Skip Navigation
acfbanner  
ACF
Department of Health and Human Services 		  
		  Administration for Children and Families
          
ACF Home   |   Services   |   Working with ACF   |   Policy/Planning   |   About ACF   |   ACF News   |   HHS Home

  Questions?  |  Privacy  |  Site Index  |  Contact Us  |  Download Reader™Download Reader  |  Print Print      


The Child Care Bureau   Advanced
Search

FFY 2007 CCDF Data Tables (Preliminary Estimates)

Index: 1-Average Monthly Families and Children Served | 2-Percent of Children Served by Payment Method | 3-Percent of Children Served by Types of Care | 4-Percent of Children Served in Regulated Settings vs.Settings Legally Operating without Regulation | 5-Percent Served by Relatives vs. Non-Relatives | 6-Percent of Children Served in All Types of Care | 7-Number of Child Care Providers Receiving CCDF Funds | 8-Methods of Consumer Education Summary | 9-Children Served by Age Group | 10-Children Served by Reason for Care | 11-Children by Racial Group | 12-Children by Latino Ethnicity | 13-Care by Age Category and Type of Care | 14-Care By Age Group and Care Type | 15-Expenditures By Age Group and Care Type | 16-TANF as a Source of Income | 17-Co-payment as a Percent of Family Income
The entire collection of tables is also available in Excel or PDF format.

Table 2
Child Care and Development Fund
Preliminary Estimates
Percent of Children Served by Payment Method (FFY 2007)
State Grants/ Contracts % Certificates % Cash % Total
Alabama 0% 100% 0% 52,836
Alaska 0% 84% 16% 10,729
American Samoa -- -- -- --
Arizona 0% 100% 0% 82,323
Arkansas 43% 57% 0% 51,486
California 37% 63% 0% 371,153
Colorado 1% 98% 1% 36,114
Connecticut 31% 69% 0% 44,771
Delaware 0% 100% 0% 21,582
District of Columbia 0% 100% 0% 11,721
Florida 53% 47% 0% 248,877
Georgia 0% 100% 0% 101,155
Guam 43% 57% 0% 2,042
Hawaii 42% 0% 58% 26,183
Idaho 0% 100% 0% 16,032
Illinois 8% 92% 0% 289,350
Indiana 2% 98% 0% 56,566
Iowa 0% 100% 0% 38,314
Kansas 0% 100% 0% 39,027
Kentucky 0% 100% 0% 71,557
Louisiana 0% 100% 0% 95,464
Maine 29% 70% 1% 8,881
Maryland 0% 100% 0% 39,854
Massachusetts 44% 56% 0% 93,976
Michigan 0% 71% 29% 183,315
Minnesota 0% 100% 0% 59,873
Mississippi 3% 97% 0% 48,932
Missouri 0% 100% 0% 75,137
Montana 0% 97% 3% 10,874
Nebraska 0% 100% 0% 32,292
Nevada 19% 81% 0% 18,002
New Hampshire 0% 100% 0% 12,838
New Jersey 19% 81% 0% 72,134
New Mexico 0% 100% 0% 36,497
New York 20% 80% 0% 214,307
North Carolina 0% 100% 0% 145,630
North Dakota 0% 100% 0% 8,243
Northern Mariana Islands 0% 0% 100% 516
Ohio 0% 100% 0% 175,279
Oklahoma 0% 100% 0% 59,537
Oregon 3% 97% 0% 39,011
Pennsylvania 0% 82% 18% 196,802
Puerto Rico 66% 34% 0% 14,577
Rhode Island 0% 100% 0% 17,663
South Carolina 0% 100% 0% 37,964
South Dakota 1% 99% 0% 9,997
Tennessee 0% 100% 0% 74,924
Texas 0% 100% 0% 243,068
Utah 0% 0% 100% 25,372
Vermont 1% 99% 0% 12,779
Virgin Islands 0% 100% 0% 973
Virginia 0% 100% 0% 52,401
Washington 0% 100% 0% 113,266
West Virginia 0% 100% 0% 24,943
Wisconsin 0% 100% 0% 93,649
Wyoming 0% 100% 0% 8,207
National Total 12% 85% 3% 3,928,995

Notes applicable to this table:
1. The source for this table is ACF-800 data for FFY 2007. The ACF-800 is based on an annual unduplicated count of families and children; i.e., a family or child that receives one hour of service on one day is counted the same as a family or child that receives full-time care throughout the fiscal year.
2. All counts are "adjusted" numbers of families and children unless otherwise indicated. These "adjusted" numbers represent the number funded through CCDF only. The "adjusted" number is the raw or "unadjusted" number reported by the State multiplied by its pooling factor as reported on the ACF-800. DC has indicated that the pooling factor reported on the ACF-800 is not applicable to the ACF-801. This report takes this factor into consideration in calculating the "adjusted" numbers or percentages.
3. A "0%" indication often means the value is less than 0.5% rather than actually zero. In a few instances, the sum of the categories may not appear to add up to exactly 100% because of rounding.
4. At the time of publication, American Samoa had not reported any ACF-800 data for FFY 2007.
Index: 1-Average Monthly Families and Children Served | 2-Percent of Children Served by Payment Method | 3-Percent of Children Served by Types of Care | 4-Percent of Children Served in Regulated Settings vs.Settings Legally Operating without Regulation | 5-Percent Served by Relatives vs. Non-Relatives | 6-Percent of Children Served in All Types of Care | 7-Number of Child Care Providers Receiving CCDF Funds | 8-Methods of Consumer Education Summary | 9-Children Served by Age Group | 10-Children Served by Reason for Care | 11-Children by Racial Group | 12-Children by Latino Ethnicity | 13-Care by Age Category and Type of Care | 14-Care By Age Group and Care Type | 15-Expenditures By Age Group and Care Type | 16-TANF as a Source of Income | 17-Co-payment as a Percent of Family Income

Posted October, 2008.