Rankings & leaderboards
States and Territories by COVID-19 Relief Dollars Obligated
All 59 jurisdictions in the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee's funding table, ranked by the federal COVID-19 supplemental dollars obligated to recipients in them.
How this list is built
The PRAC publishes a state-and-territory funding table built from USAspending: one row per awarding agency, business type, assistance listing and recipient state, with the obligated and outlayed amounts funded by COVID-19 supplemental appropriations. The archive acquired that file on 18 September 2026. This list groups its rows by recipient state and sums, then ranks by obligations.
Unit ranked: the recipient jurisdiction as the PRAC file names it. The 59 include the fifty states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the three freely associated states of Micronesia, the Marshall Islands and Palau. Metric: obligated dollars funded by COVID-19 supplemental appropriations. Universe: 59 jurisdictions over 5,596 rows, $826.82B obligated and $808.86B outlayed. Vintage: PRAC file as downloaded 18 September 2026.
The ranking
| # | Jurisdiction | Obligated | Outlayed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Texas | $79.93B | $70.46B |
| 2 | California | $79.11B | $73.02B |
| 3 | New York | $59.30B | $53.75B |
| 4 | Florida | $42.76B | $43.44B |
| 5 | Illinois | $33.83B | $32.06B |
| 6 | Pennsylvania | $31.87B | $30.03B |
| 7 | Puerto Rico | $29.69B | $14.28B |
| 8 | New Jersey | $26.01B | $24.39B |
| 9 | Ohio | $24.00B | $25.78B |
| 10 | Georgia | $23.39B | $25.55B |
| 11 | North Carolina | $22.96B | $25.16B |
| 12 | Michigan | $22.37B | $25.37B |
| 13 | Massachusetts | $19.07B | $18.67B |
| 14 | Virginia | $18.02B | $18.16B |
| 15 | Louisiana | $18.00B | $14.79B |
| 16 | Maryland | $16.17B | $15.48B |
| 17 | Arizona | $14.64B | $16.29B |
| 18 | Washington | $14.58B | $16.98B |
| 19 | Indiana | $13.13B | $14.82B |
| 20 | Colorado | $12.97B | $11.72B |
| 21 | Nevada | $12.83B | $12.21B |
| 22 | Tennessee | $12.64B | $16.49B |
| 23 | South Carolina | $12.58B | $12.67B |
| 24 | Missouri | $11.55B | $12.84B |
| 25 | Alabama | $11.42B | $12.37B |
| 26 | Connecticut | $11.27B | $10.85B |
| 27 | Minnesota | $10.89B | $11.47B |
| 28 | Oregon | $10.42B | $9.24B |
| 29 | Wisconsin | $10.15B | $11.23B |
| 30 | Oklahoma | $8.86B | $9.45B |
| 31 | Mississippi | $8.45B | $8.51B |
| 32 | Kentucky | $8.15B | $9.32B |
| 33 | New Mexico | $7.18B | $6.87B |
| 34 | Arkansas | $6.52B | $7.15B |
| 35 | Iowa | $5.79B | $6.68B |
| 36 | West Virginia | $5.56B | $6.28B |
| 37 | Kansas | $5.54B | $6.06B |
| 38 | Hawaii | $5.37B | $5.13B |
| 39 | Rhode Island | $5.09B | $4.76B |
| 40 | Utah | $4.86B | $5.36B |
| 41 | District Of Columbia | $4.39B | $4.04B |
| 42 | Alaska | $4.15B | $4.54B |
| 43 | Nebraska | $4.03B | $4.50B |
| 44 | Delaware | $4.00B | $4.06B |
| 45 | Maine | $3.91B | $4.38B |
| 46 | Idaho | $3.87B | $4.42B |
| 47 | North Dakota | $3.58B | $3.83B |
| 48 | New Hampshire | $3.58B | $4.03B |
| 49 | Vermont | $3.38B | $4.01B |
| 50 | Montana | $3.37B | $4.07B |
| 51 | South Dakota | $3.20B | $3.98B |
| 52 | Wyoming | $2.89B | $3.73B |
| 53 | Virgin Islands | $2.24B | $1.11B |
| 54 | Guam | $1.37B | $1.44B |
| 55 | Northern Mariana Islands | $1.11B | $0.84B |
| 56 | American Samoa | $0.75B | $0.66B |
| 57 | Micronesia | $0.04B | $0.04B |
| 58 | Marshall Islands | $0.02B | $0.01B |
| 59 | Palau | $0.01B | $0.01B |
What this measures, and what it does not
This is a ranking of dollars, not of need, generosity or per-person benefit. It is not adjusted for population: a per-capita column would change the order substantially, and the archive holds no state population table, so no per-capita figure is published here.
It is a recipient-state ranking, so it follows where the recipient of record sits, which is not always where the money was spent. A nationwide contractor or a multi-state grantee books to one state. 8 rows in the file carry no jurisdiction at all, $9.4M obligated between them, and they are absent from the table above.
Obligations are commitments; outlays are cash paid. Both columns are reproduced. Neither is a program-by-program total for a state: PPP loans, for instance, enter through the assistance listings USAspending carries, and any program absent from USAspending is absent here.
Sources
- PRAC, Track the money: data
- File as held:
state-and-territory-funding-data.xlsx, downloaded from the PRAC on 18 September 2026 (sha256 71bd38c5f8d53e1f…)