Description
In this particular detailed paper related to entrepreneurial assistance opportunities exist to improve programs collaboration.
ENTREPRENEURIAL
ASSISTANCE
Opportunities Exist to
Improve Programs’
Collaboration, Data-
Tracking, and
Performance
Management
Report to Congressional Committees
August 2012
GAO-12-819
United States Government Accountability Office
GAO
United States Government Accountability Office
Highlights of GAO-12-819, a report to
congressional committees
August 2012
ENTREPRENEURIAL ASSISTANCE
Opportunities Exist to Improve Programs’
Collaboration, Data-Tracking, and Performance
Management
Why GAO Did This Study
Economic development programs that
effectively provide assistance to
entrepreneurs may help businesses
develop and expand. GAO focused on
52 economic development programs,
with an estimated $2.0 billion in
funding, at Commerce, HUD, SBA, and
USDA that support entrepreneurs. In
response to a statutory requirement,
this report discusses (1) the extent of
overlap and fragmentation, the effects
on entrepreneurs, and agencies’
actions to address them; and (2) the
extent of tracked program information
and whether these programs have met
their performance goals and been
evaluated. To address these
objectives, GAO analyzed program
information and interviewed agency
officials in headquarters and selected
field offices, entrepreneurs, and third-
party entities, such as nonprofits, that
use federal grants to provide
assistance directly to entrepreneurs.
What GAO Recommends
GAO recommends that the agencies
and the Office of Management and
Budget explore opportunities to
enhance collaboration among
programs, both within and across
agencies; track program information;
and conduct more program
evaluations. Commerce, HUD, and
USDA provided written comments and
each neither agreed nor disagreed with
the recommendations. However,
USDA commented that the
recommendations were not explicit. In
the report, GAO provides specific
actions that agencies can take to
address each recommendation.
What GAO Found
Federal efforts to support entrepreneurs are fragmented—including among 52
programs at the Department of Agriculture (USDA), Commerce, and Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) and the Small Business Administration (SBA). All
overlap with at least one other program in terms of the type of assistance they
are authorized to offer, such as financial (grants and loans) and technical
(training and counseling), and the type of entrepreneur they are authorized to
serve. Some entrepreneurs struggle to navigate the fragmented programs that
provide technical assistance. For example, some entrepreneurs and technical
assistance providers GAO spoke with said the system can be confusing and that
some entrepreneurs do not know where to go for assistance. Collaboration could
reduce some negative effects of overlap and fragmentation, but field staff GAO
spoke with did not consistently collaborate to provide training and counseling
services to entrepreneurs. The agencies have taken initial steps to improve how
they collaborate by entering into formal agreements, but they have not pursued a
number of other good collaborative practices GAO has previously identified. For
example, USDA and SBA entered into a formal agreement in 2010 to coordinate
their efforts to support businesses in rural areas; however, the agencies’
programs that can support start-up businesses—such as USDA’s Rural Business
Enterprise Grant program and SBA’s Small Business Development Centers—
have yet to determine roles and responsibilities, find ways to leverage each
other’s resources, or establish compatible policies and procedures. Without
enhanced collaboration and coordination agencies may not be able to make the
best use of limited federal resources in the most effective and efficient manner.
Agencies do not track program information on entrepreneurial assistance
activities for many programs, a number of programs have not met their
performance goals, and most programs lack evaluations. In particular, the
agencies do not generally track information on the specific type of assistance
they provide or the entrepreneurs they serve, in part because they do not rely on
this information to administer the programs. Rather, agencies may rely, for
example, on data summaries in narrative format, which cannot be easily
aggregated or analyzed. According to government standards for internal control,
this information should be available to help inform management in making
decisions and identifying risks and problem areas. GAO also found that 19
programs failed to meet their annual performance goals related to
entrepreneurial assistance, including USDA’s Rural Business Opportunity
Grants, Commerce’s Economic Development/Support for Planning
Organizations, HUD’s Indian Community Development Block Grants, and SBA’s
504 loans to finance commercial real estate. Programs could potentially rely on
results from program evaluations to determine the reasons why they have not
met their goals, as well as to gauge overall effectiveness. However, the agencies
lack program evaluations for 32 of the 52 programs. Therefore, information on
program efficiency and effectiveness is limited, and scarce resources may be
going toward programs that are less effective. In addition, without more robust
program information, agencies may not be able to administer programs in the
most effective and efficient manner. View GAO-12-819. For more information,
contact William B. Shear at (202) 512-8678 or
[email protected].
Page i GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Letter 1
Background 3
Fragmented Programs Overlap, and Agencies’ Efforts to
Collaborate Have Been Limited 5
Agencies Lack Information to Track Program Activities and
Measure Performance 19
Conclusions 28
Recommendations 29
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 29
Appendix I Objectives, Scope and Methodology 37
Appendix II Illustrative Examples of Economic Activities 41
Appendix III Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52 Programs that Can
Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011 47
Appendix IV Additional Federal Programs that Can Fund Economic Activities 73
Appendix V Evaluations of Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, 2000-2012 85
Appendix VI Comments from the Department of Agriculture 90
Appendix VII Comments from the Department of Commerce 93
Appendix VIII Comments from the Department of Housing and Urban Development 97
Contents
Page ii GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Appendix XI GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 99
Tables
Table 1: Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs and Maintain
Readily Available Information, by Agency 22
Table 2: Accomplishment Data for 33 Programs that Support
Entrepreneurs and Set Goals, Fiscal Year 2011 24
Table 3: Additional Federal Programs That Can Fund Economic
Activities, as Listed in the 2011 Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance 74
Figures
Figure 1: Fragmented Delivery System of Federally Funded
Technical Assistance to Entrepreneurs 14
Figure 2: Evaluations of Programs that Support Entrepreneurs,
2000-2012 26
Page iii GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Abbreviations
BEDI Brownfields Economic Development Initiative
CDBG Community Development Block Grant
CDC Community Development Corporation
CFDA Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Commerce Department of Commerce
EDA Economic Development Administration
FAST Federal and State Technology Partnership
GPRA Government Performance and Results Act
GPRAMA GPRA Modernization Act of 2010
HUBZone Historically Underutilized Business Zone
HUD Department of Housing and Urban Development
MBC Minority Business Center
MBDA Minority Business Development Agency
NABEC Native American Business Enterprise Centers
NMVC New Markets Venture Capital
OMB Office of Management and Budget
PRIME Program for Investment in Micro-Entrepreneurs
SBA Small Business Administration
SBDC Small Business Development Center
SBIC Small Business Investment Company
SBIR Small Business Innovation Research
STTR Small Business Technology Transfer
TAA Trade Adjustment Assistance
USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture
VAPG Value Added Producer Grants
WBC Women's Business Center
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the
United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety
without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain
copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be
necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
Page 1 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
United States Government Accountability Office
Washington, DC 20548
August 23, 2012
Congressional Committees
Entrepreneurs play a vital role in the U.S. economy. The federal
government provides a variety of support and assistance to them, and
dozens of programs exist to support entrepreneurs across numerous
federal agencies. Economic development programs that effectively
provide assistance to entrepreneurs, in conjunction with state and local
government and private sector economic development initiatives, may
help businesses develop and expand. However, we have previously
raised questions about the potential negative effects of fragmentation and
overlap among federal programs that can support entrepreneurs.
Specifically, we have questioned how efficiently federal agencies are
administering these programs and how effective the programs are at
achieving their mission. This report focuses on 52 programs administered
by the U.S. Departments of Agriculture (USDA), Commerce (Commerce),
and Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the U.S. Small
Business Administration (SBA) that provide assistance to entrepreneurs.
1
In 2011, we examined these programs and found that each program
overlapped with at least one other program in terms of the economic
development activities that they are authorized to fund.
2
Section 21 of Public Law 111-139, enacted in February 2010, requires
GAO to conduct routine investigations to identify federal programs,
agencies, offices, and initiatives with duplicative goals and activities within
According to
agency officials, these programs, which typically fund a variety of
activities in addition to supporting entrepreneurs, spent an estimated $2.0
billion on economic development efforts in fiscal year 2011.
1
The number of programs administered by Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA that we
identified in February 2012 as supporting entrepreneurial efforts decreased from 53 to 52
because USDA’s Empowerment Zones program was ended by Congress during fiscal
year 2010 and has been excluded from this review. See GAO, 2012 Annual Report:
Opportunities to Reduce Duplication, Overlap and Fragmentation, Achieve Savings, and
Enhance Revenue, GAO-12-342SP (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 28, 2012).
2
GAO, Opportunities to Reduce Potential Duplication in Government Programs, Save Tax
Dollars, and Enhance Revenue, GAO-11-318SP (Washington D.C.: Mar. 1, 2011) and
Efficiency and Effectiveness of Fragmented Economic Development Programs Are
Unclear, GAO-11-477R (Washington, D.C.: May 19, 2011).
Page 2 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
departments and governmentwide, and report annually to Congress.
3
While we identified a more comprehensive list of federal programs that
can fund economic activities more generally, we focused our analyses on
these 52 economic development programs that are authorized to support
entrepreneurs because these are the programs that appeared to overlap
the most within the four agencies whose missions focus on economic
development. We reviewed statutory and regulatory authority for each
program on the activities and services the agencies can conduct to
administer each of the programs. Because there was significant overlap
and fragmentation among programs that provide technical assistance (for
example, business training and counseling and support for research and
development) to entrepreneurs (35 of the 52 programs), we focused on
how the agencies provide this assistance. We reviewed agency
documents and conducted interviews in both headquarters and the field
to determine how technical assistance is provided to entrepreneurs and
the extent of agency collaboration at the local level. We interviewed 14
officials from four federal agencies, 9 officials from two regional
commissions, four entrepreneurs who have received federal support, and
five state and local partners in select geographic areas where there was
evidence of ongoing collaboration between the federal agencies. These
geographic areas included both urban and rural areas. We assessed this
technical assistance information against promising collaborative practices
that we have previously identified.
This report discusses (1) the extent of overlap, fragmentation, and
duplication and their effects on entrepreneurs, and agencies’ actions to
address them; and (2) the extent to which agencies collect information
necessary to track program activities and whether these programs have
met their performance goals and have been evaluated.
4
For all 52 programs, we also
evaluated the agencies’ methods for tracking the activities conducted and
assistance provided against standards for internal controls that we have
previously identified.
5
3
In a letter dated August 31, 2011, to the Comptroller General, the Chairwoman of the
Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry asked, among other things, that
we address a number of issues involving the potential for overlap, duplication, and
fragmentation in economic development programs administered by the four agencies.
For each program, we reviewed information on
4
GAO, Results-Oriented Government: Practices That Can Help Enhance and Sustain
Collaboration among Federal Agencies, GAO-06-15 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 21, 2005).
5
GAO, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1
(Washington, D.C.: Nov. 1, 1999).
Page 3 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
program mission and goals, performance goals and accomplishments,
and program evaluations conducted during the last decade. We evaluated
this information against promising practices of leading organizations and
the requirements of the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010. Appendix I
provides more information on our scope and methodology.
We conducted this performance audit from June 2011 to July 2012 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that
the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives.
Fragmentation refers to circumstances in which more than one federal
agency (or more than one organization within an agency) is involved in
the same broad area of national interest. Overlap involves programs that
have similar goals, devise similar strategies and activities to achieve
those goals, or target similar users. Duplication occurs when two or more
agencies or programs are engaged in the same activities or provide the
same assistance to the same beneficiaries. In some instances, it may be
appropriate for multiple agencies or entities to be involved in the same
programmatic or policy area due to the nature or magnitude of the federal
effort. However, we have previously identified instances where multiple
government programs or activities have led to inefficiencies, and we
determined that greater efficiencies or effectiveness might be
achievable.
6
6
See GAO-12-342SP.
Background
Fragmentation, Overlap,
and Duplication
Page 4 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
In September 2000, we reported that there is no commonly accepted
definition for economic development.
7
Absent a common definition, we
subsequently developed a list of nine activities most often associated with
economic development.
8
• supporting entrepreneurial efforts,
In general, we focused on economic activities
that directly affected the overall development of an area, such as job
creation, rather than on activities that improved individuals’ quality of life,
such as housing and education. The nine economic activities are
• supporting business incubators and accelerators,
• constructing and renovating commercial buildings,
• constructing and renovating industrial parks and buildings,
• strategic planning and research,
• marketing and access to new markets for products and industries,
• supporting telecommunications and broadband infrastructure,
• supporting physical infrastructure, and
• supporting tourism.
Appendix II provides illustrative examples of each of these economic
activities. Appendix III provides more information on the 52 economic
development programs we focused on for this report. Appendix IV
includes a list of additional programs that are administered by federal
agencies we identified that can fund at least one of these activities.
7
See GAO, Economic Development: Multiple Federal Programs Fund Similar Economic
Development Activities, GAO/RCED/GGD-00-220 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 29, 2000).
8
See GAO, Rural Economic Development: More Assurance Is Needed That Grant
Funding Information Is Accurately Reported, GAO-06-294 (Washington, D.C.:
Feb. 24, 2006).
Defining Federal
Economic Development
Programs
Page 5 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
In January 2011, Congress updated the Government Performance and
Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) with the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010
(GPRAMA). GPRAMA establishes a new framework aimed at taking a
more crosscutting and integrated approach to focusing on results and
improving government performance. Effective implementation of
GPRAMA could play an important role in clarifying desired outcomes;
addressing program performance spanning multiple organizations; and
facilitating future actions to reduce unnecessary duplication, overlap, and
fragmentation. Among other things, GPRAMA requires the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) to coordinate with agencies to establish
outcome-oriented federal government priority goals covering a limited
number of policy areas, as well as goals to improve management across
the federal government. It also requires OMB—in conjunction with the
agencies—to develop a federal government performance plan that
outlines how they will make progress toward achieving goals, including
federal government priority goals. The President’s 2013 budget
submission includes the first interim federal government priority goals,
including one to increase federal services to entrepreneurs and small
businesses with an emphasis on start-ups and growing firms and
underserved markets.
9
The identified economic development programs that support entrepreneurs
overlap based on both the type of assistance they provide and the
characteristics of the beneficiaries they target. This overlap among
fragmented programs can make it difficult for entrepreneurs to navigate the
services available to them. In addition, while agencies have taken steps to
collaborate more in administering these programs, they have not
implemented a number of good collaborative practices we have previously
identified, and some entrepreneurs struggle to find the support they need.
9
GAO, Managing for Results: GAO’s Work Related to the Interim Crosscutting Priority
Goals under the GPRA Modernization Act, GAO-12-620R (Washington, D.C.: May 12,
2012). We identified additional programs at Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA that can
assist entrepreneurs with access to financing, mentorship and counseling services, and
government contracts and research grants, and we recommended that the Director of
OMB review the additional departments, agencies, and programs that we identified, and
consider including them in the federal government’s performance plan, as appropriate.
OMB staff agreed with our recommendation that OMB review the additional departments,
agencies, and programs that we have identified and determine if they are relevant to
achieving the crosscutting goals.
GPRA Modernization Act
of 2010
Fragmented Programs
Overlap, and
Agencies’ Efforts to
Collaborate Have
Been Limited
Page 6 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Federal efforts to support entrepreneurs are fragmented, which occurs
when more than one agency or program is involved in the same broad
area of national interest. Commerce (8), HUD (12), SBA (19), and USDA
(13) administered 52 programs that could support entrepreneurial efforts
in fiscal year 2011. Several types of overlap—which occurs when
programs have similar goals, engage in similar activities or strategies to
achieve them, or target similar beneficiaries—exist among these
programs, based on the type of assistance the programs offer and
characteristics of the programs’ targeted beneficiaries.
Many of the programs provide entrepreneurs with similar types of
assistance. The programs generally can be grouped according to at least
one of three types of assistance that address different entrepreneurial
needs: help obtaining (1) technical assistance, (2) financial assistance,
and (3) government contracts. Many of the programs can provide more
than one type of assistance, and most focus on technical assistance,
financial assistance, or both:
10
• Technical assistance: Thirty-five programs distributed across the four
agencies can provide technical assistance, including business
training, counseling and research, and development support.
11
• Financial assistance: Thirty programs distributed across the four
agencies can support entrepreneurs through financial assistance in
the form of grants and loans.
12
10
SBA administers two programs that solely provide entrepreneurs with assistance in
obtaining government contracts: the Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone)
program, which supports small businesses located in economically distressed areas, and
the Procurement Assistance to Small Businesses program, which serves small
businesses located in any area.
11
The number of programs administered by Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA that were
identified in GAO-12-342SP as supporting technical assistance decreased from 36 to 35
because USDA’s Empowerment Zones program is no longer active.
12
The number of programs administered by Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA that were
identified in GAO-12-342SP as supporting financial assistance decreased from 33 to 30
because USDA’s Empowerment Zones program is no longer active and because
subsequent to that report, Commerce told us that its Minority Business Centers and Native
American Business Enterprise Centers programs only support technical assistance.
Many Programs Are
Authorized to Provide
Similar Types of
Assistance and Target
Similar Beneficiaries
Page 7 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
• Government contracting assistance: Five programs, all of which are
administered by SBA, can support entrepreneurs by helping them
qualify for federal procurement opportunities.
13
We reviewed the statutes and regulations for each program and found
that overlap tends to be concentrated among programs that provide a
broad range of technical and financial assistance. Within the technical
assistance category, 24 of the 35 programs are authorized to provide or
fund a broad range of technical assistance both to entrepreneurs with
existing businesses and to nascent entrepreneurs—that is, entrepreneurs
attempting to start a business—in any industry. This broad range of
support can include any form of training or counseling, including start-up
assistance, access to capital, and accounting. Examples of programs in
this category include Commerce’s Minority Business Centers, five of
HUD’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) programs, SBA’s
Small Business Development Centers, and USDA’s Rural Business
Opportunity Grants.
14
Eight additional programs can support limited types
of technical assistance or industries.
15
Similarly, 16 of the 30 financial assistance programs can provide or
guarantee loans that can be used for a broad range of purposes to
existing businesses and nascent entrepreneurs in any industry. Examples
of programs in this category include Commerce’s Economic Adjustment
Assistance programs, six of HUD’s CDBG programs, SBA’s 7(a) Loan
Program, and USDA’s Business and Industry Loans. Five other programs
For example, Commerce’s Trade
Adjustment Assistance for Firms only supports existing businesses
negatively affected by imports, and USDA’s Small Socially-
Disadvantaged Producer Grants only serves agricultural businesses.
13
The number of programs administered by Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA that were
identified in GAO-12-342SP as supporting government contracting assistance decreased
from seven to five because subsequent to that report, Commerce told us that its Minority
Business Centers and Native American Business Enterprise Centers programs only
support technical assistance.
14
Of the eight HUD CDBG programs, five operate in different areas of the United States
that do not geographically overlap, one can only provide support to areas recovering from
presidentially declared disasters, and two can operate in any area of the United States.
15
The other three technical assistance programs are Commerce’s Economic
Development–Support for Planning Organizations, Economic Development–Technical
Assistance, and Grants for Public Works and Economic Development Facilities, which
support assistance to economic development organizations and local governments, which
in turn support businesses.
Page 8 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
can support loans for a more narrow range of purposes or industries,
while the other nine programs can only support other types of financial
assistance, such as grants, equity investments, and surety guarantees.
16
In addition, a number of programs overlap based on the characteristics of
the targeted beneficiary. Most programs either target or exclusively serve
one of four types of businesses: businesses in rural areas, businesses in
economically distressed areas, disadvantaged businesses, and small
businesses.
17
For example, all of HUD’s 12 programs that can provide
support to entrepreneurs are focused on serving beneficiaries in
economically distressed areas or target benefits at low- to moderate-
income individuals. SBA’s 19 programs are all limited to serving small
businesses, with several programs that either target or exclusively serve
disadvantaged businesses and microenterprises.
18
16
Equity investments are capital provided to a business to purchase common or preferred
stock, or a similar instrument. SBA can guarantee surety bonds (that is, an agreement
between a surety company and the owner of a project that a contract will be completed)
for contracts up to $2 million. These contracts can cover bonds for small and emerging
contractors who cannot obtain surety bonds through regular commercial channels. SBA’s
guarantee gives sureties an incentive to provide bonding for eligible contractors and
thereby strengthens a contractor’s ability to obtain bonding and greater access to
contracting opportunities.
Eight of USDA’s 13
programs are limited to rural service areas, and four of these programs
are limited to small businesses or microenterprises. Among Commerce’s
eight programs, six are limited to serving beneficiaries in economically
distressed areas, while two exclusively serve disadvantaged businesses.
17
The definition of rural varies among these programs, but according to USDA—the
agency that administers many of the economic development programs that serve rural
areas—the term rural typically covers areas with population limits ranging from less than
2,500 to 50,000. Based on statutory language, we characterize economically distressed
areas as communities with high concentrations of low- and moderate-income families or
high rates of unemployment and/or underemployment. See, e.g., 42 U.S.C. § 3141; 42
U.S.C. § 5301. Likewise, based on statutory language, we characterize disadvantaged
businesses as those owned by women, minority groups, and veterans, among other
factors. See, e.g., 15 U.S.C. § 637(a); 15 U.S.C. § 656. The definition of small business
varies among these programs, but according to SBA—the agency that administers many
of the economic development programs that serve small businesses—the term small
business refers to businesses that have annual receipts or total employee numbers under
an agency-defined value for their specific industry.
18
Microenterprises are generally defined as commercial enterprises that have ten or fewer
employees.
Page 9 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Entrepreneurs may fall into more than one beneficiary category—for
example, an entrepreneur may be in an area that is both rural and
economically distressed. Therefore, these entrepreneurs would be
eligible, based on program authority, for more than one subset of
program. For example, a small business in a rural, economically
distressed area, such as Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania, could, in
terms of program authority, receive a broad range of technical assistance
through at least nine programs at all four of the agencies, including:
• Commerce’s Economic Adjustment Assistance;
• HUD’s CDBG/States, Rural Innovation Fund, and Section 4 Capacity
Building;
• SBA’s SCORE and Small Business Development Centers;
19
• USDA’s1890 Land Grant Institutions, Rural Business Enterprise
Grants, and Rural Business Opportunity Grants.
and
20
Similarly, a small business that is both minority- and women-owned in an
urban, noneconomically distressed area, such as Seattle, Washington,
could in terms of program authority, receive a broad range of technical
assistance through at least seven programs at three of the four agencies,
including:
• Commerce’s Minority Business Centers;
• HUD’s CDBG/Entitlement and Section 4 Capacity Building; and
• SBA’s Program for Investment in Micro-entrepreneurs (PRIME),
SCORE, Small Business Development Centers, and Women’s
Business Centers.
19
SCORE, formerly Service Corps of Retired Executives, provides technical assistance
support for small business, start-ups and entrepreneurs.
20
HUD’s Rural Innovation Fund program did not receive funding in fiscal year 2011 but is
still active. USDA’s1890 Land Grant Institutions received an unspecified amount of
funding through USDA’s Salaries and Expense account rather than program
appropriations.
Page 10 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Entrepreneurs may also be eligible for multiple subsets of financial
assistance programs based on their specific characteristics. For example,
a small business in a rural, economically distressed area, such as
Bourbon County, Kansas, could in terms of authority, receive financial
assistance in the form of guaranteed or direct loans for a broad range of
uses through at least eight programs at the four agencies, including:
• Commerce’s Economic Adjustment Assistance;
• HUD’s CDBG/States, Rural Innovation Fund and Section 4 Capacity
Building;
• SBA’s 7(a) Loan Program and Small Business Investment
Companies; and
• USDA’s Business and Industry Loans and Rural Business Enterprise
Grants.
A small business that is both minority and women-owned in an urban,
noneconomically distressed area, such as Raleigh, North Carolina, could
receive financial assistance in the form of guaranteed or direct loans for a
broad range of uses through at least four programs at two of the four
agencies, including:
• HUD’s CDBG/Entitlement and Section 4 Capacity Building; and
• SBA’s 7(a) Loan Program and Small Business Investment
Companies.
Five programs provide government contracting assistance to
entrepreneurs, but our analysis did not identify significant overlap in the
types of assistance these programs provide or the types of entrepreneurs
they serve. While these five programs are all administered by SBA and
can serve businesses in any industry, they tend to target specific types of
entrepreneurs and provide unique types of assistance. For example, the
Procurement Assistance to Small Businesses program coordinates
access to government contracts for small and disadvantaged businesses
with other federal agencies, while the 8(a) Business Development
Program coordinates certification of eligible disadvantaged businesses for
Page 11 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
the contracts made available at these other agencies, in addition to
providing business development assistance during their 9-year term.
21
While many programs overlap in terms of statutory authority,
entrepreneurs may in reality have fewer options to access assistance
from multiple programs. Agencies often rely on intermediaries (that is,
third-party entities such as nonprofit organizations, higher education
institutions, or local governments that use federal grants to provide
eligible assistance directly to entrepreneurs) to provide specific support to
entrepreneurs, and these intermediaries vary in terms of their location
and the types of assistance they provide. For example, while
entrepreneurs seeking technical assistance in Susquehanna County,
Pennsylvania, are eligible to receive this support through USDA’s1890
Land Grant Institutions program, the closest funded intermediary is in
Delaware, making it unlikely that such an entrepreneur would utilize
services through this program. Additionally, intermediaries we spoke to in
several areas said they typically provide a more limited range of services
to entrepreneurs than are allowed under their statutory authority. For
example, two intermediaries that we interviewed in Texas that were
authorized to provide a broad range of technical support to entrepreneurs
through SBA’s Small Business Development Center and Commerce’s
Minority Business Center noted that they each specialized in a narrower
subset of services and referred beneficiaries to each other and other
resources for some services outside of their niches. Specifically, the
intermediary at the Small Business Development Center noted that they
provide a range of long-term services to small businesses over different
phases of development, while the intermediary at the Minority Business
Center noted that they focused specifically on larger minority-owned firms
as well as start-up companies.
Overlapping programs may also employ different mechanisms to provide
similar types of support to entrepreneurs. For example, programs may
support technical assistance through different types of intermediaries that
provide services to entrepreneurs. USDA’s Rural Business Opportunity
Grants program can provide technical assistance through local
governments, nonprofit corporations, Indian tribes, and cooperatives that
are located in rural areas, while SBA’s SCORE program utilizes retired
21
SBA’s 8(a) program, named for a section of the Small Business Act, is a development
program created to help small, disadvantaged businesses compete in the American
economy and access the federal procurement market.
Page 12 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
business professionals and others that volunteer their time to provide
assistance. Additionally, programs may support financial assistance in the
form of loans through loan guarantees, direct loans, or support for
revolving loan funds. SBA’s 7(a) Loan program provides guarantees on
loans made by private sector lenders, while USDA’s Intermediary Re-
lending program provides financing to intermediaries to operate revolving
loan funds.
Additionally, some programs distribute funding through multiple layers of
intermediaries before it reaches entrepreneurs. For example, HUD’s
Section 4 Capacity Building program is only authorized to provide grants
to five national organizations, which pass funding on to a number of local
grantees, including community development corporations that may use
the funding to provide technical or financial assistance to entrepreneurs.
HUD officials also noted that most of their programs allow local grantees
discretion on whether to use funds to support entrepreneurs or for other
authorized purposes. Other programs may competitively award grants to
multiple intermediaries working jointly in the same community to serve
entrepreneurs. For example, Commerce’s Economic Adjustment
Assistance program can provide grants to intermediaries, such as
consortiums of local governments and nonprofits, which in turn provide
technical or financial assistance to entrepreneurs.
Although we identified a number of examples of statutory overlap, we did
not find evidence of duplication among these programs (that is, instances
when two or more agencies or programs are engaged in the same
activities to provide the same services to the same beneficiaries) based
on available data. However, most agencies were not able to provide the
programmatic information, such as data on users of the program that is
necessary to determine whether or not duplication actually exists among
the programs. The agencies’ data-collecting practices will be discussed at
greater length later in this report.
Page 13 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
As previously discussed, 35 programs distributed across the four
agencies provide technical assistance, including business training and
counseling. While the existence of multiple programs in and of itself is not
a problem, the delivery system of these fragmented and overlapping
technical assistance programs contains many components (see fig. 1).
Several entrepreneurs and various technical assistance providers with
whom we spoke—including agency field offices, intermediaries, and other
local service providers—told us that the system can be confusing and that
some entrepreneurs do not know what services are available or where to
go for assistance. As discussed earlier, federal funds typically flow from
the federal agencies to different eligible intermediaries, which are third-
party entities that receive federal funds, such as nonprofits or universities.
These intermediaries in turn may provide technical assistance to
entrepreneurs by, for example, helping them to develop a business plan
or put together a loan package to obtain financing. For instance, SBA’s
Women’s Business Center and Commerce’s Minority Business Center
programs can provide technical assistance through different
intermediaries, such as the Arkansas Women’s Business Center and the
University of Hawaii. Although intermediaries are the primary providers of
technical assistance, agency field offices may also provide some
technical assistance. For example, USDA’s Rural Development state
offices may provide advice on how to complete their respective grant
applications. SBA’s district offices may also discuss the different business
structures available.
Some Entrepreneurs
Struggle to Navigate
Technical Assistance
Programs
Page 14 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Figure 1: Fragmented Delivery System of Federally Funded Technical Assistance to Entrepreneurs
Note: While our work focuses on the four federal agencies’ economic development programs that
support entrepreneurs, many state governments also have economic development departments that
assist, plan, and support economic development activities. Local governments and nonprofit
organizations may also offer programs that can be used to support economic development activities.
In addition, there may be other federal agencies involved with supporting economic development.
Some intermediaries receive support from multiple public- and private-sector institutions, and some
entrepreneurs we spoke with indicated that they had received assistance from multiple sources.
Page 15 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Technical assistance providers sometimes attempt to help entrepreneurs
navigate the system by referring them to other programs, but these efforts
are not consistently successful. Some of these providers told us that they
assess the entrepreneur’s needs to determine whether to assist them or
refer them to another entity that could provide the assistance more
effectively. For example, if an 1890 Land Grant intermediary were not able
to assist an entrepreneur, it might refer the entrepreneur to SBA, USDA, or
a local provider. However, such referrals are not always successful. For
example, an entrepreneur we spoke with described a case in which he
needed assistance with developing a business plan but was unable to
receive this assistance, even after several referrals. Some technical
assistance providers that we spoke with either did not appear to fully
understand other technical assistance programs or thought that others did
not fully understand their programs. For example, one technical assistance
provider told us that some technical assistance providers were focused on
more established businesses, but when we reached out to some of these
providers, they said they served all entrepreneurs. This lack of
understanding could prevent providers from making helpful referrals and
leveraging other programs and limit the effectiveness of the programs.
In addition, programs’ Internet resources can also be difficult to navigate.
Each agency has its own separate website that provides information to
entrepreneurs, but they often direct entrepreneurs to other websites for
additional information. For example, the SBA website directs users to
another website that lists the Small Business Development Centers,
which then directs users to another website that provides some
information on the centers’ available services. SBA, Commerce, USDA,
and other agencies have recently collaborated to develop a joint website
called BusinessUSA with the goal of making it easier for businesses to
access services. However, the site was not fully operational as of June
2012, and none of the entrepreneurs and almost all the technical
assistance providers we spoke with were not yet aware of it. As of June
2012, this website listed a number of potential technical assistance
programs across different federal agencies with links to the programs’
websites. Some technical assistance providers and entrepreneurs
suggested that a single source to help entrepreneurs quickly find
information instead of sorting through different websites would be helpful.
Page 16 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Enhanced collaboration between agencies could potentially address
some of the difficulties entrepreneurs experience and improve program
efficiency. In prior work we identified practices that can help to enhance
and sustain collaboration among federal agencies, which can help to
maximize performance and results, and have recommended that the
agencies follow them.
22
These collaborative practices include identifying
common outcomes, establishing joint strategies, leveraging resources,
determining roles and responsibilities, and developing compatible policies
and procedures. In addition, GPRAMA requires agencies to describe in
annual performance plans how they are working with other agencies to
achieve their performance goals and relevant federal government
performance goals.
23
The agencies have taken initial steps to improve how they collaborate to
provide technical assistance to entrepreneurs by, for example, entering
into formal agreements with each other, but they have not pursued a
number of other good collaborative practices we have previously
identified, as the following examples illustrate:
• USDA and SBA entered into a formal agreement in April 2010 to
coordinate their efforts aimed at supporting businesses in rural areas.
In April 2011, USDA began to survey its state offices to help the
agency gauge the level of collaboration between its field staff and
SBA, as well as to identify additional opportunities to enhance
collaboration. However, the agencies’ business development
programs that can support start-up businesses—USDA’s Rural
Business Enterprise Grant and SBA’s Small Business Development
Centers—have yet to determine roles and responsibilities, find ways
to leverage each other’s resources, or establish compatible policies
and procedures to collaboratively support rural businesses.
• The Appalachian Regional Development Initiative is a formal
agreement, which began in November 2010, among the Appalachian
Regional Commission (which coordinates economic development
activities in the Appalachian region), the four agencies, and other
22
GAO-06-15.
23
Pub. L. No. 111-352, 124 Stat. 3866 (2011).
Agencies’ Collaboration
Has Been Limited
Page 17 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
agencies.
24
• In August 2011 SBA and the Delta Regional Authority (which
coordinates economic development activities in the Delta region)
entered into a formal agreement to better deploy and coordinate
resources for small businesses located in the Delta region.
This agreement is intended to strengthen and diversify the
Appalachian economy through better deployment and coordination of
federal resources. According to officials at the Appalachian Regional
Commission, the agencies did participate in a joint workshop to
present the locally available resources from business development to
infrastructure in the fall 2011, and USDA is one of its stronger
partners. However, the agencies have not established joint strategies,
determined roles and responsibilities, or developed compatible
policies and procedures for carrying out the common outcomes
outlined in their agreements at the local level where technical
assistance is provided.
25
• In June 2011, the President created the White House Rural Council to
promote economic prosperity in rural areas. It is chaired by the
Secretary of Agriculture and includes HUD, Commerce, SBA, and
other agencies. The council is working to better coordinate federal
programs in order to maximize the impact of federal investment in
rural areas. Even though the council has announced a number of
initiatives, such as helping rural small businesses access capital, the
As part
of this agreement, in April 2012 the two entities announced a joint
effort to launch an program to support entrepreneurs called Operation
JumpStart. Operation JumpStart is designed as a hands-on,
microenterprise development program that is intended to help
entrepreneurs test the feasibility of their business ideas and plan to
launch new ventures. However, their effort thus far has been limited.
While they entered into a formal agreement to launch the program,
this agreement did not include any determinations of specific roles
and responsibilities or establish compatible policies and procedures to
collaboratively support these small businesses.
24
The Appalachian region is made up of 420 counties in parts of 12 states—Alabama,
Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania,
South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia—as well as all of West Virginia.
25
The Delta region is made up of 252 counties and parishes in parts of eight states—
Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee.
Page 18 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
agencies have yet to implement many of our other good collaborative
practices.
In addition, while most of these agencies at the headquarters level have
agreed to work together by signing formal agreements to administer some
of their similar programs, the agencies generally have yet to develop
compatible guidance to implement these agreements in the field. As
noted previously, some intermediaries we spoke with that provide
technical assistance through agency programs collaborate by referring
entrepreneurs to other federal programs and agencies that they believe
may better meet their needs. However these efforts are inconsistent and
do not always result in entrepreneurs obtaining the services they are
seeking. OMB and the four agencies also have recently taken steps to
implement GPRAMA, which requires them to coordinate better; however,
implementation was still in the early phases as of May 2012 and had not
yet affected how they administer their programs.
Implementing additional good collaborative practices could improve how
the federal government supports entrepreneurs by, for example, helping
agencies make more useful referrals, meet more diverse needs of
entrepreneurs, and present a more consistent delivery system to
entrepreneurs:
• Collaborating agencies that agree upon roles and responsibilities can
clarify who will do what, organize their joint and individual efforts, and
facilitate coordinated decision making. This effort could help agencies
not only initiate and sustain collaboration but also determine who is in
the best position to support an entrepreneur based on the client’s
need, which could lead to more effective referrals.
• Because collaborating agencies bring different resources and
capacities to their efforts, they can look for opportunities to leverage
each other’s resources, thus obtaining additional benefits that would
not be available if they were working separately. Being able to
leverage each other’s resources could help agencies more effectively
and efficiently support entrepreneurs because they may be able to
meet more diverse needs by drawing on one another’s strengths.
Page 19 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
• Compatible standards, policies, procedures, and data systems could
help to sustain collaborative efforts. As agencies standardize, for
example, procedures for supporting entrepreneurs, they can more
efficiently support entrepreneurs through more consistent service-
delivery methods across agencies and programs. This could be
particularly helpful for entrepreneurs who are not familiar with the
federal programs.
In addition, GPRAMA’s crosscutting framework requires that agencies
collaborate in order to address issues such as economic development
that transcend more than one agency, and GPRAMA directs agencies to
describe how they are working with each other to achieve their program
goals. As discussed previously, without more substantial collaboration,
the delivery of service to entrepreneurs, particularly those who are
unfamiliar with federal economic development programs, may not be as
effective and efficient as possible.
Agencies do not maintain information in a way that would enable them to
track activities for most of their programs. Further, the agencies lack
information on why some programs have failed to meet some or all of
their goals. While information from program evaluations can help
measure program effectiveness, agencies have conducted evaluations of
only 20 of the 52 active programs since 2000.
While the four agencies collected at least some information on program
activities in either an electronic records system or through paper files,
most were unable to summarize the information in a way that could be
used to help administer the programs. Promising practices of program
administration that we have identified include a strong capacity to collect
and analyze accurate, useful, and timely data.
26
26
Harold I. Steinberg, Using Performance Information to Drive Performance Improvement,
Association of Government Accountants CPAG Research Series: Report No. 29
(Alexandria, VA: Dec. 2011).
According to OMB, being
able to track and measure specific program data can help agencies
diagnose problems, identify drivers of future performance, evaluate risk,
support collaboration, and inform follow-up actions. Analyses of patterns
Agencies Lack
Information to Track
Program Activities
and Measure
Performance
Agencies Do Not Maintain
Information to Enable
Tracking of Activities for
Most Programs
Page 20 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
and anomalies can also help agencies discover ways to achieve more
value for the taxpayer’s money. In addition, agencies can use this
information to assess whether their specific program activities are
contributing as planned to the agency goals.
In addition, government internal control standards state that agencies
should promptly and accurately record transactions to maintain their
relevance and value for management decision making. Furthermore, this
information should be readily available for use by management and
others so that they can carry out their duties with the goal of achieving all
of their objectives, including making operating decisions and allocating
resources.
27
All four agencies collect program information but do not track detailed,
readily available information for most programs, such as the type of
technical assistance that their programs provide or fund, which is
necessary to effectively administer their programs. For example,
Commerce’s Economic Adjustment Assistance, HUD’s Section 4
Capacity Building, SBA’s PRIME, and USDA’s Rural Business
Opportunity Grant Program can all support a broad range of technical
assistance to various types of entrepreneurs, but agencies are unable to
provide information on the types of services provided that would be
necessary to compare activities across programs. Similarly, the agencies
typically do not track detailed information on the characteristics of
entrepreneurs that they serve, such as whether they are located in rural
or economically distressed areas or the entrepreneurs’ type of industry.
Most of the agencies collect detailed information on several of their
programs in a way that could potentially help them more efficiently
administer their programs, as the following examples illustrate:
This guidance calls for agencies to go beyond merely
collecting information, stating that they should systematically analyze, or
track, it over time to inform decision making. For example, the agencies
could track this information to identify trends on how the programs are
being used in different areas of the country. This information could help
the agencies strategically target program resources to support the unique
needs in each geographic area.
27
GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1.
Page 21 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
• SBA collects detailed information on the type of technical assistance
provided and type of entrepreneur served for 5 of its 10 technical
assistance programs. SBA categorizes the types of technical
assistance it provides by 17 categories of training and counseling,
such as helping a business develop its business plan. All of this
information is maintained in an electronic database that is accessible
by agency staff.
• For all of its programs, USDA collects detailed information on the
industry of each of the entrepreneurs it supports. In addition, USDA
collects detailed information (19 categories) on how entrepreneurs
use proceeds, such as for working capital, provided through five of its
financial assistance programs. USDA maintains this information in an
electronic database, and officials stated that they can provide this type
of detailed information upon request.
• For all eight of its technical assistance programs, Commerce collects
information on the type of entrepreneur served and the entrepreneurs’
industry.
While HUD tracked limited program information on the type of support it
provides to entrepreneurs, the agency collects information on other
program activities and uses it to monitor program compliance. HUD staff
meet quarterly with the Secretary of HUD to discuss these program data
and determine changes that should be made to improve how they carry
out program activities. Table 1 summarizes the type of information that
agencies maintain in a readily available format that could be tracked to
help administer the programs.
Page 22 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Table 1: Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs and Maintain Readily Available Information, by Agency
35 technical assistance programs
Commerce (8) HUD (9) SBA (10) USDA (8) Total (35)
Type of technical assistance
provided?
yes 2 0 5 0 7
no 6 9 5 8 28
Industry entrepreneur is
working in?
yes 8 0 5 8 21
no 0 9 5 0 14
Type of entrepreneur by
targeted categories?
a
yes 8 1 5 7 21
no 0 8 5 1 14
30 financial assistance programs
Commerce (2) HUD (10) SBA (10) USDA (8) Total (30)
Type of financial assistance
provided?
yes 2 8 9 8 27
no 0 2 1 0 3
Use of proceeds? yes 2 1 7 5 15
no 0 9 3 3 15
Industry entrepreneur is
working in?
yes 2 0 5 8 15
no 0 10 5 0 15
Type of entrepreneur by
targeted categories?
yes 2 3 8 5 18
no 0 7 2 3 12
Source: GAO analysis of information provided by Commerce, HUD, USDA, and SBA.
Note: This table is based on 50 of the 52 programs that can support entrepreneurs because we
excluded the 2 SBA programs that only support government contracting assistance. Some of the 50
programs can provide both financial and technical assistance.
a
Targeted categories can include businesses in rural or economically distressed areas,
disadvantaged businesses, or small businesses.
Officials who administer these programs provided a number of reasons
why they do not track detailed program information for all programs in a
way that could be used for program administration purposes. For
example, some officials stated they do not rely on program information
with this level of detail to make decisions about their programs. As
previously discussed, many of these programs are administered by
intermediaries, and these intermediaries may maintain detailed
information on the services they provide. Agencies do not always require
the intermediaries to forward all of this detailed information to
headquarters. Rather, an intermediary may, for example, submit data
Page 23 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
summaries of the support they have provided during the reporting period
in a narrative format—a format that cannot be easily aggregated or
analyzed. Other agency officials noted that this type of summary-level
information they collect and maintain at headquarters is sufficient for their
purposes and complies with OMB reporting guidelines. However, without
tracking more detailed program information, such as the specific type of
support provided and the entrepreneurs served, agencies may not be
able to make informed decisions or identify risks and problem areas
within their programs based on factors such as how entrepreneurs make
use of program services or funding. Furthermore, agencies may not be
able to understand the extent that their programs are serving their
intended purposes.
Our review found that for fiscal year 2011, a number of programs that
support entrepreneurs failed to meet some or all of their performance
goals. Measuring performance allows organizations to track the progress
they are making toward their goals and gives managers crucial
information on which to base their organizational and management
decisions. Leading organizations recognize that performance measures
can create powerful incentives to influence organizational and individual
behavior. Some of their good practices include setting and measuring
performance goals. GPRAMA requires agencies to develop annual
performance plans that include performance goals for an agency’s
program activities and accompanying performance measures. According
to GPRAMA, these performance goals should be in a quantifiable and
measurable form to define the level of performance to be achieved for
program activities each year. The agencies should also be able to identify
which external factors might affect goal accomplishment and explain why
a goal was not met. Such plans can help to reinforce the connection
between the long-term strategic goals outlined in their strategic plans and
the day-to-day activities of their managers and staff.
We found that of the 33 programs that support entrepreneurs and set
goals, 19 did not meet any of their goals or only met some of their goals
Some Programs Failed to
Meet Their Goals
Page 24 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
(see table 2).
28
Table 2: Accomplishment Data for 33 Programs that Support Entrepreneurs and Set
Goals, Fiscal Year 2011
These programs include Commerce’s Economic
Development/Support for Planning Organizations, HUD’s Indian
Community Development Block Grant, SBA’s 504 loan, and USDA’s
Rural Business Opportunity Grant programs. Appendix III provides more
information on fiscal year 2011 goals and accomplishments for each
program that has goals and accomplishment data available.
Programs that did
not meet goals
Programs that met
some goals
Programs that
met all goals
Commerce 1 5 2
HUD 2 0 0
SBA 2 5 7
USDA 4 0 3
Total 9 10 12
Source: GAO analysis of data from Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA.
Note: Two programs have goals but did not have goal accomplishment information. Goal
accomplishment information for HUD’s Section 4 Capacity Building for Affordable Housing and
Community Development program is unknown because HUD did not provide goal accomplishment
information. Goal accomplishment information for USDA’s Small Business Innovation Research
program is not available because the program goals are based on 2-year time periods and the current
period has not yet ended.
Agency officials provided a number of reasons why they thought these
programs did not meet their goals, including that the goals were estimates
and program funding was lower than anticipated. In addition, some
agency officials could not identify any causes for the failure to meet goals
nor had they attempted to determine the specific reasons for the failures.
28
Nineteen programs did not have fiscal year 2011 performance goals: HUD’s CDBG
Insular Areas, CDBG Entitlement, CDBG States, CDBG Non-entitlement Grants in Hawaii,
Section 108, CDBG Disaster Recovery, Rural Innovation Fund, Hispanic Serving
Institutions Assisting Communities, and Alaska Native/Native Hawaiian Institutions
Assisting Communities; SBA’s PRIME, Small Business Innovation Research, Small
Business Technology Transfer, New Markets Venture Capital, and Federal and State
Technology Partnership programs; and USDA’s Small Socially-Disadvantaged Producer
Grants, 1890’s Land Grants Institutions, Agriculture Innovation Center, Biomass Research
and Development Initiative, and Woody Biomass Utilization Grants. While the agencies
are not required to have goals for each program, agency officials said that 6 of the 19
programs did not have goals because they were either temporary, were not funded, or
were marked for elimination by agencies. One of the 19 programs that did not meet its
goals was not funded in fiscal year 2011.
Page 25 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Programs that are failing to meet performance goals without a clear
understanding of the reasons could result in agencies not being able to
identify and address specific parts of programs that may not be working
well. Additionally, without more detailed data on the activities of individual
intermediaries, determining which of these third-parties are effectively
administering these programs and helping meet program goals is difficult.
Making decisions without this information could result in scarce resources
being directed away from programs, or intermediaries, that are effective
and towards those that are not meeting their objectives or struggling to
meet their objectives.
Over the past 12 years, agencies have conducted program evaluations of
20 of the 52 programs that support entrepreneurs.
29
29
We reviewed the methodologies of these studies to ensure they were sound and
determined they were sufficiently reliable to report high-level findings related to the
programs’ overall effectiveness.
Most of these 20
programs were evaluated once in the past decade. The studies that were
conducted focus on a variety of areas, including customer satisfaction
and the programs’ economic impacts, and report an array of findings
related to the effectiveness of the programs. For example, some
evaluations reported the actual number of jobs produced as a result of
program investments, while one evaluation reported that programs were
more useful for larger firms than smaller firms. Some of the differences
among the findings are tied to the varying questions the studies sought to
answer and the methods that were used to answer them. The questions
and methods employed are typically informed by the organization’s
purpose for pursuing these studies. These purposes could include, for
example, assessing program impact, identifying areas for improvement,
or guiding resource allocation. Figure 2 describes the scope of each
program evaluation and the findings related to program effectiveness.
Appendix V provides more information on each program evaluation.
Agencies Have Not
Evaluated the Majority of
Programs That Support
Entrepreneurs
Page 26 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Figure 2: Evaluations of Programs that Support Entrepreneurs, 2000-2012
Page 27 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Although GPRAMA does not require agencies to conduct formal program
evaluations, it does require agencies to describe program evaluations that
were used to establish or revise strategic goals as well as program
evaluations they plan to conduct in the future. Additionally, while not
required, agencies can use periodic program evaluations to complement
ongoing performance measurement. Program evaluations that
systematically study the benefits of programs may help identify the extent
to which overlapping and fragmented programs are achieving their
objectives. In addition, program evaluations can help agencies determine
reasons why a performance goal was not met and give an agency
direction on how to improve program performance. For instance, 8 of the
33 programs that were not evaluated by the administering agency failed
to meet all of their performance goals. Performance evaluations could
have helped agencies understand why these programs’ goals were not
met. Further, program evaluations, which examine a broader range of
information than is feasible on an ongoing basis through performance
measures, can help assess the impact and effectiveness of a program.
30
While many of the agencies agree that performance evaluations can add
value, some stated that they have limited funds and cannot afford
performance evaluation studies. Other agency officials stated that they
are not allowed to use program funds for evaluation. For example, USDA
officials stated that they are not allowed to use program funds to study the
effectiveness of the Small Business Innovation Research program. While
program evaluations can be expensive, there are various methods that
agencies can employ to make them more cost-effective. For example,
agencies could conduct a program evaluation that relies on their own data
to prevent them from purchasing data from a vendor.
31
30
GAO, Program Evaluation: Studies Helped Agencies Measure or Explain Program
Performance,
Without periodic
program evaluations, the agencies’ ability to manage programs effectively
and efficiently may be limited. Program evaluations can also potentially
help agencies understand why some programs have failed to meet some
or all of their goals, as previously discussed. Moreover, without this type
GAO/GGD-00-204 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 29, 2000).
31
In July 2007, we recommended that SBA further utilize the loan performance information
it already collects to better report how small businesses fare after they participate in the
7(a) program. While SBA agreed with the recommendation, the agency has not
implemented it. See GAO, Small Business Administration: Additional Measures Needed to
Assess 7(a) Loan Program’s Performance, GAO-07-769 (Washington, D.C.: Jul. 13,
2007).
Page 28 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
of information, Congress and the agencies may not be able to better
ensure that scarce resources are being directed to the most effective
programs and activities.
In order to support entrepreneurs, federal economic development
programs must be efficient and accessible to the people they are
intended to serve. However, navigating these overlapping and
fragmented programs can be an ongoing challenge for some
entrepreneurs. While the agencies have a number of interagency
agreements in place, our review found that agency field staff do not
consistently collaborate and may not be able to help entrepreneurs
navigate the large number of programs available to them. We have
identified practices that can help to support collaboration among federal
agencies and programs. In addition, greater collaboration is one way
agencies can help overcome overlap and fragmentation among programs
within and across agencies. Moreover, without enhanced collaboration
and coordination, agencies may not be able to make the best use of
limited federal resources and may not reach their intended beneficiaries
in the most effective and efficient manner.
In addition, given the number of federal programs focused on supporting
entrepreneurs, agencies need specific information about these programs
to best allocate limited federal resources and make decisions about better
administering and structuring the programs. In our February 2012 report
on duplication, overlap, and fragmentation, we expected to recommend
that Congress tie funding to program performance and that OMB and the
agencies explore opportunities to restructure programs through such
means as consolidation or elimination. However, decisions about funding
and restructuring would be difficult without better performance and
evaluation information. Thus, making these recommendations would be
premature until the agencies address a number of deficiencies.
Specifically, agencies typically do not collect information that would
enable them to track the services they provide and to whom they provide
those services. This practice is not consistent with government standards
for internal controls. Without such information, the agencies may not be
able to administer the programs in a way that will result in the most
efficient and effective federal support to entrepreneurs.
Moreover, most of the programs that set goals did not meet them or only
met some of them, and agency officials could not always identify reasons
why program goals were not met. Additionally, many of these programs
have not been evaluated in 10 years or more. GPRAMA requires
Conclusions
Page 29 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
agencies to set and measure annual performance goals, and recognizes
the value of program evaluations because they can help agencies assess
programs’ effectiveness and improve program performance. Agencies’
lack of understanding of why programs have failed to meet goals may
limit decision makers’ ability to understand which programs are most
effective and allocate federal resources accordingly.
To help improve the efficiency and effectiveness of federal efforts to
support entrepreneurs, we make the following recommendations:
• The Director of the Office and Management and Budget, the
Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, and
Housing and Urban Development, and the Administrator of the Small
Business Administration should work together to identify opportunities
to enhance collaboration among programs, both within and across
agencies.
• The Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, and
Housing and Urban Development, and the Administrator of the Small
Business Administration should consistently collect information that
would enable them to track the specific type of assistance programs
provide and the entrepreneurs they serve and use this information to
help administer their programs.
• The Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, and
Housing and Urban Development, and the Administrator of the Small
Business Administration should conduct more program evaluations to
better understand why programs have not met performance goals and
their overall effectiveness.
GAO provided a draft of this report to OMB, Commerce, HUD, SBA, and
USDA for review and comment. We also provided excerpts of appendix
IV to all of the agencies with programs listed for their review. Commerce,
HUD, and USDA provided written comments. Commerce, HUD, and SBA
also provided technical comments, which were incorporated where
appropriate. OMB did not provide comments on the draft report. All
written comments are reprinted in appendixes VI, VII and VIII.
The Acting Secretary of Commerce stated that we may wish to consider
the complementary role many agencies play in the field of economic
development and the need for varied but complementary activities to
Recommendations
Agency Comments
and Our Evaluation
Page 30 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
address the complexities of entrepreneurs. She commented that what
may appear as duplication at a higher level is in reality a portfolio of
distinct services meeting unique needs. Our report notes that in some
instances it may be appropriate for multiple agencies or entities to be
involved in the same programmatic or policy area due to the nature or
magnitude of the federal effort. We found that many of the 52 programs
we examined overlap in terms of statutory authority; our report does not
state that duplication exists among these programs. However, we found
that most of these agencies were not able to provide programmatic
information, such as data on users of the programs that is necessary to
determine whether or not duplication actually exists.
The Acting Secretary also stated that federal agencies do successfully
collaborate and forge policy partnerships, and noted that EDA plays a key
role in leading and shaping federal policy for fostering collaborative
regional economic development. As noted in our report, Commerce,
HUD, SBA, and USDA have taken initial steps to improve how they
collaborate to provide technical assistance to entrepreneurs and cites
specific examples of these collaborative efforts. However, GAO found that
the four agencies, including Commerce, have not pursued a number of
other good collaborative practices we have previously identified. For
example, our report states that the White House Rural Council, comprised
of Commerce and other federal agencies, is working to better coordinate
federal programs in order to maximize the impact of federal investment in
rural areas. Although the council has announced a number of initiatives,
such as helping rural small businesses access capital, we found that the
agencies have yet to implement many of our other good collaborative
practices such as developing compatible guidance to implement inter-
agency agreements. For example, we found that while most of these
agencies at the headquarters level have agreed to work together by
signing formal agreements to administer some of their similar programs,
the agencies generally have yet to develop compatible guidance to
implement these agreements in the field.
Finally, the Acting Secretary stated that EDA agrees with our report’s
focus on the need for more specific information tracking and more
frequent performance evaluation. She noted that EDA has established
performance measures for each of its programs, and that these
performance measures were subject to thorough review and validation
procedures. She also noted that EDA routinely conducts evaluations of its
programs (often limited only by lack of resources). However, the Acting
Secretary stated that efforts to monitor and track project progress seem to
have been outside of the scope of our report, based on many of the
Page 31 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
general statements made in the report about the need for additional work
in this area. As previously stated, we found that most of the agencies
were not able to provide programmatic information for programs that can
support entrepreneurs. Our report also states that Commerce does collect
information on the type of entrepreneur served and the entrepreneur’s
industry for all eight of its programs that can provide technical assistance;
however, the report notes that Commerce does not collect information on
the specific type of technical assistance provided to entrepreneurs for six
of these eight programs—information necessary to compare activities
across programs. We provided summary information on evaluations
conducted by the agencies in the report, including Commerce. We also
found that Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA had not evaluated the
majority of the 52 programs that can support entrepreneurs, including four
of the eight programs Commerce administers. We concluded that
program evaluations, when combined with efforts to collect information,
can be a positive step toward greater understanding of programs’
effectiveness.
HUD’s Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing expressed
concern regarding our reference on the highlights page of the report to
the Indian CDBG program as one of 19 economic development programs
that failed to meet their entrepreneurial performance goals. She stated
that the entire program may be unfairly perceived as ineffective as a
result of this statement. Our report states that 33 of 52 programs we
examined set goals related to entrepreneurial assistance and that 19 of
these 33 programs did not meet any of their goals or only met some of
their goals. Our report does not state that these 19 programs were
ineffective. We added language on the highlights page of the report to
clarify that our findings were only based on each program’s goals related
to entrepreneurial assistance.
The Assistant Secretary also stated that our report misrepresents the
Indian CDBG program as an economic development program. She noted
that while economic development is an eligible program activity, only 3
percent of the dollars awarded under the program since 2005 funded
economic development activities. She further noted that most of the
program’s grants were used for community development activities, such
as building community buildings, developing infrastructure of various
types, and rehabilitating housing units on Indian lands. As noted in our
report, the 52 programs we examined for this report typically fund a
variety of activities in addition to supporting entrepreneurs. In addition, the
report notes that most of these programs either target or exclusively serve
particular types of businesses.
Page 32 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
The Assistant Secretary noted that an independent evaluation of the
Indian CDBG program was conducted in 2006. HUD had not previously
provided us with this evaluation. We revised our report to state that the
Indian CDBG program had been evaluated within the past 12 years.
Finally, the Assistant Secretary stated that HUD supports efforts to
accurately measure the performance of its programs. She noted that
HUD’s Office of Native American Programs had recognized limitations in
its method of projecting and measuring performance in the Indian CDBG
program. She also stated that the office had begun drafting a revised form
to be used at grant application and grant closeout to better collect
performance measurement data, and that the office was examining its
data collection procedures as well as the methodology used to establish
program targets. These actions are consistent with our recommendation
that the agencies collect program information and use it to help
administer their programs.
USDA’s Under Secretary for Rural Development stated that he agreed
with our report’s statements that entrepreneurs play a vital role in the U.S.
economy and that no duplication exists among federal programs that
assist entrepreneurs. However, he disagreed with some of the other
observations in our report. First, he stated that our report broadly portrays
federal programs that assist entrepreneurs and does not highlight the
unique characteristics of each agency, such as USDA’s Rural
Development’s specialization in rural economic development and its
network of state and local area offices. Our report notes that most of
USDA’s 13 programs that can support entrepreneurs are limited to areas
with a rural statutory definition. We also include discussion based on our
outreach to participants in rural economic development, including regional
commissions and authorities, on their experiences with the four federal
agencies in rural economic development efforts. More importantly,
however, when considering the unique characteristics of the various
programs, we emphasize the need for agencies to conduct program
evaluations to assess effectiveness. While the Under Secretary suggests
that the rural focus and the network of state and local area offices
enhance program effectiveness, USDA has not conducted evaluations to
support this conclusion.
Second, USDA’s Under Secretary stated that our report highlights
examples where entrepreneurs may be eligible for multiple federal
programs based on an entrepreneur’s specific characteristics, but that the
report does not mention whether this was a pervasive or problematic
issue. He stated that rural entrepreneurs may be eligible for multiple
programs, and that a business’s unique situation dictates which programs
Page 33 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
best meets its needs. Again, our report emphasizes the need for
evaluations to determine the relative effectiveness of different programs
serving similar purposes. Third, regarding our findings related to the
information agencies collect on program activities, the Under Secretary
cited a number of tools that the Rural Business-Cooperative Service
(RBS) uses to identify and improve the effectiveness of its programs. As
noted in this report, we determined that USDA collected detailed
information on the industry of each of the entrepreneurs it supports for all
of its programs. In addition, we determined that USDA collected detailed
information (19 categories) on how entrepreneurs use proceeds provided
through 5 of its financial programs. However, we found that over the past
12 years USDA had conducted a program evaluation for only 1 of its 13
programs that can support entrepreneurs, including USDA programs that
RBS does not administer.
Finally, the Under Secretary stated that the recommendations in our
report are not explicit, which makes it unclear how RBS would effectively
address them. Our report does provide information on how agencies
could address our recommendations. First, we recommended that OMB,
Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA work together to identify opportunities
to enhance collaboration among programs, both within and across
agencies. Our report identifies several practices that can help agencies
and their offices enhance and sustain collaboration, which include
indentifying common outcomes, establishing joint strategies, leveraging
resources, determining roles and responsibilities, and developing
compatible policies and procedures, among others. Second, we
recommended that Commerce, HUD, USDA and SBA consistently collect
information that would enable them to track the specific type of assistance
provided and the entrepreneurs they serve and use this information to
help administer their programs. Our report identifies programs that
Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA administer for which the agencies did
and did not maintain information in a readily available format that could be
tracked to help administer the programs. Finally, we recommended that
Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA conduct more evaluations to better
understand why programs have not met performance goals and their
overall effectiveness. Our report acknowledges that program evaluations
can be costly; however, the report also notes that there are various
methods agencies can employ to make the evaluations more cost-
effective, such as relying on their own data instead of purchasing data
from a vendor.
Page 34 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional
committees and other interested parties. In addition, this report will be
available at no charge on the GAO website athttp://www.gao.gov. Should
you or your staff have any questions concerning this report, please
contact William B. Shear, at (202) 512-8678, or [email protected].
Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public
Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. Key contributors to
this report are listed in appendix IX.
William B. Shear
Director
Financial Markets
and Community Investments
Page 35 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
List of Congressional Committees
The Honorable Debbie Stabenow
Chair
The Honorable Pat Roberts
Ranking Member
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry
United States Senate
The Honorable Kent Conrad
Chairman
The Honorable Jeff Sessions
Ranking Member
Committee on the Budget
United States Senate
The Honorable Barbara Boxer
Chair
The Honorable James M. Inhofe
Ranking Member
Committee on Environment and Public Works
United States Senate
The Honorable Mary Landrieu
Chair
The Honorable Olympia J. Snowe
Ranking Member
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship
United States Senate
The Honorable Mark Warner
Chairman
Task Force on Government Performance
Committee on the Budget
United States Senate
The Honorable Paul Ryan
Chairman
The Honorable Chris Van Hollen
Ranking Member
Committee on the Budget
House of Representatives
Page 36 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
The Honorable Spencer Bachus
Chair
The Honorable Barney Frank
Ranking Member
Committee on Financial Services
House of Representatives
The Honorable Darrell E. Issa
Chair
The Honorable Elijah Cummings
Ranking Member
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
House of Representatives
The Honorable Sam Graves
Chair
The Honorable Nydia Velazquez
Ranking Member
Committee on Small Business
House of Representatives
The Honorable Timothy V. Johnson
Chairman
Subcommittee on Rural Development, Research,
Biotechnology, and Foreign Agriculture
Committee on Agriculture
House of Representatives
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope and
Methodology
Page 37 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
This report discusses (1) the extent of overlap, fragmentation, and
duplication and their effects on entrepreneurs, and agencies’ actions to
address them; and (2) the extent to which agencies collect information
necessary to track program activities and whether these programs have
met their performance goals and been evaluated.
To determine the extent of overlap and fragmentation among federal
programs that fund economic development activities, we focused our
analyses on 52 programs administered by the Departments of Agriculture
(USDA), Commerce, and Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and
the Small Business Administration (SBA) that are authorized to support
entrepreneurs. Based on past work, these programs appeared to overlap
the most within the four agencies with missions focused on economic
development. We reviewed the statutes and regulations that authorize the
activities that can be conducted under each program. We categorized the
types of activities into three categories: (1) technical assistance, (2)
financial assistance, and (3) government contracting assistance. Many of
the programs can provide more than one type of assistance, and most
focus on technical assistance, financial assistance, or both. To identify
the effects of overlap and fragmentation on entrepreneurs and agencies’
actions to address them, we focused on 35 of the 52 programs that
provide technical assistance because there was significant overlap and
fragmentation among these programs. We reviewed agency documents,
such as inter-agency agreements, and conducted interviews to determine
how technical assistance is provided to entrepreneurs, including the
extent of agency collaboration at the local level. More specifically, we
interviewed technical assistance providers, including 14 federal agency
officials from four federal agencies located in the field, nine officials from
two regional commissions, and 14 representatives of intermediaries (that
is, third-party technical assistance providers); four entrepreneurs who
have received assistance federal support; and five state and local
partners in three geographic areas. These geographic areas included
both urban and rural areas. We selected geographic areas based on, the
presence of an active regional commission and evidence of collaboration
among at least two of the four federal agencies being located within the
same region. We assessed this technical assistance information against
promising collaborative practices that we have previously identified.
1
1
GAO, Results-Oriented Government: Practices That Can Help Enhance and Sustain
Collaboration among Federal Agencies,
GAO-06-15 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 21, 2005).
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope and
Methodology
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope and
Methodology
Page 38 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
To determine the extent to which agencies collect information necessary
to track program activities, we reviewed agency manuals and data
collection forms that describe information collected on program activities
and methods for analyzing and using the information. Specifically, we
assessed each agency’s capacity to track specific types of
entrepreneurial assistance they provided to specific types of beneficiaries,
as well as their ability to report this information in a readily available
format at the program level. We compared these processes against
standards for internal controls we have previously identified to determine
how well agencies track the support they provide to entrepreneurs.
2
To describe results from program evaluations related to the effectiveness
of the 52 economic development programs that we reviewed, we
requested all studies that have been conducted on these programs from
the four agencies that administer the programs. Our document request
resulted in 19 studies. We refined the list of 19 studies by choosing to
focus on studies that were published in or after 2000. The resulting list of
program evaluations totaled 16. Because some evaluations studied more
than one program, these 16 evaluations covered 20 of the 52 programs in
our review. We reviewed the methodologies of these studies to ensure
that they were sound and determined that they were sufficiently reliable
for our purpose, which was to report high-level findings related to the
program’s overall effectiveness (see app. V). Other evaluations of these
programs may exist.
To
determine the extent to which these 52 economic development programs
have met their performance goals, we reviewed agency documents on
their fiscal year 2011 program goals and accomplishments. We also
interviewed agency officials to determine reasons why goals were not met
(see app. III).
To provide illustrative examples of each of the nine economic activities
related to economic development that we previously identified (see app. II),
we conducted a review of the literature that has been published in the past
2
GAO, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1
(Washington, D.C.: Nov. 1999).
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope and
Methodology
Page 39 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
5 years.
3
We also used these nine economic activities to identify additional federal
programs that may be able to fund at least one of the activities (these
programs are listed in app. IV). During previous reviews, we focused on
federal programs at Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA because these
agencies have missions focused on economic development. For this
report, we identified additional federal programs that could fund the nine
economic activities. While many of the agencies that administer these
additional programs do not have missions that focus on economic
development, their programs may be able to fund at least one of the nine
economic activities. We reviewed information on all programs contained
in the 2011 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) and
provided the list of programs to all of the administering agencies.
This review included publications from a variety of sources,
including academic journals and trade publications. These sources
contained examples of how these economic activities were being
conducted at the national, state, and local levels in the United States. The
list of examples we developed is not meant to be comprehensive but is
intended to provide a range of economic activities that could be funded by
federal programs.
4
This list
of additional federal programs may not be comprehensive because not all
agencies provide data to CFDA (see app. IV).
3
The nine economic activities are supporting entrepreneurial efforts, supporting business
incubators and accelerators, constructing and renovating commercial buildings,
constructing and renovating industrial parks and buildings, strategic planning and
research, marketing and access to new markets for products and industries, supporting
telecommunications and broadband infrastructure, supporting physical infrastructure, and
supporting tourism.
4
We have previously identified incomplete or inaccurate data in the CFDA, but we chose
to rely on it for our purposes in this report because it is the only source that contains
information on programs from many different federal agencies. We did not assess the data
reliability of the CFDA. OMB has compiled initial lists of agencies and programs that
contribute to crosscutting goals, as required by GPRAMA, on performance.gov, including
those related to the entrepreneurship and small business goal. However, OMB noted that
this was not meant to be comprehensive of all programs with any contribution to the
crosscutting goals, and that they are continuing to update these lists.
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope and
Methodology
Page 40 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
We conducted this performance audit from June 2011 to July 2012 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that
the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives.
Appendix II: Illustrative Examples of Economic
Activities
Page 41 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
In September 2000, we reported that there is no commonly accepted
definition for economic development.
1
Absent a common definition for
economic development, we subsequently developed a list of nine
activities most often associated with economic development.
2
In general,
we focused on economic activities that directly affected the overall
development of an area, such as job creation and economic growth,
rather than on activities that improved individuals’ quality of life, such as
housing and education. We previously relied on these economic activities
to identify 80 economic development programs administered by the U.S.
Departments of Agriculture (USDA), Commerce, and Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) and the Small Business Administration (SBA)
because these agencies have missions that focus on economic
development.
3
In this report, we identified illustrative examples of each of
the nine economic activities.
The following examples, which resulted from a review we conducted of
academic journals and trade publications, illustrate a range of activities
that could be supported by programs that can fund at least one of the
economic activities. Examples include projects that are both publicly and
privately funded, with many receiving funding from multiple sources in
both sectors. They also had an explicit or implicit economic development
goal, such as job creation or economic growth.
1. Supporting entrepreneurial efforts. This activity is the focus of this
report, with programs grouped according to at least one of three types
of assistance that address different entrepreneurial needs: help
obtaining (1) technical assistance, which includes business training
and counseling and research and development support; (2) financial
assistance, which includes grants, loans, and venture capital; and (3)
government contracts, which involves helping entrepreneurs qualify
for federal procurement opportunities. Illustrative examples of this
activity include the following initiatives:
1
GAO, Economic Development: Multiple Federal Programs Fund Similar Economic
Development Activities, GAO/RCED/GGD-00-220 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 29, 2000).
2
GAO, Rural Economic Development: More Assurance Is Needed That Grant Funding
Information Is Accurately Reported, GAO-06-294 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 24, 2006).
3
GAO-11-318SP, GAO-11-477R and GAO-12-342SP.
Appendix II: Illustrative Examples of
Economic Activities
Illustrative Examples of
Economic Activities
Appendix II: Illustrative Examples of Economic
Activities
Page 42 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
• Individuals in an Iowa community formed an association of
entrepreneurs to provide a broad range of services to
entrepreneurs, including technical assistance in the form of
mentor counseling, training sessions on various topics, and
hosting conferences.
• A California community provided both financial and technical
support to local small businesses in order to redevelop a business
district. Businesses received micro-grants—small grants of $5,000
each—and were also required to participate in free workshops
designed to give them additional tools and resources to succeed
in a challenging marketplace. These workshops were produced by
an SBA-funded Small Business Development Center.
• Iowa provided financial assistance to entrepreneurs through loan
guarantees and a publicly funded limited liability corporation that
could coordinate venture capital investments. The initiative was
designed to increase capital levels and stimulate the creation of
more local seed funds.
2. Supporting business incubators and accelerators. This activity can
include all of the elements of entrepreneurial efforts, but combines
these types of assistance with a facility that supports multiple
businesses and may provide shared access to office space,
technology, and other support services. Illustrative examples of this
activity include the following initiatives:
• A technology business incubator was established at a Florida
university so its faculty and service partners can provide business
opportunities to client companies. The facility has grown to
support a number of services to assist start-up businesses,
including office and laboratory space, educational programs, and
networking and mentoring opportunities with other experienced
entrepreneurs.
• An Ohio community created a business accelerator that is
designed to assist small, established companies, rather than
businesses in their infancy, in becoming financially viable and
creating jobs in the region. This facility includes office space,
access to technology, and a variety of support services. The
accelerator also collaborates with a center funded by SBA’s Small
Business Development Centers program and a local community
college, which provide coaching and mentoring sessions,
Appendix II: Illustrative Examples of Economic
Activities
Page 43 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
business plan reviews, workshops, training, referrals, and
assistance in obtaining capital.
• An economic development organization in Pennsylvania created a
network of business incubators and accelerators focused on
developing and commercializing technology to create high-paying,
sustainable jobs. The initiative supports early-stage and
established companies with funding, support services, and a
network of experts in related industries and academia.
3. Constructing and renovating commercial buildings. This activity can
include support for the construction and renovation of buildings
established for commercial purposes, such as for retail and office
space. Illustrative examples of this activity include the following
initiatives:
• A community in Iowa renovated a historic building that used to be
a store to attract a large technology firm’s service center. The
renovations were designed to meet the firm’s sustainability vision
and were financed by public and private sources.
• A community in Arizona renovated a high school to create a new
research laboratory. Further buildings were constructed in the
area around this project to create a biomedical campus for both
commercial and academic purposes.
• A community in Iowa renovated buildings in a historic millwork
district to create urban mixed-use developments, which are
designed to attract both commercial and residential activity.
4. Constructing and renovating industrial parks and buildings. This
activity can include support for the construction and renovation of
buildings and campuses established for industrial purposes, such as
for manufacturing. Illustrative examples of this activity include the
following initiatives:
• A public-private partnership in Nevada constructed an industrial
park with new access to a freeway and energy infrastructure. The
facility was zoned for heavy industry and designed to be away
from population centers.
• A community in Massachusetts administered the transition of a
former military base into a light industrial area focused on
Appendix II: Illustrative Examples of Economic
Activities
Page 44 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
sustainable development and attracted both small and large firms
to the redeveloped area.
• A public-private partnership in a North Carolina created several
multi-jurisdictional business parks intended to improve local
economies. These parks serve a number of industrial purposes,
including technology, manufacturing, distribution, and logistics.
Local governments obtained funding to conduct site evaluations
and certification through Commerce’s Economic Development
Administration and HUD’s Community Development Block Grant
program.
5. Strategic planning and research. This activity includes plans for
recruiting new businesses or industry clusters, economic research
and analyses, and regional coordination and planning across
jurisdictions and sectors. Illustrative examples of this activity include
the following initiatives:
• Local officials in a southeastern state formed a regional economic
development organization to better coordinate economic and
workforce development. The organization engages in marketing
and recruitment of businesses and fosters partnerships between
various public- and private-sector entities in the region.
• A California community developed a plan for a business district to
create jobs and produce savings for businesses. The plan defined
resources, timeframes, and types of assistance needed to execute
this strategy.
• A regional consortium operating in areas of two southern states
conducted research on their area’s economic strengths and
developed an action plan to leverage these strengths. Research
included the identification of industry clusters that could be well
suited to the area.
6. Marketing and access to new markets for products and industries.
This activity may include marketing of both new and existing products
and industries, facilitating access to new markets, and supporting new
uses for existing products. Illustrative examples of this activity include
the following initiatives:
• A publicly funded regional technology center in New York provides
a range of resources for local manufacturing and technology
Appendix II: Illustrative Examples of Economic
Activities
Page 45 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
companies, including assistance with developing sales and growth
strategies, conducting marketing activities for increased market
share and revenue in existing or new markets, and identifying new
customers and market niches.
• A regional economic development organization in North Carolina
formed an energy industry cluster that included a bio-energy
facility where businesses are colocated with a landfill. These
businesses are able to sell what were formerly waste products in
new markets, such as alternative fuels and wood pallets.
• Several southern and Midwestern states have leveraged federal
and state funds to assist rural businesses with e-commerce
strategies, including assistance reaching global markets and
strengthening competitive market advantages. Both USDA and
Commerce provided some funding for this initiative.
7. Supporting telecommunications and broadband infrastructure. This
activity may include building, refurbishing, and enhancing
infrastructure used to expand access and improve the speed and
reliability of Internet access, wireless phone services, and other
electronic communication methods. Illustrative examples of this
activity include the following initiatives:
• A public-private partnership in a city in Ohio provides businesses
and residents with an underground conduit network that supports
multiple fiber-based systems for voice, data, and video
communications, intended to provide high-speed access to the
global marketplace.
• A multi-state rural regional development organization in the
southwestern United States coordinated the construction of a
broadband Internet network that was intended to generate new
opportunities for economic development. The initiative was funded
by both private and public investments and covered a large
geographic area.
• Regional leaders collaborated with a state commission to expand
broadband infrastructure to businesses, schools, and industrial
parks in a Virginia city. The high-speed network is noted to be
comparable to or faster than that of any other metropolitan area of
the country, is available at a relatively low cost, and is intended to
attract businesses to the area.
Appendix II: Illustrative Examples of Economic
Activities
Page 46 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
8. Supporting physical infrastructure. This activity includes constructing
and repairing infrastructure related to (1) transportation, such as
roads, airports and rail; (2) water and sewer; (3) energy; and (4) other
amenities, such as pedestrian areas, parking, and beautification
projects. Illustrative examples of this activity include the following
initiatives:
• A community in New York is planning to renovate a business district
by creating new rail service, a pedestrian mall, and green space.
• A community in Ohio renovated their underdeveloped downtown
area by constructing better roads and pedestrian space, improving
green space, and moving power lines underground. The project
was part of a plan to reduce blight and make the area more
accessible for visitors.
• A community in North Carolina renovated a vacant textile
manufacturing space and downtown area to create a scientific
research campus, facilitating this work through water line
replacements, the addition of a pedestrian tunnel, and road
improvements.
9. Supporting tourism. This activity includes marketing, infrastructure
improvement, planning, and research specifically related to
developing and improving tourism, as well as supporting special
events and festivals to attract visitors. Illustrative examples of this
activity include the following initiatives:
• A community in Kentucky improved trails in natural areas to attract
tourists for horseback riding and other recreational uses. In addition
to trail improvements, the community utilized survey research,
marketing, and special events to draw visitors to the area.
• A community in North Carolina entered into public-private
partnerships to construct a cluster of tourist venues that included
sports and arts museums, an arena, convention center, and
performing arts venues. The community utilized a strategic plan
for development and a branded name to market the area.
• A county in Mississippi partnered with other regional entities to
market their gaming industry and other amenities as part of a
broader regional campaign. This new partnership promoted
region-wide tourism and focused on key markets that the area
may draw visitors from.
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52 Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 47 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011 Actual
Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
Department of
Commerce
(Commerce) –
Economic
Development
Administration
(EDA)
c
Grants for Public Works and
Economic Development Facilities
Supports the construction or
rehabilitation of essential public
infrastructure and facilities necessary
to support job creation, attract
private-sector capital, and promote
regional competitiveness, innovation,
and entrepreneurship, including
investments that expand and
upgrade infrastructure to attract new
industry, support technology-led
development, accelerate new
business development, and enhance
the ability of regions to capitalize on
opportunities presented by free trade.
$114,529,000 Private investment
leveraged (3, 6, and 9
years after award)
Private investment
leveraged–9 year
totals (in millions):
$1,940
Private investment
leveraged–6 year
totals (in millions):
$674
Private investment
leveraged–3 year
totals (in millions):
$244.6
Private investment
leveraged–9 year totals
(in millions): $3,960
Private investment
leveraged–6 year totals
(in millions): $1,617
Private investment
leveraged–3 year totals
(in millions): $1,475
Yes Partial
Commerce
EDA
Grants for Public Works and
Economic Development Facilities
Total jobs created/retained
(3, 6, and 9 years after
award)
Jobs created/retained
–9 year totals: 57,800
Jobs created/retained
–6 year totals: 18,193
Jobs created/retained
–3 year totals: 6,256
Jobs created/retained–9
year totals: 56,058 Jobs
created/retained–6 year
totals: 26,416 Jobs
created/retained–3 year
totals: 14,842
Partial
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments
for 52 Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal
Year 2011
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 48 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
Commerce
EDA
Economic Adjustment Assistance
Supports economically distressed
communities in their ability to compete
economically by stimulating private
investment and promoting job creation in
targeted areas. Current investment
priorities include proposals that foster
innovation and enhance regions’ global
economic competitiveness by supporting
existing industry clusters, developing
emerging new clusters, or attracting new
regional economic drivers.
$78,720,000 Private investment
leveraged (3, 6, and 9
years after award)
Private investment
leveraged–9 year totals
(in millions): $1,940
Private investment
leveraged–6 year totals
(in millions): $674
Private investment
leveraged–3 year totals
(in millions): $244.6
Private investment
leveraged–9 year totals
(in millions): $3,960
Private investment
leveraged–6 year totals
(in millions): $1,617
Private investment
leveraged–3 year totals
(in millions): $1,475
Yes Partial
Commerce
EDA
Economic Adjustment Assistance Total jobs created/retained
(3, 6, and 9 years after
award)
Jobs created/retained–
9 year totals: 57,800
Jobs created/retained–
6 year totals: 18,193
Jobs created/retained–
3 year totals: 6,256
Jobs created/retained–
9 year totals: 56,058
Jobs created/retained–
6 year totals: 26,416
Jobs created/retained–
3 year totals: 14,842
Partial
Commerce
EDA
Global Climate Change Mitigation
Incentive Fund
Supports economic development
projects that create jobs through, and
increase private capital investment in,
efforts to limit the nation’s dependence
on fossil fuels, enhance energy
efficiency, curb greenhouse gas
emissions, and protect natural systems.
The program helps to cultivate
innovations that can fuel “green growth”
in communities suffering from economic
distress.
$17,466,000 Private investment
leveraged (3, 6, and 9
years after award)
Private investment
leveraged–9 year totals
(in millions): $1,940
Private investment
leveraged–6 year totals
(in millions): $674
Private investment
leveraged–3 year totals
(in millions): $244.6
Private investment
leveraged–9 year totals
(in millions): $3,960
Private investment
leveraged–6 year totals
(in millions): $1,617
Private investment
leveraged–3 year totals
(in millions): $1,475
Yes Partial
Commerce
EDA
Global Climate Change Mitigation
Incentive Fund
Total jobs created/retained
(3, 6, and 9 years after
award)
Jobs created/retained–
9 year totals: 57,800
Jobs created/retained–
6 year totals: 18,193
Jobs created/retained–
3 year totals: 6,256
Jobs created/ retained–
9 year totals: 56,058
Jobs created/ retained–
6 year totals: 26,416
Jobs created/ retained–
3 year totals: 14,842
Partial
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 49 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
Commerce
EDA
Economic Development/Technical
Assistance
Provides focused assistance to public
and nonprofit leaders to help in
economic development decision making
(e.g., project planning, impact analyses,
feasibility studies). The program also
supports the University Center Economic
Development Program, which makes the
resources of universities available to the
economic development community.
$13,373,000 Percentage of University
Center clients taking action
as a result of the
assistance facilitated
75% 68% No Partial
Commerce
EDA
Economic Development/Technical
Assistance
Percentage of those
actions taken by University
Center clients that
achieved expected results
80% 83% Yes
Commerce
EDA
Economic Development/Support for
Planning Organizations
Provides planning assistance to provide
support to Planning Organizations (as
defined in 13 CFR 303.2) for the
development, implementation, revision,
or replacement of a Comprehensive
Economic Development Strategy, short-
term planning efforts, and state plans
designed to create and retain higher-
skill, higher-wage jobs, particularly for
the unemployed and underemployed in
the nation’s most economically
distressed regions.
$31,352,000 Percentage of economic
development districts and
Indian tribes implementing
economic development
projects from the
comprehensive economic
development strategy that
lead to private investment
and jobs
95% 86% No No
Commerce
EDA
Economic Development/Support for
Planning Organizations
Percentage of substate
jurisdiction members
actively participating in the
economic development
district program
89% 85% No
Commerce
EDA
Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) for
Firms
The program helps economically
distressed U.S. businesses in building
competitiveness strategies to increase
$15,418,000 Percentage of TAA Center
clients taking action as a
result of the assistance
facilitated
90% 73% No Partial
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 50 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
exports and thereby create jobs. The
program provides technical assistance to
U.S. businesses that have lost sales and
employment due to increased imports of
similar or competitive goods and
services. Technical assistance is
provided through a nationwide network
of eleven Economic Development
Administration-funded Trade Adjustment
Assistance Centers.
Commerce
EDA
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms Percentage of actions
taken by TAA Center
clients that achieved
expected results
95% 100% Yes
Commerce –
Minority
Business
Development
Agency
(MDBA)
Native American Business Enterprise
Centers (NABEC)
d
The program promotes the growth and
competitiveness of businesses owned by
Native Americans and eligible minorities.
NABEC operators leverage project staff
and professional consultants to provide
a wide range of direct business
assistance services to Native American
tribal entities and eligible minority-owned
firms. NABEC services include, but are
not limited to, initial consultations and
assessments, business technical
assistance, and access to federal and
nonfederal procurement and financing
opportunities.
$0 Dollar value of contract
awards obtained
$1.1 billion $2.1 billion Yes Yes
Commerce
MBDA
Native American Business Enterprise
Centers
Dollar value of financial
awards obtained
$0.9 billion $1.8 billion Yes
Commerce
MBDA
Native American Business Enterprise
Centers
Number of jobs created 5,000 5,787 Yes
Commerce
MBDA
Minority Business Center (MBC)
The program promotes the growth and
competitiveness of eligible minority-
owned businesses. MBC operators
leverage project staff and professional
$17,948,122 Dollar value of contract
awards obtained
$1.1 billion $2.1 billion Yes Yes
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 51 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
consultants to provide a wide range of
direct business assistance services to
eligible minority-owned firms. Services
include initial consultations and
assessments, business technical
assistance, and access to federal and
nonfederal procurement and financing
opportunities. MBDA currently funds a
network of 30 MBC projects located
throughout the United States.
Commerce
MBDA
Minority Business Center Dollar value of financial
awards obtained
$0.9 billion $1.8 billion Yes
Commerce
MBDA
Minority Business Center Number of jobs created 5,000 5,787 Yes
Department of
Housing and
Urban
Development
(HUD)
Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG)/Insular Areas
HUD annually allocates $7 million of
CDBG funds to the Insular Areas
program in proportion to the populations
of the eligible territories. The program is
administered by HUD’s field offices in
Puerto Rico and Hawaii. The CDBG
programs allocate annual grants to
develop viable communities by providing
decent housing, a suitable living
environment, and opportunities to
expand economic opportunities,
principally for low- and moderate-income
persons.
$ 214,396
e
Jobs created and retained None 15,549 N/A N/A
HUD CDBG/Insular Areas Businesses assisted None 24,331 N/A
HUD CDBG/Entitlement Grants
The CDBG program works to ensure
decent affordable housing, to provide
services to the most vulnerable in our
communities, and to create jobs through
the expansion and retention of
businesses. The CDBG entitlement
program allocates annual grants to
larger cities and urban counties to
$325,549,306
f
Jobs created and retained None 15,549 N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 52 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
develop viable communities by providing
decent housing, a suitable living
environment, and opportunities to
expand economic opportunities,
principally for low- and moderate-income
persons.
HUD CDBG/Entitlement Grants Businesses assisted None 24,331 N/A
HUD CDBG/States
The primary statutory objective of the
CDBG States program is to develop
viable communities by providing decent
housing, a suitable living environment,
and opportunities to expand economic
opportunities, principally for low- and
moderate-income persons. The state
must ensure that at least 70 percent of
its CDBG grant funds are used for
activities that benefit low- and moderate-
income persons over a 1-, 2-, or 3-year
time period selected by the state.
$559,961,961
g
Jobs created and retained None 15,549 N/A N/A
HUD CDBG/States Businesses assisted None 24,331 N/A
HUD CDBG/Non-entitlement CDBG Grants in
Hawaii
HUD continues to administer the program
for the non-entitlement counties in the
state of Hawaii because the state has
permanently elected not to participate in
the State CDBG program. The CDBG
programs allocate annual grants to
develop viable communities by providing
decent housing, a suitable living
environment, and opportunities to expand
economic opportunities, principally for
low- and moderate-income persons.
$338,257
h
Jobs created and retained None 15,549 N/A N/A
HUD CDBG/Non-entitlement CDBG Grants in
Hawaii
Businesses assisted None 24,331 N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 53 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
HUD CDBG/Section 108 Loan Guarantees
Section 108 is the loan guarantee
provision of the CDBG program. Section
108 provides communities with a source
of financing for economic development,
housing rehabilitation, public facilities,
and large-scale physical development
projects. It allows them to transform a
small portion of their CDBG funds into
federally guaranteed loans large enough
to pursue physical and economic
revitalization projects that can renew
entire neighborhoods.
$6,000,000 Jobs proposed to be
created or retained
None 7,306 N/A N/A
HUD CDBG/Brownfields Economic
Development Initiative (BEDI)
The purpose of the BEDI program is to
spur the return of brownfields to
productive economic use through
financial assistance to public entities in
the redevelopment of brownfields and
enhance the security or improve the
viability of a project financed with
Section 108-guaranteed loan authority.
$0
Jobs proposed to be
created or retained
3,157 2,409 No No
HUD CDBG Disaster Recovery Grants
i
Grantees may use CDBG Disaster
Recovery funds for recovery efforts
involving housing, economic
development, infrastructure, and
prevention of further damage to affected
areas, if such use does not duplicate
funding available from the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, the
Small Business Administration, and the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The
mission and goals of the CDBG Disaster
Recovery Grants program may be
expanded or limited per the individual
appropriation that it receives each year.
$0 Businesses assisted None N/A N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 54 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
HUD CDBG Disaster Recovery Grants Permanent jobs created
(tracked by low income,
moderate income and total)
None N/A N/A
HUD CDBG Disaster Recovery Grants Permanent jobs retained
(tracked by low income,
moderate income and total)
None N/A N/A
HUD CDBG Disaster Recovery Grants Number of buildings
(nonresidential) assisted
None N/A N/A
HUD Section 4 Capacity Building for Affordable
Housing and Community Development
Through funding of national intermediaries,
the Section 4 Capacity Building program
enhances the capacity and ability of
community development corporations and
community housing development
organizations to carry out community
development and affordable housing
activities and to attract private investment
for housing, economic development, and
other community revitalization activities
that benefit low-income families.
$50,000,000 Number of trainings
created and provided to
Community Development
Corporations (CDC)
794 Not reported Unknown Unknown
HUD Section 4 Capacity Building for
Affordable Housing and Community
Development
Development cost
estimates of community
development projects
funded by CDCs
$988 million Not reported Unknown
HUD Section 4 Capacity Building for
Affordable Housing and Community
Development
Number of homes
renovated, preserved or
newly constructed
6,060 Not reported Unknown
HUD Section 4 Capacity Building for
Affordable Housing and Community
Development
Efficiency measure of per-
unit cost of capacity
building for housing units
developed or renovated
None
N/A N/A
HUD Rural Innovation Fund
j
The Rural Innovation Fund program was
established to improve the quality of life
for residents of distressed rural areas by
supporting innovative and catalytic
economic development and housing
$0
k
Number of full-time and
part-time jobs created
None N/A N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 55 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
programs. The program is designed to
support
(1) job creation through business
development and expansion,
(2) investment in human capital through
job training and education; and
(3) expanding the supply of affordable
housing with access to job centers or
transportation.
Rural Innovation Fund grantees are
selected through a competitive process.
HUD Rural Innovation Fund Number of persons
receiving job training
None N/A N/A
HUD Rural Innovation Fund Number of new businesses
opened
None N/A N/A
HUD Rural Innovation Fund Number of affordable
housing units constructed
None N/A N/A
HUD Rural Innovation Fund Number of residents
receiving homeownership
counseling
None N/A N/A
HUD Hispanic-Serving Institutions Assisting
Communities
The Hispanic-Serving Institutions
Assisting Communities program helps
Hispanic-Serving Institutions expand
their role and effectiveness in
addressing community development
needs in their localities, including
revitalization, housing, and economic
development, principally for persons of
low and moderate income. Accredited
Hispanic-Serving Institutions of higher
education that provide 2- and 4-year
degrees are eligible to participate in this
program. For an institution to qualify as a
Hispanic-Serving Institution, at least 25
percent of the undergraduate enrollment
must be Hispanic students.
$0 None N/A N/A N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 56 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
HUD Alaska Native/Native Hawaiian
Institutions Assisting Communities
The Alaska Native/Native Hawaiian
Institutions program helps these
institutions expand their role and
effectiveness in addressing community
development needs in their localities,
including revitalization, housing, and
economic development, principally for
persons of low and moderate income.
The program encourages colleges and
universities to integrate community
engagement themes into their
curriculum, academic studies, and
student activities.
$0 None N/A N/A N/A N/A
HUD Indian CDBG
The purpose of the Indian CDBG
program is the development of viable
Indian and Alaska Native communities,
including the creation of decent housing,
suitable living environments, and
economic opportunities primarily for
persons with low and moderate incomes
as defined in 24 CFR 1003.4. Funds
may be used to improve housing stock,
provide community facilities, improve
infrastructure, and expand job
opportunities by supporting the
economic development of the
communities in some instances.
$64,000,000 Jobs created 24 0 No No
HUD Indian CDBG Rehabilitated housing units 701 409 No
HUD Indian CDBG Constructed community
buildings
49 30 No
HUD Indian CDBG Average cost per
community building
None N/A N/A
HUD Indian CDBG Average amount of Indian
CDBG dollars spent per
housing unit rehabilitated
None N/A N/A
Small 7(a) Loan Program $88,000,000 Loan dollars approved $12.8 billion $19.7 billion Yes Yes
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 57 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
Business
Administration
(SBA)
The 7(a) Loan Program is SBA’s primary
program for helping start-up and existing
small businesses, with financing
guaranteed for a variety of general
business purposes. 7(a) loans are the
most basic and most commonly used type
of loans. They are also the most flexible,
since financing can be guaranteed for a
variety of general business purposes,
including working capital, machinery and
equipment, furniture and fixtures, land and
building (including purchase, renovation
and new construction), leasehold
improvements, and debt refinancing
(under special conditions).
SBA 7(a) Loan Program Small businesses assisted 40,700 46,749 Yes
SBA 7(a) Loan Program Jobs supported 474,100 582,707 Yes
SBA 7(a) Loan Program Active lending partners
l
3,000 3,537 Yes
SBA 7(a) Loan Program Underserved markets–
small businesses assisted
24,800 28,389 Yes
SBA 7(a) Loan Program Cost per small business
assisted
None $1,882 N/A
SBA 504 Loan Program
The 504 Loan Program provides growing
businesses with long-term, fixed-rate
financing for major fixed assets, such as
land and buildings. A typical 504 project
includes a loan secured from a private-
sector lender with a senior lien covering
up to 50 percent of the project cost, a
loan secured from a Certified
Development Company (backed by a
100 percent SBA-guaranteed debenture)
with a junior lien covering up to 40
percent of the total cost, and a
contribution from the borrower of at least
10 percent equity.
$38,888,000 Loan dollars approved $4.8 billion $4.8 billion Yes Partial
SBA 504 Loan Program Small businesses assisted 8,100 7,752 No
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 58 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
SBA 504 Loan Program Jobs supported 88,800 87,337 No
SBA 504 Loan Program Underserved market –
small businesses assisted
4,800 4,548 No
SBA 504 Loan Program Active lending partners 267 249 No
SBA 504 Loan Program Cost per small business
assisted
None $5,017 N/A
SBA Microloan Program
SBA’s Microloan Program provides small
businesses with small, short-term loans
for working capital or the purchase of
inventory, supplies, furniture, fixtures,
machinery or equipment. SBA makes
funds available to specially designated
intermediary lenders, which are nonprofit
organizations with experience in lending
and technical assistance. These
intermediaries then make loans to
eligible borrowers in amounts up to a
maximum of $50,000.
$38,729,000 Small businesses assisted 4,600 3,999 No Partial
SBA Microloan Program Jobs supported 14,500 13,271 No
SBA Microloan Program Loans approved by
microlenders
$65 million $47 million No
SBA Microloan Program Businesses Counseled 6,500 15,900 Yes
SBA Microloan Program Underserved markets–
small businesses assisted
4,600 3,999 No
SBA Microloan Program Active lending partners 126 121 No
SBA Microloan Program Cost per small business
assisted
None $9,685 N/A
SBA Surety Bond Guarantee Program
SBA provides and manages surety bond
guarantees for qualified small and
emerging businesses through the Surety
Bond Guarantee Program. Participating
sureties receive guarantees that SBA
will assume a predetermined percentage
of loss in the event the contractor should
breach the terms of the contract.
$4,865,000 Contract value of bid and
final bonds
$3.3 billion $3.7 billion Yes Yes
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 59 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
SBA Surety Bond Guarantee Program Bid and final bonds
guaranteed
7,600 8,638 Yes
SBA Surety Bond Guarantee Program Jobs supported 6,400 17,421 Yes
SBA Surety Bond Guarantee Program Cost per job supported None $279 N/A
SBA Program for Investment in Micro-
Entrepreneurs (PRIME)
PRIME provides assistance to various
organizations. These organizations help
low-income entrepreneurs who lack
sufficient training and education to gain
access to capital to establish and
expand their small businesses.
$8,863,000 None None N/A N/A N/A
SBA Small Business Development Centers
(SBDC)
SBDCs assist clients in gaining access to
SBA loan programs and private capital to
start up and expand their businesses.
SBDC services are available to all small
business populations. There are
specialized programs for minorities,
women, international trade, technology,
energy efficiency, veterans, people with
disabilities, and 8(a) firms in all stages, as
well as individuals in low- and moderate-
income urban and rural areas. The
ultimate objective of the SBDC program is
to support, strengthen, sustain, and grow
local economies and business entities
$130,323,000 Long-term counseling
clients
61,000 62, 117 Yes Partial
SBA Small Business Development Centers Small businesses created 12,500 13,664 Yes
SBA Small Business Development Centers Jobs supported None N/A N/A
SBA Small Business Development Centers Capital infusions $3.7 billion $3.6 billion No
SBA Small Business Development Centers Cost per job supported None N/A N/A
SBA Small Business Development Centers Cost per small business
created
None $9,538 N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 60 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
SBA Women’s Business Centers (WBC)
WBCs provide long-term training as well
as counseling and mentoring services.
By statute, WBCs fill a gap by focusing
on women who are socially and
economically disadvantaged. WBCs
offer classes during regular working
hours as well as during the evenings and
weekends to serve clients who work
during the day. The WBCs often provide
counseling in multiple languages.
$19,446,000 Small businesses assisted 135,000 138,923 Yes Yes
SBA Women’s Business Centers Small businesses created 618 701 Yes
SBA Women’s Business Centers Cost per small business
assisted
None $140 N/A
SBA SCORE
SCORE is a nonprofit association
comprised of more than 13,000
volunteer business professionals in more
than 350 chapters and on-line
nationwide, dedicated to educating and
assisting entrepreneurs and small
business owners in the formation,
growth, and expansion of their small
businesses through mentoring, business
advising and training.
$12,980,000 Small businesses assisted 349,867 356,837 Yes Partial
SBA SCORE Small businesses created 1,082 816 No
SBA SCORE Cost per small business
assisted
None $36.38 N/A
SBA Veterans Business Outreach Centers
The Veterans Business Outreach
program is designed to provide
entrepreneurial development services
such as business training, counseling
and mentoring, and referrals for eligible
veterans owning or considering starting
a small business.
$8,995,000 Veterans assisted 100,000 137,011 Yes Yes
SBA Veteran’s Business Outreach Centers Customer satisfaction 91% 91% Yes
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 61 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
SBA Veteran’s Business Outreach Centers Cost per veteran assisted None $65.65 N/A
SBA 7(j) Technical Assistance
The 7(j) program provides qualifying
businesses with counseling and training
in the areas of financing, business
development, management, accounting,
bookkeeping, marketing, and other small
business operating concerns.
$6,502,000 Small businesses assisted 3,550 3,550 Yes Yes
SBA 7(j) Technical Assistance Cost per small business
assisted
None $1,832 N/A
SBA 8(a) Business Development Program
The 8(a) Business Development
program provides various forms of
assistance (management and technical
assistance, government contracting
assistance, and advocacy support) to
foster the growth and development of
businesses owned and controlled by
socially and economically disadvantaged
individuals. SBA assists these
businesses, during their nine year tenure
in the 8(a) Business Development
program, in gaining equal access to the
resources necessary to develop their
businesses and improve their ability to
compete.
$58,274,000 Small businesses assisted 9,457 7,814 No No
SBA 8(a) Business Development Program Cost per small business
assisted
None $7,458 N/A
SBA 8(a) Business Development Program Contracts to small
disadvantaged businesses,
which includes 8(a)
program participants (%)
5% Not reported Unknown
SBA Historically Underutilized Business Zones
(HUBZone)
The HUBZone program helps small
businesses located in both urban and
rural communities gain preferential
access to federal procurement
opportunities. These preferences go to
$15,569,000 Small businesses assisted 4,000 5,801 Yes Partial
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 62 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
small businesses that obtain HUBZone
certification in part by employing staff who
live in a HUBZone. The company must
also maintain a “principal office” in one of
these specially designated areas.
SBA HUBZone Annual value of federal
contracts
$12 billion $9.9 billion No
SBA HUBZone Cost per small businesses
assisted
None $2,684 N/A
SBA HUBZone Cost per federal contract
dollar
None $.0015 N/A
SBA HUBZone Contracts to HUBZone
firms
3% 2.3% No
SBA Procurement Assistance to Small
Businesses
The program assists small businesses in
obtaining federal government contracts
and subcontracts.
$21,171,000 Percent of federal prime
and subcontracting dollars
awarded to small
businesses
For prime contracting,
statutory goal is 23%;
for subcontracting,
there is no statutory
goal, but SBA has set a
goal of 35.9%.
21.65% No No
SBA Small Business Innovation Research
Program (SBIR)
The SBIR program encourages small
businesses to explore their technological
potential and provides the incentive to
profit from its commercialization. Each
year, 11 federal departments and
agencies are required by SBIR to
reserve a portion of their research and
development funds for awards to small
businesses. SBA is the coordinating
agency for the SBIR program. It directs
the agencies’ implementation of SBIR,
reviews their progress, and reports
annually to Congress on the program’s
operation.
$781,000 Commercialization /
Innovation
• Number of companies
• Number of Phase II
awards
• Aggregate amount of
SBIR award monies
awarded to cohort
• Aggregate sales/
revenue from cohort
• Aggregate additional
investment in cohort
• Number of exits –
Initial Public Offerings
or Merger and
Acquisition activity
• Value of exits, in
dollars
None N/A N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 63 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
• Number of employees
employed by awardees
• Percent of awards that
brought products to
market (Note: Multiple
awards may lead to
only one product, but
all awards should be
given credit)
SBA SBIR Women and Minorities
• Percentage of
awardees that are
minority owned
• Percentage of
awardees that are
women owned
• Percentage of
awardees that are
HUBZone
• Percentage of
applicants that are
minority owned that
received an award
• Percentage of
applicants that are
women owned that
received an award
None N/A N/A
SBA SBIR Efficiency and
Effectiveness
• Time between close of
solicitation and
selection
• Time between
selection and cash
awarded
• Total sum of time
between close of
solicitation and cash
awarded
None N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 64 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
SBA SBIR Repeat-award winners
• Percentage of first-
time Phase II
awardees per year per
agency
• Percent age of first-
time Phase I awardees
per year per agency
None N/A N/A
SBA Small Business Technology Transfer
Program (STTR)
The STTR program encourages small
businesses to explore their technological
potential and provides the incentive to
profit from its commercialization. Each
year, five federal agencies are required
to reserve a portion of their research and
development funds for awards to small
businesses. SBA is the coordinating
agency for the STTR program. It directs
the agencies’ implementation of STTR,
reviews their progress, and reports
annually to Congress on its operation.
STTR requires cooperation with a
university or approved research
institution.
$352,000 Commercialization /
Innovation
• Number of companies
• Number of Phase II
awards
• Aggregate amount of
SBIR award monies
awarded to cohort
• Aggregate
sales/revenue from
cohort
• Aggregate additional
investment in cohort
• Number of exits –
Initial Public Offerings
or Merger and
Acquisition activity
• Value of exits, in
dollars
• Number of employees
employed by
awardees
• Percent of awards that
brought products to
market (Note: Multiple
awards may lead to
only one product, but
all awards should be
given credit)
None N/A N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 65 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
SBA STTR Women and Minorities
• Percentage of
awardees that are
minority owned
• Percentage of
awardees that are
women owned
• Percentage of
awardees that are
HUBZone
• Percentage of
applicants that are
minority owned that
received an award
• Percentage of
applicants that are
women owned that
received an award
None N/A N/A
SBA STTR Efficiency and
Effectiveness
• Time between close of
solicitation and
selection
• Time between
selection and cash
awarded
• Total sum of time
between close of
solicitation and cash
awarded
None N/A N/A
SBA STTR Repeat-award winners
• Percentage of first-
time Phase II
awardees per year per
agency
• Percentage of first-
time Phase I awardees
per year per agency
None N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 66 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
SBA Small Business Investment Company
(SBIC) Program
The SBIC program aims to increase the
availability of venture capital to small
businesses. SBICs are privately owned
and managed investment funds, licensed
and regulated by SBA, that use their own
capital plus funds borrowed with an SBA
guarantee to make equity and debt
investments in qualifying small
businesses.
$26,305,000 Small business assisted 1,150 1,339 Yes Yes
SBA SBIC Underserved markets–
small businesses assisted
345 430 Yes
SBA SBIC Amount of debenture
leveraged committed to
SBIC
$2.6 million $2.8 million Yes
SBA SBIC Cost per small business
assisted
None $19,645 N/A
SBA New Markets Venture Capital (NMVC)
Program
The purpose of the NMVC program is to
promote economic development and the
creation of wealth and job opportunities in
low-income geographic areas and among
individuals living in such areas through
developmental venture capital
investments in smaller enterprises
located in such areas. Through public-
private partnerships between SBA and
businesses, the program is designed to
serve the unmet equity needs of local
entrepreneurs through developmental
venture capital investments, provide
technical assistance to small businesses,
create quality employment opportunities
for low-income area residents, and build
wealth within low-income areas.
$0
m
Eligible small businesses
assisted
None N/A N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 67 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
SBA Federal and State Technology
Partnership (FAST) Program
The purpose of the FAST program is to
strengthen the technological
competitiveness of small business
concerns in the U.S. by improving the
participation of small technology firms in
the innovation and commercialization of
new technology.
$1,885,096 Eligible small businesses
assisted
None N/A N/A N/A
SBA FAST Outreach events held None N/A N/A
SBA International Trade
The International Trade program helps
small business exporters by providing
loans for a number of activities
specifically designed to help them
develop or expand their export activities.
$7,681,000 Loans approved $400 million $924 million Yes Yes
SBA International Trade Small and medium sized
exporters assisted
990 1,346 Yes
SBA International Trade Lenders counseled/trained 4,000 6,790 Yes
SBA International Trade Cost per small and medium
sized exporter assisted
None $5,707 N/A
U.S.
Department of
Agriculture
(USDA)
Intermediary Relending Program
The purpose of the program is to alleviate
poverty and increase economic activity
and employment in rural communities.
Under the program, loans are provided to
local organizations (intermediaries) for the
establishment of revolving loan funds.
These revolving loan funds are used to
assist with financing business and
economic development activity to create
or retain jobs in disadvantaged and
remote communities.
$7,364,000 Jobs created and saved 14,600 14,601 Yes Yes
USDA Rural Business Enterprise Grants
Program
The program provides grants for rural
projects that finance and facilitate
development of small and emerging rural
$ 38,586,000 Jobs created or saved 14,330 13,265 No No
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 68 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
businesses, help fund business
incubators, and help fund employment-
related adult education programs. To
assist with business development, the
program may fund a broad array of
activities.
USDA Rural Business Opportunity Grant
Program
The program promotes sustainable
economic development in rural
communities with exceptional needs
through provision of training and technical
assistance for business development,
entrepreneurs, and economic
development officials and to assist with
economic development planning.
$2,581,000 Businesses assisted 950 586 No No
USDA Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance
Program
The purpose of the program is to support
the development and ongoing success of
rural microentrepreneurs and
microenterprises. Direct loans and grants
are made to selected microenterprise
development organizations.
$6,668,000 Jobs created or saved 580 1240 Yes Yes
USDA Rural Cooperative Development Grants
The primary objective of this grant
program is to improve the economic
condition of rural areas through the
creation or retention of jobs and
development of new rural cooperatives,
value-added processing, and other rural
businesses. Grant funds are provided for
the establishment and operation of
centers that have the expertise or that
can contract out for the expertise to
assist individuals or entities in the start-
up, expansion, or operational
improvement of rural businesses,
especially cooperative or mutually
owned businesses.
$8,424,000 Businesses assisted 326 324 No No
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 69 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
USDA Business and Industry Guaranteed
Loans
The purpose of the program is to
improve, develop, or finance business,
industry, and employment and improve
the economic and environmental climate
in rural communities. This purpose is
achieved by bolstering the existing
private credit structure through the
guarantee of quality loans.
$70,202,000 Jobs created or saved 11,705 27,806 Yes Yes
USDA Value Added Producer Grants
The purpose of this program is to assist
eligible independent agricultural
commodity producers, agriculture
producer groups, farmer and rancher
cooperatives, and majority-controlled
producer-based businesses in
developing strategies and business
plans to further refine or enhance their
products, thereby increasing their value
to end users and increasing returns to
producers.
$1,318,000 Businesses assisted 151 0 No No
USDA Small Socially-Disadvantaged Producer
Grants
The primary objective of the program is
to provide technical assistance to small,
socially disadvantaged agricultural
producers through eligible cooperatives
and associations of cooperatives. Grants
are awarded on a competitive basis.
$2,940,000 None None N/A N/A N/A
USDA 1890 Land Grant Institutions Rural
Entrepreneurial Outreach Program/Rural
Business Entrepreneur Development
Initiative
n
The purposes of this program are to
encourage 1890 Institutions to provide
technical assistance for business
creation in economically challenged rural
communities, to conduct educational
programs that develop and improve
$0 None None N/A N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 70 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
upon the professional skills of rural
entrepreneurs, and to provide outreach
and promote USDA Rural Development
programs in small rural communities with
the greatest economic need.
USDA Agriculture Innovation Center
Award grants to centers around the
country to provide technical and
business development assistance to
agricultural producers seeking to enter
into ventures that add value to
commodities or products they produce.
$0 None N/A N/A N/A N/A
USDA Small Business Innovation Research
This program aims to stimulate
technological innovation in the private
sector; strengthen the role of small
businesses in meeting federal research
and development needs; increase
private-sector commercialization of
innovations derived from USDA-
supported research and development
efforts; and foster and encourage
participation by women-owned and
socially disadvantaged small business
firms in technological innovation.
$22,635,200 Percentage of Phase 2
businesses that have
achieved commercial
success, as a result of
increased sales
50% Data collection ongoing
because performance
data are collected over
a 2-year time period.
Not
available
Not
available
USDA Biomass Research and Development
Initiative Competitive Grants Program
This program awards grants to support
the research and development and
demonstration of biofuels and biobased
products. It is a joint effort between
USDA and the U.S. Department of
Energy.
$2,075,000 Number of technologies
successfully deployed
None N/A N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 71 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
USDA Woody Biomass Utilization Grant
Program
This program provides financial grants to
businesses and communities that use
woody biomass removed from National
Forest System hazardous fuel reduction
projects. Grants are awarded on a
competitive basis.
$3,000,000 Green tons of woody
biomass removed and
used
None N/A N/A N/A
Source: GAO analysis of information provided by Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA.
Notes:
a
Fiscal year 2011 obligations were provided by agency officials for each program. HUD’s figures
represent fiscal year 2011 actual budget authority rather than obligations. SBA figures represent
fiscal year 2011 fully allocated costs rather than obligations.
b
While some programs listed in the table did not set fiscal year 2011 performance goals, most of the
programs that had goals reported actual performance that could be compared with these goals.
c
EDA does not collect performance information (i.e., jobs created and private investment) by
program, rather this information is aggregated for all EDA programs.
d
Commerce’s Native American Business Enterprise Centers program incurred obligations in fiscal
year 2011, but Commerce officials could not provide funding data at the program level. Funding for
this program is included in the fiscal year 2011 obligations for Commerce’s Minority Business
Center program. Similarly, Commerce could not provide performance measure data at the program
level because it tracks its activity as part of the Minority Business Center program.
e
This figure is an estimate of actual budget authority used for activities that GAO categorizes as
economic development, rather than total program expenditures, and does not include other costs for
activities such as housing or public services.
f
This figure is an estimate of actual budget authority used for activities that GAO categorizes as
economic development, rather than total program expenditures, and does not include other costs for
activities such as housing or public services.
g
This figure is an estimate of actual budget authority used for activities that GAO categorizes as
economic development, rather than total program expenditures, and does not include other costs for
activities such as housing or public services.
h
This figure is an estimate of actual budget authority used for activities that GAO categorizes as
economic development, rather than total program expenditures, and does not include other costs for
activities such as housing or public services.
i
According to HUD officials, the performance measures for the CDBG Disaster Recovery Grant
program can vary and they did not provide us any set fiscal year 2011 goals.
j
HUD officials stated that the Rural Innovation Fund program is new and they are in the process of
establishing goals.
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 72 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
k
HUD officials noted that $31,355,236 in 5-year grants was awarded in September, 2011 through
this program, but they will not be obligated until after FY 2011. These funds include $25,000,000
that was appropriated in FY 2010 for the program and additional funds recaptured through HUD’s
Rural Housing and Economic Development program.
l
The performance goal and actual figures for this performance measure are for the two-year period
consisting of FY 2010 and FY 2011. SBA officials indicated that a goal was not set for FY 2011
alone.
m
According to SBA officials, the New Markets Venture Capital program is a one-time pilot program
that received one-time funding in fiscal year 2001.
n
USDA’s 1890 program does not have a congressional appropriation but is instead funded through
USDA’s Salaries and Expenses account. Funding is not reported separately for this program and is
listed as $0 here, but this is an active and funded program.
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs that
Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 73 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
We reviewed the 2011 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA)
and identified 95 additional federal programs that can support at least one
of the nine economic activities identified in appendix II (see table 3).
These programs, while not comprehensive, are in addition to the 80
economic development programs administered by Commerce, HUD,
SBA, and USDA that we included in previous reports. We identified these
94 programs based on our comparison of CFDA program descriptions
with the nine economic activities as illustrated in appendix II. However,
others conducting similar analyses may come to different conclusions on
which federal programs support economic development. Additionally, 32
of the 64 federal agencies and departments listed in the CFDA did not
provide descriptions for their programs within the 2011 CFDA, which
prevented us from assessing whether those programs are related to
economic development. Many of the agencies that administer these
additional programs have missions that do not directly focus on economic
development. For example, a number of the programs listed for the
Department of Health and Human Services focus on health-related
research, but also participate in at least one of the economic development
activities we have identified.
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 74 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Table 3: Additional Federal Programs That Can Fund Economic Activities, as Listed in the 2011 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
Appalachian
Regional
Commission
Appalachian
Regional
Development
23.001
X X X X X X X X
Appalachian
Regional
Commission
Appalachian Area
Development
23.002
X X X X X X X
Appalachian
Regional
Commission
Appalachian
Development
Highway System
23.003
X
Appalachian
Regional
Commission
Appalachian
Local
Development
District
Assistance
23.009
X
Appalachian
Regional
Commission
Appalachian
Research,
Technical
Assistance, and
Demonstration
Projects
23.011
X
Denali
Commission
Denali
Commission
Program
90.100
X
Department of
Defense
Community
Economic
Adjustment
12.600
X
Department of
Energy
Nuclear Energy
Research,
Development and
Demonstration
81.121
X
Department of
Energy
Granting Of
Patent Licenses
81.003
X X
Department of
Energy
Inventions and
Innovations
81.036
X
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 75 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
Department of
Energy
State Energy
Program
81.041
X
Department of
Energy
Federal Loan
Guarantees for
Innovative
Energy
Technologies
81.126
X X X X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Indian Health
Service
Sanitation
Facilities
Construction
Program
93.445
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Cancer Control 93.399
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Consumer
Operated and
Oriented Plan
[CO-OP] Program
93.545
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Community
Services Block
Grant
Discretionary
Awards
93.570
X X X X X X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Refugee and
Entrant
Assistance
Discretionary
Grants
93.576
X X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Job Opportunities
for Low-Income
Individuals
93.593
X X
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 76 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Assets for
Independence
Demonstration
Program
93.602
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Native American
Programs
93.612
X X
a
X X
a
X
a
X X X X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Cardiovascular
Diseases
Research
93.837
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Lung Diseases
Research
93.838
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Blood Diseases
and Resources
Research
93.839
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Arthritis,
Musculoskeletal
and Skin
Diseases
Research
93.846
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Diabetes,
Digestive, and
Kidney Diseases
Extramural
Research
93.847
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Extramural
Research
Programs in the
Neurosciences
and Neurological
Disorders
93.853
X
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 77 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Allergy,
Immunology and
Transplantation
Research
93.855
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Child Health and
Human
Development
Extramural
Research
93.865
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Aging Research 93.866
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Vision Research 93.867
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Medical Library
Assistance
93.879
X
Department of
Homeland
Security
Operation Safe
Commerce
Cooperative
Agreement
Program
97.058
X
Department of
Labor
Workforce
Investment Act—
Adult Program
17.258
X
Department of
Labor
Workforce
Investment Act—
Dislocated
Workers
17.260
X
Department of
the Interior
National Heritage
Area Federal
Financial
Assistance
15.939
X X X X X X X
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 78 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
Department of
the Interior
Tribal Self-
Governance
15.022
X
Department of
the Interior
Road
Maintenance
Indian Roads
15.033
X
Department of
the Interior
Minerals and
Mining on Indian
Lands
15.038
X
Department of
the Interior
Indian Loans
Economic
Development
15.124
X
Department of
the Interior
National Fire Plan
- Wildland Urban
Interface
Community Fire
Assistance
15.228
X
Department of
the Interior
Water
Reclamation and
Reuse Program
15.504
X
Department of
the Interior
WaterSMART
(Sustain and
Manage
America’s
Resources for
Tomorrow)
15.507
X
Department of
the Interior
Colorado River
Basin Salinity
Control Program
15.509
X
Department of
the Interior
Colorado Ute
Indian Water
Rights Settlement
Act
15.510
X
Department of
the Interior
Fort Peck
Reservation
Rural Water
System
15.516
X
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 79 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
Department of
the Interior
Garrison
Diversion Unit
15.518
X
Department of
the Interior
Indian Tribal
Water Resources
Development,
Management,
and Protection
15.519
X
Department of
the Interior
Lewis and Clark
Rural Water
System
15.520
X
Department of
the Interior
Mni Wiconi Rural
Water Supply
Project
15.522
X
Department of
the Interior
Perkins County
Rural Water
System
15.523
X
Department of
the Interior
Rocky
Boy’s/North
Central Montana
Regional Water
System
15.525
X
Department of
the Interior
San Gabriel
Basin Restoration
Project
15.526
X
Department of
the Interior
Yakima River
Basin Water
Enhancement
Project
15.531
X
Department of
the Interior
Colorado River
Basin Projects
Act of 1968
15.541
X
Department of
the Interior
Lower Colorado
River Multi-
species
Conservation
Project
15.538
X
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 80 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
Department of
the Interior
Navajo-Gallup
Water Supply
Project
15.552
X
Department of
the Interior
Economic, Social,
and Political
Development of
the Territories
15.875
X X X X X X
Department of
the Interior
Historic
Preservation
Fund Grants-In-
Aid
15.904
X X X X X X
Department of
the Interior
Preservation of
Historic
Structures on the
Campuses of
Historically Black
Colleges and
Universities
15.932
X X X X X
Department of
the Interior
Preservation of
Japanese
American
Confinement
Sites
15.933
X X X
Department of
the Treasury
Native Initiatives 21.012
X
Department of
the Treasury
Community
Development
Financial
Institutions
Program
21.020
X
Department of
the Treasury
Bank Enterprise
Award Program
21.021
X
Department of
Transportation
Airport
Improvement
Program
20.106
X
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 81 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
Department of
Transportation
Highway
Planning and
Construction
20.205
X
Department of
Transportation
Transportation
Infrastructure
Finance and
Innovation Act
Program
20.223
X
Department of
Transportation
Railroad
Development
20.314
X
Department of
Transportation
National Railroad
Passenger
Corporation
Grants
20.315
X
Department of
Transportation
Railroad
Rehabilitation
and Improvement
Financing
Program
20.316
X X X X
Department of
Transportation
Capital
Assistance to
States-Intercity
Passenger Rail
Service
20.317
X
Department of
Transportation
Maglev Project
Selection
Program-Safetea-
Lu
20.318
X
Department of
Transportation
High-Speed Rail
Corridors and
Intercity
Passenger Rail
Service Capital
Assistance
Grants
20.319
X
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 82 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
Department of
Transportation
Rail Line
Relocation and
Improvement
20.320
X
Department of
Transportation
Federal Transit
Capital
Investment
Grants
20.500
X
Department of
Transportation
Paul S. Sarbanes
Transit in the
Parks
20.520
X
Department of
Transportation
Federal Ship
Financing
Guarantees
20.802
X X
Department of
Transportation
Assistance to
Small Shipyards
20.814
X X
Department of
Transportation
America’s Marine
Highway Grants
20.816
X
Department of
Transportation
Bonding
Assistance
Program
20.904
X
Department of
Transportation
Disadvantaged
Business
Enterprises Short
Term Lending
Program
20.905
X
Department of
Transportation
Assistance to
Small and
Disadvantaged
Businesses
20.910
X
Department of
Transportation
Payments for
Small Community
Air Service
Development
20.930
X X
Department of
Transportation
National
Infrastructure
Investments
20.933
X
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 83 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Healthy
Communities
Grant Program
66.110
X X
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Environmental
Finance Center
Grants
66.203
X
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Construction
Grants for
Wastewater
Treatment Works
66.418
X
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Capitalization
Grants for Clean
Water State
Revolving Funds
66.458
X
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Capitalization
Grants for
Drinking Water
State Revolving
Funds
66.468
X
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Environmental
Justice Small
Grant Program
66.604
X
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Pollution
Prevention
Grants Program
66.708
X
National
Endowment for
the Humanities
Challenge Grants 45.130
X
National
Endowment for
the Humanities
Promotion of the
Humanities
Public Programs
45.164
X
National
Endowment for
the Humanities
Digital
Humanities Start-
up Grants
45.169
X
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 84 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
National
Science
Foundation
Engineering
Grants
47.041
X
Source: GAO analysis of the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (2011 edition).
a
The authority of Health and Human Service’s Native American program is limited regarding
construction. Its authority is limited to minor construction activities and does not allow for the
building of structures from the ground up or other major construction activities.
Appendix V: Evaluations of Programs
that Can Support Entrepreneurs, 2000-
2012
Page 85 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Author(s), title of
evaluation
Agency
reviewed
Program(s)
reviewed Purpose of the study Data and methods used
Grant Thornton,
Construction Grants
Program Impact
Assessment Report,
September 2008
Department of
Commerce
(Commerce) –
Economic
Development
Administration
(EDA)
Grants for Public
Works and
Economic
Development
Facilities
Economic
Adjustment
Assistance
To assess the economic impacts
and federal costs of EDA’s
construction program, and to
improve upon EDA’s prior study in
1997 in terms of using a more
robust regression model.
Data for this study were taken
from EDA’s Operations and
Planning and Control System
for construction projects’ status
and funding between fiscal
years 1990-2005 and Bureau
of Labor Statistics county
employment data. Study used
ordinary and two-stage least
squares regression.
Beth Walter Honadle
and Michael C.
Carroll, Center for
Policy Analysis &
Public Service,
Bowling Green State
University, Local
Technical
Assistance Program
Evaluation, 2003
Commerce EDA Economic
Development–
Technical
Assistance
To evaluate the local Technical
Assistance program for fiscal years
1997 and 1998 to determine the
extent to which the program has
achieved its mission of helping
communities solve specific
problems, respond to economic
development opportunities, and
build and expand organizational
capacity in distressed areas.
The evaluation is based on
data collected from
• project files and data
obtained from EDA
headquarters and six
regional offices,
• surveys of 121 grant
recipients, and
• two on-site case studies in
each EDA region.
Mt. Auburn
Associates, Inc., An
Evaluation of EDA’s
University Center
Program, December
2001
Commerce EDA Economic
Development–
Technical
Assistance
To evaluate the University Center
Program in five areas:
• effectiveness in meeting
economic development needs,
• effectiveness in targeting
distressed areas,
• distribution of centers being
optimal under EDA budget
constraints,
• duplication or overlap with other
federal programs, and
• leveraging resources.
Study collected data from
numerous sources:
• interviews with EDA
national and regional staff,
• compilation of a database
on University Center
characteristics and
activities from documents
such as grant
applications,
• interviews with Center
directors,
• Center client survey, and
• site visits.
Wayne State
University,
Evaluation of EDA’s
Planning Program:
Economic
Development
Districts, May 2002
Commerce EDA Economic
Development–
Support for Planning
Organizations
To evaluate the overall impact of
EDA’s Economic Development
District (EDD) Planning program,
which funds the EDDs; highlight
commonalities and differences
among the various EDDs; as well as
to assess if the program promotes
regional cooperation towards
making an impact on the economic
development goals of the
community.
Data were gathered in several
progressive stages:
• site visits,
• general survey,
• additional site visits, and
• a second survey to
respondents of first survey.
Analysis of these data was
done using statistical
techniques such as principle-
component analysis.
Appendix V: Evaluations of Programs that
Can Support Entrepreneurs, 2000-2012
Appendix V: Evaluations of Programs
that Can Support Entrepreneurs, 2000-
2012
Page 86 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Author(s), title of
evaluation
Agency
reviewed
Program(s)
reviewed Purpose of the study Data and methods used
The Urban Institute,
The Impact of CDBG
Spending on Urban
Neighborhoods,
October 2002
Department of
Housing and
Urban
Development
(HUD)
Community
Development Block
Grant
(CDBG)/Entitlement
Grants
• To find indicators for the effect
of CDBG spending and track
changes in these indicators.
• To report on neighborhoods
that had received a large
amount of CDBG funding.
• Classified cities into two
categories: those that had
available data that were
more detailed and those
that had less-detailed
available data
• Identify CDBG investment
levels that must be
complemented with
additional investment to
produce significant
improvements in
neighborhood outcomes.
The Urban Institute,
Public-Sector Loans
to Private-Sector
Businesses: An
Assessment of
HUD-Supported
Local Economic
Development
Lending Activities,
December 2002
HUD CDBG/Entitlement
Grants
CDBG/States
CDBG/Section 108
Loan Guarantees
CDBG/Brownfields
Economic
Development
Initiative (BEDI)
• To determine the results of local
third-party lending programs in
terms of business development
and job creation benefits.
• To determine whether some
kinds of borrowers in certain
types of neighborhoods create
jobs or leverage private funds at
lower cost than others.
Study was based on
• telephone interviews with
Economic Development
directors in 460 of the 972
entitlement communities
that used CDBG funds, and
interviews with 234 of the
750 business borrowers.
• sample of business loans
to those areas, matched
with Dun and Bradstreet
information.
Study examines various
indicators of program
performance, including
• business survival rates,
• rates of total and low-
income job creation,
• retention relative to jobs
planned at the time of
loan origination,
• public costs of each job
created,
• amount of private funding
induced (or leveraged) by
program loans, and
• rates at which public loan
dollars substitute for
private funds that would
have otherwise been
invested.
Econometrica, Inc,
Evaluation of the
Indian Community
Block Grant
Program, May 2006
HUD CDBG/Indian
To measure the outcomes of Indian
CDBG expenditures. The outcomes
included amount of leveraged
funding obtained by grantees,
enhancements of partnering
relationships, and level of economic
activity in the communities.
Study had three main data
sources: (1) grant file reviews
of program data, (2) telephone
survey of grant participants,
and (3) case study
observations.
Appendix V: Evaluations of Programs
that Can Support Entrepreneurs, 2000-
2012
Page 87 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Author(s), title of
evaluation
Agency
reviewed
Program(s)
reviewed Purpose of the study Data and methods used
Social Compact and
Weinheimer &
Associates,
Assessing Section 4:
Helping CDC’s to
Grow and Serve,
February 2011
HUD Section 4 Capacity
Building for
Affordable Housing
and Community
Development
To evaluate the effect of the Section
4 program on improving
organization capacity. The section 4
program was set up to support
training for Community Development
Corporations (CDC) and to help
CDCs grow and serve.
From 2001 through 2009, data
were collected from (1)
interviews of key staff at
intermediaries, (2) online
survey of 360 CDCs that
received Section 4 grants, and
(3) interviews with leaders of
34 Section 4-asssisted CDCs.
Concentrance
Consulting Group,
Impact Study of
Entrepreneurial
Development
Resources, 2002 –
2010
a
Small Business
Administration
(SBA)
Small Business
Development
Centers
Women’s Business
Centers
SCORE
To assess the impact of SBA’s
entrepreneurial development
programs on small businesses,
including businesses’ perceptions of
the programs and their economic
growth as a result of the services
provided.
Study included survey of
clients served by SBA’s
entrepreneurial businesses.
Sample size approximately
6,500 observations across all
years–2007, 2008 and 2010
with a smaller sample in 2007.
Gwen Richtermeyer
and Karen Fife-
Samyn, Quality
Research
Associates,
Analyzing the Impact
of the Women’s
Business Center
Program, July 2004.
SBA Women’s Business
Centers
To analyze the economic impact of
the SBA’s Women’s Business
Center program. Specifically the
study addressed the following
between 2001 and 2003:
• impact on growth of firms
• factors that account for success
• specific program model that
predicts success
• predictors of positive economic
outcomes, and
• effect of client demographics on
outcomes.
Study includes a set of
descriptive statistics on the
rate of growth in the number of
Women’s Business Center
clients and also the rate of
jobs and profits at those
centers.
Study used a regression to
test the association between
clients and other outcomes.
Mary Godwyn, Nan
Langowitz, and
Norean Sharpe,
Center for Women’s
Leadership at
Babson College, The
Impact and Influence
of Women’s
Business Centers in
the United States,
April 2005
SBA Women’s Business
Centers
To examine the economic impact
and effectiveness of Women’s
Business Centers.
Survey and focus group of 100
Women’s Business Centers.
The Urban Institute,
A Performance
Analysis of SBA’s
Loan and
Investment
Programs, January
2008
SBA 7(a) Loan Program
504 Loan Program
Small Business
Investment
Company (SBIC)
Program
In order to test whether SBA loan
guarantees are associated with
positive firm outcomes, this study
addressed the following questions:
• What happens to sales,
employment and survival before
and after firms receive the
guarantee?
• What explains the changes
observed?
SBA administrative data were
obtained on firms participating
in 7(a), 504 or SBIC programs.
For these firms, data were
obtained from Dun and
Bradstreet on firm outcomes.
The study used a multivariate
statistical technique to
estimate whether (a) the
change in outcome was
significant, and (b) whether
Appendix V: Evaluations of Programs
that Can Support Entrepreneurs, 2000-
2012
Page 88 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Author(s), title of
evaluation
Agency
reviewed
Program(s)
reviewed Purpose of the study Data and methods used
other factors (such as
business type) affect the
change in outcome.
The Urban Institute,
An Assessment of
Small Business
Administration Loan
and Investment
Performance:
Survey of Assisted
Businesses, January
2008
SBA 7(a) Loan Program
504 Loan Program
Microloan Program
SBIC
To produce a survey that is intended
provide customer satisfaction
indicators for the 7(a), 504, SBIC,
and MicroLoan programs.
Beginning from a sample of
assisted firms from Dunn and
Bradstreet, a survey was sent
to approximately 3,000 firms.
The surveyed firms had
received the loans 6 or 7 years
prior to the questionnaire.
Henry Beale and
Nicola Deas,
Microeconomic
Applications, Inc.,
The HUBZone
Program Report,
May 2008
b
SBA HUBZone
(Historically
Underutilized
Business Zone)
To examine the effectiveness of the
HUBZone program.
Data are from three
databases: applications for
HUBZone certification, Central
Contractor Registration on
small businesses, and the
Federal Procurement Data
System for information on
HUBZone businesses that
have won HUBZone contracts.
The report primarily used an
input-output approach to
estimate the impact on the
HUBZone areas. In this
approach, direct and indirect
impacts are measured using
the above three databases
and multipliers from Bureau of
Economic Analysis.
Charles W.
Wessner, Editor,
Committee on
Capitalizing on
Science,
Technology, and
Innovation, An
Assessment of the
Small Business
Innovation Research
Program at the
National Science
Foundation, 2008.
SBA Small Business
Innovation Research
Program (SBIR)
The study attempts to determine
the effectiveness of the SBIR
program in
• stimulating technological
innovation;
• using small businesses to meet
federal needs;
• increasing private sector
commercialization; and
• encouraging participation of
minority and other
disadvantaged groups.
Study is based on National
Research Council surveys and
reviews of agency materials.
Study includes surveys and
also case studies.
Appendix V: Evaluations of Programs
that Can Support Entrepreneurs, 2000-
2012
Page 89 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Author(s), title of
evaluation
Agency
reviewed
Program(s)
reviewed Purpose of the study Data and methods used
M.A. Boland, J.C.
Crespi, and D.
Oswald, How
Successful Was the
2002 Farm Bill’s
Value-Added
Producer Grant
Program?,
December 2007
Department of
Agriculture
(USDA)
Value Added
Producer Grants
(VAPG)
To identify the determinants for
success among USDA’s VAPG.
Survey of 739 VAPG
recipients, out of which 621
responded. A statistical
analysis was conducted using
binary logistical regression
(logit) and cumulative logit
models.
Source: GAO analysis of information provided by Commerce, HUD, SBA and USDA.
a
While SBA conducts annual impact surveys of the SBDC, WBC, and SCORE programs, for
purposes of this report we focused on the most recent impact study conducted of these programs.
b
In a previous GAO report, Small Business Administration: Additional Actions Are Needed to Certify
and Monitor HUBZone Businesses and Assess Program Results, GAO-08-643 (Washington, D.C.:
Jun. 17, 2008), we recommended that SBA further develop measures and implement plans to assess
the effectiveness of the HUBZone program. SBA took steps to conduct such an assessment.
However, SBA has since decided to rely on the 2008 study conducted by SBA’s Office of Advocacy
listed in this appendix.
Appendix VI: Comments from the Department
of Agriculture
Page 90 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Appendix VI: Comments from the
Department of Agriculture
Appendix VI: Comments from the Department
of Agriculture
Page 91 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Appendix VI: Comments from the Department
of Agriculture
Page 92 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Appendix VII: Comments from the Department
of Commerce
Page 93 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Appendix VII: Comments from the
Department of Commerce
Appendix VII: Comments from the Department
of Commerce
Page 94 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Appendix VII: Comments from the Department
of Commerce
Page 95 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Appendix VII: Comments from the Department
of Commerce
Page 96 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Appendix VIII: Comments from the Department
of Housing and Urban Development
Page 97 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Appendix VIII: Comments from the
Department of Housing and Urban
Development
Appendix VIII: Comments from the Department
of Housing and Urban Development
Page 98 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Appendix XI: GAO Contact and Staff
Acknowledgments
Page 99 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
William B. Shear, (202) 512-8678 or [email protected].
In addition to the contact named above, Marshall Hamlett and Triana
McNeil (Assistant Directors), Matthew Alemu, Ben Bolitzer, Julianne
Dieterich, Cindy Gilbert, Geoffrey King, Terence Lam, Alma Laris, Marc
Molino, Alise Nacson, Jennifer Schwartz, and Karen Villafana made key
contributions to this report.
Appendix XI: GAO Contact and Staff
Acknowledgments
GAO Contact
Staff
Acknowledgments
(250610)
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions.
GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through GAO’s website (www.gao.gov). Each weekday afternoon,
GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products,
go to www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”
The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website,http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm.
Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537.
Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.
Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube.
Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts.
Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov.
Contact:
Website: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
E-mail: [email protected]
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470
Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, [email protected], (202) 512-
4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room
7125, Washington, DC 20548
Chuck Young, Managing Director, [email protected], (202) 512-4800
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, DC 20548
GAO’s Mission
Obtaining Copies of
GAO Reports and
Testimony
Order by Phone
Connect with GAO
To Report Fraud,
Waste, and Abuse in
Federal Programs
Congressional
Relations
Public Affairs
Please Print on Recycled Paper.
doc_271138012.pdf
In this particular detailed paper related to entrepreneurial assistance opportunities exist to improve programs collaboration.
ENTREPRENEURIAL
ASSISTANCE
Opportunities Exist to
Improve Programs’
Collaboration, Data-
Tracking, and
Performance
Management
Report to Congressional Committees
August 2012
GAO-12-819
United States Government Accountability Office
GAO
United States Government Accountability Office
Highlights of GAO-12-819, a report to
congressional committees
August 2012
ENTREPRENEURIAL ASSISTANCE
Opportunities Exist to Improve Programs’
Collaboration, Data-Tracking, and Performance
Management
Why GAO Did This Study
Economic development programs that
effectively provide assistance to
entrepreneurs may help businesses
develop and expand. GAO focused on
52 economic development programs,
with an estimated $2.0 billion in
funding, at Commerce, HUD, SBA, and
USDA that support entrepreneurs. In
response to a statutory requirement,
this report discusses (1) the extent of
overlap and fragmentation, the effects
on entrepreneurs, and agencies’
actions to address them; and (2) the
extent of tracked program information
and whether these programs have met
their performance goals and been
evaluated. To address these
objectives, GAO analyzed program
information and interviewed agency
officials in headquarters and selected
field offices, entrepreneurs, and third-
party entities, such as nonprofits, that
use federal grants to provide
assistance directly to entrepreneurs.
What GAO Recommends
GAO recommends that the agencies
and the Office of Management and
Budget explore opportunities to
enhance collaboration among
programs, both within and across
agencies; track program information;
and conduct more program
evaluations. Commerce, HUD, and
USDA provided written comments and
each neither agreed nor disagreed with
the recommendations. However,
USDA commented that the
recommendations were not explicit. In
the report, GAO provides specific
actions that agencies can take to
address each recommendation.
What GAO Found
Federal efforts to support entrepreneurs are fragmented—including among 52
programs at the Department of Agriculture (USDA), Commerce, and Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) and the Small Business Administration (SBA). All
overlap with at least one other program in terms of the type of assistance they
are authorized to offer, such as financial (grants and loans) and technical
(training and counseling), and the type of entrepreneur they are authorized to
serve. Some entrepreneurs struggle to navigate the fragmented programs that
provide technical assistance. For example, some entrepreneurs and technical
assistance providers GAO spoke with said the system can be confusing and that
some entrepreneurs do not know where to go for assistance. Collaboration could
reduce some negative effects of overlap and fragmentation, but field staff GAO
spoke with did not consistently collaborate to provide training and counseling
services to entrepreneurs. The agencies have taken initial steps to improve how
they collaborate by entering into formal agreements, but they have not pursued a
number of other good collaborative practices GAO has previously identified. For
example, USDA and SBA entered into a formal agreement in 2010 to coordinate
their efforts to support businesses in rural areas; however, the agencies’
programs that can support start-up businesses—such as USDA’s Rural Business
Enterprise Grant program and SBA’s Small Business Development Centers—
have yet to determine roles and responsibilities, find ways to leverage each
other’s resources, or establish compatible policies and procedures. Without
enhanced collaboration and coordination agencies may not be able to make the
best use of limited federal resources in the most effective and efficient manner.
Agencies do not track program information on entrepreneurial assistance
activities for many programs, a number of programs have not met their
performance goals, and most programs lack evaluations. In particular, the
agencies do not generally track information on the specific type of assistance
they provide or the entrepreneurs they serve, in part because they do not rely on
this information to administer the programs. Rather, agencies may rely, for
example, on data summaries in narrative format, which cannot be easily
aggregated or analyzed. According to government standards for internal control,
this information should be available to help inform management in making
decisions and identifying risks and problem areas. GAO also found that 19
programs failed to meet their annual performance goals related to
entrepreneurial assistance, including USDA’s Rural Business Opportunity
Grants, Commerce’s Economic Development/Support for Planning
Organizations, HUD’s Indian Community Development Block Grants, and SBA’s
504 loans to finance commercial real estate. Programs could potentially rely on
results from program evaluations to determine the reasons why they have not
met their goals, as well as to gauge overall effectiveness. However, the agencies
lack program evaluations for 32 of the 52 programs. Therefore, information on
program efficiency and effectiveness is limited, and scarce resources may be
going toward programs that are less effective. In addition, without more robust
program information, agencies may not be able to administer programs in the
most effective and efficient manner. View GAO-12-819. For more information,
contact William B. Shear at (202) 512-8678 or
[email protected].
Page i GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Letter 1
Background 3
Fragmented Programs Overlap, and Agencies’ Efforts to
Collaborate Have Been Limited 5
Agencies Lack Information to Track Program Activities and
Measure Performance 19
Conclusions 28
Recommendations 29
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 29
Appendix I Objectives, Scope and Methodology 37
Appendix II Illustrative Examples of Economic Activities 41
Appendix III Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52 Programs that Can
Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011 47
Appendix IV Additional Federal Programs that Can Fund Economic Activities 73
Appendix V Evaluations of Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, 2000-2012 85
Appendix VI Comments from the Department of Agriculture 90
Appendix VII Comments from the Department of Commerce 93
Appendix VIII Comments from the Department of Housing and Urban Development 97
Contents
Page ii GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Appendix XI GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 99
Tables
Table 1: Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs and Maintain
Readily Available Information, by Agency 22
Table 2: Accomplishment Data for 33 Programs that Support
Entrepreneurs and Set Goals, Fiscal Year 2011 24
Table 3: Additional Federal Programs That Can Fund Economic
Activities, as Listed in the 2011 Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance 74
Figures
Figure 1: Fragmented Delivery System of Federally Funded
Technical Assistance to Entrepreneurs 14
Figure 2: Evaluations of Programs that Support Entrepreneurs,
2000-2012 26
Page iii GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Abbreviations
BEDI Brownfields Economic Development Initiative
CDBG Community Development Block Grant
CDC Community Development Corporation
CFDA Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Commerce Department of Commerce
EDA Economic Development Administration
FAST Federal and State Technology Partnership
GPRA Government Performance and Results Act
GPRAMA GPRA Modernization Act of 2010
HUBZone Historically Underutilized Business Zone
HUD Department of Housing and Urban Development
MBC Minority Business Center
MBDA Minority Business Development Agency
NABEC Native American Business Enterprise Centers
NMVC New Markets Venture Capital
OMB Office of Management and Budget
PRIME Program for Investment in Micro-Entrepreneurs
SBA Small Business Administration
SBDC Small Business Development Center
SBIC Small Business Investment Company
SBIR Small Business Innovation Research
STTR Small Business Technology Transfer
TAA Trade Adjustment Assistance
USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture
VAPG Value Added Producer Grants
WBC Women's Business Center
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the
United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety
without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain
copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be
necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
Page 1 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
United States Government Accountability Office
Washington, DC 20548
August 23, 2012
Congressional Committees
Entrepreneurs play a vital role in the U.S. economy. The federal
government provides a variety of support and assistance to them, and
dozens of programs exist to support entrepreneurs across numerous
federal agencies. Economic development programs that effectively
provide assistance to entrepreneurs, in conjunction with state and local
government and private sector economic development initiatives, may
help businesses develop and expand. However, we have previously
raised questions about the potential negative effects of fragmentation and
overlap among federal programs that can support entrepreneurs.
Specifically, we have questioned how efficiently federal agencies are
administering these programs and how effective the programs are at
achieving their mission. This report focuses on 52 programs administered
by the U.S. Departments of Agriculture (USDA), Commerce (Commerce),
and Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the U.S. Small
Business Administration (SBA) that provide assistance to entrepreneurs.
1
In 2011, we examined these programs and found that each program
overlapped with at least one other program in terms of the economic
development activities that they are authorized to fund.
2
Section 21 of Public Law 111-139, enacted in February 2010, requires
GAO to conduct routine investigations to identify federal programs,
agencies, offices, and initiatives with duplicative goals and activities within
According to
agency officials, these programs, which typically fund a variety of
activities in addition to supporting entrepreneurs, spent an estimated $2.0
billion on economic development efforts in fiscal year 2011.
1
The number of programs administered by Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA that we
identified in February 2012 as supporting entrepreneurial efforts decreased from 53 to 52
because USDA’s Empowerment Zones program was ended by Congress during fiscal
year 2010 and has been excluded from this review. See GAO, 2012 Annual Report:
Opportunities to Reduce Duplication, Overlap and Fragmentation, Achieve Savings, and
Enhance Revenue, GAO-12-342SP (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 28, 2012).
2
GAO, Opportunities to Reduce Potential Duplication in Government Programs, Save Tax
Dollars, and Enhance Revenue, GAO-11-318SP (Washington D.C.: Mar. 1, 2011) and
Efficiency and Effectiveness of Fragmented Economic Development Programs Are
Unclear, GAO-11-477R (Washington, D.C.: May 19, 2011).
Page 2 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
departments and governmentwide, and report annually to Congress.
3
While we identified a more comprehensive list of federal programs that
can fund economic activities more generally, we focused our analyses on
these 52 economic development programs that are authorized to support
entrepreneurs because these are the programs that appeared to overlap
the most within the four agencies whose missions focus on economic
development. We reviewed statutory and regulatory authority for each
program on the activities and services the agencies can conduct to
administer each of the programs. Because there was significant overlap
and fragmentation among programs that provide technical assistance (for
example, business training and counseling and support for research and
development) to entrepreneurs (35 of the 52 programs), we focused on
how the agencies provide this assistance. We reviewed agency
documents and conducted interviews in both headquarters and the field
to determine how technical assistance is provided to entrepreneurs and
the extent of agency collaboration at the local level. We interviewed 14
officials from four federal agencies, 9 officials from two regional
commissions, four entrepreneurs who have received federal support, and
five state and local partners in select geographic areas where there was
evidence of ongoing collaboration between the federal agencies. These
geographic areas included both urban and rural areas. We assessed this
technical assistance information against promising collaborative practices
that we have previously identified.
This report discusses (1) the extent of overlap, fragmentation, and
duplication and their effects on entrepreneurs, and agencies’ actions to
address them; and (2) the extent to which agencies collect information
necessary to track program activities and whether these programs have
met their performance goals and have been evaluated.
4
For all 52 programs, we also
evaluated the agencies’ methods for tracking the activities conducted and
assistance provided against standards for internal controls that we have
previously identified.
5
3
In a letter dated August 31, 2011, to the Comptroller General, the Chairwoman of the
Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry asked, among other things, that
we address a number of issues involving the potential for overlap, duplication, and
fragmentation in economic development programs administered by the four agencies.
For each program, we reviewed information on
4
GAO, Results-Oriented Government: Practices That Can Help Enhance and Sustain
Collaboration among Federal Agencies, GAO-06-15 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 21, 2005).
5
GAO, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1
(Washington, D.C.: Nov. 1, 1999).
Page 3 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
program mission and goals, performance goals and accomplishments,
and program evaluations conducted during the last decade. We evaluated
this information against promising practices of leading organizations and
the requirements of the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010. Appendix I
provides more information on our scope and methodology.
We conducted this performance audit from June 2011 to July 2012 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that
the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives.
Fragmentation refers to circumstances in which more than one federal
agency (or more than one organization within an agency) is involved in
the same broad area of national interest. Overlap involves programs that
have similar goals, devise similar strategies and activities to achieve
those goals, or target similar users. Duplication occurs when two or more
agencies or programs are engaged in the same activities or provide the
same assistance to the same beneficiaries. In some instances, it may be
appropriate for multiple agencies or entities to be involved in the same
programmatic or policy area due to the nature or magnitude of the federal
effort. However, we have previously identified instances where multiple
government programs or activities have led to inefficiencies, and we
determined that greater efficiencies or effectiveness might be
achievable.
6
6
See GAO-12-342SP.
Background
Fragmentation, Overlap,
and Duplication
Page 4 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
In September 2000, we reported that there is no commonly accepted
definition for economic development.
7
Absent a common definition, we
subsequently developed a list of nine activities most often associated with
economic development.
8
• supporting entrepreneurial efforts,
In general, we focused on economic activities
that directly affected the overall development of an area, such as job
creation, rather than on activities that improved individuals’ quality of life,
such as housing and education. The nine economic activities are
• supporting business incubators and accelerators,
• constructing and renovating commercial buildings,
• constructing and renovating industrial parks and buildings,
• strategic planning and research,
• marketing and access to new markets for products and industries,
• supporting telecommunications and broadband infrastructure,
• supporting physical infrastructure, and
• supporting tourism.
Appendix II provides illustrative examples of each of these economic
activities. Appendix III provides more information on the 52 economic
development programs we focused on for this report. Appendix IV
includes a list of additional programs that are administered by federal
agencies we identified that can fund at least one of these activities.
7
See GAO, Economic Development: Multiple Federal Programs Fund Similar Economic
Development Activities, GAO/RCED/GGD-00-220 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 29, 2000).
8
See GAO, Rural Economic Development: More Assurance Is Needed That Grant
Funding Information Is Accurately Reported, GAO-06-294 (Washington, D.C.:
Feb. 24, 2006).
Defining Federal
Economic Development
Programs
Page 5 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
In January 2011, Congress updated the Government Performance and
Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) with the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010
(GPRAMA). GPRAMA establishes a new framework aimed at taking a
more crosscutting and integrated approach to focusing on results and
improving government performance. Effective implementation of
GPRAMA could play an important role in clarifying desired outcomes;
addressing program performance spanning multiple organizations; and
facilitating future actions to reduce unnecessary duplication, overlap, and
fragmentation. Among other things, GPRAMA requires the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) to coordinate with agencies to establish
outcome-oriented federal government priority goals covering a limited
number of policy areas, as well as goals to improve management across
the federal government. It also requires OMB—in conjunction with the
agencies—to develop a federal government performance plan that
outlines how they will make progress toward achieving goals, including
federal government priority goals. The President’s 2013 budget
submission includes the first interim federal government priority goals,
including one to increase federal services to entrepreneurs and small
businesses with an emphasis on start-ups and growing firms and
underserved markets.
9
The identified economic development programs that support entrepreneurs
overlap based on both the type of assistance they provide and the
characteristics of the beneficiaries they target. This overlap among
fragmented programs can make it difficult for entrepreneurs to navigate the
services available to them. In addition, while agencies have taken steps to
collaborate more in administering these programs, they have not
implemented a number of good collaborative practices we have previously
identified, and some entrepreneurs struggle to find the support they need.
9
GAO, Managing for Results: GAO’s Work Related to the Interim Crosscutting Priority
Goals under the GPRA Modernization Act, GAO-12-620R (Washington, D.C.: May 12,
2012). We identified additional programs at Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA that can
assist entrepreneurs with access to financing, mentorship and counseling services, and
government contracts and research grants, and we recommended that the Director of
OMB review the additional departments, agencies, and programs that we identified, and
consider including them in the federal government’s performance plan, as appropriate.
OMB staff agreed with our recommendation that OMB review the additional departments,
agencies, and programs that we have identified and determine if they are relevant to
achieving the crosscutting goals.
GPRA Modernization Act
of 2010
Fragmented Programs
Overlap, and
Agencies’ Efforts to
Collaborate Have
Been Limited
Page 6 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Federal efforts to support entrepreneurs are fragmented, which occurs
when more than one agency or program is involved in the same broad
area of national interest. Commerce (8), HUD (12), SBA (19), and USDA
(13) administered 52 programs that could support entrepreneurial efforts
in fiscal year 2011. Several types of overlap—which occurs when
programs have similar goals, engage in similar activities or strategies to
achieve them, or target similar beneficiaries—exist among these
programs, based on the type of assistance the programs offer and
characteristics of the programs’ targeted beneficiaries.
Many of the programs provide entrepreneurs with similar types of
assistance. The programs generally can be grouped according to at least
one of three types of assistance that address different entrepreneurial
needs: help obtaining (1) technical assistance, (2) financial assistance,
and (3) government contracts. Many of the programs can provide more
than one type of assistance, and most focus on technical assistance,
financial assistance, or both:
10
• Technical assistance: Thirty-five programs distributed across the four
agencies can provide technical assistance, including business
training, counseling and research, and development support.
11
• Financial assistance: Thirty programs distributed across the four
agencies can support entrepreneurs through financial assistance in
the form of grants and loans.
12
10
SBA administers two programs that solely provide entrepreneurs with assistance in
obtaining government contracts: the Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone)
program, which supports small businesses located in economically distressed areas, and
the Procurement Assistance to Small Businesses program, which serves small
businesses located in any area.
11
The number of programs administered by Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA that were
identified in GAO-12-342SP as supporting technical assistance decreased from 36 to 35
because USDA’s Empowerment Zones program is no longer active.
12
The number of programs administered by Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA that were
identified in GAO-12-342SP as supporting financial assistance decreased from 33 to 30
because USDA’s Empowerment Zones program is no longer active and because
subsequent to that report, Commerce told us that its Minority Business Centers and Native
American Business Enterprise Centers programs only support technical assistance.
Many Programs Are
Authorized to Provide
Similar Types of
Assistance and Target
Similar Beneficiaries
Page 7 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
• Government contracting assistance: Five programs, all of which are
administered by SBA, can support entrepreneurs by helping them
qualify for federal procurement opportunities.
13
We reviewed the statutes and regulations for each program and found
that overlap tends to be concentrated among programs that provide a
broad range of technical and financial assistance. Within the technical
assistance category, 24 of the 35 programs are authorized to provide or
fund a broad range of technical assistance both to entrepreneurs with
existing businesses and to nascent entrepreneurs—that is, entrepreneurs
attempting to start a business—in any industry. This broad range of
support can include any form of training or counseling, including start-up
assistance, access to capital, and accounting. Examples of programs in
this category include Commerce’s Minority Business Centers, five of
HUD’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) programs, SBA’s
Small Business Development Centers, and USDA’s Rural Business
Opportunity Grants.
14
Eight additional programs can support limited types
of technical assistance or industries.
15
Similarly, 16 of the 30 financial assistance programs can provide or
guarantee loans that can be used for a broad range of purposes to
existing businesses and nascent entrepreneurs in any industry. Examples
of programs in this category include Commerce’s Economic Adjustment
Assistance programs, six of HUD’s CDBG programs, SBA’s 7(a) Loan
Program, and USDA’s Business and Industry Loans. Five other programs
For example, Commerce’s Trade
Adjustment Assistance for Firms only supports existing businesses
negatively affected by imports, and USDA’s Small Socially-
Disadvantaged Producer Grants only serves agricultural businesses.
13
The number of programs administered by Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA that were
identified in GAO-12-342SP as supporting government contracting assistance decreased
from seven to five because subsequent to that report, Commerce told us that its Minority
Business Centers and Native American Business Enterprise Centers programs only
support technical assistance.
14
Of the eight HUD CDBG programs, five operate in different areas of the United States
that do not geographically overlap, one can only provide support to areas recovering from
presidentially declared disasters, and two can operate in any area of the United States.
15
The other three technical assistance programs are Commerce’s Economic
Development–Support for Planning Organizations, Economic Development–Technical
Assistance, and Grants for Public Works and Economic Development Facilities, which
support assistance to economic development organizations and local governments, which
in turn support businesses.
Page 8 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
can support loans for a more narrow range of purposes or industries,
while the other nine programs can only support other types of financial
assistance, such as grants, equity investments, and surety guarantees.
16
In addition, a number of programs overlap based on the characteristics of
the targeted beneficiary. Most programs either target or exclusively serve
one of four types of businesses: businesses in rural areas, businesses in
economically distressed areas, disadvantaged businesses, and small
businesses.
17
For example, all of HUD’s 12 programs that can provide
support to entrepreneurs are focused on serving beneficiaries in
economically distressed areas or target benefits at low- to moderate-
income individuals. SBA’s 19 programs are all limited to serving small
businesses, with several programs that either target or exclusively serve
disadvantaged businesses and microenterprises.
18
16
Equity investments are capital provided to a business to purchase common or preferred
stock, or a similar instrument. SBA can guarantee surety bonds (that is, an agreement
between a surety company and the owner of a project that a contract will be completed)
for contracts up to $2 million. These contracts can cover bonds for small and emerging
contractors who cannot obtain surety bonds through regular commercial channels. SBA’s
guarantee gives sureties an incentive to provide bonding for eligible contractors and
thereby strengthens a contractor’s ability to obtain bonding and greater access to
contracting opportunities.
Eight of USDA’s 13
programs are limited to rural service areas, and four of these programs
are limited to small businesses or microenterprises. Among Commerce’s
eight programs, six are limited to serving beneficiaries in economically
distressed areas, while two exclusively serve disadvantaged businesses.
17
The definition of rural varies among these programs, but according to USDA—the
agency that administers many of the economic development programs that serve rural
areas—the term rural typically covers areas with population limits ranging from less than
2,500 to 50,000. Based on statutory language, we characterize economically distressed
areas as communities with high concentrations of low- and moderate-income families or
high rates of unemployment and/or underemployment. See, e.g., 42 U.S.C. § 3141; 42
U.S.C. § 5301. Likewise, based on statutory language, we characterize disadvantaged
businesses as those owned by women, minority groups, and veterans, among other
factors. See, e.g., 15 U.S.C. § 637(a); 15 U.S.C. § 656. The definition of small business
varies among these programs, but according to SBA—the agency that administers many
of the economic development programs that serve small businesses—the term small
business refers to businesses that have annual receipts or total employee numbers under
an agency-defined value for their specific industry.
18
Microenterprises are generally defined as commercial enterprises that have ten or fewer
employees.
Page 9 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Entrepreneurs may fall into more than one beneficiary category—for
example, an entrepreneur may be in an area that is both rural and
economically distressed. Therefore, these entrepreneurs would be
eligible, based on program authority, for more than one subset of
program. For example, a small business in a rural, economically
distressed area, such as Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania, could, in
terms of program authority, receive a broad range of technical assistance
through at least nine programs at all four of the agencies, including:
• Commerce’s Economic Adjustment Assistance;
• HUD’s CDBG/States, Rural Innovation Fund, and Section 4 Capacity
Building;
• SBA’s SCORE and Small Business Development Centers;
19
• USDA’s1890 Land Grant Institutions, Rural Business Enterprise
Grants, and Rural Business Opportunity Grants.
and
20
Similarly, a small business that is both minority- and women-owned in an
urban, noneconomically distressed area, such as Seattle, Washington,
could in terms of program authority, receive a broad range of technical
assistance through at least seven programs at three of the four agencies,
including:
• Commerce’s Minority Business Centers;
• HUD’s CDBG/Entitlement and Section 4 Capacity Building; and
• SBA’s Program for Investment in Micro-entrepreneurs (PRIME),
SCORE, Small Business Development Centers, and Women’s
Business Centers.
19
SCORE, formerly Service Corps of Retired Executives, provides technical assistance
support for small business, start-ups and entrepreneurs.
20
HUD’s Rural Innovation Fund program did not receive funding in fiscal year 2011 but is
still active. USDA’s1890 Land Grant Institutions received an unspecified amount of
funding through USDA’s Salaries and Expense account rather than program
appropriations.
Page 10 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Entrepreneurs may also be eligible for multiple subsets of financial
assistance programs based on their specific characteristics. For example,
a small business in a rural, economically distressed area, such as
Bourbon County, Kansas, could in terms of authority, receive financial
assistance in the form of guaranteed or direct loans for a broad range of
uses through at least eight programs at the four agencies, including:
• Commerce’s Economic Adjustment Assistance;
• HUD’s CDBG/States, Rural Innovation Fund and Section 4 Capacity
Building;
• SBA’s 7(a) Loan Program and Small Business Investment
Companies; and
• USDA’s Business and Industry Loans and Rural Business Enterprise
Grants.
A small business that is both minority and women-owned in an urban,
noneconomically distressed area, such as Raleigh, North Carolina, could
receive financial assistance in the form of guaranteed or direct loans for a
broad range of uses through at least four programs at two of the four
agencies, including:
• HUD’s CDBG/Entitlement and Section 4 Capacity Building; and
• SBA’s 7(a) Loan Program and Small Business Investment
Companies.
Five programs provide government contracting assistance to
entrepreneurs, but our analysis did not identify significant overlap in the
types of assistance these programs provide or the types of entrepreneurs
they serve. While these five programs are all administered by SBA and
can serve businesses in any industry, they tend to target specific types of
entrepreneurs and provide unique types of assistance. For example, the
Procurement Assistance to Small Businesses program coordinates
access to government contracts for small and disadvantaged businesses
with other federal agencies, while the 8(a) Business Development
Program coordinates certification of eligible disadvantaged businesses for
Page 11 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
the contracts made available at these other agencies, in addition to
providing business development assistance during their 9-year term.
21
While many programs overlap in terms of statutory authority,
entrepreneurs may in reality have fewer options to access assistance
from multiple programs. Agencies often rely on intermediaries (that is,
third-party entities such as nonprofit organizations, higher education
institutions, or local governments that use federal grants to provide
eligible assistance directly to entrepreneurs) to provide specific support to
entrepreneurs, and these intermediaries vary in terms of their location
and the types of assistance they provide. For example, while
entrepreneurs seeking technical assistance in Susquehanna County,
Pennsylvania, are eligible to receive this support through USDA’s1890
Land Grant Institutions program, the closest funded intermediary is in
Delaware, making it unlikely that such an entrepreneur would utilize
services through this program. Additionally, intermediaries we spoke to in
several areas said they typically provide a more limited range of services
to entrepreneurs than are allowed under their statutory authority. For
example, two intermediaries that we interviewed in Texas that were
authorized to provide a broad range of technical support to entrepreneurs
through SBA’s Small Business Development Center and Commerce’s
Minority Business Center noted that they each specialized in a narrower
subset of services and referred beneficiaries to each other and other
resources for some services outside of their niches. Specifically, the
intermediary at the Small Business Development Center noted that they
provide a range of long-term services to small businesses over different
phases of development, while the intermediary at the Minority Business
Center noted that they focused specifically on larger minority-owned firms
as well as start-up companies.
Overlapping programs may also employ different mechanisms to provide
similar types of support to entrepreneurs. For example, programs may
support technical assistance through different types of intermediaries that
provide services to entrepreneurs. USDA’s Rural Business Opportunity
Grants program can provide technical assistance through local
governments, nonprofit corporations, Indian tribes, and cooperatives that
are located in rural areas, while SBA’s SCORE program utilizes retired
21
SBA’s 8(a) program, named for a section of the Small Business Act, is a development
program created to help small, disadvantaged businesses compete in the American
economy and access the federal procurement market.
Page 12 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
business professionals and others that volunteer their time to provide
assistance. Additionally, programs may support financial assistance in the
form of loans through loan guarantees, direct loans, or support for
revolving loan funds. SBA’s 7(a) Loan program provides guarantees on
loans made by private sector lenders, while USDA’s Intermediary Re-
lending program provides financing to intermediaries to operate revolving
loan funds.
Additionally, some programs distribute funding through multiple layers of
intermediaries before it reaches entrepreneurs. For example, HUD’s
Section 4 Capacity Building program is only authorized to provide grants
to five national organizations, which pass funding on to a number of local
grantees, including community development corporations that may use
the funding to provide technical or financial assistance to entrepreneurs.
HUD officials also noted that most of their programs allow local grantees
discretion on whether to use funds to support entrepreneurs or for other
authorized purposes. Other programs may competitively award grants to
multiple intermediaries working jointly in the same community to serve
entrepreneurs. For example, Commerce’s Economic Adjustment
Assistance program can provide grants to intermediaries, such as
consortiums of local governments and nonprofits, which in turn provide
technical or financial assistance to entrepreneurs.
Although we identified a number of examples of statutory overlap, we did
not find evidence of duplication among these programs (that is, instances
when two or more agencies or programs are engaged in the same
activities to provide the same services to the same beneficiaries) based
on available data. However, most agencies were not able to provide the
programmatic information, such as data on users of the program that is
necessary to determine whether or not duplication actually exists among
the programs. The agencies’ data-collecting practices will be discussed at
greater length later in this report.
Page 13 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
As previously discussed, 35 programs distributed across the four
agencies provide technical assistance, including business training and
counseling. While the existence of multiple programs in and of itself is not
a problem, the delivery system of these fragmented and overlapping
technical assistance programs contains many components (see fig. 1).
Several entrepreneurs and various technical assistance providers with
whom we spoke—including agency field offices, intermediaries, and other
local service providers—told us that the system can be confusing and that
some entrepreneurs do not know what services are available or where to
go for assistance. As discussed earlier, federal funds typically flow from
the federal agencies to different eligible intermediaries, which are third-
party entities that receive federal funds, such as nonprofits or universities.
These intermediaries in turn may provide technical assistance to
entrepreneurs by, for example, helping them to develop a business plan
or put together a loan package to obtain financing. For instance, SBA’s
Women’s Business Center and Commerce’s Minority Business Center
programs can provide technical assistance through different
intermediaries, such as the Arkansas Women’s Business Center and the
University of Hawaii. Although intermediaries are the primary providers of
technical assistance, agency field offices may also provide some
technical assistance. For example, USDA’s Rural Development state
offices may provide advice on how to complete their respective grant
applications. SBA’s district offices may also discuss the different business
structures available.
Some Entrepreneurs
Struggle to Navigate
Technical Assistance
Programs
Page 14 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Figure 1: Fragmented Delivery System of Federally Funded Technical Assistance to Entrepreneurs
Note: While our work focuses on the four federal agencies’ economic development programs that
support entrepreneurs, many state governments also have economic development departments that
assist, plan, and support economic development activities. Local governments and nonprofit
organizations may also offer programs that can be used to support economic development activities.
In addition, there may be other federal agencies involved with supporting economic development.
Some intermediaries receive support from multiple public- and private-sector institutions, and some
entrepreneurs we spoke with indicated that they had received assistance from multiple sources.
Page 15 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Technical assistance providers sometimes attempt to help entrepreneurs
navigate the system by referring them to other programs, but these efforts
are not consistently successful. Some of these providers told us that they
assess the entrepreneur’s needs to determine whether to assist them or
refer them to another entity that could provide the assistance more
effectively. For example, if an 1890 Land Grant intermediary were not able
to assist an entrepreneur, it might refer the entrepreneur to SBA, USDA, or
a local provider. However, such referrals are not always successful. For
example, an entrepreneur we spoke with described a case in which he
needed assistance with developing a business plan but was unable to
receive this assistance, even after several referrals. Some technical
assistance providers that we spoke with either did not appear to fully
understand other technical assistance programs or thought that others did
not fully understand their programs. For example, one technical assistance
provider told us that some technical assistance providers were focused on
more established businesses, but when we reached out to some of these
providers, they said they served all entrepreneurs. This lack of
understanding could prevent providers from making helpful referrals and
leveraging other programs and limit the effectiveness of the programs.
In addition, programs’ Internet resources can also be difficult to navigate.
Each agency has its own separate website that provides information to
entrepreneurs, but they often direct entrepreneurs to other websites for
additional information. For example, the SBA website directs users to
another website that lists the Small Business Development Centers,
which then directs users to another website that provides some
information on the centers’ available services. SBA, Commerce, USDA,
and other agencies have recently collaborated to develop a joint website
called BusinessUSA with the goal of making it easier for businesses to
access services. However, the site was not fully operational as of June
2012, and none of the entrepreneurs and almost all the technical
assistance providers we spoke with were not yet aware of it. As of June
2012, this website listed a number of potential technical assistance
programs across different federal agencies with links to the programs’
websites. Some technical assistance providers and entrepreneurs
suggested that a single source to help entrepreneurs quickly find
information instead of sorting through different websites would be helpful.
Page 16 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Enhanced collaboration between agencies could potentially address
some of the difficulties entrepreneurs experience and improve program
efficiency. In prior work we identified practices that can help to enhance
and sustain collaboration among federal agencies, which can help to
maximize performance and results, and have recommended that the
agencies follow them.
22
These collaborative practices include identifying
common outcomes, establishing joint strategies, leveraging resources,
determining roles and responsibilities, and developing compatible policies
and procedures. In addition, GPRAMA requires agencies to describe in
annual performance plans how they are working with other agencies to
achieve their performance goals and relevant federal government
performance goals.
23
The agencies have taken initial steps to improve how they collaborate to
provide technical assistance to entrepreneurs by, for example, entering
into formal agreements with each other, but they have not pursued a
number of other good collaborative practices we have previously
identified, as the following examples illustrate:
• USDA and SBA entered into a formal agreement in April 2010 to
coordinate their efforts aimed at supporting businesses in rural areas.
In April 2011, USDA began to survey its state offices to help the
agency gauge the level of collaboration between its field staff and
SBA, as well as to identify additional opportunities to enhance
collaboration. However, the agencies’ business development
programs that can support start-up businesses—USDA’s Rural
Business Enterprise Grant and SBA’s Small Business Development
Centers—have yet to determine roles and responsibilities, find ways
to leverage each other’s resources, or establish compatible policies
and procedures to collaboratively support rural businesses.
• The Appalachian Regional Development Initiative is a formal
agreement, which began in November 2010, among the Appalachian
Regional Commission (which coordinates economic development
activities in the Appalachian region), the four agencies, and other
22
GAO-06-15.
23
Pub. L. No. 111-352, 124 Stat. 3866 (2011).
Agencies’ Collaboration
Has Been Limited
Page 17 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
agencies.
24
• In August 2011 SBA and the Delta Regional Authority (which
coordinates economic development activities in the Delta region)
entered into a formal agreement to better deploy and coordinate
resources for small businesses located in the Delta region.
This agreement is intended to strengthen and diversify the
Appalachian economy through better deployment and coordination of
federal resources. According to officials at the Appalachian Regional
Commission, the agencies did participate in a joint workshop to
present the locally available resources from business development to
infrastructure in the fall 2011, and USDA is one of its stronger
partners. However, the agencies have not established joint strategies,
determined roles and responsibilities, or developed compatible
policies and procedures for carrying out the common outcomes
outlined in their agreements at the local level where technical
assistance is provided.
25
• In June 2011, the President created the White House Rural Council to
promote economic prosperity in rural areas. It is chaired by the
Secretary of Agriculture and includes HUD, Commerce, SBA, and
other agencies. The council is working to better coordinate federal
programs in order to maximize the impact of federal investment in
rural areas. Even though the council has announced a number of
initiatives, such as helping rural small businesses access capital, the
As part
of this agreement, in April 2012 the two entities announced a joint
effort to launch an program to support entrepreneurs called Operation
JumpStart. Operation JumpStart is designed as a hands-on,
microenterprise development program that is intended to help
entrepreneurs test the feasibility of their business ideas and plan to
launch new ventures. However, their effort thus far has been limited.
While they entered into a formal agreement to launch the program,
this agreement did not include any determinations of specific roles
and responsibilities or establish compatible policies and procedures to
collaboratively support these small businesses.
24
The Appalachian region is made up of 420 counties in parts of 12 states—Alabama,
Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania,
South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia—as well as all of West Virginia.
25
The Delta region is made up of 252 counties and parishes in parts of eight states—
Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee.
Page 18 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
agencies have yet to implement many of our other good collaborative
practices.
In addition, while most of these agencies at the headquarters level have
agreed to work together by signing formal agreements to administer some
of their similar programs, the agencies generally have yet to develop
compatible guidance to implement these agreements in the field. As
noted previously, some intermediaries we spoke with that provide
technical assistance through agency programs collaborate by referring
entrepreneurs to other federal programs and agencies that they believe
may better meet their needs. However these efforts are inconsistent and
do not always result in entrepreneurs obtaining the services they are
seeking. OMB and the four agencies also have recently taken steps to
implement GPRAMA, which requires them to coordinate better; however,
implementation was still in the early phases as of May 2012 and had not
yet affected how they administer their programs.
Implementing additional good collaborative practices could improve how
the federal government supports entrepreneurs by, for example, helping
agencies make more useful referrals, meet more diverse needs of
entrepreneurs, and present a more consistent delivery system to
entrepreneurs:
• Collaborating agencies that agree upon roles and responsibilities can
clarify who will do what, organize their joint and individual efforts, and
facilitate coordinated decision making. This effort could help agencies
not only initiate and sustain collaboration but also determine who is in
the best position to support an entrepreneur based on the client’s
need, which could lead to more effective referrals.
• Because collaborating agencies bring different resources and
capacities to their efforts, they can look for opportunities to leverage
each other’s resources, thus obtaining additional benefits that would
not be available if they were working separately. Being able to
leverage each other’s resources could help agencies more effectively
and efficiently support entrepreneurs because they may be able to
meet more diverse needs by drawing on one another’s strengths.
Page 19 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
• Compatible standards, policies, procedures, and data systems could
help to sustain collaborative efforts. As agencies standardize, for
example, procedures for supporting entrepreneurs, they can more
efficiently support entrepreneurs through more consistent service-
delivery methods across agencies and programs. This could be
particularly helpful for entrepreneurs who are not familiar with the
federal programs.
In addition, GPRAMA’s crosscutting framework requires that agencies
collaborate in order to address issues such as economic development
that transcend more than one agency, and GPRAMA directs agencies to
describe how they are working with each other to achieve their program
goals. As discussed previously, without more substantial collaboration,
the delivery of service to entrepreneurs, particularly those who are
unfamiliar with federal economic development programs, may not be as
effective and efficient as possible.
Agencies do not maintain information in a way that would enable them to
track activities for most of their programs. Further, the agencies lack
information on why some programs have failed to meet some or all of
their goals. While information from program evaluations can help
measure program effectiveness, agencies have conducted evaluations of
only 20 of the 52 active programs since 2000.
While the four agencies collected at least some information on program
activities in either an electronic records system or through paper files,
most were unable to summarize the information in a way that could be
used to help administer the programs. Promising practices of program
administration that we have identified include a strong capacity to collect
and analyze accurate, useful, and timely data.
26
26
Harold I. Steinberg, Using Performance Information to Drive Performance Improvement,
Association of Government Accountants CPAG Research Series: Report No. 29
(Alexandria, VA: Dec. 2011).
According to OMB, being
able to track and measure specific program data can help agencies
diagnose problems, identify drivers of future performance, evaluate risk,
support collaboration, and inform follow-up actions. Analyses of patterns
Agencies Lack
Information to Track
Program Activities
and Measure
Performance
Agencies Do Not Maintain
Information to Enable
Tracking of Activities for
Most Programs
Page 20 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
and anomalies can also help agencies discover ways to achieve more
value for the taxpayer’s money. In addition, agencies can use this
information to assess whether their specific program activities are
contributing as planned to the agency goals.
In addition, government internal control standards state that agencies
should promptly and accurately record transactions to maintain their
relevance and value for management decision making. Furthermore, this
information should be readily available for use by management and
others so that they can carry out their duties with the goal of achieving all
of their objectives, including making operating decisions and allocating
resources.
27
All four agencies collect program information but do not track detailed,
readily available information for most programs, such as the type of
technical assistance that their programs provide or fund, which is
necessary to effectively administer their programs. For example,
Commerce’s Economic Adjustment Assistance, HUD’s Section 4
Capacity Building, SBA’s PRIME, and USDA’s Rural Business
Opportunity Grant Program can all support a broad range of technical
assistance to various types of entrepreneurs, but agencies are unable to
provide information on the types of services provided that would be
necessary to compare activities across programs. Similarly, the agencies
typically do not track detailed information on the characteristics of
entrepreneurs that they serve, such as whether they are located in rural
or economically distressed areas or the entrepreneurs’ type of industry.
Most of the agencies collect detailed information on several of their
programs in a way that could potentially help them more efficiently
administer their programs, as the following examples illustrate:
This guidance calls for agencies to go beyond merely
collecting information, stating that they should systematically analyze, or
track, it over time to inform decision making. For example, the agencies
could track this information to identify trends on how the programs are
being used in different areas of the country. This information could help
the agencies strategically target program resources to support the unique
needs in each geographic area.
27
GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1.
Page 21 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
• SBA collects detailed information on the type of technical assistance
provided and type of entrepreneur served for 5 of its 10 technical
assistance programs. SBA categorizes the types of technical
assistance it provides by 17 categories of training and counseling,
such as helping a business develop its business plan. All of this
information is maintained in an electronic database that is accessible
by agency staff.
• For all of its programs, USDA collects detailed information on the
industry of each of the entrepreneurs it supports. In addition, USDA
collects detailed information (19 categories) on how entrepreneurs
use proceeds, such as for working capital, provided through five of its
financial assistance programs. USDA maintains this information in an
electronic database, and officials stated that they can provide this type
of detailed information upon request.
• For all eight of its technical assistance programs, Commerce collects
information on the type of entrepreneur served and the entrepreneurs’
industry.
While HUD tracked limited program information on the type of support it
provides to entrepreneurs, the agency collects information on other
program activities and uses it to monitor program compliance. HUD staff
meet quarterly with the Secretary of HUD to discuss these program data
and determine changes that should be made to improve how they carry
out program activities. Table 1 summarizes the type of information that
agencies maintain in a readily available format that could be tracked to
help administer the programs.
Page 22 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Table 1: Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs and Maintain Readily Available Information, by Agency
35 technical assistance programs
Commerce (8) HUD (9) SBA (10) USDA (8) Total (35)
Type of technical assistance
provided?
yes 2 0 5 0 7
no 6 9 5 8 28
Industry entrepreneur is
working in?
yes 8 0 5 8 21
no 0 9 5 0 14
Type of entrepreneur by
targeted categories?
a
yes 8 1 5 7 21
no 0 8 5 1 14
30 financial assistance programs
Commerce (2) HUD (10) SBA (10) USDA (8) Total (30)
Type of financial assistance
provided?
yes 2 8 9 8 27
no 0 2 1 0 3
Use of proceeds? yes 2 1 7 5 15
no 0 9 3 3 15
Industry entrepreneur is
working in?
yes 2 0 5 8 15
no 0 10 5 0 15
Type of entrepreneur by
targeted categories?
yes 2 3 8 5 18
no 0 7 2 3 12
Source: GAO analysis of information provided by Commerce, HUD, USDA, and SBA.
Note: This table is based on 50 of the 52 programs that can support entrepreneurs because we
excluded the 2 SBA programs that only support government contracting assistance. Some of the 50
programs can provide both financial and technical assistance.
a
Targeted categories can include businesses in rural or economically distressed areas,
disadvantaged businesses, or small businesses.
Officials who administer these programs provided a number of reasons
why they do not track detailed program information for all programs in a
way that could be used for program administration purposes. For
example, some officials stated they do not rely on program information
with this level of detail to make decisions about their programs. As
previously discussed, many of these programs are administered by
intermediaries, and these intermediaries may maintain detailed
information on the services they provide. Agencies do not always require
the intermediaries to forward all of this detailed information to
headquarters. Rather, an intermediary may, for example, submit data
Page 23 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
summaries of the support they have provided during the reporting period
in a narrative format—a format that cannot be easily aggregated or
analyzed. Other agency officials noted that this type of summary-level
information they collect and maintain at headquarters is sufficient for their
purposes and complies with OMB reporting guidelines. However, without
tracking more detailed program information, such as the specific type of
support provided and the entrepreneurs served, agencies may not be
able to make informed decisions or identify risks and problem areas
within their programs based on factors such as how entrepreneurs make
use of program services or funding. Furthermore, agencies may not be
able to understand the extent that their programs are serving their
intended purposes.
Our review found that for fiscal year 2011, a number of programs that
support entrepreneurs failed to meet some or all of their performance
goals. Measuring performance allows organizations to track the progress
they are making toward their goals and gives managers crucial
information on which to base their organizational and management
decisions. Leading organizations recognize that performance measures
can create powerful incentives to influence organizational and individual
behavior. Some of their good practices include setting and measuring
performance goals. GPRAMA requires agencies to develop annual
performance plans that include performance goals for an agency’s
program activities and accompanying performance measures. According
to GPRAMA, these performance goals should be in a quantifiable and
measurable form to define the level of performance to be achieved for
program activities each year. The agencies should also be able to identify
which external factors might affect goal accomplishment and explain why
a goal was not met. Such plans can help to reinforce the connection
between the long-term strategic goals outlined in their strategic plans and
the day-to-day activities of their managers and staff.
We found that of the 33 programs that support entrepreneurs and set
goals, 19 did not meet any of their goals or only met some of their goals
Some Programs Failed to
Meet Their Goals
Page 24 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
(see table 2).
28
Table 2: Accomplishment Data for 33 Programs that Support Entrepreneurs and Set
Goals, Fiscal Year 2011
These programs include Commerce’s Economic
Development/Support for Planning Organizations, HUD’s Indian
Community Development Block Grant, SBA’s 504 loan, and USDA’s
Rural Business Opportunity Grant programs. Appendix III provides more
information on fiscal year 2011 goals and accomplishments for each
program that has goals and accomplishment data available.
Programs that did
not meet goals
Programs that met
some goals
Programs that
met all goals
Commerce 1 5 2
HUD 2 0 0
SBA 2 5 7
USDA 4 0 3
Total 9 10 12
Source: GAO analysis of data from Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA.
Note: Two programs have goals but did not have goal accomplishment information. Goal
accomplishment information for HUD’s Section 4 Capacity Building for Affordable Housing and
Community Development program is unknown because HUD did not provide goal accomplishment
information. Goal accomplishment information for USDA’s Small Business Innovation Research
program is not available because the program goals are based on 2-year time periods and the current
period has not yet ended.
Agency officials provided a number of reasons why they thought these
programs did not meet their goals, including that the goals were estimates
and program funding was lower than anticipated. In addition, some
agency officials could not identify any causes for the failure to meet goals
nor had they attempted to determine the specific reasons for the failures.
28
Nineteen programs did not have fiscal year 2011 performance goals: HUD’s CDBG
Insular Areas, CDBG Entitlement, CDBG States, CDBG Non-entitlement Grants in Hawaii,
Section 108, CDBG Disaster Recovery, Rural Innovation Fund, Hispanic Serving
Institutions Assisting Communities, and Alaska Native/Native Hawaiian Institutions
Assisting Communities; SBA’s PRIME, Small Business Innovation Research, Small
Business Technology Transfer, New Markets Venture Capital, and Federal and State
Technology Partnership programs; and USDA’s Small Socially-Disadvantaged Producer
Grants, 1890’s Land Grants Institutions, Agriculture Innovation Center, Biomass Research
and Development Initiative, and Woody Biomass Utilization Grants. While the agencies
are not required to have goals for each program, agency officials said that 6 of the 19
programs did not have goals because they were either temporary, were not funded, or
were marked for elimination by agencies. One of the 19 programs that did not meet its
goals was not funded in fiscal year 2011.
Page 25 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Programs that are failing to meet performance goals without a clear
understanding of the reasons could result in agencies not being able to
identify and address specific parts of programs that may not be working
well. Additionally, without more detailed data on the activities of individual
intermediaries, determining which of these third-parties are effectively
administering these programs and helping meet program goals is difficult.
Making decisions without this information could result in scarce resources
being directed away from programs, or intermediaries, that are effective
and towards those that are not meeting their objectives or struggling to
meet their objectives.
Over the past 12 years, agencies have conducted program evaluations of
20 of the 52 programs that support entrepreneurs.
29
29
We reviewed the methodologies of these studies to ensure they were sound and
determined they were sufficiently reliable to report high-level findings related to the
programs’ overall effectiveness.
Most of these 20
programs were evaluated once in the past decade. The studies that were
conducted focus on a variety of areas, including customer satisfaction
and the programs’ economic impacts, and report an array of findings
related to the effectiveness of the programs. For example, some
evaluations reported the actual number of jobs produced as a result of
program investments, while one evaluation reported that programs were
more useful for larger firms than smaller firms. Some of the differences
among the findings are tied to the varying questions the studies sought to
answer and the methods that were used to answer them. The questions
and methods employed are typically informed by the organization’s
purpose for pursuing these studies. These purposes could include, for
example, assessing program impact, identifying areas for improvement,
or guiding resource allocation. Figure 2 describes the scope of each
program evaluation and the findings related to program effectiveness.
Appendix V provides more information on each program evaluation.
Agencies Have Not
Evaluated the Majority of
Programs That Support
Entrepreneurs
Page 26 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Figure 2: Evaluations of Programs that Support Entrepreneurs, 2000-2012
Page 27 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Although GPRAMA does not require agencies to conduct formal program
evaluations, it does require agencies to describe program evaluations that
were used to establish or revise strategic goals as well as program
evaluations they plan to conduct in the future. Additionally, while not
required, agencies can use periodic program evaluations to complement
ongoing performance measurement. Program evaluations that
systematically study the benefits of programs may help identify the extent
to which overlapping and fragmented programs are achieving their
objectives. In addition, program evaluations can help agencies determine
reasons why a performance goal was not met and give an agency
direction on how to improve program performance. For instance, 8 of the
33 programs that were not evaluated by the administering agency failed
to meet all of their performance goals. Performance evaluations could
have helped agencies understand why these programs’ goals were not
met. Further, program evaluations, which examine a broader range of
information than is feasible on an ongoing basis through performance
measures, can help assess the impact and effectiveness of a program.
30
While many of the agencies agree that performance evaluations can add
value, some stated that they have limited funds and cannot afford
performance evaluation studies. Other agency officials stated that they
are not allowed to use program funds for evaluation. For example, USDA
officials stated that they are not allowed to use program funds to study the
effectiveness of the Small Business Innovation Research program. While
program evaluations can be expensive, there are various methods that
agencies can employ to make them more cost-effective. For example,
agencies could conduct a program evaluation that relies on their own data
to prevent them from purchasing data from a vendor.
31
30
GAO, Program Evaluation: Studies Helped Agencies Measure or Explain Program
Performance,
Without periodic
program evaluations, the agencies’ ability to manage programs effectively
and efficiently may be limited. Program evaluations can also potentially
help agencies understand why some programs have failed to meet some
or all of their goals, as previously discussed. Moreover, without this type
GAO/GGD-00-204 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 29, 2000).
31
In July 2007, we recommended that SBA further utilize the loan performance information
it already collects to better report how small businesses fare after they participate in the
7(a) program. While SBA agreed with the recommendation, the agency has not
implemented it. See GAO, Small Business Administration: Additional Measures Needed to
Assess 7(a) Loan Program’s Performance, GAO-07-769 (Washington, D.C.: Jul. 13,
2007).
Page 28 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
of information, Congress and the agencies may not be able to better
ensure that scarce resources are being directed to the most effective
programs and activities.
In order to support entrepreneurs, federal economic development
programs must be efficient and accessible to the people they are
intended to serve. However, navigating these overlapping and
fragmented programs can be an ongoing challenge for some
entrepreneurs. While the agencies have a number of interagency
agreements in place, our review found that agency field staff do not
consistently collaborate and may not be able to help entrepreneurs
navigate the large number of programs available to them. We have
identified practices that can help to support collaboration among federal
agencies and programs. In addition, greater collaboration is one way
agencies can help overcome overlap and fragmentation among programs
within and across agencies. Moreover, without enhanced collaboration
and coordination, agencies may not be able to make the best use of
limited federal resources and may not reach their intended beneficiaries
in the most effective and efficient manner.
In addition, given the number of federal programs focused on supporting
entrepreneurs, agencies need specific information about these programs
to best allocate limited federal resources and make decisions about better
administering and structuring the programs. In our February 2012 report
on duplication, overlap, and fragmentation, we expected to recommend
that Congress tie funding to program performance and that OMB and the
agencies explore opportunities to restructure programs through such
means as consolidation or elimination. However, decisions about funding
and restructuring would be difficult without better performance and
evaluation information. Thus, making these recommendations would be
premature until the agencies address a number of deficiencies.
Specifically, agencies typically do not collect information that would
enable them to track the services they provide and to whom they provide
those services. This practice is not consistent with government standards
for internal controls. Without such information, the agencies may not be
able to administer the programs in a way that will result in the most
efficient and effective federal support to entrepreneurs.
Moreover, most of the programs that set goals did not meet them or only
met some of them, and agency officials could not always identify reasons
why program goals were not met. Additionally, many of these programs
have not been evaluated in 10 years or more. GPRAMA requires
Conclusions
Page 29 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
agencies to set and measure annual performance goals, and recognizes
the value of program evaluations because they can help agencies assess
programs’ effectiveness and improve program performance. Agencies’
lack of understanding of why programs have failed to meet goals may
limit decision makers’ ability to understand which programs are most
effective and allocate federal resources accordingly.
To help improve the efficiency and effectiveness of federal efforts to
support entrepreneurs, we make the following recommendations:
• The Director of the Office and Management and Budget, the
Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, and
Housing and Urban Development, and the Administrator of the Small
Business Administration should work together to identify opportunities
to enhance collaboration among programs, both within and across
agencies.
• The Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, and
Housing and Urban Development, and the Administrator of the Small
Business Administration should consistently collect information that
would enable them to track the specific type of assistance programs
provide and the entrepreneurs they serve and use this information to
help administer their programs.
• The Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, and
Housing and Urban Development, and the Administrator of the Small
Business Administration should conduct more program evaluations to
better understand why programs have not met performance goals and
their overall effectiveness.
GAO provided a draft of this report to OMB, Commerce, HUD, SBA, and
USDA for review and comment. We also provided excerpts of appendix
IV to all of the agencies with programs listed for their review. Commerce,
HUD, and USDA provided written comments. Commerce, HUD, and SBA
also provided technical comments, which were incorporated where
appropriate. OMB did not provide comments on the draft report. All
written comments are reprinted in appendixes VI, VII and VIII.
The Acting Secretary of Commerce stated that we may wish to consider
the complementary role many agencies play in the field of economic
development and the need for varied but complementary activities to
Recommendations
Agency Comments
and Our Evaluation
Page 30 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
address the complexities of entrepreneurs. She commented that what
may appear as duplication at a higher level is in reality a portfolio of
distinct services meeting unique needs. Our report notes that in some
instances it may be appropriate for multiple agencies or entities to be
involved in the same programmatic or policy area due to the nature or
magnitude of the federal effort. We found that many of the 52 programs
we examined overlap in terms of statutory authority; our report does not
state that duplication exists among these programs. However, we found
that most of these agencies were not able to provide programmatic
information, such as data on users of the programs that is necessary to
determine whether or not duplication actually exists.
The Acting Secretary also stated that federal agencies do successfully
collaborate and forge policy partnerships, and noted that EDA plays a key
role in leading and shaping federal policy for fostering collaborative
regional economic development. As noted in our report, Commerce,
HUD, SBA, and USDA have taken initial steps to improve how they
collaborate to provide technical assistance to entrepreneurs and cites
specific examples of these collaborative efforts. However, GAO found that
the four agencies, including Commerce, have not pursued a number of
other good collaborative practices we have previously identified. For
example, our report states that the White House Rural Council, comprised
of Commerce and other federal agencies, is working to better coordinate
federal programs in order to maximize the impact of federal investment in
rural areas. Although the council has announced a number of initiatives,
such as helping rural small businesses access capital, we found that the
agencies have yet to implement many of our other good collaborative
practices such as developing compatible guidance to implement inter-
agency agreements. For example, we found that while most of these
agencies at the headquarters level have agreed to work together by
signing formal agreements to administer some of their similar programs,
the agencies generally have yet to develop compatible guidance to
implement these agreements in the field.
Finally, the Acting Secretary stated that EDA agrees with our report’s
focus on the need for more specific information tracking and more
frequent performance evaluation. She noted that EDA has established
performance measures for each of its programs, and that these
performance measures were subject to thorough review and validation
procedures. She also noted that EDA routinely conducts evaluations of its
programs (often limited only by lack of resources). However, the Acting
Secretary stated that efforts to monitor and track project progress seem to
have been outside of the scope of our report, based on many of the
Page 31 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
general statements made in the report about the need for additional work
in this area. As previously stated, we found that most of the agencies
were not able to provide programmatic information for programs that can
support entrepreneurs. Our report also states that Commerce does collect
information on the type of entrepreneur served and the entrepreneur’s
industry for all eight of its programs that can provide technical assistance;
however, the report notes that Commerce does not collect information on
the specific type of technical assistance provided to entrepreneurs for six
of these eight programs—information necessary to compare activities
across programs. We provided summary information on evaluations
conducted by the agencies in the report, including Commerce. We also
found that Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA had not evaluated the
majority of the 52 programs that can support entrepreneurs, including four
of the eight programs Commerce administers. We concluded that
program evaluations, when combined with efforts to collect information,
can be a positive step toward greater understanding of programs’
effectiveness.
HUD’s Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing expressed
concern regarding our reference on the highlights page of the report to
the Indian CDBG program as one of 19 economic development programs
that failed to meet their entrepreneurial performance goals. She stated
that the entire program may be unfairly perceived as ineffective as a
result of this statement. Our report states that 33 of 52 programs we
examined set goals related to entrepreneurial assistance and that 19 of
these 33 programs did not meet any of their goals or only met some of
their goals. Our report does not state that these 19 programs were
ineffective. We added language on the highlights page of the report to
clarify that our findings were only based on each program’s goals related
to entrepreneurial assistance.
The Assistant Secretary also stated that our report misrepresents the
Indian CDBG program as an economic development program. She noted
that while economic development is an eligible program activity, only 3
percent of the dollars awarded under the program since 2005 funded
economic development activities. She further noted that most of the
program’s grants were used for community development activities, such
as building community buildings, developing infrastructure of various
types, and rehabilitating housing units on Indian lands. As noted in our
report, the 52 programs we examined for this report typically fund a
variety of activities in addition to supporting entrepreneurs. In addition, the
report notes that most of these programs either target or exclusively serve
particular types of businesses.
Page 32 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
The Assistant Secretary noted that an independent evaluation of the
Indian CDBG program was conducted in 2006. HUD had not previously
provided us with this evaluation. We revised our report to state that the
Indian CDBG program had been evaluated within the past 12 years.
Finally, the Assistant Secretary stated that HUD supports efforts to
accurately measure the performance of its programs. She noted that
HUD’s Office of Native American Programs had recognized limitations in
its method of projecting and measuring performance in the Indian CDBG
program. She also stated that the office had begun drafting a revised form
to be used at grant application and grant closeout to better collect
performance measurement data, and that the office was examining its
data collection procedures as well as the methodology used to establish
program targets. These actions are consistent with our recommendation
that the agencies collect program information and use it to help
administer their programs.
USDA’s Under Secretary for Rural Development stated that he agreed
with our report’s statements that entrepreneurs play a vital role in the U.S.
economy and that no duplication exists among federal programs that
assist entrepreneurs. However, he disagreed with some of the other
observations in our report. First, he stated that our report broadly portrays
federal programs that assist entrepreneurs and does not highlight the
unique characteristics of each agency, such as USDA’s Rural
Development’s specialization in rural economic development and its
network of state and local area offices. Our report notes that most of
USDA’s 13 programs that can support entrepreneurs are limited to areas
with a rural statutory definition. We also include discussion based on our
outreach to participants in rural economic development, including regional
commissions and authorities, on their experiences with the four federal
agencies in rural economic development efforts. More importantly,
however, when considering the unique characteristics of the various
programs, we emphasize the need for agencies to conduct program
evaluations to assess effectiveness. While the Under Secretary suggests
that the rural focus and the network of state and local area offices
enhance program effectiveness, USDA has not conducted evaluations to
support this conclusion.
Second, USDA’s Under Secretary stated that our report highlights
examples where entrepreneurs may be eligible for multiple federal
programs based on an entrepreneur’s specific characteristics, but that the
report does not mention whether this was a pervasive or problematic
issue. He stated that rural entrepreneurs may be eligible for multiple
programs, and that a business’s unique situation dictates which programs
Page 33 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
best meets its needs. Again, our report emphasizes the need for
evaluations to determine the relative effectiveness of different programs
serving similar purposes. Third, regarding our findings related to the
information agencies collect on program activities, the Under Secretary
cited a number of tools that the Rural Business-Cooperative Service
(RBS) uses to identify and improve the effectiveness of its programs. As
noted in this report, we determined that USDA collected detailed
information on the industry of each of the entrepreneurs it supports for all
of its programs. In addition, we determined that USDA collected detailed
information (19 categories) on how entrepreneurs use proceeds provided
through 5 of its financial programs. However, we found that over the past
12 years USDA had conducted a program evaluation for only 1 of its 13
programs that can support entrepreneurs, including USDA programs that
RBS does not administer.
Finally, the Under Secretary stated that the recommendations in our
report are not explicit, which makes it unclear how RBS would effectively
address them. Our report does provide information on how agencies
could address our recommendations. First, we recommended that OMB,
Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA work together to identify opportunities
to enhance collaboration among programs, both within and across
agencies. Our report identifies several practices that can help agencies
and their offices enhance and sustain collaboration, which include
indentifying common outcomes, establishing joint strategies, leveraging
resources, determining roles and responsibilities, and developing
compatible policies and procedures, among others. Second, we
recommended that Commerce, HUD, USDA and SBA consistently collect
information that would enable them to track the specific type of assistance
provided and the entrepreneurs they serve and use this information to
help administer their programs. Our report identifies programs that
Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA administer for which the agencies did
and did not maintain information in a readily available format that could be
tracked to help administer the programs. Finally, we recommended that
Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA conduct more evaluations to better
understand why programs have not met performance goals and their
overall effectiveness. Our report acknowledges that program evaluations
can be costly; however, the report also notes that there are various
methods agencies can employ to make the evaluations more cost-
effective, such as relying on their own data instead of purchasing data
from a vendor.
Page 34 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional
committees and other interested parties. In addition, this report will be
available at no charge on the GAO website athttp://www.gao.gov. Should
you or your staff have any questions concerning this report, please
contact William B. Shear, at (202) 512-8678, or [email protected].
Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public
Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. Key contributors to
this report are listed in appendix IX.
William B. Shear
Director
Financial Markets
and Community Investments
Page 35 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
List of Congressional Committees
The Honorable Debbie Stabenow
Chair
The Honorable Pat Roberts
Ranking Member
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry
United States Senate
The Honorable Kent Conrad
Chairman
The Honorable Jeff Sessions
Ranking Member
Committee on the Budget
United States Senate
The Honorable Barbara Boxer
Chair
The Honorable James M. Inhofe
Ranking Member
Committee on Environment and Public Works
United States Senate
The Honorable Mary Landrieu
Chair
The Honorable Olympia J. Snowe
Ranking Member
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship
United States Senate
The Honorable Mark Warner
Chairman
Task Force on Government Performance
Committee on the Budget
United States Senate
The Honorable Paul Ryan
Chairman
The Honorable Chris Van Hollen
Ranking Member
Committee on the Budget
House of Representatives
Page 36 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
The Honorable Spencer Bachus
Chair
The Honorable Barney Frank
Ranking Member
Committee on Financial Services
House of Representatives
The Honorable Darrell E. Issa
Chair
The Honorable Elijah Cummings
Ranking Member
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
House of Representatives
The Honorable Sam Graves
Chair
The Honorable Nydia Velazquez
Ranking Member
Committee on Small Business
House of Representatives
The Honorable Timothy V. Johnson
Chairman
Subcommittee on Rural Development, Research,
Biotechnology, and Foreign Agriculture
Committee on Agriculture
House of Representatives
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope and
Methodology
Page 37 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
This report discusses (1) the extent of overlap, fragmentation, and
duplication and their effects on entrepreneurs, and agencies’ actions to
address them; and (2) the extent to which agencies collect information
necessary to track program activities and whether these programs have
met their performance goals and been evaluated.
To determine the extent of overlap and fragmentation among federal
programs that fund economic development activities, we focused our
analyses on 52 programs administered by the Departments of Agriculture
(USDA), Commerce, and Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and
the Small Business Administration (SBA) that are authorized to support
entrepreneurs. Based on past work, these programs appeared to overlap
the most within the four agencies with missions focused on economic
development. We reviewed the statutes and regulations that authorize the
activities that can be conducted under each program. We categorized the
types of activities into three categories: (1) technical assistance, (2)
financial assistance, and (3) government contracting assistance. Many of
the programs can provide more than one type of assistance, and most
focus on technical assistance, financial assistance, or both. To identify
the effects of overlap and fragmentation on entrepreneurs and agencies’
actions to address them, we focused on 35 of the 52 programs that
provide technical assistance because there was significant overlap and
fragmentation among these programs. We reviewed agency documents,
such as inter-agency agreements, and conducted interviews to determine
how technical assistance is provided to entrepreneurs, including the
extent of agency collaboration at the local level. More specifically, we
interviewed technical assistance providers, including 14 federal agency
officials from four federal agencies located in the field, nine officials from
two regional commissions, and 14 representatives of intermediaries (that
is, third-party technical assistance providers); four entrepreneurs who
have received assistance federal support; and five state and local
partners in three geographic areas. These geographic areas included
both urban and rural areas. We selected geographic areas based on, the
presence of an active regional commission and evidence of collaboration
among at least two of the four federal agencies being located within the
same region. We assessed this technical assistance information against
promising collaborative practices that we have previously identified.
1
1
GAO, Results-Oriented Government: Practices That Can Help Enhance and Sustain
Collaboration among Federal Agencies,
GAO-06-15 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 21, 2005).
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope and
Methodology
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope and
Methodology
Page 38 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
To determine the extent to which agencies collect information necessary
to track program activities, we reviewed agency manuals and data
collection forms that describe information collected on program activities
and methods for analyzing and using the information. Specifically, we
assessed each agency’s capacity to track specific types of
entrepreneurial assistance they provided to specific types of beneficiaries,
as well as their ability to report this information in a readily available
format at the program level. We compared these processes against
standards for internal controls we have previously identified to determine
how well agencies track the support they provide to entrepreneurs.
2
To describe results from program evaluations related to the effectiveness
of the 52 economic development programs that we reviewed, we
requested all studies that have been conducted on these programs from
the four agencies that administer the programs. Our document request
resulted in 19 studies. We refined the list of 19 studies by choosing to
focus on studies that were published in or after 2000. The resulting list of
program evaluations totaled 16. Because some evaluations studied more
than one program, these 16 evaluations covered 20 of the 52 programs in
our review. We reviewed the methodologies of these studies to ensure
that they were sound and determined that they were sufficiently reliable
for our purpose, which was to report high-level findings related to the
program’s overall effectiveness (see app. V). Other evaluations of these
programs may exist.
To
determine the extent to which these 52 economic development programs
have met their performance goals, we reviewed agency documents on
their fiscal year 2011 program goals and accomplishments. We also
interviewed agency officials to determine reasons why goals were not met
(see app. III).
To provide illustrative examples of each of the nine economic activities
related to economic development that we previously identified (see app. II),
we conducted a review of the literature that has been published in the past
2
GAO, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1
(Washington, D.C.: Nov. 1999).
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope and
Methodology
Page 39 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
5 years.
3
We also used these nine economic activities to identify additional federal
programs that may be able to fund at least one of the activities (these
programs are listed in app. IV). During previous reviews, we focused on
federal programs at Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA because these
agencies have missions focused on economic development. For this
report, we identified additional federal programs that could fund the nine
economic activities. While many of the agencies that administer these
additional programs do not have missions that focus on economic
development, their programs may be able to fund at least one of the nine
economic activities. We reviewed information on all programs contained
in the 2011 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) and
provided the list of programs to all of the administering agencies.
This review included publications from a variety of sources,
including academic journals and trade publications. These sources
contained examples of how these economic activities were being
conducted at the national, state, and local levels in the United States. The
list of examples we developed is not meant to be comprehensive but is
intended to provide a range of economic activities that could be funded by
federal programs.
4
This list
of additional federal programs may not be comprehensive because not all
agencies provide data to CFDA (see app. IV).
3
The nine economic activities are supporting entrepreneurial efforts, supporting business
incubators and accelerators, constructing and renovating commercial buildings,
constructing and renovating industrial parks and buildings, strategic planning and
research, marketing and access to new markets for products and industries, supporting
telecommunications and broadband infrastructure, supporting physical infrastructure, and
supporting tourism.
4
We have previously identified incomplete or inaccurate data in the CFDA, but we chose
to rely on it for our purposes in this report because it is the only source that contains
information on programs from many different federal agencies. We did not assess the data
reliability of the CFDA. OMB has compiled initial lists of agencies and programs that
contribute to crosscutting goals, as required by GPRAMA, on performance.gov, including
those related to the entrepreneurship and small business goal. However, OMB noted that
this was not meant to be comprehensive of all programs with any contribution to the
crosscutting goals, and that they are continuing to update these lists.
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope and
Methodology
Page 40 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
We conducted this performance audit from June 2011 to July 2012 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that
the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives.
Appendix II: Illustrative Examples of Economic
Activities
Page 41 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
In September 2000, we reported that there is no commonly accepted
definition for economic development.
1
Absent a common definition for
economic development, we subsequently developed a list of nine
activities most often associated with economic development.
2
In general,
we focused on economic activities that directly affected the overall
development of an area, such as job creation and economic growth,
rather than on activities that improved individuals’ quality of life, such as
housing and education. We previously relied on these economic activities
to identify 80 economic development programs administered by the U.S.
Departments of Agriculture (USDA), Commerce, and Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) and the Small Business Administration (SBA)
because these agencies have missions that focus on economic
development.
3
In this report, we identified illustrative examples of each of
the nine economic activities.
The following examples, which resulted from a review we conducted of
academic journals and trade publications, illustrate a range of activities
that could be supported by programs that can fund at least one of the
economic activities. Examples include projects that are both publicly and
privately funded, with many receiving funding from multiple sources in
both sectors. They also had an explicit or implicit economic development
goal, such as job creation or economic growth.
1. Supporting entrepreneurial efforts. This activity is the focus of this
report, with programs grouped according to at least one of three types
of assistance that address different entrepreneurial needs: help
obtaining (1) technical assistance, which includes business training
and counseling and research and development support; (2) financial
assistance, which includes grants, loans, and venture capital; and (3)
government contracts, which involves helping entrepreneurs qualify
for federal procurement opportunities. Illustrative examples of this
activity include the following initiatives:
1
GAO, Economic Development: Multiple Federal Programs Fund Similar Economic
Development Activities, GAO/RCED/GGD-00-220 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 29, 2000).
2
GAO, Rural Economic Development: More Assurance Is Needed That Grant Funding
Information Is Accurately Reported, GAO-06-294 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 24, 2006).
3
GAO-11-318SP, GAO-11-477R and GAO-12-342SP.
Appendix II: Illustrative Examples of
Economic Activities
Illustrative Examples of
Economic Activities
Appendix II: Illustrative Examples of Economic
Activities
Page 42 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
• Individuals in an Iowa community formed an association of
entrepreneurs to provide a broad range of services to
entrepreneurs, including technical assistance in the form of
mentor counseling, training sessions on various topics, and
hosting conferences.
• A California community provided both financial and technical
support to local small businesses in order to redevelop a business
district. Businesses received micro-grants—small grants of $5,000
each—and were also required to participate in free workshops
designed to give them additional tools and resources to succeed
in a challenging marketplace. These workshops were produced by
an SBA-funded Small Business Development Center.
• Iowa provided financial assistance to entrepreneurs through loan
guarantees and a publicly funded limited liability corporation that
could coordinate venture capital investments. The initiative was
designed to increase capital levels and stimulate the creation of
more local seed funds.
2. Supporting business incubators and accelerators. This activity can
include all of the elements of entrepreneurial efforts, but combines
these types of assistance with a facility that supports multiple
businesses and may provide shared access to office space,
technology, and other support services. Illustrative examples of this
activity include the following initiatives:
• A technology business incubator was established at a Florida
university so its faculty and service partners can provide business
opportunities to client companies. The facility has grown to
support a number of services to assist start-up businesses,
including office and laboratory space, educational programs, and
networking and mentoring opportunities with other experienced
entrepreneurs.
• An Ohio community created a business accelerator that is
designed to assist small, established companies, rather than
businesses in their infancy, in becoming financially viable and
creating jobs in the region. This facility includes office space,
access to technology, and a variety of support services. The
accelerator also collaborates with a center funded by SBA’s Small
Business Development Centers program and a local community
college, which provide coaching and mentoring sessions,
Appendix II: Illustrative Examples of Economic
Activities
Page 43 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
business plan reviews, workshops, training, referrals, and
assistance in obtaining capital.
• An economic development organization in Pennsylvania created a
network of business incubators and accelerators focused on
developing and commercializing technology to create high-paying,
sustainable jobs. The initiative supports early-stage and
established companies with funding, support services, and a
network of experts in related industries and academia.
3. Constructing and renovating commercial buildings. This activity can
include support for the construction and renovation of buildings
established for commercial purposes, such as for retail and office
space. Illustrative examples of this activity include the following
initiatives:
• A community in Iowa renovated a historic building that used to be
a store to attract a large technology firm’s service center. The
renovations were designed to meet the firm’s sustainability vision
and were financed by public and private sources.
• A community in Arizona renovated a high school to create a new
research laboratory. Further buildings were constructed in the
area around this project to create a biomedical campus for both
commercial and academic purposes.
• A community in Iowa renovated buildings in a historic millwork
district to create urban mixed-use developments, which are
designed to attract both commercial and residential activity.
4. Constructing and renovating industrial parks and buildings. This
activity can include support for the construction and renovation of
buildings and campuses established for industrial purposes, such as
for manufacturing. Illustrative examples of this activity include the
following initiatives:
• A public-private partnership in Nevada constructed an industrial
park with new access to a freeway and energy infrastructure. The
facility was zoned for heavy industry and designed to be away
from population centers.
• A community in Massachusetts administered the transition of a
former military base into a light industrial area focused on
Appendix II: Illustrative Examples of Economic
Activities
Page 44 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
sustainable development and attracted both small and large firms
to the redeveloped area.
• A public-private partnership in a North Carolina created several
multi-jurisdictional business parks intended to improve local
economies. These parks serve a number of industrial purposes,
including technology, manufacturing, distribution, and logistics.
Local governments obtained funding to conduct site evaluations
and certification through Commerce’s Economic Development
Administration and HUD’s Community Development Block Grant
program.
5. Strategic planning and research. This activity includes plans for
recruiting new businesses or industry clusters, economic research
and analyses, and regional coordination and planning across
jurisdictions and sectors. Illustrative examples of this activity include
the following initiatives:
• Local officials in a southeastern state formed a regional economic
development organization to better coordinate economic and
workforce development. The organization engages in marketing
and recruitment of businesses and fosters partnerships between
various public- and private-sector entities in the region.
• A California community developed a plan for a business district to
create jobs and produce savings for businesses. The plan defined
resources, timeframes, and types of assistance needed to execute
this strategy.
• A regional consortium operating in areas of two southern states
conducted research on their area’s economic strengths and
developed an action plan to leverage these strengths. Research
included the identification of industry clusters that could be well
suited to the area.
6. Marketing and access to new markets for products and industries.
This activity may include marketing of both new and existing products
and industries, facilitating access to new markets, and supporting new
uses for existing products. Illustrative examples of this activity include
the following initiatives:
• A publicly funded regional technology center in New York provides
a range of resources for local manufacturing and technology
Appendix II: Illustrative Examples of Economic
Activities
Page 45 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
companies, including assistance with developing sales and growth
strategies, conducting marketing activities for increased market
share and revenue in existing or new markets, and identifying new
customers and market niches.
• A regional economic development organization in North Carolina
formed an energy industry cluster that included a bio-energy
facility where businesses are colocated with a landfill. These
businesses are able to sell what were formerly waste products in
new markets, such as alternative fuels and wood pallets.
• Several southern and Midwestern states have leveraged federal
and state funds to assist rural businesses with e-commerce
strategies, including assistance reaching global markets and
strengthening competitive market advantages. Both USDA and
Commerce provided some funding for this initiative.
7. Supporting telecommunications and broadband infrastructure. This
activity may include building, refurbishing, and enhancing
infrastructure used to expand access and improve the speed and
reliability of Internet access, wireless phone services, and other
electronic communication methods. Illustrative examples of this
activity include the following initiatives:
• A public-private partnership in a city in Ohio provides businesses
and residents with an underground conduit network that supports
multiple fiber-based systems for voice, data, and video
communications, intended to provide high-speed access to the
global marketplace.
• A multi-state rural regional development organization in the
southwestern United States coordinated the construction of a
broadband Internet network that was intended to generate new
opportunities for economic development. The initiative was funded
by both private and public investments and covered a large
geographic area.
• Regional leaders collaborated with a state commission to expand
broadband infrastructure to businesses, schools, and industrial
parks in a Virginia city. The high-speed network is noted to be
comparable to or faster than that of any other metropolitan area of
the country, is available at a relatively low cost, and is intended to
attract businesses to the area.
Appendix II: Illustrative Examples of Economic
Activities
Page 46 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
8. Supporting physical infrastructure. This activity includes constructing
and repairing infrastructure related to (1) transportation, such as
roads, airports and rail; (2) water and sewer; (3) energy; and (4) other
amenities, such as pedestrian areas, parking, and beautification
projects. Illustrative examples of this activity include the following
initiatives:
• A community in New York is planning to renovate a business district
by creating new rail service, a pedestrian mall, and green space.
• A community in Ohio renovated their underdeveloped downtown
area by constructing better roads and pedestrian space, improving
green space, and moving power lines underground. The project
was part of a plan to reduce blight and make the area more
accessible for visitors.
• A community in North Carolina renovated a vacant textile
manufacturing space and downtown area to create a scientific
research campus, facilitating this work through water line
replacements, the addition of a pedestrian tunnel, and road
improvements.
9. Supporting tourism. This activity includes marketing, infrastructure
improvement, planning, and research specifically related to
developing and improving tourism, as well as supporting special
events and festivals to attract visitors. Illustrative examples of this
activity include the following initiatives:
• A community in Kentucky improved trails in natural areas to attract
tourists for horseback riding and other recreational uses. In addition
to trail improvements, the community utilized survey research,
marketing, and special events to draw visitors to the area.
• A community in North Carolina entered into public-private
partnerships to construct a cluster of tourist venues that included
sports and arts museums, an arena, convention center, and
performing arts venues. The community utilized a strategic plan
for development and a branded name to market the area.
• A county in Mississippi partnered with other regional entities to
market their gaming industry and other amenities as part of a
broader regional campaign. This new partnership promoted
region-wide tourism and focused on key markets that the area
may draw visitors from.
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52 Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 47 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011 Actual
Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
Department of
Commerce
(Commerce) –
Economic
Development
Administration
(EDA)
c
Grants for Public Works and
Economic Development Facilities
Supports the construction or
rehabilitation of essential public
infrastructure and facilities necessary
to support job creation, attract
private-sector capital, and promote
regional competitiveness, innovation,
and entrepreneurship, including
investments that expand and
upgrade infrastructure to attract new
industry, support technology-led
development, accelerate new
business development, and enhance
the ability of regions to capitalize on
opportunities presented by free trade.
$114,529,000 Private investment
leveraged (3, 6, and 9
years after award)
Private investment
leveraged–9 year
totals (in millions):
$1,940
Private investment
leveraged–6 year
totals (in millions):
$674
Private investment
leveraged–3 year
totals (in millions):
$244.6
Private investment
leveraged–9 year totals
(in millions): $3,960
Private investment
leveraged–6 year totals
(in millions): $1,617
Private investment
leveraged–3 year totals
(in millions): $1,475
Yes Partial
Commerce
EDA
Grants for Public Works and
Economic Development Facilities
Total jobs created/retained
(3, 6, and 9 years after
award)
Jobs created/retained
–9 year totals: 57,800
Jobs created/retained
–6 year totals: 18,193
Jobs created/retained
–3 year totals: 6,256
Jobs created/retained–9
year totals: 56,058 Jobs
created/retained–6 year
totals: 26,416 Jobs
created/retained–3 year
totals: 14,842
Partial
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments
for 52 Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal
Year 2011
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 48 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
Commerce
EDA
Economic Adjustment Assistance
Supports economically distressed
communities in their ability to compete
economically by stimulating private
investment and promoting job creation in
targeted areas. Current investment
priorities include proposals that foster
innovation and enhance regions’ global
economic competitiveness by supporting
existing industry clusters, developing
emerging new clusters, or attracting new
regional economic drivers.
$78,720,000 Private investment
leveraged (3, 6, and 9
years after award)
Private investment
leveraged–9 year totals
(in millions): $1,940
Private investment
leveraged–6 year totals
(in millions): $674
Private investment
leveraged–3 year totals
(in millions): $244.6
Private investment
leveraged–9 year totals
(in millions): $3,960
Private investment
leveraged–6 year totals
(in millions): $1,617
Private investment
leveraged–3 year totals
(in millions): $1,475
Yes Partial
Commerce
EDA
Economic Adjustment Assistance Total jobs created/retained
(3, 6, and 9 years after
award)
Jobs created/retained–
9 year totals: 57,800
Jobs created/retained–
6 year totals: 18,193
Jobs created/retained–
3 year totals: 6,256
Jobs created/retained–
9 year totals: 56,058
Jobs created/retained–
6 year totals: 26,416
Jobs created/retained–
3 year totals: 14,842
Partial
Commerce
EDA
Global Climate Change Mitigation
Incentive Fund
Supports economic development
projects that create jobs through, and
increase private capital investment in,
efforts to limit the nation’s dependence
on fossil fuels, enhance energy
efficiency, curb greenhouse gas
emissions, and protect natural systems.
The program helps to cultivate
innovations that can fuel “green growth”
in communities suffering from economic
distress.
$17,466,000 Private investment
leveraged (3, 6, and 9
years after award)
Private investment
leveraged–9 year totals
(in millions): $1,940
Private investment
leveraged–6 year totals
(in millions): $674
Private investment
leveraged–3 year totals
(in millions): $244.6
Private investment
leveraged–9 year totals
(in millions): $3,960
Private investment
leveraged–6 year totals
(in millions): $1,617
Private investment
leveraged–3 year totals
(in millions): $1,475
Yes Partial
Commerce
EDA
Global Climate Change Mitigation
Incentive Fund
Total jobs created/retained
(3, 6, and 9 years after
award)
Jobs created/retained–
9 year totals: 57,800
Jobs created/retained–
6 year totals: 18,193
Jobs created/retained–
3 year totals: 6,256
Jobs created/ retained–
9 year totals: 56,058
Jobs created/ retained–
6 year totals: 26,416
Jobs created/ retained–
3 year totals: 14,842
Partial
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 49 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
Commerce
EDA
Economic Development/Technical
Assistance
Provides focused assistance to public
and nonprofit leaders to help in
economic development decision making
(e.g., project planning, impact analyses,
feasibility studies). The program also
supports the University Center Economic
Development Program, which makes the
resources of universities available to the
economic development community.
$13,373,000 Percentage of University
Center clients taking action
as a result of the
assistance facilitated
75% 68% No Partial
Commerce
EDA
Economic Development/Technical
Assistance
Percentage of those
actions taken by University
Center clients that
achieved expected results
80% 83% Yes
Commerce
EDA
Economic Development/Support for
Planning Organizations
Provides planning assistance to provide
support to Planning Organizations (as
defined in 13 CFR 303.2) for the
development, implementation, revision,
or replacement of a Comprehensive
Economic Development Strategy, short-
term planning efforts, and state plans
designed to create and retain higher-
skill, higher-wage jobs, particularly for
the unemployed and underemployed in
the nation’s most economically
distressed regions.
$31,352,000 Percentage of economic
development districts and
Indian tribes implementing
economic development
projects from the
comprehensive economic
development strategy that
lead to private investment
and jobs
95% 86% No No
Commerce
EDA
Economic Development/Support for
Planning Organizations
Percentage of substate
jurisdiction members
actively participating in the
economic development
district program
89% 85% No
Commerce
EDA
Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) for
Firms
The program helps economically
distressed U.S. businesses in building
competitiveness strategies to increase
$15,418,000 Percentage of TAA Center
clients taking action as a
result of the assistance
facilitated
90% 73% No Partial
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 50 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
exports and thereby create jobs. The
program provides technical assistance to
U.S. businesses that have lost sales and
employment due to increased imports of
similar or competitive goods and
services. Technical assistance is
provided through a nationwide network
of eleven Economic Development
Administration-funded Trade Adjustment
Assistance Centers.
Commerce
EDA
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms Percentage of actions
taken by TAA Center
clients that achieved
expected results
95% 100% Yes
Commerce –
Minority
Business
Development
Agency
(MDBA)
Native American Business Enterprise
Centers (NABEC)
d
The program promotes the growth and
competitiveness of businesses owned by
Native Americans and eligible minorities.
NABEC operators leverage project staff
and professional consultants to provide
a wide range of direct business
assistance services to Native American
tribal entities and eligible minority-owned
firms. NABEC services include, but are
not limited to, initial consultations and
assessments, business technical
assistance, and access to federal and
nonfederal procurement and financing
opportunities.
$0 Dollar value of contract
awards obtained
$1.1 billion $2.1 billion Yes Yes
Commerce
MBDA
Native American Business Enterprise
Centers
Dollar value of financial
awards obtained
$0.9 billion $1.8 billion Yes
Commerce
MBDA
Native American Business Enterprise
Centers
Number of jobs created 5,000 5,787 Yes
Commerce
MBDA
Minority Business Center (MBC)
The program promotes the growth and
competitiveness of eligible minority-
owned businesses. MBC operators
leverage project staff and professional
$17,948,122 Dollar value of contract
awards obtained
$1.1 billion $2.1 billion Yes Yes
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 51 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
consultants to provide a wide range of
direct business assistance services to
eligible minority-owned firms. Services
include initial consultations and
assessments, business technical
assistance, and access to federal and
nonfederal procurement and financing
opportunities. MBDA currently funds a
network of 30 MBC projects located
throughout the United States.
Commerce
MBDA
Minority Business Center Dollar value of financial
awards obtained
$0.9 billion $1.8 billion Yes
Commerce
MBDA
Minority Business Center Number of jobs created 5,000 5,787 Yes
Department of
Housing and
Urban
Development
(HUD)
Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG)/Insular Areas
HUD annually allocates $7 million of
CDBG funds to the Insular Areas
program in proportion to the populations
of the eligible territories. The program is
administered by HUD’s field offices in
Puerto Rico and Hawaii. The CDBG
programs allocate annual grants to
develop viable communities by providing
decent housing, a suitable living
environment, and opportunities to
expand economic opportunities,
principally for low- and moderate-income
persons.
$ 214,396
e
Jobs created and retained None 15,549 N/A N/A
HUD CDBG/Insular Areas Businesses assisted None 24,331 N/A
HUD CDBG/Entitlement Grants
The CDBG program works to ensure
decent affordable housing, to provide
services to the most vulnerable in our
communities, and to create jobs through
the expansion and retention of
businesses. The CDBG entitlement
program allocates annual grants to
larger cities and urban counties to
$325,549,306
f
Jobs created and retained None 15,549 N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 52 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
develop viable communities by providing
decent housing, a suitable living
environment, and opportunities to
expand economic opportunities,
principally for low- and moderate-income
persons.
HUD CDBG/Entitlement Grants Businesses assisted None 24,331 N/A
HUD CDBG/States
The primary statutory objective of the
CDBG States program is to develop
viable communities by providing decent
housing, a suitable living environment,
and opportunities to expand economic
opportunities, principally for low- and
moderate-income persons. The state
must ensure that at least 70 percent of
its CDBG grant funds are used for
activities that benefit low- and moderate-
income persons over a 1-, 2-, or 3-year
time period selected by the state.
$559,961,961
g
Jobs created and retained None 15,549 N/A N/A
HUD CDBG/States Businesses assisted None 24,331 N/A
HUD CDBG/Non-entitlement CDBG Grants in
Hawaii
HUD continues to administer the program
for the non-entitlement counties in the
state of Hawaii because the state has
permanently elected not to participate in
the State CDBG program. The CDBG
programs allocate annual grants to
develop viable communities by providing
decent housing, a suitable living
environment, and opportunities to expand
economic opportunities, principally for
low- and moderate-income persons.
$338,257
h
Jobs created and retained None 15,549 N/A N/A
HUD CDBG/Non-entitlement CDBG Grants in
Hawaii
Businesses assisted None 24,331 N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 53 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
HUD CDBG/Section 108 Loan Guarantees
Section 108 is the loan guarantee
provision of the CDBG program. Section
108 provides communities with a source
of financing for economic development,
housing rehabilitation, public facilities,
and large-scale physical development
projects. It allows them to transform a
small portion of their CDBG funds into
federally guaranteed loans large enough
to pursue physical and economic
revitalization projects that can renew
entire neighborhoods.
$6,000,000 Jobs proposed to be
created or retained
None 7,306 N/A N/A
HUD CDBG/Brownfields Economic
Development Initiative (BEDI)
The purpose of the BEDI program is to
spur the return of brownfields to
productive economic use through
financial assistance to public entities in
the redevelopment of brownfields and
enhance the security or improve the
viability of a project financed with
Section 108-guaranteed loan authority.
$0
Jobs proposed to be
created or retained
3,157 2,409 No No
HUD CDBG Disaster Recovery Grants
i
Grantees may use CDBG Disaster
Recovery funds for recovery efforts
involving housing, economic
development, infrastructure, and
prevention of further damage to affected
areas, if such use does not duplicate
funding available from the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, the
Small Business Administration, and the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The
mission and goals of the CDBG Disaster
Recovery Grants program may be
expanded or limited per the individual
appropriation that it receives each year.
$0 Businesses assisted None N/A N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 54 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
HUD CDBG Disaster Recovery Grants Permanent jobs created
(tracked by low income,
moderate income and total)
None N/A N/A
HUD CDBG Disaster Recovery Grants Permanent jobs retained
(tracked by low income,
moderate income and total)
None N/A N/A
HUD CDBG Disaster Recovery Grants Number of buildings
(nonresidential) assisted
None N/A N/A
HUD Section 4 Capacity Building for Affordable
Housing and Community Development
Through funding of national intermediaries,
the Section 4 Capacity Building program
enhances the capacity and ability of
community development corporations and
community housing development
organizations to carry out community
development and affordable housing
activities and to attract private investment
for housing, economic development, and
other community revitalization activities
that benefit low-income families.
$50,000,000 Number of trainings
created and provided to
Community Development
Corporations (CDC)
794 Not reported Unknown Unknown
HUD Section 4 Capacity Building for
Affordable Housing and Community
Development
Development cost
estimates of community
development projects
funded by CDCs
$988 million Not reported Unknown
HUD Section 4 Capacity Building for
Affordable Housing and Community
Development
Number of homes
renovated, preserved or
newly constructed
6,060 Not reported Unknown
HUD Section 4 Capacity Building for
Affordable Housing and Community
Development
Efficiency measure of per-
unit cost of capacity
building for housing units
developed or renovated
None
N/A N/A
HUD Rural Innovation Fund
j
The Rural Innovation Fund program was
established to improve the quality of life
for residents of distressed rural areas by
supporting innovative and catalytic
economic development and housing
$0
k
Number of full-time and
part-time jobs created
None N/A N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 55 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
programs. The program is designed to
support
(1) job creation through business
development and expansion,
(2) investment in human capital through
job training and education; and
(3) expanding the supply of affordable
housing with access to job centers or
transportation.
Rural Innovation Fund grantees are
selected through a competitive process.
HUD Rural Innovation Fund Number of persons
receiving job training
None N/A N/A
HUD Rural Innovation Fund Number of new businesses
opened
None N/A N/A
HUD Rural Innovation Fund Number of affordable
housing units constructed
None N/A N/A
HUD Rural Innovation Fund Number of residents
receiving homeownership
counseling
None N/A N/A
HUD Hispanic-Serving Institutions Assisting
Communities
The Hispanic-Serving Institutions
Assisting Communities program helps
Hispanic-Serving Institutions expand
their role and effectiveness in
addressing community development
needs in their localities, including
revitalization, housing, and economic
development, principally for persons of
low and moderate income. Accredited
Hispanic-Serving Institutions of higher
education that provide 2- and 4-year
degrees are eligible to participate in this
program. For an institution to qualify as a
Hispanic-Serving Institution, at least 25
percent of the undergraduate enrollment
must be Hispanic students.
$0 None N/A N/A N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 56 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
HUD Alaska Native/Native Hawaiian
Institutions Assisting Communities
The Alaska Native/Native Hawaiian
Institutions program helps these
institutions expand their role and
effectiveness in addressing community
development needs in their localities,
including revitalization, housing, and
economic development, principally for
persons of low and moderate income.
The program encourages colleges and
universities to integrate community
engagement themes into their
curriculum, academic studies, and
student activities.
$0 None N/A N/A N/A N/A
HUD Indian CDBG
The purpose of the Indian CDBG
program is the development of viable
Indian and Alaska Native communities,
including the creation of decent housing,
suitable living environments, and
economic opportunities primarily for
persons with low and moderate incomes
as defined in 24 CFR 1003.4. Funds
may be used to improve housing stock,
provide community facilities, improve
infrastructure, and expand job
opportunities by supporting the
economic development of the
communities in some instances.
$64,000,000 Jobs created 24 0 No No
HUD Indian CDBG Rehabilitated housing units 701 409 No
HUD Indian CDBG Constructed community
buildings
49 30 No
HUD Indian CDBG Average cost per
community building
None N/A N/A
HUD Indian CDBG Average amount of Indian
CDBG dollars spent per
housing unit rehabilitated
None N/A N/A
Small 7(a) Loan Program $88,000,000 Loan dollars approved $12.8 billion $19.7 billion Yes Yes
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 57 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
Business
Administration
(SBA)
The 7(a) Loan Program is SBA’s primary
program for helping start-up and existing
small businesses, with financing
guaranteed for a variety of general
business purposes. 7(a) loans are the
most basic and most commonly used type
of loans. They are also the most flexible,
since financing can be guaranteed for a
variety of general business purposes,
including working capital, machinery and
equipment, furniture and fixtures, land and
building (including purchase, renovation
and new construction), leasehold
improvements, and debt refinancing
(under special conditions).
SBA 7(a) Loan Program Small businesses assisted 40,700 46,749 Yes
SBA 7(a) Loan Program Jobs supported 474,100 582,707 Yes
SBA 7(a) Loan Program Active lending partners
l
3,000 3,537 Yes
SBA 7(a) Loan Program Underserved markets–
small businesses assisted
24,800 28,389 Yes
SBA 7(a) Loan Program Cost per small business
assisted
None $1,882 N/A
SBA 504 Loan Program
The 504 Loan Program provides growing
businesses with long-term, fixed-rate
financing for major fixed assets, such as
land and buildings. A typical 504 project
includes a loan secured from a private-
sector lender with a senior lien covering
up to 50 percent of the project cost, a
loan secured from a Certified
Development Company (backed by a
100 percent SBA-guaranteed debenture)
with a junior lien covering up to 40
percent of the total cost, and a
contribution from the borrower of at least
10 percent equity.
$38,888,000 Loan dollars approved $4.8 billion $4.8 billion Yes Partial
SBA 504 Loan Program Small businesses assisted 8,100 7,752 No
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 58 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
SBA 504 Loan Program Jobs supported 88,800 87,337 No
SBA 504 Loan Program Underserved market –
small businesses assisted
4,800 4,548 No
SBA 504 Loan Program Active lending partners 267 249 No
SBA 504 Loan Program Cost per small business
assisted
None $5,017 N/A
SBA Microloan Program
SBA’s Microloan Program provides small
businesses with small, short-term loans
for working capital or the purchase of
inventory, supplies, furniture, fixtures,
machinery or equipment. SBA makes
funds available to specially designated
intermediary lenders, which are nonprofit
organizations with experience in lending
and technical assistance. These
intermediaries then make loans to
eligible borrowers in amounts up to a
maximum of $50,000.
$38,729,000 Small businesses assisted 4,600 3,999 No Partial
SBA Microloan Program Jobs supported 14,500 13,271 No
SBA Microloan Program Loans approved by
microlenders
$65 million $47 million No
SBA Microloan Program Businesses Counseled 6,500 15,900 Yes
SBA Microloan Program Underserved markets–
small businesses assisted
4,600 3,999 No
SBA Microloan Program Active lending partners 126 121 No
SBA Microloan Program Cost per small business
assisted
None $9,685 N/A
SBA Surety Bond Guarantee Program
SBA provides and manages surety bond
guarantees for qualified small and
emerging businesses through the Surety
Bond Guarantee Program. Participating
sureties receive guarantees that SBA
will assume a predetermined percentage
of loss in the event the contractor should
breach the terms of the contract.
$4,865,000 Contract value of bid and
final bonds
$3.3 billion $3.7 billion Yes Yes
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 59 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
SBA Surety Bond Guarantee Program Bid and final bonds
guaranteed
7,600 8,638 Yes
SBA Surety Bond Guarantee Program Jobs supported 6,400 17,421 Yes
SBA Surety Bond Guarantee Program Cost per job supported None $279 N/A
SBA Program for Investment in Micro-
Entrepreneurs (PRIME)
PRIME provides assistance to various
organizations. These organizations help
low-income entrepreneurs who lack
sufficient training and education to gain
access to capital to establish and
expand their small businesses.
$8,863,000 None None N/A N/A N/A
SBA Small Business Development Centers
(SBDC)
SBDCs assist clients in gaining access to
SBA loan programs and private capital to
start up and expand their businesses.
SBDC services are available to all small
business populations. There are
specialized programs for minorities,
women, international trade, technology,
energy efficiency, veterans, people with
disabilities, and 8(a) firms in all stages, as
well as individuals in low- and moderate-
income urban and rural areas. The
ultimate objective of the SBDC program is
to support, strengthen, sustain, and grow
local economies and business entities
$130,323,000 Long-term counseling
clients
61,000 62, 117 Yes Partial
SBA Small Business Development Centers Small businesses created 12,500 13,664 Yes
SBA Small Business Development Centers Jobs supported None N/A N/A
SBA Small Business Development Centers Capital infusions $3.7 billion $3.6 billion No
SBA Small Business Development Centers Cost per job supported None N/A N/A
SBA Small Business Development Centers Cost per small business
created
None $9,538 N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 60 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
SBA Women’s Business Centers (WBC)
WBCs provide long-term training as well
as counseling and mentoring services.
By statute, WBCs fill a gap by focusing
on women who are socially and
economically disadvantaged. WBCs
offer classes during regular working
hours as well as during the evenings and
weekends to serve clients who work
during the day. The WBCs often provide
counseling in multiple languages.
$19,446,000 Small businesses assisted 135,000 138,923 Yes Yes
SBA Women’s Business Centers Small businesses created 618 701 Yes
SBA Women’s Business Centers Cost per small business
assisted
None $140 N/A
SBA SCORE
SCORE is a nonprofit association
comprised of more than 13,000
volunteer business professionals in more
than 350 chapters and on-line
nationwide, dedicated to educating and
assisting entrepreneurs and small
business owners in the formation,
growth, and expansion of their small
businesses through mentoring, business
advising and training.
$12,980,000 Small businesses assisted 349,867 356,837 Yes Partial
SBA SCORE Small businesses created 1,082 816 No
SBA SCORE Cost per small business
assisted
None $36.38 N/A
SBA Veterans Business Outreach Centers
The Veterans Business Outreach
program is designed to provide
entrepreneurial development services
such as business training, counseling
and mentoring, and referrals for eligible
veterans owning or considering starting
a small business.
$8,995,000 Veterans assisted 100,000 137,011 Yes Yes
SBA Veteran’s Business Outreach Centers Customer satisfaction 91% 91% Yes
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 61 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
SBA Veteran’s Business Outreach Centers Cost per veteran assisted None $65.65 N/A
SBA 7(j) Technical Assistance
The 7(j) program provides qualifying
businesses with counseling and training
in the areas of financing, business
development, management, accounting,
bookkeeping, marketing, and other small
business operating concerns.
$6,502,000 Small businesses assisted 3,550 3,550 Yes Yes
SBA 7(j) Technical Assistance Cost per small business
assisted
None $1,832 N/A
SBA 8(a) Business Development Program
The 8(a) Business Development
program provides various forms of
assistance (management and technical
assistance, government contracting
assistance, and advocacy support) to
foster the growth and development of
businesses owned and controlled by
socially and economically disadvantaged
individuals. SBA assists these
businesses, during their nine year tenure
in the 8(a) Business Development
program, in gaining equal access to the
resources necessary to develop their
businesses and improve their ability to
compete.
$58,274,000 Small businesses assisted 9,457 7,814 No No
SBA 8(a) Business Development Program Cost per small business
assisted
None $7,458 N/A
SBA 8(a) Business Development Program Contracts to small
disadvantaged businesses,
which includes 8(a)
program participants (%)
5% Not reported Unknown
SBA Historically Underutilized Business Zones
(HUBZone)
The HUBZone program helps small
businesses located in both urban and
rural communities gain preferential
access to federal procurement
opportunities. These preferences go to
$15,569,000 Small businesses assisted 4,000 5,801 Yes Partial
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 62 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
small businesses that obtain HUBZone
certification in part by employing staff who
live in a HUBZone. The company must
also maintain a “principal office” in one of
these specially designated areas.
SBA HUBZone Annual value of federal
contracts
$12 billion $9.9 billion No
SBA HUBZone Cost per small businesses
assisted
None $2,684 N/A
SBA HUBZone Cost per federal contract
dollar
None $.0015 N/A
SBA HUBZone Contracts to HUBZone
firms
3% 2.3% No
SBA Procurement Assistance to Small
Businesses
The program assists small businesses in
obtaining federal government contracts
and subcontracts.
$21,171,000 Percent of federal prime
and subcontracting dollars
awarded to small
businesses
For prime contracting,
statutory goal is 23%;
for subcontracting,
there is no statutory
goal, but SBA has set a
goal of 35.9%.
21.65% No No
SBA Small Business Innovation Research
Program (SBIR)
The SBIR program encourages small
businesses to explore their technological
potential and provides the incentive to
profit from its commercialization. Each
year, 11 federal departments and
agencies are required by SBIR to
reserve a portion of their research and
development funds for awards to small
businesses. SBA is the coordinating
agency for the SBIR program. It directs
the agencies’ implementation of SBIR,
reviews their progress, and reports
annually to Congress on the program’s
operation.
$781,000 Commercialization /
Innovation
• Number of companies
• Number of Phase II
awards
• Aggregate amount of
SBIR award monies
awarded to cohort
• Aggregate sales/
revenue from cohort
• Aggregate additional
investment in cohort
• Number of exits –
Initial Public Offerings
or Merger and
Acquisition activity
• Value of exits, in
dollars
None N/A N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 63 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
• Number of employees
employed by awardees
• Percent of awards that
brought products to
market (Note: Multiple
awards may lead to
only one product, but
all awards should be
given credit)
SBA SBIR Women and Minorities
• Percentage of
awardees that are
minority owned
• Percentage of
awardees that are
women owned
• Percentage of
awardees that are
HUBZone
• Percentage of
applicants that are
minority owned that
received an award
• Percentage of
applicants that are
women owned that
received an award
None N/A N/A
SBA SBIR Efficiency and
Effectiveness
• Time between close of
solicitation and
selection
• Time between
selection and cash
awarded
• Total sum of time
between close of
solicitation and cash
awarded
None N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 64 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
SBA SBIR Repeat-award winners
• Percentage of first-
time Phase II
awardees per year per
agency
• Percent age of first-
time Phase I awardees
per year per agency
None N/A N/A
SBA Small Business Technology Transfer
Program (STTR)
The STTR program encourages small
businesses to explore their technological
potential and provides the incentive to
profit from its commercialization. Each
year, five federal agencies are required
to reserve a portion of their research and
development funds for awards to small
businesses. SBA is the coordinating
agency for the STTR program. It directs
the agencies’ implementation of STTR,
reviews their progress, and reports
annually to Congress on its operation.
STTR requires cooperation with a
university or approved research
institution.
$352,000 Commercialization /
Innovation
• Number of companies
• Number of Phase II
awards
• Aggregate amount of
SBIR award monies
awarded to cohort
• Aggregate
sales/revenue from
cohort
• Aggregate additional
investment in cohort
• Number of exits –
Initial Public Offerings
or Merger and
Acquisition activity
• Value of exits, in
dollars
• Number of employees
employed by
awardees
• Percent of awards that
brought products to
market (Note: Multiple
awards may lead to
only one product, but
all awards should be
given credit)
None N/A N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 65 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
SBA STTR Women and Minorities
• Percentage of
awardees that are
minority owned
• Percentage of
awardees that are
women owned
• Percentage of
awardees that are
HUBZone
• Percentage of
applicants that are
minority owned that
received an award
• Percentage of
applicants that are
women owned that
received an award
None N/A N/A
SBA STTR Efficiency and
Effectiveness
• Time between close of
solicitation and
selection
• Time between
selection and cash
awarded
• Total sum of time
between close of
solicitation and cash
awarded
None N/A N/A
SBA STTR Repeat-award winners
• Percentage of first-
time Phase II
awardees per year per
agency
• Percentage of first-
time Phase I awardees
per year per agency
None N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 66 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
SBA Small Business Investment Company
(SBIC) Program
The SBIC program aims to increase the
availability of venture capital to small
businesses. SBICs are privately owned
and managed investment funds, licensed
and regulated by SBA, that use their own
capital plus funds borrowed with an SBA
guarantee to make equity and debt
investments in qualifying small
businesses.
$26,305,000 Small business assisted 1,150 1,339 Yes Yes
SBA SBIC Underserved markets–
small businesses assisted
345 430 Yes
SBA SBIC Amount of debenture
leveraged committed to
SBIC
$2.6 million $2.8 million Yes
SBA SBIC Cost per small business
assisted
None $19,645 N/A
SBA New Markets Venture Capital (NMVC)
Program
The purpose of the NMVC program is to
promote economic development and the
creation of wealth and job opportunities in
low-income geographic areas and among
individuals living in such areas through
developmental venture capital
investments in smaller enterprises
located in such areas. Through public-
private partnerships between SBA and
businesses, the program is designed to
serve the unmet equity needs of local
entrepreneurs through developmental
venture capital investments, provide
technical assistance to small businesses,
create quality employment opportunities
for low-income area residents, and build
wealth within low-income areas.
$0
m
Eligible small businesses
assisted
None N/A N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 67 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
SBA Federal and State Technology
Partnership (FAST) Program
The purpose of the FAST program is to
strengthen the technological
competitiveness of small business
concerns in the U.S. by improving the
participation of small technology firms in
the innovation and commercialization of
new technology.
$1,885,096 Eligible small businesses
assisted
None N/A N/A N/A
SBA FAST Outreach events held None N/A N/A
SBA International Trade
The International Trade program helps
small business exporters by providing
loans for a number of activities
specifically designed to help them
develop or expand their export activities.
$7,681,000 Loans approved $400 million $924 million Yes Yes
SBA International Trade Small and medium sized
exporters assisted
990 1,346 Yes
SBA International Trade Lenders counseled/trained 4,000 6,790 Yes
SBA International Trade Cost per small and medium
sized exporter assisted
None $5,707 N/A
U.S.
Department of
Agriculture
(USDA)
Intermediary Relending Program
The purpose of the program is to alleviate
poverty and increase economic activity
and employment in rural communities.
Under the program, loans are provided to
local organizations (intermediaries) for the
establishment of revolving loan funds.
These revolving loan funds are used to
assist with financing business and
economic development activity to create
or retain jobs in disadvantaged and
remote communities.
$7,364,000 Jobs created and saved 14,600 14,601 Yes Yes
USDA Rural Business Enterprise Grants
Program
The program provides grants for rural
projects that finance and facilitate
development of small and emerging rural
$ 38,586,000 Jobs created or saved 14,330 13,265 No No
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 68 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
businesses, help fund business
incubators, and help fund employment-
related adult education programs. To
assist with business development, the
program may fund a broad array of
activities.
USDA Rural Business Opportunity Grant
Program
The program promotes sustainable
economic development in rural
communities with exceptional needs
through provision of training and technical
assistance for business development,
entrepreneurs, and economic
development officials and to assist with
economic development planning.
$2,581,000 Businesses assisted 950 586 No No
USDA Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance
Program
The purpose of the program is to support
the development and ongoing success of
rural microentrepreneurs and
microenterprises. Direct loans and grants
are made to selected microenterprise
development organizations.
$6,668,000 Jobs created or saved 580 1240 Yes Yes
USDA Rural Cooperative Development Grants
The primary objective of this grant
program is to improve the economic
condition of rural areas through the
creation or retention of jobs and
development of new rural cooperatives,
value-added processing, and other rural
businesses. Grant funds are provided for
the establishment and operation of
centers that have the expertise or that
can contract out for the expertise to
assist individuals or entities in the start-
up, expansion, or operational
improvement of rural businesses,
especially cooperative or mutually
owned businesses.
$8,424,000 Businesses assisted 326 324 No No
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 69 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
USDA Business and Industry Guaranteed
Loans
The purpose of the program is to
improve, develop, or finance business,
industry, and employment and improve
the economic and environmental climate
in rural communities. This purpose is
achieved by bolstering the existing
private credit structure through the
guarantee of quality loans.
$70,202,000 Jobs created or saved 11,705 27,806 Yes Yes
USDA Value Added Producer Grants
The purpose of this program is to assist
eligible independent agricultural
commodity producers, agriculture
producer groups, farmer and rancher
cooperatives, and majority-controlled
producer-based businesses in
developing strategies and business
plans to further refine or enhance their
products, thereby increasing their value
to end users and increasing returns to
producers.
$1,318,000 Businesses assisted 151 0 No No
USDA Small Socially-Disadvantaged Producer
Grants
The primary objective of the program is
to provide technical assistance to small,
socially disadvantaged agricultural
producers through eligible cooperatives
and associations of cooperatives. Grants
are awarded on a competitive basis.
$2,940,000 None None N/A N/A N/A
USDA 1890 Land Grant Institutions Rural
Entrepreneurial Outreach Program/Rural
Business Entrepreneur Development
Initiative
n
The purposes of this program are to
encourage 1890 Institutions to provide
technical assistance for business
creation in economically challenged rural
communities, to conduct educational
programs that develop and improve
$0 None None N/A N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 70 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
upon the professional skills of rural
entrepreneurs, and to provide outreach
and promote USDA Rural Development
programs in small rural communities with
the greatest economic need.
USDA Agriculture Innovation Center
Award grants to centers around the
country to provide technical and
business development assistance to
agricultural producers seeking to enter
into ventures that add value to
commodities or products they produce.
$0 None N/A N/A N/A N/A
USDA Small Business Innovation Research
This program aims to stimulate
technological innovation in the private
sector; strengthen the role of small
businesses in meeting federal research
and development needs; increase
private-sector commercialization of
innovations derived from USDA-
supported research and development
efforts; and foster and encourage
participation by women-owned and
socially disadvantaged small business
firms in technological innovation.
$22,635,200 Percentage of Phase 2
businesses that have
achieved commercial
success, as a result of
increased sales
50% Data collection ongoing
because performance
data are collected over
a 2-year time period.
Not
available
Not
available
USDA Biomass Research and Development
Initiative Competitive Grants Program
This program awards grants to support
the research and development and
demonstration of biofuels and biobased
products. It is a joint effort between
USDA and the U.S. Department of
Energy.
$2,075,000 Number of technologies
successfully deployed
None N/A N/A N/A
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 71 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Agency Program Name and Mission
Fiscal year 2011
Obligations
a
Performance Measures
Fiscal year 2011
Performance Goal
Fiscal year 2011
Actual Performance
b
Met
Individual
Goals
Met All
Goals
USDA Woody Biomass Utilization Grant
Program
This program provides financial grants to
businesses and communities that use
woody biomass removed from National
Forest System hazardous fuel reduction
projects. Grants are awarded on a
competitive basis.
$3,000,000 Green tons of woody
biomass removed and
used
None N/A N/A N/A
Source: GAO analysis of information provided by Commerce, HUD, SBA, and USDA.
Notes:
a
Fiscal year 2011 obligations were provided by agency officials for each program. HUD’s figures
represent fiscal year 2011 actual budget authority rather than obligations. SBA figures represent
fiscal year 2011 fully allocated costs rather than obligations.
b
While some programs listed in the table did not set fiscal year 2011 performance goals, most of the
programs that had goals reported actual performance that could be compared with these goals.
c
EDA does not collect performance information (i.e., jobs created and private investment) by
program, rather this information is aggregated for all EDA programs.
d
Commerce’s Native American Business Enterprise Centers program incurred obligations in fiscal
year 2011, but Commerce officials could not provide funding data at the program level. Funding for
this program is included in the fiscal year 2011 obligations for Commerce’s Minority Business
Center program. Similarly, Commerce could not provide performance measure data at the program
level because it tracks its activity as part of the Minority Business Center program.
e
This figure is an estimate of actual budget authority used for activities that GAO categorizes as
economic development, rather than total program expenditures, and does not include other costs for
activities such as housing or public services.
f
This figure is an estimate of actual budget authority used for activities that GAO categorizes as
economic development, rather than total program expenditures, and does not include other costs for
activities such as housing or public services.
g
This figure is an estimate of actual budget authority used for activities that GAO categorizes as
economic development, rather than total program expenditures, and does not include other costs for
activities such as housing or public services.
h
This figure is an estimate of actual budget authority used for activities that GAO categorizes as
economic development, rather than total program expenditures, and does not include other costs for
activities such as housing or public services.
i
According to HUD officials, the performance measures for the CDBG Disaster Recovery Grant
program can vary and they did not provide us any set fiscal year 2011 goals.
j
HUD officials stated that the Rural Innovation Fund program is new and they are in the process of
establishing goals.
Appendix III: Performance Goals and Accomplishments for 52
Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs, Fiscal Year 2011
Page 72 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
k
HUD officials noted that $31,355,236 in 5-year grants was awarded in September, 2011 through
this program, but they will not be obligated until after FY 2011. These funds include $25,000,000
that was appropriated in FY 2010 for the program and additional funds recaptured through HUD’s
Rural Housing and Economic Development program.
l
The performance goal and actual figures for this performance measure are for the two-year period
consisting of FY 2010 and FY 2011. SBA officials indicated that a goal was not set for FY 2011
alone.
m
According to SBA officials, the New Markets Venture Capital program is a one-time pilot program
that received one-time funding in fiscal year 2001.
n
USDA’s 1890 program does not have a congressional appropriation but is instead funded through
USDA’s Salaries and Expenses account. Funding is not reported separately for this program and is
listed as $0 here, but this is an active and funded program.
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs that
Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 73 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
We reviewed the 2011 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA)
and identified 95 additional federal programs that can support at least one
of the nine economic activities identified in appendix II (see table 3).
These programs, while not comprehensive, are in addition to the 80
economic development programs administered by Commerce, HUD,
SBA, and USDA that we included in previous reports. We identified these
94 programs based on our comparison of CFDA program descriptions
with the nine economic activities as illustrated in appendix II. However,
others conducting similar analyses may come to different conclusions on
which federal programs support economic development. Additionally, 32
of the 64 federal agencies and departments listed in the CFDA did not
provide descriptions for their programs within the 2011 CFDA, which
prevented us from assessing whether those programs are related to
economic development. Many of the agencies that administer these
additional programs have missions that do not directly focus on economic
development. For example, a number of the programs listed for the
Department of Health and Human Services focus on health-related
research, but also participate in at least one of the economic development
activities we have identified.
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 74 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Table 3: Additional Federal Programs That Can Fund Economic Activities, as Listed in the 2011 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
Appalachian
Regional
Commission
Appalachian
Regional
Development
23.001
X X X X X X X X
Appalachian
Regional
Commission
Appalachian Area
Development
23.002
X X X X X X X
Appalachian
Regional
Commission
Appalachian
Development
Highway System
23.003
X
Appalachian
Regional
Commission
Appalachian
Local
Development
District
Assistance
23.009
X
Appalachian
Regional
Commission
Appalachian
Research,
Technical
Assistance, and
Demonstration
Projects
23.011
X
Denali
Commission
Denali
Commission
Program
90.100
X
Department of
Defense
Community
Economic
Adjustment
12.600
X
Department of
Energy
Nuclear Energy
Research,
Development and
Demonstration
81.121
X
Department of
Energy
Granting Of
Patent Licenses
81.003
X X
Department of
Energy
Inventions and
Innovations
81.036
X
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 75 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
Department of
Energy
State Energy
Program
81.041
X
Department of
Energy
Federal Loan
Guarantees for
Innovative
Energy
Technologies
81.126
X X X X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Indian Health
Service
Sanitation
Facilities
Construction
Program
93.445
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Cancer Control 93.399
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Consumer
Operated and
Oriented Plan
[CO-OP] Program
93.545
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Community
Services Block
Grant
Discretionary
Awards
93.570
X X X X X X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Refugee and
Entrant
Assistance
Discretionary
Grants
93.576
X X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Job Opportunities
for Low-Income
Individuals
93.593
X X
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 76 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Assets for
Independence
Demonstration
Program
93.602
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Native American
Programs
93.612
X X
a
X X
a
X
a
X X X X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Cardiovascular
Diseases
Research
93.837
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Lung Diseases
Research
93.838
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Blood Diseases
and Resources
Research
93.839
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Arthritis,
Musculoskeletal
and Skin
Diseases
Research
93.846
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Diabetes,
Digestive, and
Kidney Diseases
Extramural
Research
93.847
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Extramural
Research
Programs in the
Neurosciences
and Neurological
Disorders
93.853
X
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 77 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Allergy,
Immunology and
Transplantation
Research
93.855
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Child Health and
Human
Development
Extramural
Research
93.865
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Aging Research 93.866
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Vision Research 93.867
X
Department of
Health and
Human
Services
Medical Library
Assistance
93.879
X
Department of
Homeland
Security
Operation Safe
Commerce
Cooperative
Agreement
Program
97.058
X
Department of
Labor
Workforce
Investment Act—
Adult Program
17.258
X
Department of
Labor
Workforce
Investment Act—
Dislocated
Workers
17.260
X
Department of
the Interior
National Heritage
Area Federal
Financial
Assistance
15.939
X X X X X X X
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 78 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
Department of
the Interior
Tribal Self-
Governance
15.022
X
Department of
the Interior
Road
Maintenance
Indian Roads
15.033
X
Department of
the Interior
Minerals and
Mining on Indian
Lands
15.038
X
Department of
the Interior
Indian Loans
Economic
Development
15.124
X
Department of
the Interior
National Fire Plan
- Wildland Urban
Interface
Community Fire
Assistance
15.228
X
Department of
the Interior
Water
Reclamation and
Reuse Program
15.504
X
Department of
the Interior
WaterSMART
(Sustain and
Manage
America’s
Resources for
Tomorrow)
15.507
X
Department of
the Interior
Colorado River
Basin Salinity
Control Program
15.509
X
Department of
the Interior
Colorado Ute
Indian Water
Rights Settlement
Act
15.510
X
Department of
the Interior
Fort Peck
Reservation
Rural Water
System
15.516
X
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 79 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
Department of
the Interior
Garrison
Diversion Unit
15.518
X
Department of
the Interior
Indian Tribal
Water Resources
Development,
Management,
and Protection
15.519
X
Department of
the Interior
Lewis and Clark
Rural Water
System
15.520
X
Department of
the Interior
Mni Wiconi Rural
Water Supply
Project
15.522
X
Department of
the Interior
Perkins County
Rural Water
System
15.523
X
Department of
the Interior
Rocky
Boy’s/North
Central Montana
Regional Water
System
15.525
X
Department of
the Interior
San Gabriel
Basin Restoration
Project
15.526
X
Department of
the Interior
Yakima River
Basin Water
Enhancement
Project
15.531
X
Department of
the Interior
Colorado River
Basin Projects
Act of 1968
15.541
X
Department of
the Interior
Lower Colorado
River Multi-
species
Conservation
Project
15.538
X
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 80 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
Department of
the Interior
Navajo-Gallup
Water Supply
Project
15.552
X
Department of
the Interior
Economic, Social,
and Political
Development of
the Territories
15.875
X X X X X X
Department of
the Interior
Historic
Preservation
Fund Grants-In-
Aid
15.904
X X X X X X
Department of
the Interior
Preservation of
Historic
Structures on the
Campuses of
Historically Black
Colleges and
Universities
15.932
X X X X X
Department of
the Interior
Preservation of
Japanese
American
Confinement
Sites
15.933
X X X
Department of
the Treasury
Native Initiatives 21.012
X
Department of
the Treasury
Community
Development
Financial
Institutions
Program
21.020
X
Department of
the Treasury
Bank Enterprise
Award Program
21.021
X
Department of
Transportation
Airport
Improvement
Program
20.106
X
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 81 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
Department of
Transportation
Highway
Planning and
Construction
20.205
X
Department of
Transportation
Transportation
Infrastructure
Finance and
Innovation Act
Program
20.223
X
Department of
Transportation
Railroad
Development
20.314
X
Department of
Transportation
National Railroad
Passenger
Corporation
Grants
20.315
X
Department of
Transportation
Railroad
Rehabilitation
and Improvement
Financing
Program
20.316
X X X X
Department of
Transportation
Capital
Assistance to
States-Intercity
Passenger Rail
Service
20.317
X
Department of
Transportation
Maglev Project
Selection
Program-Safetea-
Lu
20.318
X
Department of
Transportation
High-Speed Rail
Corridors and
Intercity
Passenger Rail
Service Capital
Assistance
Grants
20.319
X
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 82 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
Department of
Transportation
Rail Line
Relocation and
Improvement
20.320
X
Department of
Transportation
Federal Transit
Capital
Investment
Grants
20.500
X
Department of
Transportation
Paul S. Sarbanes
Transit in the
Parks
20.520
X
Department of
Transportation
Federal Ship
Financing
Guarantees
20.802
X X
Department of
Transportation
Assistance to
Small Shipyards
20.814
X X
Department of
Transportation
America’s Marine
Highway Grants
20.816
X
Department of
Transportation
Bonding
Assistance
Program
20.904
X
Department of
Transportation
Disadvantaged
Business
Enterprises Short
Term Lending
Program
20.905
X
Department of
Transportation
Assistance to
Small and
Disadvantaged
Businesses
20.910
X
Department of
Transportation
Payments for
Small Community
Air Service
Development
20.930
X X
Department of
Transportation
National
Infrastructure
Investments
20.933
X
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 83 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Healthy
Communities
Grant Program
66.110
X X
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Environmental
Finance Center
Grants
66.203
X
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Construction
Grants for
Wastewater
Treatment Works
66.418
X
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Capitalization
Grants for Clean
Water State
Revolving Funds
66.458
X
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Capitalization
Grants for
Drinking Water
State Revolving
Funds
66.468
X
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Environmental
Justice Small
Grant Program
66.604
X
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Pollution
Prevention
Grants Program
66.708
X
National
Endowment for
the Humanities
Challenge Grants 45.130
X
National
Endowment for
the Humanities
Promotion of the
Humanities
Public Programs
45.164
X
National
Endowment for
the Humanities
Digital
Humanities Start-
up Grants
45.169
X
Appendix IV: Additional Federal Programs
that Can Fund Economic Activities
Page 84 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Economic activities
Agency Name
Program
number
Strategic
planning &
research
Commercial
buildings
Business
incubators &
accelerators
Industrial
parks &
buildings
Physical
infrastructure
Entrepreneurial
efforts
Marketing
& new
markets
Telecommuni-
cations &
broadband
infrastructure Tourism
National
Science
Foundation
Engineering
Grants
47.041
X
Source: GAO analysis of the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (2011 edition).
a
The authority of Health and Human Service’s Native American program is limited regarding
construction. Its authority is limited to minor construction activities and does not allow for the
building of structures from the ground up or other major construction activities.
Appendix V: Evaluations of Programs
that Can Support Entrepreneurs, 2000-
2012
Page 85 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Author(s), title of
evaluation
Agency
reviewed
Program(s)
reviewed Purpose of the study Data and methods used
Grant Thornton,
Construction Grants
Program Impact
Assessment Report,
September 2008
Department of
Commerce
(Commerce) –
Economic
Development
Administration
(EDA)
Grants for Public
Works and
Economic
Development
Facilities
Economic
Adjustment
Assistance
To assess the economic impacts
and federal costs of EDA’s
construction program, and to
improve upon EDA’s prior study in
1997 in terms of using a more
robust regression model.
Data for this study were taken
from EDA’s Operations and
Planning and Control System
for construction projects’ status
and funding between fiscal
years 1990-2005 and Bureau
of Labor Statistics county
employment data. Study used
ordinary and two-stage least
squares regression.
Beth Walter Honadle
and Michael C.
Carroll, Center for
Policy Analysis &
Public Service,
Bowling Green State
University, Local
Technical
Assistance Program
Evaluation, 2003
Commerce EDA Economic
Development–
Technical
Assistance
To evaluate the local Technical
Assistance program for fiscal years
1997 and 1998 to determine the
extent to which the program has
achieved its mission of helping
communities solve specific
problems, respond to economic
development opportunities, and
build and expand organizational
capacity in distressed areas.
The evaluation is based on
data collected from
• project files and data
obtained from EDA
headquarters and six
regional offices,
• surveys of 121 grant
recipients, and
• two on-site case studies in
each EDA region.
Mt. Auburn
Associates, Inc., An
Evaluation of EDA’s
University Center
Program, December
2001
Commerce EDA Economic
Development–
Technical
Assistance
To evaluate the University Center
Program in five areas:
• effectiveness in meeting
economic development needs,
• effectiveness in targeting
distressed areas,
• distribution of centers being
optimal under EDA budget
constraints,
• duplication or overlap with other
federal programs, and
• leveraging resources.
Study collected data from
numerous sources:
• interviews with EDA
national and regional staff,
• compilation of a database
on University Center
characteristics and
activities from documents
such as grant
applications,
• interviews with Center
directors,
• Center client survey, and
• site visits.
Wayne State
University,
Evaluation of EDA’s
Planning Program:
Economic
Development
Districts, May 2002
Commerce EDA Economic
Development–
Support for Planning
Organizations
To evaluate the overall impact of
EDA’s Economic Development
District (EDD) Planning program,
which funds the EDDs; highlight
commonalities and differences
among the various EDDs; as well as
to assess if the program promotes
regional cooperation towards
making an impact on the economic
development goals of the
community.
Data were gathered in several
progressive stages:
• site visits,
• general survey,
• additional site visits, and
• a second survey to
respondents of first survey.
Analysis of these data was
done using statistical
techniques such as principle-
component analysis.
Appendix V: Evaluations of Programs that
Can Support Entrepreneurs, 2000-2012
Appendix V: Evaluations of Programs
that Can Support Entrepreneurs, 2000-
2012
Page 86 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Author(s), title of
evaluation
Agency
reviewed
Program(s)
reviewed Purpose of the study Data and methods used
The Urban Institute,
The Impact of CDBG
Spending on Urban
Neighborhoods,
October 2002
Department of
Housing and
Urban
Development
(HUD)
Community
Development Block
Grant
(CDBG)/Entitlement
Grants
• To find indicators for the effect
of CDBG spending and track
changes in these indicators.
• To report on neighborhoods
that had received a large
amount of CDBG funding.
• Classified cities into two
categories: those that had
available data that were
more detailed and those
that had less-detailed
available data
• Identify CDBG investment
levels that must be
complemented with
additional investment to
produce significant
improvements in
neighborhood outcomes.
The Urban Institute,
Public-Sector Loans
to Private-Sector
Businesses: An
Assessment of
HUD-Supported
Local Economic
Development
Lending Activities,
December 2002
HUD CDBG/Entitlement
Grants
CDBG/States
CDBG/Section 108
Loan Guarantees
CDBG/Brownfields
Economic
Development
Initiative (BEDI)
• To determine the results of local
third-party lending programs in
terms of business development
and job creation benefits.
• To determine whether some
kinds of borrowers in certain
types of neighborhoods create
jobs or leverage private funds at
lower cost than others.
Study was based on
• telephone interviews with
Economic Development
directors in 460 of the 972
entitlement communities
that used CDBG funds, and
interviews with 234 of the
750 business borrowers.
• sample of business loans
to those areas, matched
with Dun and Bradstreet
information.
Study examines various
indicators of program
performance, including
• business survival rates,
• rates of total and low-
income job creation,
• retention relative to jobs
planned at the time of
loan origination,
• public costs of each job
created,
• amount of private funding
induced (or leveraged) by
program loans, and
• rates at which public loan
dollars substitute for
private funds that would
have otherwise been
invested.
Econometrica, Inc,
Evaluation of the
Indian Community
Block Grant
Program, May 2006
HUD CDBG/Indian
To measure the outcomes of Indian
CDBG expenditures. The outcomes
included amount of leveraged
funding obtained by grantees,
enhancements of partnering
relationships, and level of economic
activity in the communities.
Study had three main data
sources: (1) grant file reviews
of program data, (2) telephone
survey of grant participants,
and (3) case study
observations.
Appendix V: Evaluations of Programs
that Can Support Entrepreneurs, 2000-
2012
Page 87 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Author(s), title of
evaluation
Agency
reviewed
Program(s)
reviewed Purpose of the study Data and methods used
Social Compact and
Weinheimer &
Associates,
Assessing Section 4:
Helping CDC’s to
Grow and Serve,
February 2011
HUD Section 4 Capacity
Building for
Affordable Housing
and Community
Development
To evaluate the effect of the Section
4 program on improving
organization capacity. The section 4
program was set up to support
training for Community Development
Corporations (CDC) and to help
CDCs grow and serve.
From 2001 through 2009, data
were collected from (1)
interviews of key staff at
intermediaries, (2) online
survey of 360 CDCs that
received Section 4 grants, and
(3) interviews with leaders of
34 Section 4-asssisted CDCs.
Concentrance
Consulting Group,
Impact Study of
Entrepreneurial
Development
Resources, 2002 –
2010
a
Small Business
Administration
(SBA)
Small Business
Development
Centers
Women’s Business
Centers
SCORE
To assess the impact of SBA’s
entrepreneurial development
programs on small businesses,
including businesses’ perceptions of
the programs and their economic
growth as a result of the services
provided.
Study included survey of
clients served by SBA’s
entrepreneurial businesses.
Sample size approximately
6,500 observations across all
years–2007, 2008 and 2010
with a smaller sample in 2007.
Gwen Richtermeyer
and Karen Fife-
Samyn, Quality
Research
Associates,
Analyzing the Impact
of the Women’s
Business Center
Program, July 2004.
SBA Women’s Business
Centers
To analyze the economic impact of
the SBA’s Women’s Business
Center program. Specifically the
study addressed the following
between 2001 and 2003:
• impact on growth of firms
• factors that account for success
• specific program model that
predicts success
• predictors of positive economic
outcomes, and
• effect of client demographics on
outcomes.
Study includes a set of
descriptive statistics on the
rate of growth in the number of
Women’s Business Center
clients and also the rate of
jobs and profits at those
centers.
Study used a regression to
test the association between
clients and other outcomes.
Mary Godwyn, Nan
Langowitz, and
Norean Sharpe,
Center for Women’s
Leadership at
Babson College, The
Impact and Influence
of Women’s
Business Centers in
the United States,
April 2005
SBA Women’s Business
Centers
To examine the economic impact
and effectiveness of Women’s
Business Centers.
Survey and focus group of 100
Women’s Business Centers.
The Urban Institute,
A Performance
Analysis of SBA’s
Loan and
Investment
Programs, January
2008
SBA 7(a) Loan Program
504 Loan Program
Small Business
Investment
Company (SBIC)
Program
In order to test whether SBA loan
guarantees are associated with
positive firm outcomes, this study
addressed the following questions:
• What happens to sales,
employment and survival before
and after firms receive the
guarantee?
• What explains the changes
observed?
SBA administrative data were
obtained on firms participating
in 7(a), 504 or SBIC programs.
For these firms, data were
obtained from Dun and
Bradstreet on firm outcomes.
The study used a multivariate
statistical technique to
estimate whether (a) the
change in outcome was
significant, and (b) whether
Appendix V: Evaluations of Programs
that Can Support Entrepreneurs, 2000-
2012
Page 88 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Author(s), title of
evaluation
Agency
reviewed
Program(s)
reviewed Purpose of the study Data and methods used
other factors (such as
business type) affect the
change in outcome.
The Urban Institute,
An Assessment of
Small Business
Administration Loan
and Investment
Performance:
Survey of Assisted
Businesses, January
2008
SBA 7(a) Loan Program
504 Loan Program
Microloan Program
SBIC
To produce a survey that is intended
provide customer satisfaction
indicators for the 7(a), 504, SBIC,
and MicroLoan programs.
Beginning from a sample of
assisted firms from Dunn and
Bradstreet, a survey was sent
to approximately 3,000 firms.
The surveyed firms had
received the loans 6 or 7 years
prior to the questionnaire.
Henry Beale and
Nicola Deas,
Microeconomic
Applications, Inc.,
The HUBZone
Program Report,
May 2008
b
SBA HUBZone
(Historically
Underutilized
Business Zone)
To examine the effectiveness of the
HUBZone program.
Data are from three
databases: applications for
HUBZone certification, Central
Contractor Registration on
small businesses, and the
Federal Procurement Data
System for information on
HUBZone businesses that
have won HUBZone contracts.
The report primarily used an
input-output approach to
estimate the impact on the
HUBZone areas. In this
approach, direct and indirect
impacts are measured using
the above three databases
and multipliers from Bureau of
Economic Analysis.
Charles W.
Wessner, Editor,
Committee on
Capitalizing on
Science,
Technology, and
Innovation, An
Assessment of the
Small Business
Innovation Research
Program at the
National Science
Foundation, 2008.
SBA Small Business
Innovation Research
Program (SBIR)
The study attempts to determine
the effectiveness of the SBIR
program in
• stimulating technological
innovation;
• using small businesses to meet
federal needs;
• increasing private sector
commercialization; and
• encouraging participation of
minority and other
disadvantaged groups.
Study is based on National
Research Council surveys and
reviews of agency materials.
Study includes surveys and
also case studies.
Appendix V: Evaluations of Programs
that Can Support Entrepreneurs, 2000-
2012
Page 89 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Author(s), title of
evaluation
Agency
reviewed
Program(s)
reviewed Purpose of the study Data and methods used
M.A. Boland, J.C.
Crespi, and D.
Oswald, How
Successful Was the
2002 Farm Bill’s
Value-Added
Producer Grant
Program?,
December 2007
Department of
Agriculture
(USDA)
Value Added
Producer Grants
(VAPG)
To identify the determinants for
success among USDA’s VAPG.
Survey of 739 VAPG
recipients, out of which 621
responded. A statistical
analysis was conducted using
binary logistical regression
(logit) and cumulative logit
models.
Source: GAO analysis of information provided by Commerce, HUD, SBA and USDA.
a
While SBA conducts annual impact surveys of the SBDC, WBC, and SCORE programs, for
purposes of this report we focused on the most recent impact study conducted of these programs.
b
In a previous GAO report, Small Business Administration: Additional Actions Are Needed to Certify
and Monitor HUBZone Businesses and Assess Program Results, GAO-08-643 (Washington, D.C.:
Jun. 17, 2008), we recommended that SBA further develop measures and implement plans to assess
the effectiveness of the HUBZone program. SBA took steps to conduct such an assessment.
However, SBA has since decided to rely on the 2008 study conducted by SBA’s Office of Advocacy
listed in this appendix.
Appendix VI: Comments from the Department
of Agriculture
Page 90 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Appendix VI: Comments from the
Department of Agriculture
Appendix VI: Comments from the Department
of Agriculture
Page 91 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Appendix VI: Comments from the Department
of Agriculture
Page 92 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Appendix VII: Comments from the Department
of Commerce
Page 93 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Appendix VII: Comments from the
Department of Commerce
Appendix VII: Comments from the Department
of Commerce
Page 94 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Appendix VII: Comments from the Department
of Commerce
Page 95 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Appendix VII: Comments from the Department
of Commerce
Page 96 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Appendix VIII: Comments from the Department
of Housing and Urban Development
Page 97 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Appendix VIII: Comments from the
Department of Housing and Urban
Development
Appendix VIII: Comments from the Department
of Housing and Urban Development
Page 98 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
Appendix XI: GAO Contact and Staff
Acknowledgments
Page 99 GAO-12-819 Entrepreneurial Assistance
William B. Shear, (202) 512-8678 or [email protected].
In addition to the contact named above, Marshall Hamlett and Triana
McNeil (Assistant Directors), Matthew Alemu, Ben Bolitzer, Julianne
Dieterich, Cindy Gilbert, Geoffrey King, Terence Lam, Alma Laris, Marc
Molino, Alise Nacson, Jennifer Schwartz, and Karen Villafana made key
contributions to this report.
Appendix XI: GAO Contact and Staff
Acknowledgments
GAO Contact
Staff
Acknowledgments
(250610)
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions.
GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through GAO’s website (www.gao.gov). Each weekday afternoon,
GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products,
go to www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”
The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website,http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm.
Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537.
Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.
Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube.
Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts.
Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov.
Contact:
Website: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
E-mail: [email protected]
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470
Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, [email protected], (202) 512-
4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room
7125, Washington, DC 20548
Chuck Young, Managing Director, [email protected], (202) 512-4800
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, DC 20548
GAO’s Mission
Obtaining Copies of
GAO Reports and
Testimony
Order by Phone
Connect with GAO
To Report Fraud,
Waste, and Abuse in
Federal Programs
Congressional
Relations
Public Affairs
Please Print on Recycled Paper.
doc_271138012.pdf