Vitaland

HealthStatistics

Characteristics of

Facilities for

the Mentally

Retarded, 1986

Series 14:

Data From

No, 34

This re~ort presents

the National Health Survey

State and national statistics on facilities for the mentally

retarded from the 1986 Inventory of Long-Term Care Places. Included are

facility characteristics such as type of ownership, type of facility, and number

of beds and residents, Also included are occupancy rates, residents per

population, age of residents, and number of black and Hispanic residents,

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Public Health Service

Centers for Disease Control

National Center for Health Statistics

Hyaftsville, Ma@and

September 1989

DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 89-1829
1

I

I

1

1,

Suggested citation

Sirrocco A. Characteristics of facilities for the mentally retarded,

1986. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat 14(34)

1989.

Copyright information

All material appearing in thw report is in the public domain and may

be reproduced or copied without permission; citation as to source,

however, is appreciated.

Library of Congrass Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Sirrocco, Al,

Characteristics of facilities for the mentally retarded. 1986,

p. cm. — (Vital and health statistics. Series 14, Data from

the national health survey ; no. 34) (DHHS publication ; no. (PHS)

89-1829

“March 1989.’”

Bibliography p,

-,

Supt. of Dots, no.: HE 20.6209:1 4/34

IS8N 0-8406–0401 -7

1. Mental retardation facilities—United States—Statistics.

2. Long-term facilities—United States—Statistics. 1. National

Center for Health Statistics (U.S.) Il. Title. Ill. Series.

IV, Series: DHHS publication ; no. (PHS) 89-1829,

[DNLM: 1. Long Term Csre— United States—statistics. 2. Mental

Retardation. 3. Residential Facilities—United States—statistics,

W2 A N148vn no. 34]

HV3006.A4S67 1989

362.3’85’0973—dc20

DNLM/DLC 89-600212

for Library of Congress CIP
National Center for Health Statistics

Manning Feinleib, M.D., Dr.P.H., Director

Robert A. Israel, Deputy Director

Jacob J. Feldman, Ph.D., Associate Directorfor Analysis

and Eptiemiology

Gail F. Fisher, Ph.D., Associate Directorfor Planning and

13tramural Programs

Peter L. Hurley, Associate Directorfor F4taland Health

Statistics Systems

Stephen E. Nieberding, Associate Directorfor Management

Charles J. Rothwell, Associate Directorfor Data Processing

and Services

Monroe G. Sirken, Ph.D., Associate Directorfor Research

and Methodology

Division of Health Care Statistics

W. Edward Bacon, Ph.D., Director

Thomas McLemore, Deputy Director

Evelyn S. Mathis, Chie$ Long-Term Care StatisticsBranch

Cooperation of the US. Bureau of the Census

Under the Iegisfation estnbtishirrg the Nationrr Health Survey, the Pubfic

Health Servico is authorized to use, insofar .aspossible, the sewices or facilities of

other Feder~ State, or private agencies.

In aumrd.ante with specificdiorrs established by the Natiorrrd Center for Health

Statistics, the U.S. Bureau of the Census, under a contmctu.nf mmngement,

participated in pkmrdrrg the survey and cdecting the data.
Introduction andbackground. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Highlight s. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

List ofdetailed tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Appendixes

1, Technica lnotes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

IL Questionnaireused inthe survey... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

III. Classification and definitions ofterms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

List of text tables

A. Residents in facilities for the mentally retarded per 100,000 U.S. population, by census regions and divisions:

United States, 1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

B. Percent distribution ofresidentsin facilities for the mentallyretarded by ageofresident, accordingtogeographic

region: United States, 1986 . . . . , $. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

C. Estimated number of Hispanic and non-Hispanic persons in the United States and in facilities for the mentally

retarded, and rates of residents in these facilities per 100,000 corresponding population, by selected States

United States, 1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

D. Average bed capacity of facilities for the mentally retarded, by type of ownership and facility United States,

1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

List of text figures

1, Residents in facilities for the mentally retarded per 100,000 population: United States, 1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

2, Percent distribution of U.S. population, and of residents in facilities for the mentally retarded, by age

United States, 1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

...

HI
Characteristics of

facilities for the mentally

retarded, 1986

by Al Sirrocco, Division of Health

Care Statistics

Introduction and

background

This report presents data by State on facilities for the

mentally retarded from the 1986 Invento~ of Long-Term

Care Places (ILTCP). Its focus will be on facility characteristics such as type of ownership, type of facility, number of

kwds, and number of residents. Also included are occupancy rates, residents per population, numbers of black and

Hispanic residents, and age of residents.

The National Center for Health Statistics, in cooperation with the National Center for Health Services Research

and Health Care Technology Assessment and the Health

Care Financing Administration, employed staff of the U.S.

Bureau of the Census to conduct the 1986 ILTCP. The

purpose of the ILTCP was to provide a current sampling

frame for two segments of the institutional component of

the 19S7 National Medical Expenditure Survey. The two

segments were nursing and related care homes and facilities for the mentally retarded.

The ILTCP had not been conducted prior to the 1986

survey. However, a similar survey, the National Master

Facility Inventory (NMFI), had been conducted many times

between 1967 and 19821. Each year the NMFI was

conducted, nursing homes were surveyed, but mental retardation (MR) facilities had not been surveyed since the 1976

NMF12. The types of questions asked in the ILTCP and the

NMFI were similar enough that a decision was made to

publish the ILTCP data as a mears of updating the NMFI

nursing home data. At the same time, the ILTCP data on

MR facilities would provide baseline information on these

facilities.

In creating the mailing list of MR facilities, the ILTCP

updated a 1982 listing of facilities from a study by the

University of Minnesota’s Center for Residential and Community Servicess. A description of how this mailing list was

created is given in appendix I.

2SuttonJF, .%rocco A. Inpatient health facilities as reported from

the 1976 MFI Survey.National Center for Health Statistics.Vital

Health Stat 14(23). 1980.

‘Hill BK, Lakin KC. Classification of residential facilities for

mentally retarded people; brief no 24. Minneapolis: Center for

Residential and Community Sewices, University of Minnesota.

1984.

lRoper D. Nursing and related care homes as reported from the

1982 National Master Facility Invento~ Survey. National Center

for Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat 14(32). 1986.

1
Highlights

During the 1986 ILTCP, 14,639 facilities for the mentally retarded were identified. At the time of the survey,

these facilities had 269,954 beds and 250,472 residents

(table 1). California had the most facilities (2,798), beds

(31,499), and residents (28,143), with Michigan second in

facilities (1,858) and New York second in beds (25,649)

and residents (24,331). Alaska and Wyoming had the fewest facilities (15 and 16), with Alaska also having the fewest

beds (205) and residents (169).

Although counts of facilities, beds, and residents are

important as measures of availability, States with large

populations invariably will have the most of these, and

States with low populations will have the least. Relating

these data to State population figures would, therefore, give

more meaningful measurements. Because mental retarda- .

tion cuts across all age groups, rates for the entire population were necessary. This is in contrast to nursing home

rates, which are better measured using the elderly populations (such as 65 years and over, 75 years and over, 85 years

and over, and so forth).

Accordingly, table 2 presents the rate per 100,000

population of residents in facilities for the mentally retarded for each State and gives the rankings from the

highest to the lowest State. As shown, the highest four rates

occurred in four contiguous States in the Midwest, namely,

Iowa, Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota, respectively. The rates for these four States were substantially

higher than those for the rest of the States, with the fourth

highest, South Dakota, having a rate (183,5) 15 percent

higher than the rate for the fifth highest State, Massachusetts (159.3). The gap between the highest two States, Iowa

and Minnesota, was even more substantial (258.1 versus

203.0, or 27 percent).

In the States ranked 5th through 12th, two more

Midwestern States appear—Michigan (6th) and Wisconsin

(llth). In addition, this group includes five northeastern

States–Massachusetts (5th), Maine (8th), Vermont (9th),

New York (lOth), and Rhode Island (12th).

At the other end of the ranking, the lowest 12 rates

included seven southern States (Alabama, Florida,

Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, Virginia, West Virginia)

and the District of Columbia along with four western States

(Alaska, Arizona, Nevada, and New Mexico).

This regional grouping of the highest and lowest 12

States suggests strong regional differences in these rates.

Table A shows these strong regional differences, which

Table A. Residents in facilities for the mentally retarded per

100,000 U.S. population, by census regions and divisions:

United States, 1986

Rateper

Regionand d/vMon 1,000population

All States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103.9

Northeast. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123.3

New England . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136.1

Mid AWu’dlc . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118.9

Midwest. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130.2

East Notih Central . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114.4

West Norlh Central. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167.6

South . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60.5

SouthAtlantic. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77.9

EsstSoulh Central. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59.1

West South Central . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96.5

West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91.6

Mountain. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

pac~c . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

67.2

10+3.7

ranged from a high of 130.2 for the Midwest to a low of

80.5 for the South. Table A also shows that when the

regions are subgrouped into census divisions, the differences are even more striking. The West North Central

division (Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska,

North Dakota, and South Dakota), with its rate of 167.6,

and the New England division (Connecticut, Maine,

Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and

Vermont), with its rate of 136.1, had rates that were more

than double those of the East South Central division (Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, and Tennessee) and the

Mountain division (Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana,

Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming), 59.1 and 67.2,

respectively. Figure 1 shows these geographic differences

quite clearly.

Table 3 shows the State distribution of facilities for the

mentally retarded by bed-size gxoups. Almost three-fourths

had fewer than 10 beds; less than 3 percent had 100 beds or

more (table 4). Only Mississippi had a proportionally high

number of large facilities (100 beds or more) —10 out of

29, or 34,5 percent.

Table 5 presents the number of residents in facilities

for the mentally retarded by bed-size groups and State, and

table 6 presents the percent distribution of these residents

in each State. As table 6 shows, almost half of all mental

retardation (MR) residents were in facilities with 100 beds

or more, despite the fact that only 2.8 percent of the

facilities had this many beds. In Mississippi, 91 percent of

all MR residents were in these large facilities, and in each

of five other States about three-fourths of the MR residents

2
Figure 1. Residents in facilities for the mentallv retarded ~er 100,000 population United States, 1986

were in these large facilities (Alabama, Louisiana, New

Jersey, Texas, and Virginia). At the other end of the facility

spectrum, three States (Hawaii, Montana, and Nevada) and

the District of Columbia showed more than half of their

MR residents in the very small facilities (one to nine beds).

Two other States (Michigan and New Hampshire) had

almost half of their residents in these small facilities.

Table 7 shows the number and percent distribution of

facilities and residents when ownership groups were

crossed with bed-size groups. The government MR facilities, whose numbers were less than a third those of the

profit or nonprofit facilities, had many more residents than

either of the other hvo ownership types. One reason for this

was that there were many more large (100 beds or more)

government facilities (242) than there were large

nongovernment facilities (163). Another reason was that

these large government facilities were larger than the large

nongovernrnent facilities, This can be found from table 7,

where the large government facilities had an average of 403

residents compared with an average of 155 residents in the

nongovernment facilities. (The average number of residents

was 136 for the profit facilities and 173 for the nonprofit.)

Of the 1,913 government facilities shown in table 7, 1,853

were State or local government and 60 were Federal, Of the

242 large facilities, only one was Federal. Table 8 gives the

State breakdowns by ownership and condensed bed

cat egories.

Table 9 gives the ownership breakdown of MR facilities and residents for each State. The majority of residents

in facilities for the mentally retarded were in government

facilities, and the table shows this was true in most States.

However, in California, Michigan, and Maine, where an

overwhelming number of MR facilities were profit, an

overwhelming number of residents were also in profit

facilities. On a smaller scale, but equally high in percents,

the vast majority of MR residents in Alaska and the District

of Columbia were in nonprofit facilities. It should also be

noted that Colorado, whose nonprofit facilities outnumbered its government ones by 105 to 6, still had more

residents in its government facilities.

The occupancy rate in facilities for the mentally retarded was 92,8 percent (table 10). Only eight States had

rates below 90 percent and, of these, only two had rates

below 86 percent–Nevada (71.3 percent) and Alaska (82.4

percent).

Table 11 shows the age distribution of residents in

facilities for the mentally retarded in each State, and table

12 gives the percent distribution for these ages. Table B

shows the percents by region.

As these tables show, most residents in facilities for the

3
Table B. Percent distribution of residents in facilities for the

mentally retarded by age of resident, according to geographic

region: United States, 1986

All Under 22-64 65 years

Region ages 22 years years and over

Percent dislribuiion

Total . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 16.4 76.0 7.6

Northeast . . . . . . . . 100.0 12.8 77.7 9.5

Midwest . . . . . . . . . 100.0 14.5 77.3 8.2

South . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 19.2 73.4 7.3

West . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 20.1 75.5 4.4

mentally retarded were neither young nor old. The vast

majority (76 percent) were between 22 and 64 years of age.

In contrast, only 55 percent of the U.S. population in 1986

was in this age group. Conversely, only 16.4 percent of MR

residents were under 22 years of age, compared with almost

twice that (32.5 percent) in the U.S. population. Similarly,

persons 65 years and over constituted 7.6 percent of the

MR residents and 12.1 percent of the U.S. population. This

can be seen in figure 2.

The number of residents in facilities for the mentally

retarded per 100,000 U.S. population shown in table 2 was

103.9. Computing this rate for each of the three age groups

also resulted in large differences between the group 22 to

64 years of age (142.7) and the other two groups (52.2 in

the group under 22 years of age and 65.3 in the group 65

years and over). The reason for this age distribution of MR

residents is unclear, but one possible explanation is that

many mentally retarded children remain at home and many

mentally retarded older people are in psychiatric facilities

or nursing and related care homes. Table 13 shows the prevrdence of mentally retarded residents in nursing and related care homes. When the 18,978 residents 65 years and

over in facilities for the mentally retarded are combined

with the 30,900 MR residents in nursing homes, the rate

per 100,000 population aged 65 years and over increases

from 65.3 to 171.0. When the 8,627 MR residents in

residential facilities are added, this rate increases to 200.5.

It can be seen in table 12, however, that not all States

had these low percents of older MR residents. More than

20 percent of the MR residents in Hawaii and Vermont

were 65 years and over, as were nearly 19 percent in New

Hampshire. In the nine States where MR residents 65 years

and over made up more than 10.0 percent of the total (table

12), eight (Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Texas, and Vermont) had more of these

older residents in facilities for the mentally retarded than

than they had MR residents in nursing homes (tables 11

and 13). This was not true of the States in table 12 with the

lower percents of older residents. Indeed, these States

showed many more MR residents in nursing homes than

older residents in facilities for the mentally retarded (tables

13 and 11). In most of these States there were at least twice

as many, and in some States there were more than 10 times

as many. This suggests that a State with a relatively low

proportion of older residents in its facilities for the mentally

retarded tends to utilize nursing homes for its older mentally retarded population.

Table 14 shows the distribution of the residents in the

three age groups crossed with ownership and bed-size

groups. Among the profit facilities, small facilities had

virtually the same age distribution as large ones. This also

was true for government facilities. However, in nonprofit

facilities, children were nearly twice as likely to be in large

facilities as in small ones, while residents ages 22 to 64

years were somewhat more likely to be in the smaller

facilities.

The large percent of residents in the age group 22 to 64

years tends to dominate table 14. Almost lost are the other

22–64 yesrs,

Under 22 years, 55 percent

U.S. population Residents in MR facilities

Figure 2, Percent distribution of U.S. population and of residents in facilities for the mentally retarded, by age United States, 1986

4
two age groups, which, when compared with one another,

reveal some interesting findings. For instance, nonprofit

facilities had many times more children than aged residents,

and this was true for all bed-size groups. Government

facilities also had more children than aged residents in

every bed-size group, but with not nearly the difference

shown in the nonprofit facilities. The profit facilities with 10

to 15 beds actually had more aged residents than children.

The other three profit bed-size groups had more children

than aged, but with smaller differences—similar to those of

the government facilities. Overall, table 14 shows that profit

facilities tend to accept more aged residents and fewer

children than nonprofit facilities. It has been suggested that

older residents are less costly to treat and care for than

younger residents; and it has been argued that profit facilities have more incentive to be less costly than nonprofit

facilities’.

Estimates of the numbers of black and Hispanic residents in facilities for the mentally retarded were obtained

during the ILTCP. Table 15 shows the State counts of these

residents, of which there were 29,442 black residents and

10,181 Hispanic residents. As mentioned earlier, the number of residents in facilities for the mentally retarded per

100,000 population was 103.9 (table 2). When this rate for

black MR residents per 100,000 black population is computed and compared with the rate for residents who are not

black, the difference is quite small-100.5 for black residents versus 104.4 for those who are not black. However, a

similar comparison between Hispanic and non-Hispanic

residents resulted in a rate for non-Hispanic residents

(108.0) nearly twice that for Hispanic residents (55.0).

Table C was created to check State variations in these

Hispanic rates. The table presents the nine States with the

most Hispanic people in 1986, and compares the rates of

4L&in Kc, ‘Hi]l B~ J3~ini~ ~, eds. An analysisof Medicaid’s

Intermediate Care Facility for the Mentally Retarded (ICF-MR)

Program. Minneapolis: Department of Educational Psychology,

Universityof Minnesota. 1985.

Hispanic versus non-Hispanic residents in MR facilities per

100,000 Hispanic and non-Hispanic population. These nine

States showed considerable variation from the total U.S.

rates mentioned above (55.0 for Hispanic and 108.0 for

non-Hispanic residents). In Arizona and Colorado, there

was virtually no difference between the rates for Hispanic

and non-Hispanic residents. In California, Illinois, and

Texas, the Hispanic rate was approximately half the rate for

non-Hispanic residents. In Florida, New Jersey, and New

York, the Hispanic rate was about one-third that for the

non-Hispanic residents. In the 41 States (and the District of

Columbia) not shown, the Hispanic rate was less than

two-thirds the non-Hispanic rate. Whether this reflects an

undercounting of Hispanic residents in MR facilities, a lack

of utilization of MR facilities by Hispanic persons, or a

lower incidence of mental retardation for Hispanic persons

is not known at this time. However, it is interesting to note

that New Mexico had the opposite situation—its nonHispanic rate was two-thirds the Hispanic rate.

There was little difference in the percent of black

mentally retarded residents, regardless of size or ownership

of the facility (table 16). The range of percents went from a

low of 8.9 to a high of 14.3. The same also was true for the

Hispanic residents, whose percents ranged from 2.9 to 5.9.

When black MR residents were compared with MR residents who were not black (table 17), black residents were

somewhat more likely to be in government facilities (54 to

45 percent). The largest difference between Hispanic and

non-Hispanic MR resident populations was for the profit

facilities, where 34 percent of Hispanic residents and 24

percent of non-Hispanic residents resided.

For this report, intermediate care facilities for the

mentally retarded (ICF-MR’S) are defined as facilities for

the mentally retarded that either identified themselves as

ICF-MR in question 6 or reported having ICF-MR beds in

question 7d (see questionnaire in appendix II). In addition,

facilities meeting either of these requirements needed four

total beds or more to be counted as ICF-MR’S. This latter

requirement was added because of the ICF-MR participaTable C. Estimated number of Hispanic and non-Hispanic persons in the United States and in facilities for the mentally retarded, and

rates of residents in these facilities per 100,000 corresponding population, by selected States: United States, 1986

Estimated Residents in

populations MR facilities MR

Non- Non- NonState Hlspan/c Hkparrlo Hkpanb Hispanla Hispan/c Hispanb

Rate per

Number In thousands Number 100,000 population

All Slates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,497 222,581 10,181 240,291 55.0 108.0

California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,192 20,789 3,701 24,442 59.8 117.6

Texas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,911 12,774 2,167 12,669 55.4 99.3

New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,032 15,740 1,039 23,292 51.1 148.0

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,354 10,321 341 8,181 25.2 79.3

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 769 10,763 418 12,203 54.4 113.2

New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 618 7,003 188 6,493 30.5 92.7

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 608 2,711 220 1,004 36.2 37.0

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 530 949 405 465 76.4 49.0

Colorado, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 363 2,904 275 2,251 75.8 77.5

Other States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,122 138,607 1,427 149,271 67.2 107.7

11em Slate @ImateS of H@8mc pemon~ were ~~p~ted USIng a 19EI13national estimate and 1980 and 19SS state estimates of the Hispsnlc populallOn as reported by tha U.S. Bureau Or tha

Census.

5
tion requirements that specifj that four persons or more,

unrelated to the proprietor, be served. In addition, it has

been found that respondents in the very small facilities

frequently check the ICF-MR box erroneously because of a

lack of understanding of the ICF-MR program. The definition of ICF-MR’S is given in appendix III, along with

definitions of other terms used in this survey.

Based on this definition, there were 3,851 ICF-MR’S

and 10,788 non-ICF-MRs (other-MR), as shown in table

18. The table indicates that among the largest MR facilities,

those with 100 beds or more, most were ICF-MRS (78

percent). The opposite was true for the small facilities (4 to

9 beds): 73 percent were other-MR.

Similarly, table 19, which presents the distribution of

residents in these same facility categories, shows that 87

percent of the residents in the largest facilities were in

ICF-MR’S, and 71 percent in facilities with 4 to 9 beds were

in other-MR’s.

If the percents were calculated in the other direction

(by bed-size groups), the results would show that 70 percent of ICF-MR residents were in these largest facilities,

compared with under 17 percent of the other-MR

residents.

Regarding ownership, almost half (5,224) of the otherMR’s were profit facilities, compared with 29 percent

(1,106) of the ICF-MR’S. The ICF-MR’S had somewhat

higher percents of nonprofit facilities (50 to 42 percent)

and government facilities (22 to 10 percent). These figures

were derived from table 18.

The largest group of ICF-MR’S were the 1,222 nonprofit facilities with 4 to 9 beds that made up almost a third

of all ICF-MR’S. There were two such large groups of

other-MR’s, 2,774 profit facilities with 4 to 9 beds and

2,539 nonprofit facilities with 4 to 9 beds, each representing

approximately one-fourth of all other-MR’s. If the next two

largest groups of other-MR’s (profit and nonprofit facilities

with 1 to 3 beds) were added to the above groups of 4 to 9

beds, these four would constitute 7,581 of all other-MR’s

(70 percent).

Although most facilities for the mentally retarded were

profit and nonprofit, the largest facilities were those owned

by State or local governments. Table D shows that the

average bed size of the State or local government facilities

was 66.6 beds, compared with 10.5 for profit and 12.3 for

nonprofit facilities. The ICF-MRS, which averaged 134.5

beds (six to eight times higher than the profit and nonprofit

facilities), were the major source of this differential. The

other-MR’s averaged 13.8 beds in the State or local government facilities, which was only moderately higher than the

profit (8.4 beds) and nonprofit (10.7 beds) facilities.

Table D also indicates that ICF-MR’S were larger than

other-MR’s in every ownership category.

Table 19 shows some distinctive differences between

the numbers of residents in ICF-MR’S and residents in

other-MR’s. For instance, more than 88 percent of all

residents in government MR facilities were in ICF-MR’S. In

contrast, only 35 percent of all residents in profit facilities

and 40 percent in nonprofit facilities were in ICF-MR’S.

Table D. Average bed capacity of facilities for the mentally

retarded, by type of ownership and facility: United States, 1986

MR facllfly

Intermediate

Type of ownership All care Other

All types of ownership . . . . . . . . . . 18.4 42.5 9.8

Profit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.5 20.5 8.4

Nonprofi t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.3 16.3 10.7

Federal Government . . . . ., . . . . . 17.1 39.7 8,7

State or local government. . . . . . . . 66.6 134.5 13.8

The largest group of ICF-MR residents was the 92,517 in

government facilities having 100 beds or more—almost 61

percent of all ICF-MR residents. There was no one such

large group of residents in any ownership or bed category

for the other-MR’s; however, four groups stood apart from

the resb profit facilities with 4 to 9 beds, profit facilities

with 16to 99beds, nonprofit facilities with 4 to 9 beds, and

nonprofit facilities with 16 to 99 beds. Together, these four

groups made up 57 percent of the total.

Table 20 presents the age breakdown of residents in

ICF-MR’S versus other-MR’s by ownership categories.

Overall, there was less than a 4-percent difference between

ICF-MR and other-MR residents in any of the age groups.

This was somewhat misleading because of the very large

numbers of residents in the age group 22 to 64 years, By

ignoring this group and comparing only the groups for

children and the aged, the differences between these two

groups become clearer. As seen in table 14 and again here

under all MR’s, the nonprofit facilities had many times

more children than aged residents. Table 20 further shows

that this was true whether the nonprofit facility was an

ICF-MR or an other-MR. The profit facilities showed little

distinction between ICF-MR’S and other-MR’s, with a

slightly higher ratio of children to aged residents in the

ICF-MR’S. However, in the government facilities a noticeable difference emerged. For ICF-MR’S there were nearly

twice as many children as aged, but for other-MR’s there

were more aged than children.

State counts of ICF-MR’S and other-MRs are shown

in table 21, and their residents are shown in table 22,

Forty-five States had more other-MR’s than ICF-MR’S (in

most cases, many times more). Five States (Indiana, Louisiana, Minnesota, Rhode Island, and Texas) and the District of Columbia had more ICF-MR’S; of these, Louisiana

had almost 13 times as many ICF-MR’S, and Minnesota

had more than 7 times as many.

Table 23 shows the percent distribution of black and

Hispanic residents in facilities for the mentally retarded by

type of ownership and type of MR facility, and thencompares these with the corresponding percent distributions for

residents who were not black and for non-Hispanic residents. The comparisons show very little difference between

black residents and those who were not black, with no more

than a 10.1-percent difference in any comparison. The

difference was even less between Hispanic and

non-Hispanic residents, with no more than a 5,0-percent

difference in any of the comparisons.

6
List of detailed tables

1.

2.

?.,

4.

5.

6,

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

1~.

Number of facilities for the mentally retarded, number

of beds, and number of residents, by State

United States, 1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Residents in facilities for the mentally retarded per

100,000 population and ranking, by State:

United States, 1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Number of facilities for the mentally retarded by bedsize group and State: United States, 1986 . . . . . . . . . .

Percent distribution of facilities for the mentally retmded by bed-size group, according to State:

United States, 1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Number of residents in facilities for the mentally retarded by bed-size group and State United States,

1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Percent distribution of residents in facilities for the

mentally retarded by bed-size group, according to State

United States, 1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Numbem and percent distributions of facilities for the

mentally retarded and of residents by bed-size group,

according totypeof ownership: United States, 1986 . .

Number of facilities for the mentally retarded, by we

of ownership, bed size, and State: United States,

1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Numbers of facilities for the mentally retarded and of

residents, by ownership and State United States,

1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Occupancy rates of facilities for the mentally retarded,

by Statti United States, 1986...., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Number of residentsin facilities for the mentally retarded, byagegroup and State United States, 1986 . .

Percent distribution of residents in facilities for the

mentally retarded by age group, according to State

United States, 1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

8

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

16

17

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

Number of mentally retarded residentsin nursing and

related-care homes, by type of home and State

United States, 1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Percent distribution of facilities for the mentally retardedby age of residents, according totype of ownership and bed size: United States, 1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Number of black and Hispanic residents in facilities for

thementally retarded, by State: United States, 1986 . .

Number and percent of black and Hispanic residents in

facilities for the mentally retarded, by type of ownership

andbedsize: United States, 1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Percent distribution of residents in facilities for the

mentally retarded by type of ownership, according to

race and Hisprmic origim United States, 1986 . . . . . . .

Number and percent distribution of facilities for the

mentally retarded by type of facility, according to type

ofownemhip and bed size United States, 1986 . . . . . .

Number and percent distribution of residents in facilities for the mentally retarded by type of faciIity, according to type of ownership and bed size United States,

1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Number and percent distribution of residents in facilities for the mentally retarded by age of resident, according to type of facility and type of ownership:

United States, 1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Number of facilities for the mentally retarded, by type

of facility and State: United States, 1986 . . . . . . . . . . .

Number of residents in facilities for the mentally

retarded, by type of facility and State: United States,

1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Percent distribution of residents in facilities for the

mentally retarded by race, Hispanic origin, and type of

facility, according to type of ownership: United States,

1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

17

18

18

19

19

20

20

21

22

22

23
Table 1. Number of facilities for the mentally retarded, number of

beds, and number of residenta, by State: United States, 1986

Sfate Facilities Beds Residents

All States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Caliiornla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

DlstrictofColumbia. . . . . . . . . . . .

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

ln~ana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

lowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kentucky, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Louisiana, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Montana. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewHampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewJersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewYork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

North Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

RhodeIsland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

West Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

14,639

41

15

90

40

2,796

142

236

22

60

447

279

136

49

211

232

220

91

94

139

218

164

546

1,656

406

29

510

63

183

54

116

276

52

1,464

263

37

649

72

92

723

119

112

lH

274

24

68

112

160

32

293

16

Number

269,954

1,567

205

1,273

1,967

31,499

2,599

3,590

699

392

8,950

4,318

1,006

1,004

13,112

4,7a9

6,356

3,131

1,944

5,752

1,848

4,254

9,741

15,552

9,116

2,031

6,943

766

1,867

527

1,019

7,173

1,002

25,649

5,693

1,332

10,660

4,141

2,561

14,681

1,266

4,291

1,339

3,982

16,395

1,419

625

4,604

4,487

920

6,868

763

250,472

1,464

169

1,224

1,917

26,143

2,526

3,406

669

383

6,522

3,985

882

933

12,621

4,460

7,359

2,811

1,891

5,407

1,720

3,694

9,293

14,045

6,553

1,867

6,391

711

1,760

376

930

6,681

870

24,331

5,349

1,276

10,244

3,757

2,514

13,354

1,249

4,198

1,299

3,747

14,656

1,331

743

4,226

4,323

662

6,354

756

Table 2. Residents in facilities for the mentally retarded per

100,000 population and ranking, by State: United States, 1986

State Rate Ranking

All States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

North Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maine

Vermont::::::::::::::::: :::::::::

NewYork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

RhodeIsland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

IGmsas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Cahfornia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NorihCarolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewHampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewJersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Misslss[Ppi. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Virginia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

DistrictofColumtXa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

West Virginia . . . . ..<...... . . . . . . . . . .

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

103.9

25a.1

203,0

187.9

163.5

159.3

153.6

149.1

146.6

137.3

136.9

132.8

128.1

126.2

124.3

120.1

114.3

113.7

112.3

110.1

109.3

106.8

105.7

104.3

96.9

96.5

95.3

93.2

93.1

90.6

89.1

67.7

66.6

83.6

83.1

61.4

79.9

78.4

76.0

77.3

73.0

71.1

65.3

59,8

58.6

54.0

50.7

44.9

39.0

38.3

36.6

31.6

,,,

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

6

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

16

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

46

49

50

51
Table 3. Number of facilities for the mentally retarded by bed-size group and State: United States, 1986

1-9 10-15 1699 100 beds

Slate Total beds beds beds or more

All States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

California, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Connecticut. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

DlslrlclofColumbla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Georgia, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kansas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mlchlgan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewHampshlre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewMexlco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewYork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NmthCarollna, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

North Dakota. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

RhodeIsland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

SoulhCarollna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

SoulhDakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Utah . .,, ., . .,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Vlrglnla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Washlnaton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

WeslVFginla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

14,639

41

15

90

40

2,7e8

142

236

22

60

447

279

136

49

211

232

220

91

1:

216

164

546

1,858

406

29

510

63

163

54

116

276

52

1,484

263

37

649

72

92

723

119

112

51

161

274

24

88

112

180

32

293

16

10,606

30

8

75

9

2,332

113

154

14

57

219

258

132

29

55

206

76

44

79

104

181

125

460

1,519

177

10

392

58

159

49

103

223

39

910

242

18

447

25

27

582

95

66

12

119

96

11

72

60

87

18

225

5

2,097

5

6

2

10

258

12

46

2

94

5

1

6

36

3

::

1

6

14

6

2;

136

8

52

2

15

1

9

14

7

481

10

7

81

16

44

39

18

15

29

42

101

1;

30

41

5

37

2

1,531

3

1

11

16

184

14

36

5

3

122

6

2

13

66

14

63

19

10

13

22

22

1:

76

1

56

2

6

3

2

30

4

59

22

10

104

19

20

80

4

23

7

16

48

9

4

16

46

7

20

6

405

3

2

5

24

3

1

1

12

8

1

1

34

9

20

5

4

14

:

10

13

15

10

10

1

3

1

2

9

2

34

9

2

17

12

1

22

2

8

3

4

29

2

1

6

6

2

11

1

9
Table 4. Percent distribution of facilities for the mentally retarded by bed-size group, according to State: United States, ?988

1-9 10-15 16-99 100 Dads

State Total beds beds beds or more

All States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . ..’...... . . . . . . . .

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

DistrictofColumbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kensas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maine

Ma~la;d”:::::::::::::::: :::::::::

Massactwsetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewHampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewJersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewYork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

North Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

RhodeIsland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

SouthCaroIina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Vir91nia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

WestVirginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

72.4

73.2

53.3

83.3

22.5

83.3

79.6

65.3

63.6

95.0

49.0

92.5

97.1

59.2

26.1

66.6

34.5

46.4

64.0

74.6

63.0

76.2

84.2

61.8

43.6

34.5

76.9

92.1

a6.9

90.7

88.8

80,8

75.0

61.3

65.5

46.6

66.9

34.7

29.3

80.5

79.8

58.9

23.5

65.7

35.0

45.6

81.6

53.6

48.3

56.2

76.6

31.3

Percent distribution

14.3

12.2

40.0

2.2

25.0

9.2

8.5

19.1

9.1

21.0

1.8

0.7

12.2

17.1

1.3

27.7

25.3

1.1

5.8

6.4

4.9

4.8

11.6

33.5

27.6

10.2

3.2

a.2

1.9

7.8

5,1

13.5

32.4

3.5

18.9

12.5

22.2

47.8

5.4

15.1

13.4

56.9

23.2

36.9

6.3

12.5

26.8

22.8

15.6

12.6

12.5

10.5

7.3

6.7

12.2

40.0

6.6

9.9

15.3

22.7

5.0

27.3

2.9

1.5

26.5

40.8

6.0

26.6

20.9

10.6

9.4

10.1

13.4

9.2

1%

3.4

11.0

3.2

3.3

5.6

1.7

10.9

7.7

4.0

7.6

27.0

16.0

26.4

21.7

11.1

3.4

20.5

13.7

a.6

17.5

37.5

4.5

14.3

25.6

21.9

6.6

50.0

2.8

7.3

2.2

12.5

0.9

2.1

0.4

4.5

2.7

2.9

0.7

2.0

16.1

3.9

9.1

5.5

4.3

10.1

0.5

5.5

1.6

0.7

3.7

34.5

2.0

1.6

1.6

1,9

1,7

3,3

3,8

2.3

3.2

5,4

2,6

16.7

1.1

3,0

1.7

7<1

5,9

1:,:

8,3

1,1

5.4

3.3

6.2

3.8

8.2

NOTE Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding.

10
Table 5. Number of residents in facilities for the mentally retarded by bed-size group and Stat= United States, 1986

state Total

1–9 l&15

beds beds

16-99 100 beds

beds or more

All States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

DlstrlctofColumbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mlchlgam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mlssourl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewHampshIre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewMexlco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewYork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NorthCarollna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NorlhDakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oklahoma. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Rhodelsland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

SoulhCarolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Texas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Vlrglnlai . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

WestVirglnla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wyoming, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

250,472

1,484

169

1,224

1,917

28,143

2,526

3,406

669

3e3

8,522

3,985

e82

933

12,621

4,480

7,359

2,811

1,891

5,407

1,720

3,694

9,293

14,045

6,553

1,867

6,391

711

1,760

376

930

6,6el

670

24,331

5,349

1,276

10,244

3,757

2,514

13,354

1,249

4,196

1,299

3,747

14,856

1,331

743

4,226

4,323

662

6,354

756

Number

50,049 23,444

177

40

397

69

9,999

775

736

85

307

1,023

919

519

200

256

1,103

505

232

246

608

67e

489

2,319

6,620

1,150

69

1,771

418

729

192

457

772

216

4,421

1,235

132

2,139

I e2

143

2,316

4e2

471

98

735

610

83

319

361

545

98

1,370

33

52

64

1:

2,816

150

522

23

1,016

36

5

73

463

33

725

267

10

68

179

90

265

2,276

1,738

69

573

20

145

15

98

149

69

5,281

100

9;

170

465

440

188

166

344

435

1,194

29

133

341

466

46

407

20

54,090

122

65

445

459

6,910

610

1,040

155

76

3,784

417

67

351

3,976

669

2,856

906

480

583

576

773

1,934

2,303

2,610

15

1,408

68

162

120

56

e73

106

2,190

675

395

3,530

685

615

3,212

132

890

207

475

2,123

481

97

499

1,420

290

722

273

122,889

1,133

35e

1,272

6,418

991

1,106

406

2,697

2,613

291

309

7,926

2,675

3,273

1,406

1,155

4,128

285

2,342

4,755

2,646

3,055

1,694

2,639

205

724

49

319

4,887

477

12,439

3,339

670

3,667

2,520

1,271

7,386

447

2,671

650

2,102

10,929

738

194

3,025

1,892

428

3,855

430

11
Table 6. Percent distribution of residents in facilities for the mentally retarded by bed-size group, according to State: United States, 1986

All

Slate beds

1-9

Oeds

10-15

beds

16-99

beds

IMJbeds

or more

Al[States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

ConnecWrt.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

DisMctofColumbia .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

IGmsae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewHampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewYorl( . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

North Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

RhodeIsland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

SoulhCarollna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

WestVirginla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

20.0

11.9

23.7

32.4

3.6

35.5

30.7

21.6

12.7

80.2

12.0

23.1

58.8

21.4

2.0

24.6

6.9

6.3

13.0

11.2

39.4

13.2

25.0

48.6

13.4

3.7

27.7

58.8

41.4

51.1

49.1

11.6

24.6

18.2

23.1

10.3

20.9

4.8

5.7

17.3

36.6

11.2

7.5

19.6

4.1

6.2

42.9

6.5

12.6

11.4

21.6

4.4

Percent distribution

9.4

3.5

37.9

2.0

6.1

10.0

5.9

15.3

3.4

11.9

0.9

0.6

7.8

3.7

0.7

E

0.5

&

2.4

1:;

20.3

4.6

9.0

2.8

8.2

4.0

10.5

2.2

7.9

21.7

1.9

6.2

6.9

4.5

19.3

3.3

15.1

4.0

26.5

11.6

8.0

2.2

17.9

8.1

10.6

5.3

x

21.6

8.2

38.5

36.4

23.9

24.8

24.1

30.5

23.2

19.8

44.4

10.5

7.6

37.6

31.5

14.9

38.8

32.2

25.4

10.8

33.6

20.9

20.8

16.4

30.5

0.6

22.0

9.6

9,2

31.9

6.0

13.1

12.4

1::

31.0

34.5

23.6

24.5

24.1

10.6

21.2

15.9

12.7

14.3

36.1

13.1

11.6

32.8

33.6

11.4

36.1

49,1

76.3

29.2

66.4

29.9

39.2

32.5

60.7

31.6

65.6

33.0

33,1

62.8

59.7

44,5

50.0

61.1

76.3

16.6

63.4

51.2

18,8

35.7

80.7

41.3

28.8

41.1

13.0

34,3

73.1

54.8

51,1

62.4

52.5

35,8

67.1

50.6

55.3

35.8

63.6

50.0

56.1

73.6

55,4

26.1

71.6

43.6

49.7

60,7

56.9

NOTE Numbersmaynotadd to totals due to rounding.

12
Table 7. Numbers and percent distributions of facilities for the mentally retarded and of residents by bed-size group, according to type

of ownership: United States, 1986

1–9 10-15 16-99 100 beds

Type of ownersh@ Total beds r)eds beds or more

Number

All facilitle s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,639 10,606 2,097 1,531 405

Profi t, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,330 4,684 737 630 79

Nonprofit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,396 4,567 1,062 683 84

Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,913 1,155 298 218 242

Percent distribution

Allfacllltles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 72.5 14.3 10.5 2.8

Profi t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 77.2 11.6 10.0 1.2

Nonprofit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 71.4 16.6 10.7 1.3

Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 60.4 15.6 11.4 12.7

Allresldents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250,472 50,049 23,444 54,090 122,669

Profit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60,560 20,127 8,289 21,390 10,754

Nonprofit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75,193 24,447 11,922 24,322 14,502

Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114,719 5,475 3,233 8,378 97,633

All residents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 20.0 9.4 21.6 49.1

Profit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 33.2 13.7 35.3 17.8

Nonprofit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 32.5 15.9 32.3 19.3

Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 4.8 2.8 7.3 85.1

NOTE Numbersmay notadd to totalsdue to mundlng.

13
Table 8. Number of facilities for the mentally retarded, by type of ownership, bed size, and State: United States, 1986

Total Profit Nonpror7t Government

1-15 16 beds 1-15 16 beds 1-15 16 beds 1-15 16 beds

State beds or more beds or more beds or more beds or more

All States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alabama. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

District of Columbia. . . . . , . . . . . .

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

lowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .,

Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewHampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewJersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NawMexIco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewYork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

North Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

RhodeIsland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Vir9inla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

West Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

12,703

35

14

77

19

2,590

125

199

16

57

313

263

133

35

91

209

137

67

1%

195

133

486

1,735

313

18

444

60

174

50

112

237

46

1,391

252

25

528

41

71

621

113

81

1::

197

13

83

90

126

23

262

7

1,936

6

1

13

21

206

17

37

6

3

134

16

3

14

120

23

63

24

14

27

23

31

60

123

93

11

66

3

9

4

4

39

6

93

31

14?

31

21

102

6

31

10

20

77

11

5

22

52

9

31

9

5,621

11

1

24

1

1,944

23

39

2

19

130

126

94

19

13

70

10

6

54

28

124

13

46

1,014

172

6

244

2

20

19

47

149

10

313

88

176

3

1:2

4

29

1:

65

52

21

46

3

121

2

709

2

4

144

8

6

3

36

1

2

13

38

10

9

10

5

4

13

2

11

71

37

5

34

2

1

22

10

12

1

22

18

6

33

2

5

7

33

10

3

6

30

2

16

5,629

21

13

40

16

463

99

99

12

36

166

46

30

16

73

124

121

56

2

59

103

416

561

140

2

159

57

64

21

61

69

33

693

136

24

313

38

59

410

72

31

36

128

65

10

27

43

61

20

129

5

767

3

8

10

51

6

6

2

3

65

3

70

5

26

10

5

14

8

21

36

44

45

1

22

1

4

1

1

8

4

55

11

8

50

10

13

48

2

6

8

7

22

1

8

14

3

10

6

1,453

3

13

163

3

61

2

2

17

87

9

5

15

6

12

11

12

17

22

140

1

10

41

1

90

10

4

19

3

385

28

1

39

1

29

37

21

15

67

3

4

26

1

12

460

3

1

3

7

13

3

25

1

31

12

;

14

8

48

4

4

9

4

8

11

1:

5

10

2

3

2

3

9

2:

8

4;

3

2

21

2

20

2

6

22

1

:

8

:

1

14
Table 9. Numbers of facilities for the mentally retarded and of residents, by ownership and State: United States, 1986

Facilities Residents

All All

State facilities Profit Nonprofit Government facilities Pror7t Nonprofil Government

All States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

DlstrlctofColumbIa. . . . . . . . . . . .

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hawall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kansas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Minnesota. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

MIssIssIPPI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewHampshlre . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewJersey. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewYork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NorthCarollna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Norlh Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

RhodeIsland: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

SoulhCarollna. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

V[rglnla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

WestVlrglnla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

14,639

41

15

90

40

2,7e8

142

236

22

60

447

279

136

49

211

232

220

91

94

139

218

164

546

1,858

406

29

510

63

183

54

116

276

52

1,484

263

37

649

72

92

723

119

112

51

181

274

24

1:

180

32

293

16

6,330

11

1

26

5

2,088

31

45

5

19

168

129

96

32

49

80

19

16

59

32

137

15

59

1,065

209

11

276

2

22

20

47

171

10

323

100

1

198

21

17

215

6

34

3

25

98

10

55

27

76

5

137

2

6,396

24

13

48

28

534

105

105

14

39

231

51

30

16

143

129

147

68

17

87

65

124

454

625

185

3

161

58

68

22

62

77

37

748

147

32

363

48

72

458

74

37

46

135

67

10

28

51

95

23

139

13

1,913

6

1

16

7

176

6

86

3

2

48

99

10

1

;

54

7

18

20

16

25

1;

12

15

51

3

93

12

7

28

5

413

36

4

88

3

3

50

39

41

2

21

89

4

5

34

9

4

17

1

Number

250,472

1,484

169

1,224

1,917

28,143

2,526

3,406

669

383

8,522

3,985

882

933

12,621

4,480

7,359

2,811

1,891

5,407

1,720

3,694

9,293

14,045

8,553

1,867

6,391

711

1,760

376

930

6,681

870

24,331

5,349

1,276

10,244

3,757

2,514

13,354

1,249

4,198

1,299

3,747

14,856

1,331

743

4,226

4,323

862

6,354

756

60,560

49

3

178

144

15,775

554

330

59

91

1,962

509

430

485

2,509

1,326

721

663

819

580

800

82

521

7,018

3,090

642

1,989

17

245

59

199

952

56

2,209

846

1,6:

1,518

259

2,413

85

420

33

383

3,170

568

365

287

1,270

98

1,882

11

75,193

281

101

522

407

5,448

e70

770

191

289

3,612

336

128

139

5,506

1,012

2,715

812

273

1,697

486

1,416

4,209

4,439

3,151

33

2,182

429

578

139

361

872

320

8,253

1,248

454

4,332

925

886

5,150

554

473

763

1,118

2,4e8

eo

163

676

1,167

194

2,110

315

114,719

1,154

65

524

1,366

6,920

1,002

2,306

419

3

2,948

3,140

324

309

4,606

2,142

3,923

1,336

799

3,130

434

2,196

4,563

2,588

2,312

1,192

2,220

265

e37

178

370

4,857

494

13,869

3,255

776

4,072

1,314

1,369

5,791

610

3,305

503

2,246

9,188

673

215

3,263

1,886

570

2.362

15
Table 10. Occupancy rates of facilities for the mentally retarded,

by State: United States, 1988

State Percent

All Stales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

CaIiiornia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

DistrictofColumbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Illinois. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Iowa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kansas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Minnesota.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

fvfississippi. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewHampshlre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewJersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewYork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

North Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ohio. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

RhodeIsland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

SouthCarotina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

West Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

92.8

93.5

82.4

96.2

96.5

89.3

97.2

94.9

95.7

97.7

95.2

92.3

87.5

92.9

96.2

93.5

88.1

89.8

97.3

94.0

93.1

86.8

95.4

90.3

93.8

91.9

92.0

92.6

94.3

71.3

91.3

93.1

86.6

94.9

94.0

95.8

96.1

90.7

98.2

91.0

97.1

97.8

97.0

94.1

90.6

93.8

90.1

91.8

96.3

93.7

92.5

96.6

Table 11. Number of residents in facilities for the mentally

retarded, byagegroup and State: United States, 1986

lJnder.22 22-64 65 years

Sate All ages~ years years and over

All States . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alabama. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . .

California . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Connecticut. . . . . . . . . . . .

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . .

DiStt’iCtOfcOlumbia. . . . . . .

Fiorida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Iiiinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

lowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Massachusetts. . . . . . . . . .

Michigan. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nebraeka . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewHampshlre . . . . . . . . .

NewJersey . . . . . . . . . . . .

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewYork . . . . . . . . . . . . .

North Carolina . . . . . . . . . .

North Dakota . . . . . . . . . . .

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pennsylvania. . . . . . . . . . .

RhodeIsland . . . . . . . . . . .

South Carolina. . . . . . . . . .

South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . .

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . .

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

~rginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Washington . . . . . . . . . . . .

Westvirglnia . . . . . . . . . . .

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . .

250,472

1,484

169

1,224

1,917

28,143

2,526

3,406

669

383

8,522

3,985

882

933

12,621

4,480

7,359

2,811

1,891

5,407

1,720

3,694

9,293

14,045

8,553

1,867

6,391

711

1,760

376

930

6,681

870

24,331

5,349

1,276

10,244

3,757

2,514

13,354

1,249

4,198

1,299

3,747

14,856

1,331

743

4,226

4,323

862

8,354

756

40,954

189

58

253

537

6,146

447

525

88

60

1,550

777

81

f41

2,341

723

831

618

358

1,550

198

367

982

1,200

1,152

380

1,256

94

248

132

79

709

168

3,042

860

124

1,509

794

359

2,228

76

898

171

592

3,079

378

77

652

642

117

1,001

118

190,469

1,211

110

948

1,368

20,808

2,003

2,729

531

292

6,211

2,974

606

695

9,391

3,616

5,300

2,144

1,431

3,726

1,301

3,153

7,640

11,407

6,798

1,398

4,567

586

1,449

238

677

4,807

661

19,108

3,996

1,024

8,017

2,734

2,117

10,032

1,068

3,109

1,097

2,960

9,908

914

515

3,300

3,516

714

4,900

19,049

64

23

12

1,189

76

152

50

31

761

234

195

97

889

141

1,228

49

102

131

221

174

671

1,436

605

89

568

31

63

17:

1,065

41

2,161

493

128

718

229

38

1,094

105

193

1:

1,869

Ifl

274

165

31

453

72

lFc,rfac]Htiesmt rep.mtlngagegroups,Irwuteddataw’ere used.

16
Table 12. Percent distribution of residents ‘in facilities for the

mentally retarded byagegroup, according to State:

United States, 1986

Under 22 22-64 65 yeas

State All ages yeats yeare and over

Table 13. Number of mentally retarded residents in nursing and

related-care homes, by type of home and Stat= United States,

1988

Nursing Re.sident/81

State Total homed faciiiiies

Ali States . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . .

California $ . . . . . . . . . . . .

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Connecticut, . . . . . . . . . . .

Dalaware . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Dlstrlct of Columbia. . . . . . .

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hawall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . .

Mlchlgan . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nebrasl(a . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewHampshire. . . . . . . . .

NewJersey . . . . . . . . . . . .

NawMexico . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewYork . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NorthCarollna . . . . . . . . . .

North Dakota . . . . . . . . . . .

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pennsylvanlao . . . . . . . . . .

RhodeIsland . . . . . . . . . . .

SoulhCarollna. . . . . . . . . .

South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . .

Tannessae . . . . . . . . . . . .

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Vermont. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Washington . . . . . . . . . . . .

Westvirglnia . . . . . . . . . . .

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . .

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

16.4

12.7

35.2

20.6

28.1

21 .e

17.7

15.4

13.2

15.7

18.2

19.5

9.2

15.1

18.6

16.1

11.3

22.0

18.9

28.6

11.5

9.9

10.6

6.5

13.5

20.4

19.7

13.2

14.1

35.0

6.5

10.6

19.3

12.5

16.1

9.7

14.7

20.9

14.3

16.7

6.1

21.4

13.2

15.a

20.7

27.8

10.4

15.4

14.8

13.6

15.8

15.5

76.0

81.e

64.8

77.6

71.3

73.9

79.3

80.1

79.4

76,2

72.9

74.6

68.7

74.5

74.4

80.7

72.0

76.3

75.7

69.0

76.6

85.4

82.2

81.2

79.5

74.9

71.5

82.4

82.3

63.3

72.8

73.4

75.9

78.5

74.7

80.2

78.3

73.0

84.2

75.1

85.5

74.1

84.5

79.0

66.7

69.3

69.2

78.1

81.3

82.8

77.1

74.9

7.6

5.7

1,9

0.6

4.2

3.0

4.5

7.5

e.1

8.9

5.9

22.1

10.4

7.0

3.2

16.7

1.7

5.4

2.4

12.9

4.7

7.2

10.2

7.1

4.7

8.9

4.4

3.6

1.6

18.7

16.0

4.7

9.0

9.2

10.0

7.0

e.o

1.5

a.2

8.4

4.6

2.3

5.2

12.6

2.9

20.4

6.5

3.8

3.6

7.1

9.6

All States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alabama. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

DistrictofColumbis. . . . . . . . . . . .

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Iiiinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

lowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewHampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

North Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

RhodeIsland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

West Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

39,527

704

23

165

898

2,189

405

740

32

69

669

1,269

78

120

2,749

1,976

1,051

247

1,262

460

313

328

1,598

1,928

910

238

1,201

131

261

66

184

685

118

2,100

2,020

296

1,763

1,009

404

I ,e52

195

473

125

551

1,131

129

66

1,011

1,026

319

1,733

17

Number

30,eoo

687

23

45

878

1,546

365

624

32

5.%

1,174

43

03

2,668

1,911

845

243

694

460

22a

323

1,400

642

a7i

237

1,050

131

217

52

144

303

78

1,544

583

253

1,633

942

325

1,050

173

300

117

527

1,099

129

33

531

867

267

1,695

17

8,627

17

120

20

643

40

116

340

95

35

37

81

65

206

4

568

85

5

198

1,086

39

1

151

44

14

40

382

40

556

1,437

43

130

67

79

802

22

173

8

24

32

53

4eo

159

52

38

NOTE Numberemay notadd to totalsdue to reundlng. 1lm~des hospital-basedfacilities.

17
Table 14. Percent distribution of facilities for the mentally

retarded by age of residents, according to type of ownership and

bed size: United States, 1986

Type of ownerah~ All Under 22 22-64 65 years

and bed size age3 years years and over

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

l–9beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

lC-15beds . . . . . . . . . . . .

18-99 beds . . . . . . . . . . . .

100 beds or more . . . . . . . .

Profit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

l-9 beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

lC-15 beds . . . . . . . . . . . .

18-99 beds . . . . . . . . . . . .

100 bedsormore . . . . . . . .

Nonprofi t . . . . . . . . . . . .

l-9 beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10-15 beds . . . . . . . . . . . .

18-99 beds . . . . . . . . . . . .

100 bedsormore . . . . . . . .

Government . . . . . . . . . . .

l-9 beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10-15 beds . . . . . . . . . . . .

18-99 beds . . . . . . . . . . . .

100 bedsormore . . . . . . . .

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

Percent distribution

16.4 76.0

15.2 78,6

10.7 82.0

20.9 70.5

16.0 76.4

15.8 72.6

17.5 72.4

8.0 78.3

16.6 70.1

17.3 73.7

19.9 76.5

13.5 83.3

13.3 83,6

26.6 70.3

24.9 69.6

14.4 77.5

14.3 79.5

7.9 85.3

15.2 71.8

14.5 77.6

7.6

6.2

7.3

8.7

7.7

11.6

10.0

13.8

13.3

9.0

3.6

3.2

3.1

3.0

5.4

8.1

6.2

6.6

13.1

7.9

NOTE Numbersmaynotadd to totalsdue to mundlng.

Table 15. Number of black and Hispanic residents in facilities for

the mentally retarded, by State: United States, 1986

Black Hlspanlc

State residents residents

All States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arlransas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Californi a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

DistrlctofColumtAa. . . . . . . . . . . .

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kansae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

MIssIssIPPI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

MOnlan6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nebraska. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewHampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewJereey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewYork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

North Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

RhodeIsland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

WestVirglnla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

29,442

311

(’)

57

392

2,466

90

262

120

273

1,746

1,134

, 8$;

’391

99

158

164

1,586

4

996

293

1,411

89

649

735

:;

34

3

985

23

2,729

1,618

, d:;

’326

49

1,312

43

1,344

G:]

2,175

4

3

1,040

80

47

170

3

10,181

(’)

(’)

220

10

3,701

275

89

s::

8

30

4;:

40

25

57

~~

2:

74

747

36

7

51

1:

15

18:

405

1,039

30

(’)

231

31

26

172

9

~3

(’)

4

2,187

50

(’)

6~

Q

47

1Fewarthan3repmted.

18
Table 16, Number and percent of black and Hispanic residents in facilities for the mentally retarded, by type of ownership and bed size:

United States, 1986

Black Hispanic Black Hispanti

Type of ownership and bed size residents residents residents residents

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . .

l-15 beds, . . . . . . . . .

16 bedsormore. . . . . .

l-15 beds . . . . . . . . . .

16 beds or more. . . . . .

l-15 beds, . . . . . . . . .

16 bedsormore. . . . . .

l-15 beds . . . . . . . . . .

16 beds or more. . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

All types of ownership

Nonprofi

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Government

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

,. ...,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Number Percent

29,442 10,181

6,835 3,147

22,607 7,034

2,720 1,590

3,783 1,905

3,228 1,177

3,710 1,139

887 380

15,114 3,990

11.e 4.1

9.3 4.3

12.8 4.0

9.6 5.8

11.6 5.9

8.9 3.2

9.8 2.9

10.2 4.4

14.3 3.8

Table 17. Percent distribution of residents in facilities for the mentally retarded by type of ownership, according to race and Hispanic

origin: United States, 1986

All Black Other than Hispanic Non-Hispan&

Type of ownetship residents residents black residents residents residents

Percent distribution

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Profit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24.2 22.1 24.5 34.3

Nonprofit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

23.7

30.0 23.8 30.e 22.7

Government, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

30.3

45.8 54.3 44.7 42.9 45.9

NOTE Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding,

19
Table 18. Number and percent distribution of facilities for the mentally retarded by type of facility, according to type of ownership and

bed size: United States, 1986

Mental retardation facility

Intermediate Intermediate

Type of ownership and bad size All care Other Ail care Other

Percent distribution

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

l-3beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4-9beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10-15beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16-99beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

100bedsormore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

14,639 3,851 10,788

2,590 2,590

8,016 2,176 5,640

2,097 790 1,307

1,531 569 962

405 316 89

100.0 26.3 73.7

100.0 100.0

100.0 27.1 72.9

100.0 37.7 62,3

100.0 37.2 62.8

100.0 78.0 22.0

Profit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

l-3beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4-9beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10-15beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16-99beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

100bedsormore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6,330 1,106 5,224

1,462 1,462

3,422 648 2,774

737 215 522

630 195 435

79 48 31

100.0 17.5 82.5

100.0 100.0

100.0 18.9 81.1

100.0 29.2 70.8

100.0 31.0 69.0

100.0 60.8 39.2

Nonprofit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

l-3beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4-9beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10-15beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16-99beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

100bedsormore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6,396 1,915 4,481

806 806

3,761 1,222 2,539

1,062 413 649

663 235 448

64 45 39

100.0 29.9 70.1

100.0 100,0

100.0 32.5 67.5

100.0 38.9 61.1

100.0 34.4 65.6

100.0 53.6 46.4

Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

R3beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4-9beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10-15beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16-99beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ioobedsormore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1,913 830 1,083

322 322

833 308 527

298 162 136

218 139 79

242 223 19

100.0 43.4 56.6

100.0 100.0

100.0 36.7 63.3

100.0 54.4 45.6

100.0 63.8 36.2

100.0 92.1 7.9

NOTE For this report, mental retardationfacilitieswithfewer thsn 4 beds did not qualify ss intermediate care fasllitles for tk mentally retarded.

Tabie 19. Number and percent distribution of residents in facilities for the mentaiiy retarded by type of facility, according to type of

ownership and bedsize: United States, 1986

Mental retardation facility

Intermediate Intermediate

Type of ownerehip and bed size All care Other All care Other

Number Percent distribution

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

l-3beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4-9beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

lC!-16beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16-99beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

100bedsormore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

250,472 152,755 97,717 100.0 61.0 39.0

5,358

44,691

23,444

54,090

122,869

5,356

31,753

14,320

30,145

16,141

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

71.1

61.1

55.7

13.1

12,936

9,124

23,945

106,746

26.9

36.9

44,3

86.9

Protit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

l-3beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4-9beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10-15beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16-99beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

100bedsormore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

60,560 21,290 39,270 100.0 35.2 64,8

2,857

17,270

8,269

21,390

10,754

2,657

13,726

5,698

12,458

4,531

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

79.5

68.7

56,2

42.1

3,544

2,591

8,932

6,223

20.5

31.3

41.8

57.9

Nonprofit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

X3beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4-9beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10-15beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16-99beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

100bedsormore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

75,193 30,022 45,171

1,836

15,140

7,124

14,577

6,494

100.0 39.9 60.1

100.0 100.0

100.0 33.0 67.0

100.0 40.2 59.8

100.0 40.1 59.9

100.0 55,2 44.8

1,836

22,611

11,922

24,322

14,502

7,471

4,798

9,745

8,008

Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

l-3beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4-9beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10-15beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16-99beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

100bedsormore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

114,719 101,443 13,276 100.0 86.4 11.6

100.0 100.0

100.0 40.0 60.0

100.0 53.7 46.3

100.0 62,9 37.1

100.0 94.6 5,2

665

4,810

3,233

8,378

97,633

665

2,887

1,498

3,110

5,116

1,923

1,735

5,268

92,517

NOTE For this report, mental retardation facilities with fewer than 4 beds dld not qualify as intermediate care facilities for the mentally retarded.

20
Table 20, Number and percent distribution of residents in facilities for the mentally retarded by age of residentj according to type of

facility and type of ownership: United States, 1986

Typeof faclllty All Under 22-64 65 years All Under 2244 65 years

and ownership ages 22 years years and over ages 22 years years and over

Number Percent distribufiin

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1*37,145 38,841 180,341 17,963 i 00.0 16.4 76.0 7.6

Profit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56,084 8,873 40,728 6,483 100.0 15.6 72.6

Nonprofit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11.6

71,039 14,159 54,353 2,527 100.0 19.9 76.5

Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3.6

110,022 15,809 85,260 8,953 100.0 14.4 77.5 8.1

Intermediate care . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146,177 23,102 133,290 9,785 100.0 15.8 77.5 6.7

Profit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,176 3,020 15,520 1,636 100.0 15.0

Nonprofit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

76.9 8.1

28,607 5,525 22,232 850 100.0 19.3 77.7

Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3.0

97,394 14,557 75,538 7,299 100.0 14.9 77.6 7.5

Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X$968 15,739 67,051 8,178 100.0 17.3 73.7 9.0

Profit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35,908 5,853 25,208 4,847 100.0 16.3 70.2

Nonprofit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

13.5

42,432 8,634 32,121 1,677 100.0 20.3 75.7

Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.0

12,628 1,252 9,722 1,654 100.0 9.9 77.0 13.1

1~cludes 13,327 residents for whom age ~s not repo~~$

21
Table 21. Number of facilities for the mentally retarded, by type

of facility and State: United Statea, 1986

Mental retardation facility

Intermediate

State All care Other

All States . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arizona. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . .

California . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Connecticut. . . . . . . . . . . .

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . .

District of Columbia. . . . . . .

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kansas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Massachusetts. . . . . . . . . .

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mississippi. . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mlssourl . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewHampshire . . . . . . . . .

NewJersey . . . . . . . . . . . .

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewYork . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NorIhCarolina . . . . . . . . . .

North Dakota . . . . . . . . . . .

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oregon. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pennsylvania. . . . . . . . . . .

RhodeIsland . . . . . . . . . . .

South Carolina. . . . . . . . . .

South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . .

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . .

Texas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Utah. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Washington . . . . . . . . . . . .

WestVirginia . . . . . . . . . . .

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . .

14,639

41

15

90

40

2,798

142

236

22

60

447

279

136

49

211

232

220

91

94

139

218

184

546

1,858

406

5:

63

183

54

116

276

52

1,484

283

37

649

72

92

723

119

112

51

181

274

24

88

112

180

32

293

16

Number

3,851

8

5

9

329

49

79

9

38

114

34

20

20

85

167

24

27

12

129

68

25

59

407

359

;

10

14

6

14

34

16

609

51

16

211

21

19

112

95

47

20

33

203

11

22

25

46

7

46

10,788

33

10

90

31

2,469

93

157

13

22

333

245

116

1$

65

196

64

82

IN

139

487

1,451

47

19

433

53

169

48

102

242

36

875

232

21

438

51

73

611

24

65

1:

71

13

66

87

134

25

247

16

Table 22. Number of residents in facilities for the mentally

retarded, bytypeof facility and State: United States, 1986

Mental retardatkvr fawty

Intermediate

State All care Other

All States . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arizona. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . .

California . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Connecticut. . . . . . . . . . . .

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . .

DistriclofColumbia. . . . . . .

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Indiana. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Massachusetts. . . . . . . . . .

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mississippi. . . . . . . . . . . . .

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewHampshire . . . . . . . . .

New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . .

New Mexico. . . . . . . . . . . .

NewYork . . . . . . . . . . . . .

North Carolina . . . . . . . . . .

North Dakota . . . . . . . . . . .

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oregon. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pennsylvania. . . . . . . . . . .

RhodeIsland . . . . . . . . . . .

SouthCarollna. . . . . . . . . .

South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . .

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . .

Texas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Washington . . . . . . . . . . . .

WestVirginia . . . . . . . . . . .

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . .

250,472

1,484

169

1,224

1,917

28,143

2,526

3,406

669

383

8,522

3,985

882

933

12,621

4,480

7,359

2,811

1,891

5,407

1,720

3,694

9,293

14,045

8,553

1,867

6,391

711

1,760

376

930

6,661

870

24,331

5,349

1,276

10,244

3,757

2,514

13,354

1,249

4,198

1,299

3,747

14,856

1,331

743

4,226

4,323

662

6,354

756

Number

152,755

1,176

105

1,421

8,862

1,663

2,253

498

296

4,788

2,913

370

525

9,197

3,634

2,102

2,121

1,194

5,220

932

2,533

4,757

4,532

7,198

1,558

2,640

319

756

173

355

5,034

626

15,727

3,663

976

7,347

2,993

1,711

7,665

973

3,375

926

2,522

13,636

1,221

304

3,268

2,592

441

3,644

97,717

306

64

1,224

496

19,281

863

1,153

173

87

3,734

1,072

512

408

3,424

646

5,257

690

697

167

788

1,161

4,536

9,513

1,355

309

3,751

392

1,004

203

575

1,647

244

8,604

1,666

300

2,897

764

803

5,669

276

823

373

1,225

“110

439

938

1,731

421

2,710

756

22
Table 23. Percent distribution of residents in facilities for the mentally retarded by race, Hispanic origin, and type of facility, according

to type of ownership: United States, 1986

Ail types

Race, Hlspanfo orlgkr, type of facility of owneishlp Profit Nonprofit Government

Percent distribution

Black residents

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Intermedlalecare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69.9 35.0 47.6 93.7

Other. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30.1 65.0 52.2 6.3

Other than black residents

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Intermedlatecare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59.8 35.2 39.2 87.6

Other. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40.2 64.6 60.8 12.4

Hlspanlc residents

Toll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Intermedlatecare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67.1 30.5 44.3 85.1

Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42.9 69.5 55.7 14.9

Non-Hispanic residents

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Intermedlatecare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61.2 35.5 39.8 88.6

Other. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36.8 64.5 60.2 11.4

23
Appendixes

Contents

I. Technical notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Creation ofthe Inventory ofLong-Term Care Places file

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Cleanup offile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mailout

25

. . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . 25

Scopeofthesurvey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Editing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

26

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

II. Questionnaire used inthe survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

III. Classification and definitionsof terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..OO 31

~pes of facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Characteristics of facilities

31

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..O. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

24
Appendix I

Technical notes

Creation of the Inventory of

Long-Term Care Places file

The 1982 National Master Facility Invento~ (NMFI)

was used as the starting point in the creation of the nursing

and related-care home portion of the 1986 Inventory of

Long-Term Care Places (ILTCP). There were approximately 26,000 homes in this file. For facilities for the

mentally retarded, the starting point was a 1982 study by

the University of Minnesota’s Center for Residential and

Community Services (CRCS). There were about 15,000

mental retardation (MR) facilities on this file.

To update both files, letters were sent to over 200 State

and national agencies in July 1985 asking them to send any

and all listings and directories that they maintained for

nursing and related-care homes and facilities for the mentally retarded. In September, followup letters were sent to

those agencies that had not responded. These letters would

very often name the specific types of facilities (for example,

adult foster care homes, family care homes, and congregate

living facilities) for which directories had not been received

and that the agency was known to license or regulate.

Additional contacts were made to nonresponding agencies

from October through December.

The Minnesota CRCS file included place names obtained through contacts with local area MR sources. Because of extremely tight time constraints, the National

Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) was unable to contact

all these local area sources. The only ones contacted were

those located in States where the number of MR facilities

reported by NCHS sources was significantly lower than the

number reported by CRCS.

As the listings and directories of facilities were received, they were manually matched against the 26,000

nursing and related-care homes or the 15,000 MR facilities.

Any facility that could not be found on these two master

files was considered new and was assigned a unique identification number. This number, along with the new facility’s

name and address, was added to the appropriate nursing

home or MR file.

While working with the CRCS file, almost 1,500 places

were found with no names or addresses; they were merely

given numbers (for example, Home No. 78). The reason for

this, apparently, was that certain States wanted to keep the

location of these facilities confidential. To do this, the data

were collected by the State and given to CRCS with all

identifiers removed. Without addresses, these places had to

be removed from the MR file. (It is likely that many of

these 1,500 facilities were in the new listings obtained from

the NCHS State sources and were added back into the file

as new MR facilities.)

Cleanup of file

After adding new facilities, a matching process was

begun for removing duplicates from within and between the

two files. The nursing home file was sorted three wayx (I)

by State, first 10 characters of city and first 10 characters of

address; (2) by State, first 10 characters of city and first 10

characters of name; and (3) by State, zip, and first 10

characters of address. (In choosing only the first 10characters of the name, address, and city fields, more matches

were created and more duplicates could be caught and

removed.) The same procedures were repeated with the

MR file. The nursing home and MR files then were merged

and the above procedures were repeated once again. If

there were any doubts as to whether two facilities were

duplicates, both were kept on the file. Whatever duplicates

still remained on the file would, in theory, be reported by

the respondents (per instructions on the questionnaire) and

removed later.

Mailout

The first questionnaire mailout was begun by the U.S.

Bureau of the Census on February 14, 1986; this was

followed by a reminder letter a week later. On March 14, a

second questionnaire was sent to all nonresponding facilities, and on April 4 a third questionnaire was sent to the

remaining nonrespondents.

By the end of the third mailout, nearly 3,300 questionnaires had been returned by the post office. These were

reviewed to determine which ones would or would not be

eligible for telephone and personal interview field followup.

As a result of this review, approximately 1,400 cases were

declared eligible for followup, and about 1,900 were declared ineligible. The 1,900 rejects fell into the following

three main categories

1.

2.

3.

Small residential and family care homes

Unknown types of facilities from New Jersey

Places with incomplete names and addresses

25
The facilities in the first catego~, with names like

“Jane Smith’s Guest Home” and “Douglas Family Home;’

probably had gone out of business. More than 600 of these

were located in California and Michigan. These two States

combined had more than 8,500 of these small residential

care facilities in the 1982 NMFI file, and virtually all of

them were retained on the ILTCP file. (Only the duplicates

were removed.) Experience has shown that these types of

places are constantly going in and out of business. The fact

that the post office could not locate them even with complete addresses led to the decision to treat them as out of

business and not subject to field followup.

The second category consisted of names of facilities

originally obtained from New Jersey’s Bureau of Rooming

and Boarding House Standards, The Bureau’s listing included everything from board-and-care facilities (in scope)

to rooming houses and dormitories (out of scope). Although each facility listed by this bureau had a classification

code, a sizable number were classified as unknown (because they had not yet been visited and classified). To avoid

losing the board-and-care places that might be present in

this unknown group, a decision was made to include all the

unknowns and remove those that were out of scope during

the survey. Approximately 350 of these unknown facilities

were found among the Post Master returns and eliminated

from the field followup.

The third catego~ consisted of names of facilities with

inadequate and undeliverable names and addresses (for

example, “Resident, Fairfax Street, Putnam, CT 06260”

and “Group Home, Marietta, GA 30060”).

The field followup was completed in July, and the final

overall response rate was 96 percent.

Scope of the survey

The survey contains two broad categories of facilities

(1) nursing and related-care homes and (2) facilities for the

mentally retarded. The first category includes skilled nursing facilities (SNF’S), intermediate care facilities (ICF’S),

licensed but uncertified nursing homes, and residential care

facilities (for example, homes for the aged, personal care

homes, and board-and-care homes).

NCHS classified any nursing home with SNF beds as

an SNF, and any nursing home with ICF beds but no SNF

beds as an ICF. Hospital-based nursing homes can be SNF,

ICF, or uncertified.

The second category, facilities for the mentally retarded, includes intermediate care facilities for the mentally

retarded (ICF-MR) and all other facilities for the mentally

retarded. An ICF-MR is a facility that has met certification

requirements set forth in Medicaid re~lations.

Editing

All nonresponding facilities were removed from this

file. Also removed were facilities that provided day care

only, outpatient care only, or served an out-of-scope population (for example, only served unwed pregnant women or

blind, deaf, alcoholic, or drug abusing persons).

Edits were conducted to correct inconsistencies between data items. For missing items, every attempt was

made to impute data from existing information, but when

this was not possible, 1982 data were substituted when

available.

26
Appendix II

Questionnaire used in

the survey

I

Dear Administrator,

I

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

BUREAU OFTHE CENSUS

ACTING AS COLLECTING AGENT FORTHE

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ANO HUMAN SERVICES

PUSUC HEALTM SERVICE

1986 INVENTORY OF

LONG-TERM CARE

PLACES

Bureauof theCensus

1201 East Tmttr Strast

Jaffumnvillo, Indiana 47132

As part of our responsibility to provide information on the NatIon’s health resources, the National

Center for Health Statistics and tha National Canter for HeaIth Services Research and Health Care

Technology Assaasment collect information about facilities providing health care including hospitals,

nursing and ralated care homes, and facilities that provide some kind of personal care, board and care,

or domiciliary cara. We are interested in all homes, even those with only one bsd, as long as care is

provided to nonralativas. This information is collected under tha authority of Sections 304 and 306

(42 U.S.C. 242b and 242kl of the Public Health Sarvice Act and, as in past yeara, we have askad tha

Buraau of tha Census to conduct tha survey for us.

The purpose of this survey is to obtain current information from each facility on its ownership, number

of beds, certification statua, end other related facility characteristics. The questionnaira is short and

will take only a faw minutas of your time. The information that you provide for sections A and B of the

questionnaire will be mada available by the Centers upon request, However, the data from section C

will be held in strict confidence, will be used only for statistical purposes, ❑nd will not be releasedto

anyone undar any circumstances other than es statistical summaries. These summaries will only be

presented in a manner which will ansure that no individual facility can be identified.

Your participation in this survey ia voluntary and thare are no penalties for your refusal to participate.

However, the information you can provide is needed by the health industry and your cooperation would

ba greatly appreciated, Please mail the completad form to the Bureau of the Census within 5 days in the

anclosed envelope which requires no poataga.

SincereIy yours,

+

--

/%’ “:.~-fiy

Manning Felnleib, M. D., Dr. P.H.

Director

National Center for Health Statiatica

John E. Mershall, Ph. D.

Director

National Center for Health Sarvices

Research and Health Care Technology Assessment

27
[

.

i

I PGM 3 [

Pleese anawer ell questions unless otherwise instructed. Definitions and special instructions are given with the

questions when needed. If your enswer to a question is ‘“None,” mark (X) the “None” box where provided or

put a zero in the appropriate space. DO NOT LEAVE THE SPACE BLANK.

IDENTIFICATION OF FACILITY

Note: Detail-d Identificatkm Information Is needed to prevent duplicate iistings and to assure that

your faoility is propariy rapresonted in this survey.

[. Is tho NAME of your home or facility cor- [

008 1

ract as shown on the maiiing Iabel? I

I U Yes

I 2❑ No — What 18 tho correet name? w

/

f

2. Is tho ADDRESS on tho m=lilng iabai corract? i 009

I

1 1 Cl Yea

I

I

2nN0— What is the corr.ct maliing addrm-? Y

I Number or box. street or route

1

I

I

1

3. What is the telephono numbar of your bomb or

010 I Area code

faciiity?

; Number

I

I

1

I I

I I — I

FACILITY INFORMATION

L% Which of thasa best describes the type of ownerahlp of

your horn= or facliity?

Mark (X) only one box.

I

Sa. What .g. group does your faciiity PRiMARiLY arrnre?

I Mark (X) only one box.

I

I

b. Which of thaae groups of persona do.s your home or

facillty sawa PRiMARILY or EXCLUSIVELY?

Mark (X) only ona box.

Remarks

g

I H For profit (an indhddual. partnership, or e corporation)

20 Nonprofit (for example, e religious group or

nonprofit corporation)

3a Federal government

40 State or local government

g I I I I

1❑ Adults ~ What ages?

20 ChiIdren ~ What ages?

3 a Both

~

1 ❑ Mentally ill only

2❑ Mentelly retarded or developmentally dissblad only

30 Mentally retarded or mentelly ill

4D Other ne”rologkally or physically handicapped

so Blind or deaf

en Unwed mothers

7D Alcoholics or drug abusera

en Orphans or other dependent children

9D Terminally ill

loo Soma other specisl group — spechjr~

on Does not serve one special group primarily or

exclusively

28
6. Which of these categories describes your

horn. or facility or a unit of your facility?

Mark (X) &that apply.

FACILITY INFORMATION — Continued

~

*

01 m A Skilled Nursing Facilii (SNFI, certified under either

Medicare or Madicaid

02 ❑ An IntermediateCare Facility (ICF), certifiedunder

Medicaid

ra, How many beds dons your home or facifity

CURRENTLY hava setup and staffed for

U*O? Do not Include bads for day care only

patients. If a hospitaI or rntiramrmt centcrr.

incIuda only bed6 for your long-term cam unit.

b, g:myfvw~m~bem::dm

Nursing Facility

E

(~) Medicare?

@NF) beds by —

(2) MadlcaId?

C. How many beds aro cwtif had as Intermediate

C-r= Facility (ICF) beds by Madicald? Exciudl

beds that am certified ● s mentally retarded

ICF-MR.

d. How many beds are certified as

lntormodlato Care Facility for thm Mentally

R=tardmd [ICF-MFU beds by Medi:ald?

os ❑ An IntermediateCare Facilityfor the Mentally Retarded

(ICF-MR) cerdfied under Medicaid ----------------------------------------------------

04D A Iicenaed but not certified nuralng home

05a A long-term care wing/unit of a licensed hospital

06❑ A nursing care unit of e retirement center

07 ❑ A sheltered or cuetodial care home, including homa for the

aged, edult foster care home, board and care home

080 Some other kind of nursing or personal cara home —- —----- __ ——____—---—- —- ——-—--—-——

09 ❑ A foster home for the mentalIy reterdad/developmentally disabled

10❑ A group reaide”ce for the mentally retarded/developmentally disabled

I I n A semi-independent living program for the maritallyratardedldevelopmentall}

disabled

12 U A State institution for the mentally reta’rded/developmentally disabled

13 ❑ Some other kind of place for the mentally retarded/developmentally disablad

14D Day cera facility or outpatient facility only

_————_---- __ ———_____-—— ———— ____________

*5❑ None of the above — Describe your kind of Pfac.e q

q

Beda set up and steffed for use

07a

SNF Medicare bads

on None

~

SNF Medicaid beds

on None

2ELI

ICF Medicaid beda

on None

@

ICF-MR Medicaid beda

“ on None

If this is a licensed hospital with,a long-term care wing or unit, please raapond for the lon8-term care unit On[Y. If,thi$ is.

‘ a nursing care unit of tr retirement center, pleaae respond only for the nursing care unit.

8a. Botwrmrt January 1.1985 and Dacambar 37,

1986. APPROXIMATELY how many I

adml=alono did YOU! home ,or facility have? I

Admissions in 1985.

,.. .

b. Wara you [n oporathm for ail of 1985? I 021

. .

i. .1 ❑ l’#as

I 2 ❑ No — How many months wore you in

opnration in 19S67 ~

I

I

I

I Months

C. How many residents or patients ~ 022 J

stayed In this facility LAST NIGHT? I

I

Residents last night

?emarks

29
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION

Information contained in this section which would permit identification of any individual or establishment is being

collected with a guarantee that it will be held in strict confidence by the Buraau of the Census, NCHSR, and NCHS,

NOTICE: will be used only for purposes stated in this study, and wili not ba disclosed or releaaed to anyona, other than

authorized staff of NCHSR and NCHS without tha consent of the individual or establishment in accordance with

Saotion 308(d) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 242m).

g. In addition to room and board, does your horn. or facility ~ ~23

ROUTINELY provide residents -

Please answer yes or no for each activity. ~

& nursing or madlcal cara? I 1❑ Yes 20No

b.:::l:id:d:ar medications that maybe seIf1

I

024 1

1 1❑ Yes 20No

C. help with bathing?

I 025 I

I 1•l Yes 20No

I

d. help with drassing? I 026

I I •l Yas 20N0

& heIp with correspondence or shopping? I 027 I

I 1•l Yes 20No

f. help with walking or getting about?

I 028 I

I

I •l Yes 20No

g. help with ●ating?

I 029

I 1•l Yas 20No

h. room and board ONLY? I 030 I

1 I •l Yas 20No

,

! O. Doas your facility provide 24-hour-a-day, saven-day-a- i 031

weak ●upervlsion of Its rasidents? 1•l Yes 20No I

11. APPROXIMATELY how many persons who stayed Iast

I 032 I

night in your homa or facility, or long-term care unit if a I

hospital or retirement center, were —

Residents

& residents whosa cam is contracted by the Veterans

I XO VA facility

Administration? (If VA facility, mark (X) box.)

1

on None

b. Black rasldents? I

033 I

1 Biack rasidents

on None

C. residents of Hispanic orlgln or ●ncestry [a.g., Cuban, I

034 I

Mexican, Puerto Rican, ●tc.}?

I

Hispanic rasidenta

I o ❑ None I

4. age 21 m- lesa? . .. . . . . . . . . . . . /036/ 21 y6aw or less 0( )None

—

e. ag&22”t~0U”gh 64? . . . . . . . . . . . . J037R ._Z2-64 years of age i3 ( > None

f-. ●~e6Serold4r7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .W38/ __J55 Ynars Or alder O t > None

..

k“ Meatallu r8tardad? . . .. . . . . . . . . . /03g/ ~enta 1 Ly retarded O ( > NonREWWKS

—-.

30
Appendix Ill

Classification and

definitions of terms

Types of facilities

Many factors were considered before a facility was

classified as a mental retardation (MR) facility. Responses

to the Inventory of Long-Term Care Places (ILTCP) questionnaire items concerning what groups of persons were

primarily served (Q.5b), which categories describe the facility (Q.6), how many intermediate care facility for the

mentally retarded beds (Q.7d), and how many MR residents (Q.llg) were used in combination with questions

intended for nursing home identification (such as presence

of skilled nursing facility (SNF) or intermediate care facility

(ICF) beds and provision of nursing or medical care). If a

facility could not be clearly classified after examining these

factors, the directo~ (or directories) that listed this facility

was located, and the agency sending the directory was

identified, If the agency dealt exclusively with MR facilities,

the facility then would be classified as MR.

Intermediate cwe fmility for the mentally retarded (ICFMR)—A facility whose primaxy function is to serve residents who are mentally retarded. It must have four total

beds or more and must participate in the ICF-MR Medicaid program.

Other facility for the mentally retarded (other-MR)–A

facility whose prima~ function is to serve residents who are

mentally retarded. It can have one bed or more, but cannot

participate in the ICF-MR Medicaid program.

Nursing home,s–Facilities had to have three beds or

more. A home was classified as a nursing home if it was (1)

certified as an SNF, (2) certified as an ICF, (3) not certified

but licensed as a nursing home, (4) identified as a nursing

care unit of a retirement center, or (5) determined to

provide nursing or medical care, andlor provide supervision

over medications that may be self-administered.

Hospital-based fmilities—Facilities had to have three

beds or more. A facility was classified as hospital based if it

was (1) identified as such by the Health Care Financing

Administration or (2) reported itself to be exclusively

hospital based on the ILTCP questionnaire.

Residential facilities—Facilities had to have three beds

or more, A facility was classified as residential if it (1) was

not classified as a nursing home or hospital-based facility as

described above and (2) provided personal care or supervision to its residents, not just room and board (for example,

help with bathing, dressing, eating, walking, shopping, or

corresponding).

Characteristics of facilities

Ownership—Type of organization that owns the home.

Profit ownership includes control by an individual, partnership, or corporation. Nonprofit includes ownership by a

religious group or by a nonprofit corporation. Government

ownership refers to homes operated under Federal, State,

or local government auspices.

Resident-A person who was admitted to, but not

discharged from, a facility for the mentally retarded. All

such persons who stayed in the facility the night prior to the

survey were included.

Occupancy rate—Computed by dividing the number of

residents by the total number of beds.

Geographic re~”onsand divLsions-The U.S. Bureau of

the Census groups the 50 States plus the District of Columbia into the following regions and divisions:

. Northeast region—

—New England division—Connecticut, Maine,

Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island,

and Vermont

—Middle Atlantic division—New Jersey, New York,

and Pennsylvania

. Midwest region—

—East North Central division—Illinois, Indiana,

Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin

—West North Central division—Iowa, Kansas,

Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota,

and South Dakota

. South region—

—South Atlantic division–Delaware, District of

Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North

Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and West

Virginia

–East South Central division–Alabama, Kentucky,

Mississippi, and Tennessee

—West South Central division—Arkansas,

Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas

● West region—

—Mountain division—Arizona, Colorado, Idaho,

Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and

Wyoming

—Pacific. division—Alaska, California, Hawaii,

Oregon, and Washington

31
Vital and Health Statistics

series descriptions

SERIES 1

SERIES 2.

cJ~l[,~7 :{

SERIES 4

SERIES 5,

SERIES Ij,

SERIES 10.

SERIES 11.

SERIES12,

SERIES13.

SERIES 14.

Programs ‘and Collection Procedural—RepoRs descnblmg

tho g~vtercd programs of the National Center for Health

Statlstws and its offices and dwls!ons and the data clJlkctmn methods used. They also Include deflnltlons and

crthur mutonal necmsary for understanding the data

Data Evaluation and Methock Ressx?trch-Studies of new

~t~tlstlc~l methodology Includlng experimental tests of

n!jw .;urvey methods, studies of vital statistics collection

mi,thods, new analytical techniques, ob]ect!ve evalumons

at rrll~blllty crf collected data, and contributions to

:,t,{iv:tl cdl theory. Studies also Include compar won of

U,S methodology with those of other countlles

An.zdyticcd and Epidcmio!ogical Stud! t?~-Reports pre-

,rnt!mg analytical or Inte(pretwe stucl!es based on vital

,[nd Iwwlth ~t~tlstms, carrying the anal},s!s further than

tlw e.powtory types of reports in the other series.

Documents cmd Committcm Repmts—F!nal reports of

m,~)or committees concerned w!th vital and health stafi!itlcu ,]nd documents such ,3s recommended model vital

rcqmtrcmon laws and revmed birth and desth certificates

Comparative International Vital and I-fetdth Statistics

Rapotis-Analytical and descnptwe reports comparing

U.S. vltd ~nd hmlth statlst!cs with those of other countnes.

Co@ticm mtd SUrtmy Mwrsuremcmt—Reports from the

r~.!t!on~l Laboratory for Collaborate Research In Cogn!-

tmrt md Survey Measurement using methods of cognmve

~,clLlncc to d~s[gn, evaluate, and test survey Instruments,

tkto I%rm the Natkrnal Health Intwviwv Survey-Statlstlc~ on Illness, accidental Injurtes, dmablllty, use of hospit;ll, medical, dental, and other sewlces, and other

hcwlth.related topics, all based on data collected In the

continuing national household interview survey.

Data From the National Health Examination Survey and

the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survtsy—

IXta from direct exammatlon, testing, and measurement

of nmionr.d samples of the cwrllan nonmstltutlonal lzed

populdton provide the basis for (1) estimates of the

mc,dmally defined prevalence of speclftc diseases m the

Unltud States and the dlstnbut[ons of the population

tvlth re~pect to physical, physiological, and psychological characteristics and (2) analysis of relationships

among the various measurements wnhout reference to

ian explicit finite universe of persons.

Data From the Institutionalized Population Sunreys-DIscontmt.md m 1975. Reports from these surveys are included In Series 13.

Data on Health Resources Utilization—Statlstlcs on the

utilization of health manpower and facllmes providing

long-term care, ambulatory care, hospital care, and family

planning setvices.

Data on Health Resources: Manpower and Facilities—

Stotlstics on the numbers, gaographtc distribution, and

characteristics of health resources includ!ng physicians,

dentists, nurses, other health occupations, hospitals,

nursing homes, and outpatient facilities.

SERIES 15

SERIES 16

SERIES 20

SERIES 21

SERIES 22.

SERIES 23.

SERIES 24.

For answers

Data From Special Swveya-Statwtics on health and

health-related topics collected In special surveys that

are not a part of the continuing data systems of the

Nat!onal Center for Health Stat! st!cs.

Compilations of Advance Data From Vital and Health

Statistics—These reports prowde early release of cfat~

from the National Center for Health Statlst[cs’ health and

demographic surveys, Many of these releases are follctv~~d

by detailed reports In the Vttal and Health Statistics

Series.

Data on Mortality -VarLous statistics on mortality ,other

than as Included !n regular annual or monthly (ep I:Irrs

Specral analyses by cause of death, age, and othcc ,dsmo -

gmph!c varlabtes, geographic and time series mal;sc:

and statistics on charac!errstlcs of deaths not miIIlzblE

from the vital records based on sample surveys of th,~s~

records

Data on Natzrlity, Pdarriage, and Divorca—Various statistics on natality, marriage, and divorce other than SE,

Included In regular annual or monthly reports Special

anal>, ses by demographic vartables; geographic and t!rne

series analyses, studtes of fertlllty; and statmtrcs on

characterlst!cs of births not aval[able from the Vita I

records based on sample surveys of those records,

Data From the National Mortality and PJatcdity SuP#ay~—

Dwcontirrued in 1975. Reports from these sample aurv:y:

based on vnal records ar~ Included in Series 20 and 21,

respectively.

Data From tho National Survey of Family Growth—

Stawstlcs on fertillty, family formation and dissolution,

family plannlng, and related maternal and Infant health

top!cs derived from a penodlc survey of a nat!ont.~ide

probab!ltty sample of women 15-44 years of age.

Cornpilationa of Data on Natdity, Morta!ity, Mcrriage,

Divorce, and Induced Terminations of Pregnancy—A%

vance reports of births, deaths, marrtages, and dworce~

are based on final deta from the National Mtal Statwt!cs

System and are pub!lshed annually as supplements to the

Monthly Vnal Statistics Report (MVSR). These reports are

followed by the publication of detailed data in Vital Statwtlcs of the United States annual volumes. Other reports

Including Induced termrnatlons of pregnancy Issued perlodIcaliy as supplements to the MVSR provide selected findings based on data from the National Vnal Stat! stlcs

System and may be followed by detailed reports m Vital

and Health Statistics Series.

to quest!ons about this report or for a list of titles of

reports published In these series, contact

Sctentlflc and Techn!csl Information Branch

Netlonai Center for Health Statwtlcs

Centera for Disease Control

Publlc Health Serwce

Hyattswlle, Md. 20782

301-436-8500
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Public Health Service

Centers for Disease Control

National Center for Health Statistics

3700 East-West Highway

Hyattsville, Maryland 20782

OFFICIAL 8USINESS

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300

BULK RATE

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

PHS/NCHS

PERMIT No. G-281

DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 89-1829, Series 14, No. 34