3. Southeast Regional Child Support Enforcement Unit Improvement Plan
Laserfiche
>
Public
>
County Commission
>
2007
>
02-05-2007
>
Regular agenda
>
3. Southeast Regional Child Support Enforcement Unit Improvement Plan
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/2/2007 10:24:52 AM
Creation date
1/30/2007 12:58:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />case analysts better preparing cases for guidelines calculations (or for two of them - <br />doing the calculations), more resources will be put to reviews and adjustments as well, <br />including the exceptions to the 35 month general rule. More accurate orders will result in <br />a greater proportion of current support distributed. <br /> <br />III. Paving Arrears <br /> <br />Description <br />This measure is the percentage of cases with arrears for which a payment was collected. <br />The interesting thing with this measurement is that it is the number of cases for which a <br />collection was made that is important, and not the amount of the collection. <br /> <br />Line 29 <br />Line 28 <br /> <br />Cases paving towards arrearages during the review period <br />Cases with arrears due during the review period <br /> <br />In FFY 06, of 7,041 cases with arrears, 5,086 cases had collections on arrears, for a <br />percentage of 72.23%. Of the eight regions, that was 3rd, with the top region at 74.63% <br /> <br />In FFY 05, of6,812 cases with an'ears, 4,912 cases had collections on arrears, for a <br />percentage of72.1 %. Of the eight regions, that was 2nd, with the top region at 75.3%. <br /> <br />No region had a 2% improvement in FFY 2006 (though one region was close with 1.97% <br />improvement), and three regions had a decrease. <br /> <br />Analysis <br /> <br />Some of the same tools that benefit the Current Support measure would also likely <br />improve this measurement as well, in two ways. First, files that stay current are tiles that <br />don't have arrears. Improving collection of current support ought to help limit the <br />growing base of cases with arrears. The Fargo Region's increase (from FFY 2005 to <br />FFY 2006) in the number of cases with arrears was more than all 7 other regions <br />combined. W11ile part of that can be explained by the overall growth in caseload, there is <br />no doubt that better collection of current support would help the performance of paying <br />arrears. <br /> <br />Second, the tools themselves will directly affect the ability to collect payments on arrears. <br />Payment plans require the payment of arrears. The exceptions to the 35 month rule allow <br />for more accurate support obligations, which make payments of arrears affordable, and <br />for those that hud run into the 50% of net income limitation on income withholding, <br />"withholdable". <br /> <br />And while deduction orders may have more of an impact on the amount collected as <br />opposed to the number of cases where a collection is made, that tool would also help <br />increase performance. <br /> <br />5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.