack of
knowledge of the services offered; the complexity of the process; and
negative perceptions of the program based on the legacy of heavy
enforcement. However, those insights were garnered using current case

Internal use
participants. To reach non-IV-D customers, researchers needed more
information. But how would they ask non-IV-D customers what they do and
what they want if they aren’t walking through the door?
Over the summer, NCSEA Public Relations Committee members Amy
Lindholm of Michigan, Bruce Erickson of Minnesota, and Nicole Darracq of
California led the effort to develop the National Child Support Market
Research Survey, a simple, short, anonymous survey, informed by humancentered
design, to learn the following:
• What do you know about child support?
• Where did you learn it?
• Do you have a child support arrangement? With a court?
Between the co-parents? How do you pay? (Venmo, check,
cash, in-kind supplies, etc.)
• Are you aware of the following services (A,B,C,D, etc.)?
• Do you think you would use these? If not, why not? If yes,
which ones?
• What services not currently offered would you find helpful?
Wordsmithing went back and forth for several months, with every
committee member weighing in to consider the questions being asked, their
tone and sensitivity, and other possible impacts. It’s important to note that
the survey is designed for non-caseparticipants,
and the anonymous nature of
responses is deliberate to encourage honesty.
With the questions decided, the Program
Innovation Team at CA DCSS built the survey
in both English and Spanish for distribution in a
mobile-responsive online software program
accessed from a simple hyperlink that can be
shared nationally. Data collected can be exported by state, analyzed by
various criteria, and mined for geographic trends, and will also be
evaluated in the aggregate to identify themes to inform better, more
effective messaging. These insights can also serve to identify and support
future program changes that will make child support services more
attractive. Along with these primary questions are some intended to identify
respondents with experience in the system, and some to elicit demographic
information.

Internal use
A core team of states—California, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Massachusetts,
Michigan, Minnesota, Texas, Utah, and Virginia—volunteered to conduct
the survey as a unit, standardizing dissemination and promotion to
establish an “apples to apples” data set. A professional research team
funded through the generosity of Michigan IV-D Director Erin Frisch and
her team will analyze the findings. This information will be combined with all
the data from the online survey and any paper survey compilations, and
analyzed again for trends and standout data points. Results will be shared
and with any luck will provide much-improved direction for messaging that
will resonate with parents, educate them on the benefits of child support
services, and stimulate new case openings. Insights into what our potential
customers actually want and need can also inform policy changes at the
state and national levels.
Information about the survey was shared with all state directors in late July.
Efforts to disseminate the survey and collect information begin on
November 1, 2022, and will run through April 30, 2023, to catch the months
of the year in which divorce filings are highest.
States not in the core team are encouraged to participate as well. There
are many ways to get a survey like this into the hands of the general public;
however, distributing it to existing case participants, although easiest, is not
the best route. Case participants are not “the general public,” and this
survey seeks to learn about those who are not using child support services.
Those who are using our services possess first-hand program knowledge
and will provide responses regarding program awareness that will skew the
data (although even with this audience, the results could be eye-opening).
A good place to start is customers of health and human services agencies
that serve economically disadvantaged customers without referral to child
support, such as Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP),
Affordable Care Act insurance exchanges, early child development
programs, and many non-governmental anti-poverty organizations who can
share the link with their customer base. Parentage or paternity
establishment partners can help too by distributing the link to their
customers. Services like PeachJar can provide the link to teachers and
students, email and address lists can be purchased through market
research companies for mass mailings of e-flyers and postcards, a vendor
can assist, and local universities or community college systems may be

Internal use
able to partner with a IV-D program. Utility companies may be willing to
insert a flyer with a QR code into their monthly billing statements. Banks,
local businesses, and grocery stores may allow posters to be displayed.
When possible, the “official sender” should be a trusted source or NCSEA
rather than the child support agency itself to encourage better response
rates and support more candid answers. The target audience is single
parents, ages 18-45, with children under 18. States should include income
level criteria appropriate for their area to target the populations possibly in
need of financial assistance.
A toolkit with suggestions on how to disseminate the survey, as well as
promotional materials in both English and Spanish for social media and
digital advertising—including postcards; social media posts formatted for
Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram; flyers; and digital advertising artwork
and copy—is available from Public Relations committee members. NCSEA
encourages all states
and stakeholders to
participate in collecting
this crucial information.
In addition to those
mentioned above, kudos
for this potentially
groundbreaking effort are due to all Public Relations committee members:
NCSEA Executive Director Ann Marie Ruskin; Kimberly Curtis, Tanya
Johnson, James Murray, and Crystal Peeler with the Administration for
Children and Families; Trisha Thomas, Statewide Director of the Texas
Department of Family and Protective Services’ Office of Community-Based
Care Transition; Annette Quintero, Director of Communication and Program
Innovation with the Texas Office of the Attorney General; James Fleming,
North Dakota IV-D Director; Kristie Arneson, Wyoming IV-D Director;
Kimberly Butzner, Program Communications and Education Manager at the
Oregon Department of Justice; Christine Towles, Bureau Chief of Illinois
Child Support Services, Administrative Operations; Lori Bengston of Young
Williams; Alisha Griffin of Alisha Griffin Wks; and Wally McClure with
Ravenwings Consulting.
For more information about the National Child Support Market Research
survey, how to use and promote it, and how findings will be shared, please
contact Nicole Darracq or Amy Lindholm.

Internal use
Raised in Sacramento, California, Nicole Darracq graduated Phi Beta Kappa and
Summa Cum Laude from the University of California at Davis. She began her career at
Beringer Vineyards in California’s Napa Valley, directing marketing and sales efforts for
several smaller wineries. She joined state service at the Delta Protection Commission,
assisting with creating the Delta Regional Foundation, whose work resulted in Congress
designating the Delta as California’s first National Heritage Area. She moved to
California Child Support Services to lead the Department’s rebranding project and was
appointed Assistant Director in the Office of Communications and Public Affairs in 2019.
Her accomplishments include expanding digital outreach, implementing behavioral
science, extending social media services to local child support agencies statewide, and
introducing website and social media metrics to inform strategic planning.
1
Number, Timing, and Duration of Marriages and Divorces: 2016 (census.gov)
2
U.S. has world's highest rate of children living in single-parent households | Pew Research Center

Internal use
Creating Safe Access to Child
Support—You Don’t Have to Do It on
Your Own
by Samantha Hinchey, Arizona Coalition to End
Sexual and Domestic Violence
Making connections and building relationships are the
backbone of the work being done to build and improve safety and services
for domestic violence survivors. Through these relationships come change,
open communication, and a willingness to learn from each other. This is
what our experience has been in Arizona between the Department of Child
Support Services (DCSS) and the Arizona Coalition to End Sexual and
Domestic Violence (ACESDV).
When tragedy happens, there is usually a recognition of a system failure or
gap, but over time the concern fades away. In Arizona, a domestic violence
tragedy involving a child support customer served as the impetus for DCSS
to reach out to ACESDV. Instead of just a one-time request for information,
however, that initial contact formed the foundation of what has evolved over
years into a genuine partnership. In response to the tragedy, DCSS rallied
and asked ACESDV to assist in educating DCSS employees about
domestic violence and to provide support to the team while they were
dealing with the incident, including support to several DCSS staff who were
directly involved.
A few years later DCSS received the Procedural Justice Alternatives to
Contempt (PJAC) grant. One of the grant requirements was to review the
process for child support cases with a family violence indicator. In a
wonderful twist of fate, on a flight home from Washington, D.C., the DCSS
Project Manager, Jonell Sullivan, received the name of Arizona’s Domestic
Violence Response Team (DVRT) Manager, Doreen Nicholas. One call
and the initial meeting was set! A true partnership was born from that
recommendation because of the two agencies’ mutual desire to educate

Internal use
advocates about child support and to help child support professionals
recognize, respond, and refer individuals affected by domestic violence.
Doreen brought in her team
and they went to work. While
government agencies do not
typically enjoy a reputation for
welcoming system changes,
Doreen and her team found
that almost everyone with
whom they came into contact at DCSS wanted to learn about domestic
violence, how it impacted their work, and how they could help survivors
safely attain financial freedom. That initial energy that we encountered at
DCSS has never faded.
ACESDV collaborated with the DCSS team to adopt best practices. One
important focus area was—and still is—building relationships based on
transparency and trust. We met about training being developed for all
employees, shared opinions and perspectives without judgment or fear of
saying the wrong thing, and explained acronyms so we were not drowning
in “alphabet soup” and trying to figure out what the other agency was
talking about.
DCSS developed a scope of work detailing what they needed from
ACESDV, and we signed a contract to provide technical assistance and
training. Our agreement also provided that DCSS would deliver basic child
support training to the partners we support who work with survivors. As we
participated in the development of DCSS’s training, it became apparent that
hearing survivors’ voices was vital to case managers’ education. Hearing
from survivors really impacted the DCSS case managers, heightening their
awareness that anyone can be a domestic violence survivor. As a result,
DCSS implemented changes to ensure case managers screen each
customer in their caseloads for domestic violence.
In addition to cross training, DCSS invited ACESDV to help develop
protocol and procedures. While DCSS learned from ACESDV how to help
survivors safely access child support services, DCSS also taught Arizona’s
domestic violence advocates about child support services and how DCSS
could help survivors. For example, recognizing that office visits might be

Internal use
too dangerous, the DCSS team has visited local domestic violence shelters
to help survivors complete child support forms. Our partnership is so strong
that when we need assistance for
a survivor, we have a direct DCSS
contact who can reach out to the
survivor and provide IV-D services.
The DVRT was asked to present
on different topics four times per
year during the life of the PJAC
Hearing from survivors really impacted
the DCSS case managers, heightening
their awareness that anyone can be a
domestic violence survivor.
grant ranging from the Dynamics of Domestic Violence to Technology
Misuse, to the Intersection of Pets and Domestic Violence. Throughout this
time, we focused on safety and the issues and concerns a case manager
could easily hear about when completing a family violence safety
questionnaire with a parent.
ACESDV partnered with DCSS to develop the safety questionnaire, and
then collaboratively delivered training. Once the DCSS team received their
initial domestic violence training, ACESDV went with DCSS to each office
to walk case managers through the safety questionnaire. By doing this with
DCSS, ACESDV was able to answer questions from the DCSS team and
help alleviate case managers’ apprehension that they did not have the
skills needed to do this work. We explained that DCSS case managers
would not be advocates, but would focus on recognizing, responding, and
referring when working with domestic violence survivors. The safety
questionnaire has been in place for some time now and is used by all
DCSS case managers working with someone seeking child support.
ACESDV also assists DCSS by providing an up-to-date link to supportive
services for those who may need it in a specific county or city. Prior to the
contract with ACESDV, DCSS case managers did not have a
comprehensive resource guide for domestic violence services and instead
relied upon word-of-mouth referrals. Case managers now have at their
fingertips direct information for shelter and other domestic violence
services, organized by geographical area.
Having an effective system of response, collaboration, and improved
services for parents is the result of the work we have done with DCSS over

Internal use
the last six years. Our work is constantly evolving, and we continue to
revise and improve our response to domestic violence.
If you would like more information on how to connect with your local
coalition to end sexual and domestic violence, please contact Samantha
Hinchey at samantha@acesdv.org.
Samantha Hinchey is Manager of Domestic Violence Initiatives at the Arizona Coalition
to End Sexual and Domestic Violence. She joined the organization as an intern in 2017
while attending Arizona State University, where she obtained a bachelor's degree in
nonprofit leadership and management. She received her master’s degree in victim
service management from Sam Houston State University in Texas. Samantha has been
working with the Department of Child Support Services providing technical assistance
and training for more than five years. She has developed specific trainings on topics
such as reproductive coercion, animal cruelty, technology misuse, the roots of violence,
perpetrator treatment in Arizona, and male survivors. Samantha is particularly interested
in the intersection of pets and domestic violence. She has two rescue animals and loves
all things Disney. She has one daughter who married recently and left the nest.

Internal use
NCSEA U at the Policy Forum
The NCSEA U program is the premier educational
offering for leaders and emerging leaders in child
support and has been offered to qualifying applicants
since 2014. Traditionally offered in conjunction with
the Annual August Leadership Symposium, each
NCSEA U participant is provided the opportunity to build key knowledge
and skills essential for child support leaders.
In February 2023, NCSEA U is offering a new course just before the Policy
Forum, focused on effective advocacy. It is not a course on lobbying, but
rather focuses on policy development and effective outreach to internal and
external stakeholders, and also touches on the federal legislative process.
Included in NCSEA U at Policy Forum are a pre-conference Get
Acquainted webinar, four on-site sessions on Tuesday, January 31, 2023, a
visit to Congress on Wednesday, February 1, 2023, and one post-event
webinar. Read the full curriculum here.
NCSEA U Instructors, Margot Bean and Lisa Skenandore
Covered topics will include the attributes of successful advocacy, making
and implementing an advocacy plan for both internal and external
stakeholders, advocacy within the context of the legislative process and
lawmakers, effective message delivery methods, and a review of NCSEA’s
policy positions. Participants will experience a visit to the Hill that will focus
on the legislative process and provide an overview of how NCSEA interests
are messaged to stakeholders.

Internal use
The course concludes with a post-Policy Forum webinar that wraps up and
reinforces the series content. Participants will discuss and provide
feedback on what was learned during the course and share status of their
action plans and goals. Not only will participants have gained a great
foundation on effective advocacy, but they will also have built a network of
peers with similar interests. This creates an opportunity for lasting
relationships that can assist leaders with future policy and advocacy efforts.
We look forward to this inaugural NCSEA U offering, and hope you join us!
Applications are available at 2023 NCSEA U at Policy Forum.
Meet Our Instructors
Margot Bean is a Managing Director in Deloitte Consulting’s Human Services
Transformation Practice, focusing on helping child support programs improve their
outcomes by providing effective and efficient data driven customer-focused services.
She helps child support programs develop human centered case management systems
that streamline business processes, effectively analyze their caseloads, and allow case
managers to execute case strategies based on customer needs.
Margot’s wide variety of government experience prior to joining Deloitte provides her
with deep understanding and insight: Commissioner of the federal Office of Child
Support Enforcement, IV-D Director of the New York State Child Support program, IV-D
Director of the Guam Child Support Program, and a child support attorney.
A current member of the NCSEA Board of Directors, Margot co-chairs the Policy Forum
Vendor Relations Committees and serves on the Policy and Government Relations
Committee. An NCSEA Past President and Honorary Life Member, Margot is also a
Past President and Honorary Board Member of the Eastern Regional Interstate Child
Support Association (ERICSA) and serves as an advisor to the Western Interstate Child
Support Enforcement Council (WICSEC).
Lisa Skenandore joined Systems and Methods Inc. as the Vice President of Business
Development in January of 2016. Prior to joining SMI, Lisa spent twenty-five years with
her tribe, the Oneida Nation, and most notably as the Child Support IV-D Director. She
began her career in child support when her tribe received its start-up grant in 2005.
During this tenure she began advocating for tribal child support and continues to do so
today. Along with child support she has also led other human service programming in
the areas of child welfare, domestic violence, prevention and foster care.
She is an NCSEA Past President and Honorary Life Member, and is also a Past
President of the National Tribal Child Support Association and National Association of
Tribal Child Support Directors. Lisa is currently President-Elect of the Eastern Regional
Interstate Child Support Association (ERICSA) and serves as an advisor to the Western
Intergovernmental Child Support Engagement Council (WICSEC).

Is NCSEA U For You?
NCSEA U was chartered in 2013 and currently has
more than 135 alumni. NCSEA U provides a unique
premier educational and professional development
opportunity. It is structured for learning leaders in the
child support community, and it complements
NCSEA’s other educational initiatives and strategies.
The program is taught by nationally recognized child
support leaders, offering a variety of informative and
strategic topics.
NCSEA is pleased to announce that NCSEA U is expanding in 2023 with NCSEA U @
Policy Forum. The curriculum is focused on policy and advocacy, policy development,
outreach to stakeholders, and a little about the federal legislative process.
Whether for yourself or your staff, NCSEA U offers a transformative learning experience
and is a catalyst for networking opportunities. NCSEA U alumni would love for you to
become a part of this unique group. Because we are proud of NCSEA U, we will be
featuring Alumni in upcoming CSQ articles. Their stories will highlight why NCSEA U is
for you.
Meet Our NCSEA U Alumni
Jen McFaggan - Class of 2022
Lac Courte Oreilles Child Support Program
Child Support Caseworker/Financials
NCSEA U @ Leadership Symposium focuses on the emerging and learning leader. How do you
define leadership?
I define leadership as someone who is understanding and knowledgeable, and can help others succeed in
their personal and professional lives and careers.
Do you believe that attending NCSEA U helped shaped this definition? How or how not?
I do, there were some tips and topics that I hadn't thought of, and NCSEA U helped with being able to use
those throughout my workday.
Most valuable aspect of the NCSEA U experience?
Networking, being able to meet so many others that share the same goal in different roles.
What is a key leadership attribute that you appreciate in others?
I would say the best is understanding and empathy.

Melissa Robinson - Class of 2022
North Dakota DHS - CS
Administrator, Intake and Locate Units
What is a key leadership attribute that you appreciate in others? Why?
Integrity because it encompasses honesty, character, morality, respectability, and taking full responsibility
for one's own actions, which makes it easier to buy-in to the organization's vision and leader's goals to work
toward that vision.
Since attending NCSEA U, what opportunities (personal and professional) have you experienced?
To apply concepts learned at NCSEU to enhance my leadership skills. I find myself referring to the training
materials because there were so many helpful ideas taught.
Do you have a favorite quote that you refer to periodically?
Yes, and it's by Erin Frisch. "A minute of thinking is more important than an hour of unplanned talking."
Kirsten Thompson - Class of 2022
Michigan Child Support
Training and Application Support Services Manager
What is the most valuable aspect of the NCSEA U experience?
The advice from the instructors on how to activate people to achieve goals. We discussed engagement
techniques at many levels, and received some great advice on managing up.
What would you like others to know about NCSEA U?
It is a great opportunity to meet other child support professionals and to take some deliberative thinking time
while you are away from the office. You have goals, and this program gives you a blueprint to make them
happen!
Do you have a favorite author in the leadership space and/or would you recommend a specific
leadership book? Why?
One of my favorites is Switch: How to Change Things When Change is Hard, by Chip and Dan Heath. First
of all, it's an enjoyable read. And it provides some practical ways to address the emotional side of change.
After all, leaders work with people, and you need to understand the whole person and their motivations.
Why would you recommend NCSEA U to others?
It was so nice to get to know some other professionals at a deeper level, and have some additional time to
breathe and digest the intense learning from the Leadership Symposium together.

Internal use
NCSEA’S 2022 Leadership Symposium
“Level-Up: Transforming Tomorrow’s Leaders”
by Phyllis Nance, Linda Rhyne-McKinley, and Carla West
NCSEA 2022 Leadership Symposium Co-Chairs
NCSEA’s Leadership Symposium is the premiere event for child support
professionals to gain a national perspective on the IV-D program and hone
leadership skills. The symposium brings together the top leaders and rising
stars from across the nation to share ideas, explore new perspectives, and
discover new ways to promote and deliver child support services. This
year’s event was held at The Westin Charlotte in historic downtown
Charlotte, North Carolina and rose to the challenge of leveling up our skills
to transform tomorrow’s leaders.
This year’s symposium was kicked off by Team Synergy, where over 580
attendees were able to meet new colleagues while catching up with old

Internal use
friends, get together to discuss relevant child support topics, and show off
their talents and share their positive energy on the first ever NCSEA graffiti
board.
The symposium kicked off with a challenge to take every opportunity to
build our leadership skills and each plenary, workshop,
and learning lab worked together to help us level up
and transform.
We would like to thank the 88 impactful presenters, the
18 amazing volunteers, the 581 attendees, the 16
Corporate Partners, and the 30 Sponsors who made
this symposium a success.
The NCSEA Leadership Symposium would not be
possible without the hard work and planning of the Leadership Symposium
Planning Committee. Our sincere thanks to this team for their efforts to
make this the best event possible.
Phyllis Nance, Linda Rhyne-McKinley, and Carla West, Co-chairs
Rieda Abrams-Miller
Sandra Comer
Jennifer Crudo Allen
Ashley Dexter, Track Chair
Natalie Dillon
Jamie Doeseckle
Robbie Endris
Tanya Glenn
Alisha Griffin
Kara Hester
Tanesha Howard
John Hurst
Daniel King
Maureen Leif
Tim Lightner
Wally McClure, Track Chair
Janice McDaniel
Ethan McKinney, Track Chair
Kelly Micka
Jamie Murray
Diane Potts, Track Chair
Julie Prado, Track Chair
Amy Rebideaux
Jackie Scharping, Track Chair
Trish Skophammer
Kenneth Sleets
Jeremy Smith
Sophia Ticer
Rob Velcoff

Internal use
We look forward to seeing you at next year’s Leadership Symposium
August 6-9, 2023
Anaheim Marriott, Anaheim, CA
_________________________________________
Phyllis Nance has 38 years of public service including 30 years in the child support
program. She is currently the Director for the Alameda County Department of Child
Support Services. She came to Alameda County in 2016 with 24 years of experience in
the Kern County Department of Child Support Services, eight of which she served as
the Director. Phyllis has an extensive knowledge of the child support program and broad
leadership experience having served in multiple leadership roles.
Linda Rhyne-McKinley has over 22 years in child support and is currently the Q&T
Supervisor for Mecklenburg County Child Support Services, responsible for the training
and professional development of 130+ staff members. Linda is currently on the NCSEA
Board of Directors and has served as NCSEA U Co-chair.
Carla West is Senior Director for Human Services and IV-D Director for the North
Carolina Department of Health and Human Services. She is charged with integrating
and improving access to person-centered services, helping individuals and families in
North Carolina achieve self-sufficiency and improved well-being. Carla serves on the
board of the National Child Support Enforcement Association (NCSEA).