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 2002 CCDF Data Tables (Expanded Set of Tables, June 2006)

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 5
Child Care and Development Fund
Of Children in Settings Legally Operating Without Regulation,
Percent Served by Relatives vs. Non-Relatives (FFY 2002)
State Relative Non-Relative Total
Alabama 29% 71% 11,892
Alaska 33% 67% 7,416
American Samoa - - 0
Arizona 100% 0% 6,327
Arkansas - - 0
California 58% 42% 86,916
Colorado 47% 53% 11,102
Connecticut 88% 12% 15,012
Delaware 47% 53% 2,175
District of Columbia 1% 99% 4,561
Florida 8% 92% 14,078
Georgia 57% 43% 8,698
Guam 89% 11% 344
Hawaii 50% 50% 25,912
Idaho 49% 51% 6,116
Illinois 56% 44% 82,718
Indiana 30% 70% 37,214
Iowa 28% 72% 6,888
Kansas 79% 21% 5,471
Kentucky 64% 36% 16,045
Louisiana 40% 60% 28,133
Maine 55% 45% 1,569
Maryland 81% 19% 12,132
Massachusetts 63% 37% 5,890
Michigan 76% 24% 39,357
Minnesota 37% 63% 20,212
Mississippi 59% 41% 6,691
Missouri 25% 75% 24,361
Montana 53% 47% 1,466
Nebraska 0% 100% 5,585
Nevada 12% 88% 5,186
New Hampshire - - -
New Jersey 25% 75% 14,460
New Mexico 74% 26% 18,332
New York 44% 56% 68,432
North Carolina 80% 20% 3,057
North Dakota 100% 0% 825
Northern Mariana Islands - - 0
Ohio - - 0
Oklahoma - - 0
Oregon 75% 25% 28,668
Pennsylvania 13% 87% 51,236
Puerto Rico 25% 75% 8,414
Rhode Island 78% 22% 810
South Carolina 2% 99% 6,688
South Dakota 75% 25% 1,027
Tennessee 31% 69% 8,990
Texas 100% 0% 41,516
Utah 91% 9% 7,820
Vermont 5% 95% 1,224
Virgin Islands 74% 26% 68
Virginia 62% 38% 7,089
Washington 68% 32% 27,879
West Virginia 73% 27% 1,495
Wisconsin - - 0
Wyoming 67% 33% 3,182
National Average 52% 48% 800,679

Notes applicable to this table:
1. The source for this table is ACF-800 data for FFY 2002. 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 the pooling factor as reported on the ACF-800. A few States have indicated that the pooling factor reported on the ACF-800 is not applicable to the ACF-801. This report takes all these factors 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. In some States there were no children served in Unregulated settings and thus the percent is "-" since division by zero is undefined.
5. New Hampshire did not report the number of children by setting type.
6. New York reports monthly averages rather than the disaggregated annual totals reported by all other states.
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