2. 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

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

4. Case Stratification Jodi Bloomberg

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

6. 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

7. 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?

8. 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?

9. 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

10. Arrears Sample “Scorecard” Points Address on FileNo -13 Yes 19 Arrears BalanceArrears Balance < $847 23 Arrears Balance $847 - $3,881 18 Arrears Balance $3,881 -$38,453 15 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

11. 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

12. 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

13. 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

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

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

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

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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

20. The Model

21. 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

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

23. 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

24. 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

25. 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

26. 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

27. 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

28. 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

29. 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

30. Napa Stratification Janet Nottley

31. 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

32. 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

33. 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

34. 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”

35. 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

36. 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)

37. 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

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

39. 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

40. 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!