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 IncomeThe entire collection of tables is also available in Excel or PDF format.
Table 13 |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age Group | Child's Home | Family Home | Group Home | Center | Total |
| Infants (0 to <1 yr) | 6% | 33% | 6% | 55% | 100% |
| Toddlers (1 yr to <3 yrs) | 5% | 28% | 6% | 62% | 100% |
| Preschool (3 yrs to <6 yrs) | 4% | 23% | 5% | 68% | 100% |
| School Age (6 yrs to <13 yrs) | 10% | 34% | 4% | 52% | 100% |
| 13 years and older | 17% | 51% | 4% | 28% | 100% |
| All Ages | 6% | 29% | 5% | 60% | 100% |
Notes applicable to this table:
1. |
The source for this table is ACF-801 data for FFY 2007. |
2. |
Nationally 1.5% of the children served with CCDF funds were excluded from the above table because either their age was invalid/not reported or one or more setting elements of the child's setting record(s) were invalid or not reported. |
3. |
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. |
4. |
All States provide an actual unadjusted count of families served each month. For States reporting full population data, the number of child records reported each month were directly counted. However, for States that only submit samples, the ratio of children-to-families was determined each month from the samples and then multiplied by the reported number of families to obtain an estimate of the unadjusted number of children served each month. The unadjusted average number of families and children were obtained from the monthly numbers in the Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) as reported on the ACF-801 summary (header) record. |
5. |
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. |
6. |
At the time of publication American Samoa and Guam had not yet reported any ACF-801 data for FFY 2007. |
7. |
The current Wyoming processing system is unable to extract a number of hours for full- and part-day authorizations resulting in a high percentage of invalid setting records. Wyoming is developing a completely new processing system that will correct this problem in the future. Connecticut does not report ACF-801 data on all or nearly all children served by contracted centers. Alaska began reporting full population data in February 2006; however, they are still resolving the difficulty of capturing information on children in Protective Services and Foster Care. |
8. |
The National values were determined by multiplying each State's percentage by the adjusted number of children served for each State, summing across the States and then dividing by the adjusted number of children served for the Nation. "Adjusted" means adjusted to represent CCDF funding only. |
9.
|
Some children are reported to have multiple settings for the same month. If a child was in more than one of the above setting categories within the same month, the child was counted in each setting in proportion to the number of hours of service received in each setting. For example if the child spent 70-hours in a center and 30-hours in a child's home, the child would be scored as 0.7 count in Center and 0.3 count in Child's Home (proportional counting). |
Posted October, 2008.