Proposed Rule2026-11530
Employment and Training Services for Noncustodial Parents in the Child Support Program; Rescission
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
June 9, 2026
Issuing agencies
Health and Human Services DepartmentChildren and Families Administration
Abstract
The Office of Child Support Enforcement proposes to rescind the Employment and Training Services for Noncustodial Parents in the Child Support Program final rule, published in the Federal Register on December 13, 2024. The final rule allowed child support agencies to utilize Federal Financial Participation under title IV-D of the Social Security Act for providing specific, optional, and non-duplicative employment and training services to eligible noncustodial parents.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 110 (Tuesday, June 9, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 110 (Tuesday, June 9, 2026)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 34798-34805]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-11530]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and Families
45 CFR Parts 302, 303, 304, and 309
RIN 0970-AD18
Employment and Training Services for Noncustodial Parents in the
Child Support Program; Rescission
AGENCY: Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE), Administration for
Children and Families (ACF), Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS or the Department).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of Child Support Enforcement proposes to rescind
the Employment and Training Services for Noncustodial Parents in the
Child Support Program final rule, published in the Federal Register on
December 13,
[[Page 34799]]
2024. The final rule allowed child support agencies to utilize Federal
Financial Participation under title IV-D of the Social Security Act for
providing specific, optional, and non-duplicative employment and
training services to eligible noncustodial parents.
DATES: Consideration will be given to written comments on this Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) received on or before August 10, 2026.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number (ACF-
2026-0100) and/or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) 0970-AD18 by one
of the following methods:
<bullet> Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov</a>.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
<bullet> Mail: Written comments may be submitted to: Office of
Child Support Enforcement, Attention: Director of Policy and Training,
330 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20201.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket number or RIN for this rulemaking. All substantive comments
received will be posted without change to <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>,
including any personal information provided. The docket on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> will include a plain language summary of the NPRM.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kimberly Curtis, Division of Policy
and Training, OCSE, telephone (202) 690-6614. Email inquiries to
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0a6569796f246e7a7e4a6b696c24626279246d657c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d0bfb3a3b5feb4a0a490b1b3b6feb8b8a3feb7bfa6">[email protected]</span></a>. Telecommunications Relay users may dial 711
first.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Submission of Comments
OCSE invites all interested parties to participate in this
rulemaking process by submitting written comments, views, and data on
any aspect of this notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). When
submitting comments, please identify the relevant section of the
document and explain the basis for each suggestion. All comments will
be reviewed by OCSE.
Comments may be submitted either online or by mail, but please
choose only one method.
Background and Scope of Regulatory Action
On December 13, 2024, OCSE published the Employment and Training
Services for Noncustodial Parents in the Child Support Program final
rule (89 FR 100789), which amended 45 CFR parts 302, 303, 304, and 309
to allow state and tribal child support agencies to claim Federal
Financial Participation (FFP) under title IV-D of the Social Security
Act (the Act) for the cost of providing certain optional employment and
training services for eligible noncustodial parents involved in the
child support program. The intention behind the final rule was to allow
matching funds for child support agencies to provide services that
enhance the economic stability of noncustodial parents, thereby
improving the regularity and reliability of child support payments.
However, a review of the rule's necessity, effectiveness, and costs
following the issuance of Executive Order 14219 Ensuring Lawful
Governance and Implementing the President's ``Department of Government
Efficiency'' Deregulatory Initiative, 90 FR 10583 (February 25, 2025),
Executive Order 14278, Preparing Americans for High-Paying Skilled
Trade Jobs of the Future, 90 FR 17525 (April 28, 2025), and Executive
Order 14303, Restoring Gold Standard Science, 90 FR 22601 (May 29,
2025) informed the decision to issue a proposal to rescind the final
rule.
Rationale for Proposed Rescission
OCSE acknowledges that this proposed rule adopts a different policy
approach than the 2024 final rule, which authorized FFP under title IV-
D of the Act for certain employment and training services based on the
premise that improving noncustodial parents' employment outcomes could
improve the regularity and reliability of child support payments. OCSE
is proposing this rescission because, upon further review, we have
concluded that the evidence and analysis presented in the final rule do
not adequately support the determinations made in that rule, and that
the policy approach reflected in the final rule is not the most cost-
effective or efficient means of advancing title IV-D objectives.
In particular, OCSE's proposed rescission is based on the following
considerations: (1) the final rule projected substantial Federal
expenditures over time, reaching $98.5 million per budget year by FY
2034; (2) the evidence discussed in the final rule indicates, at most,
modest improvements in certain employment measures and does not
consistently demonstrate improvements in the regularity or amount of
child support paid, while some evaluations relied upon are not designed
to support causal conclusions; (3) the final rule's approach creates a
parallel service-delivery and funding pathway within child support
agencies that overlaps with existing Federal workforce programs,
increasing administrative complexity and fragmentation even where
coordination is possible; and (4) the final rule does not adequately
address key uncertainties and assumptions regarding participation,
generalizability, and expected outcomes under Executive Order 14303.
The discussion below addresses these concerns in turn.
OCSE recognizes that the 2024 final rule included features intended
to address concerns regarding duplication and program integration,
including requirements that IV-D agencies determine that participants
are not receiving the same services under other Federally funded
employment and training programs and flexibility to coordinate with
those programs. Nevertheless, for reasons described in this rescission
proposal, we have concluded that these design features do not
sufficiently address concerns regarding cost-effectiveness, evidence of
effectiveness, and administrative complexity.
The estimated fiscal impact of the 2024 final rule against a
baseline of no action, accounting for existing trends, was projected to
increase Federal expenditures in FY 2025 by $17.8 million, the first
fiscal year analyzed in the 2024 final rule's estimates. As more child
support programs use this authority, the estimated fiscal impact was
projected to increase. By FY 2034, the estimated fiscal impact was
projected to be $98.5 million per budget year. These estimates reflect
only the projected Federal costs (i.e., increased Federal expenditures)
associated with providing employment and training services under the
rule. They do not include potential benefits to the Federal Government,
such as reduced costs for child support enforcement or decreased
reliance on means-tested programs, because these benefits are
speculative and cannot be reliably quantified for this rescission
NPRM.\1\ Given these substantial projected costs to the Federal
government, it is in the best interest of the child support program and
the broader Federal budget to rescind the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As discussed below, even benefits to non-Federal entities
from the 2024 final rule have been demonstrated to be minimal,
particularly in light of the projected Federal costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This NPRM is consistent with Executive Order 14219, which directed
agencies to ``prioritize review of those rules that satisfy the
definition of `significant regulatory action' in Executive Order 12866
of September 30, 1993 (Regulatory Planning and Review), as amended.''
As the Employment and Training Services for Noncustodial Parents final
rule was designated by
[[Page 34800]]
OMB as a significant regulatory action, review of the rule was
prioritized accordingly. Executive Order 12866, in turn, requires
agencies to, as relevant here, assess the costs and benefits of the
regulation, and design its regulations in the most cost-effective
manner. Upon further review, and for reasons stated below, the final
rule failed to fully and transparently assess the costs and relative
benefits of providing funding under title IV-D of the Act for
employment and training services, nor did it ensure that the rule was
designed in the most cost-effective manner.
We note also, upon further review, that the demonstrations and
studies cited in the 2024 final rule forming the basis of the
Secretary's determination to allow FFP under title IV-D of the Act for
noncustodial parent employment and training services provide, at most,
modest quantified evidence of improvement in employment outcomes. OCSE
summarizes the full evidentiary record discussed in the 2024 final rule
but discusses in greater detail the quantified findings from the Child
Support Noncustodial Parent Employment Demonstration (CSPED) and the
Families Forward Demonstration because they are the most recent
evaluations cited in the final rule and therefore the most directly
relevant to current conditions. For example, CSPED, which enrolled
10,173 noncustodial parents across 18 local jurisdictions, increased
participants' employment rate by three percent during the first two
years after enrollment and increased their earnings by four percent
during the first year after enrollment (measured using quarterly
earnings). See, 89 FR at 100795-96. The final rule also reports an
eight percent increase in the likelihood of paying child support
through income withholding during the first year after enrollment.
However, the rule further acknowledges that CSPED did not increase the
amount of child support paid, explaining that enhanced child support
services, including order modifications that reduce average order
amounts, may have operated at cross-purposes with employment services.
See 89 FR at 100796 (including footnote 74). In addition, the final
rule describes the Families Forward Demonstration as relying on an
implementation study and a pre-/post-enrollment analysis of child
support outcomes and explicitly notes that the evaluation was not
designed to attribute causality, limiting the conclusions that can be
drawn regarding sustained employment impacts from that demonstration.
See 89 FR at 100796.
We further note that many of the additional demonstrations and
evaluations cited in the 2024 final rule share similar methodological
limitations. A substantial portion of the evidence relied upon in the
rule was drawn from pre-/post-enrollment analyses or quasi-experimental
designs conducted in a limited number of jurisdictions, often without a
contemporaneous control group. While such studies may be informative
for program operations or hypothesis generation, they do not permit
reliable causal attribution of observed changes in employment,
earnings, or child support payment outcomes to the provision of
employment and training services under the child support program.
Upon reconsideration of the evidentiary record in light of the
principles articulated in Executive Order 14303, Restoring Gold
Standard Science, and the White House Office of Science and Technology
Policy (OSTP) Director's June 23, 2025 implementing memorandum,
``Agency Guidance for Implementing Gold Standard Science in the Conduct
& Management of Scientific Activities,'' OCSE has determined that the
evidentiary record discussed in the 2024 final rule does not provide a
sufficiently robust basis to support the significant policy expansion.
The OSTP guidance explains that, when research is used to inform
policy, especially in an operational or regulatory context, agencies
should emphasize disciplined study design (including appropriate
controls, robust statistical methods, and adequate sample sizes),
transparency (including clear methodological reporting and, where
feasible and lawful, access to underlying data and analytical tools),
and clear communication of error and uncertainty through quantitative
measures (e.g., confidence intervals, error margins, or sensitivity
analyses), along with clear descriptions of assumptions, methodological
limits, and what findings do and do not establish. The guidance further
cautions against speculative claims or extrapolations beyond the data's
scope. In light of these standards, the final rule's reliance on
studies that frequently reflect short-term outcome measures, limited
external validity, and designs that often do not isolate the
independent effects of IV-D-funded activities does not support
confident conclusions that allowing title IV-D funding for noncustodial
parent employment and training services would reliably or sustainably
improve employment stability or child support payment regularity on a
national scale.
Moreover, many of the initiatives cited in the final rule depended
on intensive service models, judicial involvement, or significant
funding and service delivery contributions from workforce agencies,
community-based organizations, philanthropic sources, or time-limited
grants. These features further complicate the attribution of outcomes
to IV-D program activities and limit the ability to generalize or
replicate results within the ongoing title IV-D funding structure, as
contemplated by the 2024 final rule.
Accordingly, OCSE has concerns that the evidentiary record cited in
the 2024 final rule does not fully support the broader conclusions
drawn in the rule regarding the effectiveness of allowing title IV-D
funding for noncustodial parent employment and training services to
meaningfully improve stable employment and the regularity of child
support payments. Even assuming that some jurisdictions could achieve
positive outcomes under the optional approach adopted in the 2024 final
rule, OCSE has reconsidered the appropriate role of the title IV-D
program and, as a policy matter, OCSE proposes to focus title IV-D
resources on core child support functions, which are locating parents,
establishing paternity and support orders and enforcing those orders,
rather than establishing an additional employment and training service
channel within the IV-D program.
We further note that, while the 2024 final rule extended this
optional funding authority to tribal IV-D programs, the NPRM did not
propose an explicit tribal funding provision and the studies discussed
in the final rule did not evaluate employment and training services
delivered through tribal child support programs. Moreover, there are
programmatic features that could materially affect both implementation
and fiscal effects in tribal settings. In particular, tribal IV-D
programs receive 100 percent FFP for allowable activities, which may
change uptake incentives and the Federal budget exposure relative to
state IV-D programs. In addition, the tribal provisions were added in
response to comments and were justified primarily on equity,
sovereignty, and trust-responsibility considerations rather than on
tribal program evaluation findings. Accordingly, OCSE has concerns
about the extent to which evidence from state-focused demonstrations
can be assumed to apply to tribal IV-D program implementation and
outcomes.
The 2024 final rule is based primarily on the Secretary's authority
under sections 452(a)(1) and 454(13) of the Act
[[Page 34801]]
(42 U.S.C. 652(a)(1) and 654(13)) to establish such other requirements
and standards as the Secretary determines to be necessary and effective
for obtaining child support and collecting support payments. The final
rule is also based on authority under section 1102 of the Act (42
U.S.C. 1302), providing the Secretary with authority to publish rules
and regulations, not inconsistent with this Act, as may be necessary to
the efficient administration of HHS programs. However, as explained
above, the evidentiary record discussed in the final rule does not
demonstrate that permitting title IV-D FFP for noncustodial parent
employment and training services is necessary and effective for
obtaining child support and collecting child support payments, or that
the regulatory changes are necessary to the efficient administration of
HHS programs. In particular, the studies relied upon in the final rule
indicate, at most, modest improvements in certain employment-related
measures, do not consistently indicate improvements in the regularity
or amount of child support paid, and in some instances rely on
evaluation designs that are not intended to support causal conclusions
about program effects. The final rule also does not present tribal-
program specific evaluation findings supporting extension to tribal IV-
D programs. Moreover, the final rule does not demonstrate that the
evidentiary record it relies upon is consistent with the Gold Standard
Science principles and implementing guidance described in Executive
Order 14303 and the June 23, 2025 OSTP memorandum, establishing
criteria for ``Gold Standard Science,'' including clear presentation of
uncertainty, limits on generalizability, and avoidance of
extrapolations beyond the scope of the underlying data. The final rule
does not fully address study outcomes showing limited or mixed impacts
on stable employment and regular child support payments.
Additionally, this NPRM complies with Executive Order 14278, which
emphasizes consolidating and streamlining fragmented Federal workforce
development programs while also optimizing and better targeting Federal
workforce investments. The services authorized for reimbursement under
the 2024 final rule (e.g., job search assistance, job readiness
training, job development/placement, occupational training, work
supports, and related case management) substantially overlap with
services already available through existing Federal workforce and
employment and training programs, including the Workforce Innovation
and Opportunity Act (WIOA) one-stop American Job Center network and
Employment Services, as well as programs such as SNAP Employment and
Training and TANF employment-focused activities administered by states
and tribes.
The 2024 final rule concluded that authorizing title IV-D agencies
to provide employment and training services could complement
traditional child support enforcement by helping noncustodial parents
secure and maintain employment. The rule further found that existing
federally funded workforce development programs often lack sufficient
funding to meet service needs and are not designed with a specific
focus on unemployed or underemployed noncustodial parents. Upon further
consideration, however, OCSE believes that permitting state and tribal
IV-D agencies to claim Federal financial participation under title IV-D
pf the Act for employment and training services is not the most
effective or sustainable approach to addressing those limitations.
Although OCSE acknowledges that workforce development programs
generally are not structured around parental status and may not target
noncustodial parents as a distinct population, those programs are
designed to serve unemployed and underemployed individuals with
significant barriers to employment, including many noncustodial
parents. OCSE further recognizes that funding constraints within the
workforce system can limit the availability and intensity of services
for some populations. However, establishing a separate IV-D funded
employment and training service pathway would not resolve these
systemic limitations and would instead require IV-D agencies to
undertake additional eligibility screening, contracting or service
delivery arrangements, case management, reporting, and oversight
functions. This approach would increase fragmentation across the
workforce development system and raise the risk of duplicative
administrative costs. While the 2024 final rule sought to mitigate
duplication by requiring IV-D agencies to determine that participants
are not receiving the same services under other Federally funded
employment and training programs and by allowing coordination with
those programs, OCSE believes this approach still adds a separate
workforce-service structure rather than leveraging existing workforce
systems and therefore does not align with the Administration's
workforce development program consolidation and resource realignment
goals.
OCSE therefore believes that strengthening coordination, referrals,
and partnerships between IV-D agencies and existing workforce programs,
rather than creating a parallel IV-D funded employment service
structure within child support agencies, better aligns with the
Administration's workforce development consolidation and resource
realignment goals while continuing to support noncustodial parents'
access to employment services needed to promote consistent child
support payments.
Alternatives Considered
OCSE considered a range of alternatives to rescission, including
modifications to the final rule adopted in 2024, as well as other
potential approaches to addressing the underlying policy objectives.
These alternatives were evaluated in light of concerns regarding cost-
effectiveness, evidentiary support, administrative complexity, and
projected Federal expenditures.
First, OCSE considered retaining the final rule without change. The
final rule adopted a limited set of allowable, non-duplicative
employment and training services, excluded certain higher-cost
approaches such as subsidized employment, and emphasized coordination
with other Federal and state workforce programs and authorities. OCSE
evaluated whether these existing limitations and coordination
requirements would be sufficient to address concerns regarding program
costs, implementation burden, and the strength of the evidence
supporting improved employment and child support outcomes. Upon further
review, OCSE concluded that retaining the rule in its current form
would not adequately address these concerns.
Second, OCSE considered narrowing the scope of allowable activities
or further restricting eligibility, service duration, or allowable
costs under the final rule. OCSE also considered whether additional
safeguards, reporting requirements, or evidentiary standards could be
imposed to better ensure cost-effectiveness and measurable outcomes.
OCSE determined that such modifications would add administrative
complexity for state agencies and the Federal government, while still
relying on a limited and uncertain evidence base regarding meaningful
improvements in stable employment and child support payment outcomes.
Third, OCSE considered delaying implementation of the final rule or
adopting a phased or pilot-based approach to allow for further
evaluation
[[Page 34802]]
and evidence development prior to full implementation. OCSE concluded
that this approach would continue to authorize Federal expenditures and
impose compliance and administrative burdens without sufficient
assurance that the anticipated benefits would be realized.
Finally, OCSE considered whether reliance on existing authorities
and programs outside the final rule would more effectively support
employment and child support outcomes. OCSE determined that this
approach is the most prudent path forward, as existing Federal and
state workforce programs and other available authorities already
provide avenues for coordination and service delivery without the
additional costs and complexities associated with the final rule.
Based on this analysis, OCSE has concluded that alternatives short
of rescission would not sufficiently address the concerns described
above. Accordingly, OCSE proposes rescission of the final rule and
requests comment on whether additional modifications, not identified
here, could meaningfully address these concerns while achieving the
intended policy objectives.
Reliance Interests and Implementation Status
OCSE recognizes that, in some circumstances, regulated entities may
take steps in reliance on a final rule, including planning, staffing,
contracting, or developing operational changes. OCSE understands that
participation under the 2024 final rule is optional and, as of the
development of this NPRM, we are not aware of any state or tribal IV-D
agencies that have claimed FFP under this authority. OCSE requests
comment on: (1) whether any state or tribal IV-D agencies have opted in
or initiated implementation activities under the 2024 final rule; (2)
the types and magnitude of any reliance activities undertaken; and (3)
what transition period or other measures, if any, would be appropriate
to address those reliance interests if this rescission is finalized.
Tribal Consultation
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian
Tribal Governments, requires agencies to consult with Indian tribes
when regulations have ``substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.'' Similarly, ACF's
Tribal Consultation Policy says that consultation is triggered for a
new rule adoption that significantly affects tribes, meaning the new
rule adoption has substantial direct effects on one on more Indian
tribes, on the amount or duration of ACF program funding, on the
delivery of ACF programs or services to one or more Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes. The Secretary has determined that the
proposed rescission of the 2024 final rule triggers tribal consultation
under these policies. Accordingly, OCSE conducted a virtual tribal
consultation on January 15, 2026, on the rescission of the Employment
and Training Services for Noncustodial Parents in the Child Support
Program final rule. This consultation focused on the proposed changes
that affect tribal IV-D programs and, specifically the proposal to
remove and reserve 45 CFR 309.121 and the related conforming changes in
45 CFR part 309 (including removal of Sec. Sec. 309.65(b),
309.145(c)(5), and 309.155(f)) as well as any other provisions of this
NPRM that may have substantial direct effects on Indian tribes. All
comments made during the consultation were recorded or summarized and
will be included in the public record of comments on the proposed rule.
Statutory Authority
This NPRM is published under the authority granted to the Secretary
of Health and Human Services by sections 1102, 452(a)(1), and 454(13)
of the Act (42 U.S.C. 1302, 652(a)(1), and 654(13)). Upon further
review, and for the reasons stated above, OCSE no longer believes the
2024 final rule allowing funding for employment and training services
under title IV-D of the Act achieves the purposes set forth in these
sections by establishing program requirements that are necessary and
make the program more efficient relative to the cost of the final rule.
Section by Section Discussion
Part 302 State Plan Requirements
OCSE is proposing to remove Sec. 302.76, Employment and Training
Services, and to reserve the citation. This section grants states the
option to provide employment and training services for eligible
noncustodial parents in accordance with Sec. 303.6(c)(5). The
provision was intended to complement traditional child support
enforcement tools by helping noncustodial parents gain and maintain
employment to better support their children. However, upon further
review, and for reasons stated above, the final rule implementing the
provision failed to fully and transparently assess the costs and
relative benefits of providing funding under title IV-D of the Act for
employment and training services and to design the final rule in the
most cost-effective manner. Removing Sec. 302.76 would allow the child
support program to better focus on its core responsibilities: locating
parents, establishing paternity and support orders, and enforcing those
orders, and would reduce costs for both the Federal Government and
state governments.
Part 303 Standards for Program Operations
OCSE is proposing to remove Sec. 303.6(c)(5) and redesignate
paragraph (c)(6) as paragraph (c)(5). This section grants states the
option to enforce child support obligations by providing employment and
training services to eligible noncustodial parents. It sets out
required eligibility criteria in addition to criteria that may be
established by the IV-D agency, defines allowable employment and
training services activities, and provides that FFP may be used to
provide case management in connection with those allowable services.
As previously stated, the final rule implementing the provision
failed to fully and transparently assess the costs and relative
benefits of providing funding under title IV-D of the Act for
employment and training services and to design the final rule in the
most cost-effective manner. Removing Sec. 303.6(c)(5) would allow the
child support program to better focus on its core responsibilities:
locating parents, establishing paternity and support orders, and
enforcing those orders, and would reduce costs for both the Federal
Government and state governments.
Part 304 Federal Financial Participation
OCSE is proposing to remove Sec. 304.20(b)(3)(vii), and
redesignate paragraph (b)(3)(viii) as paragraph (b)(3)(vii), which
authorizes FFP for certain employment and training services provided to
eligible noncustodial parents in accordance with Sec. Sec. 302.76 and
303.6(c)(5), as this provision is directly linked to Sec. Sec. 302.76
and 303.6(c)(5), which we also propose removing. The removal of this
provision would support Executive Order 14278, which aims to
consolidate and streamline fragmented Federal workforce development
programs while also enhancing and better targeting Federal investments
in workforce development. Allowing state and tribal IV-D programs to
claim FFP under title
[[Page 34803]]
IV-D of the Act to provide employment and training services, thereby
creating yet another fragmented workforce development program, does not
align with these objectives.
Additionally, eliminating Sec. 304.20(b)(3)(vii) would reinforce
the focus of the IV-D child support program on its core mission:
locating parents, establishing paternity, setting and modifying support
orders, and enforcing child support obligations.
OCSE is also proposing to remove Sec. 304.23(k), as this provision
is directly linked to Sec. 303.6(c)(5), which we propose removing.
Removing Sec. 303.6(c)(5), which grants states the option to enforce
child support obligations by providing employment and training services
to eligible noncustodial parents, would render Sec. 304.23(k)
obsolete. Eliminating this provision would ensure consistency across
regulations and support the overall effort to streamline the child
support program by focusing resources on core enforcement functions.
Part 309 Tribal Child Support Enforcement (IV-D) Program
OCSE is proposing to remove Sec. 309.65(b) and redesignate
paragraph (c) as paragraph (b). This section, which is optional for
tribes, allows the use of FFP for specific, non-duplicative employment
and training services provided to eligible noncustodial parents. The
provision was intended to complement traditional child support
enforcement tools by helping noncustodial parents gain and maintain
employment to better support their children. However, upon further
review, and for reasons stated above, the final rule implementing the
provision failed to fully and transparently assess the costs and
relative benefits of providing funding under title IV-D of the Act for
employment and training services and to design the final rule in the
most cost-effective manner.
The 2024 final rule also stated that this optional authority would
be particularly valuable for tribal IV-D programs because employment
and training services available to tribal communities are often
underfunded. OCSE recognizes these broader workforce funding
constraints. However, we have concerns that using title IV-D funding to
support employment and training services through tribal child support
agencies is not an efficient or well-targeted mechanism to address
underfunding of workforce programs. In our view, this approach risks
diverting tribal IV-D program resources (e.g., administrative capacity,
case management attention, and oversight) from core child support
functions and adds an additional service-delivery and reporting
structure alongside existing workforce programs, even where
coordination is possible. Accordingly, OCSE concludes that the
underfunding rationale does not overcome the concerns described above
regarding cost-effectiveness, transparency of the underlying analysis,
and the need for tribal IV-D programs to focus on their primary
responsibilities under title IV-D.
For these reasons, OCSE is proposing to remove the optional
employment and training authority in Sec. 309.65(b). Removing Sec.
309.65(b) would allow the tribal child support program to better focus
on its core responsibilities: locating parents, establishing paternity
and support orders, and enforcing those orders, and would reduce costs
for the Federal government.
OCSE is proposing to remove and reserve Sec. 309.121 Employment
and training services, as well. This optional provision permits tribes
to claim FFP for certain non-duplicative employment and training
services provided to eligible noncustodial parents. As with Sec.
302.76 for state child support programs, this provision was intended to
supplement traditional child support enforcement tools by assisting
noncustodial parents in securing and maintaining employment, thereby
enabling them to meet their child support obligations.
As discussed above in connection with Sec. 309.65(b), the 2024
final rule stated that this optional authority would be particularly
valuable for tribal IV-D programs because employment and training
programs serving tribal communities are often underfunded. OCSE
recognizes these broader workforce funding constraints. However, for
the reasons discussed above, we have concerns that using title IV-D
funding to support employment and training services is not an efficient
or well-targeted mechanism to address such underfunding and may
increase administrative complexity and divert program resources from
core IV-D functions.
Furthermore, as previously stated, the final rule implementing the
provision failed to fully and transparently assess the costs and
relative benefits of providing funding under title IV-D of the Act for
employment and training services and to design the final rule in the
most cost-effective manner. Removing Sec. 309.121 would reduce costs
for the Federal government while allowing the tribal child support
program to maintain focus on its primary responsibilities.
Additionally, OCSE is proposing to remove Sec. 309.145(c)(5),
which was added to allow FFP for tribes and tribal organizations
operating IV-D programs to provide optional employment and training
services. This provision would no longer be needed with the proposed
removal of Sec. Sec. 309.65(b) and 309.121.
Finally, OCSE is proposing to remove Sec. 309.155(f), and
redesignate paragraph (g) as paragraph (f), which is directly tied to
Sec. 309.121 and outlines employment and training services related
activities for which FFP is not available. With the proposed removal of
Sec. 309.121, Sec. 309.155(f) would become obsolete.
Impact Analysis
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
The Department has determined that this proposed rule does not
impose new information collection requirements under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521).
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The Secretary certifies, under 5 U.S.C. 605(b), as enacted by the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), Public Law 96-354, that this proposed
rule would not result in a significant impact on a substantial number
of small entities. The primary impact is on state and tribal
governments. State and tribal governments are not considered small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if the
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13563 also emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules,
and promoting flexibility. The Office of Management and Budget's Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs has designated this proposed rule
as an economically significant regulatory action under section 3(f)(1)
of Executive Order 12866. This proposed rule, if finalized as proposed,
is expected to be neither an Executive Order 14192 regulatory action
nor an Executive Order 14192 deregulatory action. The baseline for this
analysis is continued implementation of the December 13, 2024, final
rule permitting state and tribal IV-D agencies to claim FFP under title
IV-D for certain optional and non-duplicative employment and training
services for eligible noncustodial parents. As discussed in the 2024
final
[[Page 34804]]
rule and summarized in this NPRM, that rule was projected to increase
Federal expenditures by $17.8 million in FY 2025, with projected
Federal expenditures rising to $98.5 million per budget year by FY 2034
as more child support programs used the authority. Relative to that
baseline, this proposed rescission would avert the projected impacts
associated with the 2024 final rule. Table 1 summarizes the estimated
annual Federal expenditure effects of the proposed rescission relative
to that baseline.
OCSE is proposing rescission because, upon further review, we have
concluded that the evidence and analysis discussed in the 2024 final
rule do not adequately support the determinations made in that rule and
that the policy approach reflected in that rule is not the most cost-
effective or efficient means of advancing title IV-D objectives. In
particular, OCSE has concluded that the 2024 final rule projected
substantial Federal expenditures that were not netted against
demonstrated benefits, the evidence discussed showed at most modest
improvements in certain employment measures and did not consistently
demonstrate improvements in the regularity or amount of child support
paid, and the rule included studies that in some instances were not
designed to support causal conclusions. OCSE also has concerns
regarding overlap with existing Federal workforce programs,
administrative complexity, and uncertainty regarding participation,
generalizability, and expected outcomes, including in tribal settings.
OCSE considered alternatives to rescission, including retaining the
2024 final rule without change, narrowing the scope of allowable
activities or imposing additional safeguards, and delaying
implementation or adopting a phased or pilot-based approach. OCSE
concluded that these alternatives would not sufficiently address
concerns regarding projected Federal expenditures, administrative
burden, and the limited and uncertain evidence base supporting the 2024
rule. OCSE also considered reliance on existing authorities and
programs outside the 2024 final rule and concluded that existing
Federal and state workforce programs already provide avenues for
coordination and service delivery without the additional costs and
complexities associated with that rule.
OCSE recognizes that there is uncertainty regarding the extent to
which state and tribal IV-D agencies would have used the authority
established by the 2024 final rule and the extent of any implementation
or reliance activities already undertaken. Accordingly, we request
comments on whether any state or tribal IV-D agencies have initiated
implementation activities under the 2024 final rule, the types and
magnitude of any reliance activities undertaken, and what transition
period or other measures, if any, would be appropriate if this
rescission is finalized.
Table 1--Estimated Economic Effects of the Proposed Rescission Relative
to the Baseline of Continued Implementation of the 2024 Final Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated effect
Projected Federal of proposed
Fiscal year expenditure impact rescission
of 2024 final rule relative to
baseline
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2025............................ $17.8 million..... ($17.8 million).
2026............................ 25.1 million...... (25.1 million).
2027............................ 32.7 million...... (32.7 million).
2028............................ 40.7 million...... (40.7 million).
2029............................ 49.0 million...... (49.0 million).
2030............................ 59.8 million...... (59.8 million).
2031............................ 69.0 million...... (69.0 million).
2032............................ 78.4 million...... (78.4 million).
2033............................ 88.3 million...... (88.3 million).
2034............................ 98.5 million...... (98.5 million).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Values in parentheses reflect reduced Federal expenditures
relative to the baseline of continued implementation of the 2024 final
rule.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
requires that a covered agency prepare a budgetary impact statement
before promulgating a rule that includes any Federal mandate that may
result in the expenditure by state, tribal and local governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year (adjusted annually for inflation). That threshold level is
currently approximately $193 million. This proposed rule, if finalized,
does not impose any mandates on state, local, or tribal governments, or
the private sector, that will exceed this threshold in any year.
Assessment of Federal Regulations and Policies on Families
Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act of 1999 requires Federal agencies to determine whether a policy or
regulation may negatively affect family well-being. If the agency's
determination is affirmative, then the agency must prepare an impact
assessment addressing seven criteria specified in the law. The required
review of the regulations and policies to determine their effect on
family well-being has been completed. This regulation does not impose
requirements on states or families and will not have an adverse impact
on family well-being as defined in the legislation.
Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132 prohibits an agency from publishing any rule
that has federalism implications if the rule either imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on state and local governments and is not
required by statute, or the rule preempts state law, unless the agency
meets the consultation and funding requirements of section 6 of the
Executive Order. This proposed rule does not have a federalism impacts
as defined in the Executive Order 13132.
Alex J. Adams, Assistant Secretary for the Administration for
Children and Families, approved this document on June 3, 2026.
List of Subjects
45 CFR Part 302
Child support, State plan requirements.
45 CFR Part 303
Child support, Standards for program operations.
45 CFR Part 304
Child support, Federal financial participation.
45 CFR Part 309
Child support, Tribal child support enforcement (IV-D) program.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Department of Health
and Human Services proposes to amend 45 CFR Chapter III as follows:
PART 302--STATE PLAN REQUIREMENTS
0
1. The authority citation for part 302 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 651 through 658, 659a, 660, 664, 666, 667,
1302, 1396a(a)(25), 1396b(d)(2), 1396b(o), 1396b(p), and 1396(k).
Sec. 302.76 [Remove and Reserve]
0
2. Remove and Reserve Sec. 302.76:
PART 303--STANDARDS FOR PROGRAM OPERATIONS
0
3. The authority citation for part 303 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 651 through 658, 659a, 660, 663, 664, 666,
667, 1302, 1396a(a)(25), 1396b(d)(2), 1396b(o), 1396b(p), and
1396(k), and 25 U.S.C. 1603(12) and 1621e.
[[Page 34805]]
Sec. 303.6 [Amend]
0
4. Amend Sec. 303.6 by:
0
a. Adding the word ``and'' at the end of paragraph (c)(4)(iii);
0
b. Deleting paragraph (c)(5); and
0
c. Redesignating paragraph (c)(6) as paragraph (c)(5).
PART 304--FEDERAL FINANCIAL PARTICIPATION
0
5. The authority citation for part 304 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 651 through 655, 657, 1302, 1396a(a)(25),
1396b(d)(2), 1396b(o), 1396b(p), and 1396(k).
Sec. 304.20 [Amend]
0
6. Amend Sec. 304.20 by:
0
a. Adding the word ``and'' at the end of paragraph (b)(3)(vi);
0
b. Deleting paragraph (b)(3)(vii); and
0
c. Redesignating paragraph (b)(3)(viii) as paragraph (b)(3)(vii).
Sec. 304.23 [Amend]
0
7. Amend Sec. 304.23 by deleting paragraph (k).
PART 309--TRIBAL CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT (IV-D) PROGRAM
0
8. The authority citation for part 309 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 655(f) and 1302.
Sec. 309.65 [Amend]
0
9. Amend Sec. 309.65 by:
0
a. Deleting paragraph (b); and
0
b. Redesignating paragraph (c) as paragraph (b).
Sec. 309.121 [Remove and Reserve]
0
10. Remove and Reserve paragraph Sec. 309.121.
Sec. 309.145 [Amend]
0
11. Amend Sec. 309.145 by:
0
a. Adding the word ``and'' at the end of paragraph (c)(3);
0
b. Removing ``; and'' at the end of paragraph (c)(4) and adding a
period; and
0
c. Deleting paragraph (c)(5).
Sec. 309.155 [Amend]
0
12. Amend Sec. 309.155 by:
0
a. Adding the word ``and'' at the end of paragraph (e); and
0
b. Deleting paragraph (f); and
0
c. Redesignating paragraph (g) as paragraph (f).
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services.
[FR Doc. 2026-11530 Filed 6-8-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184-41-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on June 9, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.