How current job losses impact multiple households when child support is involved
When government helps our most vulnerable to thrive, we all prosper. But the COVID-19 pandemic reveals a government safety net that’s riddled with holes.
We see the headlines and read about the latest in job losses and higher and higher unemployment rates in the news each day. And many federal and state programs have been established to help replace lost income.
But often we fail to notice the secondary impact of those who rely on child support from these displaced workers. There are millions of custodial parents who work a job but also depend on the noncustodial parent to provide income, and often medical coverage, to help care for their children.
A single job loss may impact two distinct households:
1. The noncustodial parent loses his/her job.
2. The noncustodial parent applies for unemployment, but benefits are reduced and redirected to the custodial parent.
3. The custodial parent receives less money through the unemployment percentage than when the noncustodial parent was fully employed.
4. Both families/households suffer a reduction in income, jeopardizing their ability to pay bills, buy food and provide other necessities.
Many of these households were on the edge of vulnerable to begin with. How do we make sure that the custodial parents who have lost income as a result of the pandemic aren’t overlooked?
Where should efforts begin?
Through federal and state regulations, portions of child support payments are recouped through both unemployment and stimulus payment rerouting. This helps, but there is more government can do to identify and support affected families. Taking action is crucial. To see who needs help and to connect them to resources today, the government must look through a new lens — because COVID-19 is changing the definition of who is vulnerable, and it’s happening in real time.
As these rapidly changing dynamics continue to affect families, government must be all-inclusive in its determination of who the vulnerable populations are and who needs assistance. Many people who were not considered vulnerable six months ago, in terms of both economics and health, may now be struggling.
Traditionally, the government takes a program perspective in its approach to helping people, setting up policies and programs designed to meet a broad-based set of people who ordinarily utilize social services.
But in the environment created by the pandemic, with dynamic shifts in vulnerability, government must be more agile and more directly connected to the people who need help. We believe one effective way to improve service coordination and delivery is to ask people what they need. So much continues to change, and so many of those changes have broad impacts. It’s difficult to understand all of the implications and the nuances unless you’re asking at the individual level.
Ask people what they need
There’s a smarter way to do all this. State and local governments can make a difference and have a positive impact on the lives of vulnerable citizens with a proactive approach that uses technology and data. Just as “smart city” initiatives use technology to provide better services to citizens within certain cities, we should strive to create a “smart safety net.” State and local governments can migrate to a smart safety net and become more attuned to the needs of individuals and families.
We must look beyond the boundaries of existing government programs and start looking at individuals and families more holistically. We need to hear from individuals and their families and let them describe where they’re struggling. This will allow government to plan better and to ensure that people’s true needs are being met.
Proactive communication in assessing needs is critical to gaining a better understanding of how to support the population. Having proactive communication coming from the Title IV-D agency governing child support could help. Additionally, a poll could identify families who are now vulnerable by asking a parent if they have had a reduction in household income because of the employment status of the noncustodial parent. The Title IV-D program exists, after all, to help custodial parents provide for their children.
But this situation is unprecedented, and we can’t rely on programs based on assumptions made before this crisis to be the answer now or in the future.
Holding direct conversations with vulnerable populations is government’s best opportunity to understand and meet their needs. The use of data will help us better identify programs and interventions that are effective in real time.
Andrea Danes, Executive Director in Ernst & Young LLP’s Government and Public Sector practice, has 28 years’ experience in health care and human services, with a focus on using data to improve how social services are delivered. Her mission is to help vulnerable populations by teaching government how to leverage technology to redesign safety net programs.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the global EY organization or its member firms.