Child Care and Development Fund, Report to Congress for Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003
| Table
14a Child Care and Development Fund Average Monthly Percentages of Families With TANF as One of Their Sources of Income (FY 2002) |
|
|---|---|
States/Territories |
TANF (Yes) |
| Alabama | 7.0% |
| Alaska | 13.0% |
| American Samoa | 0.0% |
| Arizona | 18.9% |
| Arkansas | 41.2% |
| California | 15.6% |
| Colorado | 18.4% |
| Connecticut | 18.0% |
| Delaware | 12.3% |
| District of Columbia | 14.9% |
| Florida | 14.2% |
| Georgia | 14.5% |
| Guam | 25.4% |
| Hawaii | 26.4% |
| Idaho | 1.7% |
| Illinois | 12.4% |
| Indiana | 21.9% |
| Iowa | 46.4% |
| Kansas | 8.4% |
| Kentucky | 3.3% |
| Louisiana | 14.8% |
| Maine | 5.5% |
| Maryland | 10.7% |
| Massachusetts | 15.2% |
| Michigan | 18.8% |
| Minnesota | - |
| Mississippi | 0.5% |
| Missouri | 25.2% |
| Montana | 14.3% |
| Nebraska | 25.3% |
| Nevada | 29.3% |
| New Hampshire | - |
| New Jersey | 12.7% |
| New Mexico | 19.1% |
| New York | 21.6% |
| North Carolina | 7.9% |
| North Dakota | 13.8% |
| Northern Mariana Islands | 4.2% |
| Ohio | 17.8% |
| Oklahoma | 17.1% |
| Oregon | 30.6% |
| Pennsylvania | 8.0% |
| Puerto Rico | - |
| Rhode Island | 15.7% |
| South Carolina | 22.8% |
| South Dakota | 6.9% |
| Tennessee | 55.0% |
| Texas | 12.4% |
| Utah | 7.3% |
| Vermont | 14.1% |
| Virgin Islands | - |
| Virginia | 27.5% |
| Washington | 22.0% |
| West Virginia | 10.6% |
| Wisconsin | 9.4% |
| Wyoming | - |
| National Average | 16.9% |
Notes applicable to this table:
| 1 | The source for this table is ACF-801 data for FY 2002. |
| 2 | National percentages are based on the "adjusted" national numbers unless otherwise indicated. In other words, the national percentages are equivalent to a weighted average of the State percentages, where the weights are the "adjusted" number of families or children served as appropriate. |
| 3 | The Invalid/Not Reported column includes families that did not indicate whether TANF was a source of income or not and the family was reported as being in protective services. |
| 4 | Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands were unable to report ACF-801 case-level data before report preparation. |
| 5 | Alaska’s population reported does not accurately reflect the population served due to sampling difficulties the State is trying to resolve. |
6 |
New Hampshire did not provide valid TANF information for this measure. New Hampshire was not included in the calculation of the national average. |
7 |
Minnesota was unable to accurately identify the families receiving TANF as a source of income. However, Minnesota communicated an estimate of about 35% of child care families receive TANF. Minnesota was not included in the calculation of the national average. |
8 |
Wyoming accidentally reversed coding of the TANF variable in their state system, so a more accurate estimate is about 11% of child care families in Wyoming receive TANF. Wyoming was not included in the calculation of the national average. |