[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 195 (Friday, October 8, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55102-55110]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-25901]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and Families
45 CFR Part 308
RIN 0970-AB96
State Self-Assessment Review and Report
AGENCY: Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE), ACF, HHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: These proposed regulations would implement a provision of the
Social Security Act added by the Personal Responsibility and Work
Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), which requires each
State to annually assess the performance of its own child support
enforcement program and to provide a report of the findings to the
Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS).
DATES: Consideration will be given to written comments received by
December 7, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to: Administration for Children and Families,
Department of Health and Human Services, 370 L'Enfant Promenade, S.W.,
Washington D.C. 20447. Attention: Division of Policy and Planning,
Office of Child Support Enforcement. Comments will be available for
public inspection Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on the
fourth floor of the Department's offices at the address mentioned
above.
You may also transmit written comments electronically via the
Internet. To transmit comments electronically, or download an
electronic version of the proposed rule, you should access the
Administration for Children and Families Welfare Reform Home Page at
``http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/hypernews/'' and follow the instructions
provided.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jan Rothstein, Division of Policy &
Planning, OCSE, telephone number: (202) 401-5073, fax: (202) 401-3444,
e-mail: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
State Self-Assessment Review and Report
Statutory Authority
These proposed regulations are published under the authority of the
Social Security Act (the Act), as amended by the Personal
Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (Pub. L.
104-193). Section 454(15)(A) of the Act (42 U.S.C. 654(15)(A)) contains
a requirement for each State to annually assess the performance of the
State's child support enforcement program under title IV-D of the Act
in accordance with standards specified by the Secretary, and to provide
a report of the findings to the Secretary.
These proposed regulations are also published under the general
authority of section 1102 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 1302) authorizing the
Secretary to publish regulations necessary for the efficient
administration of the title IV-D program.
Background
Prior to PRWORA, Federal law specified that States that had been
audited and found not to be in substantial compliance with Federal
requirements were subject to a financial penalty of between 1 and 5
percent of the State's funding under the title IV-A program. These
audits were performed every 3 years. The penalty could be held in
abeyance for up to one year to allow States the opportunity to
implement corrective actions to remedy the program deficiency. At the
end of the corrective action period, a follow-up audit was conducted.
If the follow-up audit showed that the deficiency had been corrected,
the penalty was rescinded. Section 342(b) of PRWORA revised section
452(a)(4) of the Act, and
[[Page 55103]]
Federal audit requirements were changed to focus on data reliability
and to assess performance outcomes instead of determining compliance
with process steps.
At the same time, section 342(a) of PRWORA amended the Act by
adding a new section 454(15)(A) of the Act to require each State to
conduct an annual review of its Child Support Enforcement (IV-D)
program to determine if Federal requirements are being met and to
provide an annual report to the Secretary of DHHS on the findings. The
changes to sections 452 and 454(a)(15) mean that the Federal
government's audit responsibilities now focus primarily on results and
fiscal accountability while States are to focus on the responsibilities
for child support service delivery in accordance with Federal mandates.
The annual self-assessment's purpose is to give a State the opportunity
to assess whether it is meeting Federal requirements for providing
child support services and providing the best services possible to
those in need of them. It is to be used as a management tool, to help a
State evaluate its program and assess its performance. These self
reviews are not tied to fiscal sanctions. Financial penalties, like
incentive rewards, will be based on program results.
Section 454(15)(A) of the Act also requires the Secretary to
establish standards and procedures for the State to use in conducting
the annual review. These proposed rules convey the Secretary's
standards and procedures for the States' self-assessment reviews.
The requirements in this proposed rule would be effective
prospectively from the effective date of the final rule. The review
period for the first self-assessment would end no later than 12 months
after the effective date of the final regulations. Subsequent annual
review periods would end every 12 months thereafter. The first self-
assessment report would be due no later than six months after the end
of the review period and each 12-month review period thereafter. If a
State fails to submit a self-assessment report, the DHHS Office of
Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) would work with that State to try to
resolve any issues that might be preventing the State from submitting a
self-assessment report. However, if a State fails to make a good faith
effort to resolve any barriers and submit a self-assessment report, we
would begin taking the steps necessary to disapprove the State plan
pursuant to sections 452(a)(3) and 455(a) of the Act and sections
301.10 and 301.13 of this chapter.
In the development of this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, OCSE used
as its starting point the objectives outlined in the OCSE strategic
plan, which was endorsed by the States on February 28, 1995. The
strategic plan is available at www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cse/new/
spwith.htm. The three goals in the strategic plan and their
corresponding objectives are as follows:
All children have parentage established--to increase
establishment of paternities, particularly those established within one
year of birth;
All children in IV-D cases have financial and medical
support orders--to increase the percentage of IV-D cases with orders
for financial support, and to increase the percentage of cases with
orders for medical support; and
All children in IV-D cases receive financial and medical
support from both parents--to increase the collection rate, to increase
the percentage of cases where health insurance coverage is obtained
after being ordered, to increase the percentage of cases with
appropriate and up-to-date support orders, and to make the process more
efficient and responsive.
This approach is useful because it guarantees that all States have
the same goals and objectives for their self-assessment reviews and
that those goals and objectives are all focused on improving the lot of
America's children.
OCSE also believes that the self-assessment process should not
duplicate Federal audits that will be conducted by the OCSE Division of
Audit (i.e., data reliability reviews, limited cost reviews and
administrative cost audits) and should focus on agreed-upon goals.
Similarly, the self-assessment reviews should not duplicate other types
of program reviews such as automated systems certification reviews.
Following the enactment of PRWORA and to ensure broad input, OCSE
consulted with a wide variety of program stakeholders to get
recommendations on how to proceed. These recommendations addressed: the
criteria to be covered in annual reports to the Secretary; the
methodology for reviewing the criteria; and an approach for reporting
the results of these reviews. OCSE considered these recommendations in
developing these proposed rules.
OCSE received suggestions on self-assessment reviews at national
and regional meetings, including the American Public Human Services
Association, formerly known as the American Public Welfare Association
(APWA) and the National Child Support Enforcement Association (NCSEA).
In addition, several child support advocacy groups informally provided
comments. Comments were also solicited from State IV-D directors and
incorporated as deemed appropriate.
In addition, OCSE contracted with BDM, Inc., a consulting group, to
survey existing self-assessment efforts in selected States and make
recommendations for developing and implementing self-assessment
reviews. OCSE also took these recommendations into consideration in the
development of these proposed rules.
On March 31, 1998, OCSE issued Action Transmittal-98-12 to provide
the States preliminary guidance on the self-assessment review process
pending publication of this proposed rule. This action transmittal:
provides a practical methodology for implementing the self-assessment
process, covers required and optional program compliance criteria,
presents the Federal role in the process as required by the statute,
and suggests a reporting format. OCSE has appointed Amy Guzierjka to an
Intergovernmental Personnel Act (IPA) assignment from the State of
Massachusetts, to serve as the audit liaison to assist States in
complying with the self-assessment requirements. Ms. Guzierjka has
extensive experience in this area at the State level.
These proposed rules would promulgate the Secretary's requirements
for State self-assessment reviews and annual reports. We invite public
comment concerning the proposed standards and procedures required of
States in conducting the reviews and reporting to the Secretary.
Overview of the Self-Assessment Review
The self-assessment review process proposed in this rule would
consist of an annual State-conducted self-assessment of its IV-D
program, and annual reporting of the results to the Commissioner, OCSE
and Regional Offices as designees of the Secretary. Staff in the
Regional Offices will review the self-assessment reports and work with
the States if corrective action is necessary.
OCSE proposes that the State self-assessment review consist of
three categories: Required Program Compliance Criteria, Program
Direction, and Program Service Enhancements. The first category would
be mandatory for inclusion in a State's annual self-assessment review
and report. The second and third categories would be optional for
inclusion in a State's self-assessment review and report.
The Required Program Compliance category draws upon selected areas
of the child support program that have previously been covered by
Federal
[[Page 55104]]
audits and which are addressed in regulations in Parts 302 and 303.
These criteria represent the current program requirements that most
directly relate to the major child support functions and which must be
monitored to assess program performance. These criteria also bear a
direct correlation to the goals and objectives set forth in OCSE's
strategic plan and the 15 outcome measurements in that plan. These
criteria would represent the minimum that States would be required to
include in their self-assessment reviews and in their reports to the
Secretary. A State would be able to modify the review requirements by
imposing higher standards on itself or evaluating additional Federal or
State requirements; however, a State would be required to document its
review scope in its annual report. Nothing precludes States from
expanding their reviews to include other program areas. A State may
wish to expand the review to accommodate its specific management needs.
Again, we envision these reviews as serving as management tools for the
States. A State should feel free to modify them to best suit its
program needs.
Federal financial participation (FFP) would be available to
reimburse States for the cost of carrying out all three categories of
self-assessment. States may add additional optional information to the
information listed in categories 1, 2, and 3. FFP would also be
available for gathering and reporting this additional optional
information.
Federal Role
The Federal role in the self-assessment review process would be to
receive reports submitted pursuant to section 452(a)(4)(B) of the Act
and, as appropriate, provide to the States comments, recommendations
for additional or alternative corrective action, and provide any
technical assistance that a State may need. We propose that the Federal
involvement include, but not be limited to: approving IV-D State plan
amendments certifying that the State has a self-assessment review
process; providing review requirements, guidelines, instructions and
methodologies for the review to the State; responding to requests for
help from the State; providing interpretation of compliance standards;
developing continuing partnerships; reviewing and providing appropriate
comments on self-assessment reports; developing a self-assessment
review module; overseeing the implementation of the self-assessment
process in the States; periodically analyzing self-assessment reports
to identify `best practices' to be shared with other States and
providing comments and recommendations regarding the appropriateness of
proposed corrective action or alternative correction action.
The Office of Child Support Enforcement is publishing a separate
proposed rule regarding performance incentives and penalties. As
indicated in that rule, results from State self-assessments may serve
as a basis for more in-depth audits.
Description of Regulatory Provisions
We are proposing to implement the statutory requirement that a
State annually assess the performance of its IV-D program and submit a
report of the findings to the Secretary by adding a new Part 308,
``Annual State Self-Assessment Review and Report'' to existing rules in
Chapter III governing the child support enforcement program under title
IV-D of the Act.
Proposed section 308.0 sets the scope of the regulation and
specifies it is applicable only to the annual State self-assessment
review and report process.
Proposed section 308.1 provides the components of the self-
assessment implementation methodology that States must use including
organizational placement, sampling, scope of review, the review period,
and reporting.
Proposed section 308.1(a) addresses options for the organizational
placement of the self-assessment function. Ideally, the organizational
placement would be within the IV-D agency. This would enable the agency
to draw on the experience of IV-D staff who have the skills and
qualifications needed to analyze the program, an important element of a
meaningful self-assessment of the program. However, we recognize that
this is not always possible. Therefore, the proposed regulations allow
the self-assessment unit to be placed within the title IV-D agency's
umbrella agency, or another State agency. Alternatively, a State may
consider privatizing or contracting out the self-assessment function.
However, regardless of the location of this function, the IV-D agency
must maintain the responsibility and control for all reviews, review
findings and the content of the annual report.
Proposed section 308.1(b) specifies that a State must either review
all of its cases or conduct sampling which meets the criteria
specified. Due to the differences in administrative structures in
States, we believe it would be inappropriate for OCSE to prescribe a
single sampling formula for universal use by all States. Instead, under
proposed paragraph (b), a State would have discretion in designing its
own sampling methodologies that could be tailored to meet individual
State needs. However, under proposed paragraphs (b)(2) and (3), each
State must maintain a minimum confidence level of 90 percent for each
criterion, select statistically valid samples, and assure that there
are no portions of the IV-D case universe omitted from the sample
selection process.
The following checklist has been developed to provide guidance in
the form of a series of steps that should be taken during the
development and application of a sampling methodology. This checklist
is not intended as a definitive pronouncement or mandate from OCSE, but
only as a guide outlining a generic sampling approach. We provide it
for reference and guidance only.
1. Define the reason(s) for collecting and evaluating the data:
i.e. each State must evaluate its performance with regard to each
required program compliance criterion set forth in proposed section
308.2.
2. Plan the data collection method(s):
a. Identify the criteria to be evaluated (refer to proposed section
308.2).
b. Select a method of data collection/evaluation.
c. Establish a minimally acceptable level of performance.
d. Set a desired confidence level.
e. Choose a method of random selection (e.g., simple random
selection or systematic random selection).
3. Collect required data: After selecting the sample cases, obtain
the case files and/or the pertinent computer records or data elements.
4. Process the collected data: Evaluate each case for each
criterion to determine if the desired action was taken. Tabulate the
results of the sample or samples.
5. Analyze the data. Quantify results and statistically evaluate
the results obtained.
6. Present the results for each criterion in a tabular format and
provide a narrative explanation of the results obtained.
Proposed section 308.1(c) relates to the scope of the self-
assessment review. This paragraph would require a State to review all
required criteria articulated in section 308.2 on a yearly basis. We
considered accommodating some States who have not had the experience in
conducting these types of reviews by allowing reviews for some of the
criteria on a rotational basis rather than annual reviews on all
required criteria by all States. We decided that if we permitted
reviews of some of the required criteria on a rotational basis, the
results would lose meaning and not be comparable to prior years.
Therefore, we propose that
[[Page 55105]]
each State would be required to review all criteria under section 308.2
on a yearly basis.
Proposed section 308.1(d) would provide for a 12-month review
period, ending no later than 12 months after the effective date of this
final rule and each 12 month period thereafter. We believe the proposed
12-month review period is consistent with prior audit review periods
and allows enough time to evaluate the case processing timeframes in
Part 303. We also believe that it is not necessary for all States to
match each other's review periods, provided that the case samples
selected are from the period that will be reviewed and reflected in the
report. Self-assessment reviews can be conducted in one of two ways:
historically or incrementally. Using the historical approach, a State
would not begin its self-assessment review until the end of the period
to be reviewed.
Using the incremental approach, a State would select cases from
several periods during the review period and add the results to provide
a picture of performance for the entire period. The State should draw a
separate sample for each incremental review period. The incremental
approach would enable the State to spread its review effort over time
and make more efficient use of available resources because the sample
size could be smaller, while allowing the State to identify problem
areas and take corrective action prior to the end of the review period.
For those States who review their case samples incrementally, the cases
selected must be reviewed and evaluated for the actions required at the
beginning of the review period.
Proposed section 308.1(e) would address the contents of the annual
reports and require copies to be sent to the Commissioner, OCSE and
applicable Regional Offices. We propose that the State submit its
written report no later than 6 months after the end of the review
period. For example, if the review period ends September 30, 2000, the
first report would be due by March 31, 2001.
Proposed section 308.2 lists and provides descriptions of the
required program compliance criteria. In all cases, States must have
the required procedures specified in the regulations. In this section
we are also proposing to require States to use benchmarks for
performance that are identical to those that were required when
previous Federal audit standards were in place. The benchmarks for
determining the adequacy of performance are still, we believe,
appropriate under the new system of self-assessment reviews. States can
use the benchmarks to determine if corrective action is necessary if
they fail to meet one or more benchmarks. We propose that reviews of
closed cases should demonstrate that appropriate action was taken in 90
percent of the cases reviewed. We further propose that reviews of the
other required program criteria should show that appropriate action was
taken in 75 percent of the cases reviewed.
Proposed section 308.2(a) would require reviews of closed IV-D
cases to determine whether the case met one or more Federal case
closure criteria under section 303.11.
Proposed section 308.2(b)(1) would require the review of State
actions to establish paternity and support orders. A case would meet
the review requirement if an order for support was required and
established during the review period, notwithstanding the relevant
timeframes. Section 308.2(b)(2) addresses the necessary procedures to
follow when an order was required but not established during the review
period.
Proposed section 308.2(c) would require the review of State actions
to enforce child support orders. If income withholding was appropriate,
a case would meet the review requirement if it was received during the
review period, notwithstanding the mandatory timeframes. A review of
the enforcement of orders would include all cases in which an ongoing
income withholding is in place, as well as those cases in which new or
repeated enforcement actions were required during the review period.
Proposed section 308.2(d) describes reviews of the disbursement of
collections, requiring the implementation of a State Disbursement Unit
(SDU) effective October 1, 1998, or on October 1, 1999, for those
States in which the local courts are disbursing collections. This
review would include a determination of whether States are complying
with the 2-day requirement for disbursing certain collections. The
statute had two effective dates but we anticipate that final rulemaking
would be published after October 1, 1999, the date on which all States
have to have an SDU in effect and therefore, we have not included any
reference to the effective dates in the proposed rule.
Proposed section 308.2(e) would require reviews of securing and
enforcing medical support orders. This would include measuring whether
the requirements were met for: including a medical support provision in
all new orders; taking steps to determine whether reasonable health
insurance is available when health insurance is included in the order;
informing the Medicaid agency when coverage was obtained; determining
whether the custodial parent was informed of policy information when
coverage has been obtained; determining whether employers are informing
the State of lapses in coverage; and determining whether the State
transferred notice of the health care provision to a new employer when
a noncustodial parent changed employment. The forthcoming national
medical support notice has the potential to vastly improve establishing
and enforcing medical support orders. Once it becomes available, States
should be using it and reviewing for its application in appropriate
cases.
Proposed section 308.2(f) addresses the review and adjustment of
orders. A case would meet the review requirement if it was reviewed and
met the conditions for adjustment notwithstanding the applicable
timeframes. An examination of the review and adjustment criterion would
include reviews of assistance cases, review of cases where adjustments
were not necessary, quarterly repeated location efforts, notices to the
custodial and non-custodial parents informing them of their rights to
request reviews within 180 days of determining that a review should be
conducted, and reviews of whether both parties were given 30 days to
contest adjustments if the cost-of-living or automated methods had been
utilized.
Proposed section 308.2(g) addresses the interstate services. The
review criterion would include the initiating State's responsibility to
refer cases to the responding State within 20 days of determining that
the noncustodial parent is in another State pursuant to section
303.7(b)(2); providing responses to the responding State with requested
additional information within 30 calendar days of the request pursuant
to section 303.7(b)(4); notifying the responding State of new
information within 10 working days pursuant to section 303.7(b)(5); and
sending a request for review of a child support order within 20
calendar days after receiving a request for review and adjustment under
the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA) pursuant to section
303.7(b)(6).
Reviews would also include determining compliance with
responsibilities of the responding State in interstate cases, including
central registry requirements for review of submitted documentation for
completeness, forwarding the case to the State Parent Locator Service
for locate services, acknowledgment of the receipt
[[Page 55106]]
of the case and request for missing documentation from the initiating
State, and whether the IV-D agency in the initiating State was informed
of where the case was sent for action. The review would also determine
whether the central registry responded to inquiries from other States
within 5 working days of receipt of a request for a case status review
pursuant to section 303.7(a)(4).
Section 308.2(b), (c), and (f) contain language that previously
appeared in former section 305.20(d) relative to certain missed
timeframes. As we stated in the preamble to the final rule revising
Federal audit regulations in child support (59 FR 66204), the State
should not be penalized when timeframes are missed in a case if a
successful result is achieved (paternity or a support order is
established, an order is adjusted, income is withheld, or a collection
is made), since these results are the main goals of the child support
enforcement program. We emphasize that all timeframes, including those
for paternity establishment, support order establishment, review and
adjustment, and income withholding, are still Federal requirements that
States must meet.
Other timeframes that would actually be reviewed for compliance
would include: 10 days to forward the case upon locating the non-
custodial parent in a different jurisdiction pursuant to section
303.7(c)(5) and (6); 2 business days to forward any support payments
collected to the initiating State pursuant to section 303.7(c)(7)(iv);
and 10 working days to notify the initiating State upon receipt of new
information pursuant to section 303.7(c)(9).
Proposed section 308.2(h) addresses the proposed timeframes
applicable to the expedited processes criterion pursuant to section
303.101(b)(2)(i) and in keeping with previous definitions of
substantial compliance in former section 305.20, we are proposing a
benchmark of 75 percent for the number of cases to be completed within
6 months and a benchmark of 90 percent for the number of cases to be
completed within one year. The 75 and 90 percent benchmark standards
would apply to the establishment of orders from the date of service of
process to the time of disposition.
Proposed section 308.3 lists and describes the proposed optional
program areas of review, which would include program direction and
program service enhancements. Proposed section 308.3(a) pertains to the
review of State program direction.
The first optional category, Program Direction, is envisioned as an
analysis of the relationships between case results relating to program
compliance areas, and performance and program outcome indicators. While
this review category is optional, by including the information, States
have the opportunity to demonstrate how they are trying to manage their
resources to achieve the best performance possible. This evaluation
should explain the data and how the State adjusted its resources and
processes to meet goals and improve performance. In this section,
States are encouraged to discuss new laws and enforcement techniques,
etc., that are contributing to increased performance. Barriers to
success, such as State statutes, may also be discussed in this section.
Proposed section 308.3(b) pertaining to the optional review of
State program service enhancements is envisioned as a report of
practices initiated by the State that are contributing to improving
program performance and customer service.
Examples would include improvement of client services through the
use of expanded office hours, kiosks, internet, and voice response
systems. This is an opportunity for a State to promote its programs and
innovative practices. Some examples of innovative activities that a
State may elect to discuss in the report include such things as: steps
taken to make the program more efficient and effective; efforts to
improve client services; demonstration projects testing creative new
ways of doing business; collaborative efforts being taken with partners
and customers; innovative practices which have resulted in improved
program performance; actions taken to improve public image; and access/
visitation projects initiated to improve non-custodial parents'
involvement with the children. A State should also discuss in this
review area whether the State has a process for timely dissemination of
applications for IV-D services in cases that are not receiving public
assistance, when requested, and child support program information to
recipients referred to the IV-D program, as required by section
303.2(a).
Executive Order 12866
Executive Order 12866 requires that regulations be drafted to
ensure that they are consistent with the priorities and principles set
forth in the Executive Order. The Department has determined that this
proposed rule is consistent with these priorities and principles. The
proposed changes in this rule contain the Secretary's standards for
State self-assessment reviews that largely replace previously required
mandatory Federal audits.
Assessment of Federal Regulations and Policies on Families
Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act of 1999 requires Federal agencies to determine whether a proposed
policy or regulation may affect family well-being. If the agency's
conclusion is affirmative, then the agency must prepare an impact
assessment addressing seven criteria specified in the law. These
proposed regulations will not have an impact on family well-being as
defined in the legislation.
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-354) requires the
Federal government to anticipate and reduce the impact of regulations
and paperwork requirements on small entities. The Secretary certifies
that these proposed regulations will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities because the primary
impact of these regulations is on State governments.
Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13, all
Departments are required to submit to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review and approval any reporting or recordkeeping
requirements inherent in a proposed or final rule. Interested parties
may comment to OMB on these reporting requirements as described below.
This NPRM contains reporting requirements in Part 308, which the
Department has submitted, to OMB for its review.
Section 308.1(e) contains a requirement that a State report the
results of annual self-assessment reviews to the appropriate OCSE
Regional Office and to the Commissioner of OCSE. The information
submitted must be sufficient to measure State compliance with Federal
requirements for expedited procedures and to determine whether the
program is in compliance with title IV-D requirements and case
processing timeframes. The results of the report will be disseminated
via ``best practices'' to other States and also be used to determine if
technical assistance is needed and the use of resources to meet goals.
The State plan preprint page for this requirement (page 2.15, Federal
and State Reviews and Audits) was approved by OMB July 7, 1997 under
OMB Number 0970-0017.
Respondents: State child support enforcement agencies of the 50
States,
[[Page 55107]]
the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands.
This information collection requirement will impose the estimated
total annual burden on the States described in the table below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average burden
Information collection Number of Responses per hours per Total annual
respondents respondent response burden hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 308.1............................... 54 1 3,866 208,764
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) will consider
comments by the public on the proposed information collection in order
to evaluate the accuracy of ACF's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information. Comments by the public on this
proposed collection of information will be considered in the following
areas:
Evaluating the accuracy of the ACF's estimate of the
burden of the proposed collection[s] of information, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
Enhancing the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
Minimizing the burden of the collection of information on
those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate
automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technology, e.g.,
permitting electronic submission of responses.
OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of
information contained in these proposed regulations between 30 and 60
days after publication of this document in the Federal Register.
Therefore, a comment is best assured of having its full effect if OMB
receives it within 30 days of publication. This does not affect the
deadline for the public to comment to the Department on the proposed
regulations. Written comments to OMB for the proposed information
collection should be sent directly to the following: Office of
Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project, 725 17th Street,
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20503, Attn: Desk Officer for the Administration
for Children and Families.
Unfunded Mandates Act
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires
that a covered agency prepare a budgetary impact statement before
promulgating a rule that includes any Federal mandate that may result
in the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one
year. If a covered agency must prepare a budgetary impact statement,
section 205 further requires that it select the most cost-effective and
least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule
and is consistent with the statutory requirements. In addition, section
203 requires a plan for informing and advising any small government
that may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the proposed rule.
We have determined that the proposed rule will not result in the
expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of more than $100 million in any one year.
Accordingly, we have not prepared a budgetary impact statement,
specifically addressed the regulatory alternatives considered, or
prepared a plan for informing and advising any significantly or
uniquely impacted small government.
Congressional Review
This proposed rule is not a major rule as defined in 5 U.S.C.,
Chapter 8.
List of Subjects in Part 308
Auditing, Child support, Grant programs--social programs, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 93.563, Child
Support Enforcement Program)
Dated: April 20, 1999.
Olivia A. Golden,
Assistant Secretary for Children and Families.
Approved: June 14, 1999.
Donna E. Shalala,
Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, we propose to amend 45
CFR Chapter III by adding a new part 308 as set forth below:
PART 308--ANNUAL STATE SELF-ASSESSMENT REVIEW AND REPORT
Sec.
308.0 Scope.
308.1 Self-assessment implementation methodology.
308.2 Required program compliance criteria.
308.3 Optional program areas of review.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 654 (15)(a) and 1302.
Sec. 308.0 Scope.
This part establishes standards and criteria for the State self-
assessment review and report process required under section 454(15)(A)
of the Act.
Sec. 308.1 Self-assessment implementation methodology.
(a) Organizational placement. A State must:
(1) Establish a self-assessment unit within the title IV-D agency,
another State agency, or within the umbrella agency containing the IV-D
agency; or
(2) Privatize the self-assessment functions provided that the IV-D
agency maintains responsibility for and control of the results produced
and contents of the annual report.
(b) Sampling. A State must either review all of its cases or
conduct sampling which meets the following conditions:
(1) The sampling methodology maintains a minimum confidence level
of 90 percent for each criterion;
(2) The State selects statistically valid samples of cases from the
IV-D program universe of cases; and
(3) The State establishes procedures for the design of samples and
assures that no portions of the IV-D case universe are omitted from the
sample selection process.
(c) Scope of review. A State must conduct an annual review covering
all of the required criteria in Sec. 308.2.
(d) Review period. Each review period must cover a 12-month period.
The first review period shall end no later than 12 months after the
effective date of the final rule, and subsequent reviews shall cover
each 12-month period thereafter.
(e) Reporting. (1) The State must provide a report of the results
of the self-assessment review to the appropriate OCSE Regional Office,
with a copy to the Commissioner of OCSE, no later than 6 months after
the end of the review period.
(2) The report must include, but is not limited to:
(i) An executive summary, including a summary of the mandatory
program criteria findings;
(ii) A description of optional program areas covered by the review;
(iii) A description of sampling methodology used, if applicable;
(iv) The results of the self-assessment reviews; and
(v) Any corrective actions proposed and/or taken.
[[Page 55108]]
Sec. 308.2 Required program compliance criteria.
(a) Case closure. (1) The State must have and use procedures for
case closure pursuant to Sec. 303.11 of this chapter in at least 90
percent of the closed cases reviewed.
(2) If a IV-D case was closed during the review period, the State
must determine whether the case met requirements pursuant to
Sec. 303.11 of this chapter.
(b) Establishment of paternity and support order. The State must
have and use procedures required in this paragraph in at least 75
percent of the cases reviewed.
(1) If an order for support is required and established during the
review period, the case meets the requirements, notwithstanding the
timeframes for: establishment of cases as specified in Sec. 303.2(b) of
this chapter; provision of services in interstate IV-D cases per
Sec. 303.7(a), (b), (c)(4) through (6), and (c) (8) and (9) of this
chapter; and location and support order establishment under
Secs. 303.3(b)(3) and (5), and 303.4(d) of this chapter.
(2) If an order was required, but not established during the review
period, the State must determine the last required action and determine
whether the action was taken within the appropriate timeframe. The
following is a list of possible last actions:
(i) Opening a case within 20 days pursuant to Sec. 303.2(b) of this
chapter;
(ii) If location activities are necessary, using all appropriate
sources within 75 days pursuant to Sec. 303.3(b)(3) of this chapter.
This includes all the following locate sources as appropriate:
custodial parent, Federal Parent Locator Service, U.S. Postal Service,
State employment security agency, employment data, Department of Motor
Vehicles, and credit bureaus;
(iii) Repeating location attempts quarterly and when new
information is received in accordance with Sec. 303.3(b)(5) of this
chapter;
(iv) Establishing an order or completing service of process
necessary to commence proceedings to establish a support order, or if
applicable, paternity, within 90 days of locating the non-custodial
parent, or documenting unsuccessful attempts to serve process in
accordance with the State's guidelines defining diligent efforts
pursuant to Secs. 303.3(c) and 303.4(d) of this chapter.
(c) Enforcement of orders. A State must have and use procedures
required under this paragraph in at least 75 percent of the cases
reviewed. Enforcement cases include cases in which ongoing income
withholding is in place as well as cases in which new or repeated
enforcement actions were required during the review period.
(1) If income withholding was appropriate and a withholding
collection was received during the last quarter of the review period
and the case was submitted for Federal and State income tax refund
offset, if appropriate, the case meets the requirements of
Sec. 303.6(c)(3) of this chapter, notwithstanding the timeframes for:
establishment of cases in Sec. 303.2(b) of this chapter; provision of
services in interstate IV-D cases under Sec. 303.7(a), (b), (c)(4)
through (6), and (c) (8) and (9) of this chapter; and location and
income withholding in Secs. 303.3(b)(3) and (5), and 303.100 of this
chapter.
(2) If income withholding was not appropriate, and an enforcement
collection was received during the review period, and the case was
submitted for Federal and State income tax refund offset, if
appropriate, then the case meets the requirements of Sec. 303.6(c)(3)
of this chapter, notwithstanding the timeframes for: establishment of
cases in Sec. 303.2(b) of this chapter; provision of services in
interstate IV-D cases under Sec. 303.7(a), (b), (c)(4) through (6) and
(c) (8) and (9) of this chapter; and location and enforcement of
support obligations in Secs. 303.3(b)(3) and (5), and 303.6 of this
chapter.
(3) If an order needed enforcement during the review period, but
income was not withheld or other collections were not received (when
income withholding could not be implemented), the State must determine
the last required action and determine whether the action was taken
within the appropriate timeframes. The following is a list of possible
last required actions:
(i) If location activities are necessary, using all appropriate
location sources within 75 days pursuant to Sec. 303.3(b)(3) of this
chapter. This includes, at a minimum, all of the following locate
sources as appropriate: custodial parent, Federal Parent Locator
Service (FPLS), State employment security agency, Department of motor
vehicles, and credit bureaus;
(ii) Repeating attempts to locate quarterly and when new
information is received pursuant to Sec. 303.3(b)(5) of this chapter;
(iii) If there is no immediate income withholding order, initiating
income withholding upon identifying a delinquency equal to one month's
arrears, in accordance with Sec. 303.100(c) of this chapter;
(iv) If immediate income withholding is ordered, sending a notice
to the employer within 15 calendar days of the date the support order
was entered, if the employer was known, or within 2 business days after
the date information regarding a newly hired employee is entered into
the State Directory of New Hires, whichever occurs later in accordance
with Sec. 303.100(e)(2) of this chapter and section 453A(g)(1) of the
Act;
(v) If income withholding is not appropriate or cannot be
implemented, taking an appropriate enforcement action (other than
Federal and State income tax refund offset), unless service of process
is necessary, within no more than 30 days of identifying a delinquency
or identifying the location the non-custodial parent, whichever occurs
later in accordance with Sec. 303.6(c)(2) of this chapter;
(vi) If income withholding is not appropriate or cannot be
implemented and service of process is needed, taking an appropriate
enforcement action (other than Federal and State income tax refund
offset), within no more than 60 days of identifying a delinquency or
locating the non-custodial parent, whichever occurs later, or
documenting unsuccessful attempts to serve process in accordance with
the State's guidelines for defining diligent efforts and
Sec. 303.6(c)(2)of this chapter;
(vii) If the case has arrearages, submitting the case for Federal
and State income tax refund offset during the review period, if
appropriate, in accordance with Sec. Sec. 303.72, 303.102 and
303.6(c)(3) of this chapter.
(d) Disbursement of collections. A State must have and use
procedures required in this paragraph in at least 75 percent of the
cases reviewed.
(1) States must implement a State Disbursement Unit by the
statutory deadline applicable to that State.
(2) States must determine whether disbursements of collections
received in the previous quarter were made within 2 business days after
receipt by the State Disbursement Unit from the employer or other
source of periodic income in accordance with section 457(a) of the Act,
if sufficient information identifying the payee is provided pursuant to
section 454B(c) of the Act.
(3) States may delay the distribution of collections toward
arrearages until resolution of any timely appeals with respect to such
arrearages pursuant to section 454B(c)(2) of the Act.
(e) Securing and enforcing medical support orders. A State must
have and use procedures required under this paragraph in at least 75
percent of the cases reviewed. A State must:
(1) Determine whether all support orders established during the
review period included medical support. If not,
[[Page 55109]]
determine whether medical support was included in the petition for
support to the court or administrative authority pursuant to
Sec. 466(a)(19) of the Act and Sec. 303.31(b)(1) of this chapter.
(2) If a requirement for medical support is included in the order,
determine whether steps were taken to determine if reasonable health
insurance was available pursuant to Sec. 303.31(a)(1) and (b)(7) of
this chapter.
(3) If reasonable health insurance was available, but not obtained,
determine whether steps were taken to enforce the order pursuant to
Sec. 303.31(b)(7) of this chapter.
(4) Determine whether the IV-D agency informed the Medicaid agency
that coverage had been obtained when health insurance was obtained
during the review period pursuant to Sec. 303.31(b)(6) of this chapter.
(5) Determine whether the custodial parent was provided with
information regarding the policy when health insurance was obtained
pursuant to Sec. 303.31(b)(5) of this chapter.
(6) Determine whether the State requested employers providing
health coverage to inform the State of lapses in coverage pursuant to
Sec. 303.31(b)(9) of this chapter.
(7) Determine whether the State transferred notice of the health
care provision to a new employer when a noncustodial parent was ordered
to provide health insurance coverage and changed employment and the new
employer provides health care coverage.
(f) Review and adjustment of orders. A State must have and use
procedures required under this paragraph in at least 75 percent of the
cases reviewed.
(1) If a case has been reviewed and meets the conditions for
adjustment under State laws and procedures and Sec. 303.8 of this
chapter and the order is adjusted or a determination is made as a
result of a review during the self-assessment period that an adjustment
is not needed in accordance with the State's guidelines for setting
child support awards, the State will be considered to have taken
appropriate action in that case, notwithstanding the timeframes for:
establishment of cases in Sec. 303.2(b) of this chapter; provision of
services in interstate IV-D cases under Sec. 303.7(a), (b), (c)(4)
through (6), and (c) (8) and (9) of this chapter; and location and
review and adjustment of support orders contained in Secs. 303.3(b)(3)
and (5), and 303.8 of this chapter.
(2) If a case has not been reviewed, the State must determine the
last required action and determine whether the action was taken within
the appropriate timeframe. The following is a list of possible last
actions:
(i) If locate is necessary to conduct a review, using all
appropriate location sources within 75 days of opening the case
pursuant to Sec. 303.3(b)(3) of this chapter. This includes all the
following locate sources as appropriate: custodial parent, FPLS, U.S.
Postal Service, State employment security agency, unemployment data,
Department of Motor Vehicles, and credit bureaus;
(ii) Repeating location attempts quarterly and when new information
is received pursuant to Sec. 303.3(b)(5) of this chapter;
(iii) Providing the custodial and non-custodial parents notices,
not less often then once every three years, informing them of their
right to request the State to review and, if appropriate, adjust the
order;
(iv) The first notice may be included in the order pursuant to
Sec. 466(a)(10)(C) of the Act. After the initial notice, the State must
periodically (at least once every 3 years) send notices to both
parents;
(v) Within 180 calendar days of receiving a request for a review or
locating the non-requesting parent, whichever occurs later, conducting
a review of the order and adjusting the order or determining that the
order should not be adjusted pursuant to Sec. 303.8(e) of this chapter;
(vi) If an adjustment was made during the review period using cost
of living or automated methods, giving both parties 30 days to contest
any adjustment to that support order pursuant to Sec. 466(a)(10)(A)(ii)
of the Act.
(g) Interstate services. A State must have and use procedures
required under this paragraph in at least 75 percent of the cases
reviewed. For all interstate cases requiring services during the review
period, determine the last required action and determine whether the
action was taken during the appropriate timeframe:
(1) Initiating interstate cases:
(i) Except when using the State's long-arm statute for establishing
paternity, within 20 calendar days of determining that the non-
custodial parent is in another State and, if appropriate, receipt of
any necessary information needed to process the case, referring that
case to the responding State's interstate central registry for action
pursuant to Sec. 303.7(b)(2) of this chapter.
(ii) If additional information is requested, providing the
responding State's central registry with requested additional
information within 30 calendar days of the request pursuant to
Sec. 303.7(b)(4) of this chapter.
(iii) Upon receipt of new information on a case, notifying the
responding State of that information within 10 working days pursuant to
Sec. 303.7(b)(5) of this chapter.
(iv) Within 20 calendar days after receiving a request for review
and adjustment) pursuant to Sec. 303.7(b)(6) of this chapter.
(2) Responding interstate cases:
(i) Within 10 working days of receipt of an interstate IV-D case,
the central registry reviewing submitted documentation for
completeness, forwarding the case to the State Parent Locator Service
(PLS) for locate or to the appropriate agency for processing,
acknowledging receipt of the case and requesting any missing
documentation from the initiating State, and informing the IV-D agency
in the initiating State where the case was sent for action, pursuant to
Sec. 303.7(a)(2) of this chapter.
(ii) The Central registry responding to inquiries from other States
within 5 working days of a receipt of request for case status review
pursuant to Sec. 303.7(a)(4) of this chapter.
(iii) Within 10 days of locating the non-custodial parent in a
different jurisdiction or State, forwarding the case in accordance with
Federal requirements pursuant to Sec. 303.7(c)(5) and (6) of this
chapter.
(iv) Within 2 business days of receipt of collections, forwarding
any support payments to the initiating State pursuant to
Sec. 454B(c)(1) of the Act.
(v) Within 10 working days of receipt of new information notifying
the initiating State of that new information pursuant to
Sec. 303.7(c)(9) of this chapter.
(h) Expedited processes. The State must have and use procedures
required under this paragraph in the amounts specified in this
paragraph in the cases reviewed for the expedited processes criterion.
(1) In IV-D cases needing support orders established, regardless of
whether paternity has been established, action to establish support
orders must be completed from the date of service of process to the
time of disposition within the following timeframes pursuant to
Sec. 303.101(b)(2)(i) of this chapter:
(i) 75 percent in 6 months; and
(ii) 90 percent in 12 months.
(2) States may count as a success for the 6-month standard cases
where the IV-D agency uses long-arm jurisdiction and disposition occurs
within 12 months of service of process on the alleged father or non-
custodial parent.
Sec. 308.3 Optional program areas of review.
(a) Program direction. A State may include a program direction
review in its self-assessment for the purpose of analyzing the
relationships between case results relating to program compliance
areas, and performance and
[[Page 55110]]
program outcome indicators. This review is an opportunity for States to
demonstrate how they are trying to manage their resources to achieve
the best performance possible. A program direction analysis could
describe the following:
(1) Initiatives that resulted in improved and achievable
performance accompanied with supporting data;
(2) Barriers impeding progress; and
(3) Efforts to improve performance.
(b) Program service enhancement. A State may include a program
service enhancement report in its self-assessment that describes
initiatives put into practice that improved program performance and
customer service. This is an opportunity for States to promote their
programs and innovative practices. Some examples of innovative
activities that States may elect to discuss in the report include:
(1) Steps taken to make the program more efficient and effective;
(2) Efforts to improve client services;
(3) Demonstration projects testing creative new ways of doing
business;
(4) Collaborative efforts being taken with partners and customers;
(5) Innovative practices which have resulted in improved program
performance;
(6) Actions taken to improve public image; and
(7) Access/visitation projects initiated to improve non-custodial
parents' involvement with the children.
(c) A State may provide any of the optional information in
paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section in narrative form.
[FR Doc. 99-25901 Filed 10-7-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184-01-P