State & Tribal Landscape
States, territories, and tribal organizations implement home visiting models that match the needs of their communities using varied funding streams, including the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) Program. Maternal and child health indicators provide insight into states’ varied contexts, which drive their decisions and priorities.
For example, 10.2 percent of births were preterm nationally, while the state average ranges from 8.2 percent in New Hampshire to 14.6 percent in Mississippi.
The number of potential beneficiaries in each state relates to its population size, ranging from 28,600 potential beneficiaries in Vermont to 2,131,800 in California. However, size does not necessarily relate to the percentage of beneficiaries who meet 1 or more priority criteria (have an infant, insufficient income, single parent, parent or expectant parent under 21, or parent with less than a high school diploma). The percentage of high-priority families meeting any 1 of 5 priority criteria ranges from 40 percent in Utah to 59 percent in New Mexico.
How Does the Percentage of Families Served Vary by State?
In terms of families served, the percentage of potential beneficiaries served ranged from 0.4 percent in Nevada to 5.3 percent in Iowa. The percentage of high-priority families served ranged from 0.7 percent in Nevada to 11.5 percent in Iowa, 10 percent in Kansas, and 9.7 percent in Michigan.
Select a state in the interactive map below to see a brief data snapshot or click the orange button to view the information in a table or download the data file.
Home Visiting by State (2020)
|High-Priority Families (%)|
|All Families Served (%)|
|High-Priority Families Served (%)|
|Home Visits Provided|
|State||Potential Beneficiaries||High-Priority Families (%)||All Families Served (%)||High-Priority Families Served (%)||Home Visits Provided||Children Served||Families Served||Local Agencies||Models Implemented|
Sources: Service numbers and participant demographics come from evidence-based model data for 2020 as detailed in each profile. Information on potential beneficiaries is derived from the [2015–2019 American Community Survey](https://usa.ipums.org/usa/index.shtml), and includes pregnant women and families with children not yet in kindergarten.
Note: NA = not available.
*Percentages of high-priority families served are estimates of potential beneficiaries who meet any one of five priority criteria—(1) having an infant, (2) income below the federal poverty threshold, (3) pregnant women and mothers under 21, (4) single/never married mothers or pregnant women, or (5) parents without a high school diploma—and who received home visiting services in 2020.
States serve as many potential beneficiaries as possible. There are multiple reasons why they cannot reach all families who could benefit. States have limited funding and often must piece together federal, state, and private dollars to serve families. In 2020, states faced several new challenges to recruiting and serving families due to the COVID-19 pandemic; these included restrictions around in-person service delivery, lack of access to technology and internet services for virtual visits, and competing time demands on caregivers.
States work hard to overcome these barriers. In 2020, the number of families served by states ranged from 78 in the Virgin Islands to 25,147 in Michigan. Some states have an expansive network of local agencies implementing evidence-based home visiting. For example, Texas has 111 local agencies implementing 7 models across the state, serving 16,674 families.