| Return to Table of Contents |
Trade Adjustment Assistance (11.313) |
Dollars and shares using Dominant RUCA |
| Urban | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Total Obligations (FY2002-2004) | Percent of Total | Total Obligations (FY2002-2004) | |
| Alabama | 100,000 | 100.0 | 100,000 |
| California | 2,941,593 | 100.0 | 2,941,593 |
| Colorado | 2,617,438 | 100.0 | 2,617,438 |
| Georgia | 2,998,944 | 100.0 | 2,998,944 |
| Illinois | 2,855,457 | 100.0 | 2,855,457 |
| Massachusetts | 4,317,306 | 100.0 | 4,317,306 |
| Michigan | 2,243,936 | 100.0 | 2,243,936 |
| Missouri | 2,582,502 | 100.0 | 2,582,502 |
| New Jersey | 1,216,035 | 100.0 | 1,216,035 |
| New York | 2,799,600 | 100.0 | 2,799,600 |
| Pennsylvania | 3,422,198 | 100.0 | 3,422,198 |
| Texas | 2,169,115 | 100.0 | 2,169,115 |
| Washington | 2,877,526 | 100.0 | 2,877,526 |
| Total | 33,141,650 | 100.0 | 33,141,650 |
| 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) |