INTERSTATE CASE CLOSURE

1. INTERSTATE CASE CLOSURE January 10, 2019

2. OCSE Interstate Case Processing Training Series • Interstate 101 • Interstate 201 • Interstate Case Scenarios • Interstate Payment Processing • Interstate Case Closure • OCSE’s Interstate Tools and Resources

3. Agenda • Case closure basics • Federal case closure criteria • Interstate case closure • International case closure • Scenarios

4. Case Closure Basics

5. Case Closure Basics • Case must meet one of federal closure criteria (45 CFR 303.11(b)) • Responding cases may only be closed under specific criteria • Most criteria are permissive, not mandatory • 60-day notice of intent to close may be necessary • Case record must contain supporting documentation • States may establish more stringent closure criteria

6. Case Closure Tips • Closing IV-D case does not terminate support order • Cannot close case just because all parties have moved out of state • Interstate limited services action does not need to meet closure criteria • Communication and cooperation are critical Goal is to provide support to families, not to close case!

7. Federal Case Closure Criteria

8. Federal Case Closure Requirements Case closure allowed in these situations: • No longer current support order and arrearages are under $500 or unenforceable under state law • No longer current support order and all arrearages in case are assigned to state • NCP is in long-term care arrangement • No longer current support order • Children have reached age of majority • NCP has no income or assets that can be attached • NCP is deceased and no estate assets to attach

9. Federal Case Closure Requirements (cont’d) • NCP living with minor child as caregiver or intact two-parent household • Paternity cannot be established because: • Child is at least 18 and action barred by statute • Alleged father has been excluded by genetic test or court or administrative order and no other alleged father can be identified • Not in best interest of child to establish paternity • Identity of biological father is unknown

10. Federal Case Closure Requirements (cont’d) • NCP’s location is unknown, despite state efforts to locate, depending on information available after two years, one year, or six months • NCP is incarcerated, institutionalized, or disabled throughout child’s minority • NCP’s sole income is from SSI or both SSI and SSDI • NCP is citizen of, and lives in, foreign country • No reachable domestic assets • No federal or state treaty with country • IV-D agency has provided location-only services

11. Federal Case Closure Requirements (cont’d) • Non-IV-A applicant requests closure • No assignment to state of medical support • No assignment to state of arrearages • Instate limited services request completed to establish paternity only • Good cause finding • IV-D agency unable to contact applicant • Noncooperation of non-IV-A applicant

12. Federal Case Closure Requirements (cont’d) • Responding agency documents failure by initiating agency to take action essential to next step in providing services • Initiating agency closed its case and notified responding agency • Initiating agency notified responding agency that its intergovernmental services are no longer needed

13. Federal Case Closure Requirements (cont’d) • Inappropriate referral from another agency (IV-A, IV-E, etc.) • Case has been properly transferred to tribal IV-D agency Additional criterion related to Indian Health Services under 45 CFR 303.11(c): IV-D agency must close and maintain documentation when: • Child is eligible for health care services from Indian Health Service (IHS); and • IV-D case was opened due to Medicaid referral based solely upon health care services, including Purchased/Referred Care program, provided through an Indian Health Program

14. Federal Case Closure Requirements – Intergovernmental Regulation (45 CFR 303.7(c) and (d)) • Initiating state instructs responding state to: • Close its intergovernmental case and • Stop any income withholding order or notice • Must be done before initiating state issues income withholding order or notice • Closure of responding state’s intergovernmental case is mandatory

15. 60-Day Notice of Intent to Close • Required under several criteria • Provides applicant or initiating state opportunity to provide needed information • If information is provided within 60 days, case must stay open • If information is not provided within the 60 day period, case can be closed

16. Polling Question 1 Closing a IV-D case terminates the order, so the noncustodial parent no longer needs to make payments. • True • False

17. Polling Question 1 – Response Closing a IV-D case terminates the order, so the noncustodial parent no longer needs to make payments. • True • False

19. Interstate Case Closure

20. Initiating State Case Closure Summary Initiating state has application or referral for services • Makes case management decisions, including closure • Can close case for any federal closure reason • Must notify responding state of closure within 10 days and reason for closure • Must instruct responding state to stop income withholding and close their case before issuing its own withholding • Can keep case open and instruct responding state that services are no longer needed

21. Responding State Case Closure Summary Responding state may close case only under following case closure criteria: • Responding agency documents failure by initiating agency to take action essential to next step in providing services • Requires 60-day intent to close notice • Initiating agency closed its case and notified responding agency • Initiating agency notified responding agency that its intergovernmental services are no longer needed

22. Responding State Case Closure Summary (cont’d) As required under intergovernmental regulation 45 CFR 303.7(d): • Responding state must close interstate case if: • Initiating state instructs it to stop income withholding and close its intergovernmental case

23. Responding State Case Closure Summary (cont’d) As required under intergovernmental regulation 45 CFR 303.7(d) • When responding state closes intergovernmental case, it must notify initiating agency • Notification required under all responding state closure reasons • Closes communication loop with initiating state

24. Child Support Enforcement Transmittal #2 ─ Subsequent Actions • Can be used by initiating and responding agencies • Section II specific to case closure • Initiating state section: Section II. Intergovernmental Closure Actions: From Initiating Agency: 1. [ ] The initiating agency has closed its IV-D intergovernmental case because ________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Proceed with closure of your responding IV-D intergovernmental case. 2. [ ] Close the responding agency’s IV-D intergovernmental case and stop income withholding, if applicable. We are keeping our IV-D case open and your agency’s intergovernmental services are no longer needed.

25. Child Support Enforcement Transmittal #2 ─ Subsequent Actions (cont’d) Responding state section: From Responding Agency: 3. [ ] The responding agency has closed its IV-D intergovernmental case at your request. 4. [ ] The responding agency intends to close its IV-D intergovernmental case on ___________________ (mm/dd/yyyy) because your agency failed to provide______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________. 5.[ ] The responding agency has closed its IV-D intergovernmental case because your agency failed to respond to the 60-day notice dated _________________ (mm/dd/yyyy).

26. Federal Tools and Resources • CSENet • QUICK • FCR Query • EDE • IRG

27. International Case Closure

28. Case Closure in International Context Federal case processing timeframes do not apply to countries. PIQ-04-01: Processing Cases with Foreign Reciprocating Countries States should consider international context before automatically moving to case closure. Hague Child Support Convention includes longer timeframes applicable to Convention countries

29. Polling Question 2 In an interstate IV-D case, which state manages the case and controls case closure? • Initiating state • Responding state

30. Polling Question 2 ─ Response In an interstate IV-D case, which state manages the case and controls case closure? • Initiating state • Responding state

31. Polling Question 3 A responding state can close its intergovernmental case under any of the federal closure criteria without the permission of the initiating state. • True • False

32. Polling Question 3─ Response A responding state can close its intergovernmental case under any of the federal closure criteria without the permission of the initiating state. • True • False

34. Scenarios

35. Scenario 1 • Custodial parent is in WA and noncustodial parent in OR. • WA refers interstate case to OR to enforce a CA order. • After several months, noncustodial parent moves and OR is unable to locate his address. Because noncustodial parent’s address is unknown, OR can send 60-day notice of intent to close to WA due to noncooperation of initiating state. • True • False

36. Scenario 1 − Response • Custodial parent is in WA and noncustodial parent in OR. • WA refers interstate case to OR to enforce a CA order. • After several months, noncustodial parent moves and OR is unable to locate his address. Because noncustodial parent’s address is unknown, OR can send 60-day notice of intent to close to WA due to noncooperation of initiating state. • True • False

37. Scenario 2 • Custodial parent lives in SC and noncustodial parent in GA. • SC refers case to GA to enforce SC order. • GA enforces for several years. • Noncustodial parent passes away and had no assets. GA should: • Close its case because enforcement of order is no longer possible • Provide SC with information about noncustodial parent’s death and wait for instructions • Send 60-day notice of intent to close to SC since order is not enforceable

38. Scenario 2 − Response • Custodial parent lives in SC and noncustodial parent in GA. • SC refers case to GA to enforce SC order. • GA enforces for several years. • Noncustodial parent passes away and had no assets. GAshould: • Close its case because enforcement of order is no longer possible • Provide SCwith information about noncustodial parent’s death and wait for instructions • Send 60-day notice of intent to close to SC since order is not enforceable

39. Scenario 3 • Custodial parent lives in RI and noncustodial parent in ME. • ME receives interstate case from RI requesting establishment of paternity and support. • ME Central Registry notices there is no Affidavit in Support of Establishing Parentage and requests one from RI. • ME Central Registry sends case to local office and requests Affidavit again.  RI does not respond. ME can begin procedure for closing its case for noncooperation of initiating state. • True • False

40. Scenario 3 − Response • Custodial parent lives in RI and noncustodial parent in ME. • ME receives interstate case from RI requesting establishment of paternity and support. • ME Central Registry notices there is no Affidavit in Support of Establishing Parentage and requests one from RI. • ME Central Registry sends case to local office and requests Affidavit again.  RI does not respond. ME can begin procedure for closing its case for noncooperation of initiating state. • True • False

41. Scenario 4 • Custodial parent lives in KS and noncustodial parent in OK. • KS refers case to OK requesting enforcement of KS order. • OK opens case but cannot find employer for noncustodial parent and asks KS to identify one. • KS is also unable to find employer for noncustodial parent. Can OK close its case for noncooperation of initiating state for failure to provide an employer? • Yes • No

42. Scenario 4 − Response • Custodial parent lives in KS and noncustodial parent in OK. • KS refers case to OK requesting enforcement of KS order. • OK opens case but cannot find employer for noncustodial parent and asks KS to identify one. • KS is also unable to find employer for noncustodial parent. Can OK close its case for noncooperation of initiating state for failure to provide an employer? • Yes • No

43. Scenario 5 • Custodial parent lives in DE, noncustodial parent in NC when case opened. • DE refers case to NC to enforce DE order. • NC issues IWO and is sending payments to DE. • Noncustodial parent moves to SC and still works for same employer. • DE sends request to NC to stop its IWO and close its case. • NC doesn’t want to close its case as payments are being received. Can NC refuse to close its case? • Yes • No

44. Scenario 5 − Response • Custodial parent lives in DE, noncustodial parent in NC when case opened. • DE refers case to NC to enforce DE order. • NC issues IWO and is sending payments to DE. • Noncustodial parent moves to SC and still works for same employer. • DE sends request to NC to stop its IWO and close its case. • NC doesn’t want to close its case, as payments are being received. Can NC refuse to close its case? • Yes • No

45. Interstate Resources • Code of Federal Regulations, Title 45, Part 303.7 • Code of Federal Regulations, Title 45, Part 303.11 • OCSE Website • PIQ-04-01 – Processing Cases with Foreign Reciprocating Countries • Interstate Case Processing Training

46. How to Find Interstate Case Processing Training

47. How to Find Interstate Case Processing Training (cont’d)

48. Interstate Resources − Forms • Federal Intergovernmental Forms • Federal Intergovernmental Forms Training • Intergovernmental Forms Matrix

50. OCSE Interstate Case Processing Training Series • Interstate 101 • Interstate 201 • Interstate Case Scenarios • Interstate Payment Processing • Interstate Case Closure • OCSE’s Interstate Tools and Resources