The AFCARS Trends Chart tracks children in Foster Care from FY 2002 through the most recent year. A table of data and a graphic depiction of trends are shown for children in care on the first day of the year, entries to foster care, exits, children waiting to be adopted, children adopted, children with terminations of parental rights, and total children served in foster care.

This dataset depicts the number of adopted children during the October 1, 2004 - September 30, 2005 time period. The numbers are categorized and broken down by state. The male and female figures are the percentage that each makes up of the total number of those adopted. This data was collected at: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/afcars/statistics/gender_tbl1_2005.htm Access Date November 13, 2007.

This chart counts the number of unique children in DFPS custody who lived in an adoptive placement at some point during the fiscal year. Children in DFPS custody are those for whom a court has appointed DFPS legal responsibility through temporary or permanent managing conservatorship or other court ordered legal basis. An adoptive placement occurs when the child's caseworker, the family's case manager, and the adoptive family sign paperwork officially placing the child in the home for adoption. Before the paperwork can be signed, a child must be free for adoption (meaning a court has terminated parental rights), have a permanency goal of adoption and the family must have been approved for adoption through a licensed child placing agency.

Children may have more than one disabling condition.

This chart gives the count of each child with each disabling condition.

Drug/Alcohol disabling condition can either be due to self-abuse or exposure to an individual with the condition.

Other includes teen parent or pregnant teen.

Visit dfps.texas.gov for more information about DFPS and our programs.

This dataset contains aggregate data concerning the number of children that exited DCF care to an Adoption. These figures are broken out by the DCF Region and Office responsible for the child's care, by their Race/Ethnicity, and by whether their exit from care occurred within 24 months of their entry to care or not. It would be appropriate to roll up the data from all variables across multiple time periods, as they represent specific events in the lives of these children. Please note that these figures do not represent unique children, and so should not be used as the basis for creating a rate based on the child population of the state. These data form the basis of measurement for the Juan F. Consent Decree Exit Plan Outcome #8: Adoption Within 24 Months, although those figures are reported to the DCF Court Monitor on a quarterly rather than annual schedule.

Splitgraph serves as an HTTP API that lets you run SQL queries directly on this data to power Web applications. For example:

See the Splitgraph documentation for more information.

Abstract The necessary adoptions encompass cases of children over two years of age, with siblings, disabilities, chronic or interracial illness. This study aimed to present an integrative review of the necessary adoptions and how this topic has been investigated and discussed. From a search in the databases LILACS, SciELO, PePSIC and PsycINFO (2019-2018), 35 studies were retrieved. The scarce international production may be related to the fact that the necessary adoptions are a category in the Brazilian reality. Most of the studies prioritised as necessary the adoption of children children over two years of age, with few studies on children with disabilities, sickness and siblings. Further research on interracial adoptions is recommended, as well as greater awareness of the candidates to adopt regarding the profile of children for adoption in host institutions, which should be accompanied by greater visibility of the topic in the scientific field.

This dataset explores the child's finalization age at adoption by state. The ages are grouped as under 1, 1-5, 6-10, 11-15, 16-18, 19 and older. This dataset is from October 2005 - September 2006 (Fiscal year 2006).

This data explores the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Administration for Children and Families Administration on Children, Youth and Families Children's Bureau Adoption of Children with Public Child Welfare Agency Involvement by State for Fiscal Years 1995 - 2006. For Fiscal Years 1995 - 1997, The data for FY 1995-FY 1997 were reported by States to set baselines for the Adoption Incentive Program. They came from a variety of sources including the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS), court records, file reviews and legacy information systems. For Fiscal Years 1998 - 2006, Unless otherwise noted, the data come from the AFCARS adoption database. Because AFCARS adoption data are being continuously updated and cleaned, the numbers reported here may differ from data reported elsewhere. In addition, data reported for the Adoption Incentive Program will differ from these data because adoptions reported for that program are identified through a different AFCARS data element and must qualify in other ways to be counted toward the award of incentive funds. Counts include adoptions reported as of 6/1/2005. Where appropriate, AFCARS data have been adjusted for duplication.

Abstract Considering the importance of mapping family interventions practices aimed specifically to adoption, this study sought to identify through a systematic review, how family intervention models for adoptive families are structured in initial adaptation with children from 0 to 6 years old. Four databases were consulted, which led to 9.143 results: Google Scholar (n=8.056), Science Direct (n=814), SciELO (n=43) and PsycINFO (n=230). Seven articles considered pertinent to the proposal of this study were included. As a result, it was identified that most part of the interventions were not systematically described. Although promising results were indicated, replication would not be viable due to the lack of detailing of the performed practices. There was no hegemony in the choice of intervention models. Also, it was indicated that the specificity for adoption in the interventions analyzed is not clear.

The data in the table 'Adoptions through the courts; number “adopted children” at the same time in Dutch courts submitted Adoption Requests. The table shows the adoptive families. involved in the applications granted. Families are distinguished by 1, 2 or more children at their request. adopted at the same time.

The data in this table cover both ordinary adoptions and step parenting options. Adoptions covered by the Hague Adoption Convention are not included. When a child is adopted from a country that is as a member of this Convention, the adoption becomes automatic and complete. recognised without the intervention of a Dutch court.

Data available from: 1995.

Status of the figures: All figures included in the table are final figures.

When will the new figures come? This table is no longer supplemented. In the course of 2010, a new method will be adopted: a revised series will be published and will be published.

This dataset explores the gender of public agency children adopted in fiscal year 2006 by state in the USA.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Children’s Bureau (CB) is responsible for the implementation and management of the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS). State and Tribal title IV-E agencies are required to report AFCARS case-level information on all children in foster care and children who have been adopted with title IV-E agency involvement (per §479 of the Social Security Act). The regulations were updated via the final rule published in May 2020. AFCARS was established to provide data that would assist in policy development and program management. Data can be used by policymakers at the federal, Tribal, and state levels to assess how many children are in foster care, reasons why they enter, how they exit, and to develop strategies to prevent their unnecessary placement into foster care. Specifically, the data include information about children who enter foster care, their entries and exits, placement details, and foster/adoptive parent information, which makes it possible to identify trends. The data enables the Children’s Bureau to administer the federal title IV-E foster care and adoption assistance programs more effectively. The Children’s Bureau and ACF use these data for several purposes, including: Additionally, the AFCARS data are used specifically in the: The Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS) collects case-level information on all children in foster care and those who have been adopted with title IV-E agency involvement. Metadata-only record linking to the original dataset. Open original dataset below.

In 1987, the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) questionnaire included a special section that queried female respondents aged 20 through 54 about adoption. Their responses to the supplement are recorded in this dataset, along with other information about them derived from the core 1987 questionnaire. The special section on adoption asked if any children had ever been adopted, the number that were adopted, and whether these children currently lived in the household. Additional questions in the supplement inquired about the two most recent adoptions: how the adoptions were arranged, the adoptive mother's relationship to the adopted children before adoption, when and how old the adopted children were when they began living with the adoptive mother, the date of birth of the adopted children, and whether the adopted children were born in the United States. Variables from the core questionnaire include height, weight, age, race, Hispanic origin, type of living quarters, region and metropolitan status of residence, marital status, veteran status, education, family income, health status, industry, occupation, activity limitation status, medical conditions, restricted activity days in the past two weeks, bed days in the past two weeks and past 12 months, time interval since the last doctor visit, and the number of doctor visits and short-stay hospital episodes in the past two months.

Children who are 'looked after' by the State are considered one of the most vulnerable groups in society. Being in State care is associated with poor social, educational and health outcomes. Exploring how to improve the system and better support children in care is key to improving these outcomes. When children and young people come to the attention of children's social services a significant amount of information about their care experience is routinely collected by local authorities. In Wales, routine data are captured in the 'Children Looked After' Census which is submitted annually to the Welsh Government. This dataset includes details of all adoptions of looked after children in Wales.

This dataset is a subset of the primary Looked After Children in Wales (LACW) dataset. Other subsets include: Looked After Children Care Leavers aged 16 and over (LACC); Looked After Children Birthday 19 (LACB: 1999 - 2016); and Looked after Children - Education Qualifications (LACE). LACE was discontinued in 2016 (1999 - 2016) and included within LACW.

Due to the small number of looked after children with an Anonymised Linkage Field (ALF, 37%), a two-stage algorithm was developed. This algorithm utilises other datasets within SAIL to allocate children within the LACW ALF, increasing the overall ALF match rate to 61%. The improved ALF matches are available in the LAC ALF DERIVED table, part of the LACW dataset, and can be obtained by combined the SYSTEM_ID and LOCAL_AUTHORITY_CODE.

This dataset is imported from the US Department of Commerce, National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and its "Data Explorer" site. The underlying data comes from the US Census

1. dataset: Specifies the month and year of the survey as a string, in "Mon YYYY" format. The CPS is a monthly survey, and NTIA periodically sponsors Supplements to that survey.

2. variable: Contains the standardized name of the variable being measured. NTIA identified the availability of similar data across Supplements, and assigned variable names to ease time-series comparisons.

3. description: Provides a concise description of the variable.

4. universe: Specifies the variable representing the universe of persons or households included in the variable's statistics. The specified variable is always included in the file. The only variables lacking universes are isPerson and isHouseholder, as they are themselves the broadest universes measured in the CPS.

5. A large number of *Prop, *PropSE, *Count, and *CountSE columns comprise the remainder of the columns. For each demographic being measured (see below), four statistics are produced, including the estimated proportion of the group for which the variable is true (*Prop), the standard error of that proportion (*PropSE), the estimated number of persons or households in that group for which the variable is true (*Count), and the standard error of that count (*CountSE).

DEMOGRAPHIC CATEGORIES

1. us: The usProp, usPropSE, usCount, and usCountSE columns contain statistics about all persons and households in the universe (which represents the population of the fifty states and the District and Columbia). For example, to see how the prevelance of Internet use by Americans has changed over time, look at the usProp column for each survey's internetUser variable.

2. age: The age category is divided into five ranges: ages 3-14, 15-24, 25-44, 45-64, and 65+. The CPS only includes data on Americans ages 3 and older. Also note that household reference persons must be at least 15 years old, so the age314* columns are blank for household-based variables. Those columns are also blank for person-based variables where the universe is "isAdult" (or a sub-universe of "isAdult"), as the CPS defines adults as persons ages 15 or older. Finally, note that some variables where children are technically in the univese will show zero values for the age314* columns. This occurs in cases where a variable simply cannot be true of a child (e.g. the workInternetUser variable, as the CPS presumes children under 15 are not eligible to work), but the topic of interest is relevant to children (e.g. locations of Internet use).

3. work: Employment status is divided into "Employed," "Unemployed," and "NILF" (Not in the Labor Force). These three categories reflect the official BLS definitions used in official labor force statistics. Note that employment status is only recorded in the CPS for individuals ages 15 and older. As a result, children are excluded from the universe when calculating statistics by work status, even if they are otherwise considered part of the universe for the variable of interest.

4. income: The income category represents annual family income, rather than just an individual person's income. It is divided into five ranges: below $25K, $25K-49,999, $50K-74,999, $75K-99,999, and $100K or more. Statistics by income group are only available in this file for Supplements beginning in 2010; prior to 2010, family income range is available in public use datasets, but is not directly comparable to newer datasets due to the 2010 introduction of the practice of allocating "don't know," "refused," and other responses that result in missing data. Prior to 2010, family income is unkown for approximately 20 percent of persons, while in 2010 the Census Bureau began imputing likely income ranges to replace missing data.

5. education: Educational attainment is divided into "No Diploma," "High School Grad," "Some College," and "College Grad." High school graduates are considered to include GED completers, and those with some college include community college attendees (and graduates) and those who have attended certain postsecondary vocational or technical schools--in other words, it signifies additional education beyond high school, but short of attaining a bachelor's degree or equivilent. Note that educational attainment is only recorded in the CPS for individuals ages 15 and older. As a result, children are excluded from the universe when calculating statistics by education, even if they are otherwise considered part of the universe for the variable of interest.

6. sex: "Male" and "Female" are the two groups in this category. The CPS does not currently provide response options for intersex individuals.

7. race: This category includes "White," "Black," "Hispanic," "Asian," "Am Indian," and "Other" groups. The CPS asks about Hispanic origin separately from racial identification; as a result, all persons identifying as Hispanic are in the Hispanic group, regardless of how else they identify. Furthermore, all non-Hispanic persons identifying with two or more races are tallied in the "Other" group (along with other less-prevelant responses). The Am Indian group includes both American Indians and Alaska Natives.

8. disability: Disability status is divided into "No" and "Yes" groups, indicating whether the person was identified as having a disability. Disabilities screened for in the CPS include hearing impairment, vision impairment (not sufficiently correctable by glasses), cognitive difficulties arising from physical, mental, or emotional conditions, serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs, difficulty dressing or bathing, and difficulties performing errands due to physical, mental, or emotional conditions. The Census Bureau began collecting data on disability status in June 2008; accordingly, this category is unavailable in Supplements prior to that date. Note that disability status is only recorded in the CPS for individuals ages 15 and older. As a result, children are excluded from the universe when calculating statistics by disability status, even if they are otherwise considered part of the universe for the variable of interest.

9. metro: Metropolitan status is divided into "No," "Yes," and "Unkown," reflecting information in the dataset about the household's location. A household located within a metropolitan statistical area is assigned to the Yes group, and those outside such areas are assigned to No. However, due to the risk of de-anonymization, the metropolitan area status of certain households is unidentified in public use datasets. In those cases, the Census Bureau has determined that revealing this geographic information poses a disclosure risk. Such households are tallied in the Unknown group.

10. scChldHome:

Users can get information related to child welfare in the United States. Background The Child Welfare Information Gateway is part of the Administration of Children and Families. It provides resources and statistics related to child welfare, child abuse, child neglect, adoption and more. Resources are grouped under the following topics: family-centered practice; child abuse and neglect; preventing child abuse and neglect; responding to child abuse and neglect; supporting and preserving families; out-of-home care; achieving and maintaining permanency; and adoption. User Functionality The Child Welfare Information Gateway provides a number of resources for users. Users can search for foster care and adoption agencies by state using the National Foster Care and Adoption Directory; search for relevant publications using the Online Catalog and Library Search tools; search for State Statutes; and link to external databases related to child and family well-being, child abuse and neglect, child welfare and foster care, or adoption. Data Notes Years and data sources are clearly identified for each resource.

Since federal fiscal year (FFY) 2010, the title IV-E Adoption Assistance program has provided expanded eligibility provisions for any child who meets the criteria for an “applicable child” as defined in section 473(e) of the Social Security Act (the Act). Use of the applicable-child eligibility provisions (section 473(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act) tends to result in more children being determined as eligible for title IV-E since it delinks eligibility for the title IV-E Adoption Assistance program from the requirements of the Aid to Families with Dependent Children program, among other changes. (See Program Instruction [PI] ACYF-CB-PI-09-10, dated August 26, 2009, for more details on the applicable-child eligibility criteria.) The increased eligibility allows states to receive additional federal funding for adoption, thereby allowing them to reduce the level of nonfederal funds they use for these services. The reduction in nonfederal spending is referred to as “adoption savings.” Federal law (section 473(a)(8) of the Act) requires title IV-E agencies to spend an amount equal to any savings they achieve as a result of applying the differing program eligibility criteria to applicable children for other child welfare service activities permitted under titles IV-B or IV-E of the Act. The amount of adoption savings is calculated based on the title IV-E Adoption Assistance program claims made on behalf of those children who, absent the applicable-child eligibility criteria, would not have been determined eligible for title IV-E Adoption Assistance. The savings are generally equal to the federal share of these claims since, in most instances, that amount would otherwise have been paid from nonfederal title IV-E agency funds. A portion of the expenditures of adoption savings funds must be used for specified services. To implement the adoption savings requirements, the Children’s Bureau (CB) issued PIs providing detailed guidance on the calculation, expenditure, and reporting of adoption savings and developed a new annual reporting form (CB-496 Part 4) to collect the information. See PIs ACYF-CB-PI-15-06 and ACYF-CB-PI-21-08 for details on these instructions. Title IV-E agencies—as of FFY 2015—are required to calculate and report annually their adoption savings, the methodology used to calculate the savings, how savings are spent, and on what services. In calculating adoption savings, title IV-E agencies must use a methodology specified by CB or may propose an alternative for approval. The methodology developed and issued by CB is referred to as “the CB Method.” This method can be applied either to a sample of cases or to the full universe of cases if the agency was able to access actual figures for needed information without conducting a special review. The statute also requires that the annual adoption savings information reported by state and tribal title IV-E agencies be posted on the CB website. Metadata-only record linking to the original dataset. Open original dataset below.

The department is court ordered to complete a home investigation to determine if potential adoptive family whom is seeking permanency is suitable for placement. This data represents the number of investigations undertaken by this office in 2008

Splitgraph serves as an HTTP API that lets you run SQL queries directly on this data to power Web applications. For example:

See the Splitgraph documentation for more information.

The department is court ordered to complete a home investigation to determine which home is most suitable for permanency or increased visitation

This chart counts the number of unique children in DFPS custody who lived in an adoptive placement at some point during the fiscal year and the total number of adoptive placements during the year. Children can have more than one adoptive placement. This chart includes children in DFPS custody for whom a court has appointed DFPS legal responsibility through Permanent Managing Conservatorship. An adoptive placement occurs when the child's caseworker, the family's case manager, and the adoptive family sign paperwork officially placing the child in the home for adoption. Before the paperwork can be signed, a child must be free for adoption (meaning a court has terminated parental rights), have a permanency goal of adoption and the family must have been approved for adoption through a licensed child placing agency. Visit dfps.state.tx.us for information on adoption and all DFPS programs.

This article analyzes the determinants of international child adoption. We argue that prospective parents' desire to reduce transaction costs and ensure a successfully completed adoption influences adoption flows. Drawing on dyadic panel data over the period 1991–2010, we fit hurdle models to identify sending-country and dyad characteristics that correlate with adoption flows. We show that an international agreement designed to ensure the integrity of adoption depresses foreign adoptions by raising transaction costs. By contrast, adoption is more likely when sending countries have a high-quality regulatory environment and when colonial or migration ties exist within the dyad. Our findings highlight the impact of transaction costs on transnational, non-market exchange, expand political economy models of migration, and emphasize the importance of private international law in international relations.