Child Support Directors Association of California in partnership with California Department of Child Support Services Annual Child Support Training Conference & Expo October 5-7, 2010 | Orange County, California

Speakers ■Jodi Bloomberg, Technical Architect SAS ■Michael R. Henry, Senior Vice President PSI ■Janet Nottley, Director Napa County DCSS

Case Stratification Jodi Bloomberg

Case Stratification Why do it? ■Organize the workload ■Get more dollars collected with no additional resources ■Gain insight on the caseload

Case Stratification How do we do it? ■Analytics use a data driven approach ■Quantify what you already suspect ■Discover things you might not already know ■Go beyond reporting categories

Analytics ■By looking at many factors in the data at the same time ✷ Characteristics that are common to specific outcomes ■By helping identify what is important and what is not ■By ranking or scoring cases based on probability of underreported income, likelihood of delinquency, probability of voluntary arrears payment How do Analytics answer those compelling questions?

Applications in Child Support Enforcement ■Arrears Stratification ✷ What type of NCP is likely to make a voluntary payment on arrears? ■Delinquency Stratification ✷ Who is likely to become delinquent? ✷ How can we get intermittent payers to convert to regular payers? ✷ Who will never make a payment? ■Underreported Income ✷ Who is financially able to make payments but is not?

Arrears Stratification ■Goal: Determine how to get more “voluntary” arrears payments ✷ Gather data such as size of arrears balance, historical payment patters, who balance is owed to, size of monthly support obligation, etc. ■Result: ✷ Groups of NCPs most likely to be receptive to arrears payments programs (e.g. father’s day calls) ✷ Most effective programs to increase this rate

Arrears Sample “Scorecard” Points Address on FileNo -13 Yes 19 Arrears BalanceArrears Balance < $ Arrears Balance $847 - $3, Arrears Balance $3,881 -$38, Arrears Balance > $38,453 5 Percent of Months Paid Arrears in last 2 years % Months Paid Arrears< 2% -14 % Months Paid Arrears 2%-5% -2 % Months Paid Arrears 5% - 31% 13 % Months Paid Arrears> 31% 35 Ever IncarceratedYes 4 No 17 Bench Warrant in last 12 months No -3 Yes 13 Percentage of Arrears owed to State as Penalties, fees, etc Greater than 55% -2 55% or less 10

Delinquency Stratification ■Goal: Reduce delinquency rates ✷ Need to define delinquency (missed one payment, >1 payment?) ✷ Gather data related to job/address stability, NCP/CP relationship, obligation amount, court orders, etc ■Results: list of NCPs stratified by probability of delinquency ✷ Feed into backend system to give each case a delinquency “score”- probability of delinquency ✷ Change course of action policies for cases already in delinquency

Detection of Underreported Income ■Goal: Who is delinquent unrelated to ability to pay? ✷ Who are the NCPs that fit the profile of a regular payer, but are not paying? ✷ Gather same data as delinquency data plus some indicator of ability to pay such as credit score and Federal Parent Locator Service data ■Result: list of payers to be investigated for underreported income ✷ Auditors can get a narrow list of cases where we believe income is not reported or underreported

Case Stratification Results How can you use and share the results? ■Assign a score to cases indicating a priority level ■Create categories (e.g. very likely to Pay, somewhat likely, unlikely, etc) ■Use results to guide workflow

Case Stratification Michael R. Henry, JD Senior Vice President Policy Studies Inc.

Agenda ■PSI introduction ■Traditional case assignment approaches ■What is case stratification? ■How does it work? ■What are the results?

Traditional Approaches ■Generalist alpha splits ■Full-function teams ■Functional splits ■Case-type splits ✷ Foster care ✷ Interstate ■Task-based splits ✷ Financial ✷ Review & Adjust

What is Case Stratification? ■Stratification involves the assessment and treatment of cases based on specific criteria ■PSI’s stratification model recognizes that NCPs have: ✷ Different motivations for making child support payments ✷ Different financial abilities to pay support ✷ Different service needs

Case Stratification Objectives ■Minimize caseload size for high-touch cases ■Match staff skill sets to the work ■Improve efficiency ■Improve morale and job satisfaction ■Increase collection rates ■Improve customer satisfaction ■Support/maintain parent-child relationships

PSI’s Case Stratification Model ■Different approach to interacting with NCPs ■Proactive contact and positive reinforcement ■Teaming with community partners ■Different office organization and workflow ■Ability to fit skill sets and personalities of workers with needs of NCPs

The Model

Motivation ■Use quality of relationship as a proxy ■Ask following questions to custodial parent ✷ Frequency of NCP contact with kids ✷ Prior marriage ✷ Length of co-habitation ✷ Effective communication and cooperation About the children About the child support case ✷ Length of relationship ✷ Age of children ✷ Proximity

Ability to Pay ■CP assessment ■Payment history ■Employment history ■Tax refund intercepts ■Quarterly wage data ■Income information from external sources ■Quality of case data

Quadrant One: Paying Cases ■Consists of NCP’s who have demonstrated a willingness and the ability to support their children ■These cases need early intervention ■Approach ✷ Monthly monitoring ✷ Soft approach ✷ Lead with telephone ✷ Perform case maintenance to ensure case data is current ✷ Less experienced Caseworkers are assigned here ■Consists of NCP’s who have demonstrated a willingness and the ability to support their children ■These cases need early intervention ■Approach ✷ Monthly monitoring ✷ Soft approach ✷ Lead with telephone ✷ Perform case maintenance to ensure case data is current ✷ Less experienced Caseworkers are assigned here

Quadrant Two: Target Cases ■Consists of NCP’s with the ability to support their children yet payments are inconsistent ■Approach ✷ Small caseloads ✷ Use all available administrative & judicial remedies ✷ Use third party tools e.g., ACCURINT asset search ✷ Place courtesy call reminders prior to appointments and court hearings and upcoming payments ✷ In-person appointments with enforcement worker ✷ Swift enforcement action when delinquency occurs ■Consists of NCP’s with the ability to support their children yet payments are inconsistent ■Approach ✷ Small caseloads ✷ Use all available administrative & judicial remedies ✷ Use third party tools e.g., ACCURINT asset search ✷ Place courtesy call reminders prior to appointments and court hearings and upcoming payments ✷ In-person appointments with enforcement worker ✷ Swift enforcement action when delinquency occurs

Quadrant Three: Active Monitoring ■Consists of non-custodial parents whose whereabouts and/or financial ability are unknown ■Approach ✷ Skip-tracing ✷ Client interviews ✷ Application of all administrative remedies ✷ In-Person interview with NCP to determine employment status ✷ Referral to jobs programs ✷ Seek work orders ✷ Closure management ■Consists of non-custodial parents whose whereabouts and/or financial ability are unknown ■Approach ✷ Skip-tracing ✷ Client interviews ✷ Application of all administrative remedies ✷ In-Person interview with NCP to determine employment status ✷ Referral to jobs programs ✷ Seek work orders ✷ Closure management

Quadrant Four: Teaming Cases ■Consists of NCP’s who cannot financially support their children, but who exhibit motivation to do so ■Approach ✷ Conduct in-person interview with NCP to determine barriers ✷ Develop individualized plan to address barriers ✷ Refer to community service providers ✷ Modify order and suppress collection while NCP is complying with plan ■Consists of NCP’s who cannot financially support their children, but who exhibit motivation to do so ■Approach ✷ Conduct in-person interview with NCP to determine barriers ✷ Develop individualized plan to address barriers ✷ Refer to community service providers ✷ Modify order and suppress collection while NCP is complying with plan

Benefits ■Expedite order establishment ■Minimize caseload size for high-touch cases ■Match staff skill sets to the work ■Improve efficiency ■Improve morale and job satisfaction ■Increase collection rates ■Improve customer satisfaction ■Support/maintain parent-child relationships

Knoxville Study ■Federal Section 1115 grant ■Cases stratified during intake/establishment ■Willingness to pay and ability to pay considered ■High touch approach applied to cases ✷ More frequent contact with NCPs ✷ Early settlement conferences ✷ Referrals to local program for education, training, job search and retention

Knoxville Results ■Valid predictor of future compliance ■Better order establishment rates ■Improved payment rates ■Higher collections per case ■Lower arrears accumulation ■Supports early intervention ■Useful for matching NCPs with supportive services

Napa Stratification Janet Nottley

Napa Stratification ■Reasons for Stratification ✷ Best caseworker for the job ✷ Spend our resources where it will make the most difference ✷ Treat the obligors differently depending on their circumstances ✷ Employee satisfaction ✷ Open up time to do additional outreach and community activities by different workers

Process ■Reviewed the information from Missouri and other jurisdictions ■Talked to the employees ■Talked to the courts ■Identified the categories – willing and able, unwilling and able, willing but unable, Establishment, UIFSA, and MNO/Locate etc category

Process (cont) ■Identified the teams ✷ By interest ✷ By talent ✷ By need ■Stratified the case load ✷ Using CMT case stratification to load the case and obligor type. ✷ Determined which category each type fit into ✷ Changed case management manually ■Teams determined what they would do on a micro level and brought it back to management

Timeline ■Started CMT caseload stratification in June and finished in middle of August ✷ Caseload sizes of approximately 500 each ✷ Ran some overtime to get it loaded ■Took x days to change the case manager on 5200 cases ✷ Did this in stages by moving the easy cases with a future follow-up date early ■Began new caseload September 1 st ✷ Teams worked during the first month to put together their “plan”

Willing and Able ■Obligor Profile ✷ Paying full amount or almost full amount by wage withholding, SSA, or voluntarily ■Case Worker Focus ✷ Monitoring cases to ensure payments and call obligor when first payment missed. ✷ Thanking the paying obligor ✷ Maintaining contact with obligor so he/she feels comfortable calling when something is needed ✷ Data management ✷ Review and Adjustment

Willing but Unable ■Obligor Profile ✷ Had a history of paying but cannot pay due to unemployment, rehabilitation, short term disability, or other reason and a case manager can help. ✷ Partially paying what they can but cannot pay the majority for the reasons above. ✷ Paying because of UIB only ■Case Manager Focus ✷ Review and Adjustment ✷ Workforce Napa ✷ Government Resources (County, State and Federal) ✷ Community Resources (AA, housing, counseling, clothing)

Unwilling and Able ■Obligor Profile ✷ Self employed, works under the table, lives off others so he/she does not have to pay. ✷ Has history of falling to pay when employed ✷ Does not notify CSS when changes employment and addresses ■Case Manager Focus ✷ Heavy enforcement ✷ Contempt ✷ ORAP/JDX ✷ District Attorney Investigator used ✷ Maintaining constant pressure

All Others ■All others ✷ MNO only ✷ Locate ✷ Incarcerated ✷ Long term disabled ✷ Obligor on TANF or General Relief

Additional Notes ■Establishment reviews all cases and makes recommendation for stratification. Custodial parents are asked a series or questions regarding voluntary payments, contact with children, history of relationship… ■Early Intervention is done by a lead case manager and they determine what category new obligors are moved into… ■A small team, consisting of workers from each area, review and determine the category for borderline cases

The Results ■1257, 34/35, CMT and case manager tracking monitors the results. ■Comments from September… ■Napa will be sharing the results with LCSA Directors at upcoming CSDA meetings ■STAY TUNED!