Our review focused on (1)whether the CSE program has the essential management tools in place at the federal level that a program needs to fulfill its mission; (2) how well the federal office, OCSE, has fulfilled its role in fostering the development of state CSE programs; and (3) what state CSE programs are doing to overcome barriers hampering CSE efforts. In addition, we examined implications of welfare reform proposals and the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) for the CSE program. Under the Child Support Enforcement Amendments of 1984  (P.L. In addition, some of the welfare reform proposals would add to OCSE’s responsibilities by requiring it to establish and operate national databases for support orders and other information. AFDC collection efforts, therefore, drive state performance. New York Office of Child Support Enforcement officials expressed similar sentiments about their state legislature’s goals. The child support enforcement work group is focusing on common training needs and federal-state communication. Some States Have Developed Their Own Program Monitoring Strategies

Some states have developed their own internal audit procedures and monitoring systems to ensure compliance with federal standards and provide more timely performance evaluation for program management. These barriers include (1) increasingly complex and growing workloads coupled with resource constraints, (2) limited computer system capacity, (3) dispersed program control and lack of uniform procedures, (4) lack of legislative support, and (5) inadequate communication between the AFDC and CSE programs. These strategies include hiring more staff and increasing the use of (1) administrative rather than judicial processes, (2) innovative enforcement techniques, (3) automation, and (4) contracts with the private sector. As program mission and caseload have expanded over time, OCSE has continued to lack some important management tools, including a clearly articulated program mission, programwide planning and goal-setting, and a means to measure progress toward goals. Such a reengineering could not only help federal-state program relations but also serve as a means for OCSE and state program staff to obtain accurate and consistent performance data—key management data that could help OCSE and states as they seek to better serve the families that depend on CSE efforts.
Why GAO Did This Study

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the national child support enforcement (CSE) program, focusing on: (1) whether the federal government has essential management tools in place to fulfill the program's mission; (2) how well the Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) has fulfilled its role in fostering the development of state CSE programs; (3) state efforts to overcome barriers hampering enforcement efforts; and (4) the implications of welfare reform proposals and the impact of the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA).

What GAO Found

GAO found that: (1) the federal CSE program lacks a well-articulated mission, programwide planning and goal-setting, and accurate program performance data to guide program management; (2) as a GPRA pilot agency, OCSE has initiated management improvements to better serve the states and families by including stakeholders, establishing long-term goals, and focusing on program results; (3) OCSE has almost eliminated the technical support and training it provides to state programs because of declining resources; (4) various organizational and staff changes have created problems in communications between federal and state CSE officials; (5) OCSE audit and data collection efforts are insufficient to provide needed information on program results; (6) some states have set up their own audit procedures and monitoring systems; (7) common barriers hampering state enforcement efforts include increasing workloads, inadequate resources and computer systems, lack of control over local units, state legislatures' failure to support state program initiatives, inadequate client information, and nonstandardized procedures; (8) to overcome program impediments, some states have augmented their staffs with volunteers, introduced administrative procedures in place of judicial procedures, contracted with private collection agencies, improved automation, and used innovative enforcement techniques; and (9) many welfare reform proposals would expand child support enforcement missions and restructure program funding, but OCSE may have trouble implementing changes unless it strengthens its leadership and program management.