ENTREPRENEURIAL 

ASSISTANCE

Opportunities Exist to 

Improve Collaboration and 

Performance Management 

for Financial Assistance 

Programs

Statement of William B. Shear, Director

Financial Markets and Community Investment

Testimony 

Before the Subcommittee on 

Agriculture, Energy, and Trade, 

Committee on Small Business, House 

of Representatives

For Release on Delivery 

Expected at 10:00a.m. EST

Thursday, February 6, 2014

GAO-14-335T

United States Government Accountability Office
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-14-335T, a testimony 

before the Subcommittee on Agriculture, 

Energy, and Trade, Committee on Small 

Business, House of Representatives 

February 6, 2014

ENTREPRENEURIAL ASSISTANCE

Opportunities Exist to Improve Collaboration and 

Performance Management for Financial Assistance 

Programs

Why GAO Did This Study

Economic development programs that 

effectively provide assistance to 

entrepreneurs may help businesses 

develop and expand. In August 2012, 

GAO reported information on 52 

programs at Commerce, HUD, SBA, 

and USDA that provided $2.0 billion in 

support to entrepreneurs in fiscal year 

2011 (GAO-12-819). Of these 52 

programs, 30 programs distributed 

across the four agencies can provide

financial assistance in the form of 

grants and loans. Inefficiencies in the 

administration of these programs could 

compromise the government’s ability to 

effectively provide services and meet

the shared goals of the programs.

This testimony discusses (1) the extent 

of overlap, fragmentation, and 

duplication among these programs and 

the extent to which programs 

collaborate 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. This testimony is based on 

GAO’s August 2012 report and 

provides information on the agencies’ 

actions to address recommendations 

GAO made in that report.

What GAO Recommends

In August 2012, GAO recommended 

that the four agencies and OMB 

explore opportunities to enhance 

collaboration among programs and that 

the four agencies track program 

information and conduct more program 

evaluations. The agencies neither 

agreed nor disagreed with the 

recommendations but did provide 

information on their plans to address 

them.

What GAO Found

Federal programs GAO reviewed that offer financial support to entrepreneurs, 

such as grants and loans, are fragmented and overlap based on the type of 

support they are authorized to offer and the type of entrepreneur they are 

authorized to serve. The Departments of Commerce (Commerce), Housing and 

Urban Development (HUD), and Agriculture (USDA); the Small Business 

Administration (SBA); and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) have 

taken steps to collaborate more in administering these programs in response to a 

recommendation in GAO’s August 2012 report. For example, OMB has 

established a Cross-Agency Priority goal for entrepreneurship and small 

business and an associated interagency working group. However, the four 

agencies have not implemented a number of good collaborative practices GAO 

has identified, such as establishing compatible policies and procedures to better 

support rural businesses. The Government Performance and Results Act 

Modernization Act of 2010 (GPRAMA) 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. 

Some entrepreneurs struggle to navigate the fragmented programs that provide 

technical assistance in the form of training and counseling. This difficulty can in 

turn affect referrals to other programs, including financial assistance programs. 

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 technical 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. Without enhanced collaboration and coordination, agencies may 

not be able to use limited federal resources in the most effective and efficient 

manner and entrepreneurs may struggle to navigate these fragmented programs. 

While the four agencies collect at least some information on entrepreneurial 

assistance program activities, they do not track such information for many 

programs, a practice that is not consistent with government standards for internal 

controls. They 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. In addition, 

GAO found that from 2000 through 2012, the four agencies conducted program 

evaluations of 13 of the 30 financial assistance programs reviewed. GPRAMA

requires 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. Without more robust 

program information, agencies may not be able to administer programs in the 

most effective and efficient manner, and scarce resources may be going toward 

programs that are less effective. 

View GAO-14-335T. For more information, 

contact William B. Shear at (202) 512-8678 or 

shearw@gao.gov.
Page 1 GAO-14-335T Entrepreneurial Assistance

Chairman Tipton, Ranking Member Murphy, and Members of the 

Subcommittee: 

I am pleased to be here today to discuss our work on programs that 

provide financial assistance to entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurs play a vital 

role in the U.S. economy, and the federal government provides a variety 

of support and assistance to them. In August 2012, we reported 

information on 52 programs at the Departments of Commerce 

(Commerce), Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and Agriculture 

(USDA), and the Small Business Administration (SBA) that support 

entrepreneurs.1 In March 2013, we testified before the House of 

Representatives Small Business Committee on our findings from our 

August 2012 report and the actions the four agencies had taken since the 

report.2 According to agency officials, these programs, which typically 

fund a variety of activities in addition to supporting entrepreneurs, spent 

an estimated $2 billion on economic development efforts in fiscal year 

2011. Of these 52 programs, 30 programs distributed across the four 

agencies can support entrepreneurs through financial assistance in the 

form of grants and loans.3 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 

found that the ways that these programs have been administered, and the 

lack of data collection and program evaluations, could lead to inefficient 

delivery of services. These inefficiencies could compromise the 

government’s ability to effectively provide the needed services and meet 

the shared goals of the programs. 

In January 2011, Congress updated the Government Performance and 

Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) with the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 

 1

GAO, Entrepreneurial Assistance: Opportunities Exist to Improve Programs’

Collaboration, Data-Tracking, and Performance Management, GAO-12-819 (Washington, 

D.C.: Aug. 23, 2012).

2

GAO, Entrepreneurial Assistance: Opportunities Exist to Improve Programs’

Collaboration, Data-Tracking, and Performance Management, GAO-13-452T

(Washington, D.C.: Mar. 20, 2013). 

3

The programs generally can be grouped according to at least one of three types of 

assistance that address different entrepreneurial needs: (1) technical assistance, (2) 

financial assistance, and (3) government contracting assistance. This testimony focuses 

on those programs that offer financial assistance.
Page 2 GAO-14-335T Entrepreneurial Assistance

(GPRAMA). GPRAMA established a new framework aimed at taking a 

more crosscutting and integrated approach to focusing on results and 

improving government performance. 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. GPRAMA also highlighted 

the importance of program evaluation for federal agencies. Specifically, 

GPRAMA requires agencies to describe program evaluations that were 

used to establish or revise strategic goals. In addition, the President’s

2013 budget submission established Cross-Agency Priority goals, 

including one to increase federal services to entrepreneurs and small 

businesses, with an emphasis on start-ups, growing firms, and 

underserved markets.4

My testimony today is based on information on the 30 financial assistance 

programs discussed in our August 2012 report and 2013 testimony. 

Specifically, this testimony discusses (1) the extent of overlap, 

fragmentation, and duplication among these programs and the extent to 

which programs collaborate 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. 

This testimony also provides information on the agencies’ recent actions 

to address recommendations we made in our August 2012 report. 

For our August 2012 report, we reviewed statutory and regulatory 

authority on the activities and services the agencies can conduct to 

administer each of the programs, and we found significant overlap and 

fragmentation among programs that provide financial assistance. We 

evaluated this information against promising practices of leading 

organizations and the requirements of GPRAMA. In addition, we obtained 

and reviewed the agencies’ statements on their plans for implementing 

the recommendations made in our August 2012 report. The work on 

which this statement is based was performed during the June 2011 

through February 2014 time period 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 

 4

Cross-Agency Priority Goal: Entrepreneurship and Small Business, accessed on January 

28, 2014, available at http://goals.performance.gov/node/38579. 
Page 3 GAO-14-335T Entrepreneurial Assistance

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. 

Programs providing financial assistance to entrepreneurs are 

fragmented—which occurs when more than one agency or program is 

involved in the same broad area of national interest. Of the 30 financial 

assistance programs we reviewed, 16 can provide or guarantee loans 

that can be used for a broad range of purposes by existing businesses 

and nascent entrepreneurs in any industry. Examples of programs in this 

category include SBA’s 7(a) Loan Program and USDA’s Business and 

Industry Loans. Other programs can support loans for a more narrow 

range of purposes or industries or can only support other types of 

financial assistance, such as grants, equity investments, and surety 

guarantees.5

In addition, a number of programs overlap based on the characteristics of 

the targeted beneficiary.6 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. Such entrepreneurs may 

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 multiple programs at the 

four agencies, including

• Commerce’s Economic Adjustment Assistance; 

 5

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 $10 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.

6

Appendix I lists the financial assistance programs GAO identified that may have similar or 

overlapping objectives, provide similar services, or be fragmented across government 

missions.

Fragmented 

Programs Overlap, 

and Agencies’ Efforts 

to Collaborate Have 

Been Limited
Page 4 GAO-14-335T Entrepreneurial Assistance

• HUD’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)/States

Program; 

• SBA’s 7(a) Loan Program and Small Business Investment Companies

Program; and 

• USDA’s Business and Industry Loans and Rural Business Enterprise 

Grants. 

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. Some programs distribute 

funding through multiple layers of intermediaries before it reaches 

entrepreneurs or 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, as discussed later, 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. 

In our 2012 report, we examined entrepreneurs’ experiences with the four 

agencies’ technical assistance programs—which provide services such 

as helping with development of business plans or a loan package to 

obtain financing—and found that some struggle to navigate the 

fragmented programs. For example, some 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 
Page 5 GAO-14-335T Entrepreneurial Assistance

what services are available or where to go for assistance.7 Technical 

assistance providers sometimes attempt to help entrepreneurs navigate 

the system by referring them to other programs, but these efforts are not 

consistently successful. 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. SBA, Commerce, USDA, and 

other agencies have collaborated to develop a joint website, called 

BusinessUSA, with the goal of making it easier for businesses to access 

services. Some technical assistance providers and entrepreneurs we 

spoke with suggested that a single source to help entrepreneurs quickly 

find information instead of sorting through different websites would be 

helpful. 

Given the fragmented nature of the federal programs that provide 

financial assistance to entrepreneurs, enhanced collaboration between 

agencies could help 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 we have recommended that the agencies follow them.8

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’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. While most of the agencies at the headquarters level have agreed 

to work together by signing formal agreements to administer some of their 

similar programs, they have not implemented a number of other good 

collaborative practices we have previously identified. For example, SBA 

and USDA entered into a formal agreement in April 2010 to coordinate 

their efforts aimed at supporting businesses in rural areas. USDA’s most 

 7

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. 

Although intermediaries are the primary providers of technical assistance, agency field 

offices may also provide some technical assistance. Field staff GAO spoke with did not 

consistently collaborate to provide training and counseling services to entrepreneurs.

8

GAO, Results-Oriented Government: Practices That Can Help Enhance and Sustain 

Collaboration among Federal Agencies GAO-06-15 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 21, 2005).
Page 6 GAO-14-335T Entrepreneurial Assistance

recent survey of state directors indicates strong collaboration in several 

areas, including field offices advising borrowers of SBA’s programs, 

referring borrowers to SBA and its resource partners, and exploring ways 

to make USDA and SBA programs more complementary. However, the 

agencies have not implemented other good collaborative practices, such 

as establishing compatible policies and procedures to better support rural 

businesses.

While the four agencies collect 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. 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. 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 and anomalies in program information can also help 

agencies discover ways to achieve more value for the taxpayers’ money. 

In addition, agencies can use this information to assess whether their 

specific program activities are contributing as planned to the agency 

goals. Promising practices of program administration include a strong 

capacity to collect and analyze accurate, useful, and timely data.9

 Table 

1 summarizes the type of information that agencies maintain in a readily 

available format that could be tracked to help administer the financial 

assistance programs we reviewed. For example, 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.

 9

Harold I. Steinberg, Using Performance Information to Drive Performance Improvement, 

Association of Government Accountants CPAG Research Series: Report No. 29 

(Alexandria, Va: Dec. 2011).

Agencies Lack 

Information to Track 

Program Activities 

and Have Not 

Evaluated Programs
Page 7 GAO-14-335T Entrepreneurial Assistance

Table 1: Financial Assistance Programs that Can Support Entrepreneurs and Maintain Readily Available Information, by 

Agency, Fiscal Year 2011

Type of Information 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 data from Commerce, HUD, SBA and USDA.

We also found that for fiscal year 2011, a number of programs that 

support entrepreneurs failed to meet some or all of their 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. 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. 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.10

Further, from 2000 through 2012, the agencies had conducted program 

evaluations of 13 of the 30 financial assistance programs that support 

entrepreneurs we reviewed. Based on our review, we found that SBA has 

conducted program evaluation studies on 5 of its 10 programs. We also 

 10See GAO, Small Business Administration: Additional Guidance on Documenting Credit 

Elsewhere Decisions Could Improve 7(a) Program Oversight, GAO-09-228 (Washington, 

D.C.: Feb. 12, 2009) and Small Business Administration: Additional Measures Needed to 

Assess 7(a) Loan Program’s Performance, GAO-07-769 (Washington, D.C.: July 13, 

2007). We also have ongoing work on SBA’s 504 Loan Program including the 

performance measures SBA has established to help ensure 504 loans meet key 

requirements, among other issues. We plan to issue this report in the near future.
Page 8 GAO-14-335T Entrepreneurial Assistance

found that USDA has evaluated 1 of its 8 financial assistance programs,

but the study did not address the extent to which the program was 

achieving its mission. 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 to do so, 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.

Since our August 2012 report we have also evaluated certain SBA 

financial assistance programs.11 For example, in September 2013 we 

reported on a pilot initiative within SBA’s 7(a) loan guarantee program, 

the Patriot Express Pilot Loan Program, which provided small businesses 

owned and operated by veterans and other eligible members of the 

military community access to capital.12 We found that SBA did not 

establish measurable goals for the pilot and did not evaluate the effects of 

this pilot, which would have allowed SBA to assess if program operations 

have resulted in the desired benefits, and, for pilots, determine whether to 

make the programs permanent. In this report, we made two additional 

recommendations pertaining to program evaluation. SBA said it would 

consider the findings as it reviewed extending the pilot program.13

Subsequently, SBA discontinued the Patriot Express Pilot Program as of 

December 31, 2013, but announced a temporary program, the SBA 

Veterans Advantage Program, to serve veteran-owned small businesses.

 11GAO has also issued a number of older reports reviewing various aspects of SBA’s loan 

programs, including performance evaluations. See GAO-09-228 and GAO-07-769. 

12GAO, Patriot Express: SBA Should Evaluate the Program and Enhance Eligibility 

Controls, GAO-13-727 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 12, 2013). This pilot program was 

terminated as of December 31, 2013. 

13See GAO-13-727 for more detailed information on our findings and recommendations.
Page 9 GAO-14-335T Entrepreneurial Assistance

To address the issues identified in our August 2012 report and to help 

improve the efficiency and effectiveness of federal efforts to support 

entrepreneurs, we made 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 

the programs’ overall effectiveness. 

The agencies, together with the administration, have taken some steps to 

address our recommendations. For example, the administration has 

initiated steps that provide the agencies with a mechanism to work 

together to identify opportunities to enhance collaboration among 

programs. In particular, it introduced a Cross-Agency Priority goal to 

increase services to entrepreneurs and small businesses in the

President’s fiscal year 2013 budget submission.14 One of the objectives 

under this goal is to use programs and resources across the federal 

government to improve and expand the reach of training, counseling, and 

mentoring services to entrepreneurs and small business owners. In 2012, 

the administration established an interagency group (including 

Commerce, SBA, USDA, and others) that aims to streamline existing 

programs, improve cooperation among and within agencies, ease 

entrepreneurs’ access to the programs, and increase data-based 

 14GPRAMA, among other things, required OMB to coordinate with agencies to establish 

outcome-oriented federal government priority goals—referred to as crosscutting goals—

covering a limited number of policy areas, as well as goals to improve management 

across the federal government. Entrepreneurship and small businesses was 1 of 14 

interim crosscutting priority goals included in the President’s 2013 budget submission. 
Page 10 GAO-14-335T Entrepreneurial Assistance

evaluation of program performance. According to the third quarter fiscal 

year 2013 status update on the administration’s Cross-Agency Priority 

goal for small business and entrepreneurship, the working group was to

create an interagency evaluation framework in the fourth quarter of fiscal 

year 2013 to measure the impacts of coordinating funding streams 

through cluster initiatives. It will be important for the interagency group to 

follow through on developing an evaluation framework, including metrics, 

to ensure that the programs are delivering assistance to entrepreneurs 

efficiently and effectively. In addition, in November 2013, OMB noted that 

an interagency group meets monthly to discuss individual agency efforts 

and identify key areas for improved interagency coordination for the 

BusinessUSA website. It will be important for the interagency group to 

follow through on any key areas identified to improve coordination among 

agencies.

In addition, the four agencies have completed actions or have actions 

underway that are intended to improve data collected on program 

performance.

• In November 2013, USDA noted that the department’s Rural Business 

Services completed three initiatives in fiscal year 2013 to improve the 

quality of performance measurement, including a project to improve 

the integrity of data the agency uses to compile program performance 

measures. 

• In November 2013, HUD noted that the department had undertaken a 

series of actions to improve the quality of data on the department’s 

Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funded activities,

including economic development activities. HUD’s efforts include an 

extensive clean-up of CDBG data, which the department expects to 

complete by the end of the second quarter of fiscal year 2014. 

• In February 2013, SBA noted that the agency had undertaken a 

modernization project for its resource partner data collection system 

to enhance current data fields, improve budget and performance 

integration capabilities, and expand reporting capabilities. 

• In October 2012, Commerce’s Economic Development Administration 

(EDA) noted that it had recently partnered with two universities to 

develop a comprehensive set of performance measures that can be 

used to evaluate the effectiveness of its programs. 

Going forward, we will continue to obtain updates on the agencies’ 

progress. We will report on the actions taken by the agencies as we do 

for other areas included in our mandated work addressing federal 
Page 11 GAO-14-335T Entrepreneurial Assistance

programs with fragmentation, overlap, and duplication.15 We look forward 

to continuing to work with the agencies as well as this and other 

congressional committees in addressing ways to assist entrepreneurs in 

the most effective and efficient manner. 

Chairman Tipton and Ranking Member Murphy, this concludes my 

prepared statement. I would be happy to answer any questions at this 

time. 

For further information on this testimony, please contact me at (202) 512-

8678 or shearw@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of 

Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page 

of this statement. Key contributors to this testimony include Marshall 

Hamlett, Assistant Director; Catherine Gelb; John McGrail; and Jennifer 

Schwartz.

 15GAO, Duplication & Cost Savings, Action Tracker, accessed February 3, 2014, available 

at http://www.gao.gov/duplication/action_tracker/all_areas.

GAO Contacts and 

Staff 

Acknowledgements
Appendix I: List of Programs That Provide 

Financial Assistance to Entrepreneurs

Page 12 GAO-14-335T Entrepreneurial Assistance

Biomass Research and Development Initiative Competitive Grants 

Program

Business and Industry Loans

Intermediary Re-lending

Rural Business Enterprise Grants

Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Program

Small Business Innovation Research

Value Added Producer Grants

Woody Biomass Utilization Grant Program

Economic Adjustment Assistance

Global Climate Change Mitigation Incentive Fund

Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)/Brownfields Economic 

Development Initiative

CDBG/Disaster Recovery Grants

CDBG/Insular Areas

CDBG/Non-entitlement CDBG Grants in Hawaii

CDBG/Section 108 Loan Guarantees

CDBG/States

CDBG/Entitlement Grants

Indian CDBG

Rural Innovation Fund

Section 4 Capacity Building for Affordable Housing and Community 

Development

504 Loan Program

7(a) Loan Program

7(a) Export Loan Guarantees

Federal and State Technology Partnership Program

Microloan Program

New Markets Venture Capital Program

Small Business Innovation Research Program

Small Business Investment Companies

Small Business Technology Transfer Program

Surety Bond Guarantee Program

Appendix I: List of Programs That Provide 

Financial Assistance to Entrepreneurs

Department of 

Agriculture 

Department of 

Commerce

Department of 

Housing and Urban 

Development

Small Business 

Administration (SBA)

(250768)
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.
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 (http://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 http://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: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (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.