How States Are Graded
Our methodology for assigning letter grades to state foster care systems, data sources, metric definitions, and grading scale.
Primary Grade, Reunification Rate
Each state receives an A–F grade based primarily on its reunification rate: the percentage of children who exit foster care by returning to their birth family or primary caregiver.
| Grade | Reunification Rate | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| A | 55% or higher | Excellent, well above national average (~50%) |
| B | 45% to 54.9% | Good, near national average |
| C | 35% to 44.9% | Below average, room for improvement |
| D | 25% to 34.9% | Significantly below average |
| F | Below 25% | Well below average, significant concern |
All 8 Tracked Metrics
In addition to the primary grade, we track 8 performance dimensions for each state:
Reunification Rate
Percentage of exits to reunification with family
Adoption Rate
Percentage of exits to adoption
Aging Out Rate
Percentage of exits aging out at 18+ without permanency
Median Length of Stay
Median months a child spends in foster care
Re-entry Rate
Percentage re-entering foster care within 12 months of exit
Placement Stability
Percentage of children with 2 or fewer placement moves
Maltreatment Recurrence
Percentage with repeat maltreatment within 6 months of first report
Timely Permanency
Percentage achieving permanency within 12 months of entry
Data Sources
All state performance data comes from federal sources:
- ACF AFCARS - Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System, administered by the Administration for Children and Families (ACF). States submit data annually. We use AFCARS Report #30 (FY2022 estimates), the most recent AFCARS release with a full state-by-state data table; ACF replaced numbered state reports with an interactive dashboard starting with FY2023 data, and as of this writing that dashboard has not published a downloadable state-level breakdown, so FY2022 remains the newest state-comparable vintage available.
- HHS NCANDS - National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System for maltreatment data
- U.S. Census ACS - For child population estimates to calculate per-capita rates
Grade-band thresholds at a glance
Grades are assigned by ranking every state's reunification rate against the national distribution for the current AFCARS release, not against fixed percentage cutoffs, so the exact rate boundary for each grade shifts slightly with every data refresh. The table below reflects the actual boundaries and state counts observed in the current dataset.
| Grade | Reunification rate range (this release) | States (of 51) |
|---|---|---|
| A | 55.8% to 59.4% | 8 (15.7%) |
| B | 45.4% to 54.8% | 38 (74.5%) |
| C | 42.6% to 44.8% | 5 (9.8%) |
Live-computed from the current dataset (51 states/DC), not a fixed lookup table, so it will not drift out of sync with the actual grades shown on state pages. In the current release, no state's reunification rate falls low enough to earn a D or F; if a future AFCARS release includes lower-performing states, those bands will appear here automatically.
Limitations
This grading system has important limitations to understand:
- A single metric (reunification rate) cannot fully capture the complexity of a state's child welfare system
- States have different definitions, data systems, and reporting practices, which can affect comparability
- Higher maltreatment report rates may reflect better detection systems, not worse safety outcomes
- Geographic and demographic differences between states affect all outcomes
- This is a simplified educational tool, not an official federal assessment
Frequently Asked Questions
Why is reunification rate the primary grading factor?
Reunification with birth family is the preferred permanency outcome under federal law, and it's the most universal metric available across all states. A high reunification rate generally indicates effective family support services, reasonable caseloads, and a system focused on keeping families together when safe.
Does a lower grade mean a state is negligent?
No. Grades reflect outcomes measured by available federal metrics, not the effort or dedication of child welfare workers. States with lower grades may face structural challenges: underfunding, high caseloads, rural service gaps, or higher rates of substance use disorders in their communities.
Are there other federal grading systems?
Yes. The federal Child and Family Services Reviews (CFSRs) assess states on safety, permanency, and well-being outcomes. States that don't meet federal standards must complete Program Improvement Plans. Our grading system draws on the same AFCARS data but uses a simplified approach for public clarity.
Why doesn't the grade include maltreatment data?
Maltreatment data from NCANDS is presented separately because it measures a different dimension, child safety, and its reporting varies significantly by state definitions and practices. A state with more reports may actually have better detection systems, not worse child safety.