! ! ! ! ! ! !

December 2003

Secretariat services provided by:

Interstate Movementof Children

Receiving Adoption Assistance

Funded by the Children’s Bureau of the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services,Adoption Opportunities Grant Number 90-C0-0866

Ursula Gilmore, MAElizabeth Oppenheim, JD

Additional copies of this report are available from

APHSA810 First Street, NE, Suite 500, Washington, DC 20002

Tel: (202) 682-0100; FAX: (202) 289-6555; www.aphsa.org

Interstate Movementof Children

Receiving Adoption Assistance

Funded by the Children’s Bureau of the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services,Adoption Opportunities Grant Number 90-C0-0866

! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This report was developed under an Adoption

Opportunities grant, Grant Number 90-CO-

0866, provided to the Association of Adminis-

trators of the Interstate Compact on Adoption

and Medical Assistance (AAICAMA) by the U.S.

Department of Health and Human Services, Ad-

ministration for Children, Youth, and Families,

Children’s Bureau, to gain a better understand-

ing of the movement of special needs children

who have been adopted or moved across state

lines. Special thanks to our project officer, Jane

Morgan for her support.

AAICAMA is most grateful to the 39 state ICAMA

Compact Administrators and child welfare

agency staff that participated in the Survey on

the Movement of Children Receiving Adoption

Assistance. This report would not have been

possible without their assistance.

Ursula Gilmore, AAICAMA Research Analyst and

Liz Oppenheim, Director of Interstate Affairs,

coauthored the report.

AAICAMA would also like to thank Rebecca

Dunhem, who was critical to the development

of the survey and Robyn Bockweg who designed

the final product.

iii

! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

CONTENTS

iv

SECTION IINTRODUCTION

Introduction...................... ……………………………………………......…....……………..………..1

Backgound and Legislative Framework ….......……..……………..........………………….…….…2

Purpose....................................………………………………………………....……………..………..3

SECTION IIDATA COLLECTION & METHODOLOGY

Methodology ………………………………………………………........………………...……...…….3

Types of Data Collected..............…………………………………........………………..………….…4

Response Rates and Limitations ……………………………………….........…………...…………..4

SECTION IIISUMMARY OF RESULTS

Number of Children Receiving Adoption Assistance and the State of Residence.........………..4

Number of Children Receiving Adoption Assistance and Residing Out of State..........………...6

Distribution of Children Residing Outside Adoption Assistance State ...........…..............…....8

Regional Movement of Children Residing Outside Adoption Assistance State….......................9

Children’s Movement Across State Lines...........................................................…………...……..9

SECTION IVCONCLUSION

Conclusions.............................………………………………………………………..………………..9

APPENDICES

Appendix A: COBRA Chart....................................................................…………...............……...15

Appendix B: Survey Instrument ………………………………….......……...……................…….17

! ! ! ! ! ! !

v

! ! ! ! ! ! !

RRRRReport on the Intereport on the Intereport on the Intereport on the Intereport on the Interstststststate Moate Moate Moate Moate Movvvvvementementementementementof Childrof Childrof Childrof Childrof Childrenenenenen

RRRRReceiving Aeceiving Aeceiving Aeceiving Aeceiving Adoption Adoption Adoption Adoption Adoption Assistssistssistssistssistanceanceanceanceance

1

A fundamental goal of the child welfare systemis to move those children who cannot bereunified with their birth families into permanenthomes in a timely fashion. Recent data from theAdoption and Foster Care Analysis ReportingSystem (AFCARS) demonstrate that nationwide,the annual number of completed adoptions fromfoster care doubled between 1995 and 2000from 25,644 adoptions in 1995 to 51,000adoptions in 2000. The vast majority of theseadoptions involved children with special needs—88 percent of the children adopted in 2000received adoption assistance related to a medicalcondition, age, membership in sibling group, orminority status.1 Child welfare researchersproject that the rate of growth in the number ofchildren under age 18 who are adopted fromfoster care will exceed the rate of growth of thefoster care population for at least the next twodecades.2 While the number of children eligiblefor Title IV-E adoption assistance in 1999 was

approximately 195,000, this number is projectedto reach more than 600,000 by 2010.3 Althoughadoptions have increased substantially, a totalof 116,653 children with a goal of adoption werestill in foster care at the end of September 2001.4

In addition, at any given time, about 1.5 percentof foster children—about 8,000—are legallyavailable for adoption but have no immediateprospects for adoption.

Interstate adoptions will play a critical role instates’ efforts to increase adoptions from fostercare. National adoption exchanges such asAdoptUSKids and state adoption exchanges havehelped remove geographic boundaries byenabling child welfare agencies to locateprospective families across state lines and haveexponentially increased the ability of families tolearn about available children living in otherstates.

This study, Report on the Interstate Movement ofChildren Receiving Adoption Assistance, wasundertaken by the Association of Administrators

I. INTRODUCTION

1 Department of Health and Human Services, Administrationfor Children and Families, Children’s Bureau. The AFCARSReport for the period ending September 20, 2001.www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb2 Fred Wulczyn and Kristin Brunner, Growth in the AdoptionPopulation, Issue Papers on Foster Care and Adoption, Topic#2 (Chicago: Chapin Hall Center for Children, 2002)

3 Karen Spar and Christine Devere, Child Welfare Financing:Issues and Options (Washington, DC: CongressionalResearch Service, 2001)4 The AFCARS Report for the period ending September20,2001. www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb

! ! ! ! ! ! !

2

of the Interstate Compact on Adoption andMedical Assistance (AAICAMA) to provide abetter understanding of the number of specialneeds children receiving adoption assistanceacross the country, how many of these childrenreside in states other than the adoptionassistance state, and how these numbers changeover time. In addition to providing a nationalpicture of the number of children receivingadoption assistance, the systematic tracking ofinterstate cases provides states with a critical toolfor improved decision-making in programplanning and the provision of needed medicaland post-adoption services for children beingadopted or moving across state lines.

Background and Legislative Framework

Recognizing the extraordinary costs anddemands of raising special-needs children thatcan pose barriers to would-be adoptive parents,states developed adoption subsidy programs.These programs were designed to provide cashassistance and support services to adoptivefamilies of special-needs children. Following thestates’ lead, Congress passed the AdoptionAssistance and Child Welfare Act5 in 1980 (P.L.96-272) which establishes a federally aidedadoption assistance program under Title IV-E ofthe Social Security Act. P.L. 96-272 also directsstates to protect the interstate interests ofchildren receiving Title IV-E adoption assistance6

by ensuring that adoptive families receiveneeded services and benefits from the adoptionassistance program, no matter where they reside.

The goals of the Adoption and Safe Families Act7

(ASFA), signed into law in 1997, are to strengthenthe state child welfare systems’ response tochildren’s safety, need for permanency, and well-being. The Act required states to make more

timely efforts to move children toward adoptionand other permanent arrangements whenchildren could not return to their birth families.Among its many provisions, ASFA containsprovisions that focus on eliminating geographicbarriers to adoption. ASFA requires states todevelop plans for the effective use of cross-jurisdictional resources to facilitate timelyadoptive or permanent placements andprohibits states from denying or delaying achild’s adoption when an approved family isavailable outside the child’s jurisdiction.8

The Interstate Compact on Adoption and MedicalAssistance (ICAMA) provides a formalmechanism that meets the mandates of P.L. 96-272 and ensures that adoptive parents and theirchildren receive medical benefits and otherservices in interstate situations. Adoptiveparents may initially adopt across state lines ormove from one state to another once or severaltimes during the continuance of the adoptionassistance agreement. With the growth ofadoption exchanges and ASFA’s provisions toeliminate geographic barriers, it is expected thatthe number of children adopted across state lineswill continue to increase. ICAMA protects theinterstate interests of these children byestablishing a framework for formalizedinterstate cooperation to ensure and coordinatethe delivery of medical and other benefits toadopted children with special needs, no matterwhere they reside.

The mission of AAICAMA is to improve practiceand policy in the area of special needs adoption.It facilitates the administration of ICAMA, worksto strengthen protections for children withspecial needs, assists in the development andimplementation of model practices and policies,and provides technical assistance to its members.

5 Pub. L. No. 96-272, 94 Stat. 500 (1980) (codified at 42 U.S.C. §§ 670 et seq. (1982))6 42.U.S.C. §675 (3)(B).7 42 U.S.C. §§671-675

8 42 U.S.C. §§ 671-675

! ! ! ! ! ! !

3

Purpose of the StudyTo inform and facilitate improvements ininterstate policy and practice, AAICAMA hasperiodically conducted and updated theInterstate Movement Survey to determine thenumbers of children receiving both Title IV-E9

and state-funded10 adoption assistance11 who areresiding in other states and to gain anunderstanding of the interstate movement ofthese children.

It is well-documented that children adopted fromfoster care often struggle with multiple andcomplex needs. Studies on post-adoptivefunctioning of children adopted from the childwelfare system have found high rates ofemotional and behavioral problems.12 As childwelfare agencies work to design effectiveprograms for these children and their families,reliable data on the interstate placement andmovement of children with special needs canassist states in identifying and ensuring thatnecessary medical benefits, supports, and post-adoption services are available in intrastate andinterstate adoption cases.

Based on an analysis of the data provided bystates, this report contains the following typesof information:

• A national overview of the number ofchildren receiving Title IV-E and state-fundedadoption assistance.

• The total number of children receivingTitle IV-E and state-funded adoption assistancewho are residing in states other than the stateproviding the adoption assistance.

• A state-by-state compilation of thenumber of children residing in each state whoare receiving adoption assistance from anotherstate.

• Baseline data on why special needschildren initially move outside the adoptionassistance state (i.e., were they initially adoptedacross state lines or did they move after thefinalization of the adoption?).

II. DATA COLLECTION & METHODOLOGY

AAICAMA originally conducted the InterstateMovement Study in 1994 to obtain baselineinformation regarding the total number ofchildren receiving both Title IV-E and state-funded adoption assistance and the numberresiding in states other than the adoptionassistance state. The study was updated in 1997.In the summer of 2002, the study was expandedto reflect additional data needs, includinginformation on why adopted children withspecial needs were residing outside the adoptionassistance state. The final instrument was pilotedin three states13 and sent to all 50 states and theDistrict of Columbia in August 2002. Surveyswere collected though May 2003 in order toobtain data from a majority of states.

9 Title IV-E adoption assistance is a federal adoption subsidyprogram in which the federal government contributes a sharebased on the state’s rate of federal financial participationunder Title IV-E of the Social Security Act.10 State-funded adoption assistance is the benefit providedfrom the state’s own funds. These children do not meet theeligibility criteria for the Title IV-E Adoption AssistanceProgram.11 “Adoption assistance state” means the state that hassigned an adoption assistance agreement with an adoptiveparent(s). For the purposes of this paper, if the adoptivefamily does not reside in the adoption assistance state, thestate in which they reside may be referred to as the “residencestate.”12 Family Impact Seminar. Finding Families for Waiting Kids:the Challenges of Special Needs Adoption in the 90’s andBeyond, Washington, DC: Family Impact Seminar,1997,p.7.

13 Illinois, Michigan, and Washington

! ! ! ! ! ! !

4

Types of Data CollectedThe survey collected data on children receivingeither Title IV-E or state-funded adoptionassistance as of March 31, 2002. A total of 12questions were asked to obtain informationconcerning the following:

• The total number and percentage ofchildren receiving Title IV-E and state-fundedadoption assistance.

• The total number and percentage ofchildren receiving Title IV-E and state-fundedadoption assistance and residing outside of theadoption assistance state.

• The state-by-state distribution of childrenreceiving Title IV-E adoption assistance in out-of-state situations.

• The state-by-state distribution of childrenreceiving state-funded adoption assistance inout-of-state situations.

• The regional distribution of childrenreceiving both Title IV-E and state-fundedadoption assistance in out-of-state situations.

• The number of special needs childreninitially adopted outside their residence stateand the number who moved, with their adoptivefamilies, across state lines after finalization ofthe adoption.

Survey Response Rates and LimitationsCompleted surveys were returned by 39 statesreflecting a response rate of 77percent.However, the level of completeness varied foreach survey question. Among the variances ofreported data were:

• One state reported data as of August 22,2002.

• A number of states could not provideinformation concerning the states of residenceof the children receiving adoption assistancefrom their state but living in another state.

• Six states were able to provide the totalnumbers of children receiving IV-E and state-funded adoption subsidies but could not indicatewhether they were residing instate or out ofstate.

The statistics included in this report, therefore,do not provide a complete picture of the inter-jurisdictional movement of children receivingadoption assistance in this country.Nonetheless, despite these limitations, the reportcontains important information about thenumbers and interstate movement of specialneeds children receiving adoption assistance thatwould assist administrators in developingadoption policies and programs, and in theeffective targeting of resources for adoptivefamilies.

III. SUMMARY OF RESULTS

A. Number of Children Receiving AdoptionAssistance and the State of Residence

The chart on page 5 displays statistics for thenumber of children receiving Title IV-E and statefunded adoption assistance living within theadoption assistance state as compared to thoseliving in states other than the adoptionassistance state. Thirty-nine states providedthese statistics, and as of March 31, 2002, a totalof 266,931 children were receiving either a TitleIV-E or a state-funded adoption subsidy. Of

these, 220,115 (82.5%) were receiving Title IV-E adoption assistance, while 46,816 (17.5%)were receiving state-funded adoption assistance.

Title IV-E82%

State Funded

18%

Percentage of ChildrenReceiving IV-E &

State-Funded Adoption Assistance

! ! ! ! ! ! !

5

N=39 states

Total RAAS* ROS** Total RAAS ROS Total RAAS ROS

Alabama 1,300 1,219 81 786 734 52 514 485 29Alaska 1,162 864 298 995 720 275 167 144 23Arizona 6,030 5,380 650 4,523 4,127 396 1,507 1,253 254Arkansas 1,762 1,613 149 1,618 1,476 142 144 137 7California --- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- ---Colorado 637 550 87 605 519 86 32 31 1Connecticut --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---Delaware 951 834 117 775 689 86 176 145 31DC --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---Florida 13,186 11,113 2,073 12,188 10,475 1,713 998 638 360Georgia 8,714 8,506 208 5,989 5,828 161 2,725 2,678 47Hawaii 1,613 1,263 350 1,265 1,027 238 348 236 112Idaho --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---Illinois 31,641 28,846 2,795 29,127 26,590 2,537 2,514 2,256 258Indiana --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---Iowa 4,898 4,295 603 4,015 3,562 453 883 733 150Kansas 4,423 3,806 617 3,412 2,936 476 1,011 870 141Kentucky 2,667 --- 130 2,067 1,937 130 600 --- ---Louisiana 2,996 2,653 343 2,323 2,032 291 673 621 52Maine 1,762 1,543 219 1,485 1,301 184 277 242 35Maryland 5,676 5,209 467 3,867 3,540 327 1,809 1,669 140Massachusetts 9,361 --- --- 5,940 --- --- 3,421 --- ---Michigan 21,386 21,386 --- 18,816 18,816 --- 2,570 2,570 ---Minnesota 7,876 --- --- 6,061 --- --- 1,815 --- ---Mississippi 1,138 1,058 80 751 697 54 387 361 26Missouri 7,124 6,355 769 6,808 6,128 680 316 227 89Montana --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---Nebraska --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---Nevada --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---New Hampshire --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---New Jersey 7,255 6,065 1,190 3,761 3,227 534 3,494 2,838 656New Mexico 2,066 1,679 387 1,697 1,369 328 369 310 59New York 42,444 33,943 8,501 39,082 31,259 7,823 3,362 2,684 678North Carolina 7,811 7,261 550 6,027 5,527 500 1,784 1,734 50North Dakota 536 444 92 388 320 68 148 124 24Ohio --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---Oklahoma 5,349 4,764 585 3,786 3,385 401 1,563 1,379 184Oregon 7,707 --- --- 6,217 --- --- 1,490 --- ---Pennsylvania 12,300 --- --- 11,100 --- --- 1,200 --- ---Puerto Rico --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---Rhode Island 2,309 1,953 356 1,424 1,199 225 885 754 131South Carolina 4,968 4,464 504 3,718 3,382 336 1,250 1,082 168South Dakota 913 684 229 631 472 159 282 212 70Tennessee 3,693 3,365 328 2,763 2,518 245 930 847 83Texas 13,757 11,929 1,828 10,411 9,053 1,358 3,346 2,876 470Utah 94 66 28 82 55 27 12 11 1Vermont 993 894 99 937 841 96 56 53 3Virginia 4,831 --- --- 3,075 --- --- 1,756 --- ---Washington 8,150 7,009 1,141 6,804 5,827 977 1,346 1,182 164West Virginia --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---Wisconsin 5,452 5,057 395 4,796 4,466 330 656 591 65Wyoming --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---TOTALS 266,931 196,070 26,249 220,115 166,034 21,688 46,816 31,973 4,561* AA State= Adoption Assistance State ** ROS = Residing Out of State

Number of Children Receiving Adoption Assistance In State and Out of State as of March 31, 2002

Both Title IV-E and State fundedState Title IV-E Children State funded Children

! ! ! ! ! ! !

6

When AAICMA originally collected these datain 1994, 37 states reported that 79,177children14 were receiving both Title IV-E andstate-funded adoption assistance, indicating anincrease of more than 200 percent in an eight-year period.

In the data collected in March 1997, 49 statesand the District of Columbia reported that a totalof 204,994 children were receiving either a TitleIV-E or a state-funded adoption subsidy at theend of March 1997. Of these, 73 percent werereceiving Title IV-E adoption assistance, while27 percent were receiving state-funded adoptionassistance.

A comparison of the data collected from the 39states that completed surveys in both 1997 andin 2002 reflects a more accurate picture ofchanges over the past five years. In 1997, 39states reported that a total of 155,468 childrenwere receiving Title IV-E adoption assistance. Ofthese, 119,269 (76.7%) were receiving Title IV-E adoption assistance and 36,199 children(23.2%) were receiving state-funded adoptionassistance.

Therefore, a comparison of the 1997 and 2002data of these 39 states demonstrates an increaseof 71 percent in the total number of childrenreceiving adoption assistance in 2002, with anincrease of 80 percent in the number of childrenreceiving Title IV-E adoption assistance and anincrease of 29 percent in the number of childrenreceiving state-funded adoption assistance in afive-year period.

14 Of those children, 48,486 (64.3%) were receivingTitle IV-E adoption assistance and 28,373 (35.7%)were receiving state-funded adoption assistance.

N=39

B. Number of Children Receiving AdoptionAssistance and Residing Out of State

Regarding children residing outside the state, 32states reported that a total of 26,249 or 9.8percent of the children receiving adoptionassistance were residing in a state other thanthe adoption assistance state.

Of the children residing in other states, 21,688(83%) received Title IV-E adoption assistanceand 4,561 (17%) received state-funded adoptionassistance.Overall, New York reported the largest numberof adoption assistance children (8,501) living

outside its borders. Illinois and Florida had thesecond highest numbers of children residing inother states, with 2,795 children and 2,073children respectively. Three other states (Texas,New Jersey, and Washington) reported over1,000 children receiving adoption assistancefrom their state but residing in other states. Utahreported the fewest number of children (28)living outside its borders. Overall, 13 of theresponding states (39%) reported more than500 children residing in other states while 19states (61%) reported fewer than 500 childrenliving outside their state.

The chart on page 7 displays, for each state, thepercentages of children receiving Title IV-E andstate-funded adoption assistance who are livingin states other than the adoption assistance state.

Overall, approximately 8.1percent of the totalnumber of special-needs children in these statesreceive Title IV-E adoption assistance and reside

Title IV-E, 83%

State Funded,

17%

Subsidy Received by Children Residing Outside the

Adoption Assistance State: 2002

050,000

100,000150,000200,000250,000300,000

Total Title IV-E State-funded

Chi

ldre

n

19972002

Number of Children ReceivingAdoption Assistance in 1997 and 2002

! ! ! ! ! ! !

7

N= 39 states

Total RAAS* ROS** Total RAAS ROS Total RAAS ROSAlabama 100.0% 93.8% 6.2% 60.5% 56.5% 4.0% 39.5% 37.3% 2.2%Alaska 100.0% 74.4% 25.6% 65.7% 62.0% 23.7% 14.4% 12.4% 2.0%Arizona 100.0% 89.2% 10.8% 75.0% 68.4% 6.6% 25.0% 20.8% 4.2%Arkansas 100.0% 91.5% 8.5% 91.8% 83.8% 8.1% 8.2% 7.8% 0.1%California --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---Colorado 100.0% 86.3% 13.7% 95.0% 81.5% 13.5% 5.0% 4.9% 0.2%Connecticut --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---Delaware 100.0% 87.7% 12.3% 81.5% 72.5% 9.0% 18.5% 15.2% 3.3%DC --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---Florida 100.0% 84.3% 15.7% 92.4% 79.4% 13.0% 7.6% 4.8% 2.7%Georgia 100.0% 97.6% 2.4% 68.7% 66.9% 1.8% 31.3% 30.7% 0.5%Hawaii 100.0% 78.3% 21.7% 78.4% 63.7% 14.8% 21.6% 14.6% 6.9%Idaho --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---Illinois 100.0% 91.2% 8.8% 92.1% 84.0% 8.0% 7.9% 7.1% 0.8%Indiana --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---Iowa 100.0% 90.4% 9.6% 82.0% 72.7% 9.2% 18.0% 14.9% 3.1%Kansas 100.0% 86.1% 13.9% 77.1% 66.4% 10.8% 22.9% 19.7% 3.2%Kentucky 100.0% --- --- 77.5% 72.6% 4.5% 22.5% --- ---Louisiana 100.0% 88.6% 11.4% 77.5% 67.8% 9.7% 22.5% 20.7% 1.7%Maine 100.0% 87.6% 12.4% 84.3% 73.8% 10.4% 15.7% 13.7% 2.0%Maryland 100.0% 91.8% 8.2% 68.1% 62.4% 5.8% 31.9% 29.4% 2.5%Massachusetts 100.0% n/a n/a 63.5% n/a n/a 36.5% n/a n/aMichigan 100.0% 100.0% n/a 88.0% 88.0% n/a 12.0% 12.0% n/aMinnesota 100.0% --- --- 76.9% --- --- 23.1% --- ---Mississippi 100.0% 93.0% 7.0% 66.0% 61.2% 4.7% 34.0% 31.7% 2.3%Missouri 100.0% 89.2% 10.8% 95.0% 86.0% 9.5% 4.4% 3.1% 1.2%Montana n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/aNebraska --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---Nevada --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---New Hampshire --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---New Jersey 100.0% 83.6% 16.4% 51.8% 44.5% 7.4% 48.2% 39.1% 9.0%New Mexico 100.0% 81.3% 18.7% 82.1% 66.3% 15.9% 17.9% 15.0% 2.9%New York 100.0% 80.0% 20.0% 92.1% 73.6% 18.4% 7.9% 6.3% 1.6%North Carolina 100.0% 93.0% 7.0% 77.2% 70.7% 6.4% 22.8% 22.2% 0.6%North Dakota 100.0% 82.8% 17.2% 72.4% 59.7% 12.7% 27.6% 23.1% 4.5%Ohio --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---Oklahoma 100.0% 89.1% 10.9% 70.8% 63.3% 7.5% 29.2% 25.8% 3.4%Oregon 100.0% n/a n/a 80.6% n/a n/a 19.3% n/a n/aPennsylvania 100.0% n/a n/a 90.2% n/a n/a 9.7% n/a n/aPuerto Rico --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---Rhode Island 100.0% 84.6% 15.4% 61.7% 51.9% 9.7% 38.3% 32.7% 5.7%South Carolina 100.0% 89.8% 10.2% 74.8% 68.1% 6.7% 25.2% 21.8% 3.4%South Dakota 100.0% 74.9% 25.1% 69.1% 51.7% 17.4% 30.9% 23.2% 7.7%Tennessee 100.0% 91.1% 8.9% 74.8% 68.2% 6.6% 25.2% 22.9% 2.2%Texas 100.0% 86.7% 13.3% 75.7% 65.8% 9.9% 24.3% 20.9% 3.4%Utah 100.0% 70.2% 29.8% 87.2% 58.5% 28.7% 12.8% 11.7% 1.1%Vermont 100.0% 90.0% 10.0% 94.4% 84.7% 9.7% 5.6% 5.3% 0.3%Virginia 100.0% n/a 36.3% 63.7% n/a n/a 36.3% n/a n/aW ashington 100.0% 86.0% 14.0% 83.5% 71.5% 12.0% 16.5% 14.5% 2.0%W est Virginia --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---W isconsin 100.0% 92.8% 7.2% 88.0% 81.9% 6.1% 12.0% 10.8% 1.2%W yoming --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---TOTALS 100.0% 73.5% 9.8% 82.5% 62.2% 8.1% 17.5% 12.0% 1.7%NOTE: Total percentages for RAAS and ROS do not equal 100%; 7 states could not provide the in state and out of stat breakdowns for 16.7% of children receiving adoption assistance.*RAAS - Adoption Assistance state **ROS - residing out of state

Percent of Children Receiving Adoption Assistance In State and Out of State As of March 31, 2002

Both IV-E and State Funded Title IV-E Children State Funded ChildrenState

e

! ! ! ! ! ! !

8

outside the adoption assistance state. However,the percentages of out-of-state children receivingTitle IV-E adoption assistance variesconsiderably. Percentages range from a low of1.8 percent of children in Georgia to a high ofmore than 23 percent of children in Alaska andUtah.15 Far fewer special needs children receivestate-funded adoption subsidies and reside outof state—only 1.7 percent. Of the total numberof children receiving adoption assistance, theindividual state percentages ranged from lessthan 1 percent in Arkansas and Colorado to ahigh of 9 percent in New Jersey, with a medianof 2.3 percent.

Finally, when data collected in 2002 are comparedto 1997 state data, 30 states were able toprovide comparable information on the numberof children residing in a state other than theadoption assistance state. A comparison of datafrom both years demonstrate that the numbersof children residing in a state other than theadoption assistance state grew by 70 percentover the five-year period—from 9,878 childrenin 1997 to 17,098 children in 2002.

These data should be viewed cautiously,however. Several states with large numbers ofchildren receiving adoption assistance (Title IV-Eand state-funded) are not included. Michigan,Ohio, and Pennsylvania could not report howmany of their children were residing outside thestate. Furthermore, data from California wereunavailable and are not included in this study.

15 While Utah reported that only 28 children receiving adoptionsubsidies were placed out of state, the vast majority of these,27, were receiving Title IV-E adoption assistance out of atotal of 94 children, which accounts for the high percentage.16 Data from New York and Arizona were excluded since thesestates did not provide data on out-of-state children in bothsurveys.

EXHIBIT VI

N=28 states

Title IV-E State Funded TotalsAlabama 393 84 477Alaska 80 26 106Arizona 285 67 352Arkansas 211 64 275California 665 155 820Colorado 289 91 380Connecticut 217 44 261Delaware 135 21 156DC 165 13 178Florida 2,261 391 2,652Guam 2 0 2Georgia 1,413 267 1,680Hawaii 51 15 66Idaho 149 37 186Illinois 288 85 373Indiana 409 70 479Iowa 136 39 175Kansas 137 60 197Kentucky 172 29 201Louisiana 190 41 231Maine 77 24 101Maryland 361 71 432Massachusetts 197 59 256Michigan 423 83 506Minnesota 296 73 369Mississippi 411 72 483Missouri 500 133 633Montana 74 24 98Nebraska 129 44 173Nevada 155 28 183New Hampshire 72 15 87New Jersey 651 79 730New Mexico 131 34 165New York 302 104 406North Carolina 1,417 256 1,673North Dakota 19 8 27Ohio 403 90 493Oklahoma 318 80 398Oregon 245 72 317Pennsylvania 935 236 1,171Puerto Rico 621 97 718Rhode Island 49 6 55South Carolina 1,191 195 1,386South Dakota 68 16 84Tennessee 397 74 471Texas 804 207 1,011Utah 143 34 177Vermont 44 13 57Virginia 212 212Washington 230 78 308West Virginia 52 27 79Wisconsin 292 34 326Wyoming 44 15 59

TOTALS 18,699 4,192 22,891** AA = Adoption Assistance

State of Residence for Children Receving Adoption Assistance from another State

Number of Children Residing in State receiving AA** from another StateResidence State

Number of Children Receiving AdoptionAssistance from a State Other than the

State of Residence N=28

! ! ! ! ! ! !

9

C. Distribution of Children Residing Outsideof Adoption Assistance State

In this survey, 28 states were able to providespecific information on which states have becomehome to children for whom they provideadoption assistance. The chart on page 8provides, for each state, the number of childrenreported residing in their state with adoptionagreements with other states.

Florida had the largest number of childrenresiding in the state, (2,652) while receivingadoption assistance from other states. Of those,2,261 (85%) were receiving Title IV-E adoptionassistance and 391 (14.5%) were receiving state-funded adoption assistance. The states with thenext highest number of children living in theirstate but receiving adoption assistance fromother states are Georgia (1,680), North Carolina(1,673), South Carolina (1,386), Pennsylvania(1,171), and Texas (1,011). Again, the vastmajority of these children were receiving TitleIV-E adoption assistance. Survey data indicatethat an additional four states (California,Michigan, Missouri, and New Jersey) and PuertoRico reported more than 500 children residingin their state while receiving adoption assistancefrom another state. The state with the fewestnumber of resident children with adoptionassistance agreements with other states wasNorth Dakota with 27 children.

D. Regional Movement of Children ResidingOutside the Adoption Assistance State

In order to gain a better understanding of thepatterns of children’s movements across statelines, a regional analysis was conducted (see thechart on page 10). Overall, a small number ofchildren (5,103 or 21%) receiving adoptionassistance and residing in another state remainedwithin the same federal region as the adoptionassistance state. However, children’s movementwithin regions varied considerably by region. Forexample, states in Region IV reported significant

numbers of children moving within that region.Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and Tennesseereported that over 40 percent of childrenreceiving adoption assistance from theirrespective state and residing in other states, wereliving in other Region IV states. However, thereporting states in Regions II and VIII, indicatedthat less that than 15 percent of childrenreceiving adoption assistance from these statesresided in other states within their federal region.

E. Children’s Movement Across State LinesChildren can reside in one state and receiveadoption assistance from a different state in oneof two ways: Children can be adopted byparents residing in another state or children canmove across state lines with their adoptedfamilies. Eleven states tracked this informationfor children receiving adoption assistance fromtheir state but currently residing in another state.These states reported that the majority of thesechildren (59.4%) were initially adopted acrossstate lines while 41.1 percent moved acrossstate lines with their adoptive families. Whilepercentages varied considerably among the 11responding states, these numbers provide somebaseline information on why children withspecial needs are living outside the adoptionassistance state.

In the past, Americans were born, grew up, andraised their families all in the same geographic

IV. Conclusion

Children who Moved

Across State Lines , 41.1%

Children Initially

Adotped Across State Lines , 59.4%

Movement of Adopted Children withSpecial Needs Across State Lines

! ! ! ! ! ! !

10

A riz o n a 89 7 1 4 6 1 6 .3 % 6 4 3 1 0 5 6 .4 % 2 5 4 4 1 1 6 .1 % C a lifo rn ia -- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - H aw a ii 35 0 8 8 2 5 .1 % 2 3 8 6 7 8 .8 % 1 1 2 2 1 1 8 .8 % N e v a d a -- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - -

G u a m -- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - -

A la s k a 29 8 9 2 3 0 .9 % 2 7 5 8 2 2 9 .8 % 2 3 1 0 4 3 .5 % Id a h o -- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - O re g o n -- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - -

W a s h in g to n 1 ,1 4 1 2 7 5 2 4 .1 % 9 7 7 23 1 2 3 .6 % 1 6 4 4 4 2 6 .8 %

* R O S = R e s id in g o u t o f s ta te

E X H IB IT V II R eg ion al D is trib ution of M o vem ent

B oth T itle IV -E and S tate -funded C h ildren

T itle IV -E C h ildren S tate-funded C h ild ren

R eg io n / Ad o ptio n A ss istan ce S ta te

T ota l R O S *

To ta l R O S w /in

reg ion

Percen t R O S w /in

reg ion

To tal R O S

To ta l R O S w /in

reg io n

P ercent R O S w /in

reg ion

To ta l R O S

Tota l R O S w /in

reg io n

P ercent R O S w /in

region C o n nec ticu t --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- M aine 219 58 26 .5% 184 47 25.5% 35 11 31.4% M assachuse tts --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- N ew H am p sh ire --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- R h o de Is land 356 134 37 .6% 225 80 35.6% 131 54 41.2%

Verm o nt 99 48 48 .5% 96 48 50.0% 3 0 0 .0%

N ew Y o rk 8,512 1 ,226 14 .4% 7,823 1 ,131 14.5% 689 95 13.8% N ew Jerse y 1,190 105 8 .8% 534 55 10.3% 656 50 7 .6% Pu erto R ico --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

U .S . V irg in Is land s --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

D elaw are 117 56 47 .9% 86 42 48.8% 31 14 45.2% D is tric t o f C o lum b ia --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- M aryland 467 142 30 .4% 327 79 24.2% 140 63 45.0% Pen ns ylvan ia --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- V irg in ia --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

W est V irg inia --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Alabam a 81 46 56 .8% 52 27 51.9% 29 19 65.5% Flo rid a 2,073 836 40 .3% 1 ,713 701 40.9% 360 135 37.5% G eo rg ia 208 109 52 .4% 161 90 55.9% 47 19 40.4% K en tu cky --- --- --- 130 --- --- --- --- --- M ississ ipp i 80 27 33 .8% 54 16 29.6% 26 11 42.3% N o rth C aro lin a --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- S o u th C aro lina 504 156 31 .0% --- --- --- --- --- ---

Ten nessee 328 140 42 .7% 245 97 39.6% 83 43 51.8%

Illin o is 2,795 563 20 .1% 2 ,537 536 21.1% 258 27 10.5% Ind ian a --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- O h io --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- M ich igan --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- M in nesota --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

W isco nsin 395 127 32 .2% 330 109 33.0% 65 18 27.7%

Arkan sas 149 28 18 .8% 142 24 16.9% 7 4 57.1% Lo u is iana 343 94 27 .4% 291 71 24.4% 52 23 44.2% N ew M ex ico 387 114 29 .5% 328 100 30.5% 59 14 23.7% O klah o m a 585 180 30 .8% 401 142 35.4% 184 38 20.7%

Texas 1,828 286 15 .6% 1 ,358 203 14.9% 470 83 17.7%

Iow a 485 111 22 .9% 453 79 17.4% 150 32 21.3%

K an sas 617 190 30 .8% 476 142 29.8% 141 48 34.0%

M issou ri --- --- --- -5 --- --- --- --- ---

N eb raska --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

C o lorado 87 4 4 .6% 86 4 4.7% 1 0 0 .0% M o ntana --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- N o rth D akota 92 11 12 .0% 68 9 13.2% 24 2 8 .3% S o u th D akota 229 32 14 .0% 159 24 15.1% 70 8 11.4% U tah 28 2 7 .1% 27 0 0.0% 1 2 200.0%

W yom ing --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Both Title IV-E andState Funded Children State Funded Children

PercentageROS Percentage

Percentage

Reg

ion

IR

egio

n II

Regi

on II

IR

egio

n IV

Reg

ion

VR

egio

n Vi

iiR

egio

n VI

IR

egio

n VI

Reg

ion

IXR

egio

n X

! ! ! ! ! ! !

11

location or neighborhood. Today’s families oftenmove for job opportunities, improved climate,health benefits, and to be near family members.This mobility is characteristic of adoptivefamilies as well. Moreover, it is easier than everbefore for prospective adoptive parents to usethe Internet to learn about children available foradoption in states other than their own.Increasing mobility and the use of stateexchanges and the national AdoptUSKids website have blurred geographic boundaries forprospective adoptive families seeking to adoptchildren in foster care.

Despite these changes, survey findings indicatethat adopted children who receive state andfederal adoption subsidies largely reside in thestate that is signatory to the adoption assistanceagreement. States reported that the majority ofadopted children with special needs (over75%)17 reside in the adoption assistance state.Current survey data show that a relatively smallpercentage, 9.8 percent of children receivingadoption assistance, reside in states outside theadoption assistance state, however, thesenumbers are clearly increasing. In five years, thetotal number of children residing in a state otherthan the adoption assistance state has doubledfrom 12,478 children in 1997 to 26,249 childrenin 2002. Moreover, the overall proportion ofchildren residing outside the adoption assistancestate rose from 6.1percent in 1997 to 9.8 percentin 2002. When data from the 39 states whoparticipated in both the 1997 and 2002 InterstateMovement studies were compared, findingsdemonstrated an increase of 70% in childrenresiding outside the adoption assistance state. Itis expected that, as the number of adoptions rise,adoption exchanges proliferate, and statescontinue their efforts to recruit families beyondtheir state borders, this trend will continue. Theincrease in interstate adoptions of special needschildren suggests that states are making strides

in breaking down the geographic barriers toadoption.

In addition to increases in the number of specialneeds children residing in states other than thestate that is signatory to the adoption assistanceagreement, survey data indicate that both thenumber and proportion of children with specialneeds who are receiving Title IV-E adoptionassistance vs. state-funded subsidies areincreasing. In 2002, 82.5 percent of special needschildren received federally funded adoptionsubsidies and 17.5 percent of children receivedstate-funded subsidies. Five years earlier only73 percent of special needs children receivedTitle IV-E adoption assistance, while more thana quarter (26.7%) received state-fundedsubsidies.

Although there was a greater increase in thenumber of children receiving federally fundedsubsidies (81%) since 1997, findings alsoindicate that the percentage of childrensupported by adoption assistance through state-funded programs has grown by 29 percent (to46,816) since 1997. This is important becauseincreasing numbers of these children are alsoresiding in states other than the adoptionassistance state. While the ConsolidatedOmnibus Reconciliation Act of 1986 (COBRA)18

only requires the state of residence to provide

17 Approximately 16 percent of reporting states could notprovide the breakdown on the number of children residingin state and out of state.

18 The Consolidated Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1985made two changes in Title XIX Medicaid. First, it required thestate of residence to provide Medicaid to all children adoptedunder the federally assisted adoption subsidy program.Second, COBRA gives states the option of extending TitleXIX Medicaid to children adopted pursuant to state-fundedadoption subsidy programs if they meet the followingeligibility criteria: (1) there is an adoption assistanceagreement between the state and the adoptive parents; (2)the state agency has determined that the child cannot beplaced for adoption without Medicaid because the child hasa special need for medical or rehabilitative care; and (3)before or at the time the adoption assistance agreementwas executed, the child would have been eligible for medicalassistance given his own income and resources or the childwas receiving or was eligible to receive Medicaid as either amandatory or optional categorically needy (Section1902(a)(10)(ii)(VII) SSA; CFR 435.227)

! ! ! ! ! ! !

12

Medicaid to children adopted through the TitleIV-E federally assisted adoption subsidyprogram, states do have the option to extendMedicaid coverage to children adopted pursuantto their own state-funded adoption assistanceprograms, or children residing in their state withstate-funded adoption assistance agreementsfrom other states.19 Currently, 41 states providemedical assistance to children residing in theirstate who are receiving state-funded adoptionassistance from another state (see Appendix A).A recent study of barriers to interstateplacements conducted jointly by AAICAMA andthe Association of Administrators of the InterstateCompact on the Placement of Children (AAICPC),revealed that difficulties in obtaining medicalcoverage for non-IV-E eligible children placedwith families in other states was a leading causeof delay in the interstate placement process.20

Yet, the provision of medical assistance is oneof the most important services that can beprovided to an adoptive family of a child withspecial needs. Therefore, to ensure that specialneeds children who receive state-fundedsubsidies receive needed medical benefits andservices when they move to other states, it iscritical that the remaining ten states institute apolicy of reciprocity. This would serve toeliminate a key geographic barrier to adoptionfor those children who are not Title IV-E eligible.Execution of joinder by all states in ICAMA isalso important, as is the legal mechanism bywhich states can facilitate the provision ofMedicaid for children receiving state-fundedadoption assistance across state lines.

In addition to providing a national picture of theadoption and movement of special needschildren across state lines, survey findings also

have a number of implications for practice andservice provision. With the increasing numberof special needs children available for adoptionand moving outside the state providing adoptionassistance, states need the necessary resourcesto provide quality medical and post-adoptionservices to those children and their families.Adoption professionals and advocatesunderscore the fact that adoption is not a time-limited service — behavioral and mental healthissues can surface throughout a child’s life. Statesmust be able to adequately address the multipleneeds of special needs children and theiradoptive families, no matter when they arise orwhere the family lives. Subsequently, theavailability of adequate medical and post-adoption services for the growing numbers ofintrastate and interstate adoptive cases will becritical for ensuring the success of special needsadoptions.

As child welfare work becomes increasinglycomplex and outcomes-oriented, the importanceof data as a tool that can guide decision-making,identify needed services, and assess programeffectiveness cannot be overstated.Consequently, the systematic collection of dataregarding the number of children receivingadoption benefits and living in states other thanthe adoption assistance state emerges as acritical task, particularly in light of expectedincreases in interstate adoptions. The nationaldata consistently collected by AAICAMA willcontinue to be an important resource fordeveloping sound adoption policies, supports,and services for children with special needs. Inthe absence of sound data on interstateadoptions, it will be difficult to design programsthat effectively improve outcomes for thechildren and families served by the child welfaresystem, wherever they reside.

19 42 U.S.C. 1296a.20American Public Human Services Association. Understanding Delays in the Interstate Home Study Process. Washington, DC: APHSA, September 2002

! ! ! ! ! ! !

33

APPENDICES

13

! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !APPENDIX A

State COBRA Option

Reciprocity

Comments

Alabama Yes Yes Reciprocity with ICAMA member states only Alaska Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Arizona Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Arkansas Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states California Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Colorado Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Connecticut No * See footnote1 below Delaware Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states District of Columbia Yes No How reciprocity will be offered has not yet been established Florida Yes Yes Reciprocity with ICAMA member states only Georgia Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Hawaii Yes No Idaho Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Illinois Yes No Indiana Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Iowa Yes No Kansas Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Kentucky Yes Yes Reciprocity with ICAMA member states only Louisiana Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Maine Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Maryland Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Massachusetts Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Michigan* Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Minnesota Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Mississippi Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Missouri Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Montana Yes Yes Reciprocity with ICAMA member states only Nebraska Yes No Nevada Yes No Actively working towards obtaining a policy of reciprocity New Hampshire Yes No New Jersey* Yes No Will have reciprocity upon executing joinder in ICAMA this year New Mexico No No New York Yes No

North Carolina Yes Yes Reciprocity with ICAMA member states only

North Dakota Yes Yes Reciprocity with ICAMA member states only Ohio Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Oklahoma Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states

Oregon Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states

Pennsylvania Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Rhode Island Yes Yes Reciprocity with ICAMA member states only South Carolina Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states South Dakota Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Tennessee Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Texas Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Utah Yes Yes Reciprocity with ICAMA member states only Vermont Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Virginia Yes Yes Reciprocity with ICAMA member states only Washington Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states West Virginia Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Wisconsin Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states Wyoming Yes Yes Reciprocity with all states

1 Effective October 1, 2000, DCF will use the DO2 state funded medical coverage group to provide health insurance for any child with special needs as determined under section 473c for who there is in effect an adoption assistance agreement between a State and an adoptive parent(s).

15

! ! ! ! ! ! !

16

! ! ! ! ! ! !

17

Interstate Movement of Children Survey Update

Survey Cover Sheet

Respondents Name: _______________________________________________

Title: ____________________________________________________________

State: ___________________________________________________________

Phone Number: ___________________________________________________

Fax: ____________________________________________________________

E-mail: __________________________________________________________

Address: _________________________________________________________

Please return the survey by Friday, April 11, 2003, to Ursula Krieger by: e-mail: ukrieger@aphsa.org or fax: (202) 289-6555

! ! ! ! ! ! !

18

Interstate Movement of Children Survey Update The Association of Administrators of the Interstate Compact on Adoption and Medical Assistance (AAICAMA) is conducting the Interstate Movement of Children Survey Update. The data was originally compiled in 1997. Your input is extremely important. This data has been very valuable in educating policy-makers and administrators about children adopted from the child welfare system. However, it is now out-of-date. In order to have a more current picture of the number of children receiving adoption assistance/ subsidies and the interstate movement of these children, we ask for you to complete this survey. Upon completion of the data collection, the data will be analyzed and a final report written. A copy of the final report will be sent you. Please return the completed instrument to Ursula Krieger by Monday, April 21, 2003. Surveys may be returned by:

1. fax: (202) 289-6555, Attn: U. Krieger; or

2. e-mail: Ukrieger@aphsa.org . (Note: If you choose to fill out the survey electronically,

please: (a) save the survey as a word document; (b) complete all survey questions; (c) save the completed survey as a word document; & (d) attach survey document to e-mail and return to Ukrieger@aphsa.org).

If you have any questions about the survey, please contact Ursula Krieger at (202) 682-0100 ext. 269 or ukrieger@aphsa.org. Thank you for your efforts. 1. a. As of March 31, 2002, what is the total number of children in your state who receive some

type of adoption assistance under Title IV-E adoption assistance agreements? _________(01)

b. Out of the total in part a, how many receive Medicaid coverage only (and no money payment) under Title IV-E adoption assistance agreements? __________(02)

2a. As of March 31, 2002, what was the total number of children receiving Title IV-E adoption

assistance from your state, but residing outside of your state? __________ (03) b. Of the number indicated in 2a, how many of these children were initially adopted by a family

in another state? __________ (04) c. Of the number indicated in 2a, how many of these children moved out-of-state with their

families after finalization of the adoption? __________ (05)

! ! ! ! ! ! !

33

19

3. As of March 31, 2002, in which states were children residing for whom your state wasproviding Title IV-E adoption assistance? Please fill in the number of children you have in each statereceiving Title IV-E adoption assistance from your state. If zero, please put a “0” in the space.

If this information is unavailable or unknown, please check the box.

State Number State Number State Number State Number

Alabama 06-01 Illinois

06-15 Nebraska

06-29

South Carolina

06-43

Alaska 06-02 Indiana

06-16 Nevada

06-30 South Dakota

06-44

Arizona 06-03 Iowa

06-17

New Hampshire

06-31 Tennessee

06-45

Arkansas 06-04 Kansas

06-18 New Jersey

06-32 Texas

06-46

California 06-05 Kentucky

06-19 New Mexico

06-33 Utah

06-47

Colorado 06-06 Louisiana

06-20 New York

06-34 Vermont

06-48

Connecticut 06-07 Maine

06-21

North Carolina

06-35 Virginia

06-49

Delaware 06-08 Maryland

06-22

North Dakota

06-36

U.S. Virgin Islands

06-50

District of Columbia

06-09 Massachusetts

06-23 Ohio

06-37 Washington

06-51

Florida 06-10 Michigan

06-24 Oklahoma

06-38 West Virginia

06-52

Guam 06-11 Minnesota

06-25 Oregon

06-39 Wisconsin

06-53

Georgia 06-12 Mississippi

06-26 Pennsylvania

06-40 Wyoming

06-54

Hawaii 06-13 Missouri

06-27 Puerto Rico

06-41 Other

11-55

Idaho 06-14 Montana

06-28

Rhode Island

06-42

4. As of March 31, 2002, what was the total number of children receiving state-funded adoption assis-tance in your state? __________ (07)

5a. As of March 31, 2002, what was the total number of children receiving state-fundedadoption assistance from your state, but residing outside your state? __________ (08)

b. Of the number indicated in 5a, how many of these children were initially adopted by a family inanother state? __________ (09)

c. Of the number indicated in 5a, how many of these children moved out-of-state with their familiesafter finalization of the adoption? __________ (10)

! ! ! ! ! ! !

State Number State Number State Number State Number

Alabama 11-1 Illinois 11-15 Nebraska 11-29

South Carolina

11-43

Alaska 11-2 Indiana 11-16 Nevada 11-30

South Dakota

11-44

Arizona 11-3 Iowa 11-17 New Hampshire

11-31 Tennessee

11-45

Arkansas 11-4 Kansas 11-18 New Jersey 11-32 Texas

11-46

California 11-5 Kentucky 11-19 New Mexico 11-33 Utah

11-47

Colorado 11-6 Louisiana 11-20 New York 11-34 Vermont

11-48

Connecticut 11-7 Maine 11-21 North Carolina

11-35 Virginia

11-49

Delaware 11-8 Maryland 11-22 North Dakota

11-36

U.S. Virgin Islands

11-50

District of Columbia 11-9 Massachusetts 11-23 Ohio

11-37 Washington

11-51

Florida 11-10 Michigan 11-24 Oklahoma

11-38

West Virginia

11-52

Guam 11-11 Minnesota 11-25 Oregon

11-39 Wisconsin

11-53

Georgia 11-12 Mississippi 11-26 Pennsylvania

11-40 Wyoming

11-54

Hawaii 11-13 Missouri 11-27 Puerto Rico

11-41 Other

11-55

Idaho 11-14 Montana 11-28

Rhode Island

11-42

6. As of March 31, 2002, in which states were children residing for whom your state wasproviding state-funded adoption assistance? Please fill in the number of children you have ineach state receiving state-funded adoption assistance from your state. If zero, please put a0 in the space.

If this information is unavailable or unknown, please check the box.

7. How did your state collect the data for this survey? (12)a. Hand countb. SACWIS systemc. Stand-alone systemd. Other (please specify):e. Multiple data sources (please specify):

8. Would your state use an automated tracking and reporting system if developed by AAICAMA? (13)

a. Yesb. Noc. Uncertain

Thank you for taking the time to fill out this survey! The information you have provided is veryvaluable in helping us understand more about children who are receiving adoption assistance/subsidies

and the interstate movement of these children.Please return the survey by Monday, April 21, 2003, to Ursula Krieger by:

fax: (202) 289-6555; or e-mail: ukrieger@aphsa.org

20

! ! ! ! ! ! !

American Public Human Services Association810 First Street NE

Suite 500Washington, D.C. 20002

(202) 682-0100 tel(202) 289-6555 fax

www.aphsa.org