2. Speakers ■Janet Nottley, Director Napa County DCSS ■Salli Matteson, Staff Development Manager Yolo County DCSS

3. References ■Reference Materials: ■ CSSIN Letter 08-05 Dated Aug. 22, 2008 ■Transferring a IV-D Case QRG Table 1 ■Creating and Updating Case Accounts QRG, Table 3 Balance Adjustment Scenarios- CUCA versus CI ■Opening a IV-D Case QRG ■Cleanup Report Series 77-8 Cases with Historic Orders and Active Accounts Setup ■ICT Coordinator Contact List, located on CA Child Support Central ■Split Case Training, located on the LCSA Secure Website

4. Definitions ■Split Cases: Cases that contain a case construct of the same NCP and Child(ren). The CPs are not the same. There may be no court order, a court order, or more than one order. All children do not need to be present in all cases. ■Case Management Responsibility (CMR): Identifies the county responsible for case management.

5. Split Case Diagram

6. THE GOAL – ONE COURT ORDER PER FAMILY “Except for cases initiated with foster care or third party custodians, every effort should be made to have one court order per family unit and that court order would be managed by one county. Family unit: Children of the same relationship.” * Language adopted by LCSA Directors, DCSS Policy and Legal, CSDA Legal Practices Committee and the Managing Attorney Forum

7. “Is it really a problem? “We like to get our own order.”

8. Customer Service ■Understanding federal case construct is hard enough for LCSAs, much less our customers. ■Obligors may not know his/her child(ren) have moved between custodial parents or foster care. ■One county to contact ■Consistent answers ■Reduces risks of errors in cases, such as duplicate charging

9. Courts ■The courts have requested that the counties limit the number of court orders per family whenever possible. ■Determination of arrears by the court should be based on the court order, not case. ■Reduces the number of inconsistent or duplicate court orders. ■Reduces the number of court hearings

10. Case Management ■Single county CMR of all associated cases allows one Court to have jurisdiction over all child support issues and only one LCSA for the NCPs to deal with. ■Single county CMR reduces the number of registrations required statewide. ■One court order reduces the number of liens ■Since CSE enforces at the Court Caption level, single county CMR alleviates form discrepancies when linked court orders are managed by different counties. ■Audits are appropriate by court order, not case(s).

11. “Okay, I am listening…”

12. Identifying a Split Case ■Processing a Service Request (SR) from IV-A at intake or updates. ■Worker identifies that the NCP and child(ren) already exist in CSE on another case. ■Court Caption Detail Page ✷ In the “Related IV-D Case List”, all cases that are associated to this Court Case Number are displayed. CSE links a IV-D case to a caption based on the NCP and child(ren) combination.

13. Identifying a Split Case (cont) ■Participant Overview ✷ “Cases for this Participant” has a list of all cases the participant is associated with and their role in the case along with the names of CPs and DPs. ■Legal Activities List ✷ When reviewing this list you may notice legal activities that were not taken by your county. This should prompt you to review the case to determine if there is a split case. ■Contact with a participant ■Another LCSA

14. General Information ■Split cases can occur within one county. It is important to review all court orders, legal actions, charging instructions and accounts to determine that the case is set up appropriately to allow for automated actions to occur. ■When counties share a split case or split cases, whether or not a court order exists, one county must take Case Management Responsibility (CMR) for split case scenarios in CSE.

15. Determination of Case Management Hierarchy for Determining CMR*

16. What about Venue? ■Generally, venue is determined by where the CP and child are receiving IV-A services, where they currently reside and applied for IV-D services, or where they last received services. If UIFSA responding cases, it is where the NP lives. ■If venue is challenged, the county that the Judge selects for venue will hear all the related IV ‑ D cases.

17. Reassessment of Case Management ■After the managing county has been determined, if there is a change in circumstances at a later date (such as a participant discontinues aid), the Managing County will not be re-assessed except in the following circumstances: ✷ A new county is introduced into the split case scenario ✷ A CP applies for aid in another county (may change) ✷ One of the IV-D cases involved in the split case scenario closes and the remaining case has current support

18. Responsibilities of the Counties ■Case file information is current and accurate i.e.: Participant addresses, phone numbers, employers and court order information etc ■Communication between sending and receiving counties ICT Coordinators ■Complete all pending legal actions ■Complete all overdue and current tasks due, prior to completion of the transfer ■Review financials, make sure they are correct and audit if necessary ■Image all documents pertinent to case

19. SPLIT CASE SCENARIOS

20. Scenario #1 ■Napa County has an existing case with Dad Joe as NCP, Mom Janie as CP and one child Sally. There is a court order for child Sally. Intake worker receives a service request for child Megan with Grandma Betty as the CP. Joe is named and the father and Janie as the mother. There is no court order.

21. Answer #1 ■A second case with Betty as the CP should be opened. The court order with Sally should be linked to the new case. A supplemental S&C should be generated for child support for Megan and Betty. ■A third case, if appropriate, should be opened with Janie as the NCP. A new S&C should be generated on that case.

22. Scenario #2 ■Napa County has a open case with NCP dad, CP mom, children Mary (is emancipated), Ann and Mike. Case has arrears only. Children Ann and Mike go to live with grandma in Yolo County Co. There is a Napa County Court Order for all three children with current support. Intake worker at Yolo County identifies a split case at case opening. Cash aid is being paid in Yolo County for Ann and Mike

23. Answer #2 ■A Second case with Ann and Mike will be opened in Yolo County with CP grandma. The court order will be linked to the 2 nd case and Yolo will contact Napa to ICT their case that is arrears only to Yolo County. Yolo County will have CMR of both cases. ■A third case, if appropriate, should be opened with Mom as the NCP. A new S&C should be generated on that case.

24. Scenario #3 ■Case worker in Sacramento County receives a Service Request from Welfare with NCP dad, CP mom and two children John and Jill. Case worker identifies that there are 2 additional open cases with the NCP and children in common. A case in Napa County with the same case construct as the Service Request that is arrears only and a case in Yolo County that is a Responding UIFSA to Washington. Yolo County’s case construct is with NCP dad, CP grandmother and children John and Jill. Current support is being charged.

25. Answer #3 ■Sacramento’s ICT coordinator will contact Napa County to advise that their case will need to transfer to Sacramento County ■Sacramento’s ICT coordinator will also contact Yolo County to advise that the children are now in California and receiving cash assistance in Sacramento County. ■Yolo County will end date charging instructions, contact Washington and transfer their case to Sacramento County. ■Sacramento will have CMR of all cases as they the current support obligation for children