CHARACTERISTICS AND FINANCIAL CIRCUMSTANCES\
OF TANF RECIPIENTS

OCTOBER 1999 -- SEPTEMBER 2000

This is a report of the demographic characteristics and financial
circumstances of families who received assistance and families who no
longer received assistance under the Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families (TANF) program during the period of October 1999 -- September
2000. It also includes the characteristics data of the Separate State
Program - Maintenance of Effort (SSP-MOE) recipient families. This
report is available on the Internet at
"http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/opre/particip/index.htm#characteristics".

The data referenced by this document were obtained from a statistically
valid sample of TANF and SSP-MOE cases within the national TANF/SSP-MOE
Database. Data are presented for all States, the District of Columbia,
Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands.

Prepared by:

Administration for Children and Families

Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation

370 L'Enfant Promenade, S.W.

Washington, DC 20447

# CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION [1](#introduction)

SUMMARY [2](#summary)

The TANF Family [2](#the-tanf-family)

The TANF Adults [3](#the-tanf-adults)

The TANF Children [5](#the-tanf-children)

Financial Circumstances [5](#financial-circumstances)

AFDC/TANF TRENDS IN THE 1990'S [9](#afdctanf-trends-in-the-1990s)

Child-only Families [9](#child-only-families)

Racial/Ethnic Composition of Families
[9](#racialethnic-composition-of-families)

Age of Adult Recipients [10](#age-of-adult-recipients)

Employment Rate [10](#employment-rate)

Age of the Youngest Child [10](#age-of-the-youngest-child)

LIST OF TABLES [12](#list-of-tables)

APPENDIX II [26](#appendix-ii)

Reliability of Estimates [26](#reliability-of-estimates)

Standard (Sampling) Errors [26](#standard-sampling-errors)

Nonsampling Errors [27](#nonsampling-errors)

Standard Errors of Subsets [27](#standard-errors-of-subsets)

Standard Errors for State Estimates
[27](#standard-errors-for-state-estimates)

Statistically Significant Differences
[27](#statistically-significant-differences)

# INTRODUCTION

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of
1996 (PRWORA) established a new Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF) program to replace the Aid to Families with Dependent Children
(AFDC) program. The new welfare law also established State data
reporting requirements for the TANF program. The Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS) issued final regulations implementing data
reporting and other aspects of PRWORA in April 1999.

The TANF statute requires States to collect TANF data on a monthly basis
and report them to HHS on a quarterly basis. These data include
disaggregated case record information on the families receiving
assistance, families no longer receiving assistance and families
newly-approved for assistance from programs funded with TANF funds.
Effective with the October-December 1999 quarter, all States, the
District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands were
requested to implement the quarterly reporting requirements in the final
TANF rules. All 54 States and Territories transmitted 8,391,790 active
cases and 649,794 closed cases onto the national TANF database for
fiscal year (FY) 2000. Oregon transmitted its closed cases after
preparing this report. In addition, 24 States with separate State
Maintenance of Effort (SSP-MOE) programs reported characteristics data
on recipients covered by these separate State programs. Their SSP-MOE
recipient characteristics are presented in Appendix I.

Under the TANF data reporting system, States have the option to submit
either sample data or universe data to HHS. Thirty States submitted
universe data, from which HHS randomly selected approximately 275 active
cases and 100 closed cases each month to prepare this report. The
remaining 24 States submitted sample data. A total sample of 198,415
active cases and 54,340 closed cases was used to compile 54 tables for
TANF recipient characteristics. The statistical data in this report are
estimates derived from samples and, therefore, are subject to sampling
errors as well as non-sampling errors. Statistical specifications can be
found in Appendix II, the reliability of estimates.

Implementation of the final rules of TANF/SSP-MOE data collection
requirements posed significant initial challenges to State and HHS.
Despite every effort to ensure the reliability of the data, HHS
eliminated some problem/questionable data from this report. In cases
where a few States submitted questionable data, the data from those
States were eliminated from the tables. In cases where numerous States
reported questionable data or unusually large numbers of "unknown" or
"other" categories, HHS urges caution in drawing conclusions on the
basis of the data.

# SUMMARY

This summary describes TANF recipient characteristics in October 1999 --
September 2000. Wherever possible, the recipient characteristics were
compared with those in the preceding year, October 1998 -- September
1999. As presented in Exhibit I, October 1999 -- September 2000 TANF
recipient characteristics were also compared between active cases,
newly-approved cases, child-only cases, and closed cases. In Appendix I
there are SSP-MOE recipient characteristics for 24 States who reported
characteristics data on their SSP-MOE families. Because SSP-MOE eligible
families may be quite different among these 24 States, it was not
possible on a national level to compare characteristics of SSP-MOE
recipients with those of TANF recipients.

## The TANF Family

The average monthly number of TANF families was 2,269,000 in fiscal year
(FY) 2000. The estimated total number of TANF recipients was 1,579,000
adults and 4,385,000 children. The average monthly number of TANF
families decreased in almost all States and reflects an overall 14
percent decrease from 2,648,000 families in October 1998 - September
1999. During FY 2000, 147,000 applicant families were approved each
month to receive TANF assistance, and 2,034,000 TANF families had their
assistance terminated.

California had the largest number of TANF families with a monthly
average of 501,000, which accounted for almost a quarter of the U.S.
total TANF families. New York ranked second with a monthly average of
258,000. California and New York had a combined monthly average of
759,000, which accounted for a third of the U.S. totals. Of the \$9.5
billion paid to TANF eligible families in cash assistance during FY
2000, California alone paid \$2.9 billion, which accounted for 30
percent of the U.S. total cash payments. New York made total cash
payments of \$1.4 billion. The combined TANF cash payments of California
and New York accounted for almost a half of the U.S. total TANF cash
payments.

The average number of persons in TANF families was 2.6 persons. The TANF
families averaged 2 recipient children, which remained unchanged. Two in
five families had only one child. One in 10 families had more than three
children. However, the average number of children in closed-case
families was 1.8. Nearly one in two closed-case families had one child,
and only 7 percent had more than three children.

Two-thirds of TANF families had only one adult recipient, and four
percent included two or more adult recipients. In 15 States, there were
no two-parent family cases to be used in calculating the work
participation rate. These States placed two-parent families under
separate State programs. About 35 percent of TANF families had no adult
recipients, up about 5.4 percentage points when compared to the October
1998 - September 1999 period. Child-only cases were 21 percent of
newly-approved families and 25 percent of closed-case families. Even
though the percentage of child-only cases on the welfare rolls has
continued to increase in the past several years, the total number of
child-only cases has actually declined by about 200,000 since FY 1996.

Nearly half of child-only families had a parent in the household. Of
those child-only families with a parent present, about 42 percent had a
parent on SSI and 26 percent had a parent in unknown
citizenship/alienage status. Only 11 percent had a parent in sanction
status because of refusing to comply with work requirements, not
attending school, or not cooperating with child support. The remaining
21 percent had a parent in unknown reasons for their not being in the
assistant unit.

There was little change in the racial composition of TANF families.
Black families comprised 39 percent of TANF families. White families
comprised 31 percent of the families and 25 percent were Hispanic or
Latino. Of TANF families, 1.6 percent were American Native, and 2.2
percent were Asian. It is notable that 28 percent of child-only families
were Hispanics. Of all newly-approved families, 39 percent were black
families, 37 percent were white families and 20 percent were Hispanics.
Of all closed-case families, 36 percent were black families, 38 percent
were white families and 21percent were Hispanics.

Of TANF families, 80 percent received Food Stamp assistance, which is
consistent with previous levels. Those families received the average
monthly Food Stamp assistance of \$223. Of closed-case families, about
70 percent received Food Stamp assistance.

Almost every TANF family was eligible to receive medical assistance
under the State plan approved under title XIX.

Reasons for which TANF families received a reduction in assistance for
the reporting month were: sanction at 6.1 percent, recoupment of a prior
overpayment at 8.7 percent and other at 8.8 percent. Over 50 percent of
sanctions were due to a failure to comply with work requirements.
"Other" could include reasons for a reduction in assistance, such as
length of receiving assistance, or the application of a family cap.

The reasons for TANF families no longer receiving assistance were due to
employment at 19.7 percent, State's policy at 12.1 percent, family
served by a Tribal program at 10.5 percent, failure to cooperate with
eligibility requirements at 22.2 percent, sanction at 6.5 percent, and
voluntary closure at 2.3 percent. States reported 26.4 percent of cases
closing due to other unspecified reasons.

## The TANF Adults 

Most TANF adult recipients were women. Men represented 10 percent of
adult recipients. The average age of TANF adult recipients was 31.3
years. Of TANF adult recipients, 7 percent were teenagers and 18 percent
were 40 years of age or older. Nearly 93 percent of adult recipients
were the head of the household. There were about 138,000 teen parents
whose child was also a member of the TANF family. In other words, 14
percent of teen recipients were teen parents. Only 12 percent of adult
recipients were married and living together.

Two of three TANF adult recipients were members of minority races or
ethnic groups. Black adults comprised 38 percent of adult recipients.
White adults comprised 33 percent of adult recipients and 24 percent
were Hispanic or Latino. Of adult recipients, 1.8 percent were American
Indian or Alaska Native, and 2.6 percent were Asian. The percentage of
Asian adults significantly decreased from 5.0 percent in FY 1999.

There were about 700,000 non-recipient adults in child-only cases. Of
all non-recipient adults living in the child-only case household, 55
percent were parents, 38 percent were caretakers and 7 percent were
other persons. Of such non-recipient adults who may not be eligible to
receive assistance, 30 percent received SSI benefits, 21 percent were in
unknown citizenship/alienage including undocumented or non-qualified
aliens and only 7 percent were in sanction status. About 42 percent were
in unknown reasons for their not being in the assistant unit.

Most TANF adult recipients were U.S. citizens. Non-citizens residing
legally in this country were 8 percent of TANF adults. Half of TANF
adult recipients completed a formal education of 12 years or more. About
20 percent of adult recipients had less than 10 years of education.

Of TANF adult recipients, 26.4 percent were employed. There was little
difference of the employment rate between the male recipients and the
female recipients. Employment slightly decreased by about 4 percent when
compared with 27.6 percent in FY 1999. A half of TANF adult recipients
were in the labor force, i.e., seeking work but not employed, and a
quarter of adult recipients were not in the labor force. On the other
hand, 19.7 percent of adult recipients were employed in newly-approved
families. In closed-case families, 37.9 percent were employed.

Work participation was mandatory for almost three of every five adult
recipients. Of TANF adult recipients, about 7 percent were exempt from
the work participation because they were single custodial parents with
child under 12 months. Nearly 11 percent were exempt because of a
sanction, part of an ongoing research evaluation or an approved welfare
reform waiver. Ten percent were exempt from the work participation
status because of a good cause exception, e.g., disabled, in poor
health, or other. About 8 percent were teen parents who were required to
participate in education.

Overall, 42 percent of all TANF adult recipients participated in some
type of work activities during the reporting month. In other words, 26
percent worked in unsubsidized jobs, 5 percent did job search, and
another 14 percent were engaged in subsidized employment, job skills
training or work preparation activities. (Some TANF adults did two or
three work activities. Also, some adults participated in under the work
exemption status.) Their average number of hours per week participating
in work activities was 25 hours.

In addition to 37 percent who were exempt from work participation, at
least 20 percent of adult recipients did not participate in the required
mandatory work activities.

## The TANF Children

TANF recipient children averaged about 7.8 years of age. Thirteen
percent of recipient children were under 2 years of age, while 39
percent were of preschool age under 6. Only 8 percent of the children
were 16 years of age or older.

Most recipient children were children of the head of the household in
TANF families, and only 8 percent were grandchildren of the head of the
household. Of all TANF recipient children in child-only cases, 62
percent lived with parents and 23 percent with grandparents who did not
themselves receive assistance.

The racial distribution of TANF recipient children was slightly changed
in recent years. Black children continued to be the largest group of
welfare children, comprising about 40 percent of recipient children.
About 27 percent of TANF recipient children were white and also were
Hispanic or Latino. The percentage of black children on TANF remains
unchanged. However, the percentage of white or Hispanic children is up
1.0 percentage point, and down by 1.8 percentage points for Asian
children when compared to October 1998 -- September 1999.

## Financial Circumstances

Of TANF families, 98 percent received cash and cash equivalents
assistance with the average monthly amount of \$349 under the State's
TANF program. The monthly cash payment to the TANF families was \$285
for one child, \$356 for two children, \$423 for three children and
\$516 for four children or more. Some TANF families who were not
employed received other forms of assistance such as child care,
transportation and other supportive services.

One in every four TANF families had non-TANF income. The average monthly
amount of non-TANF income was \$580 per family. Sixteen percent of the
TANF families had earned income with the average monthly amount of
\$675. Eight percent of the TANF families had unearned income with the
average monthly amount of \$277. Similarly, 22 percent of
newly-approved-families had non-TANF income with the average monthly
amount of \$495. Of all closed-case families, 38 percent had non-TANF
income with the average monthly amount of \$832.

A quarter of TANF recipient adults had earned income. Their average
monthly earned income increased to \$668 from \$598 in FY 1999, an
increase of about 12 percent. Six percent of adult recipients had
unearned income averaging about \$291 per month. Three percent of
recipient children had unearned income with the average monthly amount
of \$166.

Ten percent of TANF families received child support with the average
monthly amount of \$174.

One in 10 TANF families had some cash resources (e.g., cash on hand,
bank accounts, or certificates of deposit) with the average amount of
\$252. Such family's cash resources were defined by the State for
determining eligibility for and/or amount of benefits.

**[NOTE]{.underline}**: The work participation activity data may be
somewhat different from those discussed in the work participation rates,
because TANF recipient characteristics were prepared using (1) sample
cases of 3,300 randomly selected for States who submitted universe data,
and (2) the data transmitted by States as of May 23, 2001.

**EXHIBIT I**

**TANF RECIPIENT CHARACTERISTICS**

**OCTOBER 1999 -- SEPTEMBER 2000**

**TOTAL NEWLY- CHILD- CLOSED-**

**ACTIVE APPROVED ONLY CASE**

**FAMILIES FAMILIES FAMILIES FAMILIES**

**FAMILIES:**

**.TOTAL 2,269,000 147,000 782,000 2,034,000**

**.CHILD-ONLY CASES 782,000 31,500 \-- 515,000**

**PERCENT 34.5 21.4 \-- 25.3**

**.NUMBER OF FAMILY MEMBERS (PERCENT OF ALL FAMILIES)**

**1 20.3 17.0 \-- 22.8**

**2 34.0 38.4 \-- 34.5**

**3 23.2 24.1 \-- 22.7**

**4 OR MORE 22.4 20.5 \-- 20.0**

**AVERAGE 2.6 2.6 \-- 2.5**

**.NUMBER OF RECIPIENT CHILDREN (PERCENT OF ALL FAMILIES)**

**1 44.2 47.4 53.6 47.5**

**2 28.4 27.2 26.8 25.2**

**3 15.3 12.9 12.0 12.2**

**4 OR MORE 10.1 7.6 7.1 6.7**

**UNKNOWN 2.0 4.9 0.5 8.0**

**AVERAGE 2.0 1.8 1.8 1.8**

**.TYPE OF ASSISTANCE RECEIVING (PERCENT OF ALL FAMILIES)**

**MEDICAL 98.8 98.5 97.8 95.8**

**FOOD STAMPS 79.9 79.6 62.6 70.4**

**SUB'ZED HOUSING 17.7 14.3 12.8 12.4**

**.ETHNICITY/RACE (PERCENT OF ALL FAMILIES)**

**WHITE 31.2 36.5 29.5 37.5**

**BLACK 38.6 39.2 37.8 36.1**

**HISPANIC\* 25.0 19.9 27.7 21.3**

**ASIAN 2.2 0.8 1.8 1.7**

**AMERICAN NATIVE 1.6 2.0 1.3 1.8**

**OTHER 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.9**

**UNKNOWN 0.8 0.9 1.2 0.7**

**.TANF CASH ASSISTANCE (PERCENT OF ALL FAMILIES)**

**PERCENT 98.0 96.4 96.9 \--**

**MONTHLY AMOUNT \$ 348.93 276.29 308.81 \--**

**.NON-TANF INCOME (PERCENT OF ALL FAMILIES)**

**PERCENT 22.7 22.1 \-- 38.1**

**MONTHLY AMOUNT \$ 579.83 494.84 \-- 831.90**

**ADULTS:**

**.AGE DISTRIBUTION (PERCENT OF ALL ADULTS)**

**UNDER 20 7.1 11.1 \-- 11.0**

**20-29 42.5 47.6 \-- 43.5**

**30-39 32.1 29.1 \-- 30.5**

**OVER 39 18.3 12.2 \-- 15.0**

**AVERAGE AGE 31.3 32.5 \-- 30.1**

**.MARITAL STATUS (PERCENT OF ALL ADULTS)**

**SINGLE 65.3 61.9 \-- 63.7**

**MARRIED 12.4 13.8 \-- 13.7**

**SEPARATED 13.1 14.9 \-- 13.1**

**WIDOWED 0.7 0.4 \-- 0.6**

**DIVORCED 8.5 9.0 \-- 8.9**

**EXHIBIT I -- CONTINUED**

**TANF RECIPIENT CHARACTERISTICS**

**OCTOBER 1999 -- SEPTEMBER 2000**

**TOTAL NEWLY- CHILD- CLOSED-**

**ACTIVE APPROVED ONLY CASE**

**FAMILIES FAMILIES FAMILIES FAMILIES**

**.EDUCATION LEVEL (PERCENT OF ALL ADULTS)**

> **1 - 6 YEARS 3.8 2.5 \-- 2.7**
>
> **7 -- 9 YEARS 12.5 11.6 \-- 10.0**

**10 - 11 YEARS 30.0 28.4 \-- 29.1**

> **12 YEARS 47.5 48.7 \-- 48.1**

**MORE THAN 12 3.4 4.2 \-- 3.8**

> **NO FORMAL 2.6 2.8 \-- 3.2**
>
> **UNKNOWN 0.4 1.8 \-- 3.2**

**.EMPLOYMENT RATE 26.4 19.7 \-- 37.9**

**.NON-TANF INCOME (PERCENT OF ALL ADULTS)**

**PERCENT 28.4 23.1 \-- 45.3**

**MONTHLY AMOUNT \$ 620.16 520.02 \-- 827.01**

**CHILDREN:**

**.AGE DISTRIBUTION (PERCENT OF ALL CHILDREN)**

**0 -- 1 13.1 20.1 8.2 16.8**

**2 -- 5 25.6 28.6 21.8 28.5**

**6 -- 11 36.2 31.8 38.3 33.9**

**12 -- 15 17.4 14.4 21.5 14.5**

**16 -- 19 7.6 5.2 10.3 6.2**

**UNKNOWN 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1**

**AVERAGE AGE 7.8 7.5 8.8 7.1**

**.AGE OF YOUNGEST (PERCENT OF ALL FAMILIES)**

**0 - 1 13.4 19.9 6.9 14.0**

**1 - 2 20.1 23.5 14.2 22.6**

**3 - 5 20.7 18.5 18.7 19.7**

**6 - 8 15.8 12.8 18.5 14.0**

**9 - 11 12.0 9.0 15.9 9.1**

**12 - 15 11.7 9.2 17.3 9.3**

**16 AND OLDER 5.1 3.2 8.4 7.7**

**UNKNOWN 1.2 3.9 0.1 3.5**

**.ETHNICITY/RACE (PERCENT OF ALL CHILDREN)**

**WHITE 26.8 32.2 25.9 33.8**

**BLACK 40.1 41.8 37.9 39.8**

**HISPANIC\* 26.8 21.2 30.6 21.1**

**ASIAN 2.8 0.9 2.7 1.4**

**AMERICAN NATIVE 1.6 2.2 1.3 2.0**

**OTHER 0.6 0.4 0.5 0.9**

**UNKNOWN 1.3 1.3 1.1 1.1**

**.UNEARNED INCOME (PERCENT OF ALL CHILDREN)**

**PERCENT 2.9 3.1 4.3 2.6**

**MONTHLY AMOUNT \$ 166.16 152.87 149.87 222.56**

**NOTES: '\*'= Can be of any race. '\--'= Not Applicable.**

**Columns may not add to 100 percent due to rounding.**

# AFDC/TANF TRENDS IN THE 1990'S

Because of the rapid decline in the caseload beginning from a record
high of 5.0 million families in 1994 and accelerating after the
implementation of PRWORA in 1996 to 2.3 million families in 2000, the
question has been raised as to whether the current caseload has changed
significantly after PRWORA. For example, it has been suggested that the
families now receiving cash assistance are more disadvantaged than prior
to welfare reform. In order to address the question, an examination of
longer-term trends is helpful in beginning to understand whether, and
how, welfare reform has contributed to changes in the characteristics of
welfare recipients.

A number of major changes in the characteristics of welfare recipients
have occurred in the 1990's including the number of child-only families,
the racial composition of welfare families, the age of adult recipients,
the age of the youngest child, and the employment rate of adults. These
trends in AFDC/TANF recipient characteristics are presented in Exhibit
II.

## Child-only Families

In 2000, there were about 782,000 child-only cases, which accounted for
35 percent of the total caseload. The number of child-only families
increased steadily throughout the middle 1990's, reaching a peak of
978,000 such families in 1996. Through 1998 the number of child-only
families decreased to 743,000, although their proportion of the caseload
continued to increase slowly to 23 percent. However, in 2000 both the
number and the proportion increased.

## Racial/Ethnic Composition of Families

The racial composition of welfare families has changed substantially
over the past ten years. In 1990, it was 38 percent whites, 40 percent
blacks and 17 percent Hispanics. In 2000, however, it was 31 percent
whites, 39 percent blacks and 25 percent Hispanics. Viewed over the
decade there has been a shift from white to Hispanic families which is
consistent with broader population trends. This shift has been
accelerated since 1996 and is particularly pronounce in California, New
York and Texas. Thus, in 2000, 70 percent of all Hispanic welfare
families were in three large States (California, New York and Texas), as
compared to 65 percent in 1996. In California, the proportion of
Hispanic welfare families increased to 45 percent in 2000 from 38
percent in 1996. In addition, black families that had been a declining
proportion of the caseload have trended up slightly since 1996. The
upshot of these changes is that the proportion of welfare families that
were minorities has increased from three-fifths to just over two-thirds
over the decade, primarily driven by the growth in Hispanic families.

## Age of Adult Recipients

Throughout the decade the average age of adults has gradually, but
steadily, increased from 29.7 in 1990 to 31.3 in 2000. Between 1990 and
2000, the proportion of older adults over 39 years increased most
dramatically from 13 to 18 percent of adult recipients. Slightly less
than half of this growth occurred in the three years after TANF compared
to the six years before.

## Employment Rate

The employment rate of adult recipients has been increased significantly
in the past five years. In 2000, 26 percent of adult recipients were
employed, about 2.4 times the 1996 employment rate of 11 percent and
four times the rate of the early 1990's.

## Age of the Youngest Child 

Between 1990 and 2000 the proportion of families with a youngest child
who was a toddler, i.e., aged 1 or 2, declined sharply from 30 to 20
percent. At the same time the proportion of families with a youngest
child with no pre-schooler, i.e., no child under 6 years old, increased
sharply from 36 to 45 percent. Furthermore, this trend was accelerated
after 1996 with 63 percent of the growth occurring in the later three
years.

Although the question of whether the caseload has become more
disadvantaged cannot be answered simply through the administrative data
provided by the States and will require analysis of data from national
data sets as it becomes available, the trends identified above are
certainly consistent with a more disadvantaged caseload. For example,
older recipients who have older children comprise a larger share of the
caseload, and that is consistent, but does not prove, that these may
comprise longer-term recipients who are having a harder transition to
independence. Similarly, the larger proportion of minorities, especially
Hispanics who may have a higher probability of speaking English as a
second language could also partly account for the sharper increase in
minorities after 1996. However, it is important to note that these
trends also represent longer-term trends. In addition, a number of
studies suggest that minorities be helped into work as much as
non-minorities by the kinds of welfare-to-work strategies that most
States are employing. Longer-term observation of these trends along with
examination of other national data when it becomes available will thus
be necessary to better understand if the caseload is becoming more
disadvantaged.

**EXHIBIT II**

**TREND OF AFDC/TANF RECIPIENT CHARACTERISTICS**

**FY 1990 - FY 2000**

**[FY 1990 FY 1992 FY 1994 FY 1996 FY 1998 FY 2000]{.underline}**

**FAMILIES ---**

**TOTAL 3,976,000 4,769,000 5,046,000 4,553,000 3,176,000 2,269,000**

**CHILD-ONLY CASES 459,000 707,000 869,000 978,000 743,000 782,000**

**PERCENT 11.6 14.8 17.2 21.5 23.4 34.5**

**RACE (PERCENT OF ALL FAMILIES)**

**WHITE 38.1 38.9 37.4 35.9 32.7 31.2**

**BLACK 39.7 37.2 36.4 36.9 39.0 38.6**

**HISPANIC 16.6 17.8 19.9 20.8 22.2 25.0\*\***

**ASIAN 2.8 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.4 2.2**

**AMERICAN NATIVE 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6**

**OTHER - - - - 0.6 0.6**

**UNKNOWN 1.5 2.0 2.1 2.0 0.7 0.8**

**ADULTS ---**

**AGE DISTRIBUTION (PERCENT OF ALL ADULTS)**

**UNDER 20 7.7 7.1 5.9 5.8 6.1 7.1**

**20-29 46.3 45.9 44.1 42.3 41.4 42.5**

**30-39 32.5 33.3 34.8 35.2 33.8 32.1**

**OVER 39 13.4 13.6 15.2 16.5 18.6 18.3**

**AVERAGE AGE 29.7 29.9 30.5 30.8 31.4 31.3**

**EMPLOYMENT RATE 7.0 6.6 8.3 11.3 22.8 26.4**

**CHILDREN ---**

**AGE OF YOUNGEST (PERCENT OF ALL FAMILIES)**

**UNBORN 2.4 2.0 1.8 1.5 \-- \--**

**0 - 1 9.0 10.3 10.8 10.4 11.0 13.4**

**1 - 2 29.9 29.7 28.1 24.3 22.0 20.1**

**3 - 5 21.1 21.2 21.6 23.5 23.1 20.7**

**6 - 11 23.0 23.1 22.7 24.4 26.6 27.8**

**12 - 15 9.4 9.3 9.8 10.6 10.7 11.7**

**16 AND OLDER 3.4 3.5 3.5 3.8 4.7 5.1**

**UNKNOWN 1.9 0.8 1.7 1.5 1.8\* 1.2\***

**RACE (PERCENT OF ALL CHILDREN)**

**WHITE 33.1 33.9 33.0 31.6 28.3 26.8**

**BLACK 41.4 38.5 37.9 38.4 40.2 40.1**

**HISPANIC 17.7 18.7 21.2 22.4 23.4 26.8\*\***

**ASIAN 3.9 3.9 3.6 3.8 4.2 2.8**

**AMERICAN NATIVE 1.3 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.6**

**OTHER - - - - 0.7 0.6**

**UNKNOWN 2.7 3.4 2.9 2.4 1.8 1.3**

**\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**

**NOTES: '\*'= Including unborn child. '\*\*'= Can be of any race.**

**Columns may not add to 100 percent due to rounding.**

# LIST OF TABLES

***[I. TANF Active Cases]{.underline}***

I-1 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases Percent
Distribution of TANF Households by Number of Persons Living In the
Household, October 1999 - September 2000

I-2 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Families by Number of Recipients, October 1999 --
September 2000

I-3 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Families by Number of Adult Recipients, October
1999 - September 2000

I-4 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Families by Number of Recipient Children, October
1999 - September 2000

I-5 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Families with No Adults by Number of Recipient
Children, October 1999 - September 2000

I-6 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Families with One Adult by Number of Recipient
Children, October 1999 - September 2000

I-7 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Families with Two or More Adults by Number of
Recipient Children, October 1999 - September 2000

I-8 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Families by Ethnicity/Race, October 1999 --
September 2000

I-9 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families -Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of All Adults\* Living In the Household by the Family
Affiliation, October 1999 - September 2000

I-10 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Teen Recipients with Teen Parent Status, October
1999 - September 2000

I-11 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Families Receiving Assistance, October 1999 --
September 2000

I-12 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Families with Receipt of Child Support And with
Cash Resources, October 1999 - September 2000

I-13 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Families by Reason for Grant Reduction, October
1999 - September 2000

I-13 (cont.) Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of TANF Families by Reasons\* for Grant Reduction,
October 1999 - September 2000

I-14 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Families by the Federal Time Limit Exemption
Status, October 1999 - September 2000

I-15 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Families by Type of Family for Work Participation,
October 1999 - September 2000

I-16 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Adult Recipients by Age Group, October 1999 --
September 2000

I-17 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Male Adult Recipients by Age Group, October 1999 -
September 2000

I-18 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Female Adult Recipients by Age Group, October
1999 - September 2000

I-19 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Adult Recipients by Ethnicity/Race, October 1999 --
September 2000

I-20 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Adult Recipients by Marital Status, October 1999 --
September 2000

I-21 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Adults Receiving Disability Benefits, October 1999
-- September 2000

I-22 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Adult Recipients by Relationship to the Head of
Household, October 1999 - September 2000

I-23 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Adult Recipients by Educational Level, October
1999 - September 2000

I-24 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Adult Recipients by Citizenship Status, October
1999 - September 2000

I-25 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Adult Recipients by Work Exemption Status, October
1999 - September 2000

I-26 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Adult Recipients Participating In Work
Activities\*, October 1999 - September 2000

I-27 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Adult Recipients by Average Weekly Hours
Participation In Work Activities, October 1999 - September 2000

I-28 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Adult Recipients by Employment Status, October
1999 - September 2000

I- 28 (cont.) Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of TANF Male/Female Adult Recipients by Employment
Status

I-29 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Recipient Children by Age Group, October 1999 --
September 2000

I-30 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Male Recipient Children by Age Group, October
1999 - September 2000

I-31 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Female Recipient Children by Age Group, October
1999 - September 2000

I-32 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Youngest Child Recipient by Age Group, October
1999 - September 2000

I-33 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Recipient Children by Ethnicity/Race, October
1999 - September 2000

I-34 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Recipient Children Receiving Disability Benefits,
October 1999 - September 2000

I-35 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Recipient Children by Relationship to the Head of
Household, October 1999 - September 2000

I-36 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Recipient Children by Educational Level, October
1999 - September 2000

I-37 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Active Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Recipient Children by Citizenship Status, October
1999 - September 2000

I-38 Temporary Assistance to Needy Families - Active Cases - TANF
Families Receiving Cash Assistance by Number of Recipient Children,
October 1999 - September 2000

I-39 Temporary Assistance to Needy Families - Active Cases - TANF
Families with Income by Type of Non-TANF Income, October 1999 -
September 2000

I-40 Temporary Assistance to Needy Families - Active Cases - TANF Adult
Recipients with Income by Type of Non-TANF Income, October 1999 --
September 2000

I-41 Temporary Assistance to Needy Families - Active Cases - TANF
Recipient Children with Unearned Income, October 1999 - September 2000

***[II. TANF Child-Only Cases]{.underline}***

II-1 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Child-Only Cases -
Percent Distribution of TANF Households by Number of Persons Living In
the Household, October 1999 - September 2000

II-2 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Child-Only Cases -
Percent Distribution of TANF Families by Number of Recipient Children,
October 1999 - September 2000

II-3 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Child-Only Cases -
Percent Distribution of TANF Child-Only Cases with Parents Reasons for
Parents Living In the Household But Not In the Assistant Unit (Au),
October 1999 -- September 200

II-4 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Child-Only Cases -
Percent Distribution of TANF Families Receiving Assistance, October 1999
-- September 2000

II-5 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Child-Only Cases -
Percent Distribution of TANF Recipient Children by Age Group, October
1999 -- September 2000

II-6 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Child-Only Cases -
Percent Distribution of TANF Recipient Children by Ethnicity/Race,
October 1999 - September 2000

II-7 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Child-Only Cases -
Percent Distribution of TANF Recipient Children Receiving Federal
Disability Benefits, October 1999 - September 2000

II-8 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Child-Only Cases -
Percent Distribution of TANF Recipient Children In Child-Only Cases by
Relationship to Head of Household, October 1999 - September 2000

II-9 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Child-Only Cases -
Percent Distribution of TANF Recipient Children In Child-Only Cases by
Education Level, October 1999 - September 2000

II-10 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Child-Only Cases -
Percent Distribution of TANF Recipient Children by Citizenship Status,
October 1999 - September 2000

***[III. TANF Newly-Approved Cases]{.underline}***

III-1 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Households by Number of Persons Living In
the Household, October 1999 - September 2000

III-2 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Families by Number of Recipients In the
Family, October 1999 - September 2000

III-3 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Families by Number of Adult Recipients,
October 1999 - September 2000

III-4 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Families by Number of Recipient Children,
October 1999 - September 2000

III-5 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Families with No Adults by Number of
Recipient Children, October 1999 - September 2000

III-6 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Recipients with Teen Parent Status, October
1999 - September 2000

III-7 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Families by Ethnicity/Race, October 1999 --
September 2000

III-8 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Families Receiving Assistance, October
1999 - September 2000

III-9 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Adult Recipients by Age Group, October
1999 - September 2000

III-10 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Adult Recipients by Ethnicity/Race, October
1999 - September 2000

III-11 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Adult Recipients by Marital Status, October
1999 - September 2000

III-12 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Adults Receiving Federal Disability
Benefits, October 1999 - September 2000

III-13 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Adults by Relationship to Head of
Household, October 1999 - September 2000

III-14 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Adult Recipients by Educational Level,
October 1999 - September 2000

III-15 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Adult Recipients by Citizenship Status,
October 1999 - September 2000

III-16 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Adult Recipients by Work Exemption Status,
October 1999 - September 2000

III-17 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Adult Recipients Participating In Work
Activities\*, October 1999 - September 2000

III-18 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Adult Recipients by Average Weekly Hours of
Participation In Work Activities, October 1999 - September 2000

III-19 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Adult Recipients by Employment Status,
October 1999 - September 2000

III-20 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution TANF Recipient Children by Age Group, October
1999 - September 2000

III-21 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Youngest Recipient Child by Age Group,
October 1999 - September 2000

III-22 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Recipient Children by Ethnicity/Race,
October 1999 - September 2000

III-23 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Recipient Children Receiving Federal
Disability Benefits, October 1999 - September 2000

III-24 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Children by Relationship to the Head of
Household, October 1999 - September 2000

III-25 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Recipient Children by Educational Level,
October 1999 - September 2000

III-26 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
Percent Distribution of TANF Recipient Children by Citizenship Status,
October 1999 - September 2000

III-27 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
TANF Families Receiving Cash Assistance And Average Monthly Amount by
Number of Recipient Children, October 1999 - September 2000

III-28 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
TANF Families with Income by Type of Non-TANF Income, October 1999 -
September 2000

III-29 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
TANF Adult Recipients with Income by Type of Non-TANF Income, October
1999 - September 2000

III-30 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Newly Approved Cases --
TANF Recipient Children with Unearned Income, October 1999 -- September
2000

***[IV. TANF Closed Cases]{.underline}***

IV-1 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Households by Number of Persons
Living In the Household, October 1999 - September 2000

IV-2 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Families by Number of Family Members,
October 1999 - September 2000

IV-3 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Families by Number of Adult
Recipients, October 1999 - September 2000

IV-4 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Families by Number of Recipient
Children, October 1999 - September 2000

IV-5 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Families by Reason for Closure,
October 1999 - September 2000

IV-6 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Families by Ethnicity/Race, October
1999 - September 2000

IV-7 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Families Received Assistance, October
1999 - September 2000

IV-8 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Adult Recipients by Age Group,
October 1999 - September 2000

IV-9 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Male Adult Recipients by Age Group,
October 1999 - September 2000

IV-10 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Female Adult Recipients by Age Group,
October 1999 - September 2000

IV-11 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Adult Recipients by Ethnicity/Race,
October 1999 - September 2000

IV-12 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Adult Recipients by Marital Status,
October 1999 - September 2000

IV-13 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Adult Recipients Received Federal
Disability Benefits, October 1999 - September 2000

IV-14 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Adult Recipients by Relationship to
the Head of Household, October 1999 - September 2000

IV-15 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Adult Recipients by Educational
Level, October 1999 - September 2000

IV-16 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Adult Recipients by Citizenship
Status, October 1999 - September 2000

IV-17 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Adult Recipients by Employment
Status, October 1999 - September 2000

IV-18 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Recipient Children by Age Group,
October 1999 - September 2000

IV-19 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Recipient Children by Ethnicity/Race,
October 1999 - September 2000

IV-20 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Recipient Children Received Federal
Disability Benefits, October 1999 - September 2000

IV-21 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Recipient Children by Relationship to
the Head of Household, October 1999 - September 2000

IV-22 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Recipient Children by Educational
Level, October 1999 - September 2000

IV-23 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - Percent
Distribution of TANF Closed-Case - Recipient Children by Citizenship
Status, October 1999 - September 2000

IV-24 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - TANF
Closed-Case - Families with Income by Type of Non-TANF Income, October
1999 - September 2000

IV-25 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - TANF
Closed-Case - Adult Recipients with Income by Type of Non-TANF Income,
October 1999 - September 2000

IV-26 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Closed Cases - TANF
Closed-Case - Recipient Children with Unearned Income, October 1999 -
September 2000

***[V. SSP-MOE Cases]{.underline}***

V-1 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Households by Number of Persons Living
In the Household, October 1999 - September 2000

V-2 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Families by Number of Recipients,
October 1999 - September 2000

V-3 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Families by Number of Adult Recipients,
October 1999 - September 2000

V-4 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Families by Number of Recipient
Children, October 1999 - September 2000

V-5 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Families by Ethnicity/Race, October
1999 - September 2000

V-6 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Families Receiving Assistance, October
1999 - September 2000

V-7 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Adult Recipient by Age Group, October
1999 - September 2000

V-8 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Adult Recipients by Marital Status,
October 1999 - September 2000

V-9 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Adult Recipients Receiving Federal
Disability Benefits, October 1999 - September 2000

V-10 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Adult Recipients by Relationship to the
Head of Household, October 1999 - September 2000

V-11 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Adult Recipients by Education Level,
October 1999 - September 2000

V-12 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Adult Recipients by Citizenship Status,
October 1999 - September 2000

V-13 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Adult Recipients by Work Exemption
Status, October 1999 - September 2000

V-14 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Adult Recipients Participating In Work
Activities\*, October 1999 - September 2000

V-15 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Adult Recipients by Average Weekly Hours
Participation In Work Activities, October 1999 - September 2000

V-16 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Adult Recipient by Employment Status,
October 1999 - September 2000

V-17 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Recipient Children by Age Group, October
1999 - September 2000

V-18 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Recipient Children Receiving Federal
Disability Benefits, October 1999 - September 2000

V-19 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Recipient Children by Relationship to
the Head of Household, October 1999 - September 2000

V-20 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Recipient Children by Education Level,
October 1999 - September 2000

V-21 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Recipient Children by Citizenship
Status, October 1999 - September 2000

V-22 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
SSP-MOE Families Receiving Cash Assistance And Average Monthly Amount by
Number of Recipient Children, October 1999 - September 2000

V-23 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Active Cases -
SSP-MOE Families with Income by Type of Non-SSP Income, October 1999 -
September 2000

V-24 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Closed Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Households by Number of Persons Living
In the Household, October 1999 - September 2000

V-25 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Closed Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Families by Number of Persons, October
1999 - September 2000

V-26 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Closed Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Families by Number of Adult Recipients,
October 1999 - September 2000

V-27 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Closed Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Families by Number of Recipient
Children, October 1999 - September 2000

V-28 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Closed Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Families by Reason for Closure, October
1999 - September 2000

V-29 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Closed Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Families Receiving Assistance, October
1999 - September 2000

V-30 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Closed Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Families by Ethnicity/Race, October
1999 - September 2000

V-31 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Closed Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Adult Recipients by Age Group, October
1999 - September 2000

V-32 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Closed Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Adult Recipients by Marital Status,
October 1999 - September 2000

V-33 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Closed Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Adult Recipients Receiving Federal
Disability Benefits, October 1999 - September 2000

V-34 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Closed Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Adult Recipients by Relationship to the
Head of Household, October 1999 - September 2000

V-35 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Closed Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Adult Recipients by Educational Level,
October 1999 - September 2000

V-36 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Closed Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Adult Recipients by Citizenship Status,
October 1999 - September 2000

V-37 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Closed Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Adult Recipients by Employment Status,
October 1999 - September 2000

V-38 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Closed Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Recipient Children by Age Group, October
1999 - September 2000

V-39 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Closed Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Recipient Children Receiving Federal
Disability Benefits, October 1999 - September 2000

V-40 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Closed Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Recipient Children by Relationship to
the Head of Household, October 1999 - September 2000

V-41 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Closed Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Recipient Children by Education Level,
October 1999 - September 2000

V-42 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Closed Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Recipient Children by Citizenship
Status, October 1999 - September 2000

V-43 Separate State Program - Maintenance of Effort - Closed Cases -
Percent Distribution of SSP-MOE Families with Income by Type of Non-SSP
Income, October 1999 - September 2000

## APPENDIX II \-- RELIABILITY OF ESTIMATES

1.  Average Monthly TANF Active Caseload, Sample Size, Sample Fraction
    and Percent by Which Estimate of 50 Percent Might Vary From True
    Value at the 95 Percent Confidence Level

2.  Total Number of Annual TANF Closed Cases, Sample Size, Sample
    Fraction and Percent by Which Estimate Of 50 Percent Might Vary From
    True Value at the 95 Percent Confidence Level

3.  Approximate Standard Error of Estimated Percentages of TANF Families

4.  Significance Differences for Percentage Values Between the United
    States and States With Samples of 3000

5.  Significance Differences for Percentage Values Between States with
    Samples of 3000

# APPENDIX II

## Reliability of Estimates

All States, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico and Virgin
Islands were required to submit TANF data on the demographic
characteristics and financial circumstances of families receiving
assistance and families no longer receiving assistance under their TANF
program. During FY 2000, all 54 States and Territories transmitted
8,391,790 active cases and 649,794 closed cases onto the national TANF
database. Under the TANF data reporting system, States have the option
to submit either sample data or universe data to HHS. Twenty-four States
submitted sample data. The remaining 30 States submitted universe data,
from which HHS randomly selected approximately 275 active cases and 100
closed cases each month. A total probability sample of 198,415 active
cases and 54,340 closed cases was used in the TANF recipient
characteristics study for FY 2000.

The statistical data are estimates derived from samples and, therefore,
are subject to sampling errors as well as nonsampling errors. Sampling
errors occur to the extent that the results would have been different if
obtained from a complete enumeration of all cases. Nonsampling errors
are errors in response or coding of responses and nonresponse errors or
incomplete sample frames.

## Standard (Sampling) Errors

For FY 2000, the average monthly caseload, annual sample sizes, average
monthly sample sizes, sampling fractions and the percentage points by
which estimates of the total caseload for each State might vary from the
true value at the 95 percent confidence level are shown in Table 1 and
2.

Table 3 indicates the approximate standard error for various percentages
for the U.S. total caseload. These standard errors are somewhat
overstated because they are calculated assuming a sample of 14,855 cases
out of a total of 2,269,131 cases or 0.65466546 percent of the average
monthly caseload. California is the State with such a small sampling
fraction. To obtain the 95 percent confidence level at each percent in
Table 3, multiply the standard error by a factor of 1.96.

For example, national estimates of 50 percent should not vary from the
true value by more than plus or minus 0.8036 percentage points (0.41 x
1.96) at the 95 percent confidence level. To obtain the 99 percent
confidence level, multiply the standard errors by a factor of 2.58.

## Nonsampling Errors

Every effort is made to assure that a list of the universe or the sample
frame is complete. It is possible, however, that some cases receiving
assistance for the reporting month are not included. There is no measure
of the completeness of the universe.

Data entries are based on information in the case records. Errors may
have occurred because of misinterpretation of questions and because of
incomplete case record information. Errors may also have occurred in
coding and transmitting the data. There are no measures of the
reliability of the coded information. For some data elements, obviously
incorrect or missing information was recoded as unknown in the data
processing.

## Standard Errors of Subsets

For tables based on subsets of the populations, e.g., one‑adult or
two‑adult families, the approximate standard errors can be computed by
the following method: (a) determine the assumed sample size of the
subset by multiplying the number of cases in the subset by 0.0065466546;
(b) divide the sample size of all families (14,855) by the assumed
sample size of the subset; and (c) take the square root of the result
and multiply it by the standard errors of the total caseload shown in
Table 3.

For example, for child-only cases the approximate standard errors of
percentages can be found by multiplying the data in Table 3 by the
square root of 14,855/5,117 or 2.9031. The sample size of 5,117 is
determined by 781,546 x 0.0065466546.

## Standard Errors for State Estimates

The method used above can be adapted to calculating standard errors of
State estimates. First, divide the national sample size of all families
(14,855) by the State sample size shown in Table 1. Then take the square
root of the result and multiply it by the standard errors shown in Table
3. For example, for Florida the approximate standard errors of
percentages can be found by multiplying the data in Table 3 by the
square root of 14,855/3,275 or 2.1298.

## Statistically Significant Differences

Table 4 shows the percentage values at which differences between
national and State estimates become significant at the 5 percent
confidence level based on annual State samples of 3,000 active cases.

Table 5 shows the percentage values at which differences between State
estimates become significant at the 5 percent confidence level based on
annual State samples of 3,000 active cases.

**TABLE 1**

**AVERAGE MONTHLY TANF ACTIVE CASELOAD, SAMPLE SIZE, SAMPLE FRACTION
AND**

**PERCENT BY WHICH ESTIMATE OF 50 PERCENT MIGHT VARY FROM TRUE VALUE**

**AT THE 95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL**

**OCTOBER 1999 - SEPTEMBER 2000**

**\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--**

**AVERAGE ANNUAL AVERAGE SAMPLING PERCENT THAT 50%**

**MONTHLY SAMPLE MONTHLY FRACTION VALUES AT 95%**

**STATE CASELOAD SIZE SAMPLE PERCENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL**

**\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--**

**ALABAMA 19,068 2,950 246 1.29 6.8**

**ALASKA 7,317 3,300 275 3.76 6.2**

**ARIZONA 33,722 3,300 275 0.82 6.9**

**ARKANSAS 11,336 3,057 255 2.25 7.4**

**CALIFORNIA 501,019 3,280 273 0.05 6.8**

**COLORADO 11,154 3,768 314 2.82 6.5**

**CONNECTICUT 28,095 3,266 272 0.97 6.2**

**DELAWARE 5,814 3,300 275 4.73 6.0**

**DIST. OF COL. 17,563 3,129 261 1.48 7.9**

**FLORIDA 67,355 3,275 273 0.41 5.9**

**GEORGIA 53,267 3,300 275 0.52 7.2**

**GUAM 1/ 2,721**

**HAWAII 14,705 3,300 275 1.87 6.3**

**IDAHO 1,275 2,827 236 18.48 6.2**

**ILLINOIS 88,493 3,925 327 0.37 7.8**

**INDIANA 35,714 3,300 275 0.77 6.1**

**IOWA 19,952 3,300 275 1.38 6.8**

**KANSAS 12,576 3,273 273 2.17 6.4**

**KENTUCKY 38,542 3,300 275 0.71 6.8**

**LOUISIANA 27,820 3,300 275 0.99 7.3**

**MAINE 10,864 3,300 275 2.53 7.2**

**MARYLAND 27,523 3,024 252 0.92 6.5**

**MASSACHUSETTS 43,895 3,331 278 0.63 7.1**

**MICHIGAN 74,211 4,215 351 0.47 8.0**

**MINNESOTA 39,293 6,334 528 1.34 4.9**

**MISSISSIPPI 14,970 3,470 289 1.93 6.4**

**MISSOURI 46,710 3,468 289 0.62 6.8**

**MONTANA 4,555 3,300 275 6.04 6.2**

**NEBRASKA 9,444 6,103 509 5.39 4.4**

**NEVADA 6,274 3,038 253 4.04 6.9**

**NEW HAMPSHIRE 5,838 3,177 265 4.53 6.9**

**NEW JERSEY 51,614 3,300 275 0.53 6.3**

**NEW MEXICO 23,651 3,296 275 1.16 7.1**

**NEW YORK 257,790 3,371 281 0.11 7.1**

**NORTH CAROLINA 48,158 4,007 334 0.69 6.2**

**NORTH DAKOTA 2,890 3,300 275 9.52 5.8**

**OHIO 97,825 16,596 1,383 1.41 2.6**

**OKLAHOMA 15,112 3,300 275 1.82 7.1**

**OREGON 16,918 3,300 275 1.63 6.6**

**PENNSYLVANIA 88,765 3,300 275 0.31 7.0**

**PUERTO RICO 31,812 2,636 220 0.69 7.1**

**RHODE ISLAND 16,320 3,300 275 1.69 7.3**

**SOUTH CAROLINA 16,059 3,158 263 1.64 7.1**

**SOUTH DAKOTA 2,802 3,211 268 9.55 5.9**

**TENNESSEE 53,788 3,300 275 0.51 6.1**

**TEXAS 131,162 6,189 516 0.39 6.3**

**UTAH 8,409 3,300 275 3.27 6.1**

**VERMONT 6,048 3,300 275 4.55 6.8**

**VIRGIN ISLANDS 934 2,949 246 26.31 5.6**

**VIRGINIA 31,834 3,300 275 0.86 6.2**

**WASHINGTON 57,008 3,300 275 0.48 6.4**

**WEST VIRGINIA 11,829 5,147 429 3.63 4.9**

**WISCONSIN 16,719 3,300 275 1.64 7.0**

**WYOMING 599 2,636 220 36.67 5.7**

**\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--**

**NOTE: 1/ SAMPLE INCOMPLETED**

**TABLE 2**

**TOTAL NUMBER OF ANNUAL TANF CLOSED CASES, SAMPLE SIZE, SAMPLE FRACTION
AND**

**PERCENT BY WHICH ESTIMATE OF 50 PERCENT MIGHT VARY FROM TRUE VALUE**

**AT THE 95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL**

**OCTOBER 1999 - SEPTEMBER 2000**

**\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--**

**TOTAL ANNUAL SAMPLING PERCENT THAT 50%**

**NUMBER OF SAMPLE FRACTION VALUES AT 95%**

**STATE CLOSED CASES SIZE PERCENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL**

**\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--**

**ALABAMA 17,084 1,200 7.02 2.7**

**ALASKA 7,955 1,200 15.08 2.6**

**ARIZONA 38,154 1,200 3.15 2.8**

**ARKANSAS 14,156 703 4.97 3.6**

**CALIFORNIA 422,701 786 0.19 3.7**

**COLORADO 17,830 1,200 6.73 2.7**

**CONNECTICUT 21,146 817 3.86 3.4**

**DELAWARE 5,974 1,200 20.09 2.5**

**DIST. OF COL. 6,877 776 11.28 3.3**

**FLORIDA 141,448 888 0.63 3.3**

**GEORGIA 49,912 1,200 2.40 2.8**

**GUAM 810 315 38.89 4.3**

**HAWAII 8,447 1,200 14.21 2.6**

**IDAHO 2,137 1,200 56.15 1.9**

**ILLINOIS 80,219 773 0.96 3.5**

**INDIANA 29,443 1,200 4.08 2.8**

**IOWA 20,192 1,200 5.94 2.7**

**KANSAS 14,692 1,144 7.79 2.8**

**KENTUCKY 35,844 1,200 3.35 2.8**

**LOUISIANA 30,625 1,200 3.92 2.8**

**MAINE 8,780 1,200 13.67 2.6**

**MARYLAND 36,119 810 2.24 3.4**

**MASSACHUSETTS 34,347 807 2.35 3.4**

**MICHIGAN 78,847 958 1.22 3.1**

**MINNESOTA 23,576 1,200 5.09 5.1**

**MISSISSIPPI 9,968 816 8.19 3.3**

**MISSOURI 32,794 799 2.44 3.4**

**MONTANA 5,811 1,200 20.65 2.5**

**NEBRASKA 14,244 1,200 8.42 2.7**

**NEVADA 8,996 889 9.88 3.1**

**NEW HAMPSHIRE 5,887 1,200 20.38 2.5**

**NEW JERSEY 34,993 1,200 3.43 2.8**

**NEW MEXICO 2,034 797 39.18 2.7**

**NEW YORK 149,580 957 0.64 3.2**

**NORTH CAROLINA 27,099 837 3.09 3.3**

**NORTH DAKOTA 4,195 1,200 28.61 2.4**

**OHIO 106,872 1,481 1.39 2.5**

**OKLAHOMA 23,369 1,200 5.14 2.8**

**OREGON 1/ 28,107**

**PENNSYLVANIA 67,497 1,200 1.78 2.8**

**PUERTO RICO 9,216 287 3.11 5.7**

**RHODE ISLAND 10,480 1,200 11.45 2.7**

**SOUTH CAROLINA 16,375 857 5.23 3.3**

**SOUTH DAKOTA 3,633 915 25.19 2.8**

**TENNESSEE 36,442 1,200 3.29 2.8**

**TEXAS 146,123 1,394 0.95 4.1**

**UTAH 11,201 1,200 10.71 2.7**

**VERMONT 5,522 1,200 21.73 2.5**

**VIRGIN ISLANDS 534 534 100.00 0.0**

**VIRGINIA 28,189 1,200 4.26 2.8**

**WASHINGTON 67,517 1,200 1.78 2.8**

**WEST VIRGINIA 14,200 960 6.76 3.1**

**WISCONSIN 14,510 1,200 8.27 2.7**

**WYOMING 1,178 440 37.35 3.7**

**\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--**

**NOTE: 1/ SAMPLE NOT REPORTED.**

**TABLE 3**

**APPROXIMATE STANDARD ERROR OF ESTIMATED PERCENTAGES OF**

**TANF FAMILIES FOR OCTOBER 1999 - SEPTEMBER 2000**

**\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--**

**ESTIMATED STANDARD ESTIMATED STANDARD**

**PERCENTAGE ERROR PERCENTAGE ERROR**

**\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--**

**1\...\..... 0.08 26\...\..... 0.36**

**2\...\..... 0.11 27\...\..... 0.36**

**3\...\..... 0.14 28\...\..... 0.37**

**4\...\..... 0.16 29\...\..... 0.37**

**5\...\..... 0.18 30\...\..... 0.37**

**6\...\..... 0.19 31\...\..... 0.38**

**7\...\..... 0.21 32\...\..... 0.38**

**8\...\..... 0.22 33\...\..... 0.38**

**9\...\..... 0.23 34\...\..... 0.39**

**10\...\..... 0.25 35\...\..... 0.39**

**11\...\..... 0.26 36\...\..... 0.39**

**12\...\..... 0.27 37\...\..... 0.39**

**13\...\..... 0.28 38\...\..... 0.40**

**14\...\..... 0.28 39\...\..... 0.40**

**15\...\..... 0.29 40\...\..... 0.40**

**16\...\..... 0.30 41\...\..... 0.40**

**17\...\..... 0.31 42\...\..... 0.40**

**18\...\..... 0.31 43\...\..... 0.40**

**19\...\..... 0.32 44\...\..... 0.41**

**20\...\..... 0.33 45\...\..... 0.41**

**21\...\..... 0.33 46\...\..... 0.41**

**22\...\..... 0.34 47\...\..... 0.41**

**23\...\..... 0.34 48\...\..... 0.41**

**24\...\..... 0.35 49\...\..... 0.41**

**25\...\..... 0.35 50\...\..... 0.41**

**\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--**

**BASED ON A SAMPLE OF 14,855 CASES OUT OF A TOTAL OF 2,269,131**

**ACTIVE CASES OR .65466546 PERCENT OF THE CASELOAD. THIS IS**

**THE SAME SAMPLE PERCENTAGE AS CALIFORNIA.**

**TABLE 4**

**SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES FOR PERCENTAGE VALUES**

**BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND STATES WITH SAMPLES OF 3,000**

**OCTOBER 1999 - SEPTEMBER 2000**

**\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--**

**PERCENTAGE VALUE AT PERCENTAGE VALUE AT**

**WHICH DIFFERENCES WHICH DIFFERENCES**

**ESTIMATED BECOME SIGNIFICANT ESTIMATED BECOME SIGNIFICANT**

**PERCENTAGE UPPER LOWER PERCENTAGE UPPER LOWER**

**\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--**

**1\...\..... 1.5 0.6 51\...\..... 53.0 48.9**

**2\...\..... 2.6 1.4 52\...\..... 54.0 49.9**

**3\...\..... 3.7 2.3 53\...\..... 54.9 50.9**

**4\...\..... 4.8 3.2 54\...\..... 55.9 51.9**

**5\...\..... 5.9 4.1 55\...\..... 56.9 52.9**

**6\...\..... 7.0 5.0 56\...\..... 57.9 54.0**

**7\...\..... 8.1 6.0 57\...\..... 58.9 55.0**

**8\...\..... 9.1 6.9 58\...\..... 59.9 56.0**

**9\...\..... 10.2 7.8 59\...\..... 60.9 57.0**

**10\...\..... 11.2 8.8 60\...\..... 61.9 58.0**

**11\...\..... 12.3 9.7 61\...\..... 62.9 59.0**

**12\...\..... 13.3 10.7 62\...\..... 63.9 60.0**

**13\...\..... 14.4 11.6 63\...\..... 64.9 61.0**

**14\...\..... 15.4 12.6 64\...\..... 65.9 62.0**

**15\...\..... 16.4 13.5 65\...\..... 66.8 63.0**

**16\...\..... 17.5 14.5 66\...\..... 67.8 64.0**

**17\...\..... 18.5 15.5 67\...\..... 68.8 65.0**

**18\...\..... 19.5 16.4 68\...\..... 69.8 66.1**

**19\...\..... 20.6 17.4 69\...\..... 70.8 67.1**

**20\...\..... 21.6 18.4 70\...\..... 71.8 68.1**

**21\...\..... 22.6 19.3 71\...\..... 72.7 69.1**

**22\...\..... 23.7 20.3 72\...\..... 73.7 70.1**

**23\...\..... 24.7 21.3 73\...\..... 74.7 71.1**

**24\...\..... 25.7 22.3 74\...\..... 75.7 72.2**

**25\...\..... 26.7 23.2 75\...\..... 76.7 73.2**

**26\...\..... 27.7 24.2 76\...\..... 77.6 74.2**

**27\...\..... 28.8 25.2 77\...\..... 78.6 75.2**

**28\...\..... 29.8 26.2 78\...\..... 79.6 76.2**

**29\...\..... 30.8 27.2 79\...\..... 80.6 77.3**

**30\...\..... 31.8 28.1 80\...\..... 81.5 78.3**

**31\...\..... 32.8 29.1 81\...\..... 82.5 79.3**

**32\...\..... 33.8 30.1 82\...\..... 83.5 80.4**

**33\...\..... 34.9 31.1 83\...\..... 84.4 81.4**

**34\...\..... 35.9 32.1 84\...\..... 85.4 82.4**

**35\...\..... 36.9 33.1 85\...\..... 86.4 83.5**

**36\...\..... 37.9 34.0 86\...\..... 87.3 84.5**

**37\...\..... 38.9 35.0 87\...\..... 88.3 85.5**

**38\...\..... 39.9 36.0 88\...\..... 89.2 86.6**

**39\...\..... 40.9 37.0 89\...\..... 90.2 87.6**

**40\...\..... 41.9 38.0 90\...\..... 91.1 88.7**

**41\...\..... 42.9 39.0 91\...\..... 92.1 89.7**

**42\...\..... 43.9 40.0 92\...\..... 93.0 90.8**

**43\...\..... 44.9 41.0 93\...\..... 93.9 91.8**

**44\...\..... 45.9 42.0 94\...\..... 94.9 92.9**

**45\...\..... 47.0 43.0 95\...\..... 95.8 94.0**

**46\...\..... 48.0 44.0 96\...\..... 96.7 95.1**

**47\...\..... 49.0 45.0 97\...\..... 97.6 96.2**

**48\...\..... 50.0 45.9 98\...\..... 98.5 97.3**

**49\...\..... 51.0 46.9 99\...\..... 99.3 98.4**

**50\...\..... 52.0 47.9**

**TABLE 5**

**SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES FOR PERCENTAGE VALUES**

**BETWEEN STATES WITH SAMPLES OF 3,000**

**OCTOBER 1999 - SEPTEMBER 2000**

**\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--**

**PERCENTAGE VALUE AT PERCENTAGE VALUE AT**

**WHICH DIFFERENCES WHICH DIFFERENCES**

**ESTIMATED BECOME SIGNIFICANT ESTIMATED BECOME SIGNIFICANT**

**PERCENTAGE UPPER LOWER PERCENTAGE UPPER LOWER**

**\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--**

**1\...\..... 1.6 0.5 51\...\..... 53.5 48.4**

**2\...\..... 2.8 1.3 52\...\..... 54.5 49.4**

**3\...\..... 3.9 2.1 53\...\..... 55.5 50.4**

**4\...\..... 5.1 3.0 54\...\..... 56.5 51.4**

**5\...\..... 6.2 3.9 55\...\..... 57.5 52.4**

**6\...\..... 7.3 4.8 56\...\..... 58.5 53.4**

**7\...\..... 8.3 5.7 57\...\..... 59.5 54.4**

**8\...\..... 9.4 6.6 58\...\..... 60.5 55.4**

**9\...\..... 10.5 7.5 59\...\..... 61.5 56.4**

**10\...\..... 11.6 8.4 60\...\..... 62.5 57.4**

**11\...\..... 12.6 9.4 61\...\..... 63.5 58.4**

**12\...\..... 13.7 10.3 62\...\..... 64.4 59.4**

**13\...\..... 14.7 11.2 63\...\..... 65.4 60.4**

**14\...\..... 15.8 12.2 64\...\..... 66.4 61.5**

**15\...\..... 16.9 13.1 65\...\..... 67.4 62.5**

**16\...\..... 17.9 14.1 66\...\..... 68.4 63.5**

**17\...\..... 18.9 15.0 67\...\..... 69.4 64.5**

**18\...\..... 20.0 16.0 68\...\..... 70.3 65.5**

**19\...\..... 21.0 17.0 69\...\..... 71.3 66.5**

**20\...\..... 22.1 17.9 70\...\..... 72.3 67.6**

**21\...\..... 23.1 18.9 71\...\..... 73.3 68.6**

**22\...\..... 24.1 19.8 72\...\..... 74.2 69.6**

**23\...\..... 25.2 20.8 73\...\..... 75.2 70.6**

**24\...\..... 26.2 21.8 74\...\..... 76.2 71.7**

**25\...\..... 27.2 22.7 75\...\..... 77.2 72.7**

**26\...\..... 28.2 23.7 76\...\..... 78.1 73.7**

**27\...\..... 29.3 24.7 77\...\..... 79.1 74.7**

**28\...\..... 30.3 25.7 78\...\..... 80.1 75.8**

**29\...\..... 31.3 26.6 79\...\..... 81.0 76.8**

**30\...\..... 32.3 27.6 80\...\..... 82.0 77.8**

**31\...\..... 33.4 28.6 81\...\..... 82.9 78.9**

**32\...\..... 34.4 29.6 82\...\..... 83.9 79.9**

**33\...\..... 35.4 30.5 83\...\..... 84.9 81.0**

**34\...\..... 36.4 31.5 84\...\..... 85.8 82.0**

**35\...\..... 37.4 32.5 85\...\..... 86.8 83.0**

**36\...\..... 38.4 33.5 86\...\..... 87.7 84.1**

**37\...\..... 39.5 34.5 87\...\..... 88.7 85.2**

**38\...\..... 40.5 35.5 88\...\..... 89.6 86.2**

**39\...\..... 41.5 36.4 89\...\..... 90.5 87.3**

**40\...\..... 42.5 37.4 90\...\..... 91.5 88.3**

**41\...\..... 43.5 38.4 91\...\..... 92.4 89.4**

**42\...\..... 44.5 39.4 92\...\..... 93.3 90.5**

**43\...\..... 45.5 40.4 93\...\..... 94.2 91.6**

**44\...\..... 46.5 41.4 94\...\..... 95.1 92.6**

**45\...\..... 47.5 42.4 95\...\..... 96.0 93.7**

**46\...\..... 48.5 43.4 96\...\..... 96.9 94.8**

**47\...\..... 49.5 44.4 97\...\..... 97.8 96.0**

**48\...\..... 50.5 45.4 98\...\..... 98.6 97.1**

**49\...\..... 51.5 46.4 99\...\..... 99.4 98.3**

**50\...\..... 52.5 47.4**