ENTREPRENEURIAL 

ASSISTANCE

Opportunities Exist to 

Improve Programs’ 

Collaboration, DataTracking, 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 thirdparty 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 

View GAO-12-819. For more information, most effective and efficient manner.

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

shearw@gao.gov. 
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

 

10SBA 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.

11The 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.

12The 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 SociallyDisadvantaged Producer Grants only serves agricultural businesses.

 

13The 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.

14Of 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.

15The 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 moderateincome 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

 

16Equity 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.

17The 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.

18Microenterprises 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.

 

19SCORE, formerly Service Corps of Retired Executives, provides technical assistance 

support for small business, start-ups and entrepreneurs. 

20HUD’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 

 

21SBA’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 Relending 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 thirdparty 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 

 

22GAO-06-15.

23Pub. 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.

 

24The 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.

25The 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 servicedelivery 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

 

26Harold 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.

 

27GAO/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. 

 

28Nineteen 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

 

29We 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

 

30GAO, 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).

31In 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 interagency 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 costeffective, 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 at http://www.gao.gov. Should 

you or your staff have any questions concerning this report, please 

contact William B. Shear, 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 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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 Actual 

Performanceb

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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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, shortterm planning efforts, and state plans 

designed to create and retain higherskill, 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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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 minorityowned 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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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.

$ 214,396e 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 

$325,549,306f 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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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 moderateincome persons over a 1-, 2-, or 3-year 

time period selected by the state. 

$559,961,961g 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.

$338,257h 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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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 Grantsi

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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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 perunit cost of capacity 

building for housing units 

developed or renovated

None N/A N/A

HUD Rural Innovation Fundj

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 

$0k 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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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 partnersl 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 privatesector 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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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 MicroEntrepreneurs (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 moderateincome 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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

Met 

Individual 

Goals

Met All 

Goals

SBA SBIR Repeat-award winners 

• Percentage of firsttime Phase II 

awardees per year per 

agency

• Percent age of firsttime 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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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 firsttime Phase II 

awardees per year per 

agency

• Percentage of firsttime 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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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 publicprivate 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.

$0m 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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

Met 

Individual 

Goals

Met All 

Goals

businesses, help fund business 

incubators, and help fund employmentrelated 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 startup, 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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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 

Initiativen

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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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 USDAsupported 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 

Obligationsa Performance Measures

Fiscal year 2011

Performance Goal 

Fiscal year 2011 

Actual Performanceb

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. 

mAccording 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

Telecommunications & 

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

Telecommunications & 

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

Telecommunications & 

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 Xa X Xa Xa 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

Telecommunications & 

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

Telecommunications & 

broadband 

infrastructure Tourism

Department of 

the Interior 

Tribal SelfGovernance 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

Telecommunications & 

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 Multispecies 

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

Telecommunications & 

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-InAid 

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

Telecommunications & 

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-SafeteaLu 

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

Telecommunications & 

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

Telecommunications & 

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 Startup 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

Telecommunications & 

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 principlecomponent 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 lowincome 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 – 

2010a

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 FifeSamyn, 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 2008b

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 shearw@gao.gov. 

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: 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.