| | Committee on Ways and Means, Subcommittee on Human Resources, 3-20-97 Testimony |
 | | Two criticisms of the current incentive payment structure are that (1) it focuses only on comparing collections to the cost of making them, while ignoring measures such as paternity and support order establishment, and (2) states currently receive a minimum level of incentive payments regardless of their performance. |
 | | Instead of making incentive payments to localities and states that collected support payments on another state's behalf, the federal government made the incentive payments directly to the states and each state was required to pass incentive payments through to local CSE agencies if those agencies were financially liable for CSE operating costs. |
 | | Since incentive payments are designed to encourage program development, the Commission on Interstate Enforcement's 1992 report, President Clinton 1994 welfare reform package, and many bills introduced in Congress during the early 1990s proposed that the incentive payment system be based on performance. |
| waysandmeans.house.gov /Legacy/humres/105cong/3-20-97/3-20fear.htm (7011 words) |