| Return to Table of Contents |
Intermediary Re-lending Program (10.767) |
Dollars and shares using Dominant RUCA |
| Urban | Rural | Total | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total Obligations (FY2002-2004) | Percent of Total | Total Obligations (FY2002-2004) | Percent of Total | Total Obligations (FY2002-2004) | |
| Alaska | 750,000 | 100.0 | 0 | 0 | 750,000 |
| Arizona | 750,000 | 39.5 | 1,150,000 | 60.5 | 1,900,000 |
| Arkansas | 750,000 | 100.0 | 0 | 0 | 750,000 |
| California | 2,250,000 | 50.0 | 2,250,000 | 50.0 | 4,500,000 |
| Colorado | 0 | 0 | 500,000 | 100.0 | 500,000 |
| District Of Columbia | 750,000 | 100.0 | 0 | 0 | 750,000 |
| Georgia | 2,250,000 | 60.0 | 1,500,000 | 40.0 | 3,750,000 |
| Hawaii | 500,000 | 100.0 | 0 | 0 | 500,000 |
| Idaho | 650,000 | 46.4 | 750,000 | 53.6 | 1,400,000 |
| Illinois | 0 | 0 | 2,275,000 | 100.0 | 2,275,000 |
| Iowa | 950,000 | 42.2 | 1,300,000 | 57.8 | 2,250,000 |
| Kentucky | 1,250,000 | 100.0 | 0 | 0 | 1,250,000 |
| Louisiana | 750,000 | 100.0 | 0 | 0 | 750,000 |
| Maine | 0 | 0 | 2,500,000 | 100.0 | 2,500,000 |
| Maryland | 750,000 | 27.3 | 2,000,000 | 72.7 | 2,750,000 |
| Massachusetts | 1,500,000 | 100.0 | 0 | 0 | 1,500,000 |
| Michigan | 600,000 | 44.4 | 750,000 | 55.6 | 1,350,000 |
| Minnesota | 1,250,000 | 50.8 | 1,212,207 | 49.2 | 2,462,207 |
| Mississippi | 750,000 | 50.0 | 750,000 | 50.0 | 1,500,000 |
| Missouri | 0 | 0 | 500,000 | 100.0 | 500,000 |
| Montana | 750,000 | 11.2 | 5,967,000 | 88.8 | 6,717,000 |
| Nebraska | 650,000 | 34.2 | 1,250,000 | 65.8 | 1,900,000 |
| Nevada | 0 | 0 | 1,250,000 | 100.0 | 1,250,000 |
| New Hampshire | 500,000 | 14.3 | 3,000,000 | 85.7 | 3,500,000 |
| New Jersey | 800,000 | 100.0 | 0 | 0 | 800,000 |
| New Mexico | 991,971 | 100.0 | 0 | 0 | 991,971 |
| New York | 0 | 0 | 1,050,000 | 100.0 | 1,050,000 |
| North Carolina | 1,300,000 | 12.4 | 9,217,980 | 87.6 | 10,517,980 |
| North Dakota | 1,000,000 | 80.0 | 250,000 | 20.0 | 1,250,000 |
| Ohio | 2,250,000 | 60.0 | 1,500,000 | 40.0 | 3,750,000 |
| Oklahoma | 750,000 | 21.4 | 2,750,000 | 78.6 | 3,500,000 |
| Oregon | 900,000 | 27.2 | 2,410,000 | 72.8 | 3,310,000 |
| Pennsylvania | 1,745,000 | 58.3 | 1,250,000 | 41.7 | 2,995,000 |
| South Carolina | 2,000,000 | 100.0 | 0 | 0 | 2,000,000 |
| South Dakota | 500,000 | 5.3 | 8,900,000 | 94.7 | 9,400,000 |
| Tennessee | 750,000 | 33.3 | 1,500,000 | 66.7 | 2,250,000 |
| Texas | 4,430,283 | 72.3 | 1,700,000 | 27.7 | 6,130,283 |
| Utah | 750,000 | 30.0 | 1,750,000 | 70.0 | 2,500,000 |
| Vermont | 500,000 | 16.2 | 2,595,000 | 83.8 | 3,095,000 |
| Virginia | 0 | 0 | 150,000 | 100.0 | 150,000 |
| Washington | 1,500,000 | 50.0 | 1,500,000 | 50.0 | 3,000,000 |
| West Virginia | 1,431,510 | 40.3 | 2,125,000 | 59.7 | 3,556,510 |
| Wisconsin | 0 | 0 | 750,000 | 100.0 | 750,000 |
| Wyoming | 495,000 | 39.8 | 750,000 | 60.2 | 1,245,000 |
| Total | 40,443,764 | 36.9 | 69,052,187 | 63.1 | 109,495,951 |
| For a more detailed discussion of our scope and methodology and additional details see "Rural Economic Development: More Assurance Is Needed That Grant Funding Information Is Accurately Reported." |
| (GAO-06-294) |