Federal Funding of Provincial and Territorial Child Support, Support Enforcement and Child Custody and Access Projects

Family Justice Initiatives Projects (continued)

Alternative Mechanisms to Determine, Vary or Recalculate Child Support

The child support amounts set out in agreements and orders can be modified as the personal and financial circumstances of separated and divorced parents and their children change.  Normally, the procedures followed to vary an order parallel those used to determine the original arrangements—that is, an application must be filed with the court and a judge must issue an order modifying the current arrangement.  Several jurisdictions have attempted to simplify the process for all concerned through revised procedures, special pilot projects or both.  Some of these innovations will be based on a recalculation procedure made possible by section 25.1 of the Divorce Act.

Under section 25.1, the federal Minister of Justice can enter into an agreement with a province or territory that authorizes a designated child support service “to recalculate, at regular intervals, in accordance with the applicable guidelines, the amount of the child support order on the basis of updated income information.”   The recalculated child support amount would come into effect within 31 days, unless one of the parents makes an application to have the matter reviewed by the court.

Child Support Variation Procedures

Four jurisdictions have allocated federal resources to support the development, testing and implementation of less onerous and more timely child support variation and recalculation procedures.

Three provinces have developed and are implementing projects that will handle child support variation applications using procedures of the kind envisioned by section 25.1 of the Divorce Act.

Child Support Calculation Software

Software developers have designed applications that do the calculation of basic support payments under child support guidelines and all provinces and territories have provided such tools to the judiciary, court staff and others to permit them to make quick and accurate calculations.  British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Quebec, the Northwest Territories, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick have devoted federal funds to purchase a site licence for the software, to train users, and, in some cases, to lease computers.

Enforcement Activities

Provincial and territorial governments established maintenance enforcement programs in the mid-1980s to provide an intermediary service for those paying support and those receiving support payments.  In most provinces, their primary function is to receive payments from debtors and forward them to the creditor once the funds have been cleared through a trust account. The greater challenge for enforcement programs arises when debtors fail to make payments in a timely fashion or at all.  When this happens, the programs attempt to trace and locate the individuals who have defaulted and to obtain the money that is due.  In Quebec, the maintenance enforcement program (which is located within Revenu Québec) advances the amount of the periodic payment to any creditor on income assistance.  To this end, legislatures have given maintenance enforcement programs the authority to recover the support owing from assets, by garnisheeing income and restricting access to privileges such as motor vehicle licences.  In 1996, the federal government amended the Family Orders and Agreements Enforcement Assistance Act (FOAEA) and other statutes to introduce measures such as licence suspension procedures to help encourage compliance with child support agreements and orders.  In addition, the Department of Justice Canada has supported national planning and research work with the provincial and territorial governments to identify and implement stronger enforcement measures through provincial and territorial laws and programs.  This federal-provincial-territorial collaboration has facilitated a range of administrative and operational improvements designed to increase the effectiveness of maintenance enforcement services.

FOAEA Access

The Department of Justice Canada administers the FOAEA Act through the Family Law Assistance Section in Ottawa.  The provincial and territorial maintenance enforcement programs (MEP) are the main users of the three FOAEA services:  tracing, interception and licence denial.  The tracing service provides MEPs, from federal data banks, with the residential address and employer name and address of individuals who have obligations under a support, access or custody order or agreement.  The interception service allows for the garnishment of designated federal monies payable, including income tax refunds, employment insurance benefits, old age security, Canada Pension Plan benefits, interest on regular Canada Savings Bonds and selected Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada programs.  Finally, the licence denial service, which was implemented in 1997, processes MEP applications to suspend and deny Canadian passports and federally issued licenses, such as aviation and navigation certificates, for individuals who are in default of family support by at least $3,000 or are three payments in arrears.

In order to increase the efficiency of its service, the FOAEA program established an information management system and procedures that permit provincial and territorial MEP staff to request and obtain FOAEA services via the Internet.  The design and implementation of this system required that each MEP develop and implement information management and communications solutions of its own to automate file and data exchange with the FOAEA system.  Typically, implementation of such a solution called for changes in service delivery procedures, system development and design, acquisition of equipment and information management and security software, and staff training.

All the provinces and territories, save Manitoba and Nunavut, allocated federal funding resources to assist with this work.

National Maintenance Enforcement Survey

As part of the Child Support Initiative, the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics launched the National Maintenance Enforcement Survey to collect and publish national information about support compliance and enforcement.  The Centre, in addition to developing a centralized data processing and reporting system, has contracted with the provinces and territories to build interfaces to extract maintenance enforcement data from their databases.  Governments will use such information for policy and program development, research and evaluation.  The academic community, non-governmental organizations and the general public will also find it useful.  This aggregate survey collects information about cases in maintenance enforcement programs, describing the following:

British Columbia, Prince Edward Island, Yukon, Quebec, Ontario, Nova Scotia, the Northwest Territories, New Brunswick and Alberta each used Department of Justice Canada funds to design and implement system changes to meet the Centre’s requirements.

Maintenance Enforcement System Development

Provincial and territorial maintenance enforcement programs must handle thousands of transactions daily, work that is dependant on effective automated information and financial management systems.  As laws, procedures and service standards change, these systems must be updated, upgraded or, in some cases, replaced.  Since 1997, the federal government has supported this critical work in all provinces and territories.

The following are samples of work done in each jurisdiction that illustrate the kinds of information systems development efforts that were needed to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of maintenance enforcement programs.

  • British Columbia.  The Family Maintenance Enforcement Program made changes to its system to implement electronic commerce, a new systems methodology, review of the system architecture and production of auto-generated letters.

  • Alberta.  Alberta Justice hired systems consultants to conduct preliminary needs assessments and a business analysis prior to the design, development and implementation of a replacement for its 15-year-old tracking system.

  • New Brunswick.  The province modified its existing system to ensure Year 2000 compliance and improved table maintenance capabilities.  As well, it consolidated the eight regional databases to improve service to clients.

  • Newfoundland.  The province has been involved in replacing the program’s mainframe system with a distributed-server system that will also be accessed by Human Resources and Employment staff.

  • Northwest Territories.  The territorial government purchased computers and applications to process data and manage the program and has begun to adapt its existing applications using in-house technical support to ensure that its maintenance enforcement system can deliver the required data.

  • Nunavut.  Nunavut Justice began planning system development and procedural redesign work that will link its maintenance enforcement program to court files and related computer records.

  • Ontario.  The Family Responsibility Office developed a Windows-based interface for its mainframe case management system, a document management module to allow users to attach case documents to screens via desktop document scanning, and personal productivity tools to reduce delays and allow users to generate letters and reports.

    The Family Responsibility Office, which retains private lawyers to act on its behalf in maintenance enforcement proceedings, also wanted to ensure that these lawyers have timely case management information throughout the province.  To this end, the Office developed a system that gives these lawyers access to support enforcement documents via remote dial-in to the agency’s mainframe system.  The remote access system required the development and installation of software and telecommunications solutions capable of ensuring the security and privacy of personal data.

  • Prince Edward Island.  The province updated the accounting module of its application, allowing it to track arrears information more accurately.

  • Quebec.  The province reviewed the performance and capacity of its maintenance enforcement computer system to assess its performance, define client needs and describe the work processes.  The work involved modifying the program’s financial system to ensure accurate reports and acceptable financial controls that meet general accounting standards.

  • Saskatchewan.  The maintenance enforcement office implemented system reviews and modifications to ensure Year 2000 compliance, improved its table maintenance capabilities, and performed new functions required by legislative changes.

  • Yukon.  The territory’s Department of Justice looked into adapting a system from another province or territory to replace its outdated maintenance enforcement computer system in the expectation that it would save time and money.  However, the requirements analysis and other assessments demonstrated that such a solution would be more expensive than building an entirely new system.  Therefore, the territorial government has contracted for the development of a new information system.

Electronic Banking

Alberta, British Columbia, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Quebec and Saskatchewan evaluated and implemented electronic banking procedures and applications.  Typically, these measures allow for pre-authorized payment arrangements for debtors and direct deposits to creditors’ accounts that reduce collection costs and minimize delays in payments to creditors.

British Columbia’s work in this area illustrates the effort required to develop and implement electronic banking procedures.  In 1997-1999, the province hired a consultant to assess the feasibility of automating transactions with the province’s Treasury Branch to allow for the use of automatic bank withdrawal from payors’ accounts, coded invoices for payors through selected institutions, direct deposit to recipients’ accounts, electronic fund transfers from attachees, and direct payment of maintenance through protected services.  The review and development process, which continued in 2000‑2001, included implementing the direct deposit arrangements for payments to recipients and online and telephone banking systems to benefit payors.

Improved Collection Mechanisms

Several jurisdictions have allocated federal funding to support the design and implementation of procedures and programs to improve the ability of maintenance enforcement programs to locate debtors and collect arrears.

  • Yukon.  The Department of Justice, on a trial basis, employed a tracking investigative officer to reduce the collection problems associated with the seasonal nature of the Yukon workforce.  The officer used government databases and field investigations to locate defaulters.

  • New Brunswick.  The New Brunswick Department of Justice negotiated access to databases maintained by other provincial departments to facilitate debtor tracing.

  • British Columbia.  The Family Justice Programs Division implemented information systems enhancements to support provincial enforcement legislation (i.e. driver’s licence non-renewal or denial, and credit bureau reporting), to obtain the information needed to attach provincial funds owing to payors in default, and automate tracing procedures.

  • Alberta.  As a result of program reviews conducted in 1997 and 1998, Alberta introduced a special investigations unit.  The unit seeks and executes third-party judgments and performs collections audit functions for the program.

  • Alberta has also sought to improve collections on behalf of creditors by implementing default hearings.  The province’s Maintenance Enforcement Act allows the Maintenance Enforcement Program to serve a summons on a defaulting debtor requiring him or her to appear before the court to:

    • explain to the court why the maintenance order should not be enforced;
    • be examined under oath about his or her finances; and
    • show why he or she should not be committed to prison for wilfully defaulting on maintenance payments.

  • Default hearings are held before a Master of the Court of Queen’s Bench, who has the power to issue court orders when other collection efforts have failed and Program authorities believe that the debtor has the ability to pay but has wilfully not done so.  When possible, a senior collection officer meets with the debtor before the start of a hearing to try to negotiate a reasonable payment plan so that a full hearing will not be necessary.  In a hearing, the Maintenance Enforcement Program is represented by its legal counsel who, along with the Master, can examine the debtor under oath.

  • Ontario.  The Family Responsibility Office has negotiated arrangements with provincial government agencies such as the Ontario Motor Vehicle Industry Council and CORPAY which manages the Government of Ontario’s corporate pay and benefits) to obtain information to help trace defaulters.  In each case, the Office and the other agency have to negotiate freedom of information responsibilities and memoranda of understanding.

    The Family Responsibility Office also tested the use of private collection agencies with positive results and expanded the project.  Under the revised project mandate, companies selected through a bidding process seek to collect arrears in cases that have been delinquent for six or more months.

  • Quebec.  In 1999-2000, the province’s maintenance enforcement program assessed the feasibility of negotiating agreements among the provinces and territories that would provide inter-jurisdictional access to motor vehicle licensing databases to facilitate debtor tracing.  The project was undertaken with the expectation that inter-jurisdictional cooperation would allow maintenance enforcement agencies to process enforcement applications more quickly, improve the productivity of enforcement staff, increase the number of cases processed, and improve client service.

New Enforcement Measures

As a result of the 1997 amendments to the FOAEA Act, maintenance enforcement programs can now apply to have passports and certain federal licences withdrawn or denied when the holder or applicant is more than three months or $3,000 in arrears on support payments.  The expectation is that the defaulter’s inability to obtain these privileges will motivate greater compliance.  With the same objectives in mind, provincial and territorial authorities have considered, and in many cases implemented, similar enforcement measures affecting licences and privileges governed by provincial law.  In a number of cases, provinces have allocated federal resources to support their study and/or implementation of such strategies.

  • Saskatchewan.  The province implemented provincial legislation allowing the Maintenance Enforcement Office to report defaulters to the credit bureau.  It also took steps to improve the administration of the provincial licence withholding process by assigning a licence withholding clerk to monitor case files to identify default payors who meet the criteria for licence withholding, prepare notices and initiate withholding action as appropriate.

  • Quebec and New Brunswick.  Both provinces have used federal funding to support studies of the feasibility and likely costs of implementing additional enforcement tools such as licence denial and credit bureau reporting.

  • Ontario.  The Family Responsibility Office began planning for significant changes to its information management system to facilitate implementation of driver’s licence withholding measures.

  • British Columbia.  The province implemented six new enforcement provisions beginning in 1998‑1999:  credit bureau reporting, driver’s licence withholding, payment conferencing (i.e. meetings between payors and Program staff to obtain voluntary compliance), personal property registry liens, data matches with possible income sources, and enforcement against corporations.  These measures will help the program pursue delinquent payors who cannot be located, “hide behind a corporate veil,” or do not have regular incomes.

Meeting Service Demands

Alberta, Quebec and New Brunswick each allocated federal resources to meet increased demands for services associated with the rise in the number of child support variations following implementation of child support guidelines.

Responding to Client Enquiries

Maintenance enforcement programs must deal with high volumes of calls from paying and receiving parents inquiring about the status of their accounts.  In order to address this continuing demand for individual information, several of the programs have introduced automated telephone systems, frequently referred to as integrated voice response (IVR) systems.  The IVR services operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week to give clients access to case-specific enforcement status and payment information, as well as information about enforcement legislation and other related matters.  Typically, clients must register for the service and obtain a PIN number to ensure the security of personal information on the automated line.  During office hours, clients who cannot obtain the information they seek through the automated service can have their calls forwarded to enforcement staff or leave a detailed message asking for staff assistance.

Prince Edward Island, Ontario, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, the Northwest Territories, Alberta and British Columbia used federal resources to design, install and maintain their IVR systems.  The specific work ranged from hardware installation to the preparation of the scripts for the audio recordings that provide callers with general public information about enforcement laws and procedures.  New Brunswick is planning on using federal funds to design, install and/or maintain their IVR system and is targeting implementation for April 1, 2002.

In September 2000, Alberta implemented a service to give MEP clients access to their account information via the Internet.  Alberta’s MEP Accounts Online project, which was supported by federal funding, is the first of its kind in Canada.  It allows both creditors and debtors to access current account status (the last four payments), request a statement, report their change of address, and send an e-mail inquiry or comment.  The system complements existing services provided by collection officers and the Integrated Voice Response Telephone System.  Prince Edward Island is designing a similar system.

Improving Client Services

Provincial and territorial MEPs allocated federal resources to projects designed to evaluate and enhance client services.

  • Quebec.  In 1998-1999 and 1999-2000, the province’s maintenance enforcement program hired twelve recent graduates, 8 specializing in family law and 4 in accounting, to do outreach work with its staff and clients through face-to-face meetings, telephone calls and other means to provide information on the maintenance enforcement program, address concerns and gather suggestions for program improvements.  The program also conducted studies on a range of measures intended to better meet client needs.

  • Saskatchewan.  In 2000-2001, the Maintenance Enforcement Office employed two client service representatives, whose responsibilities include routinely contacting new registrants to ensure that they are familiar with the Office’s services and procedures and responding to questions and complaints.

  • British Columbia.  The Family Justice Programs Division conducted a series of recipient and payor surveys to identify systemic client relation problems and track levels of client satisfaction.  The sample of payors ranged from exemplary payors to those who had never complied.  The data generated information about overall satisfaction, suggested improvements and ways to decrease payor resistance, and improved client knowledge of federal and provincial enforcement initiatives.

    In 2000-2001, in order to evaluate ways to further enhance client services, British Columbia’s Family Maintenance Enforcement Program established an outreach project.  Under the project, the Program assigned enforcement officers to liaise with Family Justice Centres located in the Lower Mainland and in Kelowna to provide services to Centre clients.  The enforcement officers participate in case conferences, meet with individual clients and conduct payment conferences.

  • Ontario.  In 2000-2001, the Family Responsibility Office conducted outreach sessions and workshops targeted to specific clients or client service provider groups.  Office staff provided legal outreach sessions to family law associations, the Canadian Bar Association (Ontario), the Family Bench and Bar and new panel lawyers.

Staff Training and Support

British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario and Quebec used federal funds for staff training and related activities in addition to the training associated with specific initiatives such as new enforcement measures and the implementation of information system changes.  British Columbia, for example, developed guidelines to assist staff involved in negotiating voluntary payments.  Alberta published a newsletter to keep agency staff informed of procedural and policy changes as new procedures were implemented in 1997-1998 and, in 1999-2000, hired a senior program advisor whose responsibilities included designing and managing enhanced training for enforcement personnel.  In 2000-2001, Ontario conducted a number of orientation sessions for new staff, and planned and prepared an upcoming course called Dealing with Difficult Clients for all Family Responsibility Office staff.  Quebec, in order to improve the delivery of work-related information to staff and management, developed an Intranet that gives maintenance enforcement program staff ready access to up-to-date user guides, procedures manuals, forms and the other material they require to perform their duties.