| Return to Table of Contents |
Empowerment Zones Program (14.244) |
Dollars and shares using Dominant RUCA |
| Urban | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Total Obligations (FY2002-2004) | Percent of Total | Total Obligations (FY2002-2004) | |
| California | 5,981,100 | 100.0 | 5,981,100 |
| Connecticut | 5,981,100 | 100.0 | 5,981,100 |
| Florida | 5,981,100 | 100.0 | 5,981,100 |
| Indiana | 5,981,100 | 100.0 | 5,981,100 |
| Massachusetts | 5,981,100 | 100.0 | 5,981,100 |
| Minnesota | 5,981,100 | 100.0 | 5,981,100 |
| Missouri | 5,981,100 | 100.0 | 5,981,100 |
| New Jersey | 5,981,100 | 100.0 | 5,981,100 |
| Ohio | 11,962,200 | 100.0 | 11,962,200 |
| South Carolina | 5,981,100 | 100.0 | 5,981,100 |
| Tennessee | 5,981,100 | 100.0 | 5,981,100 |
| Texas | 5,981,100 | 100.0 | 5,981,100 |
| Virginia | 5,981,100 | 100.0 | 5,981,100 |
| West Virginia | 5,981,100 | 100.0 | 5,981,100 |
| Total | 89,716,500 | 100.0 | 89,716,500 |
| 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) |