January 2023 CSQ
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
ChildSupportCommuniQue
Table of Contents<br />
<strong>January</strong> <strong>2023</strong><br />
Executive Director’s Message……………………………………………3<br />
Community Corner: Thank you, dear friend. You will be missed……..5<br />
Taking a New Look at Appropriate Medicaid Referrals to Child<br />
Support…………………………………………………………………….10<br />
Self-Assessments and Data Reliability Audits…….…………………..15<br />
Intergovernmental Hot Topics Part 2…………………………………...21<br />
Teleworking Tips…………………………………………………………..27<br />
Policy Forum Preview…......................................................................32<br />
NCSEA U Alumni Spotlight……………………………………………….36
Ann Marie Ruskin<br />
NCSEA Executive Director<br />
In September of 2010, I received an email in response to a job application I<br />
submitted. It was from the Executive Director of the National Child Support<br />
Enforcement Association, and she wanted to interview me for an open<br />
position. I had never heard of the National Child Support Enforcement<br />
Association, and my only knowledge of child support was supporting a<br />
good friend trying to collect ordered child support from an absent father and<br />
ex-husband. But, that day I started on a journey that has brought me not<br />
only tremendous professional satisfaction, but wonderful friends and<br />
colleagues and a true appreciation for the child support community, and the<br />
critically important work they do.<br />
One of the first things I learned after joining NCSEA is that the IV-D<br />
program is . . . complicated! Just when I thought I understood the program<br />
administration or process, I discovered a new complexity. To this day, I am<br />
constantly learning about the program and trying to understand its many<br />
details and nuances.<br />
Directing NCSEA’s professional development programs from 2010 to 2015,<br />
I worked with knowledgeable, dedicated volunteers and proudly introduced<br />
NCSEA U and Leadership Symposium to the child support community.<br />
With a background in government relations, I was eager to work with the<br />
Policy & Government Relations committee and subcommittees, and<br />
enjoyed the opportunity to promote legislation to improve the IV-D program<br />
and make positive changes to help families.<br />
From February 2016 to February 2018, I worked on two other MCI USA<br />
(our association management company) clients. While the work brought me<br />
satisfaction and it was nice meeting and working with new people,<br />
something was missing. The something was the organizations’ mission, a<br />
commitment to the greater good. And so, when the opportunity came to
eturn to NCSEA, I couldn’t say yes fast enough. I missed the people, I<br />
missed the work, and most of all I missed NCSEA’s mission impacting<br />
policy and supporting children and families. I felt I was “home” again.<br />
Since February 2018, I have had the privilege to lead NCSEA, working with<br />
an incredible staff including Katie, Gillyn, Kate, LaTrese, Sierra, and<br />
Amalia, as well as wonderful officers, board members, and committee<br />
leads and members. It’s been an adventure for sure—breaking attendance<br />
records for both the Policy Forum and the Leadership Symposium,<br />
establishing strong financial performance, increased engagement on<br />
Capitol Hill with policy-makers, and managing the topsy-turvy world of the<br />
pandemic! We were faced with new challenges, and I feel we rose to the<br />
occasion each time. And I knew I always had the support and backing of<br />
the NCSEA leadership.<br />
So, as I approach retirement, I want to say thank you . . . to the NCSEA<br />
officers, board members, committee chairs, and committee members (all<br />
past and present), for supporting me and encouraging me, for lots of laughs<br />
and good times. NCSEA will continue to flourish because volunteers are<br />
the heart of the organization—the dedication of its members and their<br />
passion for helping children and families is amazing! I’m constantly in awe<br />
of you who work tirelessly to lift children out of poverty, and improve the<br />
lives of children and families. It is an honor to refer to you all as friends and<br />
colleagues.<br />
I look forward to retirement and spending quality time with family and<br />
friends. But I will miss all of you, as well as the work we do. Good luck and<br />
best wishes for success to each and every one of you as you continue to<br />
advance the important mission of NCSEA well into the future!<br />
With warm wishes,
Ann Marie with two of her four treasured grandchildren—Maximus and Blair<br />
Thank you, dear friend. You will be missed<br />
by Jim Fleming, NCSEA President<br />
Most of us have experienced that dreaded moment when a colleague you<br />
really like announces her retirement. You simultaneously want to shout “no”<br />
and “hurray for you!” You will badly miss the retiree, yet you really can’t<br />
fault someone who says “I want to spend more time golfing and playing<br />
with my grandchildren.” All you can do is face the reality of “all good things<br />
must come to an end.”<br />
NCSEA Executive Director Ann Marie Ruskin will be retiring at the end of<br />
February <strong>2023</strong>. No matter how many months of advance notice she gives<br />
us, there is still no filling her shoes.<br />
Ann Marie started with NCSEA in September 2010 directing professional<br />
development and education. In her words, “Since then, I have had the<br />
privilege of working with the most passionate, dedicated group of people<br />
that comprise NCSEA.” After a brief hiatus from 2016–18, the NCSEA<br />
Board of Directors invited Ann Marie to rejoin NCSEA as Executive Director<br />
and we are very glad she said “yes.”<br />
Highlights of Ann Marie’s tenure include our<br />
robust Corporate Partner program and<br />
implementation of free webinars as a benefit of<br />
NCSEA membership. NCSEA is a thriving<br />
organization today in no small part due to the<br />
talent, commitment, and stewardship of Ann Marie<br />
Ruskin. Thank you so much, Ann Marie—your<br />
Ann Marie & husband, Glenn
husband, three children, and four grandchildren will be very lucky to enjoy<br />
more of your time. You will be missed!<br />
Here is a collection of some parting words from some of Ann Marie’s<br />
colleagues during her service as NCSEA Executive Director:<br />
• Tanguler Gray, NCSEA President 2019–2020: “I hate so much to see<br />
her go. I want her to know how much I respect and appreciate all she’s<br />
done for NCSEA, especially during my presidency when she said I was<br />
acting like a madwoman trying to educate people about our membership<br />
benefits. She’s always been in the right place at the right time to capture<br />
that perfect moment. Thank you and happy retirement!”<br />
• Katie Kenney, NCSEA Senior Manager for Professional Development:<br />
“Without exaggeration, Ann Marie is the most gracious person under<br />
whose direction I’ve ever had the pleasure of working. She has an<br />
innate ability to identify people’s strengths and empower them to act<br />
independently and confidently. I am so grateful for the opportunity to<br />
have worked with her and hope to continue the legacy of her dedication<br />
to NCSEA. She’s also an amazing resource for a mean cocktail recipe.”<br />
• Lori Bengston, NCSEA President 2020–2021: “I always valued Ann<br />
Marie as the NCSEA Executive Director, but it was not until I was<br />
NCSEA President that I fully realized the dedication she has to our<br />
organization. Ann Marie juggles so many priorities and always made<br />
sure I was ready for whatever was next as NCSEA President. I truly do<br />
not know what I would have done without her organization skills and<br />
ability to handle so many competing demands. I will always remember<br />
her as an exceptional leader and a true friend, and I wish her a long and<br />
happy retirement!”<br />
• Lisa Skenandore, NCSEA President 2019–2020: “My first experience<br />
with NCSEA was as an ex officio board member in my role as NTCSA<br />
president. Ann Marie consistently went out of her way to welcome me<br />
and always had a warm hug in greeting. I always felt comfortable in her<br />
presence. This warmth and hospitality has continued to this day. I will<br />
always be grateful for Ann Marie's kind and welcoming presence and<br />
most of all friendship. All the best.”
• Gillyn Croog, formerly NCSEA Director for Professional Development:<br />
“When I first joined NCSEA, Ann Marie told me, ‘You will get to work<br />
with the best people. They are good people, trying to do great things for<br />
kids. I really have missed them.’ If you are not aware, Ann Marie<br />
stepped away from NCSEA for a few years and worked on other<br />
projects. When the Executive Director’s job opened, the Board asked<br />
her to return. NCSEA needed seasoned leadership—someone familiar<br />
with the organization, fiercely protective of the mission, able to make<br />
hard decisions, and focused on NCSEA’s best interests—and she was<br />
the perfect partner, who happily reengaged whole heartedly. She had<br />
missed the mission and most of all the people. She worked tirelessly for<br />
the good of NCSEA and enjoyed every minute; I was lucky to have been<br />
there with her for part of her journey. She is a rare gem in every sense<br />
of the word. Looking back, when she said you get to work with the best<br />
people, she wasn’t talking about herself, but she absolutely is the best of<br />
the best. While she is off enjoying retirement—time with her kids,<br />
grandkids, and Glenn—she will miss you. You NCSEA people have a<br />
With daughter Kara and sons Bryan and Kyle<br />
habit of making a lasting impression on people. I know that from<br />
experience. But I want to let you in on a little secret: you will miss her<br />
more. Trust me, I know that from experience.”<br />
• Sharon Pizzuti, NCSEA Treasurer: “Ann Marie has always embraced<br />
NCSEA with a motivating compassion. She has a clear mission to see<br />
people flourishing in their fullness. Her empathy and commitment drive<br />
the NCSEA community to aim higher for the good of others. She always<br />
set her sights on noble goals and was committed to not give up. She has<br />
inspired me and others to step outside of comfort zones and be changed
y the experience and I am grateful. Congratulations to you, Ann Marie,<br />
and Godspeed in your retirement journey!”<br />
• Craig Burshem, NCSEA President 2018–2019: “I had the distinct honor<br />
of working closely with Ann Marie when I was NCSEA president. She<br />
was unfailingly kind, professional, helpful, and unflappable, and she<br />
made my job so much easier. Ann Marie is one of those people<br />
everyone turns to for advice and answers, and her vast experience has<br />
been invaluable in keeping NCSEA running smoothly for many years.<br />
She somehow always knows what to do even when no one else does!<br />
They say no one is irreplaceable, but Ann Marie is certainly the<br />
exception to that rule. NCSEA and the whole child support community<br />
are better for having had Ann Marie as their advocate and support. Her<br />
work over the years has undoubtedly improved the lives of countless<br />
families. I am grateful to call her my colleague and even more grateful to<br />
call her my friend. Wishing Ann Marie many happy years of retirement.<br />
She will be sorely missed!”<br />
• Ashley Dexter, NCSEA Secretary: “Ann Marie is so genuinely<br />
passionate about NCSEA, professional development, and partnerships. I<br />
served as the Leadership Symposium planning committee co-chair for 3<br />
years and Ann Marie always kept the true purpose of the Leadership<br />
Symposium—Professional Development and Leadership—at the<br />
forefront of planning committee activities. Ann Marie graciously values<br />
input and feedback and has elevated the value of the corporate partner<br />
program each and every year for partners and NCSEA. Her commitment<br />
to NCSEA, its mission, and its members is amazing. Most of all, Ann<br />
Marie always has a smile and hug even when she is running around like<br />
crazy at conferences. She will be sorely missed, but I wish her a very<br />
happy retirement and lots of birdies!”<br />
• Erin Frisch, NCSEA President-Elect: “Being executive director of an<br />
organization like NCSEA takes adept organizational skills, being open<br />
and welcoming to a diverse group of people, and in many ways leading<br />
from behind the scenes. Ann Marie has done all this and more with<br />
incredible grace and an unwavering positive attitude. We have come to<br />
expect the best through her leadership, and these will be hard shoes to<br />
fill! Thank you, Ann Marie, for adopting our cause as your own and
ecoming a dear friend in the process. Best wishes for many happy<br />
days ahead!”<br />
• Diane Potts, NCSEA President 2017–2018: “I was so happy when Ann<br />
Marie decided to come back to NCSEA in 2018. She served for more<br />
than four years as our Executive Director and led NCSEA to success<br />
during that time in many ways that included bringing in amazingly<br />
talented folks like Gillyn and Katie. Ann Marie, you will be missed by all<br />
of us!”<br />
With granddaughter Reagan and the newest family member, Baby Lincoln<br />
The words of my fellow officers, former NCSEA presidents, and our past<br />
and present team members capture so well what has made Ann Marie a<br />
tremendous Executive Director. Through a decade on the NCSEA board<br />
and nearly six years on the Executive Committee, I have had countless<br />
honest and candid conversations with Ann Marie on NCSEA matters, and it<br />
has always been reassuring to know that someone so skilled and kind with<br />
such good instincts has been at the helm of our organization. Thank you<br />
and farewell!
Taking a New Look at Appropriate<br />
Medicaid Referrals to Child Support<br />
by Jim Fleming, North Dakota Child Support<br />
Services<br />
In July 2022, guidance was issued by the federal Administration for<br />
Children and Families (ACF) reiterating that federal law requires referrals<br />
from the Foster Care program to Child Support only “where appropriate.” i<br />
This flexibility is not new. It was previously acknowledged by ACF at least<br />
as early as September 6, 2007. ii<br />
The renewed guidance and support from ACF for selective referrals has<br />
triggered a new round of discussion around the country on how the Child<br />
Support and Foster Care programs can better cooperate to support<br />
reunification efforts of families with children in Foster Care and avoid<br />
referrals of unproductive cases.<br />
This article suggests comparable attention should be spent analyzing<br />
appropriate referrals from the Medicaid program to Child Support.<br />
Since at least 2008, which is nearly as long as the Foster Care guidance<br />
has been in place, the Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) has<br />
similarly indicated that referrals from the Medicaid program to Child<br />
Support are not required in all cases:<br />
Title XIX of the Act, and its implementing regulations or guidance, do<br />
not require State Medicaid agencies to refer Medicaid applicants or<br />
recipients to State IV-D agencies. Therefore, a State Medicaid<br />
agency may determine which cases are appropriate to refer to State<br />
IV-D agencies. State IV-D and Medicaid agencies should coordinate<br />
to determine criteria for referring appropriate cases and exchanging<br />
information by the most efficient and cost-effective means available<br />
(using manual or automated systems). OCSE IM-08-03 (April 22,<br />
2008). iii
This flexibility was enhanced in 2016 when federal regulations were<br />
changed to authorize child support agencies to close a case that is opened<br />
as the result of an inappropriate referral. iv<br />
One could suggest, perhaps only somewhat<br />
sarcastically, that medical support joins<br />
distribution and intergovernmental as a<br />
“special” area of thankless expertise<br />
frequently assigned to the newest policy<br />
person in a child support agency. All three<br />
topics can be very complicated and take a<br />
long time (if ever) to master.<br />
Analysis of “appropriate” Medicaid referrals should begin at the end—what<br />
is the desired outcome in the case? In other words, what does Medicaid<br />
want to accomplish by referring the case to Child Support?<br />
As amended in late 2016, federal regulations accept both public coverage<br />
and private insurance as acceptable forms of medical support. v So, if a<br />
state is content with the child being covered by Medicaid without seeking<br />
replacement private coverage or cost recovery through a cash medical<br />
support obligation that is often uncollectible, why bother with a referral?<br />
The answer may also depend on whether paternity has been established<br />
for the child.<br />
It is worth noting that most health care exchanges and Medicaid<br />
applications do not do an adequate job collecting information about<br />
noncustodial parents from custodial parents who are seeking health care<br />
coverage. To this author, the implied message is that it is not a priority for<br />
the child support program to establish and enforce medical support in<br />
Medicaid cases.<br />
Federal regulations suggest an opt-out approach to Medicaid referrals<br />
regarding establishment and enforcement of child support: the child support<br />
agency must provide all IV-D services “unless the individual notifies the<br />
State that only IV-D services related to securing medical support are<br />
wanted.” vi The requirement of an “opt out” for child support services in<br />
Medicaid cases warrants development of effective pre-referral processes<br />
where the Medicaid agency gives the custodial parent an informed<br />
opportunity to provide any needed information about the noncustodial<br />
parent and express a preference regarding receipt of child support
services. If the custodial parent is not cooperative, or is not interested in<br />
receiving child support services, a Medicaid-only referral to Child Support<br />
can be avoided.<br />
Alternatively, the child support agency could develop intake procedures<br />
where supplemental information is automatically requested from a custodial<br />
parent after a<br />
Medicaid referral prior<br />
to setting up a child<br />
support case, and the<br />
case is closed as an<br />
inappropriate referral if<br />
the needed response<br />
or information is not<br />
forthcoming within a<br />
predefined period of<br />
In preparing for this article, the author asked a<br />
handful of state directors about their current<br />
Medicaid referral practices. The responses varied<br />
widely from referring all Medicaid-only cases to<br />
not referring any Medicaid cases regardless of<br />
whether the custodial parent opted out of child<br />
support services.<br />
time. Either approach would successfully limit Medicaid referrals to cases<br />
where beneficial child support and medical support services can be<br />
provided to a cooperative custodial parent.<br />
In preparing for this article, the author asked a handful of state directors<br />
about their current Medicaid referral practices. The responses varied widely<br />
from referring all Medicaid-only cases to not referring any Medicaid cases<br />
regardless of whether the custodial parent opted out of child support<br />
services.<br />
A complicating factor is a federal regulation providing that a Medicaid<br />
recipient cannot be required to provide an application or other request for<br />
services in order to obtain child support services. vii In a state where<br />
Medicaid cases are not referred and the custodial parent needs to apply for<br />
child support services, one could wonder whether this regulation is being<br />
honored. The regulation may be outdated.<br />
Why spend time analyzing Medicaid referrals? In the author’s state for<br />
example, which still has broad referral policies for both Foster Care and<br />
Medicaid cases, there are roughly three times as many open Medicaid-only<br />
cases as Foster Care cases. The same proportion would apply to the<br />
Former Assistance caseload. The potential efficiencies through improved<br />
Medicaid referral processes are significant and surpass the similar<br />
efficiencies that could be achieved through improved Foster Care referral<br />
processes (which the author strongly supports as well).
This article is not meant to suggest the fewer Medicaid referrals, the better.<br />
To the contrary, Medicaid is a means-tested program. If a family is<br />
receiving Medicaid but is not yet eligible for benefits under other programs<br />
such as TANF, a Medicaid referral can be a key gateway to child support<br />
services that can help provide funds to families and promote selfsufficiency.<br />
The time between the original application for Medicaid and the<br />
opening of a child support case is critical to screen appropriate cases,<br />
including domestic violence screening, and gather the information needed<br />
for the case to move forward.<br />
This article is limited to the Medicaid referral<br />
process and does not delve into the<br />
complexities of establishing and enforcing<br />
medical support, especially amid a decline<br />
in the availability of employer-provided<br />
coverage. In the time since federal medical<br />
support regulations were significantly<br />
changed in 2008, medical support policy<br />
development has followed a tortured path of enactment of the Affordable<br />
Care Act, implementation of the health care exchanges, delayed<br />
compliance with the 2008 mandates, and ultimately the expansion of<br />
“health care coverage” in 2016 to include public coverage. viii<br />
Ironically, efforts to improve the quality of Medicaid referrals will lead only<br />
to further reduction of the child support caseload in many states. As states<br />
work to develop “smarter” referral practices, it would therefore seem<br />
important to communicate with internal and external stakeholders that a<br />
reduction in total caseload can be expected and is not necessarily a<br />
negative outcome.<br />
Conclusion<br />
OCSE IM-14-01 was issued before states were authorized to close<br />
inappropriate referrals, but otherwise provides helpful guidance to states on<br />
making informed decisions about Medicaid referrals: “[w]hile establishing or<br />
updating Medicaid referral policies, States should consider cost<br />
effectiveness, safety, and the desired child support outcomes for the<br />
family.” The IM lists the negative impacts of inappropriate referrals and<br />
offers four strategies (not including case closure) to collaborate with the<br />
Medicaid agency.
Flexibility to avoid inappropriate referrals, whether from Foster Care or<br />
Medicaid, is a great opportunity for child support agencies to conserve<br />
scarce resources and improve the quality and effectiveness of referrals.<br />
Not to mention improvement in performance for which we all strive.<br />
_________________________________________<br />
James C. Fleming is the director of the Child Support Section of the North Dakota<br />
Department of Health and Human Services, President of the National Child Support<br />
Enforcement Association (NCSEA), member of the Board of Directors for the Western<br />
Intergovernmental Child Support Engagement Council (WICSEC), and former President<br />
of the National Council of Child Support Directors (NCCSD). Jim is a member and<br />
former co-chair of NCSEA’s Policy and Government Relations Committee and<br />
NCCSD’s Policy and Practice Committee, and a member of the editorial committee for<br />
the NCSEA Child Support CommuniQue. Jim also co-chairs NCCSD’s Employer<br />
Collaboration Committee.Jim was named the 2022 recipient of the American Payroll<br />
Association’s Government Partner Award. He has been an assistant attorney general<br />
for North Dakota for 28 years, following a clerkship with the North Dakota Supreme<br />
Court. Jim and his wife Terri are the proud parents of four daughters and were recently<br />
blessed with a perfect granddaughter.<br />
i<br />
OCSE DCL-22-06 (July 29, 2022). The DCL attached a joint letter from the Children’s Bureau<br />
and Office of Child Support Enforcement announcing changes to the Child Welfare Policy<br />
Manual.<br />
ii<br />
ACF IM-07-06 (September 6, 2007). See also ACF IM-12-06 (August 1, 2012).<br />
iii<br />
See also OCSE DCL-00-122 (December 22, 2000) (attaching a December 19, 2000, letter<br />
from the HHS Health Care Finance Agency to state Medicaid directors).<br />
iv<br />
45 CFR § 303.11(b)(20).<br />
v<br />
45 CFR § 303.31(a).<br />
vi<br />
45 CFR § 302.33(a)(5).<br />
vii<br />
45 CFR § 302.33(a)(2).<br />
viii<br />
For a thorough analysis of the choices and considerations in pursing medical support, see<br />
MEDICAL SUPPORT 2.0: Re-Positioning Medical Support in the Changing Landscape of Health<br />
Insurance, Robert G. (Bob) Williams, Ph.D. (July 25, 2019).
Self-Assessments and Data Reliability Audits:<br />
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly<br />
by Gay Harris, Arizona Department of Economic Security<br />
Brian Miele, Arizona Department of Economic Security<br />
Liz Schriber, Georgia Division of Child Support Services<br />
One of the best strategies to prepare for federal audits is to establish a<br />
solid self-assessment process. Self-assessment and internal data reliability<br />
audits are management tools for states to gauge and improve their<br />
performance. For a self-assessment process to be an effective tool for<br />
management, it must provide accurate and reliable information. The<br />
information provided should identify program strengths, weaknesses, and<br />
relevant estimates of current performance levels. This provides leadership<br />
teams with data to make informed decisions.<br />
Child support offices in Arizona and Georgia<br />
have seen a lot of good come from their selfassessment<br />
processes and they have been able<br />
to prevent negative results on self-assessment<br />
and internal audits.<br />
Start with the Good<br />
There are various ways to establish a good self-assessment process that<br />
helps ensure favorable results when being audited by the federal Office of
Child Support Enforcement (OCSE). States have options in terms of where<br />
they establish a self-assessment unit. For example, a unit can be<br />
established within the IV-D agency, as is done in Georgia, or within an<br />
umbrella agency containing<br />
the IV-D agency, as is done<br />
in Arizona with its<br />
Department of Economic<br />
Security (ADES). Other<br />
options include establishing a<br />
unit within another state<br />
As a result of their self-assessment and<br />
data reliability efforts, Arizona and<br />
Georgia have continued to receive<br />
favorable results in their federal Data<br />
Reliability Audits (DRAs).<br />
agency or using contracted staff from a private company. One key to<br />
success is ensuring that those conducting self-assessments have a healthy<br />
degree of separation and independence from those managing the cases. In<br />
Arizona and Georgia, teams are solely designated to conduct these<br />
required self-assessments to help ensure data reliability. Another key to<br />
success is that these teams follow well-defined self-assessment processes<br />
that ensure consistency and efficiency. For example:<br />
● In Arizona, a team of auditors is solely dedicated to conducting selfassessments<br />
for each of Arizona’s 14 offices annually, and is<br />
responsible for submitting the annual audit to the OCSE. In addition,<br />
they conduct internal data reliability audits each month. The audit<br />
team is located within the ADES Office of Inspector General and is<br />
structurally independent of program management. In addition to<br />
having its audit processes well-documented, these auditors have<br />
prior experience managing cases, and in addition, are overseen by<br />
an audit supervisor.<br />
● In Georgia, a performance management team–consisting of<br />
individuals who have no case management responsibilities–conducts<br />
a statewide annual self-assessment review of program operations<br />
and compliance with internal standard operating procedures (SOPs),<br />
financial reviews of internal units, and special projects. These<br />
processes are well established and evolving to increase efficiency.
As a result of their self-assessment and data reliability efforts, Arizona and<br />
Georgia have continued to receive favorable results in their federal Data<br />
Reliability Audits (DRAs). With this, they have avoided monetary penalties<br />
imposed when federal data reliability benchmarks are not met, and<br />
continue to receive incentive funding to benefit the child support program.<br />
Avoid the Bad<br />
Even if a self-assessment process is established with an independent team<br />
that has a documented process, this could still result in a negative outcome<br />
without considering a few additional keys to success. For example, an<br />
office may have a pattern of underperforming in<br />
a particular area, or new problems may arise<br />
that result in underserving clients or losing time<br />
and money. A key strategy for preventing<br />
repeat problems is to address the root cause of<br />
problems identified in self-assessments.<br />
Further, a key strategy for preventing new problems is to use selfassessment<br />
processes to proactively identify and address high-risk areas.<br />
Examples of these strategies include the following:<br />
● In Arizona, the team conducting individual self-assessment audits<br />
evaluates cases against the criteria for the eight federal requirements<br />
to ensure benchmarks are met for each criterion. As a proactive<br />
measure, cases are also evaluated for quality control to identify highrisk<br />
areas such as ensuring support orders are promptly added to the<br />
child support system so that families receive the support payments on<br />
time. The internal data reliability audit team reviews sample data<br />
each month and uses a similar methodology used by federal auditors.<br />
They validate the data on the child support system to ensure the<br />
information is correct. The team has also identified the root causes of<br />
problems in the cases that directly impact the federal requirements or<br />
the OCSE-157 line items, which has resulted in updates to specific<br />
procedures for the Division.<br />
● In Georgia, for this federal fiscal year, its performance management<br />
team is taking a holistic approach to conducting compliance reviews
y using case samples from each office, which will be reviewed by<br />
the financial, paternity, and self-assessment teams. Georgia’s<br />
Division of Child Support Services (DCSS) has taken several<br />
proactive steps to improve data reliability and performance. For<br />
example, DCSS creates a report based on a proactive review using<br />
the data relationship schedule, which is typically provided to states<br />
during a federal DRA or federal Data Reliability Review (DRR). The<br />
proactive relationship schedule compares the same performance line<br />
logic and is reviewed prior<br />
to the end of the federal<br />
fiscal year. Another report<br />
proactively reviewed for<br />
data reliability is the “All<br />
Child” report, which as its<br />
name suggests, contains<br />
paternity and support order<br />
information for all children.<br />
Reviews are also conducted for SOPs that may have higher<br />
standards than the federal compliance requirements. The Same Day<br />
Service SOP’s timeframe to establish a IV-D case is the day the<br />
application is received, or within three business days based on the<br />
application type. This differs from the 20-day federal requirement in<br />
an effort to ensure compliance, efficiently process requests for<br />
service, and provide excellent customer service.<br />
Transform the Ugly<br />
No matter how good or bad the self-assessment process looks on paper, it<br />
will be ugly without a culture of collaborative communication between those<br />
conducting a self-assessment and those benefiting from it. The<br />
independent nature of the self-assessment team helps keep results<br />
consistent and unbiased but should not make the team come off as cold,<br />
aloof, or ignorant. Those managing the cases should not feel afraid of the<br />
team or feel like the team has them under a microscope. Instead, the team<br />
should act as, and be viewed as, a trusted partner that will help ensure the
agency is ready for OCSE audits. A culture of open communication and<br />
respect will go a long way in preventing the “bad” things mentioned above.<br />
Below are some ideas on how to help establish such a culture:<br />
● In Arizona, a collaborative meeting between the audit team and<br />
DCSS leadership resulted in getting a good perspective on how the<br />
audit reports can add value to benefit the program. Further, the audit<br />
team developed a survey to obtain valuable feedback about its selfassessment<br />
and data reliability reports. As a result, the audit team is<br />
working to add additional information to the report to make it easier<br />
for case managers to review the report without having to do further<br />
research. The audit team also expanded its exit conferences to<br />
encourage the whole office to attend–including line staff–rather than<br />
meeting with only the office manager to discuss the audit process and<br />
the report. This change in the style of the meeting was especially<br />
informative to case managers who were new to the child support<br />
program and helped them realize how vital their role is to ensure data<br />
is accurate and reliable. Their attendance also allowed case<br />
managers to ask questions about how the audit team reviews the<br />
information. This collaboration with the entire office created a<br />
partnership and open communication even if the result of the audit<br />
report was not favorable. The audit team can be viewed as a trusted<br />
partner with the child support division.<br />
● In Georgia, DCSS held virtual training sessions for staff—including<br />
case managers and their supervisors— to explain the importance of<br />
data reliability in audits, and its impact on incentive awards. The DRA<br />
process is a team effort involving staff in local offices and state office<br />
units. This year, DCSS held a virtual kick-off meeting with managers<br />
to discuss the process and outcomes from the prior year’s audit to<br />
help identify improvements for next year. A similar closeout meeting<br />
will be planned after the final report is issued.<br />
Summary<br />
Child support programs can face federal audits with confidence by following<br />
a few keys to success. These keys include establishing an independent
and well-documented self-assessment process, using self-assessment<br />
audits to address the root causes of problems, proactively identifying and<br />
addressing high-risk areas, and ensuring a culture of collaborative<br />
communications between those conducting the self-assessment audits and<br />
those managing the cases. Ultimately, the goal is to not only pass OCSE<br />
audits with flying colors but to provide the best possible experience for the<br />
clients served.<br />
_________________________________________<br />
Gay Harris is currently an Audit Supervisor for the Arizona Department of Economic<br />
Security (ADES) and joined the Office of Inspector General, Internal Audit<br />
Administration office in 2012 to conduct internal data reliability and control selfassessment<br />
audits. Prior to that, she worked in ADES, Division of Child Support<br />
Services for 25 years in various roles as a case manager and conducting internal audits<br />
for the Division. She has extensive knowledge and experience in the child support<br />
program specifically in data reliability and control self-assessment. She attended<br />
Haskell Indian Nations University in Lawrence, Kansas, and received a degree in<br />
business education. She is also a Certified Inspector General Auditor.<br />
Brian Miele is the Chief Auditor for the Arizona Department of Economic Security<br />
(ADES). He joined ADES in 2019 and has been involved in auditing the Arizona state<br />
government since 2006. Brian received a Master of Public Administration from Brigham<br />
Young University and is a Certified Inspector General Auditor.<br />
Liz Schriber currently serves as the Strategic Performance Planning Manager for the<br />
Georgia Department of Human Services, Division of Child Support Services (DCSS).<br />
She has been with DCSS since 2006. She is an NCSEA U Alumni and Co-chair of the<br />
NCSEA Research Subcommittee. Liz has extensive data analysis experience and<br />
comes up with creative ways to identify trends and opportunities for improvement. Liz<br />
has a Bachelor of Political Science degree with a minor in sociology from the University<br />
of Georgia.
Intergovernmental Hot Topics! Part 2<br />
by Rob Velcoff<br />
Intergovernmental Support Services<br />
The <strong>January</strong> 2022 Child Support CommuniQue included part one of<br />
“Intergovernmental Hot Topics!.” If that article left you wanting more, please<br />
allow me to introduce Part 2. In the first article, we discussed items such as<br />
interstate payment processing, enforcement of “dead” cases, and $0<br />
orders. Now let’s add a few more controversial subjects to the list.<br />
Interstate Case Closure Regulations<br />
There are currently 21 case closure criteria listed in CFR § 303.11. Of<br />
these, a responding jurisdiction in a two-state interstate case has only three<br />
at its disposal for case closure:<br />
(17) The responding agency documents failure by the initiating<br />
agency to take an action that is essential for the next step in providing<br />
services;<br />
(18) The initiating agency has notified the responding State that the<br />
initiating State has closed its case under § 303.7(c)(11);<br />
(19) The initiating agency has notified the responding State that its<br />
intergovernmental services are no longer needed;<br />
The other 18 criteria can be used only by an initiating jurisdiction. That<br />
means that if the initiating jurisdiction wants the responding jurisdiction to<br />
keep a two-state interstate case open, the responding jurisdiction has to do<br />
so even if one or more of the other 18 case closure criteria apply in its<br />
jurisdiction. Remember, the federal case closure criteria are optional, not<br />
mandatory. States may choose which ones they do or do not want to use.<br />
Let’s say the responding jurisdiction normally closes a local case in its own<br />
state using criterion #9(i), “The noncustodial parent's sole income is from<br />
Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments ….” But if the initiating<br />
jurisdiction does not use that particular criterion, the responding jurisdiction<br />
would have to keep such a case open. They might have previously closed<br />
several in-state cases that met these circumstances, but they would have<br />
to keep an interstate case open. This defies logic, to say nothing of the fact
that it would be very difficult to have to explain to one custodial parent why<br />
her/his case with a given noncustodial parent has to be closed while the<br />
case of a different custodial parent with the same noncustodial parent must<br />
remain open.<br />
This situation cries out for consistency. There is a fear that states will be<br />
closing two-state cases against the wishes of the initiating jurisdictions.<br />
Perhaps. But this would not occur very often. In fact, in an attempt to<br />
mandate cooperation, the reverse is actually occurring. It would be better to<br />
encourage communication and understanding between the states instead<br />
of trying to force a policy that only works part of the time. Responding<br />
jurisdictions should be able to close their two-state cases if any of their<br />
case closure criteria apply, while the initiating jurisdiction keeps the case<br />
open (if applicable) and works it to the best of their ability as a local onestate<br />
case. If the case circumstances change, the case can always be<br />
made two-state in the future if the given case closure criteria no longer<br />
exists. Trusting states to work out these issues among themselves might<br />
be the better option than attempting to mandate something that<br />
perpetuates inconsistency.<br />
Interest<br />
Interest in child support is very controversial – you either love it or you hate<br />
it. States that add interest to their arrears or money judgments generally<br />
think it is an important tool to assist custodial parents in keeping their<br />
financial heads above water when<br />
dealing with delinquent payors. Some<br />
custodial parents may have to go into<br />
debt due to the non-payment of support,<br />
and may end up having to pay interest<br />
on their own overdue bills as a result, so<br />
the extra money received in interest<br />
payments is a way of evening things out.<br />
States that do not charge interest<br />
believe it is just another burden to heap on the backs of parents who are<br />
struggling to meet their financial obligations without having to compile<br />
additional fees onto an often insurmountable sum. We’ve all heard the<br />
stories of arrears-only cases where the noncustodial parent is making<br />
monthly payments but, due to high interest charges, the total arrears<br />
amount due at the end of each month is actually higher despite some<br />
payments being made.
Is there any sort of compromise possible on interstate cases when one<br />
state charges interest and the other state does not? Or when two states<br />
each charge different percentages? For those states that don’t charge<br />
interest on child support arrears or that call for a single percentage<br />
nationwide, remember that<br />
interest rates on money<br />
judgments are not just a child<br />
support thing. States that<br />
charge interest generally do<br />
so on all money judgments,<br />
child support or otherwise,<br />
Interest forgiveness can also be an<br />
important tool when conducting debt<br />
compromise on a case.<br />
and do not have the ability to vary this amount from judgment to judgment.<br />
If a tax judgment charges interest in State A at a rate of 10%, so too would<br />
a child support judgment, and the child support agency enforcing such a<br />
judgment would likely have no discretion when working the case.<br />
Interest forgiveness can also be an important tool when conducting debt<br />
compromise on a case. Many states do this on their TANF caseloads.<br />
States often do this in non-TANF cases as well, either with the custodial<br />
parent’s permission or via state policy. The reasoning behind this approach<br />
makes perfect sense: most parents to whom the support is owed would be<br />
perfectly happy to receive current support and a little something toward the<br />
arrears. To help ensure such payments, interest accruals are something<br />
many of them would be more than willing to forego.<br />
When a responding jurisdiction registers a court order from a state that<br />
charges interest, the registering state is not expected to calculate the<br />
interest. That is the responsibility of the initiating jurisdiction. However, the<br />
responding jurisdiction is expected to enforce the interest that has accrued.<br />
In fact, federal policy requires this. If you recall the information from Part 1<br />
of this article, the state that issued the controlling order has the official<br />
determination of arrears. So when the court order state periodically updates<br />
the arrears figure and adds interest, the responding jurisdiction is bound by<br />
those figures and must enforce them. Updated payment histories are<br />
helpful; a best practice is for annual updates, although if a case is going<br />
into court on an enforcement or a modification petition that would be a good<br />
time for an arrears reconciliation as well. While this is extra work on the<br />
part of the responding jurisdiction, helping each other is part of our jobs.<br />
Explaining to the person paying support why the arrears are so high due to<br />
the interest that is charging is something the child support worker from the<br />
paying parent’s jurisdiction is expected to do.
There has been some discussion about not charging any interest on<br />
interstate cases as a nationwide policy. While initially that might make<br />
sense because it would make everyone’s life easier, I do not agree with<br />
that policy. Noncustodial parents would still be charged interest in many<br />
states; it’s just that said interest would not be enforced by the responding<br />
jurisdiction. So by the time the order terminates and the responding state<br />
closes the two-state case, there could be thousands of dollars in interest<br />
that is still owed on the initiating state’s case record. Asking all states to<br />
waive interest charges on interstate cases is not a viable solution either, as<br />
some child support agencies might not have the authority to do so. Plus<br />
some states think that charging interest is a good thing. Making child<br />
support workers’ lives easier should not be the only goal in interstate case<br />
processing. There are just too many reasons not to introduce such a policy.<br />
While charging interest on child support arrears might be an interesting<br />
topic for debate, remember that the states that charge interest are<br />
generally required by law to do so. There might be no option here. All<br />
states must enforce the accrued interest on those registered orders<br />
whether they agree with the concept or not.<br />
Interstate IWO on UIB<br />
One of the best things that happened when<br />
the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act<br />
(UIFSA) came about in 1996 was the<br />
advent of the interstate income withholding<br />
order (IWO). For more than twenty-five<br />
years, states have had the authority to send<br />
wage withholding orders to employers<br />
anywhere in the United States. This has<br />
greatly increased collections, reduced timeframes, cut down on two-state<br />
actions, and resulted in tremendous improvements to the child support<br />
program nationwide. The language in UIFSA is very cut and dried:<br />
SECTION 501. EMPLOYER’S RECEIPT OF INCOME-<br />
WITHHOLDING ORDER OF ANOTHER STATE. An incomewithholding<br />
order issued in another state may be sent by or on behalf<br />
of the obligee, or by the support enforcement agency, to the person<br />
defined as the obligor’s employer under the income-withholding law<br />
of this state without first filing a petition or comparable pleading or<br />
registering the order with a tribunal of this state.
The next question is, does this section of law also pertain to unemployment<br />
insurance benefits (UIBs)? The answer depends upon whom you ask.<br />
Currently, only 14 states/territories (out of 54, or a little over 25%) permit<br />
this type of withholding: Georgia, Indiana, Massachusetts, Michigan,<br />
Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma,<br />
Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Virgin<br />
Islands, and Wisconsin. There is<br />
additional information on the<br />
Intergovernmental Reference<br />
Guide (IRG) about this for these<br />
states/territories. For the rest, the<br />
simple explanation is that<br />
unemployment insurance benefits<br />
do not fall under the legal<br />
definition of “income” in that jurisdiction. That is an oversimplification, and<br />
there certainly may be more to it than that.<br />
In most if not all states, UIB intercepts are done via a mass match, not by<br />
individual IWOs. The Unemployment Benefits office may not have the<br />
ability to handle individual IWOs sent one at a time. However, this lack of<br />
resources should not be enough to stop a legally issued formal document.<br />
There has to be something more at work here. The issue likely goes back<br />
to the legal definition of “income” and “employer.” Here is some information<br />
from a very old federal policy document, PIQ-99-04, dated March 22, 1999:<br />
Question 1: Are State Employment Security Agencies (SESAs)<br />
required to process UC intercepts from States other than their own?<br />
Answer: Yes. If the State UI agency is encompassed by the definition<br />
of "employer" within section 501 of the Uniform Interstate Family<br />
Support Act (UIFSA) as enacted by the receiving state, an income<br />
withholding order may be sent directly to the UI agency since it is "the<br />
person or entity defined as the obligor’s employer under [the income<br />
withholding laws of the State]...". Withholding for UI benefits is also<br />
governed by sections 303(e) and 454(a)(19) of the Social Security<br />
Act (the Act).<br />
What this seems to boil down to is the legal definition. Still, the intent of<br />
section 501 of UIFSA is very clear. Since interstate wage withholding works<br />
so well for employment, it would also work equally well for unemployment.<br />
For the three-quarters of the states/territories that do not currently allow<br />
interstate wage withholding for UIBs, reconsidering the definition of<br />
“income” and “employer” would work for the greater good of the child
support program and would ultimately benefit the children and families we<br />
all serve.<br />
Rob Velcoff is an independent child support consultant with his own agency,<br />
Intergovernmental Support Services. Before starting his own agency, Mr. Velcoff<br />
worked for the New York State Division of Child Support Services for over 30 years. Mr.<br />
Velcoff has received several awards, including ERICSA’s Felix Infausto Award<br />
(President’s Award). An individual member of NCSEA, Mr. Velcoff received a BS in<br />
Criminal Justice from the State University College of New York at Brockport and an MA<br />
in Criminal Justice from the State University of New York at Albany.
Teleworking Tips as a Service to<br />
Child Support Workers<br />
by Laurel Eaton, Rachel Karch, and Nancy Sonleitner,<br />
University of Oklahoma, Center for Public Management<br />
On March 16, 2020, Oklahoma Child Support Services (CSS) staff, along<br />
with all but essential workers in all areas of employment across Oklahoma<br />
government, were sent home to quarantine in an effort to slow the spread<br />
of COVID-19. The abrupt change in work location and how work was to be<br />
done was a challenge for many CSS workers. In order to keep employees<br />
engaged and still feeling like a part of the CSS team, three members of the<br />
University of Oklahoma Center for Public Management (OU-CPM) i contract<br />
team began writing daily Teleworking Tips.<br />
In order to write a daily one- to two-page article, we used available<br />
resources for inspiration and, in some cases, content. We were careful not<br />
to plagiarize, and we faithfully cited our sources. We focused on the child<br />
support audience and used inclusive language to create and maintain a<br />
cohesive identity of going through the difficulties together. Initially, the<br />
Teleworking Tips concerned technology issues. Before quarantine, and<br />
with an eye on the future, the Oklahoma Department of Human Services<br />
(OKDHS) administration ii was making a move toward using more<br />
technology, including Microsoft Office 365. The Teleworking Tips first<br />
began addressing how to use Teams, its various features, and ways to<br />
keep in touch with co-workers in “offices” that were no longer housed<br />
together.
“Thank you, thank you! It<br />
always seems that<br />
whenever I’m feeling down<br />
or stuck, along comes the<br />
perfect tip! I loved the one<br />
about the stretching<br />
exercise the other day, and<br />
then today up pops ‘Just<br />
Breathe.’ Again, thanks a<br />
lot!”<br />
The Teleworking Tips team includes a<br />
talented artist who made the Tips visually<br />
interesting so more child support staff<br />
would be enticed to look at the Daily Tip to<br />
see what it was all about.<br />
Our artist-in-residence created an<br />
imaginative logo for Tips articles, as well<br />
as for new Technology Training articles<br />
and health and wellness articles we<br />
created for child support field workers. The<br />
backgrounds and images used were<br />
engaging and sometimes amusing. The<br />
team is lucky to have this person, and we are proud of her contributions to<br />
the aesthetic of the Tips.<br />
As we settled into our daily production routine, the Teleworking Tips team<br />
became aware of concerns about staying safe and healthy during the early<br />
months of quarantine. Many businesses were closed; just about the only<br />
open businesses were grocery stores and pharmacies. The team wrote<br />
articles on mask wearing, social distancing, handwashing, and DIY<br />
cleaning products.<br />
As the weeks turned into months, it became clear that vacations and<br />
cruises were not going to happen, and movie theaters, restaurants, and<br />
other entertainment venues were still closed. Seeing that the child support<br />
workforce might need a distraction and some recreation, the team wrote<br />
articles on amusement parks, museums<br />
around the world, U.S. National Parks,<br />
online zoos, and night sky gazing.<br />
Articles offered virtual roller coaster<br />
rides, featuring some of the most famous<br />
wood and steel roller coasters in the<br />
United States. We located virtual<br />
museum tours around the world where<br />
viewers could “walk through” the<br />
museum as if they were there themselves. We identified celestial events<br />
taking place within the month and explained what they were and how to<br />
see them. There are also several interesting things to see in Oklahoma; the<br />
team wrote about them and their locations in one memorable publication.
Children staying home from school, with parents thrust into the role of parttime<br />
educators while trying to keep up with<br />
“Thanks so much. The tips<br />
full-time work, was stressful. The<br />
seem like common sense<br />
Teleworking Tips team wrote articles on<br />
until I sit down and just get<br />
how to keep children entertained and busy,<br />
absorbed by my laptop.<br />
featuring activities that took little effort to<br />
The "do more than just get<br />
create and needed little supervision. The<br />
a cup of coffee" one hits<br />
team produced suggestions on<br />
home!”<br />
office/workspace arrangements, including<br />
signs and signals parents could use to let<br />
children know when not to interrupt. The team also supported parents in<br />
their role as substitute educators by writing articles that included<br />
suggestions for coping and reminding them that they did not have<br />
education degrees, no one expected them to replace their children’s<br />
teachers, and they were doing the best they could.<br />
The team also considered other stressors, such as dealing with unfamiliar<br />
technologies, separation from co-workers, and concerns about staying<br />
healthy. The Teleworking Tips included articles on mental health, stress<br />
reduction, short exercise breaks, physical activity, and self-care. Articles on<br />
breathing, meditation, and taking 5-minute body scan breaks to relieve<br />
tension were also part of the effort to help with stress management.<br />
Understanding the value of laughter in helping our immune system and<br />
improving mood, the Teleworking Tips team also wrote articles featuring<br />
jokes to give readers a chuckle. The jokes were mainly “dad jokes” and<br />
family-friendly, amusing puns.<br />
Many folks fondly remember making bread and experimenting with cooking<br />
during the pandemic. The team wrote articles on snacks, easy to prepare<br />
main dishes, “tour of the world of food” recipes, and lots of comfort food<br />
recipes. As holidays approached, the<br />
team included holiday craft ideas,<br />
recipes, and tips on how to have virtual<br />
family parties when it wasn’t safe to get<br />
together. These tips included ideas for<br />
decorating, “eating together,” and family<br />
game nights.<br />
As the pandemic wore on and the<br />
promise of a vaccine was on the horizon, the Teleworking Tips focus<br />
shifted somewhat to include more health and resilience articles. The team<br />
also presented an entire series on all the Microsoft Office 365 apps, not
only via email but also through presentations on MS Teams to answer<br />
questions and demonstrate how to access, set up, and use the apps in the<br />
world of child support.<br />
In addition, to help separated co-workers retain a sense of community,<br />
readers were asked to send pictures of their<br />
“I love this article! It’s so on<br />
pets to feature these “co-workers” in an<br />
point with the Science of<br />
article. There were so many responses to<br />
Hope, positive psychology,<br />
this request that this article was written as a<br />
and changing your mindset<br />
series featuring unusual pets, cats, and<br />
to a Growth Mindset! This<br />
large and small dogs. The series featured<br />
is wonderful!”<br />
pets’ human companions as well, along with<br />
their comments about their pets’ cuteness<br />
or quirkiness.<br />
As we slowly began to emerge from the months-long isolation of<br />
quarantine, some of us were not sure how to re-engage. The team wrote<br />
articles on how to create your own Pandemic Pod (e.g. safe social group)<br />
and what to keep in mind when getting together with others indoors. Other<br />
articles focused on suggestions for how to stay safe while flying or using<br />
other forms of travel.<br />
During the pandemic, many people from all walks of life lost their jobs or<br />
were suffering financially. The Teleworking Tips team wrote articles<br />
addressing this source of stress, as well as articles offering suggestions<br />
and support during the difficulties.<br />
After more than a year of daily Teleworking Tips, we reduced articles to five<br />
to six times a month with an emphasis on applying Microsoft 365<br />
technology to child support processes and procedures, along with<br />
occasional articles to provide entertainment or tips on wellness and<br />
technology. From the middle of March 2020, the team wrote approximately<br />
240 articles in the first year and over 100 articles in the second year and<br />
continues to produce informational and helpful articles.<br />
You may access some of the Tips here.<br />
Other states also sent encouraging emails to their staff throughout the<br />
pandemic to help them carry forward throughout the stress of the<br />
quarantine. These encouraging emails gave us all hope for a better day.<br />
Hope is one of the strongest predictors of well-being, and an emerging,<br />
robust body of evidence is demonstrating that hope is also an important<br />
component of organizational well-being. Based on this research and on the<br />
experiences many CSS workers have on a daily basis with our customers,
it has become apparent that hope benefits<br />
everyone in the child support system, from<br />
caseworkers to customers. The<br />
Teleworking Tips team’s goal was to<br />
provide hope, information, and a sense of<br />
community to the many CSS workers who<br />
diligently continued to serve our customers<br />
during a difficult and unprecedented time.<br />
_________________________________________<br />
Laurel Eaton retired in 2016 as the Programs Manager for the Office of Planning,<br />
Evaluation, and Learning-Child Support Services after 46 years with the Oklahoma<br />
Department of Human Services—38 of those years with or related to CSS. She is now a<br />
Project Coordinator with the University of Oklahoma, Center for Public Management,<br />
contracted to Child Support Services. Ms. Eaton is an individual member of NCSEA.<br />
Rachel Karch has a master’s degree in Instructional Leadership and Academic<br />
Curriculum, specializing in classroom gamification, from the University of Oklahoma.<br />
She has taught in Lexington and Norman Public Schools as an AP World History<br />
teacher and an art teacher, during which time she received several awards and grants<br />
for her work in education. In 2019, she began working for OUCPM as a curriculum<br />
developer, became an instructional designer for the same team, and now is the OSIS<br />
Policy Contract Manager.<br />
Dr. Nancy Sonleitner has a Ph.D. in sociology from the University of Oklahoma and<br />
has taught in Dubai, the United Arab Emirates, the University of Tennessee (Martin),<br />
and online at Bowling Green State University and local community colleges. Currently,<br />
Dr. Sonleitner is assisting Oklahoma Child Support Services create training materials for<br />
the Child Support workforce, and assisting with course development for asynchronous<br />
and face-to-face workforce training.<br />
i<br />
OU-CPM - https://outreach.ou.edu/community-services/health-human-services/center-publicmanagement/services/<br />
OU-CPM is the administrator of the Child Support Specialist Certification<br />
Program, the CSS Employer Services Center, and a host of other services for OKDHS.<br />
ii<br />
OKDHS (Oklahoma Department of Human Services) is the umbrella agency for Child Support<br />
Services.
NCSEA <strong>2023</strong> Policy Forum Preview<br />
by Margot Bean and Connie Chesnik<br />
Co-chairs, NCSEA <strong>2023</strong> Policy Forum<br />
Early in February <strong>2023</strong>, Child Support and Human Services professionals<br />
from across the country will come together again in Washington, D.C. for<br />
the annual NCSEA Policy Forum. This year’s theme, “Engagement –<br />
Delivering Quality Services with a Passion for Helping Families,”<br />
focuses on what we in the child support program do well with passion while<br />
being mindful of the impact and ramifications of our decision-making. Over<br />
the Forum’s three days, sessions will explore the important balance of<br />
keeping a focus on child support’s strong historical foundation, while<br />
embracing innovations and program evolution.<br />
As we set out planning this year's agenda, we remained committed to our<br />
effort to build on NCSEA’s collaborative inclusion of various perspectives<br />
and priorities that clearly support our collective vision. The perspectives of<br />
our tribal members, the impact of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI)<br />
efforts, and the importance of engaging external partners were vital to the<br />
conversations. The Policy Forum Planning Committee has developed 10<br />
plenary sessions that offer attendees a variety of perspectives on trending<br />
topics in the entire child support community. We continue our practice from<br />
last year’s Policy Forum of presenting–in some of the sessions–a short<br />
video from a variety of think tanks performing research and advocacy that<br />
showcases their insights into child support engagement and quality<br />
services.
Thursday’s Opening Plenary will begin with NCSEA President Jim Fleming<br />
sharing his vision for the Policy Forum, followed by welcoming remarks<br />
from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS),<br />
Administration for Children and Families (ACF) Assistant Secretary,<br />
<strong>January</strong> Contreras. ACF Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE)<br />
Commissioner, Tanguler Gray, will deliver a keynote reflecting on the past<br />
year’s accomplishments and the future focus of her Office.<br />
Thursday’s second plenary will present an ambitious proposal from<br />
NCSEA’s Policy and Government Relations (PGR) Committee that resulted<br />
from a massive effort to develop a comprehensive child support legislative<br />
proposal not seen since PWRORA was passed in 1998. PGR’s work has<br />
identified improvements and solutions in different areas of the program that<br />
will enhance performance and quality service delivery to families, including<br />
reforms and changes to TANF recovery, performance measures,<br />
intergovernmental, program funding, and enforcement. In addition,<br />
congressional staff will share their views on a variety of potential child<br />
support legislative proposals.<br />
Thursday afternoon will commence with a focus on modern child support<br />
enforcement tools. This includes using enforcement as a stepping-stone to<br />
building family capacity, engaging effectively through electronic hearings,<br />
requiring the reporting of independent contractors, and improving the<br />
insurance match process. The afternoon finishes with a comprehensive<br />
review of the 20-plus years’ history of federally funded Section 1115 grants,<br />
Special Improvement Project (SIP) grants, and Section 1115 waiver<br />
demonstration projects that have aided the seismic shift from a focus solely<br />
on enforcement to comprehensive engagement. The session will highlight<br />
the most recent demonstration grants, including employment services and<br />
support for non-custodial parents, behavioral interventions, procedural<br />
justice, and communication and outreach in a digital world.<br />
In the last two-plus years, much has been shared and debated on how we<br />
go about implementing DEI. Friday’s plenaries will open with expanding the<br />
DEI conversation by hearing from those who have succeeded in<br />
implementing DEI-related change and are continuing to build on their<br />
initiatives. They will share the challenges and tools they used to help us<br />
form action plans to benefit the child support community across the<br />
country. This plenary is followed by a discussion of the recent joint ACF<br />
OCSE/Children’s Bureau guidance on case referrals from IV-E to IV-D.<br />
From a panel of states that have changed their processes, the audience
will learn more about the guidance and the supporting research,<br />
implementation considerations, strategies, and challenges, and how these<br />
changes can strengthen collaboration between child support and child<br />
welfare.<br />
Friday’s program continues with a session that builds off the work of an<br />
existing partnership among the American Public Human Services<br />
Association (APHSA), the National Conference of Child Support Directors<br />
(NCCSD), and NCSEA to create strategies to align child support with<br />
parallel programs and services. The panel will include child support<br />
directors and economic support administrators who will discuss advancing<br />
economic mobility and improving collections through promoting supportive<br />
services, access to assistance, and enhanced employment and training<br />
opportunities for all parents and caregivers. The panel will also discuss<br />
successfully aligning services with families at the center with perspectives<br />
from tribal human services. This session will also incorporate custodial and<br />
noncustodial parents with lived experience, who will share their<br />
perspectives on how thoughtful, trauma-informed services and connections<br />
to support lead to better outcomes for all parents and their children. The<br />
day’s final plenary will feature a brief research presentation about the most<br />
recent data on the prevalence of incarceration in the U.S. and, specifically,<br />
arrests/convictions/periods of incarceration among noncustodial parents<br />
that leads to difficulty meeting their obligations and engaging with child<br />
support agencies. Author Sharmain Harris will share his lived experience<br />
as a justice-involved father and take us on an inspirational ride through his<br />
personal stories and work over the past six years to increase awareness of<br />
father involvement and to implement strategies to be more engaging.<br />
Policy Forum attendees will not want to miss the final Saturday morning<br />
program. The day opens with a highly interactive plenary that explores<br />
various state child support debt compromise policies. By diving into the<br />
actual processes behind those programs—and their data—participants in<br />
this plenary will gain a heightened appreciation for the burden of running<br />
such programs, versus the amount of child support debt reduced.<br />
The national child support program caseload dropped almost 1½ million<br />
over the past five years. Despite this reduction, it still serves nearly 16<br />
million children or about one in five children nationwide, and performance<br />
on the federal performance measures continues to improve for those<br />
children. The <strong>2023</strong> NCSEA Policy Forum will conclude with another not-tobe-missed<br />
plenary where speakers discuss why caseloads are decreasing
and, more importantly, what can be done to turn this trend around so that<br />
our services reach customers who need it the most.<br />
We look forward to connecting with you in Washington, D.C., February 2-4,<br />
<strong>2023</strong>, to continue the conversations from last year’s Policy Forum and to<br />
start new ones!<br />
Margot Bean is a Managing Director in Deloitte Consulting’s Human Services<br />
Transformation Practice, focusing on helping child support programs improve their<br />
outcomes by providing effective and efficient data driven customer-focused services.<br />
She helps child support programs develop human centered case management systems<br />
that streamline business processes, effectively analyze their caseloads, and allow case<br />
managers to execute case strategies based on customer needs. Margot’s wide variety<br />
of government experience prior to joining Deloitte provides her with deep understanding<br />
and insight: Commissioner of the federal Office of Child Support Enforcement, IV-D<br />
Director of the New York State Child Support program, IV-D Director of the Guam Child<br />
Support Program, and child support attorney. She is a current member of the NCSEA<br />
Board of Directors<br />
Connie M. Chesnik received both her undergraduate and law degrees from the<br />
University of Wisconsin-Madison. As an attorney for the Wisconsin Department of<br />
Workforce Development, Connie advised the child support program for many years and<br />
has spoken frequently on Wisconsin’s child support guidelines and Wisconsin’s tribal IV-<br />
D program. She is currently the Administrator of the Division of Family and Economic<br />
Security in the Department of Children and Families where she oversees Wisconsin’s<br />
child support, refugee and employment programs. Connie is a member of the State Bar<br />
of Wisconsin, and the State and National Child Support Enforcement Associations. She<br />
currently serves on the NCSEA Board of Directors.
Is NCSEA U For You?<br />
NCSEA U was chartered in 2013 and currently has<br />
more than 135 alumni. NCSEA U provides a unique<br />
premier educational and professional development<br />
opportunity. It is structured for learning leaders in the<br />
child support community and it complements NCSEA’s<br />
other educational initiatives and strategies. The<br />
program is taught by nationally recognized child<br />
support leaders, offering a variety of informative and<br />
strategic topics. Classes are structured with an<br />
emphasis on group discussions that include work/life balance and best practice initiatives<br />
with real time work environment scenarios. And starting in February, <strong>2023</strong>, NCSEA U @<br />
Policy Forum offers participants training in policy, advocacy and outreach.<br />
Whether for yourself or your staff, NCSEA U offers a transformative learning experience<br />
and is a catalyst for networking opportunities. NCSEA U alumni would love for you to<br />
become a part of this unique group. Because we are proud of NCSEA U, we will be<br />
featuring Alumni in upcoming <strong>CSQ</strong> articles. Their stories will highlight why NCSEA U is for<br />
you.<br />
Meet Our NCSEA U Alumni<br />
Liz Schriber, Class of 2022<br />
Georgia Division of Child Support Services<br />
Strategic Performance Planning Manager<br />
What would you like others to know about NCSEA U? NCSEA U is an amazing opportunity to<br />
learn from top-notch leaders and network with other child support professionals. It was very clear<br />
that there is a lot of thought and preparation that goes into the materials for the sessions. NCSEA<br />
U provides a unique experience for participants to share their experiences and perspectives on<br />
program improvement.<br />
NCSEA U @ Leadership Symposium focuses on the emerging and learning leader. How do<br />
you define leadership? I define leadership as the ability to bring people together and<br />
empowering the team to achieve a common goal.<br />
Why would you recommend NCSEA U to others? NCSEA U provides an opportunity for you to<br />
meet other child support professionals that share a passion for program improvement and<br />
enhancing their leadership skills. It allows you to learn from other program perspectives and<br />
expand your network of child support friends and community.
Emily Gregg, Class of 2022<br />
Tennessee Child Support<br />
Policy and Case Resolution Director<br />
What is the most valuable aspect of the NCSEA U experience? Ideas, Ideas, Ideas!<br />
Connections, connections, connections!<br />
What would you like others to know about NCSEA U? NCSEA U is a wonderful experience.<br />
The leaders provided great insight into their trials and errors throughout their child support journey.<br />
The NCSEA U leaders (Erin, Wally, and Lisa) helped each one of us take an idea and form the<br />
idea into an actual plan of action. Hearing from other states who have tried various initiatives also<br />
assists with planning your own priorities and initiatives within your state, tribe, or county.<br />
What is a key leadership attribute that you appreciate in others? I appreciate someone who<br />
values others' input and who can lead by example. Someone who is not afraid to admit they may<br />
not know the answer but is willing to do the digging to find out. Someone who is not afraid to jump<br />
in and help out.<br />
Van Nguyen, Class of 2022<br />
Washington State Division of Child Support<br />
Child Support Program Manager<br />
What would you like others to know about NCSEA U? NCSEAU is educational, inspirational,<br />
and is a supportive network.<br />
Since attending NCSEA U, what opportunities (personal and professional) have you<br />
experienced? Working with the Research, Data and Analysis Division on creating a survey for my<br />
project.<br />
What is a key leadership attribute that you appreciate in others? Some key attributes that I<br />
appreciate in others include: honesty, integrity, excellence, accountability, emotional intelligence,<br />
and respect. I believe a leader who embodies these values is able to gain/earn trust from the people<br />
that they lead and nothing is impossible to achieve when you have people's trust.