| 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 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Alabama | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Alaska | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| California | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Connecticut | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Hawaii | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Illinois | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Maine | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Massachusetts | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Missouri | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Montana | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| New Jersey | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| New York | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Ohio | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Oklahoma | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Oregon | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Rhode Island | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Washington | Dominant RUCA | Rural-Urban Continuum |
| Wisconsin | 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) |