Comment: One commenter raised the concern that the NPRM's proposed revisions to the case closure regulation would result in the closure of many cases that should not be closed. Response: If the IV-D agency enters into a cooperative agreement to implement this requirement in accordance with the authority at 45 CFR 302.12(a)(3), then the other entity would perform this interview as IV-D staff. CONTENT: This Action Transmittal consolidates and addresses case closure questions to which we have been most often asked to respond. In addition, Sec. Description of Regulatory Provisions---Sec. The family may have no other mailing address through which it could receive notice of case closure. Response: There is no residency requirement for receiving IV-D services. Such a case is open and being worked by only one State. Case Closure Matrix How It Works 1. 45 CFR Part 303 2. Response: Under 302.33(a)(4), whenever a family is no longer eligible for assistance under the State's AFDC, IV-E foster care, and Medicaid programs, the IV-D agency must, within five working days of the notification of ineligibility, notify the family that IV-D services will be continued unless the family notifies the IV-D agency otherwise. The courthouse is located at 600 S. Commonwealth Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90005. To open a case in California, fill out the online application or visit your local child support agency - agency locations can be found here. We received thirty-one comments from representatives of State and local IV-D agencies, national organizations, advocacy groups and private citizens on the proposed rule published February 24, 1998 in the Federal Register (63 FR 9172). In cases in which there is no assigned support, the IV-D agency may also close the case if the custodial parent requests case closure. Conversely, another commenter objected to reducing the existing three-year period to one year. Comment: One commenter requested that paragraph (b)(1) be expanded to allow for the closure of a case which has a valid enforceable current support order, but where there has been no collection for a period of three years, to allow a State to close cases with low collection potential. Comment: Two commenters questioned the wisdom of the one-year waiting period before a case can be closed under the authority of subparagraph (b)(4)(ii) when the noncustodial parent's location is unknown and the IV-D agency does not have sufficient information to initiate an automated locate effort. 3. For example, the obligor's duty to provide child support survives the death of the obligee. Response: Paragraph (b)(12) applies to all interstate IV-D cases, assistance and nonassistance alike. When the arrearages are fully collected, the case may be closed under 303.11(b)(9), which provides for case closure when the non-AFDC custodial parent requests and there is no assignment to the State of arrearages which accrued under a support order. A PRS may be able to reopen the case. Question 32: May a IV-D agency adopt a policy of requiring IV-D obligees to request closure of their IV-D cases if and while they have entered into contracts with private collection agencies for collection of child support? Therefore, for purposes of 303.11, if the applicant for services was not the custodial parent, States should substitute the applicant for services whenever 303.11 refers to the custodial parent. However, requiring that recipients of IV-D services notify the IV-D agency of the involvement of private counsel is appropriate, in order to prevent duplication of effort and to maximize the effectiveness of actions taken through coordinated efforts. Response: Section 454(29) of the Act provides the States the option to have good cause determined by either the State IV-D agency, or the agencies administering the State's TANF, IV-E or Title XIX funded program. Money is often cited as the No. The primary impact is on State governments. Decisions to close cases are linked with notice to recipients of the intent to close the case and an opportunity to respond with information or a request that the case be kept open. Comment: One commenter requested the final rule include a definition of the term "good cause.''. As stated in the preamble to the proposed rule, although OCSE is revising this regulation to provide the States with additional flexibility to manage their IV-D caseloads, we are aware of the necessity to balance this flexibility against the program's mission to ensure that the public receives needed child support enforcement services. Response: The reduction of the case closure time frame, from three years to one year, appears in Sec. Comment: Two commenters responded to the NPRM by asking that paragraph (c) exempt a number of factual situations from the requirement that a notice of case closure be sent. Federal self-assessment regulations require that at least 90 CASE CLOSURE OF TITLE IV-E FOSTER CARE CASES. 303.11. The State requesting the information must comply with the location timeframes established in 303.3(b)(3). (10) In a non-IV-A case receiving services under Sec. As explained in the preamble to the final rule, the basic premise for development of case closure criteria was to establish clear and concise standards which preclude premature or inappropriate closing of cases, and to identify specific areas where case closure is permitted. There is no order of support. In order for a case to be eligible for closure under this authority there are three requirements. Section IX of this Action Transmittal addresses case closure questions raised about noncustodial parents as applicants. VII. It is not appropriate for a State to close a case upon the occurrence of the criterion set forth in paragraph (b)(10) without fully complying with the requirements of paragraph (c). Your case may be eligible to be transferred to a child support enforcement agency (CSEA) in another county, depending on specific facts and circumstances. The States have been successful in implementing this standard of review and OCSE has no reason to believe that this standard, when applied to an initiating State as opposed to a custodial parent, will become problematic. Question 17: What case closure criteria may be used in a IV-D case when a former AFDC mother with an unborn child has moved to another jurisdiction and the IV-D agency is notified that aid has been discontinued for the AFDC mother and aid was never granted for the unborn child of this defendant? Default: An action that is automatically taken when someone does not respond to legal papers or show up to court as expected. Step 4: Reference the original child support order and outline the case or order number. Question 15: How should a IV-D case be closed when the former AFDC recipient previously refused continued IV-D services upon termination of AFDC benefits but the IV-D case remains open because arrears were still owed the State? Response: Yes, OCSE concurs with this recommendation and the final rule revises paragraph (c) to require the responding State, upon deciding to close a case pursuant to the authority of paragraph (b)(12), to send a notice of case closure to the initiating State. A parent does not have to pay current child support for an emancipated minor. Response: OCSE has decided not to adopt this suggestion. However, OCSE encourages the States to keep this issue in mind when they are otherwise revising their local forms. As we stated in OCSE-PIQ-92-13, a IV-D agency may not adopt a policy of requiring IV-D obligees to request case closure of their IV-D cases while they have contracts with private collection agencies. Federal law allows the child support agency to close a child support case under certain conditions. 303.11; Case Closure Criteria. Why not to fight your ex for child support, alimony or other money. Title IV, Part D of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. Both commenters recommended that a reference to "other exceptions'' be included in paragraph (b)(9) when the final rule was issued. Response: As we stated in OCSE-PIQ-92-09, the final regulations published in the Federal Register on August 4, 1989 (54 FR 32284 at 32306) state that we received many comments by States and other organizations who requested that non-cooperation by the custodial parent (failure to attend hearings, refusal to sign forms, etc.) Response: A State may close a case if it meets one or more of the requirements specified at 303.11. Electronic Payment Card (EPC): You receive a Mastercard branded card that works like a debit card. As we stated in OCSE-PIQ-91-02 and OCSE-PIQ-91-14, the case closure criteria enumerated in 303.11(b) do not allow the IV-D agency to close the IV-D case when the AFDC custodial parent refuses to cooperate and is removed from the AFDC grant. Passport Denial Program (PDP): Passport Denial Program. Comment: One commenter objected to the replacement of the former "certified'' mailing requirement with the current "regular'' mailing requirement. Similarly, if the initiating State failed to provide necessary information to enable the responding State to provide services, and failed to respond to requests to provide the information, the responding State was required to keep the case open, although it was unable to take any action on it. While the term "custodial parent" is used because that is the typical situation, it encompasses any applicant or recipient of IV-D services. In these instances the case is no longer "workable'' under the requirements of IV-D, and, therefore, it is appropriate for the IV-D agency to close the case. Another reason why it would be imprudent to adopt this recommendation is that the interstate request for services may be based solely upon an arrearage owed to the initiating State, and the whereabouts of the custodial parent may be unknown to both States. Donna E. Shalala, This rule does not contain information collection provisions subject to review by the Office of. Case ClosureHomeChild SupportCase ClosureGet Case InformationApply for Child SupportMake a Payment OnlineChild support cases close for different reasons. When a case is closed it means that CSSD will no longer provide services for that case. This does not mean that, at some time in the future, the Department of Revenue might not come after you again for child support. Nevertheless, notice to both parents is not precluded. We believe a one-year waiting period achieves a reasonable balance between the desire to assure that workable cases remain open and the desire to close those cases which show no promise of being workable. In addition, it must be kept in mind that the individuals the IV-D agency is attempting to contact with this mailing are recipients of services who are not receiving public assistance. 303.7 apply and will drive the decision as to whether or not an initiating State has failed to take an action that is essential to the next step in providing services. Close a Case - Child Support Services. Specifically, they asked if the interview was required to be conducted "face-to-face,'' or could a separate IV-D interview be conducted over the telephone? Question 21: How is a "case" defined for reporting purposes, using the forms OCSE-156 and OCSE-158, and for case closure purposes, under 303.11(b)? Response: Yes, this recommendation was adopted by including paragraph (b)(12) closures in the sections referenced by paragraph (c), which incorporates a 60 calendar day case closure time frame. The residential parent of a child must notify the CSEA of any reason why the support order should terminate. An Initiating State is Non-responsive in an Interstate Case Notice Not Required . Closure When Wyoming is the Initiating State, the case worker will request the Responding State close its case when: The case meets federal closure criteria as detailed in Chapter 12 Closure; or The non-custodial parent is located in another state. wage withholding). * * * * *, b. Paragraph (b)(3) is redesignated as paragraph (b)(2). Response: In order for a paternity establishment case to be eligible for closure under subparagraph (b)(3)(iv), a State must make a meaningful attempt to identify the biological father. Question 12: Must IV-D agencies reopen previously closed public assistance IV-D cases at the time of periodic redetermination of eligibility for public assistance if there is no new information which could help lead to establishment of paternity, or establishment or enforcement of child support order? In the first sentence, the reference to "paragraphs (b)(1) through (7) and (11) and (12) of this section'' is changed to read "paragraphs (b)(1) through (6) and (10) through (12) of this section[.]'' Financial disagreements clog the courts and wrack up attorney bills not to mention burn untold units of stress and misery for each party, their children and anyone within earshot. File: Submitting paperwork to the court clerk. The IV-D agency must continue to attempt to identify and locate an alleged father and to establish paternity, if possible. The rule, as revised, provides the IV-D agencies with sufficient flexibility to manage cases with "low collection potential.'' Response: No. Similarly, it is OCSE's position that it would be inappropriate for a IV-D agency to close a case in an analogous situation, if the custodial parent hired a private attorney, because that too would not meet one of the case closure criteria set forth in 303.11. Comment: One commenter asked if paragraph (b)(1) could be used as authority for a IV-D agency to close a case that was opened after a child attained the age of majority, during which there was no need for a child support order, but subsequently (after emancipation) became disabled and under State law a support order was entered against this individual's parents? Section 303.11(b)(1) as revised, provides that, "There is no longer a current support order and arrearages are under $500 or unenforceable under State law[.]'' (e) The IV-D agency must retain all records for cases closed in accordance with this section for a minimum of 3 years, in accordance with 45 CFR 75.361 . 3. OCSE believes that this final rule is successful in striking a good balance between these two factors and, as a result, we expect that the public will receive improved services from the IV-D program. Commissioner Question 9: Is redirection of payments an appropriate way to handle interstate cases in which the custodial parent moves from one State to another and the obligated parent resides in a third State? Comment: One commenter recommended that the reference to 45 CFR 232.40 be removed from paragraph (b)(9) because this Federal regulation was obsolete. 99-5831 Filed 3-9-99; 8:45 am] Therefore, there may be circumstances in which a State may decide to keep open, and continue to work a case, even though it meets the requirements for case closure. The CSEA may also terminate a support order when the mother and father of the child marry or re-marry. Click Resolve beside each step. The final rule balances good case management and workable administrative decisions with providing needed services, always erring in favor of including any case in which there is any chance of success. Local child support agency (LCSA): The agency in each county that is responsible for managing the child support program. When opening the .pdf form from a web-browser such as Firefox, Microsoft Edge, or Chrome: download the form - right click on the link and select save link as and save it to your computer; open the file - right click on the file and choose open with Adobe . OCSE is addressing the continuation of services issue in IV-E cases in another rulemaking activity. Michigan IV-D Child Support Manual Michigan Department of Health and Human Services 3.50 Case Closure June 6, 2022 Page 3 of 70 request that the IV-D case be reopened by reapplying for IV-D services.5 Finally, per federal regulations,6 the IV-D agency must retain all records for closed IV-D cases for a minimum of three years.7 2. At the request of the States, OCSE originally promulgated regulations in 1989 which established criteria for States to follow in determining whether and how to close child support cases.

Nicole Jacqueline Desy,