| Return to Table of Contents |
Program-level data |
Below are links to various views of the program information. Clicking on a link beside the state name will open a table of that state's county-level program data. |
| Analysis by | ||
|---|---|---|
| California | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Colorado | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Idaho | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Kansas | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Kentucky | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Maryland | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Michigan | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Nebraska | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| New Mexico | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| North Dakota | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Ohio | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Oklahoma | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Oregon | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Pennsylvania | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| South Dakota | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Texas | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Wyoming | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| 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) |