Books > Law > Laws of other jurisdictions & general law > Private, property, family law > Family law
|
Buy Now
Child Support Enforcement Program Incentive Payments - Background and Policy Issues (Paperback)
Loot Price: R443
Discovery Miles 4 430
|
|
Child Support Enforcement Program Incentive Payments - Background and Policy Issues (Paperback)
(sign in to rate)
Loot Price R443
Discovery Miles 4 430
Expected to ship within 10 - 15 working days
|
The Child Support Enforcement (CSE) program, enacted in 1975, to
help strengthen families by securing financial support from
noncustodial parents, is funded with both state and federal
dollars. The federal government bears the majority of CSE program
expenditures and provides incentive payments to the states (which
include Washington, DC, and the territories of Guam, Puerto Rico,
and the Virgin Islands) for success in meeting CSE program goals.
In FY2011, total CSE program expenditures amounted to $5.7 billion.
The aggregate incentive payment amount to states was $513 million
in FY2011. P.L. 105-200, the Child Support Performance and
Incentive Act of 1998, established a revised incentive payment
system that provides incentive payments to states based on a
percentage of the state's CSE collections and incorporates five
performance measures related to establishment of paternity and
child support orders, collections of current and past-due support
payments, and cost-effectiveness. P.L. 105-200 set specific annual
caps on total federal incentive payments and required states to
reinvest incentive payments back into the CSE program. The exact
amount of a state's incentive payment depends on its level of
performance (or the rate of improvement over the previous year)
when compared with other states. In addition, states are required
to meet data quality standards. If states do not meet specified
performance measures and data quality standards, they face federal
financial penalties. P.L. 109-171 (the Deficit Reduction Act of
2005) prohibited federal matching (effective October 1, 2007, i.e.,
FY2008) of state expenditure of federal CSE incentive payments.
However, in 2009 P.L. 111-5 (the American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act of 2009) required the Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS) to temporarily provide federal matching funds (in FY2009 and
FY2010) on CSE incentive payments that states reinvested back into
the CSE program. Thus (since FY2011), CSE incentive payments that
are received by states and reinvested in the CSE program are no
longer eligible for federal reimbursement. The FY2008 repeal of
federal reimbursement for incentive payments reinvested in the CSE
program garnered much concern over its fiscal impact on the states
and renewed interest in the incentive payment system per se. A
comparison of FY2002 incentive payment performance score data to
FY2011 performance score data shows that CSE program performance
has improved with respect to all five performance measures.
Although CSE incentive payments were awarded to all 54
jurisdictions in FY2002, FY2005, FY2010, and FY2011 (the years
covered in this report), some jurisdictions performed poorly on one
or more of the five performance measures. Even so, on the basis of
the unaudited FY2011 performance incentive scores of the 54
jurisdictions, 53 jurisdictions received an incentive for all five
performance measures, and 1 jurisdiction (the Virgin Islands)
received an incentive for four performance measures. Despite a
general consensus that the CSE program is doing well, questions
still arise about whether the program is effectively meeting its
mission and concerns exist over whether the program will be able to
meet future expectations. Several factors may cause a state not to
receive an incentive payment that is commensurate with its relative
performance on individual measures. These factors include static or
declining CSE collections; sliding scale performance scores that
financially benefit states at the upper end (but not the top) of
the artificial threshold and financially disadvantaged states at
the lower end of the artificial threshold; a limited number of
performance indicators that do not encompass all of the components
critical to a successful CSE program; and a statutory maximum on
the aggregate amount of incentive payments that can be paid to
states.
General
Is the information for this product incomplete, wrong or inappropriate?
Let us know about it.
Does this product have an incorrect or missing image?
Send us a new image.
Is this product missing categories?
Add more categories.
Review This Product
No reviews yet - be the first to create one!
|
You might also like..
|
Email address subscribed successfully.
A activation email has been sent to you.
Please click the link in that email to activate your subscription.