Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

COLLECTING HARD TO COLLECT EARNINGS: FINDING THE RIGHT TOOL FOR THE JOB Moderator: Diane Hogan, Informatix Inc. Speaker: Matt Marsolais, OCSE Speaker:

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "COLLECTING HARD TO COLLECT EARNINGS: FINDING THE RIGHT TOOL FOR THE JOB Moderator: Diane Hogan, Informatix Inc. Speaker: Matt Marsolais, OCSE Speaker:"— Presentation transcript:

1 COLLECTING HARD TO COLLECT EARNINGS: FINDING THE RIGHT TOOL FOR THE JOB Moderator: Diane Hogan, Informatix Inc. Speaker: Matt Marsolais, OCSE Speaker: Andrew Szymak, Oklahoma CSS ERICSA 50 th Annual Training Conference & Exposition ▪ May 19 – 23 ▪ Hilton Orlando Lake Buena Vista, Florida

2 Agenda Multistate Financial Institution Data Match Program Thrift Savings Plan Match Federally Assisted State Transmitted Levy Insurance Match Program Debt Inquiry Service for Insurers 2

3 Multistate Financial Institution Data Match (MSFIDM) Legislation 1996 – Required state IV-D agencies to enter into matching agreements with financial institutions (FI) conducting business in their state to obtain account information about delinquent obligors 1998 – Authorized OCSE to conduct a centralized match for those FIs conducting business in two or more states 3

4 MSFIDM Information Over 4,500 financial institutions participate Matches are conducted on a quarterly basis Match data is provided to states through the Federal Case Registry (FCR) States use their freeze and seize procedures to collect past-due support 4

5 MSFIDM Success FIs return on average 4 million matches per quarter associated with 1.7 million unique SSNs States voluntarily report collections – $ 20.9 million in 2000 – $144 million in 2011 – $110 million in 2012 (still collecting data) $1.31 billion collected since program inception 5

6 Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) Retirement plan offered to federal civilian employees and members of the military Partnership between OCSE and Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board (FRTIB) – responsible for administering the TSP Quarterly matches implemented in 2011 6

7 TSP Success States have voluntarily reported $20.4 million All but four states garnish TSP accounts! 7 StateCollections Texas$13,577,062 Illinois$ 2,601,662 Tennessee$ 1,651,442 Arizona$ 908,880 Oklahoma$ 672,589 Florida$ 426,981

8 Federally Assisted State Transmitted (FAST) Levy Pilot Automate freeze/seize process between states and FIs – Process flow – OCSE as the “conduit” Pilot participants – FIs: JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, US Bank, Navy Federal Credit Union – States: California, District of Columbia, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Washington 8

9 FAST Levy Pilot Progress to date – Meetings/Conference Calls – Record Layout Timeframe Next Steps 9

10 Insurance Match (IM) Program Authorized by Section 452(l) [to be redesignated (m)]of the Social Security Act – OCSE works with insurers or their agents and state workers’ compensation agencies to compare information about individuals who owe past-due support with payee information on insurance claims, settlements, payments and awards – Information provided to states so they can intercept payouts and apply to past-due support 10

11 IM Program Participation is voluntary for states and insurers – Currently matching with 22 State Workers’ Compensation Agencies 756 Insurers through the Insurance Services Office U.S. Department of Labor – Matches since program inception: 351,473 – 25 of the 53 states/territories voluntarily reported collections totaling over $18 million 11

12 Debt Inquiry Service (DIS) for Insurers Web-based application on the FPLS portal lets insurers report upcoming lump sum and other payments What happens when there’s a match? – Insurers receive information about the state(s) that is responsible for collecting past-due support – States receive match notification so they can take action 12

13 Questions/Comments Contact Matt Marsolais, OCSE Analyst matthew.marsolais@acf.hhs.gov (202) 260-5479 13

14 MISSED COLLECTION CHALLENGES AND THEIR SOLUTIONS (IN OTHER WORDS, FINDING THE RIGHT TOOL)

15 WHAT ARE THE MISSED COLLECTION CHALENGES? -FIDM (Financial Institution Data Match) -Instate matching opportunities -Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) -Insurance Matching

16 -Alaska Permanent Dividend Fund -BP Oil Spill a.k.a. Gulf Coast Cleanup Fund -Interstate Unemployment Insurance Benefit (UIB) Intercept

17 -Social Security Administration (SSA) Intercepts -Limited Services a.k.a. AEI

18 FIDM Instate Matching Opportunities -Challenge: A large number of FIDM matches are missed because states are not sharing Instate bank match data -Solution: Make access to Instate bank account data a simple and effective process

19 Access to Out-of-State FIDM Matches -Two sources of matches -Multi-State FIDM (e.g., Bank of America, Chase, Regions, Wells Fargo) -In-state matches In-house Alliance or consortium

20 FIDM Alliance -Made up of 18 states entering into an Alliance to outsource in-state FIDM programs. -Formed to cooperatively develop, issue and oversee these FIDM operations. -Cross border FIDM matching done on a state to state agreement basis.

21 FIDM Alliance (Continued) -Each participating state is responsible for entering into individual contracts with the selected contractor that oversees the program. -Texas is the lead state of the Alliance for the purpose of procurement

22 Interstate Data Exchange Consortium - IDEC -Oklahoma receives its Interstate FIDM matches through IDEC. What is IDEC? -A partnership of 15 states for the collection and enforcement of child support

23 Interstate Data Exchange Consortium – IDEC (Continued) -Access to accounts in all member states -Operated as a state-administered, state-owned system -Managed by the State of South Carolina

24 FIDM Limited Partnerships -IDEC offers a Limited Partnership that allows non-member states to participate in the quarterly interstate matching of Full Member states -Limited Partners become reciprocal partners with IDEC member states

25 Two types of Limited Partnerships with IDEC -FIDM Alliance member states -Independent FIDM states

26

27 Oklahoma and Texas Limited Partnership Collections -Oklahoma is an IDEC member -Overall Oklahoma 2012 FIDM Collections: $3,216,748 Overall Oklahoma Collections from Limited Partnership participation: $580,530

28 -Texas is a member of the FIDM Alliance -Overall Texas 2012 FIDM Collections: $36,099,858 Texas Overall Collections from Limited Partnership participation: $593,912

29 Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) -Very good collection tool! -Simple processing Use Income Withholding Order for State Agencies either by itself or as cover letter -Cooperative agency / good customer support

30 Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) Collections -Oklahoma Overall Collections: $807,053 -Texas Collections: $13,577,062 -Tennessee Collections: $2,015,945

31 Insurance Matching Personal Injury Claims -Insurance matches are received on a daily basis from Child Support Lien Network (CSLN) or OCSE. -Matches go through an automated analyzer process

32 -Worker verifies insurance lien printed automatically. Worker may also print out lien form manually - Liens are printed at local offices for attorney signature. -Liens are sent to insurance company NCP, NCP’s attorney.

33 -56 O.S. Sect 237B – Mandatory matching law. -Claims of $500 or more -Insurers authorized to do business in Oklahoma -Contact OCSS to verify if claimant owes past due support

34 Workers Compensation Claims -Insurance matches are received on a daily basis from CSLN, OCSE, OK state insurance fund and Workers Compensation Court -Matches go through an automated analyzer process, similar to personal injury cases

35 -Worker verifies insurance lien printed automatically. Workermay also print forms manually. -Liens are printed at local office for attorney signature. -IWOs are sent to collect on weekly temporary benefit payments

36 -Liens are sent to insurance company, NCP, NCP’s attorney and filed with workers compensation court by state office personnel. -56 O.S. Sect. 237B – Mandatory matching law also applies to workers compensation claims

37 -Oklahoma Personal Injury Settlement Intercept 2012 Fiscal Year Collections: $1,339,225 -Workers Compensation Settlement Intercept 2012 Fiscal Year Collections: $,5,697,804 (IWO $1,923,385, Liens $3,774,419)

38 -Texas Overall Insurance Settlement Intercept 2012 Fiscal Year Collections: $34,511,816 -Tennessee Overall Insurance Settlement Intercept 2012 Fiscal Year Collections: $1,482,123

39 Attaching the Alaska Permanent Dividend Fund -Alaska citizens’ percentage of state revenues from a variety of sources within the state -To match with Alaska: Send inquiry file with NCP information matched against their Permanent Dividend Fund database. Match information requested is Obligor’s name, SSN and DOB.

40 -Preferred method of transmitting inquiry file is using FTP, (using encrypted CDs is also possible). -To attach dividend: Send UIFSA transmittal 1, requesting that a garnishment go against the obligor’s dividend. Limited Services requests are sent back to Alaska in August.

41 -Funds are sent back to requesting state in October. -Oklahoma yearly dividends collections range between $11K to $50K -Texas dividend 2012 collections were $64,869 -Tennessee dividend 2012 collections were $7,817

42 BP Oil Spill a.k.a. Gulf Coast Cleanup Fund -$20 Billion available for claims associated with the Deepwater Horizon oil spill -Challenge: How to stake claims on money owed to noncustodial parents behind on their child support payments.

43 -Possible solution: Send an electronic list of NCP’s owing past due support to Gulf Coastal Cleanup Fund (GCFF) -Problem: Out of 200,000 cases Oklahoma could find 21,926 NCPs with possible connections to settlement funds

44 -Problem: GCFF said they would not take electronic lists so we were looking at subpoenas -A lot of subpoenas. Stack of paper over 70 inches tall filling five paper boxes. They were sent to GCFF on November 12, 2010. -Fortunately for GCFF we also included an encrypted CD with the same information

45 -Upon receipt of Oklahoma’s subpoenas and CD we received a call from GCFF telling us they would process our electronic file -GCFF asked for IWOs on the specific matches (81 total). Hard copies and an additional electronic file was sent with the IWO information -Oklahoma referred GCFF to OCSE in order to establish a nationwide procedure to get an electronic matching system in place

46 -Total payments Oklahoma received to date add up to $56,000. Initial payments were from smaller claims ranging from a few hundred dollars up to $3,500. The largest single payment to date being $16,250 -Total payment Texas received to date add up to $69,000 -Total payment Tennessee received to date add up to $25,163

47 Interstate Unemployment Insurance Benefits (UIB) Intercepts -Challenge: OCSS received UIB information through the Federal Case Registry (FCR) but the data would sit on FCR until discovered by a child support specialist -Solution: Automate the process to intercept Interstate UIB

48 How The Process Works -Two analyzers are involved in the automated process -UIB Analyzer: Program runs on a daily basis looking for matches between FCR UIB claims and open OCSS cases in our system -IWO Analyzer: If appropriate sends an Income Withholding Order to another state’s Employment Security Commission

49 State Classifications; Easy, Medium and Hard -Easy: Direct Income Withholding Order (IWO) (10 states and one territory currently allow this). IN, MI, MN, NY, ND, OH, OK, PA, PR, TN and WI. -If a state accepts IWOs directly, the system automatically sends an IWO to that state’s State Employment Security Commission (SESC).

50 -Medium: Limited Services Interstate Referral -If a state does not accept IWOs but does accept Limited Services Interstate Referrals, the system prints a Limited Services Interstate Referral document (UIFSA Transmittal 1) at the district offices printer. -Worker sends the Limited Services referral with any other necessary documents to the other state’s interstate central registry.

51 -Hard: Full Service Interstate Referral. -If a state does not accept direct IWOs or Limited Services Interstate Referrals, the system can not automate the process. -The worker must prepare a Full Service Intergovernmental Referral and forward it to the appropriate state’s Interstate Central Registry.

52 2012 Interstate UIB Collections -1,520 IWO’s were issued to direct UIB withholding states -2012 Interstate UIB collections: $163,647

53 SSA Intercept Process -Two types of collections from SSA -Use e-IWO to intercept Social Security benefits -Collect on lump sum payments

54 SSA IWO Process -Process list of pending claims provided by SSA using automated process -Only go after claims with Title 2 (SSD) benefits -Presently send average of 950 IWOs to SSA each month

55 SSA Lump Sum Process -OCSS receives e-mail or call from SSA payment center about lump sum payment. Average of 50 to 60 lump sum contacts per month. -OCSS state office and Oklahoma Employer Services Center (OKESC)review case to verify principal and interest balances.

56 -We can ask for 100% of lump sum -CCPA does not apply. -50% already goes to beneficiary -Confirmation by phone from OCSS office regarding case status and balances. -Key to success with SSA: Establish a solid working relationship with local SSA offices.

57 -Oklahoma Social Security Administration (SSA)Intercept 2012 Collections: $12.5 Million.

58 Limited Services a.k.a. AEI -What can Limited Services requests be used for: -FIDM -Unemployment Insurance Benefit (UIB) Intercepts -Personal Injury claims -Workers Compensation claims -Liens in Probate cases

59 -Service of Process -State Tax Intercept -Other types of assess (you name it and we will try to collect it).

60 How to Work Incoming Limited Services Referrals (Oklahoma’s Perspective) -Build case and obligation in our system -Most cases will require UIFSA Transmittal 1, copy of arrearage computation and order. Also specific information on asset to be attached. -Note: Some states may only require the use of the UIFSA Transmittal 3 form.

61 -Prepare and send appropriate notices and other documents to all necessary parties -If contacted by obligor, work with the Requesting State to assist with review and hearing request -Receive attached funds and forward to Requesting State and close case. -Both states will be able to report the collection

62 2011 Limited Services Collections -Oklahoma received 46 limited services requests. 32 actions were successful with $106,449 in collections. -Texas collected $374,558 in outgoing referrals.

63 Contact Andrew Szymak Oklahoma Child Support Services FIDM Coordinator E-mail: Andrew.Szymak@okdhs.orgAndrew.Szymak@okdhs.org Phone: (405) 522-6230 Fax: (405) 522-4570


Download ppt "COLLECTING HARD TO COLLECT EARNINGS: FINDING THE RIGHT TOOL FOR THE JOB Moderator: Diane Hogan, Informatix Inc. Speaker: Matt Marsolais, OCSE Speaker:"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google