The Department of Child Support Services (DCSS) administers California’s child support program by overseeing 52 locally-operated offices. The primary purpose of the program is to collect support payments from absent parents for custodial parents and their children. Local child support offices provide services such as locating absent parents; establishing paternity; obtaining, enforcing, and modifying child support orders; and collecting and distributing payments. Federal law requires each state to develop a child support enforcement program that complies with federal requirements. The department is under the umbrella of the state Health and Human Services Agency.

About DCSS (Official website)

The origins of California's child support program go back to 1872 when California made failure to pay child support a misdemeanor, later increased to a felony. Beginning in the 1950s, California enacted a series of laws governing child support enforcement and most counties established Family Support Divisions within their district attorneys' offices to enforce those support obligations.

In 1975, the federal government required all states with a welfare program to operate a child support program and enforce child support obligations. In response, California established the Department of Social Services (DSS) as the single state agency responsible for administration of its child support program.  DSS, however, did not operate the program alone, but contracted out its day-to-day operations to the 58 county district attorneys' office. 

Child support programs at the state and local level received heavy criticism throughout the ‘90s for systemic failures and unsatisfactory performance. A devastating series of stories by the Los Angeles Times in 1998 focusing on problems in Los Angeles County and across the state set the stage for a legislative initiative spearheaded by joint hearings of state Senate and Assembly committees the next year.   

Following the landmark hearings, the Legislature made major structural reforms in the program by transferring state responsibility from DSS to the newly created Department of Child Support Services (DCSS); transferring local responsibility for the program from the district attorneys to local child support agencies (LCSAs) which were put under the control of DCSS; and creating a complaint resolution and fair hearing process for resolving child support complaints.

Over the years, the federal government strengthened the child support program. In 1988, it required wage withholding for current support as well as past-due support and required all states to implement statewide automated child support systems. California was slow to establish the automated system and paid nearly $1 billion in fines between 1998 and 2008 for its pokiness.

The DCSS was created on Jan. 1, 2000.

In July 2002, all local child support programs were transitioned out of the district attorneys’ offices and into standalone LCSAs, currently 52 county and regional departments. And Curtis L. Child was appointed by Gov. Davis as director of DCSS. These transitions resulted in a program savings of $13 million annually.

The Child Support Program in California  (California Assembly report) (pdf)

Federal law requires each state to establish, publish and review every four years a set of guidelines outlining a method of calculating child support. California’s guideline is outlined in Family Code §§ 4050-4076 and based on the income shares model. The Judicial Council of California is required to conduct the California Child Support Guideline Review and the DCSS provides the enforcement of these guidelines.

To help the DCSS enforce the guidelines, LCSA offices were created out of local programs that were once apart of local district attorney offices. The LCSA offices enforce child support laws by offering the following services:

·        Locating Parents – The LCSA will try to find the parent to establish paternity and/or establish, change or enforce orders for child support.

·        Establishing Paternity – The LCSA can help establish paternity with a Paternity Opportunity Program Declaration or a court order. The declaration is a form that must be filled out and signed by both parents to establish paternity without a court order. How to file a Declaration of Paternity (CS 909).

·        Establishing and Enforcing Child Support Orders – Once paternity is established, the DCSS can help get a child support order based on each parent’s income, visitation and other information. Child support orders can be obtained and enforced, even if one of the parents lives in another state.

·        Collecting Child Support – The LCSA has several ways of collecting child support including: withholding wages from paychecks, bank levies (attaching bank accounts), license suspensions, levies on property, passport denial, interception of state or federal income tax refunds, unemployment benefits, state disability benefits and lottery winnings.

The DCSS has a number of programs established to enforce state guidelines:

·        Compromise of Arrears Program – In certain cases, the law allows for a parent to pay less than his or her total child support debt.

·        Resources for Recently Activated Military Personnel – The DCSS offers several services for those in the military.

·        Paternity Opportunity Program – Establishing paternity is a key part of many child support services. This program offers various ways of establishing paternity.

·        Ombudsperson Program – If you have a problem with a LCSA you can speak to an ombudsperson. It is his or her job to help you get child support services, explain your rights and responsibilities, help you resolve problems with your case, explain the complaint process before, during and after a complaint is filed, and help you request and prepare for a state hearing.

·        Complaint Resolution and State Hearing Program – Either a custodial party or a non custodial parent can file a complaint over the handling of a child support case. Complaint forms are available at each LCSA and on the DCSS website. You can also speak with an ombudsperson about a complaint. Both the Ombudsperson and the Complaint Resolution and State Hearing Programs were established to create a check and balance within the state’s child support program.

·        California Parent Locator Service (CPLS) – It is available when address or employer data is needed.

·        Child Support Training and Certification Program – California offers statewide training for LCSA professionals.

About DCSS (DCSS website)

List of County Departments (DCSS website)

2010-2014 Strategic Plan (DCSS website) (pdf)

Apply for Child Support Services (DCSS website)

Child Support Publications (DCSS website)

Child Support Calculator (DCSS website)

Two-thirds of the department’s administrative funding comes from the federal government and the rest from the state General Fund. Almost 84% of its money is distributed to the counties for administering the program, while the state pays its employee and operating expenses with the rest.

The department collected $2.2 billion from persons owing child support in fiscal year 2009-10. Of that, 61% came through wage withholding, 12.3% directly from non-custodial parents, 9.3% via the IRS and 8.8% from tapping the unemployment insurance of a deadbeat parent.

Budget Change Proposals (DCSS website) (pdf)

Revenue Stabilizing Funding (DCSS website) (pdf)

2011-12 Projected Budget (DCSS website) (pdf)

Programmed to Fail

In 1988, the federal government required the states to establish an automated child support system. California's first attempt to comply, called the Statewide Automated Child Support System (SACSS), was developed by Lockheed Martin Information Management Systems. Although major problems were discovered early, development continued. By 1997, after well over $100 million had been expended and the federal deadline for completion of the automation system had passed, it became apparent that SACSS would never work and California terminated the contract. 

The next attempt was spearheaded by local district attorneys.  Their plan was to have four county systems linked together to form a statewide system.  That proposal, which required a major upgrade of existing systems, was rejected by the federal government.

Finally, in 1999, the DCSS teamed up with the Franchise Tax Board to develop a system that came to be known as the California Child Support Automation System (CCSAS).  Bank of America and IBM signed contracts by 2004 for a 10-year $1.3 billion project and began rolling it out in 2007.

The delay in getting a workable system in place cost California nearly $1 billion in federal penalties from 1998-2008. 

California Child Support Automated System (2010 NASCIO Recognition Awards) (pdf)

The Child Support Program in California  (California Assembly report)

Personal Information Released

The Department of Child Support Services mistakenly released the personal information of 1,175 people with open cases to an unnamed financial institution in January 2007. The information included Social Security numbers, birth dates and child support record numbers. DCSS said the state employee who faxed the internal document to the financial institution during the course of routine business had been counseled and appropriate procedures reviewed.

Potential Breach of Personal Information (DCSS press release) (pdf)

Agency Released Personal Data Inadvertently (by Joe Goldeen, Stockton Record)

Personal Information Lost

When the California Department of Child Support Services shipped records for some 800,000 parents, guardians and children to Colorado in 2012, it was supposed to be an exercise in disaster preparedness. Instead, it may have been involved in one.

FedEx was supposed to fly the records, stored on special data cartridges, back to California from an IBM facility in Colorado but four of the 15 backup tapes turned up missing on March 12. Two weeks later they were officially pronounced lost. “What we believe at this time is that the containers were not properly secured,” said Christine Lally of the California Technology Agency. “They opened during transit and the tapes spilled out.”

The data includes names, Social Security numbers, driver’s license numbers and health service providers for about one-fifth of the department’s 4.3 million clients. The departments tracks their cases to ensure that children receive financial and medical support ordered by the courts.

The department said the cartridges are in a specialized format, would be difficult for anyone to access and that there was no indication that their security had been breached. Department Director Kathleen Hrepich said the processing of child support cases would be not be affected.

California Officials Say Child Support Services Data Now Missing (by Jon Ortiz, Sacramento Bee)

Child Support Services Lose Computer Storage Info (by John King, San Francisco Chronicle)

Improving Child Support Collections

A report by the independent state Legislative Analyst’s Office pointed out in a 2006   report that California lagged much of the nation in the collection of child support and in its performance on other federal measures. It recommended a performance-based system that would give counties incentives to meet state benchmarks. The report noted that that the LCSAs have no financial stake in the program; enforcement is supported with a combination of state and federal funds without a county share of cost. The Analyst said that one way to ensure counties bear more responsibility for the success of the child support program is to give them a stake in it though a share of program costs. The recommendation was reiterated by the Analyst in its 2009-2010 budget analysis.

Strategies for Improving Child Support Collections In California (Legislative Analyst’s Office)      

High Interest Rates

California is not unique in having an enormous amount of money owed in back child support. As of 2007, $105.4 billion had accrued since 1975, piling up interest with each passing day. Non-custodial parents in California owe $19.2 billion in delinquent child support payments, an abnormally large amount that researchers link to the state's high interest rate for debt. California has one of the highest child support interest rates in the country, a 10% annual charge, that is only exceeded by Alabama, Vermont, Wisconsin and Rhode Island. They charge 12%. The debt load has been accruing since 1975 and the department estimates that about 80% of the past-due money is owed by parents who make less than $15,000 a year.

In January 2011, California child support law was changed. The interest rate didn’t change, but no interest would accrue on arrears in any month “the obligor [usually the non-custodial parent] has paid, in full, the current month’s court-ordered payments of current support and arrears.”  The move was hailed by groups representing the interests of non-custodial parents, but is the rate still too high?

No. It’s Not Too High

Interest rates are supposed to serve as incentives for non-custodial parents to pay the money they owe to support their children. When the rate was set in 1982, it was applied to money due for all civil judgments, including property damage, personal injury claims and contracts between businesses where debt was owed. It wasn’t meant to single out dead-beat dads (and usually it is dad, not mom), but if they are weighing paying off a credit card versus putting food on their child’s table, they might opt for the former as a cost-saving method. High interest rates get their attention and refocus their priorities, and that benefits children.

The Legislature has given careful consideration to the issue of interest over the years following a series of studies by the Urban Institute and others, and it has chosen not to lower the rate. In 2009, it passed legislation so that payments will first be credited to current support, then to the arrears principal and then to arrears interest. That is expected to have a significant effect stemming the debt growth. It has also limited retroactive payments that contributed to high debt and eliminated some of the court fees that dissuaded people from seeking to have their payments adjusted downward when their economic situations degraded.

Yes. It’s Too High

“High interest doesn’t benefit anyone,” according to Elaine Sorensen, a senior fellow at the Urban Institute. “There is no evidence at all in the child support arena that charging a high interest rate encourages people to pay child support. None.” 

Accrued interest makes up a high percentage of money owed. In a 2007 study by the Urban Institute, interest was found to be “the single most important factor contributing to arrears growth during the past fifteen years.” At the time of the study, only 18 states charged interest on a routine basis, 18 did it intermittently and 14 not at all. Although all the states experienced an increase in accrued debt over time, those states that routinely charged interest saw their debt grow at a rate roughly twice that of the other states.

Most of the people who owe back child support are poor. The Department of Child Support Services estimates that about 80% of the arrears are owed by parents who make less than $15,000 a year. However, about 10% of the non-custodial parents who owed arrears in 2000 were responsible for 45% of the debt. Poor people with more than one child to support were piling up debt and interest. A 2003 study by the Urban Institute found that 36% of California debtors simply do not have the money to pay support. The study found that those making $5,000 or less on average had child support payments that were twice as high as their net monthly income. What good comes from beating that dead horse? The institute recommended lowering the interest rate from 10% to 7% and/or revising the interest structure to a two-pronged system of interest and penalties. Using the two-pronged system would help alleviate one of the system’s glaring weaknesses: poor collection systems.

There is no end to stories of people who thought they were making proper child support payments, only to find that because of a legal miscommunication, lost paperwork, bank errors, etc., payments they thought they were making were either insufficient or not reaching the designated recipient. An attempt to make proper restitution then ran head on into an unexpected insurance payment of significant size that kept growing.

High Interest Rate Driving State's Child Support Debt (by Kelley Weiss, California Watch)

Examining Child Support Arrears in California (Urban Institute)

Assessing Child Support Arrears in Nine Large States and the Nation (Urban Institute) (pdf)

Report on Status of Child Support Program and Performance 2002-2005 (DCSS website) (pdf)

SB 578  (Around the Capital)

Kathleen Hrepich, 2011-2014

Jan Sturla, 2008-2011

David Maxwell-Jolly, 2007-2008

Greta Wallace, 2004-2007

Curtis L. Child, 2002-2004. Child was the first and only director of DCSS not appointed by Gov. Schwarzenegger. Child was appointed by Gov. Gray Davis upon inception of DCSS.