The Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) regional office staff and the Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) oversee the state-administered programs. As shown in figure 1.1, reported collections in fiscal year 1995 were 80 percent higher than they were in 1990. In August 1992, we issued a report citing major problems with oversight and monitoring of these development efforts. We, therefore, made recommendations to HHS for improvement. Our specific objectives were to determine (1) the status of automated state systems, including costs, (2) whether HHS had implemented our 1992 recommendations, and (3) whether HHS was providing effective federal oversight of state systems development. Progress in developing systems varies—some states have automated many features, while others are in the earlier phases of development and may not be certified or operational by the October 1, 1997, deadline. Systems Costs Continue to Increase; Vary Widely From State to State

According to OCSE records, states have spent over $2.6 billion since the early 1980s to develop, operate, maintain, and modify county and statewide automated child support systems. States generally underestimated the costs of developing and operating child support enforcement systems. In 1992, we recommended that OCSE (1) work with the audit division to identify and resolve systems-related problems, (2) use its authority to suspend federal funding when major problems existed, and (3) require states to implement needed corrective actions when first identified. Further, OCSE has not completed nationwide analyses or post-implementation reviews to effectively assess lessons learned, hindering its ability to provide more thorough, helpful leadership. According to OCSE’s director of state child support information systems, the agency has not monitored the projects using a structured approach because it lacks the technical expertise and resources needed to be involved at critical points in the development process. SSAIS tracks the historical data on automated systems projects—including the child support program—on a state-by-state basis. Welfare Reform Places New Demands on Child Support Systems

Recently enacted welfare reform legislation substantially increases the importance of collecting child support payments from noncustodial parents, since for welfare recipients who lose eligibility, child support may be their only remaining source of income. But this progress has been expensive. Certifications were narrowly focused and conducted only at a state’s request, when the state was ready. The agency’s reviews are narrowly focused and, as a result, not effective or timely in assessing the states’ systems approaches and progress. In HHS’ response to our report, it noted elsewhere that the agency “has the authority, which it frequently exercises, to require states to send an as-needed APD at critical milestones in its life cycle methodology.” And in response to comments from states concerning the extent of OCSE’s reviews, HHS said that it intends to continue monitoring state systems projects, noting that it has “responsibilities for assuring that the expenditure of federal funds on state systems is necessary for the effective and efficient operation of the programs.” This is consistent with recent legislation that requires more effective oversight of systems development activities.
Why GAO Did This Study

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO updated its 1992 report on child support enforcement, focusing on: (1) the status of state development efforts, including costs incurred; (2) whether the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) had implemented GAO's 1992 recommendations; and (3) whether the Department was providing effective federal oversight of state systems development activities.

What GAO Found

GAO noted that: (1) it is too early to judge the potential of fully developed automated systems, yet bringing the benefits of automation to bear on child support enforcement appears to have played a major role in locating more noncustodial parents and increasing collections; (2) according to HHS, in fiscal year (FY) 1995, almost $11 billion was collected, 80 percent higher than the amount collected in 1990; (3) while automated state child support systems are being developed, many may not be certified by the October 1, 1997, deadline; (4) furthermore, states have underestimated the magnitude, complexity, and costs of their systems projects; (5) systems development costs for FY 1995 alone were just under $600 million, and over $2.6 billion has been spent since 1980 for county and statewide systems development; (6) GAO's 1992 report discussed significant problems in federal oversight and monitoring of state activity, and made three recommendations; (7) however, only one has been completely implemented; (8) the Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) now works with its audit division to identify and resolve systems problems; (9) GAO's recommendations to suspend federal funding when major problems exist and to require states to initiate corrective actions when problems are first identified were only partially addressed; (10) OCSE's oversight of state child support systems has been narrowly focused and, as a result, not effective or timely in assessing the states' systems approaches and progress; (11) OCSE believes it lacks the technical expertise and resources to be involved at critical points in the systems development process; (12) OCSE's role has been primarily limited to document review and after-the-fact certification when the states request an inspection of completed systems; (13) therefore, OCSE has allowed some funds to be spent without ensuring that states were progressing toward effective or efficient systems; (14) while OCSE has shared some lessons learned, its oversight has operated on a state-by-state basis; (15) lacking this nationwide perspective has hindered the agency's ability to provide proactive leadership to the states; (16) as added systems functional requirements of the newly enacted welfare reform legislation come into play, it will be increasingly important that child support enforcement systems work as envisioned and that OCSE monitor progress on a broader scale; and (17) many recipients may find that they no longer qualify for welfare benefits, with child support being their only remaining income.