Methodology

How the RHTP State Rollout Tracker Works

The tracker is built on a six-stage scale that classifies implementation progress from the sub-grantee's perspective. This is the analytical layer that makes the tracker useful — not just a list of links, but a consistent framework for comparing progress across all 50 states.

The Six-Stage Scale

Stage 0Allocated

CMS has announced the award. The state has not publicly announced implementation steps, named a lead agency, or published any stakeholder engagement timeline.

Baseline for most states as of December 2025.

Stage 1Planning

The state has named a lead agency, begun stakeholder engagement, or released a planning timeline. No sub-grantee solicitation has been published.

Montana (stakeholder engagement underway), Washington (HCA named as lead agency, January 2026).

Stage 2Framework

The state has published a solicitation framework, eligible entity criteria, or allocation methodology — but has not yet opened applications.

Oregon (RFGP framework published, applications not yet open).

Stage 3Open

At least one sub-grantee solicitation (RFA, RFGP, NOFO) is open and accepting applications.

Kansas (REH/CAP due Mar 20 2026, RPGP due Apr 3 2026), North Carolina (due Apr 2 2026).

Stage 4Pending

All sub-grantee application windows have closed. Award review is underway. Sub-grantee awards have not yet been announced.

No states at this stage as of March 2026.

Stage 5Active

At least one sub-grantee award has been made and announced. Funds are beginning to flow to providers.

No states at this stage as of March 2026.

What We Track

State-Level Fields

Each state record includes: lead agency, CMS Year 1 award amount, implementation stage, priority activities selected in the state application, tribal set-aside (existence, amount, and mechanism), and a link to the state's application to CMS.

Solicitation-Level Fields

Each sub-grantee solicitation is tracked separately. Fields include: solicitation name and type (RFA, RFGP, NOFO, Contract), mechanism (grant, contract, cooperative agreement), open and close dates, eligible entity types (CAH, FQHC, RHC, Tribal, CCBHC, and others), funding range per award, match requirements, and compliance prerequisites (SAM.gov registration, indirect cost rate, 2 CFR 200 methodology, etc.).

Editorial Analysis Notes

State pages include analysis written by the GrantBridges team — not just raw data. These notes explain what the solicitation design means for specific provider types, flag unusual requirements, and identify compliance infrastructure gaps that could disqualify otherwise-eligible organizations.

Data Sources

State health agency websites

Solicitation documents, timelines, eligible entity lists, application materials

Authoritative but fragmented across 50 agencies

CMS RHTP overview page

Award amounts, consolidated state summaries, program guidance

High — authoritative federal source

SHVS tracker

Lead agency identification, state application links, stakeholder engagement tracking

High — curated by State Health Value Strategies experts

KFF analysis

Award amounts, per-capita analysis, policy context

High — curated by Kaiser Family Foundation researchers

Grants.gov

Federal-level NOFO details for states using federal grant mechanisms

High for federal-layer solicitations

Update Schedule

Weekly: Stage classifications updated, new solicitations added, deadline tracking refreshed. A brief analysis note is published for any state that changes stage.

As events occur: Solicitation alerts published immediately when a new application window opens.

Quarterly:Full 50-state review, derived analytics refresh (mechanism analysis, tribal set-aside comparison, compliance prerequisite matrix), and "State of the Rollout" deep analysis.