Child Maltreatment 2007

• 1.Child Maltreatment U.S. Department of Health & Human Servicesth th Administration for Children and Families YE G Administration on Children, Youth and Families INR AOF T Childrens Bureau R E POR

2. For further information, contact the NCANDS Federal Project Officer at the following address:Dr. John A. Gaudiosi Mathematical Statistician Childrens Bureau Administration on Children, Youth and Families 1250 Maryland Avenue, SW 8th Floor Washington, DC 20024 2022058625 [email protected] publication is available on the Internet at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/ index.htm#can.Restricted use files of the NCANDS data are archived at the National Data Archive on Child Abuse and Neglect (NDACAN) at Cornell University. Researchers who are interested in using these data for statisti cal analyses can contact NDACAN by phone at 6072557799, by e-mail at [email protected], or on the Internet at www.ndacan.cornell.edu.Material contained in this publication is in the public domain and may be reproduced, fully or partially, without permission of the Federal Government. The courtesy of attribution, crediting the source of the material, is requested. The recommended citation follows:U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration on Children, Youth and Families. Child Maltreatment 2007 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2009). 3. 2007 4. ii Child Maltreatment 2007 5. AcknowledgementsThe Administration on Children, Youth and Families (ACYF) strives to ensure the well-being of our children through many programs and activities. One such activity is the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS) of the Childrens Bureau.National and State statistics about child maltreatment are derived from the data collected by child protective services agencies through NCANDS. The data are analyzed, disseminated, and published in an annual report. Child Maltreatment 2007 marks the 18th issuance of this report. I hope that it continues to serve as an important resource for policymakers, child welfare practitioners, researchers, and other concerned citizens.This years national statistics were based upon case-level data from 48 States, including the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and aggregate data from two States. Due to the dedication of State agencies, we approach our goal of receiving case-level data from all States. We continue to provide States with technical support to improve data quality. Each year, we also conduct a technical assistance meeting for the States, at which they partner with us in discussing issues related to improving data quality.ACYF wishes to thank the many people who made this publication possible. The Childrens Bureau has been fortunate to partner with informed and committed State personnel who work hard to provide comprehensive data, which reflect the work of their agencies. In addition, child protective services administrators and information systems managersserving as representa tives to the State Advisory Groupcontinue to be an important source of advice and support for this effort. ACYF gratefully acknowledges the priorities that were set by State and local agencies to submit these data to the Childrens Bureau, and thank the caseworkers and supervisors who contribute to and use the States information system. The time and effort dedicated by these and other individuals form the basis for our successful Federal-State partnership.Acknowledgementsiii 6. iv Child Maltreatment 2007 7. Contents Acknowledgementsiii Summary ix chapter 1: Introduction1Background of NCANDS 1Annual Data Collection Process 3Structure of the Report4 chapter 2: Reports5Screening of Referrals5Report Sources6Investigation or Assessment Results 7Report Dispositions by Report Source9Response Time from Referral to Investigation9CPS Workforce and Workload 10Tables and Notes 10 chapter 3: Children23Children Who Were Subjects of a Report 23Child Victims24First-Time Victims 25Age and Sex of Victims 25Race and Ethnicity of Victims25Types of Maltreatment25Living Arrangement of Victims27Risk Factors 27Perpetrator Relationship 29Recurrence 29Maltreatment in Foster Care29Tables and Notes 30 chapter 4: Fatalities55Number of Child Fatalities 55Age and Sex of Child Fatalities56Race and Ethnicity of Child Fatalities 56Perpetrator Relationship 57Maltreatment Types of Child Fatalities 57Prior CPS Contact of Child Fatalities57Tables and Notes 57Contents v 8. chapter 5: Perpetrators 65Age and Sex of Perpetrators 65Race and Ethnicity of Perpetrators65Perpetrator Relationship66Types of Maltreatment 66Tables and Notes67 chapter 6: Services 77Preventive Services 77Postinvestigation Services79In-Home Services79Children Who Were Removed From Home 79Tables and Notes80 chapter 7: Additional Research Related to Child Maltreatment91Reports on Key Indicators, Outcomes, and National Statistics91Studies of the Characteristics of Children in the Child Welfare system93Capacity-Building Initiatives 96Suggestions for Future Research 98 appendix a: Required CAPTA Data Items103 appendix b: Glossary 107Acronyms 107Definitions108 appendix c: Data Submission and Data Elements117 appendix d: State Commentary 125 appendix e: Reader Feedback161vi Child Maltreatment 2007 9. List of Tables and Figures Figures Figure 21 Report Sources, 20076 Figure 22 Investigation Dispositions, 20078 Figure 23 Percentage of States by Investigation Rate, 20032007 8 Figure 24 Dispositions by Report Sources, 20079 Figure 31 Disposition and Victimization Rates, 20032007 24 Figure 32 Age by Percentage of Victims, 2007 25 Figure 33 Victimization Rates by Age and Sex, 2007 26 Figure 34 Victims by Maltreatment Type, 2007 26 Figure 35 Victims by Maltreatment Type and Age, 2007 28 Figure 36 Victims by Perpetrator Relationship, 200729 Figure 41 Age of Fatalities by Age Group Percentage, 200756 Figure 42 Fatality Rates by Age and Sex, 200756 Figure 43 Maltreatment Types of Child Fatalities, 2007 57 Figure 51 Age and Sex of Perpetrators, 200766 Figure 52 Perpetrators by Relationship to Victims, 200766Tables Table 21Screened-In and Screened-Out Referrals, 2007 12 Table 22Report Sources, 2007 13 Table 23Investigation Dispositions, 2007 16 Table 24Report Investigation Trends, 20032007 17 Table 25Dispositions by Report Sources, 2007 19 Table 26PART Measure: Response Time in Hours, 2005200721 Table 27Child Protective Services Workforce, 200722 Table 31Dispositions of Children Who Received a CPS Investigation, 200733 Table 32Child Disposition Rates, 20032007 35 Table 33Victimization Rates, 20032007 36 Table 34Child Victimization Rates Trend, 20032007 38 Table 35PART Measure: First-Time Victims, 2005200739 Table 36Age and Sex of Victims, 2007 40 Table 37Race and Ethnicity of Victims, 200741 Table 38Victims by Maltreatment Type, 2007 43 Table 39Victims by Maltreatment Type and Report Source, 2007 45 Table 310 Victims by Maltreatment Type and Race, 200746 Table 311 Victims by Maltreatment Type and Age, 2007 47 Table 312 Living Arrangement of Victims, 200748 Table 313 Victims with a Reported Disability, 2007 49 Table 314 Children with Caregiver Risk Factor of Domestic Violence, 2007 51 Table 315 Victims by Perpetrator Relationship, 200752 Table 316 Absence of Maltreatment Recurrence, 2004200753 Table 317 Absence of Maltreatment in Foster Care, 2004200754 Table 41Child Fatalities, 2006200759 Table 42Child Fatality Rates per 100,000 Children, 20032007 60 Table 43Age and Sex of Child Fatalities, 200761 Table 44Race and Ethnicity of Child Fatalities, 2007 62 Contents v ii 10. Table 46Maltreatment Types of Child Fatalities, 2007 62Table 45Perpetrator Relationships to Child Fatalities, 200762Table 47Prior CPS Contact of Child Fatalities, 200763Table 51Age and Sex of Perpetrators, 200768Table 52Race and Ethnicity of Perpetrators, 2007 69Table 53Perpetrators by Relationship to Victims, 200770Table 54Type of Parental Perpetrators, 200772Table 55Perpetrators by Type of Maltreatment, 2007 73Table 56Perpetrators by Maltreatment Types and Relationship to the Victim, 200774Table 61Children Who Received Preventive Services, 200781Table 62Funding Sources, 200782Table 63Children Who Received Postinvestigation Services, 2007 83Table 64Children Who Received In-Home Services, 2007 84Table 65Children Who Were Removed From Home, 200785Table 66Maltreatment Types of Victims Who Were Removed From Home, 2007 86Table 67Victims with Court Action and Court-Appointed Representatives, 200788Table 68Victims Who Received Family Preservation orFamily Reunification Services Within Previous 5 Years, 200789 Table A1Required CAPTA Data Items, by State Response, 2007104Table C1State Data Submissions, 2007118Table C2Child File Data Element List119Table C3Agency File Data Elements 123viii Child Maltreatment 2007 11. Summary Summary Summary ix 12. x Child Maltreatment 2007 13. Summary Overview Any recent act or failure to act on the part of a All 50 States, the District of Columbia, and theparent or caretaker which results in death, seri U.S. Territories have mandatory child abuse ous physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse and neglect reporting laws that require certain or exploitation; or professionals and institutions to report suspected An act or failure to act which presents an maltreatment to a child protective services (CPS) imminent risk of serious harm. agency. Examples of these mandatory reporters include health care providers and facilities,Within the minimum standards set by CAPTA, mental health care providers, teachers and other each State is responsible for providing its own school staff, social workers, police officers, definitions of child abuse and neglect. Most foster care providers, and daycare providers. TheStates recognize four major types of maltreat initial report of suspected child abuse or neglect ment: neglect, physical abuse, sexual abuse, is called a referral. Approximately one-third of and psychological maltreatment. Although any referrals are screened out each year and do notof the forms of child maltreatment may be found receive further attention from CPS. The remainingseparately, they also can occur in combination. referrals are screened in and an investigation or assessment is conducted by the CPS agency What is the National Child to determine the likelihood that maltreatment hasAbuse and Neglect Data occurred or that the child is at risk of maltreat System (NCANDS)? ment. After conducting interviews with familyNCANDS is a federally sponsored effort that members, the alleged victim, and other peoplecollects and analyzes annual data on child abuse familiar with the family, the CPS agency makes a and neglect. The 1988 CAPTA directed the U.S. determination or finding concerning whether theDepartment of Health and Human Services to child is a victim of abuse or neglect or is at riskestablish a national data collection and analysis of abuse or neglect. This determination oftenprogram. The Childrens Bureau in the Administra is called a disposition. Each State establishestion on Children, Youth and Families, Administra specific dispositions and terminology. tion for Children and Families, U.S. Departmentof Health and Human Services, collects and Each State has its own definitions of child abuseanalyzes the data. and neglect based on minimum standards set by Federal law. Federal legislation provides a foundaThe data are submitted voluntarily by the States, tion for States by identifying a minimum set of acts the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth or behaviors that define child abuse and neglect.of Puerto Rico. The first report from NCANDS was The Federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment based on data for 1990; the report for 2007 data Act (CAPTA), (42 U.S.C.A. 5106g), as amended by is the 18th issuance of this annual publication. the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 2003, defines child abuse and neglect as:Summary xi 14. How are the data used?maltreatment of approximately 5.8 millionNCANDS data are used for the annual report, children, were referred to CPS agencies.Child Maltreatment, which is published eachyear. In addition, data collected by NCANDS Approximately 62 percent (61.7%) ofare a critical source of information for manyreferrals were screened in for investigationpublications, reports, and activities of the or assessment by CPS agencies.Federal Government and other groups. Data Approximately 25 (25.2%) percent of thefrom NCANDS are used in the Child and Family investigations or assessments determinedServices Reviews of the States, in the Child at least one child who was found to be aWelfare Outcomes: Report to Congress, and in victim of abuse or neglect with the folthe Program Assessment Rating Tool.lowing report dispositions: 24.1 percent substantiated, 0.6 percent indicated, andWhat data are collected? 0.5 percent alternative response victim.NCANDS collects case-level data on all More than 74 percent of the investigationschildren who received an investigation oror assessments determined that the childassessment by a CPS agency. States thatwas not a victim of maltreatment withare unable to provide case-level data submit the following dispositions: 61.3 percentaggregated counts of key indicators. unsubstantiated, 6.1 percent alternative response nonvictim, 5.7 percent other,Case-level data include information on the 1.6 percent closed with no finding, andcharacteristics of referrals of abuse or neglect 0.0 percent intentionally false.that are made to CPS agencies, the childrenreferred, the types of maltreatment that areWho reportedalleged, the dispositions (or findings) of thechild maltreatment?investigations, the risk factors of the child and For 2007, more than one-half (57.7%) of allthe caregivers, the services that are provided, reports of alleged child abuse or neglect wereand the perpetrators. made by professionals. The term professionalmeans that the person had contact with theWhere are the data available? alleged child maltreatment victim as part ofRestricted usage files of State case-level data the report sources job. This term includesare available for researchers from the National teachers, police officers, lawyers, and socialData Archive on Child Abuse and Neglect atservices staff. The remaining reports werewww.ndacan.cornell.edu. In addition, aggre made by nonprofessionals, including friends,gated counts of key indicators by State are neighbors, sports coaches, and relatives.available for 19902007. The three largest percentages of reportThe Child Maltreatment reports are available sources were from such professionals ason the Internet at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/ teachers (17.0%), lawyers or police officersprograms/cb/stats_research/index.htm#can.(16.3%), and social services staff (10.2%).How many children wereWho were the child victims?reported and received anDuring 2007, an estimated 794,000 childreninvestigation or assessment were determined to be victims of abuse orfor abuse and neglect?neglect. Among the children confirmed asDuring Federal fiscal year 2007, an estimated victims by CPS agencies in 2007:3.2 million referrals, involving the alleged xii Child Maltreatment 2007 15. Children in the age group of birth to 1 year Infant boys (younger than 1 year) had thehad the highest rate of victimization athighest rate of fatalities, at 18.85 deaths21.9 per 1,000 children of the same age per 100,000 boys of the same age in thegroup in the national population; national population; and More than one-half of the child victims Infant girls had a rate of 15.39 deaths perwere girls (51.5%) and 48.2 percent were100,000 girls of the same age.boys; and Approximately one-half of all victims were Who abused andWhite (46.1%), 21.7 percent were African-neglected children?American, and 20.8 percent were Hispanic.In 2007, nearly 80 percent of perpetrators of child maltreatment (79.9%) were parents, What were the most common and another 6.6 percent were other relatives types of maltreatment?of the victim. Women comprised a larger As in prior years, neglect was the most percentage of all perpetrators than men, 56.5 common form of child maltreatment. CPSpercent compared to 42.4 percent. Nearly investigations determined that: 75 percent (74.8%) of all perpetrators were younger than age 40. Nearly 60 percent (59.0%) of victimssuffered neglect; Of the perpetrators who were child daycare More than 10 percent (10.8%) of the providers, nearly 24 percent (23.9%) comvictims suffered physical abuse;mitted sexual abuse. Less than 10 percent (7.6%) of the victims Of the perpetrators who were parents,suffered sexual abuse; andnearly 90 percent (87.7%) were the biologi Less than 5 percent (4.2%) of the victims cal parent of the victim.suffered from psychological maltreatment. Who received services? How many children diedDuring an investigation, CPS agencies provide from abuse or neglect?services to children and their families, both in Child fatalities are the most tragic conse the home and in foster care. quence of maltreatment. Yet, each year children die from abuse and neglect. More than 60 percent (62.1%) of victims During 2007: and 31.2 percent of nonvictms receivedpostinvestigation services. An estimated 1,760 children died due to More than 20 percent (20.7%) of victimschild abuse or neglect; and 3.8 percent of nonvictims were placed The overall rate of child fatalities wasin foster care.2.35 deaths per 100,000 children; More than 30 percent (34.1%) of childfatalities were attributed to neglect only;physical abuse also was a major contributor to child fatalities; More than three-quarters (75.7%) of thechildren who died due to child abuse andneglect were younger than 4 years old; Summary xiii 16. xiv Child Maltreatment 2007 17. Introduction CHAPTER 1Child abuse and neglect is one of the Nations most serious concerns. The Childrens Bureau,Administration on Children, Youth and Families in the Administration for Children andFamilies in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, addresses this important issuein many ways. One example is to collect data on the children who are served by child protectiveservices (CPS) agencies. This Child Maltreatment 2007 report, now in its 18th edition, presents national data about childabuse and neglect known to CPS agencies in the United States during Federal fiscal year (FFY)2007. The data were collected and analyzed through the National Child Abuse and Neglect DataSystem (NCANDS) supported by the Childrens Bureau. This chapter discusses the backgroundof NCANDS and describes the annual data collection process. Background of NCANDSThe Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) was amended in 1988 to direct theSecretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to establish a nationaldata collection and analysis program that would make available State child abuse and neglectreporting information.1 HHS responded by establishing NCANDS as a voluntary nationalreporting system. During 1992, HHS produced its first NCANDS report based on data from 1990. The ChildMaltreatment report series has evolved from that initial report. During the early years, Statesprovided aggregated data on key indicators of CPS. Starting with the 1993 data year, Statesvoluntarily began to submit case-level data. For a number of years, States provided both datasets, but starting with data year 2000, the case-level data set became the primary source of datafor the annual report. The aggregated data file, the Summary Data Component (SDC), is phasingout as States are able to provide case-level data.2 For FFY 2007, 48 States reported case-level data(Child Files) and 2 States reported aggregate data files (SDC).3 During 1996, CAPTA was amended to require all States that receive funds from the Basic StateGrant program to work with the Secretary of HHS to provide specific data, to the extent practicable, about children who had been maltreated. These data elements were incorporated intoNCANDS; the required CAPTA data items are provided in appendix A. An NCANDS glossaryof terms is provided as appendix B. 1 42 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 5116 et seq., Public Law 100294 passed April 25, 1988.2 In this report, States includes the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.3 Two StatesMaryland and Michiganwere not able to submit data to NCANDS prior to the publication of theChild Maltreatment 2007 report.CHAPTER 1: Introduction 1 18. A State Advisory Group comprising State CPS program administrators and information systemsmanagers assists with the identification and resolution of issues related to CPS data. Thisgroup suggests strategies for improving the quality of data submitted by the States and reviewsproposed modifications to NCANDS. The Childrens Bureau convenes the State Advisory Groupannually. The most recent list of State Advisory Group members is provided below: Alaska, Michael Matthews New York, Lillian DentonCalifornia, Debbie WilliamsNorth Carolina, Hank BowersFlorida, Keith Perlman North Dakota, Tara MuhlhauserIllinois, Jim Van Leer Oklahoma, Bill HindmanIowa, Jeff RegulaOregon, Maria DuryeaLouisiana, Walter Fahr Puerto Rico, Evelyza Crespo RiveraMaryland, David Ayer South Carolina, Judy SealsMassachusetts, Ros Walters Wisconsin, Michelle RawlingsNew Mexico, Linnette Carlson In addition to the annual meeting of the State Advisory Group, a technical assistance meetingfor all States is held each year. This technical assistance meeting serves as a forum for providingguidance to the States for their annual data submissions and discussing data utilization andtraining needs. Data collected by NCANDS are a critical source of information for many publications, reports,and activities of the Federal Government and other groups. An annual report on child welfareoutcomes based on State submissions to NCANDS includes context and outcome data on safety.4 NCANDS data have been incorporated into the Child and Family Services Reviews (CFSR),which ensures conformity with State plan requirements in titles IV, B, and E of the SocialSecurity Act. NCANDS data are the basis for two of the CFSR national data indicators: The absence of the recurrence of maltreatment; andThe absence of maltreatment in foster care. The NCANDS data are used to help assess the performance of several Childrens Bureau programs through the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) process. The PART is a systematicmethod of assessing the performance of program activities across the Federal Government thatuses a questionnaire to help assess the management and performance of programs. It is usedto evaluate a programs purpose, design, planning, management, results, and accountability todetermine its overall effectiveness.5 The measures listed below are used to assess one or moreChildrens Bureau programs including the CAPTA Basic State Grant and the Community-BasedChild Abuse Prevention (CBCAP) program. 4 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration on Children, Youth and Families, Child Welfare Outcomes 2003: Annual Report (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2007).5 Office of Management and Budget, retrieved from http//www.whitehouse.gov/omb/expectmore/part.html. 2 Child Maltreatment 2007 19. Decrease in the rate of first-time victims per 1,000 children. This measure is based on analysis of the NCANDS Child File and the prior victim data element. The focus is on primaryprevention of child abuse and neglect (CBCAP). Improvement in States average response time between maltreatment report and investigation. This is based on the median of States reported average response time, in hours, fromscreened-in reports to the initiation of the investigation as reported in the NCANDS AgencyFile. The objective is to improve the efficiency of child protective services and to reduce therisk of maltreatment to potential victims (CAPTA). Decrease in the percentage of children with substantiated reports of maltreatment who havea repeated substantiated report of maltreatment within 6 months. This measure is based onanalysis of the annual NCANDS Child File. The goal is to ensure childrens safety by reducingthe recurrence of maltreatment (CAPTA). Annual Data Collection Process States that submit case-level data, construct a child-specific record for each report of alleged child abuse or neglect that received a disposition as a result of an investigation or an assessment during the reporting period; this data file is called the Child File. The reporting period for Child Maltreatment 2007 was October 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007.Upon receipt of data from each State, a technical validation review was conducted to assess the internal consistency of the data and to identify probable causes for missing data. In many instances, the review concluded that corrections were necessary and the State was requested to resubmit its data. Once a States case-level data were finalized, aggregate counts were computed and shared with the State. In addition, the aggregate-level data provided in the Agency File were subjected to various logic and consistency checks. (See appendix C, Data Submissions and Data Elements, for additional information regarding data submissions.)The population of the 48 States that submitted Child Files accounts for approximately 70 million children or 94 percent of the Nations child population younger than 18 years (table C1).6Trend data in this report are based on the most recent population estimates and data resubmis sions from the States, including resubmissions for prior years. To increase the comparability of the trend data, the population data for Puerto Rico were added into all years and estimates were used for Puerto Rico data prior to 2005, which was its first reporting year. Wherever possible, trend data are presented in 5-year increments, with 2003 as the benchmark year. Data for FFY 2007 were accepted through August 2008.76 U.S. Census Bureau file PRC-EST2007-AGESEX-RES: Estimates of the Resident Population by Single-Year of Ageand Sex for Puerto Rico (http://www.census.gov/popest/puerto_rico/files/PRC-EST2007-AGESEX-RES.csv [released5/1/2008]), and U.S. Census Bureau file SC-EST2007-Alldata6: State Characteristics Population Estimates with 6Race Groups (http://www.census.gov/popest/states/asrh/files/SC-EST2007-Alldata6.csv [released 5/1/2008]). Here andthroughout this report, the term child population refers to all people in the U.S. population younger than 18 years. 7 New Hampshire resubmitted its FFY 2006 Agency File. Trend data reported in Child Maltreatment 2007 reflectthat resubmission. CHAPTER 1: Introduction 3 20. Structure of the ReportThis report contains the additional chapters listed below. Throughout the report, tables withsupporting data are located at the end of each chapter: Chapter 2, Reportsreferrals and reports of child maltreatment Chapter 3, Childrencharacteristics of victims and nonvictims Chapter 4, Fatalitiesfatalities that occurred as a result of maltreatment Chapter 5, Perpetratorsperpetrators of maltreatment Chapter 6, Servicesservices to prevent maltreatment and to assist victims Chapter 7, Additional Research Related to Child Maltreatmentresearch activities that use NCANDS data Commentary about State data and contact information for State representatives is presentedin appendix D. The commentary section of this report provides valuable insights into policiesand conditions that might affect State data. Additional information about specific State policiesor practices can be obtained from the State contact listed in the commentary section. A readerfeedback form is included to solicit advice for future reports (appendix E). 4 Child Maltreatment 2007 21. ReportsCHAPTER 2 Child protective services (CPS) agencies use a two-stage process for handling allegations of child maltreatment. Those stages are screening and investigation. During the screening stage, an initial notificationcalled a referralalleging abuse or neglect is made to CPS. Agency hotline or intake units conduct the screening process to determine whether the referral is appropriate for further investigation or assessment. Referrals that do not meet the investigation or assess ment criteria are screened out or diverted from CPS.During the investigation stage, a screened-in referralcalled a reportreceives an investiga tion or assessment. The purpose of an investigation or assessment is to determine if a child was maltreated or is at-risk of maltreatment and to establish the appropriate intervention. During Federal fiscal year (FFY) 2007: Approximately 3.2 million referrals of child abuse and neglect that included approximately5.8 million children were made to CPS agencies. About 62 percent (61.7%) of those referrals reached the second stage, became a report, andwere either investigated or received an assessment. More than 25 percent (25.2%) of the investigations that reached the report stage determinedthat at least one child was a victim of child abuse or neglect.This chapter presents statistics regarding referrals, reports, and investigations or assessments. National estimates for FFY 2007 are based on the child populations for the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. Screening of Referrals The process of determining whether a referral meets a States standard for an investigation or assessment is known as screening. Screening in a referral means that an allegation of child abuse or neglect met the States standard for investigation or assessment and the referral reaches the second stage and is called a report. Screening out a referral means that the allegation did not meet the States standard for an investigation or assessment. Reasons for screening out a referral include: The referral did not concern child abuse or neglect; it did not contain enough information to enable an investigation or assessment to occur; the children in the referral were the responsibility of another agency or jurisdiction, e.g., a military installation or a tribe; or the alleged victim was older than 18 years. CHAPTER 2: Reports 5 22. During FFY 2007, an estimated 3.2 million referrals, which included approximately 5.8 million children, were referred to CPS agencies. The national rate was 43.0 referrals per 1,000 children for FFY 2007 compared with 43.7 referrals per 1,000 children for FFY 2006.1, 2During FFY 2007, CPS agencies screened in 61.7 percent of referrals and screened out 38.3 per cent. These results were identical to FFY 2006 data, which indicated 61.7 percent were screened in and 38.3 percent were screened out. Report Sources NCANDS collects case-level information for all reports that received a disposition or finding within the year. The information includes the report source, the number of children in the investigation, and the disposition of the report.Professionals submitted more than one-half (57.7%) of the reports (figure 21). The term profes sional indicates that the person encountered the alleged victim as part of the report sources Figure 21 Report Sources, 2007Source Professional Sources Nonprofessional Sources Unknown or OtherEducational Personnel17.0 Legal, Law Enforcement,16.3 Criminal Justice Personnel Social Services Personnel10.2 Medical Personnel8.4 Mental Health Personnel 4.3 Child Daycare Provider(s) 0.9 Foster Care Provider(s) 0.6Anonymous Source(s) 7.6Other Relative(s)7.3 Parent(s)6.1Friend(s) or Neighbor(s)5.1Alleged Victim(s)0.6Alleged Perpetrator(s) 0.1 Other 8.6Unknown or Missing7.10% 5%10%15%20% PercentageBased on data from table 22. 1 Supporting data are provided in table 21, which is located at the end of this chapter. States provide aggregated datafor the number of referrals. Based on data from 37 States, the national rate of referrals is 43.0 referrals per 1,000 children. A referral can include more than one child. Multiplying this rate by the national child population of 74,904,677and dividing by 1,000 results in an estimated 3,220,901 referrals for FFY 2007. The estimate was then rounded to3,200,000. Unless otherwise specified, all rates refer to children younger than 18 years in the national population. 2 The number of children included in all referrals was calculated by multiplying the average number of children includedin a referral (1.81) by the number of estimated referrals (3,220,901). This results in an estimated 5,829,831 children,which was rounded to the nearest 100,000. The average number of children included in a referral based on data from50 States was calculated by dividing the number of children reported (3,359,295) by the number of investigations thatreceived a disposition (1,860,262).6Child Maltreatment 2007 23. occupation. State laws require most professionals to notify CPS agencies of suspected maltreat ment. The categories of professionals include teachers, legal staff or police officers, social services staff, medical staff, mental health workers, child daycare workers, and foster care providers. The three largest percentages of 2007 reports were from professionalsteachers (17.0%), lawyers or police officers (16.3%), and social services staff (10.2%).3Nonprofessional sources submitted 26.8 percent of reports. These included parents, relatives, friends and neighbors, alleged victims, alleged perpetrators, and anonymous callers. The three largest groups of nonprofessional reporters were anonymous (7.6%), other relatives (7.3%), and parents (6.1%).Unknown or other report sources submitted 15.7 percent of reports. The National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS) uses the term other sources for those categories that States are not able to crosswalk to any of the NCANDS terms.4 Other sources may include clergy members, sports coaches, camp counselors, bystanders, volunteers, and foster siblings. Unknown or other report sources are listed separately because either the data are missing or the data cannot be classified into either the professional or nonprofessional category. Investigation or Assessment Results CPS agencies assign a findingalso called a dispositionto a report after the circumstances are investigated and a determination is made as to whether the maltreatment occurred or the child is at-risk of maltreatment. For FFY 2007, 1,860,262 investigations or assessments received a disposition. Each State establishes dispositions by policy and law. The major NCANDS disposi tion categories are described below. Alternative Response Nonvictim: A conclusion that the child was not identified as a victimwhen a response other than an investigation was provided. Alternative Response Victim: A conclusion that the child was identified as a victim when aresponse other than an investigation was provided. Indicated: An investigation disposition that concludes that maltreatment could not besubstantiated under State law or policy, but there was reason to suspect that the child mayhave been maltreated or was at-risk of maltreatment. This is applicable only to States thatdistinguish between substantiated and indicated dispositions. Substantiated: An investigation disposition that concludes that the allegation of maltreatmentor risk of maltreatment was supported or founded by State law or State policy. Unsubstantiated: An investigation disposition that determines that there was not sufficientevidence under State law to conclude or suspect that the child was maltreated or at risk ofbeing maltreated.3 See table 22. 4 During the preparation of the NCANDS data file, each State establishes a crosswalk between its disposition terms andthe categories used by NCANDS. CHAPTER 2: Reports7 24. Figure 22 Investigation Dispositions, 2007 Two alternative response categories are provided in NCANDS. The category that is most commonly used by States is alternative Closed With Other 5.7%Unknown response nonvictim. Some States also use the No Findingor Missing 1.6% 0.1%alternative response victim category. Dur Intentionally False 0.0%Substantiated ing FFY 2007, 11 States used the alternative24.1% response nonvictim category and 2 States used Indicated the alternative response victim category. 0.6% For more than 25 percent (25.2%) of investiga Alternative Response Victim0.5%tions, at least one child was found to be a victim of maltreatment with one of the followingAlternativeUnsubstantiated Response Nonvictimdispositionssubstantiated (24.1%), indicated 61.3% 6.1%(0.6%), or alternative response victim (0.5%)(figure 22).5 The remaining investigations ledBased on data from table 2-3. to a finding that the children were not victimsof maltreatment and the report received one ofthe following dispositionsunsubstantiated(61.3%), alternative response nonvictim (6.1%), other (5.7%), closed with no finding (1.6%),and intentionally false (0.0%).6 When the FFY 2003 investigation rates were analyzed in a 5-yeartrend, it was noted that by FFY 2007, the majority of States (29) had increased their investigationrates.7 Three States were unable to submit the data needed for this analysis (figure 23). Figure 23 Percentage of States by Investigation Rate, 20032007 Percentage of States Investigation Rate 019 Investigation Rate 2039 Investigation Rate 4059 80%71.4 Investigat68.6 66.7 70% 66.0 62.0 Investigat 60%50% Investigat40%28.0 30%24.023.5 20.421.6 20%14.0 8.2 9.89.8 10%6.0 0% 2003 20042005 20062007Year Based on data from table 24.5 See table 23. Other dispositions include those categories that States were not able to crosswalk to NCANDS dispositions.6 Due to a change in Floridas State policy, reports with a disposition of some indication were mapped to the NCANDS category other. In prior years, these reports were mapped to the NCANDS category indicated. This change increased the national percentage of other from 3.2 percent during FFY 2006 to 5.7 percent during FFY 2007.7 See table 24.8 Child Maltreatment 2007 25. Figure 24 Dispositions by Report Sources, 2007Percentage Total Professionals Total Nonprofessionals Total Unknown or Other Reporters 90% Total Unk 80%70.270.7 70% 66.0Total Non62.3 62.3 60%53.8 54.4Total Prof49.7 50% 45.0 39.7 38.8 40%34.830.930.7 30%26.7 27.5 21.7 18.4 20% 15.514.716.311.410.3 10%7.6 6.5 7.37.00%Substantiated Indicated Alternative Alternative Unsubstantiated Intentionally Closed With OtherUnknownResponseResponseFalse No FindingVictims Nonvictim DispositionsBased on data from table 25. Report Dispositions by Report Source Report dispositions are based on the facts of the report as found by the CPS worker. The type of report source may be related to the disposition of a report because of the reporters knowledge and credibility (figure 24). Case-level data submitted to NCANDS were used to examine this hypothesis.8 Based on more than 1.8 million reports, key findings are listed below.Approximately two-thirds of substantiated or indicated reports were made by professional report sources. The term professional means that the person had contact with the alleged child maltreatment victim as part of the report sources job. This term includes teachers, police offi cers, lawyers, and social services staff. About 25 percent of substantiated and indicated reports were made by legal staff and police officers. The remaining reports were made by nonprofession als, including friends, neighbors, sports coaches, and relatives.Professional report sources accounted for more than one-half of several categories of report dispositions in which the children were not found to be victims of maltreatment. Those included unsubstantiated (54.4%), other (62.3%), or unknown (62.3%). Response Time from Referral to Investigation Most States set requirements for beginning an investigation into a report of child abuse or neglect. The response time is defined as the time between the login of a call to CPS alleging child maltreatment and the initial face-to-face contact with the alleged victim, where appropriate.While some States have a single timeframe for responding to reports, many States establish priorities based on the information received from the report source. Of the States that establish priorities, many specify a high-priority response as within 1 hour or within 24 hours. Lower8 See table 25.CHAPTER 2: Reports 9 26. priority responses range from 24 hours to 14 days.9 The average response times reflect the types of reports that are received, as well as the ability of workers to meet the time standards.The FFY 2007 median response time from report to investigation was 79 hours or approximately 3.3 days.10 The FFY 2006 median response time was 66 hours or 2.8 days. The FFY 2007 aver age response time was 84 hours or approximately 3.5 days. This is comparable to an average response time of 86 hours for FFY 2006.CPS Workforce and Workload Given the large number and complexity of investigations and assessments that are conducted each year, there is an ongoing interest in the nature of the workforce that performs CPS func tions. In most agencies, the screening and investigation are conducted by different groups of workers. In many rural and smaller agencies, one worker may perform both functions, and other functions not mentioned here.States that reported significant numbers of specialized workers for intake, screening, investiga tion, and assessment were used to estimate the average number of cases that were handled by CPS workers.11 The weighted average number of completed investigations per investigation worker was 66.4 per year. (This compares with 62.0 in FFY 2006.) It is important to note that these calculations did not consider other activities of these workers and that some workers conducted more than one function. Also, each investigation could include more than one child. A more accurate calculation of workload would require a systematic estimation of work for a specific timeframe.12Tables and Notes The following pages contain the tables referenced in Chapter 2. Unless otherwise explained, a blank indicates that the State did not submit usable data. Specific information about State submissions can be found in appendix D. Additional information regarding methodologies that were used to create the tables is provided below.Table 21 For those States that submitted the Child File, the screened-in number is the sum of the reports by disposition. For Summary Data Component (SDC) States, the number is takendirectly from the States report form.9U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Administration for Children and Families/Childrens Bureau and Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. National Study of Child Protective Services Systems and Reform Efforts: Review of State CPS Policy. (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2006). This document is also available at http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/cps-status03 10 See table 26. This table uses data from the Agency File. 11 See table 27. The number of screening and intake workers (2,395) and the number of investigation workers (15,792) were reported by 33 States. 12 A workload study in California estimated that an average monthly caseload for workers who exclusively conducted CPS Emergency Response investigations and no other services was 16.15 investigations per worker per month or ap proximately 194 per year. Each investigation could include more than one child. American Humane Association, 2000, SB 2030 Child Welfare Services Workload Study Report (Sacramento: California Department of Social Services). 10 Child Maltreatment 2007 27. The national referral rate, 43.0 referrals per 1,000 children in the population, was calculatedfrom the total number of referrals and the child population in the 37 States reporting bothscreened-in and screened-out referrals. Screened-out referral data are from the Agency File. States that reported screened-in referrals, but not screened-out referrals, are not included inthis analysis.Table 24 The investigation rate is calculated by dividing the total investigations number by the child population number and multiplying by 1,000. States that reported victim data, but not nonvictim data, are not included in this analysis.Table 25 States that submitted an SDC file are not included in this analysis.Table 26 Data were reported by States in the Agency File. The PART target is a 5 percent decrease in the average response time across all reporting States each year. The baseline is from 2003, which had a median of 67 hours. States use different criteria to indicate the start of an investigation. Some States use the date the report was approved for investigation, while others use the date of attempted contactwith the victim. According to the Childrens Bureau, States are encouraged to use the date ofsuccessful contact with the victim. States are continuing to improve the reporting of this dataelement, which may account for some data fluctuations.Table 27 Only States that were able to report workforce data by screening and intake workers and investigation workers and that provided data for screened-in referrals were included incalculations for screened-in referrals per investigation worker. The average number of screened-in referrals per investigation worker is based on dividing the total number of referrals by the total number of investigation workers for the 33 States thatsubmitted these data. CHAPTER 2: Reports 11 28. Table 21 Screened-In and Screened-Out Referrals, 2007Child Screened-In Referrals (Reports) Screened-Out Referrals Total ReferralsStatePopulation NumberPercent NumberPercentNumber Rate Alabama 1,123,53718,710 61.4 11,752 38.630,462 27.1Alaska182,218 4,906 50.24,869 49.8 9,775 53.6Arizona 1,669,866 33,18899.3 245 0.733,433 20.0Arkansas 700,537 27,846 69.3 12,338 30.740,184 57.4California9,383,924232,29768.5107,006 31.5 339,303 36.2Colorado1,192,679 31,52047.9 34,306 52.165,826 55.2ConnecticutDelaware205,646 5,693 77.91,613 22.1 7,306 35.5District of Columbia 113,7204,506 92.2 382 7.8 4,888 43.0Florida 4,043,560154,95159.6104,913 40.4 259,864 64.3Georgia 2,531,609 48,96577.0 14,656 23.063,621 25.1HawaiiIdahoIllinoisIndiana 1,586,518 41,90060.8 27,071 39.268,971 43.5Iowa 711,40323,09358.0 16,754 42.039,847 56.0Kansas696,082 16,91253.9 14,490 46.131,402 45.1Kentucky1,003,973 48,60076.4 15,012 23.663,612 63.4LouisianaMaine279,4676,710 40.29,968 59.816,678 59.7MarylandMassachusetts 1,432,856 39,80158.7 27,992 41.367,793 47.3MichiganMinnesota 1,260,282 18,99333.6 37,588 66.456,581 44.9Mississippi768,704 17,871 66.39,093 33.726,964 35.1Missouri1,424,830 54,63553.3 47,944 46.7 102,579 72.0Montana219,4988,699 67.74,153 32.312,852 58.6Nebraska446,145 11,29049.0 11,760 51.023,050 51.7Nevada660,002 16,34272.76,150 27.322,492 34.1New Hampshire 298,186 6,834 41.89,516 58.216,350 54.8New JerseyNew Mexico 500,27614,85349.3 15,277 50.730,130 60.2New YorkNorth CarolinaNorth DakotaOhioOklahoma 899,50735,87357.0 27,092 43.062,965 70.0Oregon862,908 26,38141.5 37,123 58.563,504 73.6PennsylvaniaPuerto RicoRhode Island233,1157,71062.04,733 38.012,443 53.4South Carolina1,059,917 18,33767.28,956 32.827,293 25.8South Dakota196,890 3,627 25.0 10,854 75.014,481 73.5TennesseeTexas 6,623,366166,58482.5 35,431 17.5 202,015 30.5Utah 816,82220,38662.9 12,038 37.132,424 39.7Vermont 131,353 2,564 20.89,763 79.212,327 93.8Virginia1,826,179 30,19652.0 27,864 48.058,060 31.8Washington1,536,368 35,26247.4 39,119 52.674,381 48.4West Virginia387,38121,96269.09,851 31.031,813 82.1Wisconsin 1,321,27926,978 49.3 27,726 50.754,704 41.4Wyoming 125,365 2,442 48.22,628 51.8 5,070 40.4Total48,455,9681,287,417798,0262,085,443Percent 61.738.3Weighted Rate43.0Number Reporting3737 37 37 37 3737 12Child Maltreatment 2007 29. Table 22 Report Sources, 2007 (continues on page 14)Professional Legal, Law Enforcement,Child DaycareEducational Foster CareCriminal Justice Mental Health Social Services Provider(s)PersonnelProvider(s) Personnel Medical PersonnelPersonnelPersonnelStateNumber%Number%Number% Number %Number%Number %Number % Alabama1610.93,02816.242 0.24,084 21.81,8179.75633.0 1,98110.6Alaska521.195119.4 170.31,014 20.764213.1 255 5.24549.3Arizona4781.46,88520.75,638 17.04,27312.9 1,401 4.22,1006.3Arkansas 3701.33,60612.92,823 10.11,9967.22,488 8.92,0217.3California 9020.4 42,24418.2 239 0.1 35,202 15.2 15,3586.6 23,21110.0 15,8716.8Colorado 3961.36,26519.9 502 1.67,382 23.43,21410.2 2,036 6.52,1146.7Connecticut3701.46,20623.4 248 0.96,211 23.52,78310.5 1,810 6.81,7686.7Delaware851.51,11919.718 0.31,562 27.457110.0 186 3.32905.1District of Columbia340.873716.4 511.1753 16.72295.1172 3.81,14025.3Florida1,3810.9 23,10814.9 38,995 25.2 11,0747.14,0322.6 15,726 10.1Georgia3710.8 12,59825.78,628 17.64,8609.92,860 5.84,4539.1Hawaii3 0.142416.870.3552 21.839715.7431.7 41516.4Idaho 851.21,36019.233 0.51,502 21.272410.2520.7 2443.4Illinois 1690.2 13,56119.9 587 0.9 14,054 20.68,58512.6 9691.4 8,84713.0Indiana4211.07,79718.6 402 1.08,126 19.44,85511.61,704 4.1 2,6156.2Iowa 3391.53,38914.7 324 1.43,963 17.21,5266.67093.1 3,45315.0Kansas 1951.23,86022.8 462 2.71,582 9.4 9665.71100.7 2,64815.7Kentucky 3,763 7.7 178 0.44,0308.31,2692.6885 1.81,6533.4Louisiana1600.83,60118.7 106 0.52,812 14.62,38012.3 569 2.91,5868.2Maine1021.51,10916.513 0.2958 14.367110.0 6139.1 82612.3MarylandMassachusetts3000.84,17910.5 970.28,538 21.54,06210.22,1275.3MichiganMinnesota2391.34,19122.1 294 1.55,105 26.91,3867.37113.7 1,7289.1Mississippi1130.63,23418.186 0.52,547 14.32,09011.7 617 3.55423.0Missouri 6501.28,44615.5 173 0.37,212 13.23,6146.6 2,762 5.1 6,72612.3Montana1281.51,14413.264 0.71,631 18.75756.62613.0 1,34615.5Nebraska 2242.01,74815.5 104 0.91,868 16.5994 8.8 5675.0 1,17810.4Nevada 2161.33,42921.039 0.23,718 22.81,6259.9547 3.31,5089.2New Hampshire 721.11,32319.421 0.31,255 18.473410.7 434 6.45317.8New Jersey 1830.4 11,37425.5 602 1.35,823 13.13,3107.4 1,7003.82,5385.7New Mexico560.42,95519.921 0.12,566 17.31,268 8.5 4613.1 7685.2New York 4560.3 30,68719.7 2,182 1.4 17,564 11.39,697 6.2 5,512 3.5 30,65319.7North Carolina 1690.31,835 2.72,655 4.0 1,686 2.52,2623.4North Dakota 76 2.172520.214 0.4942 26.32657.4 85 2.43289.2Ohio 8041.09,39212.1 489 0.6 14,035 18.15,0826.6 2,9743.8 12,54516.2Oklahoma 6391.84,12011.5 149 0.44,353 12.13,099 8.6 1,868 5.26,168 17.2Oregon 2671.04,46716.9 224 0.86,003 22.82,72610.3 732 2.83,56413.5Pennsylvania 4902.15,78224.6 1,369 5.81,5226.53,33414.21,3715.83,36514.3Puerto Rico 140.12,37615.160.01,760 11.21,0977.0124 0.85783.7Rhode Island 1371.81,60320.81,119 14.51,10614.3 1331.7 1,01313.1South Carolina 1320.73,72720.3 145 0.83,293 18.02,43813.3 423 2.31,86510.2South Dakota661.858016.013 0.41,134 31.32757.6143 3.9 792.2Tennessee8741.49,20714.8 401 0.69,718 15.65,4008.7 1,7152.89,30615.0Texas2,0381.2 30,05918.0 359 0.2 25,308 15.2 21,65013.05,147 3.1 9,7625.9Utah 1910.92,14410.5 215 1.16,133 30.11,179 5.8 6983.4 2,22110.9Vermont 682.752020.315 0.6474 18.52228.729011.32379.2Virginia 3661.26,98823.135 0.15,457 18.12,473 8.21,7485.81,8286.1Washington 1,0342.96,203 17.6283 0.84,328 12.33,117 8.8 1,8955.4 6,94019.7West Virginia1360.62,91713.3 111 0.51,716 7.8 1,1065.0 900.4 3,01313.7Wisconsin4361.64,55716.962 0.24,774 17.71,577 5.8 1,413 5.24,41916.4Wyoming50620.735 1.4483 19.8134 5.5 1144.7 1958.0Total16,648 316,02910,837302,905 155,51179,203189,538Percent 0.9 17.0 0.616.38.4 4.3 10.2Number Reporting48 48 50 50 44 4450 50 50504848 50 50CHAPTER 2: Reports13 30. Table 22 Report Sources, 2007 (continued from page 13)Nonprofessional AllegedAlleged AnonymousFriend(s) orOther Perpetrator(s) Victim(s) Source(s) Neighbor(s) Relative(s) Parent(s)StateNumber%Number% Number%Number%Number% Number% Alabama32 0.21831.0 1,2186.5990 5.3 1,951 10.41,664 8.9Alaska 60.1 180.4438 8.9185 3.82966.02575.2Arizona2430.7 3,0649.22,134 6.4 2,767 8.3 2,426 7.3Arkansas 80.01440.5 4,200 15.11,784 6.4 3,169 11.42,398 8.6California 1,0840.5 23,54610.16,147 2.6 11,4904.9 2,956 1.3Colorado 10.02230.7 1,0053.21,620 5.1 2,572 8.2 1,696 5.4Connecticut90.01140.4 3,209 12.1262 1.08823.3 1,417 5.4Delaware 22 0.4 400.7391 6.9172 3.03165.64287.5District of Columbia 26 0.6 400.9392 8.7172 3.83136.92234.9Florida1,8821.2627 0.48,784 5.7 13,1568.514,395 9.3Georgia38 0.11570.3 3,2156.62,635 5.4 4,103 8.4 3,300 6.7Hawaii 80.3 79 3.1 68 2.71265.0 652.6Idaho 610.9221 3.191012.84906.95698.0Illinois134 0.22130.3 6,881 10.12,496 3.7 4,420 6.5 4,684 6.9Indiana49 0.12360.6 4,0029.62,697 6.4 3,200 7.6 3,992 9.5Iowa 44 0.2Kansas450.3 2,674 15.8663 3.9 1,022 6.0 1,631 9.6Kentucky 3700.8 5,633 11.68,34317.2 3,521 7.2 3,865 8.0Louisiana34 0.2 710.4 1,5598.11,464 7.6 2,423 12.61,714 8.9Maine 250.4520 7.7474 7.15998.94306.4MarylandMassachusetts 241 0.6 840.2 3,4418.6 8412.19462.4MichiganMinnesota17 0.1 840.4465 2.4849 4.57824.17924.2Mississippi1951.1 2,459 13.81,223 6.8 2,301 12.91,600 9.0MissouriMontana30.0358 4.1547 6.37358.46958.0Nebraska 80.19568.5423 3.71,19410.6 1,028 9.1 520.5Nevada 20.0 730.4 1,5999.8858 5.3 1,071 6.6 1,168 7.1New Hampshire 190.3 88312.94486.64736.9New Jersey 3110.7 6,933 15.51,399 3.1 2,077 4.7 3,689 8.3New Mexico 50 0.3 470.3 3,826 25.8165 1.18535.76494.4New York 19,817 12.74,998 3.2 7,653 4.910,949 7.0North Carolina820.1 1,1091.71,308 2.0 1,738 2.67611.1North Dakota 60.2 180.5124 3.5208 5.82135.92687.5Ohio 40.04380.6 8,804 11.44,766 6.2 10,83314.0 9961.3Oklahoma 41 0.11560.4750 2.11,889 5.3 5,336 14.92,390 6.7Oregon 4681.8 1,0934.11,228 4.7 1,601 6.16072.3Pennsylvania 19 0.13821.6 1,1815.0641 2.79764.2 1,855 7.9Puerto Rico11 0.12381.5 5,369 34.2731 4.79556.1 1,588 10.1Rhode Island580.8762 9.9498 6.54916.45797.5South Carolina 53 0.3 730.4 1,6729.1967 5.3 1,788 9.8 1,127 6.1South Dakota 30.140.1242 6.7 92 2.52797.71714.7Tennessee53 0.12340.4 9,65915.5 7,114 11.46,033 9.7Texas3730.2 8,0264.8 10,491 6.317,916 10.8 16,872 10.1Utah 18 0.11140.6 1,415 6.9 2,863 14.01,114 5.5Vermont30.1 281.1111 4.3 73 2.81676.52178.5Virginia 48 0.21370.5 3,679 12.21,141 3.8 2,244 7.4 2,109 7.0Washington 90.02390.7712 2.03,351 9.5 2,867 8.1 2,650 7.5West Virginia20 0.11660.8 5,168 23.51,092 5.0 2,068 9.4 2,231 10.2Wisconsin30.01370.5 1,1204.21,200 4.4 1,849 6.9 1,967 7.3Wyoming10.0 190.8153 6.3196 8.01837.525710.5Total 1,013 10,293142,27095,062 136,086 112,915Percent 0.1 0.67.65.1 7.3 6.1Number Reporting 32 32474745 4547 47 48 48484814Child Maltreatment 2007 31. Unknown or OtherUnknown or Total OtherMissingReports StateNumber %Number %Number %Alabama 9945.320.018,710100.0 Alaska3216.5 4,906100.0 Arizona1,712 5.2 670.233,188100.0 Arkansas 2,83910.227,846100.0 California35,50415.318,543 8.0 232,297100.0 Colorado 2,494 7.931,520100.0 Connecticut1,061 4.01290.526,479100.0 Delaware4938.7 5,693100.0 District of Columbia2245.0 4,506100.0 Florida 21,79114.1 154,951100.0 Georgia1,141 2.36061.248,965100.0 Hawaii 833.3257 10.2 2,527100.0 Idaho 836 11.820.0 7,089100.0 Illinois 2,133 3.13680.568,101100.0 Indiana1,804 4.341,900100.0 Iowa 5,37423.3 3,97217.223,093100.0 Kansas 1,047 6.270.016,912100.0 Kentucky 6,92114.2 8,16916.848,600100.0 Louisiana 8144.219,293100.0 Maine 3585.3 120.26,710 100.0 Maryland Massachusetts3,253 8.211,69229.439,801100.0 Michigan Minnesota 8674.6 1,483 7.818,993100.0 Mississippi 8484.7 160.117,871100.0 Missouri 1,475 2.723,57743.254,635100.0 Montana 1,171 13.5 410.5 8,699100.0 Nebraska4714.24754.211,290100.0 Nevada4883.010.016,342100.0 New Hampshire 6169.0 250.4 6,834100.0 New Jersey 3,170 7.1 1,497 3.444,606100.0 New Mexico 1,158 7.8 100.114,853100.0 New York15,341 9.9 155,509100.0 North Carolina53,20979.666,814100.0 North Dakota3128.720.1 3,586100.0 Ohio 6,274 8.177,436100.0 Oklahoma 4,67413.02410.735,873100.0 Oregon 3,40112.926,381100.0 Pennsylvania 1,226 5.223,513100.0 Puerto Rico 8505.4 120.115,709100.0 Rhode Island1692.2 420.57,710 100.0 South Carolina6343.518,337100.0 South Dakota546 15.1 3,627100.0 Tennessee 6941.1 1,775 2.962,183100.0 Texas 16,053 9.6 2,530 1.5 166,584100.0 Utah 1,005 4.9 1,076 5.320,386100.0 Vermont 1174.6 220.9 2,564100.0 Virginia 1,713 5.72300.830,196100.0 Washington 1,634 4.635,262100.0 West Virginia2,003 9.11250.621,962100.0 Wisconsin1,899 7.0 1,565 5.826,978100.0 Wyoming 1616.650.2 2,442100.0 Total160,167 131,785 1,860,262 Percent8.6 7.1100.0 Number Reporting 49493535 5050 CHAPTER 2: Reports 15 32. Table 23 Investigation Dispositions, 2007Alternative Alternative ResponseResponseUnsubstanti Intentionally Closed WithUnknown orTotalStateSubstantiated IndicatedVictim NonvictimatedFalseNo Finding Other Missing Dispositions Alabama 6,387 11,413 910 18,710Alaska1,830 2,700376 4,906Arizona 2,87911130,198 33,188Arkansas6,967 19,6091,27027,846California54,533 177,7568 232,297Colorado7,196 23,259 1,065 31,520Connecticut 6,634 19,845 26,479Delaware1,369 3,77382 430 39 5,693District of Columbia1,699 2,560247 4,506Florida31,656 78,299 44,795201154,951Georgia21,541 27,424 48,965Hawaii1,170 1,3572,527Idaho 1,064 6,013127,089Illinois 17,207 50,42147368,101Indiana 12,89928,262 739 41,900Iowa8,958 14,135 23,093Kansas1,558 15,354 16,912Kentucky9,8431,72413,75520,9351,572 77148,600Louisiana 5,79244 12,6038459 19,293Maine 2,566 4,1446,710MarylandMassachusetts23,012 16,789 39,801MichiganMinnesota 4,506 10,4813,21918769 18,993Mississippi 4,791 13,08017,871Missouri5,452 28,14419,1061,93354,635Montana 1,0241066,667672 230 8,699Nebraska2,401 8,649 24011,290Nevada3,068 353 12,921 16,342New Hampshire6495,672513 6,834New Jersey5,352 39,254 44,606New Mexico3,784 11,069 14,853New York50,989104,520 155,509North Carolina6,7756,82035,476 17,74366,814North Dakota 6602,9242 3,586Ohio 16,50810,268 48,5161,187957 77,436Oklahoma7,3446,39219,4442,69335,873Oregon7,227 12,7906,36426,381Pennsylvania4,177 19,25581 23,513Puerto Rico 5,384 8,42782 1,114 673 29 15,709Rhode Island2,462 5,141107 7,710South Carolina7,222 11,115 18,337South Dakota 8512,506270 3,627Tennessee 9,961723 9,97937,0524,263205 62,183Texas42,295 96,4966,21321,580 166,584Utah8,507 125 10,904 10 84020,386Vermont7281,8277 112,564Virginia4,377 3,7857021,96430,196Washington4,769 7,641 13,389582 8,88135,262West Virginia 4,438 15,6361,862 26 21,962Wisconsin 5,468 21,510 26,978Wyoming478 1,4295352,442Total448,40711,208 8,544113,819 1,140,001 75628,909 106,5492,069 1,860,262Percent 24.1 0.60.5 6.161.30.0 1.65.7 0.1100.0Number Reporting50 4 2 11 50 92313750 16Child Maltreatment 2007 33. Table 24 Report Investigation Trends, 20032007 (continues on page 18)2003 20042005 Child TotalInvestigation Child TotalInvestigationChild TotalInvestigationStatePopulationInvestigations RatePopulationInvestigations Rate PopulationInvestigations Rate Alabama 1,108,51117,820 16.1 1,106,52219,11817.31,107,07918,31816.5Alaska 186,907 10,575 56.6182,9904,273 23.4Arizona 1,481,58433,627 22.7 1,522,131 35,62323.4 1,574,856 37,088 23.6Arkansas 676,91219,68029.1679,297 20,076 29.6 684,04423,12033.8California9,476,210244,69425.8 9,516,270234,03524.6 9,532,676 228,01223.9Colorado1,141,412 29,36225.7 1,145,691 29,54025.8 1,153,86926,95023.4Connecticut843,13532,80238.9838,707 32,097 38.3 830,77030,03036.1Delaware 198,6625,432 27.3200,0035,276 26.4 202,1955,799 28.7District of Columbia 116,4304,660 40.0116,6314,977 42.7 116,0984,958 42.7Florida 3,824,062156,84841.0 3,893,303145,39337.3 3,968,247 148,00437.3Georgia 2,310,56271,501 30.9 2,353,89385,817 36.5 2,400,364 74,165 30.9Hawaii 298,3923,894 13.0297,8563,608 12.1 298,6372,733 9.2Idaho375,3966,264 16.7379,4016,50217.1386,6536,499 16.8Illinois3,236,597 59,28018.3 3,233,17164,784 20.0 3,225,14966,30520.6Indiana 1,569,753 34,28721.8 1,569,72735,817 22.8 1,573,346 37,860 24.1Iowa 714,436 24,172 33.8711,23424,36634.3 709,85924,53634.6Kansas 703,66915,84022.5699,975 15,729 22.5 696,417 14,146 20.3Kentucky 992,38345,34845.7993,209 46,95147.3995,888 47,960 48.2Louisiana 1,181,619 25,48021.6 1,174,289 23,84320.3 1,167,62926,90123.0Maine292,4405,14317.6 289,1125,358 18.5 285,1705,396 18.9MarylandMassachusetts 1,490,523 39,68626.6 1,476,886 38,94026.4 1,463,16938,66926.4Michigan2,552,16174,390 29.1 2,533,05474,333 29.3 2,509,307 65,174 26.0Minnesota 1,271,46417,587 13.8 1,265,83717,471 13.8 1,260,95318,84314.9Mississippi761,99115,99821.0761,62815,80120.7 762,072 15,745 20.7Missouri1,415,504 55,58039.3 1,413,662 54,21638.4 1,414,887 55,217 39.0Montana221,0739,023 40.8 219,775 7,450 33.9 218,7318,18137.4Nebraska 445,2837,160 16.1445,141 10,962 24.6 445,08715,50134.8Nevada 571,319 13,191 23.1 593,71713,424 22.6 613,75614,53223.7New Hampshire308,1716,878 22.3304,9096,400 21.0 301,7276,583 21.8New Jersey2,113,18542,762 20.2 2,114,289 44,12720.9 2,105,57434,80616.5New Mexico 504,293 15,278 30.3504,84816,44532.6 506,37720,22539.9New York4,628,087149,84732.4 4,600,581148,24432.2 4,565,760 140,21430.7North Carolina2,055,521 59,58329.0 2,078,86866,172 31.8 2,112,57766,69831.6North Dakota 150,0443,899 26.0148,2293,912 26.4 146,4373,96127.0Ohio2,829,458 68,39924.2 2,810,41870,280 25.0 2,790,677 71,762 25.7Oklahoma 885,621 36,641 41.4883,691 36,070 40.8 886,36936,95241.7Oregon 849,551 20,552 24.2846,86923,52927.8 849,59825,06329.5Pennsylvania2,858,851 23,6018.32,840,739 23,8628.42,821,095 23,114 8.2Puerto Rico 1,031,914 31,673 30.7Rhode Island247,632 7,012 28.3245,8086,707 27.3 241,8397,101 29.4South Carolina1,019,266 18,43418.1 1,023,27817,186 16.8 1,030,036 17,088 16.6South Dakota 196,3005,534 28.2195,3354,620 23.7 194,6194,445 22.8Tennessee 1,410,17229,790 21.1 1,416,415 48,62234.3 1,428,28559,99842.0Texas 6,162,780133,82721.7 6,245,791140,03822.4 6,337,618 161,89525.5Utah 736,66120,00927.2755,550 21,132 28.0 775,353 21,052 27.2Vermont140,4522,936 20.9138,2472,690 19.5 135,8142,504 18.4Virginia1,783,36915,911 8.91,791,79228,105 15.7 1,803,450 27,937 15.5Washington1,517,018 30,22219.9 1,516,46832,314 21.3 1,519,92434,29322.6West Virginia391,37719,55650.0390,14418,508 47.4389,16222,400 57.6Wisconsin 1,340,10041,377 30.9 1,330,485 40,20530.2 1,320,89929,66022.5Wyoming123,1512,381 19.3122,3992,018 16.5 121,5192,020 16.6Total71,709,450 1,833,753 71,735,275 1,872,693 73,196,5211,916,359Rate25.6 26.126.2Number Reporting5050 504949 49 5151 51CHAPTER 2: Reports17 34. Table 24 Report Investigation Trends, 20032007 (continued from page 17) 20062007Child Total Investigation Child Total InvestigationState PopulationInvestigationsRatePopulationInvestigationsRate Alabama1,119,663 18,651 16.7 1,123,537 18,710 16.7Alaska183,500 5,755 31.4182,218 4,906 26.9Arizona 1,625,87033,743 20.8 1,669,866 33,188 19.9Arkansas696,03225,524 36.7700,53727,846 39.7California 9,401,360225,911 24.0 9,383,924232,297 24.8Colorado1,173,75330,940 26.41,192,67931,520 26.4Connecticut 827,06928,500 34.5820,21626,479 32.3Delaware204,023 5,781 28.3205,646 5,693 27.7District of Columbia114,531 5,077 44.3113,720 4,506 39.6Florida 4,032,726 151,822 37.6 4,043,560154,951 38.3Georgia 2,475,38260,277 24.4 2,531,609 48,965 19.3Hawaii283,576 2,285 8.1 285,694 2,527 8.8Idaho 399,024 6,662 16.7407,712 7,089 17.4Illinois3,203,17866,495 20.83,199,15968,101 21.3Indiana 1,584,01744,051 27.8 1,586,518 41,900 26.4Iowa712,09725,029 35.1711,40323,093 32.5Kansas693,39515,164 21.9696,08216,912 24.3Kentucky 1,003,483 48,649 48.51,003,97348,600 48.4Louisiana1,066,962 25,536 23.91,079,56019,293 17.9Maine 283,332 5,949 21.0279,467 6,710 24.0MarylandMassachusetts1,446,323 38,918 26.9 1,432,856 39,801 27.8Michigan 2,483,332 70,036 28.2Minnesota 1,261,01719,846 15.7 1,260,282 18,993 15.1Mississippi 764,27516,888 22.1768,70417,871 23.2Missouri1,425,01447,491 33.3 1,424,830 54,635 38.3Montana 218,929 8,737 39.9219,498 8,699 39.6Nebraska445,09413,109 29.5446,14511,290 25.3Nevada639,64514,982 23.4660,00216,342 24.8New Hampshire 302,593 6,640 21.9298,186 6,834 22.9New Jersey2,079,58828,134 13.52,063,78944,606 21.6New Mexico497,67916,565 33.3500,27614,853 29.7New York4,467,031 150,796 33.84,413,414 155,509 35.2North Carolina 2,163,091 67,524 31.22,217,68066,814 30.1North Dakota143,529 3,791 26.4142,809 3,586 25.1Ohio2,774,85073,156 26.42,751,87477,436 28.1Oklahoma889,65836,673 41.2899,50735,873 39.9Oregon857,57025,598 29.8862,90826,381 30.6Pennsylvania2,807,28423,071 8.2 2,786,71923,513 8.4Puerto Rico1,018,306 13,797 13.5 1,002,944 15,709 15.7Rhode Island236,719 8,441 35.7233,115 7,710 33.1South Carolina 1,048,614 16,712 15.91,059,91718,337 17.3South Dakota196,231 3,908 19.9196,890 3,627 18.4Tennessee1,462,511 61,886 42.31,471,48662,183 42.3Texas6,489,667166,728 25.7 6,623,366166,584 25.2Utah796,87720,206 25.4816,82220,386 25.0Vermont 133,878 2,315 17.3131,353 2,564 19.5Virginia 1,821,202 29,141 16.01,826,17930,196 16.5Washington1,525,94735,698 23.4 1,536,368 35,262 23.0West Virginia 388,45123,210 59.8387,38121,962 56.7Wisconsin1,326,996 29,029 21.91,321,27926,978 20.4Wyoming 122,974 2,437 19.8125,365 2,442 19.5Total 73,317,848 1,907,26471,099,024 1,860,262Rate26.026.2Number Reporting 5151 51 505050 18Child Maltreatment 2007 35. Table 25 Dispositions by Report Sources, 2007 (continues on page 20)Alternative Response Alternative ResponseSubstantiatedIndicated Victim Nonvictim UnsubstantiatedReport Sources Number %Number% Number % Number %Number %Professionals Child Daycare Providers2,829 0.695 0.863 0.78520.7 11,232 1.0Educational Personnel 58,09713.2 1,34912.0 91810.7 13,69012.0 216,445 19.3Foster Care Providers2,131 0.51201.11 0.0 2780.27,788 0.7Legal, Law Enforcement,124,68328.3 2,72924.3 1,49117.59,8538.7129,524 11.5Criminal Justice PersonnelMedical Personnel 50,96011.69898.8 91710.74,3173.8 84,948 7.6Mental Health Personnel 15,182 3.45905.3340.4 2,9242.6 54,786 4.9Social Services Personnel 55,30012.6 2,05218.3 1,17313.77,7436.8107,315 9.5Total Professionals309,18270.2 7,92470.7 4,59753.8 39,65734.8 612,038 54.4Nonprofessionals Alleged Perpetrators 490 0.120.024 0.0433 0.0Alleged Victims1,771 0.486 0.8540.6 2560.26,812 0.6Anonymous Reporters 19,215 4.44363.9 7929.3 2,2021.9110,342 9.8Friends or Neighbors14,333 3.34303.8 1,03412.16,3725.6 63,049 5.6Other Relatives 27,480 6.2 1,28511.5 1,07112.54,5394.0 87,881 7.8Parents 17,889 4.11981.8 4375.1 4,2503.7 78,748 7.0Total Nonprofessionals81,17818.4 2,43721.7 3,38839.7 17,64315.5 347,265 30.9Unknown or Other Reporters Unknown 16,775 3.810 0.1 3303.952,01145.760,100 5.3Other 33,385 7.68377.5 229 2.74,5084.0104,884 9.3Total Unknown or50,16011.4 847 7.6 5596.556,51949.7 164,984 14.7Other ReportersTotal440,520 11,2088,544113,8191,124,287Percent 100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0Number Reporting48 48 4 4 2 2111148 48 CHAPTER 2: Reports19 36. Table 25 Dispositions by Report Sources, 2007 (conintued from page 19) Intentionally Closed WithFalseNo FindingOther Unknown TotalReport Sources Number %Number % Number %Number %Number %Professionals Child Daycare Providers 3 0.4 169 0.6 1,0531.1 9 0.4 16,305 10.4Educational Personnel 506.62,8409.817,23517.221310.3310,83717.0Foster Care Providers 4 0.5 106 0.41430.1281.4 10,5999.5Legal, Law Enforcement, 59 7.8 3,991 13.823,078 23.0 55226.7295,960 16.2Criminal Justice PersonnelMedical Personnel 314.11,8776.5 8,3168.3 165 8.0152,5208.3Mental Health Personnel 172.3 844 2.9 3,9393.9 703.4 78,3864.3Social Services Personnel 374.93,171 11.0 8,6038.6252 12.2185,646 10.1Total Professionals 201 26.7 12,99845.062,367 62.3 1,28962.3 1,050,25357.4Nonprofessionals Alleged Perpetrators1 0.1 220.1350.01,007 0.7Alleged Victims 3 0.41740.6620 0.6 311.59,8078.8Anonymous Reporters 229 30.4 2,911 10.1 4,710 4.7 216 10.4141,053 7.7Friends or Neighbors526.92,929 10.1 5,3295.3 984.7 93,626 71.0Other Relatives 7810.3 3,301 11.4 8,4858.5 152 7.3134,272 7.3Parents 135 17.9 1,8756.5 8,3708.4 138 6.7112,0406.1Total Nonprofessionals498 66.0 11,21238.827,549 27.5 63530.7491,805 26.9Unknown or Other Reporters Unknown 121.61,8576.46870.71 0.0131,783 7.2Other 43 5.7 2,8429.8 9,582 9.6144 7.0156,4548.5Total Unknown or55 7.3 4,699 16.310,269 10.3 145 7.0288,237 15.7Other ReportersTotal 75428,909 100,185 2,0691,830,295Percent 100.0 100.0100.0 100.0 100.0Number Reporting8 8 2323 12 12 77 20 Child Maltreatment 2007 37. Table 26 PART Measure: Response Time in Hours, 20052007 Response Time AverageState2005 20062007 AlabamaAlaska199Arizona 76 4759Arkansas 189208 223CaliforniaColoradoConnecticut 40Delaware 152154 179District of Columbia2933 28Florida 11 10 9GeorgiaHawaii 184132 116Idaho 60 57Illinois12 1212IndianaIowa4943 38Kansas78 7490Kentucky27 31LouisianaMaine 12072MarylandMassachusettsMichiganMinnesota 79 6055Mississippi207166 135Missouri4558 25MontanaNebraska 413312 148Nevada47 4233New Hampshire 5558 60New Jersey48 26New Mexico 85New YorkNorth CarolinaNorth Dakota31 3238Ohio 54Oklahoma 16114187Oregon116 109PennsylvaniaPuerto Rico 146 307Rhode Island18 2122South Carolina9484 79South Dakota 180182 113Tennessee71Texas 1834136Utah 110102 100Vermont 67 7290VirginiaWashington70 77 4West VirginiaWisconsin 99104 109Wyoming 29 1524Total 2,595 3,105 2,611Average 8986 84Median67 6679Number Reporting29 3631CHAPTER 2: Reports 21 38. Table 27 Child Protective Services Workforce, 2007Screened-In Screening andInvestigation Screening, Intake,Screened-InReferrals per StateIntake WorkersWorkers Investigation WorkersReferrals Investigation WorkerAlabama 82 58867018,710 32 Alaska59 199258 4,906 25 Arizona 70 973 1,043 33,188 34 Arkansas30 47350327,846 59 California4,871 Colorado Connecticut Delaware1483 97 5,693 69 District of Columbia4477121 4,506 59 Florida 157 1,719 1,876154,95190 Georgia Hawaii1475 89 2,527 34 Idaho Illinois99 86896768,101 78 Indiana 616 Iowa222 Kansas78 27735516,912 61 Kentucky751,540 1,61548,600 32 Louisiana9 24425319,293 79 Maine 28 1291576,71052 Maryland Massachusetts 80 25233239,801 158 Michigan Minnesota 13125939018,993 73 Mississippi4 38739117,871 46 Missouri50 42047054,635 130 Montana Nebraska288911711,290 127 Nevada33 20323616,342 81 New Hampshire 1260 72 6,834 114 New Jersey94 84994344,606 53 New Mexico39 18122014,853 82 New York North Carolina16280096266,814 84 North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma15423138535,873 155 Oregon Pennsylvania3,176 Puerto Rico 37 11214915,709 140 Rhode Island2934 637,710227 South Carolina South Dakota3150 81 3,627 73 Tennessee Texas 413 3,0803,493 166,58454 Utah39 11515420,386177 Vermont 2636 62 2,564 71 Virginia65 85491930,196 35 Washington74 28936335,262 122 West Virginia 401 Wisconsin 13524638126,978 110 Wyoming 123 Total 2,395 15,79227,596 1,048,871 Weighted Average66.4 Average 85.3 Number Reporting3333 3933 33 22Child Maltreatment 2007 39. Children 1 CHAPTER 3 Each State bases its own definitions of child abuse and neglect on the standards set by Federal and State laws. The child protective services (CPS) units within each State respond to the safety needs of children who are alleged to have been maltreated based on those State definitions. The Federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA), (42 U.S.C.A. 5106g), as amended by the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 2003, defines child abuse and neglect as: Any recent act or failure to act on the part of a parent or caretaker which results in death,serious physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse or exploitation; or An act or failure to act which presents an imminent risk of serious harm.National child maltreatment estimates for Federal fiscal year (FFY) 2007 are based on child populations for the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. During FFY 2007: An estimated 794,000 children were victims of maltreatment; The rate of victimization was 10.6 per 1,000 children in the population; and More than 3.5 million children received CPS investigations or assessments.This chapter provides in-depth information about the characteristics of children found to be abused or neglected during FFY 2007. This chapter also discusses the 5-year trend of children who received investigations or assessments and the 5-year trend of victimization rates. Children Who Were Subjects of a Report Based on data from 50 States, the rate of children who were subjects of a screened-in referral (a report) and who subsequently received an investigation or assessment was 47.2 per 1,000 children.2 State rates ranged from 8.4 to 127.4 per 1,000 children.When applied to the national population for all 52 States, an estimated 3.5 million children received an investigation or assessment.3 The national rate of children who received an investi gation or assessment rose from 46.3 during FFY 2003 to 48.3 in FFY 2005, but has been decli1 This chapter is primarily about child victims, but includes some information about nonvictims and, therefore, istitled Children. 2 Supporting data are provided in table 31, which is located at the end of this chapter. The child disposition rate wascomputed by dividing the total count of children who received an investigation (3,359,295) by the child population forthe 50 States that reported these data (71,099,024) and multiplying by 1,000. 3 A national estimate of 3,535,501 (rounded to 3.5 million) children who were the subjects of an investigation was calculated by multiplying the child investigation rate (47.2) by the national child population for all 52 States (74,904,677)and dividing by 1,000. CHAPTER 3: Children 23 40. ning since 2005.4 The FFY 2006 rate was 47.9 and the FFY 2007 rate was 47.2 per 1,000 children(figure 31). The national estimate of children who received an investigation or assessment hasdeclined from 3.6 million during 2006 to 3.5 million during 2007.Child VictimsBased on data from 50 States, nearly one-quarter (22.5%) of children who received an investigation or assessment were found to have been maltreated.5 This compares to 25.2 percent ofchildren who were found to have been maltreated during FFY 2006. The number of reportedvictims of maltreatment from the 50 States was 753,357.6 The victimization rate for FFY 2007was 10.6 per 1,000 in the population.7 State rates of victimization ranged from 1.5 to 26.3 per1,000 children. Based on the victimization rate of 10.6 per 1,000 in the population, an estimated794,000 children were victims of maltreatment during FFY 2007.8 Between FFY 2003 and FFY 2006, the rate of victimization fluctuated between 12.2 and 12.0per 1,000 children. Between FFY 2006 and FFY 2007, the rate of victimization dropped from12.1 to 10.6 per 1,000 children, which is a change of 12 percent. This decrease can be attributedto several factors including the increase in children who received an other disposition, thedecrease in the percentage of children who received a substantiated or indicated disposition, andthe decrease in the number of children who received an investigation or assessment. It is notpossible to tell whether this years decrease indicates a trend until more data are collected. Figure 31 Disposition and Victimization Rates, 20032007 Rate per 1,000 Disposition Victimization60.0 48.148.3 47.947.2 46.350.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 12.212.1 12.1 12.0 10.610.00.0 20032004200520062007 YearBased on data from tables 32 and 34.4 See table 32.5 The percentage of children who were determined to have been abused or neglected is the total number of victims with substantiated, indicated, or alternative response victim dispositions.6 See table 33. A victim was counted once for each report of maltreatment, and therefore, this number is duplicated. Counting each victim only once, regardless of the number of maltreatment reports, gives an unduplicated count of 683,549. This unduplicated victim count is for 48 States, as the States that reported data via the Summary Data Com ponent (SDC) can not report unduplicated counts.7 The victimization rate was computed by dividing the number of total victims (753,357) by the child population for the 50 States that reported these data (71,099,024) and multiplying by 1,000.8 See table 34. A national estimate of 794,000 child victims was calculated by multiplying the victimization rate (10.6) by the national population (74,904,677), dividing by 1,000, and rounding to the nearest 1,000.24Child Maltreatment 2007 41. First-Time VictimsApproximately three-quarters of victims (75.4%) had no history of prior victimization.9 Information regarding first-time victims is a Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) measure. TheCommunity-Based Child Abuse Prevention Program (CBCAP) reports this PART measure tothe Office of Management and Budget (OMB) each year as an average of all States. IndividualState data are not reported to OMB.Age and Sex of VictimsNearly 32 percent (31.9%) of all victims of maltreatment were younger than 4 years old (figure32). An additional 23.8 percent were in the age group 47 years and 19.0 percent were in theage group 811 years.10 Victimization was split almost evenly between the sexes; 48.2 percentof victims were boys and 51.5 percent of the Figure 32 Age by Percentage victims were girls. The sex of 0.3 percent ofchild victims was unknown.of Victims, 2007 The youngest children had the highest rate of47 Years 23.8% victimization. The rate of child victimization for boys in the age group of birth to 1 year was6.3% 3 Years 22.2 per 1,000 male children of the same age6.6% 2 Years group (figure 33). The child victimization 811 Yearsrate for girls in the age group of birth to 1 year 19.0%