[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 91 (Monday, May 12, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26192-26198]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-12492]
[[Page 26191]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part VIII
Department of Commerce
_______________________________________________________________________
Economic Development Administration
_______________________________________________________________________
Research and Evaluation, National Technical Assistance--Request of
Proposals; Notice
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Notices
[[Page 26192]]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Economic Development Administration
[Docket No. 970508107-7107-01]
RIN 0610-ZA04
Research and Evaluation, National Technical Assistance--Request
for Proposals
AGENCY: Economic Development Administration (EDA), Department of
Commerce (DoC).
ACTION: Notice of availability of funds.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: A total of $328,500,000 is available to EDA for all of its
programs for FY 1997 (See Notice of Funding availability for FY 1997 at
61 FR 67434), of which approximately $1,780,000 is or will be available
for National Technical Assistance and for Research and Evaluation for
specific projects which will aid in better understanding the causes of
and solutions to economic distress/underemployment and unemployment
throughout the Nation in the specific priority areas described herein.
Additional funding may or may not be available. EDA issues this Notice
describing the conditions under which eligible applications for these
National Technical Assistance under 13 CFR Part 307, Subpart C, and
Research and Evaluation under 13 CFR Part 307, Subpart D, projects will
be accepted and selected for funding. EDA is soliciting proposals for
the specific projects described herein which will be funded if
acceptable proposals are received. Remaining funding, if any, may be
used to fund additional projects.
DATES: Prospective applicants are advised that EDA will conduct a pre-
proposal conference on May 23, 1997, at 10:00 a.m. in the Department of
Commerce, Herbert C. Hoover Building, 14th and Constitution Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC 20230, Room 1414, at which time questions on the
National Technical Assistance and Research and Evaluation projects can
be answered. Prospective applicants are encouraged to provide written
questions (See Addresses section below) by May 20, 1997. Prospective
applicants unable to attend the pre-proposal conference may participate
by teleconference. Teleconference information may be obtained by
calling (202) 482-4085 between 8:30-5:00 EST on May 22, 1997.
Initial proposals for funding under this program will be accepted
through June 9, 1997. Initial proposals received after 5:00 p.m. EST in
Room 7001A, on June 9, 1997, will not be considered for funding.
By June 20, 1997, EDA will advise successful proponents to submit
full applications (containing complete proposals as part of the
application), OMB Control Number 0610-0094. Completed applications must
be submitted to EDA by July 21, 1997. EDA will make these awards no
later than September 30, 1997.
ADDRESSES: Send initial proposals to John J. McNamee, Acting Director,
Research and National Technical Assistance Division, Economic
Development Administration, Room 7001A, U.S. Department of Commerce,
Washington, DC 20230.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John J. McNamee, (202) 482-4085.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
A. Authority
The Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 (PWEDA),
(Pub. L. 89-136, 42 U.S.C. 3121 et seq.), as amended at Sec. 3151
authorizes EDA to provide technical assistance which would be useful in
reducing or preventing excessive unemployment or underemployment, and
enhancing the potential for economic growth in distressed areas (42
U.S.C. 3151(a)); and a program of research to assist in the formulation
and implementation of national, state, and local programs to raise
income levels and other solutions to the problems of unemployment,
underemployment, underdevelopment and chronic depression in distressed
areas and regions (42 U.S.C. 3151(c)(B)). The Omnibus Consolidated
Appropriations Act of 1997, Public Law 104-208, makes funds available
for these programs.
B. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
11.303 Economic Development--Technical Assistance Program; 11.312
Economic Development--Research and Evaluation Program.
C. Program Descriptions
For descriptions of these programs see PWEDA and EDA's regulations
at 13 CFR Chapter III.
D. Briefings and Workshops
Unless otherwise noted, each of the proposals requested below
includes a requirement that the applicant conduct a total of up to
seven briefings and/or training workshops for individuals and
organizations interested in the results of the project. These will take
place when the project is completed and the results known. Potential
applicants should be aware that the completion dates set forth below
are for completion of the project and submission of the final written
report. Briefings/workshops will take place no later than one year
after completion of the project and submission of the final report, at
seven locations and on seven dates at EDA's discretion.
E. Additional Information and Requirements
Applicants should be aware that if they incur any costs prior to an
award being made, they do so solely at their own risk of not being
reimbursed by the Government. Notwithstanding any verbal or written
assurance that may have been received, there is no obligation on the
part of EDA to cover pre-award costs.
The total dollar amount of the indirect costs proposed in an
application under this program must not exceed either the indirect cost
rate negotiated and approved by a cognizant Federal agency prior to the
proposed effective date of the award, or 100 percent of the total
proposed direct costs dollar amount in the application, whichever is
less.
If an application is selected for funding, EDA has no obligation to
provide any additional future funding in connection with an award.
Renewal of an award to increase funding or extend the period of
performance is at the sole discretion of EDA.
Unless otherwise noted below, eligibility, program objectives and
descriptions, application procedures, selection procedures, evaluation
criteria, and other requirements for this program are set forth in
PWEDA and EDA's regulations at 13 CFR Chapter III., and EDA's Notice of
Availability for FY 1997 at 61 FR 67434.
No award of Federal funds will be made to an applicant who has an
outstanding delinquent Federal debt until either: (1) The delinquent
account is paid in full; (2) a negotiated repayment schedule is
established and at least one payment is received; or (3) other
arrangements satisfactory to the Department of Commerce are made.
Unsatisfactory performance under prior Federal awards may result in
an application not being considered for funding.
Applicants should be aware that a false statement on the
application is grounds for denial of the application or termination of
the grant award and grounds for possible punishment by a fine or
imprisonment as provided in 18 U.S.C. 1001.
Applicants are hereby notified that any equipment or products
authorized
[[Page 26193]]
to be purchased with funding provided under this program must be
American-made to the maximum extent feasible.
Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person is required
to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure
to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) unless that collection of
information displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) control number. This notice involves a collection of information
requirement subject to the provisions of the PRA and has been approved
by OMB under Control Number 0610-0094.
II. How to Apply
A. Eligible Applicants
National Technical Assistance--See 13 CFR 307.12. Eligible
applicants are as follows: Public or private nonprofit organizations
including nonprofit national, state, area, district, or local
organizations; accredited educational institutions or nonprofit
entities representing them; public sector organizations; Native
American organizations, including American Indian tribes; local
governments and state agencies. Technical Assistance grant funds may
not be awarded to private individuals or for-profit organizations.
Research and Evaluation--See 13 CFR 307.17. Eligible
applicants are as follows: private individuals, partnerships,
corporations, associations, colleges and universities, and other
suitable organizations with expertise relevant to economic development
research.
B. Proposal Submission Procedures
The initial proposals submitted by potential applicants may not
exceed ten pages in length and should be accompanied by a proposed
budget, resumes/qualifications of key staff, and proposed time line.
EDA will not accept proposals submitted by fax. Proposals must be
received in Room 7001A at the address and by the submission deadline
indicated above, in order to be considered.
III. Areas of Special Emphasis
A. National Technical Assistance Program
Leveraging Capital for Defense Adjustment Infrastructure
Assistance
EDA invites proposals to examine the potential for using EDA's
defense adjustment appropriations in combination with new or innovative
techniques to leverage significant additional capital for defense
adjustment assistance, including construction related to military base
reuse.
Background: The capital required for most defense adjustment
infrastructure (re)development exceeds the ability of many communities
to raise. Public funding available for defense adjustment assistance is
modest compared with the current need for infrastructure assistance.
This project would develop, evaluate, and recommend, if appropriate,
alternative ways for using EDA's defense appropriations to leverage
other financing for defense adjustment infrastructure projects. This
project is not to review, discuss or report on the wide array of
development financing techniques presently available for funding public
infrastructure. The area of interest for this project is intended to be
highly focused on the potential use of relatively small amounts of EDA
grant funds in innovative ways to raise or leverage larger amounts of
other funds which, in turn, could be used to pay for infrastructure
costs associated with the redevelopment of military bases and other
economic development activities. In other words, this project will
investigate the possibility of using EDA grants funds to raise or
leverage money for public infrastructure, as opposed to the present
practice of investing EDA grant funds, separately or in conjunction
with other public or private funding partners, directly into
infrastructure or other economic development activities. Such
leveraging might involve using EDA defense appropriations to partially
secure large bond issues, or to provide for the first several years of
payment on large bond issues until new/future tenants, etc., can pick
up the costs. It would also evaluate what role other Federal financing
mechanisms might play. The feasibility of such alternatives are not
known, but they could possibly serve to greatly extend the impact of
limited Federal/EDA defense infrastructure funds. Alternatives
considered need not be limited to those possible under EDA's current
legislation and regulations, but may also include those that require
changes to EDA's or other Federal legislation or regulations.
Scope of Work: The successful applicant will: (1) Bring together a
panel of public and private sector financial experts to explore the
full range of realistic, innovative financing alternatives for using
EDA defense adjustment funds to leverage private or other public
financing, including the relative advantages and disadvantages of each;
(2) determine what legislative or regulatory changes will be required
for implementation, if any; (3) prepare a comprehensive report; and (4)
conduct briefings and/or training workshops as set forth in Section
I.D. above.
Cost: If properly justified, the Assistant Secretary may consider a
waiver of the required 25 percent local share of the total project
costs. Part of the funding for this project will be provided by the
Office of Economic Adjustment of the Department of Defense.
Timing: This project should be completed and the final report
submitted by March 31, 1998.
Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) Program Impact Evaluation
EDA invites proposals to develop evaluation criteria for and to
evaluate the impact of the TAA Program on small and medium-sized
manufacturing firms injured by increased imports.
Background: The TAA Program is rooted in the presumption that
increased international trade is good for the nation as a whole, but
there are firms, communities and industries that will suffer a
disproportionate share of the impact of changing trade patterns. Each
new round of trade agreements has led to the lowering of trade barriers
and increased foreign competition for U.S. manufacturers. The EDA-
administered TAA Program was developed to help U.S. manufacturing firms
and industries injured by import competition regain the ability to
compete in the global marketplace. The TAA Program assistance is
provided to manufacturers through a network of twelve Trade Adjustment
Assistance Centers (TAACs) located at universities and other nonprofit
organizations throughout the Nation.
In order to qualify for assistance under the TAA Program, a
manufacturer must show a decline in sales or production and a decline
in employment, and that imports contributed importantly to such
declines. Once a firm is certified, TAAC staff work with the firm to
develop and implement recovery strategies based on the firm's own
priorities and decisions.
EDA now seeks an evaluation of the impact of the TAA Program. EDA
is interested in determining the measurable and ``value added'' aspects
of the TAA Program process and in measuring overall program
performance. In undertaking this analysis of the implementation of the
recovery process, the applicant will need to examine selected grants.
The target universe of assisted firms is approximately 550 firms that
have completed at least one
[[Page 26194]]
task of their approved adjustment proposal between FY 1990 and 1995 and
are not doing any additional tasks with TAAC assistance. The applicant
should select a representative sample of those firms. The resulting
data must be appropriately analyzed and the results, with
recommendations as appropriate, presented in a final report to be
available for use by interested Federal and state agencies and other
interested parties. All available project records are located in, or
are accessible through, the twelve TAAC offices. Access to client
records may require prior client approval.
EDA will not accept proposals for this project from TAACs, TAAC
sponsoring organizations, or trade organizations that have received
assistance under the TAA Program.
Scope of Work: The successful applicant will: (1) Evaluate the
effectiveness of the TAA Program assistance, including as assessment of
the appropriateness of the TAA Program assistance and the impact of the
assistance on the firms' economic recovery; (2) examine the current TAA
Program performance measures and recommend revisions as necessary; [The
current performance measures are Project Outcomes at 2 Years and 4
Years After Completion: (a) The percentage of TAA Program client firms
which have completed the adjustment process and have successfully
restructured, and (b) Sales and employment after completing assistance
compared to sales and employment two years before entering the program
and at the time they entered the program.] (3) measure and assess the
value and impact of the diagnostic and adjustment proposal process; (4)
make recommendations for maintaining the status quo and/or improving
both the assistance process and the TAA Program; (5) identify the
features of the TAA Program that make the program effective in meeting
the needs of its clients, the best practices in the TAACs and the best
practices in other business assistance programs that could be
incorporated into the TAA Program; and (6) conduct briefings and/or
training workshops as set forth in Section I.D above.
Cost: If properly justified, the Assistant Secretary may consider a
waiver of the required 25 percent local share of the total project
costs.
Timing: An interim report on sections (1) (3) and (5) of the scope
of work should be provided by February 28, 1998. The project should be
completed and the final report submitted by June 30, 1998.
Update Overall Economic Development Program
EDA seeks proposals for a cooperative agreement through which the
successful applicant will review, evaluate, and make recommendations on
the Overall Economic Development Program (OEDP) comprehensive planning
process. The goal of this effort is to increase the benefits of the
OEDP process and optimize the economic development capacity created at
the local level with the assistance provided by the EDA planning
programs. A lead applicant may partner with one or more other
organizations.
Background: The OEDP is a process that requires a community or
region to conduct an inclusive and comprehensive review of the factors
and resources affecting the economic development of its area. The OEDP
process:
is intended to maximize the benefit of investments by
responding to a locally-initiated economic development plan;
should incorporate, when feasible, a number of recent or
emerging approaches to comprehensive economic development, such as
sustainable development, cluster development, and regionalism;
should take into account planning processes that other
Federal programs (EZ/EC, RDC, ISTEA, EPA, etc.) are initiating, to
reduce the total administrative burden on planning entities and local
communities.
Scope of Work: A cooperative agreement will be awarded to implement
the scope of work. The work includes identifying and using diversified
expertise from the many sectors dealing in economic development,
conducting a series of working meetings, or contracts under the co-
operative agreement, if necessary, for specific studies, preparing
recommendations and a final report, and conducting briefings. Actions
included are:
(1) Developing an agenda and selecting a panel of participants. The
number of participants should not exceed 30, and should include:
--Economic development practitioners (representatives of Economic
Development Districts, counties, Indian tribes, cities, states,
university centers, and urban and rural areas);
--EDA staff (Planners, Regional Directors, Economic Development
Representatives, Program Directors);
--Academicians (planning schools, experts in the field);
--National organizations such as for example, (NADO, NARC, CUED, NASDA,
APA, Nature Conservancy, Wilderness Society, etc.);
--Other Federal agencies (USDA, HUD, EPA, DOT, DOD, etc.);
(2) Convening an initial meeting of all participants to determine
what should be looked at, what issues or topics should be explored,
what path to follow;
(3) Conducting specific studies or, if necessary, issuing contracts
under the co-operative agreement for specific studies identified in the
initial meeting, such as: research and analysis of issues; best
practices, models, and success stories; definition of regions and
planning areas; and identification of recommendations.
(4) Convening a final meeting to review and discuss the studies and
recommendations, selecting best practices, and formalizing
recommendations to be incorporated in the final report;
(5) Conducting briefings and/or training workshops as set forth in
Section I.D. above.
The expected outcomes of this effort are:
Incorporate the latest and most effective approaches to
comprehensive economic development planning into a revitalized OEDP
process;
Maximize the economic benefit of Federal, other public,
and private investments based on a comprehensive local economic
development process;
Standardize the use of a single comprehensive plan to
guide the growth and development of the community, as well as to serve
to qualify the area to receive assistance from EDA and other Federal
and state programs.
Cost: If properly justified, the Assistant Secretary may consider a
waiver of the required 25 percent matching share of the total project
cost. The recipient organization (or group of organizations) will
receive an award to cover the following activities:
Coordinating the overall process;
Conducting two general meetings, including the costs of
meeting facilities, and the travel expense, lodging, and professional
fees of the participants;
If necessary, contracts under the co-operative agreement
for specific studies, not to exceed an aggregate for all such contracts
of $100,000;
Preparing a final report, including recommendation;
Conducting briefings and/or training workshops as set
forth in Section I.D. above.
Timing: The project should be completed and the final report
submitted by September 30, 1998.
[[Page 26195]]
Demand for Economic Development Infrastructure
EDA requests proposals for conducting a study of the nature and
approximate cost of the infrastructure that is needed for the economic
development of (1) areas with high unemployment or low average income
and of (2) areas impacted by defense downsizing.
Background: The study's purpose is to determine the demand for
public works assistance in such areas. One of the principal ways that
economic development assistance fosters the creation of private sector
jobs in areas of economic distress is through financing critical public
infrastructure. In recent years a number of efforts have been
undertaken to assess the infrastructure needs of the United States. For
example, in the late 1970s, EDA funded a study, at the direction of
Congress, of historical public works investments in the United States
and the implications for the then-current trends in such investments.
In 1988, the National Council on Public Works Improvement issued a
report on the nation's infrastructure, entitled Fragile Foundations. In
1990, the House Committee on Public Works and Transportation tasked the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to compile abstracts of significant
infrastructure studies, which resulted in Infrastructure Reports:
Summaries (1992). Studies such as these deal with nationwide needs.
EDA's current interest in learning the extent of infrastructure needs
is more limited: EDA is interested in determining the critical
infrastructure needs of areas suffering long-term economic distress or
that are reasonably anticipated to experience defense downsizing, and
therefore need such infrastructure in order to grow their local
economies so private sector jobs can be created/retained and the
economic vitality of the area restored and sustained. EDA is cognizant
of the fact that well-defined infrastructure investment needs grow out
of a local planning process where the community or region identifies,
among other needs, the type of infrastructure that is needed for the
economic development or economic adjustment of the area.
This request has two aspects:
Under its Public Works program, EDA grants help distressed
communities attract new industry, encourage private investment and
business expansion, diversify local economies, and generate long-term,
private sector jobs. It does so by funding critically-needed
infrastructure such as water and sewer facilities for industry and
commerce, access roads to industrial sites, business incubators, skill
training facilities, and modern technological improvements. EDA's
public works assistance is focused on areas experiencing significant
economic distress, defined principally as unemployment substantially
higher than the national average or per capita income substantially
lower than the national average. Under this request, EDA is interested
in assessing the infrastructure needs of these economically-distressed
areas.
Under its Defense Adjustment program, EDA helps areas to
meet the serious structural economic changes caused by or threatened by
the closure of military bases or the impacts of reduced defense
expenditures by (1) Working with DoD's Office of Economic Adjustment to
design adjustment strategies, and (2) helping to implement those
strategies through a variety of types of projects, including
infrastructure projects. While the process of fully implementing a
base-reuse implementation strategy may take as long as twenty years and
require significant private development financing, the early projects
and access to public financing, such as through EDA's programs are
widely viewed as very critical to successful long-term reuse. Under
this request, EDA is interested in (a) assessing the actual and
anticipated infrastructure needs growing out of defense downsizing at
BRAC 88, 91, 93 and 95 base closure sites, (b) assessing the average
timeframe from the date of BRAC announcement that is envisioned for
full implementation of infrastructure-type projects related to base
reuse strategies, and (c) determining an average timeline and level of
investment related to the most critical early phase infrastructure for
which base-reuse communities look to public funding sources, such as
EDA for assistance. This request seeks to determine initially whether
there is a relatively simple, and inexpensive, way to assess
infrastructure needs in areas of actual economic distress or in areas
affected by defense downsizing.
Scope of Work: The scope of work will take place in two phases.
A. In the first phase, EDA will select a grantee to determine
whether there is a valid and cost-effective methodology to determine
the demand for economic development infrastructure. The potential
grantee would:
(1) Propose a method to assess (a) actual and anticipated defense
adjustment needs growing out of base closing and realignment and
defense downsizing; and (b) the timing when actual infrastructure
financing needs will occur;
(2) Propose a method to assess public works needs of areas of
economic distress;
B. If an acceptable, cost-effective methodology is developed in the
first phase, in the second phase EDA will select a grantee to:
(1) Assess defense adjustment infrastructure needs and estimate the
length of time from development of an adjustment strategy to actual
financing of the resulting infrastructure;
(2) Assess public works infrastructure needs in areas of economic
distress.
(3) Prepare a report; and
(4) Conduct briefings and/or training workshops as set forth in
Section I.D. above.
Upon completion of the first phase, EDA may opt not to complete the
second phase of the grant, or may extend the grant with the first phase
grantee on a non-competitive basis to complete the second phase, or may
make a competitive selection of a new grantee to complete the second
phase. Completion of the second phase is dependent also on availability
of funds in FY 1998.
Cost: If properly justified, the Assistant Secretary may consider a
waiver of the required 25 percent local share of the total project
cost.
Timing: The first phase of this project should be completed by
February 27, 1998.
Performance Measures for EDA's Planning and Local Technical
Assistance Programs
EDA invites proposals to develop performance measures for EDA's
planning and local technical assistance programs.
Background: EDA recently established a set of core performance
measures for each of its grant program areas, and has begun to
systematically test how effective the standards measure each program's
performance, and what adjustments to the core measures may be
necessary. EDA is interested in developing/validating measures for the
performance of the 301(b) Economic Development District and Indian
Planning Program, 302(a) State and Urban Planning Program and 301(a)
Local Technical Assistance Program. Some types of measures are easy to
define. These would include: input measures, such as the number of
full-time employees administering the program, the total amount of
grants awarded; output measures--the number of applications processed;
and efficiency measures--the cost per client served. It is much more
difficult to measure the success or outcomes of EDA's planning and
local technical
[[Page 26196]]
assistance programs, whose outcomes often cannot be measured in easily
quantifiable ways, such as measuring the number of jobs created or
saved.
The value of planning per se is difficult to measure. Planning
activities include: the bringing together of community stakeholders
with diverse interests to work in a collaborative manner; the gathering
of comprehensive economic information; the identification of strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities, and threats; the identification and
agreement on goals, measurable objectives and strategies; ongoing
feedback and evaluation; and communication of the collaborative process
and the plan. Attempts to measure planning performance could focus on
planning activities per se, or on the accomplishment of the measurable
objectives that are developed as part of the planning process, or a
combination of both.
It is also difficult to measure the performance of local technical
assistance projects. They are often single-client and/or single-issue
focused, such as technical or market feasibility studies, and grantees
have little or no control over the outcomes of the projects.
Scope of Work: The successful applicant will: (1) Research the
literature and consult with appropriate experts and practitioners; (2)
examine a cross-section of EDA planning and local technical assistance
projects; (3) develop proposed performance measures; (4) test the
proposed performance measures on a sample of planning and local
technical assistance grants; (5) prepare a report which identifies
performance measures and provides the justification for their
selection; and (6) conduct briefings and/or training workshops as set
forth in Section I.D. above.
Cost: If properly justified, the Assistant Secretary may consider a
waiver of the required 25 percent local share of the total project
cost.
Timing: The project should be completed and the final report
submitted by April 30, 1998.
B. Research and Evaluation Program
State Incentives Evaluation
EDA invites proposals to develop a tool to evaluate state
incentives.
Background: Incentives have been used in various forms since the
founding of the nation to launch business enterprises, improve and
settle states and territories, and open up the West. Following World
War I, states used incentives to diversify their economies, provide
work for their populations and improve the quality of life.
``Smokestack chasing'' began with the South to recruit companies to
locate where operating and labor costs would be lower, and encouraged
the substantial industrial shift which took place after World War II as
companies searched for ways of reducing business costs. During the
1970s, foreign competition began to substantially affect American
industry, and some communities lost much or all of their manufacturing
base. Incentives packages assumed new importance as states, regions and
localities competed with one another to develop strategies to attract
and retain companies and assist them in expanding and creating jobs.
Examples of controversial incentives packages are the location of a BMW
plant in South Carolina and of a Mercedes Benz plant in Alabama. In
these and similar cases, critics argue that immediate and long-term
loss to the taxpayers and tax base are excessive and not justified by
the job gains. What is now seen by some observers as a new ``war
between the states,'' may have become too costly in the long-term:
communities and states commit themselves to provide essential public
services from a reduced tax base due to abatements to individual
companies.
Communities do not have an adequate tool(s) to use in evaluating
the potential impact of proposed incentives packages. EDA is interested
in developing such a tool (or tools) for evaluating incentives packages
that would help communities determine whether the outcomes, over the
long-term, are commensurate with the investment.
Scope of Work: The successful applicant will: (1) Develop
methodologies for analyzing incentive packages to determine, among
other things, the costs/benefits, fiscal impact, and return on
investment; (2) develop guidelines which state and local officials can
use to craft, evaluate and negotiate recruitment policies; (3) develop
recommendations on the appropriate role of the Federal Government with
regard to incentives; and (4) conduct briefings and/or training
workshops as set forth in Section I.D. above.
Cost: No local match is required for this project.
Timing: This project should be completed and the final report
submitted by June 30, 1998.
Outmigration/Population Loss as Indicator of Economic Distress
EDA invites proposals to assess outmigration/population loss as an
indicator of economic distress and recommend an appropriate measure.
Background: EDA's primary and least controversial eligibility
criteria are high unemployment and low income. In addition, areas may
be eligible for assistance if they have had ``a substantial loss of
population due to lack of employment opportunity.'' Elsewhere, EDA's
authorizing legislation refers more specifically to ``outmigration,''
which is a component of population loss.
Some rural areas of the United States, such as Appalachia,
experience outmigration and population loss in addition to high
unemployment and/or low income. However, other areas, primarily in the
Plains and Rocky Mountains, experience outmigration and population loss
in the absence of high unemployment and low income. It is hypothesized
that such population loss, by itself, constitutes economic distress,
because of the loss of tax base, reduced services, school closures,
expensive care for the remaining elderly who do not migrate, and so on.
Scope of Work: The successful applicant will:
(1) Examine all significant forms of dislocation and distress that
accompany population loss/outmigration and the adverse effects of the
loss/outmigration on the community. The hypothesis of population loss/
outmigration as economic distress should be tested against the
contrasting view that it is an alleviator of economic distress and its
many symptoms. In this view, outmigration is the relief valve that
allows the unemployed, underemployed, and those of low income to seek
better circumstances elsewhere.
(2) Compare and contrast population loss/outmigration with other
measures of economic distress, including high unemployment and low
income. Any significant distress-based distinctions between population
loss and its outmigration component should be examined and described.
(3) If population loss/outmigration is found to be an indicator of
economic distress, evaluate and recommend specific measurements that
can be used to quantify this indicator. For example, a high-
unemployment-rate threshold can be set at some level above the
prevailing national or state rate; and a low-income threshold can be
set at some percentage of per-capita income. What threshold can be used
to define areas experiencing excessive population loss/outmigration?
(4) Prepare a comprehensive final report containing the project
background, methodology, findings, and recommendations.
[[Page 26197]]
(5) Conduct briefings and/or training workshops as set forth in
Section I.D. above.
Cost: No local match is required for this project.
Timing: The project should be completed and the final report
submitted by March 31, 1998.
Socioeconomic Data Needed for Economic Development
Practitioners
EDA invites proposals to assess the need for and quality of state,
regional, and local socioeconomic data that are essential for effective
economic development.
Background: The many kinds of data used by the economic development
community are collected by a variety of agencies. Just at the Federal
level, these include decennial population and quinquennial economic
censuses by the Bureau of the Census, macroeconomic figures on output
and its components and other much more industrially and geographically
detailed income and employment data by the Bureau of Economic Analysis,
and labor force data by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. All three
agencies are variously responsible for the income/poverty data and
unemployment data that are crucial to economic development programs.
Local and state agencies are also important data sources.
Improvements in data are needed, but budget limitations require
that they be prioritized so that the most broadly needed and useful are
implemented first. The kinds of improvements most often discussed fall
into four categories: (1) Additional topics: Among the many
possibilities are improved breakdowns of poverty and unemployment data
by minority status, gender status, industry, etc. (2) Greater
frequency: Population Census data are collected only every ten years.
Some advanced countries conduct their censuses more often. Since the
usefulness of decennial data declines rapidly, and to address this
concern, the Census Bureau has begun the start-up phase of the American
Community Survey, which will start to provide data for sub-state areas
in 2001 and, by late in the next decade, will provide annual social and
economic profiles about the population for areas as small as city
neighborhoods. (3) Finer geographical detail: Many data are available
at the national level only. Other data are available no lower than the
state or multistate regional levels. The Census Bureau has recently
developed statistical models for the county level to produce income and
poverty data (small area income and poverty estimates). This program is
in its first stages and the first set of estimates is currently being
evaluated. Even data available at the county level can be too coarse
for purposes of inner-city/poverty-pocket program eligibility and
analysis. (4) Greater accuracy: Accuracy can be improved in various
ways, but it often involves larger samples, and attendant greater cost
for the surveys in which the size is increased. Census Bureau plans for
Census 2000 call for the use of sampling in place of some costly door-
to-door visits and as a quality check. This will both reduce census
costs and improve the accuracy of the totals. With the increased use of
sampling, Census 2000 will be more accurate than past decennial
censuses, which missed many millions of U.S. residents. Still other
categories of data improvement beyond these four--through statistical
modeling, for example--are possible and can be addressed by the
respondents to this request.
Scope of Work: The successful applicant will:
(1) Be both bold and realistic in the needs assessment and
recommendation of data augmentation. For example, a more frequent
Census of Population is unlikely and would be extremely expensive. Many
of its objectives would be met by the American Community Survey and
modifications of the monthly Current Population Survey. Finer
geographical detail is both expensive and statistically problematical;
most data for small sub-populations have wide error ranges, wherein the
reported figures are merely the midpoints. Additional data topics
require new questions in the underlying surveys and censuses, bringing
up questions of citizen privacy and inconvenience, as well as added
expense.
(2) Where data are collected by different levels of government or
by different entities, such as states, at the same level of government,
examine the difficulties of data comparability and the need for data
standards. For example, unemployment data collected by one state should
not have biases towards higher or lower values that make such data
incompatible with that collected by other states.
(3) Assess how existing data are used, or not used, by the economic
development community, in order to understand how demands for new data
might be partly satisfied by greater practitioner awareness of the data
already available.
(4) Prepare a comprehensive final report containing the project
background, methodology, findings, and recommendations.
(5) Conduct briefings and/or training workshops as set forth in
Section I.D. above.
Cost: No local match is required for this project.
Timing: The project should be completed and the final report
submitted by June 30, 1998.
Microenterprise as an Economic Adjustment Tool
EDA invites proposals to evaluate the role of microenterprise as an
economic adjustment tool.
Background: Microenterprise programs provide entrepreneurial
assistance and small loans, sometimes as small as $100, to low and
moderate income people, especially women and minorities, who would not
be eligible for loans from traditional lending institutions. The
programs active in the United States basically fall into two categories
(1) Entrepreneur training and technical assistance and (2) access to
capital, with many programs offering both services. Many of the
programs, especially those which deal exclusively with low-income
groups, also provide personal effectiveness assistance, mentoring, and
peer support groups to promote and sustain in their clients the
discipline of focus, self-confidence, and commitment, among other
factors. The supportive environment assists the borrowers in developing
the skills needed to start and grow a business, as well as to manage
capital financing activities. Some programs also assist in promoting
alliances among microenterprises and in connecting them with
traditionally inaccessible markets.
For purposes of this evaluation, micro enterprises are defined as
businesses with five (5) or fewer employees, and in programs offering
access to capital, businesses receiving loans in the amount of 25
thousand dollars or less.
While microenterprise programs no doubt help to promote personal
development and self-sufficiency among low income people who have had
little opportunity to enter and participate in more traditional ways in
the mainstream economy, the question remains as to what extent
microenterprise programs meet the more conventional economic
development objectives. For example, EDA presently makes grants to
establish Revolving Loan Funds (RLFs) under the authority of its
Economic Adjustment Program, which is directed at assisting communities
struggling with structural economic change. Such changes can occur when
significant sectors of a community's economic base are seriously
damaged, such as by a natural disaster, or eliminated altogether, such
[[Page 26198]]
as by a military base closing. The community's objective is to
stabilize, diversify and replace the economic activity that was lost.
To what extent can microenterprise activity offset such losses and
contribute to economic recovery? Can microenterprise programs assist in
the alleviation of the problems of unemployment and underemployment in
distressed areas and make a contribution to job creation, creation of
wealth, and tax base enhancement? Should microenterprise development be
viewed as an appropriate part of overall structural economic recovery,
perhaps encouraging the development of adequate services within a
community to keep pace with other efforts to rebuild economies? Should
EDA assistance, other than RLFs, focus on microenterprise, e.g.,
microenterprise incubator or technical assistance projects? These
questions will be considered in an assessment of the impact of
microenterprise programs, and whether they can be an effective tool for
addressing the economic adjustment needs of communities facing
structural economic problems.
Scope of Work: The successful applicant will: (1) Choose a broad
sample of microenterprise programs to analyze, compare, and evaluate in
terms of their impact on job creation and income enhancement for
targeted groups in distressed areas; (2) assess the utility of
microenterprise programs in different environments, e.g., urban,
suburban, and rural; (3) determine whether, the extent to which, and
under what conditions microenterprise is an effective economic
adjustment tool; (4) present these matters in a final report, which
will be available to interested parties; and (5) conduct briefings and/
or training workshops as set forth in Section I.D. above.
Cost: No local match is required for this project.
Timing: This project should be completed and the final report
submitted by September 30, 1998.
IV. Selection Process and Evaluation Criteria
Proposals will receive initial reviews by EDA to assure that they
meet all requirements of this announcement, including eligibility and
relevance to the specified project as described herein. The Office of
Economic Adjustment of the Department of Defense will participate in
evaluating proposals submitted for Leveraging Capital for Defense
Adjustment Infrastructure Assistance and Demand for Public Works and
Defense Adjustment Infrastructure projects described above. If a
proposal is selected, EDA will provide the proponent with an
Application form, and EDA will carry out its selection process and
evaluation criteria as described in 13 CFR Chapter III, part 304 and
Sections 307.13, 307.14, 307.18, and 307.19.
From the full proposals and applications, EDA will select the
applicants it deems most qualified and cost effective. EDA anticipates
that more full proposals and applications will be invited than will
eventually be funded.
Dated: May 8, 1997.
Phillip A. Singerman,
Assistant Secretary for Economic Development.
[FR Doc. 97-12492 Filed 5-9-97; 1:29 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-24-P
