Table 131. Federal obligations for R&D plant for selected agencies, by state and other locations: FYs 2008–16

(Dollars in millions)

State or location	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016
All locations	1,893.3	3,591.3	6,563.3	4,100.5	2,088.9	1,856.0	2,178.2	2,791.8	2,401.7
Alabama	2.6	4.2	98.1	93.2	3.4	39.3	12.5	14.5	1.6
Alaska	3.6	173.5	57.8	6.3	6.6	7.8	8.1	8.0	9.6
Arizona	5.7	20.5	194.9	30.3	2.9	1.0	29.2	85.9	98.7
Arkansas	6.1	8.9	28.5	6.4	5.9	3.0	5.6	5.2	3.7
California	291.0	475.5	1,087.8	997.4	117.9	166.2	246.5	307.4	451.4
Colorado	115.9	279.5	300.0	140.6	108.2	150.9	170.4	74.1	112.7
Connecticut	5.6	3.1	123.2	93.7	1.7	1.5	3.1	1.6	1.3
Delaware	0.4	0.5	13.5	0.4	0.8	0.2	1.1	0.1	1.4
District of Columbia	76.7	180.4	364.9	236.9	135.4	167.5	225.1	39.8	49.8
Florida	12.9	56.7	140.7	90.4	47.9	37.6	104.0	29.7	28.7
Georgia	36.0	53.8	58.5	45.4	50.8	92.4	37.3	5.3	11.9
Hawaii	3.1	25.3	38.1	23.3	15.4	13.0	15.2	14.2	14.8
Idaho	5.9	16.6	25.2	30.9	41.0	1.2	2.6	80.9	89.1
Illinois	61.7	233.8	281.3	115.4	245.0	103.4	108.6	126.0	176.9
Indiana	3.7	7.5	34.9	6.6	2.2	2.6	1.4	8.5	8.3
Iowa	11.3	11.1	28.3	7.1	8.0	7.5	3.7	2.5	3.8
Kansas	0.4	2.9	12.7	4.4	5.5	2.5	1.0	815.7	0.8
Kentucky	5.6	2.5	21.8	4.6	8.5	0.8	0.7	1.2	3.2
Louisiana	2.8	26.7	28.4	14.9	1.2	12.2	1.9	0.7	2.7
Maine	0.8	6.3	1.4	1.5	0.1	1.7	0.8	1.1	0.9
Maryland	262.1	238.7	1,137.3	404.9	235.3	263.7	202.7	208.3	328.5
Massachusetts	13.9	48.8	102.7	30.8	28.0	13.9	26.8	24.9	29.9
Michigan	1.3	11.3	45.0	3.5	23.8	24.5	59.6	95.7	107.5
Minnesota	0.9	8.5	24.1	24.0	2.1	2.2	3.1	3.1	2.7
Mississippi	3.1	25.3	77.6	22.0	13.6	14.5	14.1	17.6	18.6
Missouri	1.9	5.8	30.5	4.2	7.1	2.9	9.8	5.1	12.2
Montana	0.9	2.0	23.3	0.4	0.0	1.0	0.4	0.8	3.7
Nebraska	1.0	0.9	22.2	0.8	0.5	0.5	1.2	2.7	0.2
Nevada	4.3	1.2	1.8	4.1	1.1	0.3	0.6	0.2	0.3
New Hampshire	0.8	2.1	11.1	1.6	2.0	1.3	0.5	0.6	2.0
New Jersey	53.3	82.8	74.5	40.0	52.1	55.5	71.5	44.8	46.2
New Mexico	184.6	108.7	190.5	96.8	54.2	82.9	90.4	86.0	66.3
New York	81.7	326.0	309.7	210.5	186.2	94.1	172.9	204.3	153.8
North Carolina	4.9	12.2	36.7	8.8	10.7	7.4	8.0	6.4	7.7
North Dakota	0.7	2.0	5.9	0.4	0.7	0.0	*	0.2	0.3
Ohio	16.7	24.3	100.5	55.2	61.6	4.7	4.2	7.7	120.9
Oklahoma	12.8	5.7	19.0	13.1	10.6	8.2	7.4	9.8	1.1
Oregon	2.9	4.9	35.9	18.1	9.6	9.6	12.2	14.2	17.6
Pennsylvania	35.0	37.8	127.1	15.2	23.3	13.0	10.4	34.8	24.7
Rhode Island	0.8	4.7	6.1	2.6	6.5	6.2	18.0	19.5	27.8
South Carolina	11.4	14.7	24.5	19.0	16.2	13.2	16.0	16.5	25.8
South Dakota	0.3	2.2	2.6	0.8	0.6	1.1	1.8	0.3	1.1
Tennessee	188.8	330.1	371.6	315.3	248.3	223.4	292.9	264.4	194.7
Texas	20.6	39.9	430.3	428.7	34.8	15.0	9.2	9.3	29.7
Utah	1.9	83.7	12.1	1.5	2.0	3.6	1.4	0.4	0.8
Vermont	0.8	0.6	3.2	1.4	0.5	0.3	1.6	*	0.3
Virginia	268.9	268.6	215.1	344.7	169.7	131.9	103.9	30.6	82.7
Washington	13.5	215.2	89.0	48.8	52.3	40.8	35.3	37.0	13.2
West Virginia	13.1	52.2	35.7	21.4	14.9	0.2	14.6	14.1	*
Wisconsin	30.6	36.9	33.3	10.0	11.3	5.7	7.2	9.0	8.2
Wyoming	0.0	0.5	1.2	0.5	0.3	1.2	0.7	0.5	0.0
Outlying areas	8.0	3.6	23.3	1.5	0.5	0.6	0.8	0.6	0.7
Puerto Rico	4.4	3.6	15.9	1.5	0.5	0.6	0.8	0.6	0.7
Other areas^a	3.6	*	7.4	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0
Offices abroad^b	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.4	*
Undistributed^c	NA	NA	NA	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.2

NOTES: Because of rounding, detail may not add to total. Eleven agencies are required to report data for this section of the survey: the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense (DOD), Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, the Interior, and Transportation; the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA); and the National Science Foundation. Obligations of these 11 agencies represented over 98% of federal R&D plant obligations in FY 2016. Although the nongeographic historical tables incorporate corrections to previously reported data that have been submitted by reporting agencies, corresponding corrections to geographic distributions are rarely obtainable. Geographic distribution of DOD development funding to industry reflects location of prime contractors and not the numerous subcontractors who perform much of the R&D. In FY 2010, NASA resumed reporting International Space Station (ISS) obligations as R&D plant. In FY 2012, NASA began reporting ISS obligations as research rather than R&D plant. In FY 2013, NASA revamped its reporting process so that the data for FY 2012 forward are not directly comparable with totals reported in previous years. In FY 2010, EPA was unable to report R&D plant by performer or by location. Percentage distributions calculated from EPA's data submission for FY 2009 were used to estimate its FY 2010 R&D plant by performer and its location. FYs 2009 and 2010 obligations include additional funding provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.