Pennsylvania
Domestic Relations Sections (DRS)
Best Practices in the Child Support Program
Fourth Edition
May 2003

Allegheny County

 

                              Lump Sums Anyone??

The “Lump Sum” program, a remedy utilized for child support collection by Allegheny County Family Division (“ACFD”), was implemented in 1992 by the Court.   The procedure was initiated in response to an increasing number of cases where child support garnished from workers compensation payments ended when the obligor settled their comp case for a significant lump sum payment in lieu of the on-going (future) entitlement to this income.  This settlement, previously referred to as a “Commutation”, is now called a “Compromise and Release”.  An ACFD protocol was put into place to insure collection of child support from these lump sum payments, both to liquidate arrears and to secure future payments of support.

This protocol is premised on Pennsylvania’s support statute, which includes workers’ compensation benefits within the definition of income subject to wage garnishment (23 Pa. C.S.A.  §4302).   In addition, workers’ compensation case law makes it very clear that these lump sum settlements are “future income”.   Hence, the Court may garnish lump-sum “settlement” payments and require that these funds be escrowed and utilized for payment of future support by distributing the monthly support amount.

To prevent the payout by workers compensation insurance carriers of these lump sum payments, the following language was added to all wage garnishment orders directed to the carriers:

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT NO COMMUTATION OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION BENEFITS OR OTHER LUMP SUM DISTRIBUTION TO THE DEFENDANT SHALL OCCUR UNTIL THIS ORDER OF COURT IS DISSOLVED BY FURTHER ORDER.   THE DEFENDANT MUST PETITION THIS COURT TO HAVE THE ORDER DISSOLVED.  IF THE PLAINTIFF, PAYEE, DOES NOT HAVE COUNSEL OF RECORD, NOTICE MUST BE GIVEN TO THE TITLE IV-D ATTORNEY, 300 FORT PITT COMMONS BUILDING, 445 FORT PITT BLVD., PITTSBURGH, PA 15219

 

All practicing workers compensation attorneys in Allegheny County quickly learned that if their client (insurance company or obligor/claimant) was preparing to settle a workers compensation case, they should contact the IV-D Attorney to negotiate a settlement.   The IV-D Attorney instituted general parameters of “settlement recommendations” to be made to the plaintiff.   The general recommendation is to pay off all existing arrears and escrow four years of support (or enough to cover the extent of the obligation, whichever was lower).  Once a plaintiff ‘s approval is obtained, Court orders are prepared and processed to effectuate the agreement and escrow.  In addition, the Court order addresses the treatment of earning capacity for the obligor in future support proceedings (i.e., obligor stipulates that the net lump sum settlement amount, divided by 500 weeks, plus any other actual income he/she receives, would be income for determination of future support).  This prevents the obligor from spending all of the net proceeds and then requesting a modification based on having no income (i.e., the monthly support obligation should not decrease because obligor voluntarily chooses to settle her/his case). 

Practicing attorneys in the County expressed great satisfaction with the process as it enabled them to quickly resolve all aspects of the compensation case.   This became vitally important when amendments to the workers compensation law in 1996 required Compromise and Release agreements to address the payment of support.

The increase in child support collections rose a substantial amount once this new remedy was implemented.  With that in mind, Allegheny County began to garnish other lump sum payments such as bonuses, personal injury settlements, and vacation pay.  This was accomplished by placing the same language on all wage garnishment orders.   While these other types of lump sum payments may not be used for future support (as they are not “future income”), they can be used to satisfy or reduce support arrears.  In the instance of personal injury claims, the garnishment order is sent to both the insurance company and the attorney handling the claim for the obligor.  With this language added to the garnishment, the defendant’s income provider becomes liable to contact the Court prior to the release of any lump sum payment to which the defendant may be entitled.  Once contacted, the Court then makes a determination whether a lump sum is applicable on a case by case basis.  ACFD’s lump sum orders are issued outside of PACSES, utilizing templates created in Microsoft Word.

If the Court receives information that the income provider released monies to the defendant without the Court’s knowledge, a contempt hearing is scheduled for both the income provider and the defendant.  Under Pennsylvania law, that payor can be made to pay the full amount of the lump sum settlement.

The workers’ compensation / lump sum settlement program has increased ACFD collections by an outstanding average of over one million dollars per year.   Other lump sum orders have increased collections by substantially reducing arrears in the hundreds of thousands.

If you wish to learn more about this efficient collection remedy, please contact the ACFD Administrator, 440 Ross Street, 5th Floor, Pittsburgh, PA  15219, and (412) 350-6930 for additional information. 

 

PHONE POWER

The Objective:

Increase collections from delinquent accounts by directly contacting defendants in the evenings. It was understood that the program would need to be cost effective since it would be paid with overtime funding and would occur outside of normal working hours.  It requires the use of our best customer service employees.

The Staffing:

One clerical supervisor, one team-lead and six telephone operators work this project every Wednesday evening from 4:30 to 8:00 p.m.

 The Methodology:

The six telephone operators are provided with a packet listing various delinquent payors, who they telephone without any prior notice. The lists used by   the operators are derived from a report that is generated specifically for this project.  For the first hour, the operators review their lists and prepare a “game-plan” for their calls.  This hour period also gives time for the delinquent payor to get home from their normal work routine.

       The operators begin calling the clients randomly in an effort to “surprise” them and to catch them off guard.  The operator telephone numbers are blocked and cannot be identified through caller I.D.  Assuming a contact with a payor is made, the operators then pursue collecting monies, updating current employment information and verifying other demographic information, especially Social Security numbers and addresses.  Most of the telephone conversations last only 5-7 minutes depending on the client’s cooperation.

       The operators then give the payor directions on how to make payments through the mail.  They also are able to take credit card payments over the telephone.  The operators advise the delinquent payor that if s/he cannot commit an amount immediately, they must pay a specific amount within a specified period of days or their case will be listed for immediate court action, a contempt proceeding.

       If clients are not at home for a call, a message is left with a “call-back” telephone number. This number is manned by a team member the next day and the same collection process is followed.

       At the conclusion of the evenings’ work, the operators complete their statistics and turn them in to the lead, who is responsible for all follow-up, compliance review, and scheduling cases if necessary.

Results

Total number of calls made                                                         1566

Total number of “hits” (direct contact w/deft)                               257

Total number of cases referred for rules                                      790

Total number of new wa’s                                                              141

Total number of employee hours worked                                    630

Total number of nights worked                                                        30

Total amount of collections                                                          $53,310.80

 

This is a cumulative figure from May 8, 2002 – December 31, 2002.

 

Participation via telephone – Interstate and Intercounty cases

Procedures developed for Plaintiff/Custodial Parent participation via telephone when Allegheny County/PA is the responding jurisdiction.

In order to facilitate the plaintiff’s participation via telephone in any scheduled conference and/or hearing on an interstate or intercounty case, Allegheny County developed an application form for the plaintiff to complete and return to our office.  A copy of this form is attached.

This notice is mailed with all notices of scheduled conference/hearing.  On UIFSA cases, the notice with application is sent to the initiating state.  On IFSA cases, the notice with application is sent directly to the plaintiff.

We do not require that the plaintiff appear at his/her local child support enforcement office to participate via telephone.  If the plaintiff returns the form with all of the required documentation, a call will be placed from our office to the number designated on the form.

This procedure has been successful – all plaintiffs with interstate or intercounty cases are informed of the right to participate via telephone.  Participation via telephone has increased since implementation and we are able to obtain information directly from the plaintiff which otherwise may have caused a delay in the case.  It is especially helpful since we first schedule a conference before a Domestic Relations Officer as an attempt to settle the case by consent of the parties – when the plaintiff participates by telephone, the likelihood of consent agreement increases. If the case does not settle and is scheduled for a hearing, this procedure has been helpful in gathering information for use by the IV-D attorney and in providing a phone number for the IV-D attorney to contact the plaintiff in preparation for hearing.

 

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY

FAMILY DIVISION

 

___________________________________

                                           Plaintiff                                   PACSES ID#___________________

       v.

                                                                                           DOCKET #____________________

____________________________________

                                           Defendant

 

 

PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION TO PARTICIPATE VIA TELEPHONE IN A UIFSA OR IFSA CONFERENCE/HEARING

 

Please check the appropriate line:

 

___  This is a request for a telephone conference. The conference date is _______________________.

 

___  This is a request for a telephone hearing. The hearing date is ________________________.

 

A request for participation via telephone must be received at least seven days prior to the scheduled court date.

 

Telephone number, including area code, where I can be contacted on the day and time of the conference/hearing ________________________.

Is this number confidential?  ____ Yes  ____ No

 

** If your phone line blocks private numbers and you do not answer when we initiate the call, the conference will proceed without your participation **

I understand by making this request, I agree to:

1.)   Be available at the telephone number provided on the date of the conference/hearing. If I am not available, the conference/hearing will proceed in my absence.

2.)   Provide all required financial and medical insurance information as requested in the Order of Court scheduling the conference/hearing. The court must receive this documentation no later than seven days prior to the scheduled court date.

3.)   Attach a copy of my driver’s license or other photo identification (i.e. passport, employee or school id) to this form for verification of my identity. (Note: If this verification is not provided, your request to participate via telephone may be denied.)

I verify that the information I have provided in association with this request is true and correct:

_________________________________________                                                                  Plaintiff’s signature                                                                           Date

THIS FORM AND ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS MUST EITHER BE MAILED TO THE ALLEGHENY COUNTY FAMILY DIVISION, UIFSA DEPARTMENT, 440 ROSS STREET, PITTSBURGH PA 15219 OR SENT VIA FACSIMILE TO (412) 350-7197.  ANY QUESTIONS SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO YOUR LOCAL DOMESTIC RELATIONS/CHILD SUPPORT OFFICE.

 

                            BERKS COUNTY

Expand use of Direct Deposit for Child Support

Berks DRO have been requested by the Bureau of Child Support Enforcement (BCSE) and the State Collection and Disbursement Unit (SCDU) to pilot efforts to expand the use of the Direct Deposit Option for clients to receive their support payments from SCDU. The pilot started on 4/1/03 and will run until 10/1/03. This pilot will target enrolling new and existing clients into the direct deposit program. After the pilot, the most successful methods will be summarized and reported to other Pennsylvania county DROs. The advantages of using the Direct Deposit option are numerous, such as no more trips to the bank, no lost checks, eliminate potential theft of their checks, no delays due to building closings, mail tampering or weather delays and the information is secure, confidential and protected by the PACSES systems security measures. The prior statewide outreach in January 2002 resulted in over 30,000 new enrollments through a mass mailing.

The Client Services Unit is instrumental to the first phase of outreach by surveying all clients visiting the office and supplying them with a survey form for the first four weeks along with a Direct Deposit Form. For the remainder of the pilot period, walk in and scheduled clients will receive forms and will be personally encouraged to enroll. Although the Client Services Unit will initiate the idea of using the Direct Deposit option, your job is to reassure clients that the system will benefit them in the long run. SCDU requires the enrollment forms to be approved by the client's bank and the form with original signatures are then mailed to SCDU. Depending on the response, later phases may include mass mailings to clients not yet enrolled. The special Direct Deposit Enrollment Forms (lilac colored) are available throughout the office for employee's use to encourage clients to use direct deposit.

Outreach efforts will also include inviting the local banking institutions and credit unions. The presentation will request their support and discuss solutions to the hurdles indicated by the client surveys. The banks can gain from this as well by establishing new customers and automating more of their deposit processing business. Early indicators say that "Free Checking" and instantaneous access to funds are needed from our banking partners. To solve the frequent barrier of no paper trail, a discussion item has been included to the Portal Development Team's next meeting agenda.

    All efforts and activity in this area will be compiled during the pilot and used as a way to expand the program statewide. Although legislation does not exist to require clients to use Direct Deposit, our strong encouragement is expected to help it grow. The early reports indicate Berks has 20% of the cases with orders who had a payment in the last 60 days utilize Direct Deposit, about 2,000 clients. The reduced costs associated with the mail preparation and postage costs at SCDU could be significant while at the same time speeding up the receipt of the money to the families. If the 2,000 clients currently on Direct Deposit continue their participation, the savings of postage alone amount to over $21,000 annually assuming 1 payment per month. If 30% (approx 150,000) of clients receiving payments in Pennsylvania were to enroll, the postage savings would total at least $650,000 based on mailing 1 payment per month per family. Mail preparation costs at the state collection units are eliminated but additional costs are incurred through bank transaction charges.

If any county or state has a very successful strategy or legislative effort used to expand client's participation in Direct Deposit Processing, please forward your information to mposerina@countyofberks.com

 

Clarion County

        When a petitioner appears at the Clarion County DRS to schedule an intake appointment on a paternity case. The intake worker interviews her to see if she has knowledge that the alleged father may want testing. If she indicates that he does want testing or may request testing, the intake worker requests that the petitioner, if possible, bring the alleged father with her to the intake appointment. If she does not feel he will come with her at that time, the intake worker then sends the alleged father a letter with his notice to appear for a conference.  This letter informs him that if he wants testing to contact the office immediately so that the testing and the results can be accomplished prior to the conference. On many instances the petitioner knows prior to her intake appointment that testing is required and therefore we have both parties appear for intake and the testing is done at that time. After the results are received,  the conference is scheduled or the case is dismissed.

This speeds up the process on establishing paternity and also establishing an order for support in a more timely manner. Clarion County does their own buccal swab.

 

Centre County

    Pennsylvania Justice Network(JNET)

Since October 2000, enforcement staff of Centre County DRS have been able to enhance their locate and identification processes by obtaining vital criminal offender records through the Pennsylvania Justice Network(JNET). The ability for county personnel to effectively and efficiently gain access to the extensive criminal justice records/data via JNET is unprecedented. Centre County DRS is the only DRS state-wide to have JNET capabilities on-site in the local child support enforcement office and was the first Centre county office, after the pilot project in the Centre County Criminal Justice Planning Department, to roll-out JNET to its enforcement staff. A stand-alone computer in the DRS connects into the JNET/County network by means of highly secured/encrypted Internet/Web based technology.

The JNET infrastructure provides the DRS access to multi-database of nine(9) state agencies' designated records: AOPC, BOP, DOC, DPW, JCJC, OAG, PBPP, PCCD, and PennDot. JNET provides the following information: case-file transfer, digital mug shots, PennDOT photo images and drivers license information, State Identifier Number(SID) with fingerprints and Offense Tracking Number(OTN).

JNET features include but are not limited to:

* Accurate offender identification through the use of digital photos and other profile identifiers such as Name, Date of Birth, Social Security Number, State Identifier Number(SID) and Offense Tracking Number(OTN)

* The ability to verify past and/or present criminal offender charges, detainers and warrant status in other PA criminal jurisdictions

* Secure and confidential data exchanges

* Coordination and cooperation between various agencies to track offenders

* Timely decision-making in order to apprehend defendants

* Receive timely criminal event notifications electronically such as arrests, warrants and wants on offenders under county or state supervision

* Cost effectiveness and reduction in redundancy and errors by improving the management of record data

Currently, thirty(30) state agencies, twelve(12) federal agencies, and at least twenty-two(22) counties are JNET members. A combined total of more than 5,500 law enforcement personnel are currently enrolled to receive JNET.

The criminal justice process begins in and affects our communities; therefore, the county and local personnel ultimately become the foundation, as well as beneficiaries, of the JNET. Child support enforcement staff benefit from this predominantly criminal justice network by working synergistically with the information provided to provide personal service of court documents, locate absent parents and arrest defendants who have outstanding bench warrants.

                                            Cumberland County

 Imaging Project

The Federal mandate requiring states to implement statewide computer systems in theory was designed for a variety of reasons. One of those reasons was to accomplish a paperless office. In Pennsylvania, with 67 different Domestic Relations Sections, the need to design a system to accommodate so many varied ways of functioning actually caused a dramatic increase in the amount of paper consumed. This increase was needed to perform necessary court functions not only from a legal perspective but also from a concern for uniformity across judicial jurisdictions.

Many counties have found themselves vastly limited in actual office space due to the need to maintain increasingly numerous hard copy documents. With an increase in cases each year as well as more documentation, it is necessary that alternate business practices be developed to ease the burden. In Cumberland County we approached this need by looking for an alternative that would allow, not only ease of access, but also unlimited access. We wanted something that would be secure, accurate, quick, and have sufficient storage space for future document storage.

We, with our private vendor, developed a business process which we believe accomplishes the task at hand. First we developed a system where every document that comes into our office is categorized with a form number, and is indexed into the laser fiche system so as to reduce the happenstance that errors of transposition will occur. Each item, whether one page or four, is indexed into our laser fiche system. This process, although seemingly time consuming, in reality takes a very short period of time. A cross check allows verification that date entry is accurate. Once there it will always be readily accessible.

Each item when indexed in can be cross referenced, by date, chronology, form number, and by case number. All PACSES forms already contain a form number. We developed a form number for everything that comes to our office, and can readily identify whether the item is from a client, an employer, or an attorney. The data entry is limited, and items are batched in or entered in single increments. This allows for rapid access when calls come in and questions are asked. Any question on items already imaged in can be answered through ready access at the individual's desk through their desktop PC.

Inputting batches of information takes minutes. We are inputting in excess of 1000 items on a daily basis. From a business perspective we decided to go forward with imaging as opposed to doing historical documents. It seemed the logical business decision for our circumstance. With a staff of 37 and a large caseload we felt that most information needed was information regarding some recent circumstance and so the great majority of need would be for recent information already imaged. Any cases opened after November 20, 2002, will no longer have a working case file. We will retain a hard copy docket file.

Due to security reasons, laser fiche does not access the PACSES data base, but a simple toggle to the laser system brings up any document within seconds. We no longer will need to be concerned about lost files. We no longer will need to be concerned about secure information being passed along to the incorrect party due to the ability to redact sensitive out instantaneously.

We continue to work through internal procedures and tweak the program. We do this so that in the future when other counties have the need to proceed down the same road, major problems have been flushed out and the implementation should be relatively seemless after accommodating any local procedural idiosyncrasy.

                                                      

Dauphin County

The Dauphin County Domestic Relations Office developed a policy and procedure manual to ensure uniform operation of the office.  The manual is based on the Commonwealth's policy and procedure manual.  That manual provided the outline of what would be included in the local manual.  From there we included local rules of court and internal office policy and procedure.  Each unit provided information their outlining duties and responsibilities.  The manual’s editor included the information in the relative chapter.  For the most part, each unit's function and role went into a chapter titled for that unit (client services, fiscal, enforcement, etc.)  Also included are applicable state and federal law and regulations, Department of Public Welfare Domestic Relations Section memoranda, court policies and internal office memoranda.  The manual includes a glossary, index and appendix.

Here is an outline of contents:

·        Dauphin County Domestic Relations Section Mission Statement       

·        Dauphin County Values       

·        Confidentiality Agreement  

·        Conference Officers Duties 

·        Code of Civility

·        Glossary

 

Chapter I through 12 are titled:

 

·        Introduction to Dauphin County Domestic Relations Administrative Policy and Procedure Manual

·        Organizational Structure

·        Case Initiation/Client Services

·        Locate

·        Case Establishment 

·        Enforcement

·        Case Closure

·        Statistical/Fiscal

·        Administrative guidelines

·        Record Retention and Maintenance

·        Safeguarding Information and Security

 

The manual is updated annually.

 

Erie County

                                                      Night Court

Ø      The program started on January 15, 2003.

Ø      Time frames:

1.        From 4:30pm until 5:00pm, employees can move their cars to a parking lot adjacent to the building, get something to eat, go to bathroom, etc.

2.        Official evening office hours are from 5:00pm until 8:00pm, official employee hours are from 4:30pm until 8:30pm, four hours.

3.        Customers are seen on a first come, first serve basis.

4.        Phone calls are received during the time frame at a specific advertised number.

Ø      Services Offered:

1.        Intake – New petitions and modifications, answer any questions. 

2.        Financials – Accept purge and fee payments, information requests, answer any questions.

3.        Enforcement – Meet with clients, answer any questions.

4.        Conference – Just answer any questions, nothing scheduled.

Ø      Personnel:   18 DRS employees and 2 Deputy Sheriff’s:

1.        Intake – Three employees to take petitions and mods, one clerical, one manager.

2.        Financials – One employee on the payment window, one employee at the reception desk, one employee in the file room, one employee manning the telephone, one manager.

3.        Enforcement – Two officers to meet with clients, one clerical, one manager.

4.        Conference – One employee to answer any questions, one clerical.

5.        Directors – Director, Assistant Director, or Office Manager.

6.        Sheriff’s Department – One Deputy at entrance to the building to screen clients through metal detector, one Deputy stationed inside DRS in case of violent situations.

Ø      Employee Payment:

1.        Employees are given one hour of “comp” time for every hour worked, to be used in place of vacation time only.  The comp time can only be used with the approval of their supervisor. 

2.        If the employees are sent home early because of lack of clients, the employees will be given the full amount of comp time.  If the employee leaves early, they will only be given the amount of comp time earned.

 

Ø      Number of Clients Served:

1.        January:  3 Nights = 26 clients and 23 phone calls.

2.        February:  4 Nights = 50 clients and 19 phone calls.

3.        March:  4 Nights = 47 clients and 15 phone calls.

4.        April:   2 Nights = 39 clients and 5 phone calls.

5.        Intake

a.      January:  3 Nights = 15 actions.

b.   February:  4 Nights = 28 actions.

c.   March:  4 Nights = 20 actions.

d.   April:  2 Nights = 13 actions.

6.        Enforcement

a.  January: 3 Nights = 8 actions.

b.  February:  4 Nights = 5 actions.

c.  March:   4 Nights = 10 actions.

d.  April:   2 Nights = 7 actions.

7.        Financials

a.   January:   3 Nights = 3 actions.

b.   February:   4 Nights = 14 actions.

c.   March:   4 Nights = 13 actions.

d.   April:   2 Nights = 16 actions.

                     8.   Conference

       a.   January:   3 Nights = 0 actions.

       b.   February:   4 Nights = 1 action.

       c.   March:   4 Nights = 2 actions.

       d.   April:    2 Nights = 3 actions.

9.   Telephone Calls – 62 total phone calls, detailed as follows:

       a.   Intake:   10 total phone calls.

       b.   Enforcement:   16 total phone calls.

       c.   Financials:   18 total phone calls.

       d.   Conference:   18 totals phone calls.

Ø      Observations:

1.        It was a harsh winter in Erie County, and Wednesday nights were usually the worst night of the week.

2.        Most nights, the employees were sent home at 7:30pm, but given the entire 4 hours of comp time.

3.        The Professional Union, ECAPE, made an issue of only union employees doing union classed jobs.  We had to train Enforcement Officers to do intakes to cover the shortage.

4.        This is a totally volunteer program.

5.        The President Judge had a Press Conference to announce this program, emphasis on “Customer Service” to taxpayers, we had some media coverage as well as a newspaper article.

6.        Sent out 5,000 inserts to announce this program and although the numbers seem to be increasing with the better weather and more sunlight, we need to find a inexpensive method to keep advertising this program.

 

 Indiana County

1.      WEB Site - Indiana County has the child support web site printed on all stationary and envelopes.

2.      CONFIDENTIALITY - To ensure client confidentiality when a client comes to the window to inquire about a case, we have them write their social security number down as opposed to saying it so that no other clients or person in the waiting room hears it. The paper is then shredded when we are done working with the client.

3.      AGREEMENT FORM - The Indiana County DRS and local Bar Association developed an Agreement form and instruction sheet. If the plaintiff and child/ren are not receiving cash assistance, the plaintiff and defendant enter the conditions of their support order without requesting a conference on the agreement form. The parties stipulate the amount of current support, arrears payment, party providing medical coverage and proportionalization of unreimbursed medical expenses. The DRS then enters an order of court based upon the parties' agreement. The agreement may be changed at anytime. The clients, DRS and local Bar Association are very pleased with the results of this Agreement form.

4.      PUBLIC RELATIONS - The Indiana County DRS staff attorney and a member of the DRS staff, upon request of another agency, will go on site to give an overview of how the office functions and answer general questions about the DRS office. Handouts and pamphlets are available. This helps keep other agencies and the public informed on how to obtain DRS services and also any new policies.

5.      COLLECTION AGENCIES - When we receive an agreement from a plaintiff that has hired a collection agency to collect s/he's support, we will not change anything until we send our form letter and administrative order to the plaintiff. Upon the collection agency complying with our administrative order, we will make the necessary changes on the computer system.

Letter to the plaintiff - The letter states we received s/he's signed agreement with a collection agency. We enclose a copy of our Administrative Order and state the plaintiff must satisfy all requirements before we can comply with the request.

Administrative Order - 1. The Domestic Relations Section shall allow child support collection agencies the same access to client files as are permitted other client representatives (i.e. attorneys) upon presentation of a release signed and notarized by the Plaintiff.

2. The Domestic Relations Section honors a written change of address form which permits checks to be sent to the collection agency only upon the compliance with the following by the collection agency:

(a) The collection agency must present a signed and notarized authorization from the Plaintiff. The authorization must expressly state that the Plaintiff understands that checks will be sent directly to the collection agency instead of to the Plaintiff. The authorization must also state that it can be revoked at any time without the consent of the collection agency upon no more than five (5) days notice to the collection agency;

(b) The collection agency must present proof that all collection agency employees who handle money or have check-writing authority are bonded against theft or other acts of dishonesty in an amount no less than $250,000.

(c) The collection agency's agreement with the Plaintiff must provide that payment will be transmitted to the Plaintiff, minus fees and costs, according to the following standards:

i. within 24 hours for cash, bank checks, certified checks or similar instruments whether local or out-of-state;

ii. within three (3) working days for other in-state checks;

iii. within ten working days for other out-of-state checks.

(d) The collection agency's agreement with the Plaintiff must provide that no fee or costs will be charged on collections resulting from payment of support which is less than 30 days past due, payments from income attachments initiated by the DRS, and payments resulting from local Court enforcement proceedings such as contempt;

(e) The collection agency's agreement with the Plaintiff must provide for no contingent fee.

3. Child support collection agencies will not be permitted to file Praecipes and Petitions with the Court.

6. LOCATE PRACTICES - Manual Locates are given to Locate Enforcement Officer (EO). From there Locate EO goes through these steps to obtain information.

(a) Interview with plaintiff

(b) Phone interviews or phone scams with other parties familiar with defendant

(c) Internet search on Yahoo.com, Searchbug.com, USSearch.com, Verizon.com, 411.com, Anywho.com and theworknumber.com

(d) J-net, driver's license information

(e) Credit Bureau

(f) CIS-welfare system

(g) Locate forms on PACSES system, FTPR for blank forms

(h) Create a good working relationship with other agencies to obtain information.

i. State Prisons and County Jails

ii. Law Enforcement agencies: State Police, Sheriffs Office, Probation, Local Police

iii. Prothonotary's Office

Locate EO then keeps record of the members he did manual locate work on and who he actually located.

 

                                                       Jefferson County

 

                                                       LOW INCOME LITIGANTS

 

(The following is a summary of an article presented at the Domestic RelationAssociation of Pennsylvania Annual Conference in the Fall 2000.)

A tremendous challenge exists for courts in rural Pennsylvania to issue orders of support which are fair, just and reasonable for both the obligor and obligee.  The challenge arises because of the depressed economic conditions of the local economies, such conditions being reflected in the litigants that appear before the courts.  In general, all of rural Pennsylvania is experiencing a decrease in population over the last fifty years.  Fewer rural residents have high school diplomas, and still fewer have post-secondary degrees, as compared to the more populated counties of the Commonwealth.  As expected, the medium household income in rural Pennsylvania significantly less than more populated counties.  The economic conditions of rural Pennsylvania are reflected in the financial profiles of the litigants appearing in court.  For example, in Jefferson County, Pennsylvania, statistical information was compiled of the income levels of litigants in child support cases from January 1 through September 30, 2002.  Startling levels of impoverishment were revealed, which confirmed the above statements.

Liability for payment of support is statutorily based, with statewide guidelines established by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.  The reasonable needs of the child seeking support and the ability of the obligor to provide support are the goals of the guidelines.  Primary emphasis is placed on the net incomes and earning capacities of the parties with allowable deviations for unusual needs, extraordinary expenses and other factors.  A rebuttable presumption is created that the amount of the support derived from the application of the Statewide Guidelines is the correct amount of support to be awarded.  The support award may be rebutted only upon findings on the records that the application of guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate in a particular situation.

Nine separate and distinct factors may be considered under the rules as a basis for deviation of the amount of support derived by the support guidelines.  In addition to those considerations, the guidelines have shown that an obligor requires $550.00 net income per month to provide for basic personal needs.  This has been termed the Computed Allowance Minimum or CAM.  The goals of CAM are to ensure that the overall support obligation leaves the obligor with sufficient income to meet basic personal needs and to maintain the incentive to continue working so that support can be paid.

Given the demographics of rural Pennsylvania in general, and the economic profile of Domestic Relations Section litigants in Jefferson County in particular, a support order which adequately meets the needs of the child is difficult to achieve.  If an obligor earns minimum wage, full time, his net income is simply not enough to provide for the needs of a subject child as well as his own. 

The difficult process of entering an order of support for litigants whose net income is low begins with a determination of that income or earning capacity. 

Where the litigant’s actual income is at least more than full time minimum wage, that income is used as a basis for the guideline calculation, unless, there is a well-founded argument that the litigant has a higher earning capacity.  However, in the event that the litigant’s actual income is less than full time minimum wage, the actual wage will only be used if one of the following situations exist: The litigant receives Social Security Disability benefits; the litigant is either fully or partially disabled; or, the litigant is precluded from full time employment for some non-disability related reason.  If none of the above exists, the litigant is imputed with a full-time minimum wage earning capacity. 

Subsequent to the imputing of a minimum wage earning capacity, or where an actual income is low, in an effort to reach a fair and reasonable monthly support order, both parties are requested to discuss their actual income and expenses.

At this point in the conference, the parties may reach an agreement which sets an amount of monthly support that meets the reasonable needs of the subject child while not causing undue financial hardship upon the obligor.  However, if no agreement is reached, than an inquiry as to the factors provided under the Support Guideline Deviation is conducted.  The following is a partial list of inquiries: Additional household income of either litigant, disabilities or special needs of the litigants or subject child; medical expenses not covered by insurance; school loans; adult children of the litigants which are supported in whole or in part; or which reside in the household; partial custody issues; transportation issues; bankruptcy filings, proposed or recent; uninsured losses of litigants; criminal fines and probation costs. 

The child support guideline calculation based upon the litigants’ actual or imputed income provides a support award.  An inquiry into the above factors may provide the basis to rebutting the support award in the event that said award would be unjust or inappropriate in a particular case.  The difficulty, of course, is deciding the amount of the deviation, if any, based upon the findings that a deviation exists.  Obviously, no general rule or guiding principle exists in such cases.  Rather, the amount of the support award is based upon particular findings in the subject case after expending time and effort in ascertaining the litigants’ particular situation.  Hopefully, the support award satisfies the stated goals of the statute and guidelines, as well as the needs of the litigants.

Entering an order of support in low income cases is a difficult task, much time and effort may be expended into a detailed inquiry with litigant’s particular situations required to make certain that the order of support is just and reasonable

 

Lancaster County

 

Client Reminder Project

Introduction

Over the past few years, Lancaster County Domestic Relations Section (DRS) has noted an increase in the number of clients who do not appear for scheduled conferences, genetic testing and Court hearings.  While it is obvious that in many cases the non-appearance of clients can impact the ability of the DRS to establish a non-custodial parent’s support obligation or may result in the dismissal of a support action, less obvious is the impact that non-appearance has on the ability of the DRS to establish support obligations which are appropriate based on the circumstances of a particular case and the impact this may have on order compliance and further case litigation.  DRS management developed a tracking tool to monitor client attendance beginning in April 2002.

The initial approach to increase client attendance involved some re-organization of staff resources and revision of DRS policies as a means to shorten the length of time between the date of scheduling and the actual appointment.  While this approach was extremely successful in shortening the time lapse for most scheduled appointments from 10-12 weeks to 3-5 weeks for most cases, it did not significantly alter the non-appearance rate of clients (though it did increase DRS performance in other areas).  Thus the process began to devise another strategy for addressing this issue.

Program Development and Description

DRS management revisited this subject and engaged in a brainstorming session to identify potential solutions.  Early in this process, comments which had been recently made by Dr. Sherri Z. Heller, Commissioner of the Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement, at a speaking engagement became the focus of discussion.  In her comments, Dr. Heller suggested how the simple process of calling clients on the telephone can be a useful tool which is underutilized by child support enforcement agencies in this era of automation.  Management recalled how telephone reminders of scheduled doctor and dentist appointments have been a routine service for many years.  Would a similar program implemented by the DRS to provide this service to clients provide a possible solution to the identified problem?

A pilot program was developed.  The development of the pilot began with an analysis of the number of daily appointments in order to determine what staffing commitment would be required to enact the program.  It was determined that one staff member would be sufficient to contact all scheduled clients within the scheduled work day.  Management then evaluated unit performance and staffing to identify what reorganization of resources and assignments was possible to dedicate the needed staff member to the project.  Additional assignments were identified that this staff member could perform on a daily basis after completing assigned reminder calls.  A more detailed measurement tool was developed to verify the success of the pilot program.  Prior to implementation of the pilot program, the DRS utilized the revised measurement tool to establish a baseline against which program success could be measured.  Finally, a written procedure (attached) was developed for the staff member outlining the program parameters and to provide specific scripting for the staff member to use when calling.

 

 

Results

In February, 2003, a baseline study was completed which documented that approximately 37% of all clients directed to appear for DRS appointments failed to appear.  This baseline factors out clients who would are not required to attend proceedings (such as custodial parents filing UIFSA actions).  The pilot program was commenced in March, 2003. 

During the month of March, 2003, the designated DRS staff member was able to make contact with 54% of scheduled clients.  The percentage of clients who failed to appear for DRS appointments fell to under 28% of those scheduled during the month of March, 2003.  Particularly notable is the marked reduction in non-attendance for genetic testing which during March, 2003 was a mere 7%.

During the month of April, 2003, DRS staff was able to contact 56.5% of scheduled clients and the percentage of client who failed to appear had declined even further to 24.5%.

The staff member assigned to this case has reported positive feedback from DRS clients who have frequently thanked her for reminding them of the appointment and commented on how nice it was to receive a personal phone call.  Some clients have had questions or issues about the scheduled appointments.  These cases are referred to assigned staff members so that appropriate actions can be taken in advance of scheduled appointment  resulting in a more positive outcome.

During a meeting with Sr. Conference Officer staff on April 11, 2003, a suggestion emerged to modify the script to include a reminder to obligors to bring cash, money orders or cashiers checks when they are scheduled for contempt proceedings.  A script was drafted and implemented on April 14, 2003.  Since the script has been revised, Conference Officers have noted an increase in cash collections during contempt conferences.  One Conference Officer excitedly reported that she got a cash collection on every contempt case scheduled on a particular date.  Another Conference Officer reported collecting $2,800.00 from her scheduled contempt conferences - four times more than she had ever collected.  While it is too soon to empirically determine the impact of this reminder on the actual support collected, many Conference Officers have reported similar positive results which not only contributes to increased collections but to employee morale.

 

DRS Client Reminder Project- Further Details

Objective: To increase client attendance at scheduled conferences and scheduled hearings.

Implementation: Designated DRS staff member will contact all clients 2 days prior to the scheduled conference or hearing (excluding Plaintiff’s on UIFSA, IFSA, Juvenile Probation and Children & Youth cases).  Staff member will maintain documents to track which clients were contacted.  Staff member will also document which clients appeared after receiving the reminder notice.  The project will commence on March 3, 2003.

Procedure:                       

DRS staff member will print SATL screen which lists all scheduled events involving DRS cases

1.      Staff member will review all cases to identify interstate cases, inter-county cases and foster care cases.  Home phone numbers will be noted from DEMO screen for all parties expected to be present at scheduled event.  Staff member will not call Plaintiffs who have filed a support action through another county or state or Lancaster Co. Children & Youth or Lancaster Co. Juvenile probation since their attendance is not required.  In these cases, staff member will only contact Defendant who is required to attend.

2.      Staff member will call home phone number of scheduled client.  Once they have client on the telephone, staff member will  identify himself/herself and indicate he/she is calling to remind client of hearing/conference/ genetic test etc.  Staff member will provide client with the day, date, time and location of the scheduled event.

3.      If client is not home, staff member will inquire with person answering phone whether client continues to reside at that address or whether there is updated telephone number and/or address for client.

4.      If client still resides at address, leave message advising date, time and location of event with person answering call.  Though we are giving the appointment information, staff member will not release any other information to person answering call about what is scheduled or answer specific questions.

5.      If number no longer valid, delete it from PACSES.  If new number is provided, attempt to reach client at that number before adding to database.

6.      If answering machine is reached and outgoing message confirms we have reached client, staff member will leave message on machine for client detailing the day, date, time and location of scheduled event.

7.      If answering machine does not confirm identity, staff member will identify self and leave message that he/she is calling to remind ‘you’ of the conference/hearing/genetic test, etc.  The day, date, time and location of the scheduled event will be left on the message, however, the name of the client called will be omitted in the event that telephone number of record is erroneous.

8.      Invalid or disconnected telephone numbers will be deleted from the DEMO screen.

9.      A brief case note will be entered in PACSES documenting that: a) client received a reminder call; b) a voice mail message was left for client; c) reminder attempted to make reminder call, but no answer; d) telephone number on record is invalid, disconnected or that DRS has no telephone number for client.

10. Staff member will answer general questions from clients related to the scheduled events including information on DRS continuance policy; DRS telephone testimony policy; and questions about what information must be brought by client to scheduled event.  Staff member will refer all other specific case questions to appropriate unit for appropriate response.

NOTE: At no time, will a DRS staff member make any reference to genetic tests - simply refer to this as an appointment.

 

SCRIPT

1)    Call is answered:

Hello.  This is ______ from the Domestic Relations Section calling.  May I please speak with _____?

 

2)          Speaking with client:

       I am calling to remind you that you have an appointment  scheduled on (day of week), (date) at (time) in (location of appointment including street address, floor, Courtroom number, etc.).  Thank you.

 

3)         Answering machine with client name on outgoing message:

Hello.  This is ______ from the Domestic Relations Section calling for (client name) .  I am calling to remind you that you have an appointment scheduled on (day of week), (date) at (time) in (location of appointment including street address, floor, Courtroom number, etc.).  Thank you.

 

4)        Answering machine without client name on outgoing message:

Hello.  This is ______ from the Domestic Relations Section calling to remind you of an appointment scheduled on (day of week), (date) at (time) in (location of appointment including street address, floor, Courtroom number, etc.).  If you feel you have received this message in error, please contact a customer service representative at 717-299-8141.  Thank you.

 

5)        Additional reminder for defendants scheduled for support contempt conferences or hearings:

a) You are speaking with Defendant:

Be sure to bring cash, money order or a cashiers check so we can work together to satisfy this contempt issue.

b) You are leaving a message:

Be sure to bring cash, money order or a cashiers check to your     appointment.

 

   Montgomery County

 

     Same day Paternity Testing

Problem Description:

All cases that were possible paternity cases were scheduled on Wednesdays each week to coincide with the scheduling of a Phlebotomist.  Plaintiffs were instructed to bring the children with them to the conference in the event the defendant questioned paternity.  The available “paternity days” began to fill up quickly.  Cases were scheduled 8 – 10 weeks out.  Cases that resulted in acknowledgements at the conference waited unnecessarily.  Parties “swabbed” on paternity day received results in 6 – 10 days and then were rescheduled if the results were conclusive.  Approximately 4- 6 weeks out.  This means the clients waited a longer period of time when paternity was questioned and often these were the cases that needed an order more quickly.

Solution:

Every intake worker was trained to do Bucol Swab DNA collections eliminating the need for a phlebotomist.  Cases could be scheduled any day of the week.

Result:

Three to four weeks of wait time was eliminated. Paternity determinations are made more quickly. Orders were entered more quickly.  Support payments were made sooner and children received needed support more quickly.  The lab experienced a cost savings by no longer needing the services of a phlebotomist.  They passed this savings on to the County by reducing the cost per sample. 

 

     Bench Warrant Amnesty

Problem Description:

Warrants are issued against defendants for failure to appear for contempt hearings. These cases are sent to the County Sheriff’s department with descriptive information to arrest the defendant.  Costs, fees and man hours are incurred searching for the defendants and trying to apprehend them.  Plaintiffs are angry during the interim period because they are not receiving support and want to see results.  They often call the Judges, County Commissioners, area Legislators and the local newspapers to complain about the inactivity on the case.

Solution:

A 2 week amnesty period was offered to anyone with a Domestic Relations Warrant.  All they had to do was to turn themselves in and provided updated address and employment information.  The Bench Warrant was revoked by the Domestic Relations Officer and a new Contempt order was entered. The new order contained payment arrangements and scheduled a new contempt hearing date in the event the defendant failed to comply.  The defendant was personally served with the new date of the hearing.  The media was alerted to the amnesty and letters were sent to all defendants who had warrants for their arrest.  Special notification was given alerting the clients that they could still be apprehended during the amnesty and they would only avoid arrest if they turned themselves in during the amnesty. 

Result:

Over 100 defendants turned themselves in and made payment arrangements.  At the 6 month review of the programs effectiveness, arrears decreased on these cases by over $44,000.  36% of the cases continued to be wage attached.  All area newspapers and TV stations ran stories on the program that shed a positive light on the office and innovative, cost saving attempts to obtain child support in the most difficult cases. The program also provided positive feedback on the County Sheriff’s Office further fostering the relationship between the 2 departments.  Since the Amnesty Program,  the Domestic Relations Office found it useful to employ a liaison employee to work solely with the Sheriff’s Department and effectuate the processing of Domestic Relations Warrants.  Warrants are now streamlined and there was an opportunity to promote a DRS staff member.

 

Philadelphia County

 

PAVE Program

Since November 2001, in an effort to partnership with faith based organizations, the Domestic Relations Branch has been involved with the Parental Access, Visitation, and Education Program, P.A.V.E.  This program is sponsored by the Salvation Army and is funded by the Department of Public Welfare and the Bureau of Child Support Enforcement.  The PAVE program offers supportive services to custodial, non custodial, and incarcerated parents, their children, and their families.  The program’s primary purpose is to support, nurture, and enable parents to financially support their children.  The Salvation Army holds parenting classes which are located at Philadelphia Domestic Relations Section located at 34 S. 11th Street.  The classes address the challenges that parents encounter as they seek to become more responsibly involved in their children’s lives.

Referrals to this program are made from several sources including cases listed for court on support and custody matters.  Judges refer parents to the PAVE classes, and then monitor the progress of the parents’ movement towards supporting their children and becoming more involved in their children’s lives.  This has been a wonderful opportunity for the court to aid parents through a Faith Based Initiative.

Networking For Jobs

The Networking for Jobs Project (NJF) has been developed to create a city-wide initiative to provide training and employment opportunities, focusing on those most at risk.  The project helps non- custodial parents to become self sufficient and to have the ability to pay child support.  Some of the services provided are: job training programs, resource referrals, assistance in job application and resume writing, mentoring services, and deterrents to crime and delinquent behavior.

The NFJ program links non-custodial parents to jobs, job placement services, counseling, and family support services. The program’s objectives of increasing child support payments, preserving family units, and providing employment are met every day.

Referrals are made from Hearing Officers, Masters in Support, and Judges.   The program coordinator, Mr. Paul Bennett interviews each non-custodial parent individually and determine which provider would best meet his or her needs.  The progress of the non-custodial parent is monitored and eventually a child support order is entered or an existing order is enforced.

This program not only allows a path for the child support obligation to be meet, but gives the non-custodial parent the tools to support their children and builds self sufficiency.

 

 

 

 

Pennsylvania Bureau of Child Support Enforcement

      

                                                                   Language Line

 

The Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare (DPW), which houses Pennsylvania’s Title IV-D agency, the Bureau of Child Support Enforcement, was engaged by the Federal Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights (OCR), for failing to address the limited English proficiency (LEP) of customers of DPW services as required by Title Vi of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  Because the Title Vi requirements apply to all entities that receive Federal financial assistance, Pennsylvania’s Title IV-D Program implemented measures to address the deficiencies cited by OCR.

 

Following a survey of the 67 County Domestic Relations Sections (DRS), the agencies that provide Title IV-D services at the local level, it was found that Title IV-D customers speak many languages.  The DRSs historically established their own resources for interpreter and translation services, but to ensure all customers are provided LEP assistance as necessary; DPW extended the availability of Language Line Services, Inc. (LLS) to each DRS in September 2002.  The DRSs are not charged a fee for the use of LLS, Inc., which includes on-call telephone conference interpreters and document translation.  Instead, the expenses are billed directly to and paid by DPW.  Federal Financial Participation to reimburse the costs is available through the Title IV-D Program.  Approximately six DRSs and the Bureau of Child Support Enforcement headquarters office have used the service, and the response from the DRSs has been positive.

 

Another measure taken to address the OCR activity is that the Pennsylvania Child Support Enforcement System (PACSES) now requires the DRSs to document the customer’s language preference via coding that mirrors coding used by DPW’s Title IV-A Client Information System.  As requested by the Secretary of DPW, language preference reports can be generated by PACSES for monitoring by OCR.

 

Pennsylvania Child Support Enforcement Training Institute

 

The Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare (DPW), Bureau of Child Support Enforcement (BCSE), contracted with the Pennsylvania State University (PSU) to create, staff, and operate the Pennsylvania Child Support Enforcement Training Institute (PACSETI) for the purpose of establishing a standardized training program for Pennsylvania’s Title IV-D Child Support Enforcement Program.  The development of PACSETI has been a collaborative effort inasmuch as the selection of the vendor and the development of PACSETI evolved from an advisory committee that consists of management staff from the State and county Title IV-D agencies.  The collaborative environment continues to exist as State staff, including policy, systems, and operations staff, and county staff work very closely with the PACSETI instructors and management staff to develop the over-arching training plan and specific course curricula.  

  PACSETI currently conducts a New Hire Training course and a Performance Enhancement Training course on an ongoing basis.  The New Hire Training, an introductory two-week course for all newly hired Title IV-D staff that provides an overview of all of facets of the Title IV-D Program, commenced with pilots in September and November 2002.  The training plan requires that new hires be enrolled in the New Hire Training within the first six months of employment.  The Performance Enhancement Training is a one-week condensed version of the New Hire course and is offered to more experienced staff.  The Performance Enhancement Training course began in January 2003 and will be offered only until all experienced staff has attended the course.  Both courses are conducted using hardcopy material contained in a Participant’s Manual and simulations of screens staff view on the Pennsylvania Child Support Enforcement System (PACSES), Pennsylvania’s statewide-automated system. 

To measure the success of the training, students complete Pre- and Post-Training Assessments for the New Hire and Performance Enhancement Training courses.  Pre-Training Assessments evaluate a student’s knowledge about Title IV-D statutes, regulations, and PACSES, prior to attending the training.  Post-Training Assessments then measure the change in knowledge after the completion of the classroom instruction.  The PACSETI shares the scores of both assessments with the student’s management staff for use as a professional development tool. 

Beginning in 2003, PACSETI will offer Specialized Training courses to address in greater detail the core components of the New Hire and Performance Enhancement Training courses.  These topics include Case Initiation, Locate, Paternity and Order Establishment, Financials, Enforcement, and Interstate functions.  In addition, “soft skills” Specialized Training courses will be available to train DRS staff in topic areas including, but not limited to, customer service, problem solving and workplace safety.  The PACSETI will also develop and conduct training on an “as needed” basis to address specific programmatic deficiencies.

  PSU created and implemented the PACSETI website so that students can be easily registered and enrolled in the various training courses.  The registration and enrollment functions are limited to the agency Directors.  In addition, the website provides information regarding PACSETI such as training schedules, directions to training facilities, and course descriptions.  Web-Based Training courses will also be available the PACSETI website. 

PSU has established three permanent regional sites at which all training courses are conducted.  However, PACSETI courses may be taught at satellite locations as needed because the required systems access is achieved through the use of laptops and wireless technology.  Such flexibility greatly expands the ability of PACSETI to support the training requirement throughout Pennsylvania. 

The responses from staff that have attended both New Hire and Performance Enhancement Training have been very positive and supportive.  Comments received indicate attendees feel they greatly benefited from the information provided by PACSETI, and that the instructors are skilled, knowledgeable and dedicated.  In addition, students have found the reference materials, such as a Participant’s Manual, provided at the training to be useful tools, which they can use in the long-term to reinforce the information learned in the course work.

While continuing to evolve, PACSETI has already proven to be a major component in achieving excellence in customer service for Pennsylvania.  County Directors are reporting significant improvement in staff performance in all areas of the Title IV-D Program.  As a whole, PACSETI has been successful in delivering superior training and resources and has achieved the desired results, making the investment very worthwhile.  Pennsylvania believes that through classroom instruction in the law, rules, policy, and systems, PACSETI will enable every state and county child support worker to reach his or her professional potential.  Equally as important, attending training affords staff the opportunity of meeting colleagues from surrounding counties.  As the success of any program directly links to the abilities of its workforce, the training investment is essential.  

 

Pennsylvania Automated Child Support Enforcement System (PACSES)

 

Data Management

The evolution of Data Management 

The PACSES project team has always recognized the importance of accurate and complete data not only from a reporting perspective but also from a program performance perspective.  Over the years the number of data management initiatives both centrally and locally has grown.  The goal of each initiative is to improve data integrity, data reporting and/or data analysis.  These initiatives plus the best practices associated with each initiative are explained below.

Data Integrity

Several years ago the Data Integrity team was established to identify missing or erroneous data and produce actionable case clean up lists (DIT lists).  These lists still exist; however, since the original lists were published on the PACSES Home Page (PHP) several changes have been made.

What’s New? 

·        The layout on the PHP: In order to provide focus to the more critical lists, the lists have been separated into the following categories: clean up lists that will effect performance, clean up lists that will affect interfaces, general clean up lists, and lists of data that was systematically fixed.

·        The Process: The process for publishing the DIT lists is now a combined effort by both the DIT team and the County 8 counties who validate and verify the lists before they are published on the PHP.

What’s In the Works?

·        DIT Trends: The project team is eager to analyze the trends from one month to the next in order to identify which cases are being cleaned up and which aren’t.  This will allow the project team to measure outcomes and follow up with counties when action is not being taken, and also identify lists that may no longer be required.

 

Data Reporting

PACSES uses three primary methods to reflect collected and processed data: 1) Mainframe operational (or batch) reports, 2) federal reports generated from the Data Warehouse and 3) Ad Hoc reports.  Due to the number of existing reports and the different tools used to generate the reports, many PACSES stakeholders are unclear as to which tool provides what data via which report.  In addition, the purpose, the definition (data source) and the content of each report is not always clearly documented.  In order to tackle this challenge the PACSES project has launched a number of initiatives.

What’s New?

Education:  In the fall of 2002, five Data Management workshops were conducted and over 120 DRS users participated.  The purpose of the workshops was to discuss the different aspects of data management (i.e. understanding performance measures, the importance of data reliability, what’s happening with the PACSES reports, what’s changing with DPSR, what’s new with the DIT lists, and how to navigate the Data Warehouse).

·        The Enhanced DPSR application:  An enhanced web application for requesting ad hoc reports (i.e. DPSR) is now available on the PHP.  Some of the key features are 1) the robust search engine which allows DRS users to search for existing ad-hoc report requests based on key words and modules, and 2) the sorting mechanism to manipulate the data.   

What’s in the works?

·        Updating/creating new documentation for the Data Warehouse:  In order to help define the data that exists in the Data Warehouse reports two things are being done: 1) a user guide is being created for each report and then posted on the PHP Data Warehouse site and 2) the meta data application (i.e. the data about the data) is being updated to provide more user friendly definitions.

·        Updating/creating new documentation for the PACSES reports:  In order to help define the purpose, content and data elements of each PACSES report, a report description document is being created and then posted on the PACSES Reports Description PHP.

·        Generating the Federal Case Closure Grid from PACSES:  The project team is evaluating all the existing reports from all the reporting tools (i.e. the PACSES application, the Data Warehouse, DIT and DPSR) in order to determine the validity of each report and the best tool to produce the report.    

·        Identifying new reports that can be generated from the Data Warehouse:  A Data Management workgroup consisting of project staff, BCSE representatives, and county representatives has been formed to address some of the data management challenges.  Recently the data management workgroup was tasked with developing a standard annual report template that could be generated from the data warehouse – a task that has been outstanding for years.  Not only have the requirements been gathered but design and development work is underway.

 

Data Analysis

Now that we are in the post-PRWORA phase, significant emphasis has been placed on data analysis due to the demand from the federal government to demonstrate measurable program changes and improvements.  PACSES users can find meaningful program information through the Pennsylvania enterprise data warehouse and its features such as – trend analysis, comparative analysis, performance measurement data, and PRWORA enforcement remedy outcome measurements.   

 

What’s New?

·        Federal Reporting: The PACSES Data Warehouse completely supports all Federal reporting requirements. Data reliability audits are also fully supported from the Data Warehouse.

·        Self Assessment: The Data Warehouse is used by the program office to conduct its Self-Assessment reviews. It has features not only to track and assess process efficiencies but also provides the ability to identify ‘actionable cases’ that counties can review to help improve their business process efficiency.

 

What’s in the works?

·        Education: In the spring of 2003 four data warehouse training sessions were conducted and nearly 100 DRS staff, BCSE agents and PACSETI staff participated.  This training is just the first of a series of training sessions on the data warehouse.  The goal is to provide as much education about the tool and the resident data in order to increase its usage.

 

Interstate / CSENet Functionality

 

                               In 2003, Pennsylvania continued to lead the nation’s push toward successfully tackling the oft-times thorny area of Interstate child support enforcement.  February 2002 witnessed the Federal Certification Review Team’s visit to Harrisburg to evaluate ENF/MSC CSENet processing among other things, the result of which was full certification of the Pennsylvania Child Support Enforcement System (PACSES). A month later, a Region III Federal Interstate Conference was held in Dover, DE and featured a plenary session presentation of Pennsylvania’s CSENet functionality.  Since this presentation, Pennsylvania has been the recipient of numerous invitations by other states to assist in their development of the CSENet system.

                               Irrespective of all the positive feedback Pennsylvania received regarding its Interstate/CSENet functionality, a system is only as good as the people who operate it.  With this in mind, a CSENet Training Road Show was conducted during the summer months of 2002.  This two-day training session made numerous stops at various training sites throughout the Commonwealth, attracting a total attendance of over 400 DRS personnel.  The effect of this training was reflected almost immediately in Interstate collection figures.  Comparing the period of 8/01 through 12/01 (pre-CSENet training) to the same period one year later (post-CSENet training), Interstate collections in Pennsylvania rose an impressive $1.8 million dollars.  CSENet sessions conducted during the 20020 Annual DRAP Training Conference heightened DRS workers’ awareness of the CSENet process and the accomplishments that PA has made in the CSENet arena.   As a result, additional interstate/CSENet training seminars are in the planning stages.

                               The success PA has realized with its CSENet functionality has placed the Commonwealth in the forefront of national Interstate efforts.  In addition to the numerous national and regional conference presentations and the requests for “CSENetic” assistance from other states, PA was invited by the Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement to participate in a federally funded Interstate Workgroup on Inter-agency Data Access.  This Washington, DC-based workgroup assembled on four different occasions in an attempt to map out an ongoing strategy addressing the improvement in the exchange of information between states in Interstate child support case processing. Clearly the future of the Pennsylvania Interstate/CSENet subsystem is indeed a bright one.

Managing Federal Tax Information

In August of 2002, the Department of Internal Revenue Services (IRS) came to Pennsylvania, to perform an audit on Computer Security with respect to the PA Child Support Enforcement System (PACSES).  The results of the review provided the PACSES team with a better understanding of what Federal Tax Information (FTI) must be safeguarded as well as why the FTI must be safeguarded. The following topics are areas where PACSES is enhancing and streamlining security to ensure the FTI is being safeguarded:

Vulnerability/Risk Self-Assessment:

The PACSES project team is performing an internal vulnerability/risk self assessment to ensure that PACSES security operates effectively and provides appropriate confidentiality, integrity, and controlled availability, as well as identifies potential risk resulting in loss, misuse, or unauthorized access of FTI.

In order to perform a risk self-assessment, states must complete the self-assessment questionnaire provided by the National Institute of System Technology. The completion of the self-assessment questionnaire is an aid in developing or enhancing a system security plan. The IRS requires the self assessment be performed every three years.

The PACSES project has implemented a self assessment team to undertake the task of setting up procedures and evaluating the questionnaire for the implementation of the self assessment program. This team will assist the PACSES project in the completion of the self assessment questionnaire.

 

 

Web Page access for the FTI Reports:

PACSES reports are generated at the end of daily, weekly, monthly, end of calendar month, beginning of calendar month, quarterly and annually time periods. Some of these reports contain only FTI.  Other reports contain a degree of FTI along with non-FTI.  These commingled reports have also been classified as FTI reports.

To increase security of these reports and to address the issue of keeping historical data available and secured, PACSES has installed a central file server to house all current and future reports with FTI. The reports containing FTI data are transferred to this secure server at the time they are generated by the PACSES system.

Access to the new secure server is provided to limited designated staff in each DRS.  They are given the authorization to access the restricted report file server. A security check to determine that the requestor is an approved user is performed by the central server before reports can be viewed or retrieved.

Audit trails are in place for monitoring the activity of each authorized user. By broadening the search structure within the audit trails, the project team is able to perform statistical analysis related with performance measures.

With the implementation of the web page, the local printing of the reports containing FTI data on the counties designated printer is being eliminated 60 days after the installation of the new Win 2000 PCs.  (The upgraded PCs contain the prerequisite Operating System needed to provide connectivity to the central reports server).

Disclosure Awareness Program:

Any agency receiving FTI should have an awareness program that annually notifies all employees having access to FTI of the confidentiality provisions of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC), including provisions for civil criminal sanctions for unauthorized inspection or disclosure of FTI.

The first phase of the awareness program was introducing a security warning banner on the PACSES logon screen to make all users aware of the disclosure rules.  The second phase of the user disclosure awareness requires states to perform disclosure awareness training for all employees having access to FTI.  Records must be maintained for five years with signatures of all employees that complete the training - which will meet the requirement for the receipt of certification for each employee. The annual training is not just for new employees, but rather for all employees. 

 

The IRS has provided clarification that electronic signature is an acceptable signature for an employee. This provides the possibility that by viewing a PACSES created FTI security video, each employee can meet the annual training requirement.  Details on how to capture and record this information will need to be defined and implemented.

County Inspections:  

The IRS requires internal inspection by the recipient agency to ensure that adequate safeguard or security measures have been maintained. States are required to establish an inspection process that all offices receiving FTI are reviewed within a three year period.

To meet this requirement with IRS, the state is developing an internal inspection form where counties will be required to answer safeguard questions. The questions on the form consist of what the safeguarding procedures are for storage, disposal, limited access, and printing of FTI data.  A user document will be provided to all agencies to help answer some of the frequently asked questions. The inspection form is going to be placed on the PHP so that the counties can complete the responses on-line.  The responses will be captured in a secure database. An electronic signature will be required upon the completion of the inspection form.

PACSES Child Support Portal

The Customer Service Challenge

Over the past five years, the nation’s child support program has evolved tremendously.  PRWORA introduced new child support enforcement remedies and new penalties for account delinquency.  The PRWORA initiatives such as – State Disbursement Unit, federal case registry, driver’s license suspension, new hire reporting, credit bureau reporting, and financial institution data match, dramatically increased the need for timely and accurate communications to child support customers.  Now, in the post-PRWORA phase, the child support focus has shifted toward improved customer service through the use of multiple mediums of communication.

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Child Support Enforcement program (PACSES) recognized this growing need for increased customer service in child support enforcement.  An Automated Voice Response unit (AVR) was implemented in 1998.  The AVR continues to serve on average over 500,000 calls per month.  In 1999 under the State Disbursement Unit contract, a self service website, pachildsupport.com, was implemented primarily to provide child support payors and payees the ability to view payments on-line.  Building on this experience and following the DPW web development standards, the PACSES team developed a comprehensive child support web application to be the singular “portal” to accessing all child support needs by both the public and customer users.

The new website, www.childsupport.state.pa.us, is a secure web site that provides a ‘one-stop shop’ for child support payment and case related information 24 hours a day, seven days a week.  This web site is available for the benefit of its customers and various stakeholders of the child support program:

·        Those receiving and paying child support through the PACSES system can now view their payments online, check the amount of child support owed, review support order details, check for any upcoming scheduled hearings or activities, as well as provide updates to their mailing address and employment information.

·        Employers can now view and update their employee income withholding lists online. They can also provide their Federal Employer Identification Number (FEIN) and make changes to their address, phone number and fax number, email addresses, and contact persons online.

·        Lien processors, credit bureaus, and lending institutions can now search the PACSES system online for those members who have overdue support arrears in the PACSES system.

·        Attorneys, journalists, child support case workers, and others can search online and obtain court docket information and history. 

·        The public can receive updated information about the Pennsylvania child support program, the services provided by the program, and the location of the nearest child support agency.

The Department’s vision is that this web site will become part of a larger enterprise portal that will integrate various program office views. This would enable a citizen to register and login with a single universal user credential, and access state online services seamlessly.

Benefits of the PACSES Child Support View

Improved Customer Service

The self-service web site is an additional channel for child support information delivery, and co-exists with the other available customer service channels: voice response units, county web sites, SDU, and Commonwealth customer service units, and DRS Offices.  A majority of calls to customer service representatives deal with questions such as “where’s my payment?”, “how much do I owe?”, or “when is my next hearing?”  These and other questions can now be easily answered via the web site, instead of waiting for a case worker, or a customer service representative.  The payment history option provided on the web site enables those paying and receiving child support to obtain up to two calendar years history of payments on their cases on line

Improved Cost Efficiency

The self-service web site improves the cost efficiency of the child support program in many ways. Giving participants in child support cases self service access to information about their cases frees DRS workers to spend more time in proactive casework that directly improves program performance.  In the nine months since the web self service site was implemented, an increased amount of money on hold for address information has been released as a result of self-service address updates.  E-mail reminders of scheduled hearings and appointments provided by the web site have the potential for improved case processing, and a reduction in the number of rescheduled events.  Tips provided by clients via the web site have helped to locate absent parents and to establish income attachments on child support orders resulting in more money to more children more quickly.

 

Greater Accessibility to Information

The portal enables stake-holders such as employers, attorneys, financial lending institutions, and courts to access child support information ‘anywhere, anytime’.

Empowerment of Customers

     Self service empowers case participants by giving them access to their case and member data.  Providing the ability to update information that previously required case worker action such as address, employment, and date of birth update leads to a better sense of data ownership and provides more current member information in PACSES. 

     Over 75,000 members have registered on the web site since implementation. More than 6000 member address updates have been made, resulting in the release of over $125,000 from address hold.  Employers have made 350 address updates and 200 employee income withholding status changes.

 

PACSES / DRS Locate Methodologies

 

Playing Defense

 

Since PACSES began to communicate regularly with the Federal Case Registry in December of 2000, we have learned many things about electronic interfaces and the importance of accurate demographic data. All of PACSES’ electronic interfaces (both in Locate and the automated Enforcement tools) have revealed that ALL databases have errors and less than perfect data. This was leading to many time-consuming “fixes”, such as restoring a driver’s license that the system suspended on a non-PACSES member, to restoring the correct credit rating on an inaccurate credit bureau report, to fixing a wage attachment that was issued on the wrong employee. What we were seeing was that inaccurate demographic data (SSN and DOB in particular) was causing most of these time consuming issues for the counties. These data inaccuracies were occurring both in PACSES and often in the databases of the various institutions that PACSES interfaces with.

 

A conscious decision was made to improve the data by promoting accuracy in data gathering and in data entry on the PACSES side and to have the interface programs enhanced to do better validation and have tighter edits that would increase the chance of “catching” incorrect incoming data. Change Control 452 – Demographic Standardization, brought standardization to how demographic data is entered and stored in PACSES and provides a more complete audit trail of changes to a member’s name, SSN and DOB. It closed several “holes” that allowed workers to make inadvertent errors in data entry and directed all interface programs to select demographic data from the same areas on the DEMO screen. These data problems were promoted in presentations at two Locate conferences held in July of 2002 and again at the 2002 DRAP conference. These presentations have been effective in raising awareness of DRS workers to the problems caused by inaccurate data and many counties have instituted policies and processes that include verifying and photocopying documents (Social Security cards, Driver’s licenses etc). At PACSES we have seen a change in the source of the problems that do occur. More often than not, we see that the problem lies within the database of the institution that we are interfacing with, not with PACSES data, and the number of reported problems has been reduced dramatically. Playing defense is working well.

 

Filtering out the Silt

Specifically in the Locate area, PACSES has discovered that much of the Locate data that we bring in (particularly address and employer data) has been very repetitive. The Address Auto Compare program has been improved to simply delete incoming data that is repetitive rather than add this data to the discard screens as it had been doing. This eliminates repetitive entries on LDY2 and excessive records on XADR and XEMP (address and employer discard screens) while still keeping a record of data that the worker has actually determined to be of no value or incorrect. Another aspect of the incoming locate data was that (other than State New Hire and National New Hire data) it is not very effective in definitive confirmed “hits”. This data, while not always conclusive, does provide many “clues” to an Absent Parent’s location. Locate workers have started to “mine” these clues and use more manual methods in order to find the absent parent.

 

Working Together – Making it Real

The 2002 Locate conferences and the 2002 DRAP presentation were organized as multilevel events. At the Locate conferences, the presenters represented ACF, OCSE and the Dept of Defense (DOD) at the federal level, PACSES and BCSE at the state level and DRS from the county level. This multilevel approach was extremely effective in the flow of information from the federal level down through the state level to the county workers, but more importantly it also facilitated the flow of information from the “front line” county workers all the way back to the policy and systems people at the state and federal levels. Every one learned things about the automated locate processes and how to make them more effective.

The DRAP presentation was done with state and county presenters and was focused on workers who were, for the most part, not locate workers. The attendees were mostly Administrative, Establishment, and Enforcement workers. The focus here was more on getting correct data into the system, doing effective interviews for locate information and tips on how to think more creatively when attempting to locate an absent parent.

 

Two Fresh Approaches

 

Two approaches to performing Locate activities in the DRSs have emerged since the 2002 Locate conferences.

1.      Combined Intake and Locate Approach Several counties have combined their Intake and Locate units to insure getting as much information on the absent parent as soon as possible. It allows for the Locate workers and Intake workers to focus on accurate, verified demographic information and to establish a relationship with the custodial parent in the child support process. The custodial parent becomes an integral part of the child support process and a partner to the DRS worker in locating. Some counties have been extensively using the DFCN, Defendant Contact screen, to record information on the defendant’s friends, hang outs, parents, social cubs/organizations, etc. They are building a reference tool that can be utilized when the absent parent disappears and needs to be located. An additional benefit of combined locate/intake units is that manual locate efforts can begin anywhere from 2 -6 months earlier and the custodial parent is not required to make as additional visit to the DRS.

 

2.      Locate is Everyone’s Business The other approach to performing locate activities is the “Locate is Everyone’s Business’ model. Some counties have instituted policies that whenever any worker is working on a case, that the MAIL alerts for that case get reviewed and if they can be cleared or some action can be taken, don’t pass it on, just take the action. This spreads the locate alerts across an entire office with “new” eyes each time a case is reviewed.

Both of these models seem to work well with the automated Locate interfaces.

 

PACSES TV

 

The Communication Challenge

 

Providing timely and concise communication to the PACSES users is always critical to ensure efficient use of all aspects of the PACSES system.   Some of the challenges of knowledge transfer are:

·        Keeping informed of constantly changing software solutions.  This year the big ones were the deployment of Windows 2000 and MS Office 2000.  Additionally third party software used in conjunction with the application was upgraded, namely Masq to Equate and Accessory Manager to WebTS.

·        Integrating the understanding of improvements and enhancements to the PACSES application with baseline IV-D system and policy knowledge.

·        Making knowledge transfer as focused as possible to quickly bring new employees (as high as 40% per year) up to speed on using the PACSES system while performing child support program services.

·        Offering a variety of knowledge transfer vehicles to facilitate different learning methods.  Workshops, conferences, on-line HELP, PACSES Information Memos, DRS Memos, Daily Production Status releases, Application Tips, and on-line Requests all resides on the PACSES Home Page, each offering special methods of information sharing.

 

An E-learning Solution

Electronic Content Delivery Networks enable government agencies to improve learning, communications, and productivity by delivering rich media on the Web simply and affordably. Agencies are able to deliver any streaming formats: MPEG, RealG2, QuickTime, Windows Media, PDFs, PowerPoint presentations, IP videoconferences, Shockwave, Flash, applications, and more. In short, they make high-impact desktop learning across the enterprise a reality.

The PACSES Network Team has installed the Cisco CDN solution within the PACSES network.  This system and its parallel application, Internet Protocol Television (IPTV), accepts input from any video source; reformats the input into movie quality video, which is then delivered to the local Cisco storage devices on the PACSES network. (Each DRS and BCSE site has a local Content Engine (CE).  When a user requests a video choice from their desktop, the system directs the requesting workstation IP address to receive the video feed from the local CE.  In summary, Cisco IPTV provides the ability to share business information across the PACSES enterprise network to PACSES users’ desktops. 

Content Management

The challenge of creating and managing video segments is a combination of technical ability and appropriate content.  Although the system has enormous flexibility in supporting multiple video formats, the overall network utilization must be considered to mitigate the possibility of any impact to processing production transactions.

 

Content is a combination of pre-recorded video and Project produced video.  Electronic information from OCSE with topics such as Security and FPLS and other agency pre-recorded material is available through PACSES TV.  Candidates for PACSES produced clips are areas of new processes and/or software releases, topics that generate significant help requests, such as the complex desktop password composition, and functional processes where a series of data entry screens shown through video would make learning occur more quickly that reading extensive documentation.  Development of a combination of advertisement video, user tips video and workshop/training sessions videos are envisioned.

Standards for producing and releasing PACSES TV clips include receiving topic suggestions from all users, developing the material, creating the video clip, conducting an internal review for content accuracy, validation by the Project site staff for technical and content correctness, providing links to other supporting documentation, and publishing new releases through the daily Production Status Report.  To maintain the standard that all communications are accessed through the PACSES Home Page, PACSES TV resides within that web structure.

 

 

end