Published research edition — not attorney-reviewed.
The 50 state PDFs and research records are being published as public-interest research drafts without qualified local attorney review. They are not legal advice, official agency forms, or certified legal guidance. Publication does not mean every statement has been independently validated for every case. These materials do not stop an investigation, prevent lawful emergency action, satisfy a filing requirement, file an appeal, or pause any deadline. Check the current official law, the actual agency or court notice, and case-specific requirements before relying on a deadline or taking action.
50state notice drafts in this archive
50state PDFs published as research drafts
20flagged issues or source gaps in the first-pass legal audit
0full legal certifications
Published: research Passes 39–50Massachusetts through New York — twelve focused state research summaries, source links, deadline distinctions and unresolved verification notes.
Open the Passes 39–50 research archive.
Published: Pass 38 — Rhode Island, South Dakota and VermontFinal three-state research pass, including appeal routes, registry distinctions and deadline triggers.
Open Pass 38 findings.
New: Pass 22 master consistency auditCross-state deadline, notice, interview, consent, emergency-action, findings, records and source-version review. The page identifies what has been checked, what remains unresolved, and why all 50 notices remain on hold.
Open the Pass 22 master audit.
New: Pass 23 — Texas, Maine and Idaho source auditThree more states received a targeted source review focused on administrative appeal eligibility, deadline triggers, review stages and registry consequences. Existing notice PDFs were not changed.
Open Pass 23 findings.
New: Pass 24 — Florida, Pennsylvania and New Jersey source auditAppeal routes, deadline conflicts, eligibility and registry consequences reviewed against official state sources and court decisions. Existing state notice PDFs were not changed.
Open Pass 24 findings.
New: Pass 25 — Utah, Nebraska and Tennessee source auditSupported findings, central-registry placement, formal file review and appeal-stage deadlines reviewed. Existing state notice PDFs were not changed.
Open Pass 25 findings.
New: Pass 26 — Indiana, Kentucky and Ohio source auditChild-protection finding classifications, registry challenges, review stages and record correction routes reviewed. Existing state notice PDFs were not changed.
Open Pass 26 findings.
New: Pass 27 — West Virginia, Virginia and North Carolina source auditSubstantiation grievances, founded-disposition appeals, juvenile-court review and key procedural distinctions. Existing state notice PDFs were not changed.
Open Pass 27 findings.
New: Pass 28 — South Carolina, Georgia and Alabama source auditIndicated-case appeals, DFCS administrative review levels, Alabama due-process hearing and record-review routes. Existing state notice PDFs were not changed.
Open Pass 28 findings.
New: Pass 36 — Nevada, New Hampshire and New York source auditNevada's 15-day pre-registry appeal, New Hampshire's current 2025 rule and receipt-based appeal, and New York's amendment-request/fair-hearing sequence. Existing state notice PDFs were not changed.
Open Pass 36 findings.
\nNew: Pass 35 — Missouri, Montana and Nebraska 2026 updateMissouri appeal routes, Montana substantiation fair hearing, and Nebraska LB 668 pre-registry appeal changes. Includes an update to Nebraska's earlier Pass 25 audit. Existing state notice PDFs were not changed.
Open Pass 35 findings.
\nNew: Pass 34 — Massachusetts, Michigan and Minnesota source auditDCF supported-report hearings, Michigan Central Registry amendment and expunction, Minnesota 2026 reconsideration and fair-hearing sequence. Existing state notice PDFs were not changed.
Open Pass 34 findings.
\nNew: Pass 33 — Iowa, Kansas and Maryland source auditFounded versus confirmed dispositions, Kansas 2026 registry reform, Maryland's separate indicated/unsubstantiated appeal tracks, court stays and deadline triggers. Existing state notice PDFs were not changed.
Open Pass 33 findings.
\nNew: Pass 32 — Delaware, Hawaii and Illinois source auditRegistry procedures, Family Court and administrative hearing routes, deadline triggers, court-case exclusions and an upcoming Illinois statutory amendment. Existing state notice PDFs were not changed.
Open Pass 32 findings.
\nNew: Pass 31 — Alaska, California and Connecticut source auditSubstantiation classifications, registry challenge rights, appeal deadlines, court-proceeding exclusions and administrative review stages. Existing state notice PDFs were not changed.
Open Pass 31 findings.
\nNew: Pass 30 — Colorado, New Mexico and Arizona source auditFinding classifications, appeal windows, separate review stages and registry consequences checked against state rules, statutes and agency guidance. Existing state notice PDFs were not changed.
Open Pass 30 findings.
\nNew: Pass 29 — Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi source auditTrue/indicated/justified findings, administrative appeal clocks, registry consequences and a current-policy gap in Mississippi. Existing state notice PDFs were not changed.
Open Pass 29 findings.
New: Pass 37 — North Dakota, Ohio and Oklahoma source auditNorth Dakota confirmed-assessment appeal timing, Ohio county-specific report-disposition policies and Oklahoma substantiation file-review eligibility and deadlines. Existing state notice PDFs were not changed.
Open Pass 37 findings.
\nState-by-state notice library
Choose a state to open its PDF or editable Word draft. The underlying archive is Pass 21; the production audit is Pass 20. These are not the later individual state research passes 39–50 and should not be mistaken for a newly revalidated master set.
Alabama
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Alaska
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Arizona
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Arkansas
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
California
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Colorado
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Connecticut
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Delaware
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Florida
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Georgia
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Hawaii
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Idaho
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Illinois
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Indiana
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Iowa
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Kansas
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Kentucky
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Louisiana
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Maine
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Maryland
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Massachusetts
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Michigan
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Minnesota
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Mississippi
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Missouri
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Montana
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Nebraska
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Nevada
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
New Hampshire
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
New Jersey
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
New Mexico
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
New York
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
North Carolina
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
North Dakota
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Ohio
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Oklahoma
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Oregon
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Pennsylvania
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Rhode Island
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
South Carolina
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
South Dakota
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Tennessee
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Texas
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Utah
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Vermont
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Virginia
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Washington
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
West Virginia
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Wisconsin
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Wyoming
Published research draft · not attorney-reviewed
Research and audit records
High-priority corrections identified
New York: distinguish the statutory up-to-90-day amendment request window under Social Services Law §422(8) from older or inconsistent guidance; do not present one deadline as risk-free.
Montana: distinguish §41-3-216(2) initial written rights, §41-3-216(1) recording advisement verbally required on removal, and §41-3-202(4) access to an unedited child-interview recording only when one was made.
Illinois: Public Act 104-0597 amends the Abused and Neglected Child Reporting Act and is effective January 1, 2027. Do not confuse that date with November 1, 2026, which is the scheduled repeal date of the separate Child Welfare Liability Insurance Survey Act (PA 104-0445), not an effective date for PA 104-0597.
Method and limits
- The prior audit matched at least one targeted core legal provision for each state; that is not a clause-by-clause review of every notice.
- Agency forms, policies, local procedures, court decisions, exceptions, appeal triggers, service rules, and effective dates may require separate verification.
- Structural and print QA does not establish that a legal statement is correct or suitable for an individual case.
- Publication status means the research draft is publicly available; it does not mean attorney review, complete legal validation, or suitability for an individual case.
Corrections
Corrections should identify the state, exact passage, proposed correction, and current official primary source. A public correction email has not yet been supplied, so this site does not collect personal case records or confidential information.