Random-Assignment Evaluations
IRP Reports
This report examines the use of child support orders expressed as a percentage of noncustodial parents' incomes and the effects of percentage-expressed orders on child support payments. Data are from court records in twenty-one Wisconsin counties and the Wisconsin Department of Revenue. The investigators discover that the use of percentage-expressed orders, as opposed to orders expressed as a fixed sum of money, results in substantially more money collected in child support payments, after controlling for differences between child support cases. Compliance rates, however, are lower in cases with percentage-expressed orders than in cases with fixed-sum orders. Even so, there are large increases over time in the dollar amounts of support orders when they are expressed as a percentage of income, and these increases offset the adverse effects of low compliance rates.
This is the second volume of a two-volume IRP Special Report containing papers presented at a conference held in Washington, D.C., in February 1992, entitled "Paternity Establishment: A Public Policy Conference. The conference was sponsored by the Institute for Research on Poverty and two divisions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation and the Administration on Children and Families. A summary overview of the conference is in Volume I (see above). For more on the conference, see the Summer 1992 issue of Focus, IRP’s newsletter. All opinions and conclusions expressed in the papers are those of the authors alone and not of the sponsoring institutions.
This is the first volume of a two-volume IRP Special Report containing papers presented at a conference held in Washington, D.C., in February 1992, entitled "Paternity Establishment: A Public Policy Conference." The conference was sponsored by the Institute for Research on Poverty and two divisions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation and the Administration on Children and Families. The overview that begins Volume 1 was written by Daniel R. Meyer, the conference organizer. For more on the conference, see the Summer 1992 issue of Focus, IRP’s newsletter. All opinions and conclusions expressed in the papers are those of the authors alone and not of the sponsoring institutions.
This report addresses the question of whether high-income families allocate a smaller proportion of income to current consumption than do low-income families. Canadian data on families in similar economic circumstances to families in Wisconsin are used. Study findings include: 1. The share of total expenditures allocated by Canadian families to current consumption is negatively related to both net and gross income–the larger the income, the smaller is the expenditure share allocated to current consumption. 2. The strength of the relationship between current consumption and income depends on the choice among specific current consumption measures. As more expenditures for durable goods are included in measures of consumption, the smaller is the measured difference between lower- and upper-income households in propensities to consume out of gross income. 3. Only small differences are noted in the relationship of current consumption share to net versus gross income. 4. The issue of whether implementation of a percentage-of-income standard will result in payment by high-income absent parents of an unfair share of child-rearing costs depends on the percentage levels established. Using Williams' estimates of child-rearing costs as a benchmark, analysis indicates that application of the Wisconsin percentage-of-income standard to establish child support payments results in awards very close to actual childrearing costs.
This report on the effects of universal, immediate, income withholding is the first to measure the effects of any of the five key features of the child support assurance system (CSAS) that Wisconsin is developing. Under CSAS, the proportion of their income that noncustodial parents are required to share with their children is specified in code or law in very simple terms that everyone can understand–such as 17 percent of gross income for one child, 25 percent for two, and 29 percent, 31 percent, and 34 percent respectively for three, four, and five or more children. Under the third and fourth features, the children receive the amount paid by the noncustodial parent or a socially assured benefit, whichever is higher, and custodial parents with below-average income also receive a public subsidy of one dollar per hour worked to cover work expenses. Finally, when the amount paid by the noncustodial parent plus an equal proportion of the income of the custodial parent add up to less than the assured benefit, the public finances the difference.
The findings are encouraging with respect to the effects of income withholding on child support collections for children on welfare. No matter how we measure it, there is a statistically significant increase in the number and amount of child support payments per AFDC case. The best estimates are that the number of child support collections increased by 3percent more and the amount of dollars collected increased by about 5percent more in pilot than in control counties.
This report assesses in a preliminary fashion the utilization of the percentage-of-income standard and immediate income withholding and their effects on child support orders and collections. Under the CSAS, the proportion of their income that noncustodial parents are required to share with their children is specified in code or law in very simple terms that everyone can understand–17 percent of gross income for one child, 25 percent for two, and 29 percent, 31 percent, and 34 percent, respectively, for three, four, and five or more children. The resulting obligation in all cases takes effect immediately and is withheld from wages and other income sources, just as are income and payroll taxes.
Preliminary findings, based on surveys of judges and family court commissioners, indicate that utilization of the percentage-of-income standard to arrive at fixed-dollar child support orders has increased. Average initial child support awards as a proportion of noncustodial parent income were close to the standard before its publication and remained so afterwards. As expected, utilization of immediate income withholding has increased substantially within pilot counties--from about 7 percent to about 58 percent. Unexpectedly, however, utilization of immediate income assignments is far from universal in pilot counties, and in four of the ten control counties such utilization is nearly as high or higher than in some of the pilot counties. Child support collections have increased by about 10 percent in both pilot and control counties.
Child support is an income transfer from a noncustodial parent to his/her dependent children. It is a mechanism for the noncustodial parent to share the cost of raising his/her children. For divorced and separated parents, it is an extension of the sharing of resources that presumably took place when the family was intact. Many noncustodial parents fail to make this contribution. This is especially true for noncustodial parents of AFDC recipients. The purpose of this thesis is to measure the impacts of potential child support transfers on Wisconsin's AFDC costs, caseloads, and recipient well-being.
The laws providing for the support of children by their noncustodial parents differ from state to state. Even though there are many similarities and common themes across state legislation, each state unfortunately organizes its statutes on an individual basis, making it difficult to locate statutory provisions among several states. This publication offers an overview of some areas of child support law, plus compilations for the fifty states and the District of Columbia, as an aid to those seeking information on state provisions for child support.
This study begins with a sample of AFDC mothers, identifies the absent fathers of their children, and then estimates the ability of the absent fathers to pay more child support than they are currently paying. Data from the (1) Wisconsin Computer Reporting Network, (2) county child support agencies, and (3) federal and state income tax records are utilized. Use of actual tax records makes this study unique in that previous studies have used indirect methods to estimate the incomes of absent fathers. The major weakness of the study, however, is that because tax records could be obtained in six months time for only one-third of the original sample, an indirect method had to be used to estimate incomes for two-thirds of the sample.
Results of this study show that there is a potential for increased child support from the absent fathers of AFDC children. The amount of the increase varies considerably, depending upon the particular normative standard or set of value judgments that guide the determination of ability to pay. Assuming 100 percent collection effectiveness and support orders for all absent fathers, increases in child support in Wisconsin range from $32 million to $163 million for the three normative standards used in this study. This is a maximum estimate and other estimates using more realistic assumptions are presented. But more important, even if collection is a great deal less than perfect, the range remains enormous, and depends upon which value judgments are adopted.
In the summer of 1980, a research team from the Institute for Research on Poverty under contract with the Wisconsin Department of Health and Social Services engaged in a project to examine the existing Wisconsin child support system and design and evaluate alternatives to it. This report presents the preliminary findings of the research, program design, and evaluation effort. The report consists of three volumes. Volume III contains research papers prepared as background for the main report plus a set of papers prepared for the spring 1981 child support conference.
In the summer of 1980, a research team from the Institute for Research on Poverty under contract with the Wisconsin Department of Health and Social Services engaged in a project to examine the existing Wisconsin child support system and design and evaluate alternatives to it. This report presents the preliminary findings of the research, program design, and evaluation effort. The report consists of three volumes. Volume II contains a proposal for a demonstration of the child support program in several Wisconsin counties and a set of issues papers on each major program recommendation.
In the summer of 1980, a research team from the Institute for Research on Poverty under contract with the Wisconsin Department of Health and Social Services engaged in a project to examine the existing Wisconsin child support system and design and evaluate alternatives to it. This report presents the preliminary findings of the research, program design, and evaluation effort. The report consists of three volumes. Volume I contains the Executive Summary, the main body of the report, and a draft of the law which would enact a new child support program.