california guideline review csda legal practice committee guideline review subcommittee

Post on 02-Jan-2016

219 Views

Category:

Documents

2 Downloads

Preview:

Click to see full reader

TRANSCRIPT

California Guideline Review

CSDA Legal Practice Committee

Guideline Review Subcommittee

Sub - Committee Members

Jonathan Burris - Sacramento Tom McCool – Orange Jeanne Miskel - Sonoma George Nielson – Contra Costa David Oppenheim - CSDA Melinda Self – San Francisco

Data Collection

Sample of top performing states Sample of bottom performing states Sample of large states

Difficulties Encountered

Different guideline models Calculation of income Concepts of self sufficiency reserve Treatment of CP income Treatment of timeshare Treatment of multiple children Treatment of children from other relationship

Monthly Support for one child, comparing Guidelines

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750

Net Monthly Income

AZ CA PA AL SD IL MA MN NY OH

Monthly support for two children, comparing Guidelines

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750

Net M onthl y I nc ome

AZ CA P A AL SD IL MA MN NY OH

Monthly support for three children, comparing Guidelines

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750

Net Monthly Income

AZ CA PA AL SD IL MA MN NY OH

Monthly Support for four children, comparing Guidelines

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750

Net M onthl y I nc ome

AZ CA P A AL SD IL MA MN NY OH

Monthly support for five children, comparing Guidelines

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750

Net M onthl y I nc ome

AZ CA P A AL SD IL MA MN NY OH

Monthly support for six children, comparing Guidelines

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750

Net M onthy I nc ome

AZ CA P A AL SD IL MA MN NY OH

Monthly Support for one child, comparing Guidelines

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750

Net Monthly Income

Su

pp

ort

Ord

er

AZ CA PA AL SD IL MA MN NY OH

Monthly support for two children, comparing Guidelines

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750

Net Monthly Income

Su

pp

ort

Ord

er

AZ CA PA AL SD IL MA MN NY OH

Monthly support for three children, comparing Guidelines

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750

Net Monthly Income

Su

pp

ort

Ord

er

AZ CA PA AL SD IL MA MN NY OH

Monthly Support for four children, comparing Guidelines

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750

Net Monthly Income

Su

pp

ort

Ord

er

AZ CA PA AL SD IL MA MN NY OH

Monthly support for five children, comparing Guidelines

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750

Net Monthly Income

Su

pp

ort

Ord

er

AZ CA PA AL SD IL MA MN NY OH

Monthly support for six children, comparing Guidelines

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750

Net Monthy Income

Su

pp

ort

Ord

er

AZ CA PA AL SD IL MA MN NY OH

Analysis

Correlation inconclusive as to FM3 Ca. GL consistently higher at all levels Ca. GL consistently higher for multiple

children Court discretion to depart from guideline

Review of Literature

If support is too high as a percentage of income it won’t be paid

Bulk of non-paid support is at the low end of the income spectrum

Obligor must be able to meet basic needs or won’t/can’t pay support

Recommendations

Simplify the formula Provide subsistence allowance for

obligor Reduce the multiplier for additional

children Grant courts more discretion to depart

form guideline based on individual case circumstances.

top related