"It’s Like Playing the Lottery": (Ir)Regularity of Child Support and Child Care Subsidies

• In Event: Childcare Subsidies, Labor Supply, and Household Decisions

Abstract

Background: Child support and child care subsidies are crucial economic supports for custodial parent families. Beyond their individual importance, these programs interact in consequential ways. In Wisconsin, monthly child support income exceeding $1,250 affects child care subsidy eligibility and amounts.  Because child support is often an irregular source of income, parents ordered to receive support amounts near this threshold may experience variation in subsidy coverage. Additionally, Wisconsin requires subsidy recipients to participate in the child support program. Despite their relevance for working families, gaps remain in understanding families impacted by this programmatic intersection and how the interplay of these policies shapes child care arrangements. We use a mixed method study to address these gaps. We leverage state administrative data to descriptively examine family and case characteristics and semi-structured interviews for an in-depth understanding of families’ experiences.    

Data and Methods: Our quantitative sample includes mothers owed child support and eligible for child care subsidies between 2015 and 2024. We descriptively analyze characteristics of mothers who regularly receive all, no, or irregular support, including child support order and receipt amounts, subsidy amounts and demographics. We also examine subsidy spells and use event history analysis to explore the association between child support irregularity and subsidy eligibility. To explore how families experience this intersection, we draw on in-depth interviews with 25 Wisconsin mothers who were owed child support and eligible for subsidies in 2024. Data were coded in NVivo and analyzed thematically. 

Results: Preliminary quantitative findings indicate about two in five mothers with an open child support case also received at least one month of child care subsidies. Nearly three-quarters of mothers with a child support payment above the threshold went on to lose their subsidy, with loss occurring just over 6 months after the first above-threshold payment. Early qualitative findings suggest that regular child support receipt was crucial in buffering economic precarity; yet, even mothers receiving full, regular payments often struggled to make ends meet. Irregular child support impacted some mothers’ subsidy experiences; this volatility, together with impacts on other income sources, constrained child care options. Child support volatility also impacted many domains of finances (housing, credit card debt, children’s necessities and extracurriculars), decisions about work, and relationships with co-parents.  

Conclusions and Implications: These findings provide insight into the number and characteristics of families who may be juggling these two important sources of support; how the regularity of child support shapes stability of subsidies and care arrangements; and lived experiences of these intersecting programs. Our preliminary findings suggest at least two clear opportunities for policy. First, the substantial overlap between families served by both programs and families’ experiences navigating both, underscores the need for cross-program coordination. Additionally, there is an opportunity for policy to consider how best to serve families, particularly when obligors do not make payments in full, to avoid cascading consequences including disrupted subsidy eligibility, employment, child care arrangements, and overall family well-being. While findings are drawn from Wisconsin, the programmatic intersection and policy implications exist across states.

Authors

• Molly A Costanzo, University of Wisconsin-Madison
  Presenting Author

• Lisa Klein Vogel, University of Wisconsin-Madison
  Non-Presenting Co-Author

• Hanna Han, University of Wisconsin-Madison
  Non-Presenting Co-Author

• Alexis M Dennis
  Non-Presenting Co-Author