FISCAL YEAR 2016

ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS

TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE FOR FIRMS 

PROGRAM

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Page 2 of 34

Executive Summary

This Report is provided pursuant to Section 255A of chapter 3 of title II of the Trade Act, as 

amended (19 U.S.C. § 2341 et seq.), which directs the Secretary of Commerce to provide an 

annual report on the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms (TAAF) program.

Through this report, the Secretary is required to provide findings and results, to the extent that 

data are available, on the 19 measures listed below in the Table of Contents, classified by 

intermediary organization, state, and national totals.

The Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms (TAAF) program funds a national network of 11

Trade Adjustment Assistance Centers (TAACs), some of which are university-affiliated and 

some independent non-profits. Using TAAF funds that are matched by firms, these TAACs 

provide direct technical assistance to U.S. manufacturing, production, and service firms 

negatively affected by increased imports in order to help such firms develop and implement 

projects to regain global competitiveness, increase profitability, and create jobs. The 

responsibility for administering the TAAF program has been delegated by the Secretary of 

Commerce to the Economic Development Administration (EDA). 

TAAF Program Authorization

The TAAF program is authorized by Chapters 3 and 5 of Title II of the Trade Act of 1974, as 

amended (Pub. L. 93-618, 19 U.S.C. § 2341 et seq.), and as further amended by P.L. 97-35, 98-

120, 98-369, 99-272, 99-514, 100-418, 103-66, 105-277, 107-210, 111-5, 111-344, 112-40, 113-

203, and 114-27. 

TAAF Program Funding Competition

On September 25, 2015, EDA published a Federal Funding Opportunity (FFO) on Grants.gov 

that solicited applications from organizations to operate as TAACs. Through this competition, 

EDA aimed to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the TAAF program through enhanced 

program performance measurement, decreased program administrative costs, better coordination 

with other complementary Federal programs, closer alignment of geographic service areas of 

TAACs with the service areas of EDA’s six regional offices, and a more equitable distribution of 

services across all U.S. States and territories.

1

 

One of the key components of the FFO was that selected organizations include a strategy that 

increased coordination with EDA Regional Offices and complementary Federal programs that 

provide, or could provide, comprehensive assistance to import-impacted firms and communities 

in order to avoid duplicative effort and maximize Federal dollars. Examples of such Federal 

programs include, but are not limited to, the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s 

Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Centers, the U.S. Department of Labor 

(DOL) Trade Adjustment Assistance for Workers program, U.S. Export Assistance Centers, 

 1 See http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/view-opportunity.html?oppId=279141
Page 3 of 34

Regional DOL Employment and Training Administration (ETA) offices, and Workforce 

Investment Boards.

The geographic service areas of TAACs in this Report reflect the cooperative agreements for 

each of the 11 selected TAACs that began May 1, 2016.

Key Findings of this Report2

Firms that received technical assistance through EDA’s TAAF program over the last several 

years have performed more successfully than the manufacturing industry as a whole,

demonstrating a significant return on Federal investment. 

Specifically, EDA analyzes the extent to which client firms increased their sales, and

employment levels following the implementation of TAAF-supported projects (referred to in this 

report as “program completion”). To measure these outcomes, EDA compares average sales, and 

average employment of all firms completing the program in a particular year (known as the 

“base year”) to these same figures for the same firms at one and two years following program 

completion. The base year used for this Report is FY 2014 (for which complete data were 

available for 49 firms that completed the program), as this allows EDA to compare these 

measures looking back both one and two years from the date of this FY 2016 Report.

One year after completing the program, firms reported that average sales had increased by six

percent, and average employment had increased by eight percent from the prior year. By 

comparison, the Census Bureau’s Annual Survey of Manufacturers reported that, during the 

same time period,3 the national manufacturing industry in aggregate experienced an average 

sales decrease of six percent while the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported an average 

manufacturing employment increase of one percent.

4

Two years after completing the program, these same firms reported average sales had increased 

by nine percent, average productivity had decreased by two percent, and average employment 

had increased by 11 percent from 2014. Meanwhile, BLS reported that the U.S. manufacturing 

industry experienced an average employment increase of one percent from 2014.

5 Therefore, 

while not all firms complete the program (see page 27) and not all 129 firms that completed the 

program submitted complete data on their post-program results, the 49 firms that completed the 

TAAF program in FY 2014 and did provide data to EDA performed better on average in terms of 

employment growth than the overall manufacturing industry during the first two years following 

program completion. 

 2 For the purposes of this Report, data are reported only for firms for which all data were available. 3 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014 Annual Survey of Manufactures.

4 Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics: Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment 

Statistics survey (National). 5 Only employment data – not sales – are available for 2016 at the time of this Report for the manufacturing 

industry.
Page 4 of 34

Summary of the TAAF Program

The mission of the TAAF program is to help import-impacted U.S. manufacturing, production 

and service firms develop and implement projects to regain global competitiveness, expand 

markets, strengthen operations, increase profitability, and create jobs. The program provides 

direct technical assistance to support the development of business recovery plans, commonly 

referred to as “Adjustment Proposals” or “APs,” under Section 252 of the Trade Act, and 

matching funds to implement projects outlined in the APs. 

The TAAF program funds a national network of 11 TAACs, some of which are universityaffiliated and some independent non-profits, to help import-impacted firms in all 50 States, the 

District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Firms work with the TAACs in a 

public-private collaborative framework to apply for certification of eligibility for TAAF 

assistance and prepare and implement strategies to guide their economic recovery. EDA’s 

partnership with the TAACs allows firms to receive customized assistance from staff who are 

knowledgeable about the challenges and opportunities facing businesses in their region. 

Projects outlined in Adjustment Proposals may cover a range of functional areas to improve a 

firm’s market position and increase its overall competitiveness. These areas include engineering, 

information technology, management process improvement, marketing and sales growth, new 

product development, export expansion, enhanced support systems, staff capacity building, and 

manufacturing quality improvement. The most common types of assistance provided to 

participating firms in FY 2016 were marketing/sales improvement and support 

systems/enterprise resource planning projects. These projects comprised over half of all projects 

supported throughout the year. 

As of September 30, 2016, 689 active firms with combined sales of $10.5 billion and a 

workforce of 55,688 were participating in the TAAF program While not all firms complete the 

program (e.g. 50 left the program prior to completion in FY 2016, 2 of which went out of 

business), all firms that did complete the program in FY 2014 were in operation at the end of FY 

2016. In FY 2016, TAACs provided technical assistance to 246 firms in preparing petitions, 94

firms in preparing APs, and 629 firms in implementing projects within their APs. Meanwhile, 

EDA certified 68 petitions and approved 75 APs.

In FY 2016, the average processing time for petitions was 19 business days, and the average 

processing time for APs was 43 business days.
Page 5 of 34

Table of Contents

Program Description............................................................................................................................... 6

Results/Findings....................................................................................................................................... 9

Data for This Report............................................................................................................................... 9

(1) The number of firms that inquired about the program..................................................................... 9

(2) The number of petitions filed under Section 251. ......................................................................... 10

(3) The number of petitions certified and denied by the Secretary. .................................................... 10

(4) The average time for processing petitions after the petitions are filed.......................................... 10

(5) The number of petitions filed and firms certified for each Congressional District in the United 

States.............................................................................................................................................. 12

(6) Of the number of petitions filed, the number of firms that entered the program and received 

benefits........................................................................................................................................... 16

(7) The number of firms that received assistance in preparing their petitions. ................................... 17

(8) The number of firms that received assistance developing business recovery plans. ..................... 17

(9) The number of business recovery plans approved and denied by the Secretary............................ 18

(10) Average duration of benefits received under the program nationally and in each region served 

by an intermediary organization (the TAAC) referred to in Section 253(b)(1) of the Trade Act. 20

(11) Sales, employment, and productivity at each firm participating in the TAAF program at the 

time of certification. ...................................................................................................................... 21

(12) Sales, employment, and productivity at each firm upon completion of the program and each 

year for the two-year period following completion....................................................................... 21

(13) The number of firms in operation as of the date of this Report and the number of firms that ceased 

operations after completing the program in each year during the two-year period following 

completion of the program............................................................................................................. 26

(14) The financial assistance received by each firm participating in the program................................ 26

(15) The financial contribution made by each firm participating in the program. ................................ 26

(16) The types of technical assistance included in the business recovery plans of firms participating 

in the program................................................................................................................................ 27

(17) The number of firms leaving the program before completing the project or projects in their 

business recovery plans and the reason the project or projects were not completed..................... 27

(18) The total amount expended by all intermediary organizations referred to in Section 253(b)(1) 

and by each organization to administer the program..................................................................... 28

(19) The total amount expended by intermediary organizations to provide technical assistance to 

firms under the program nationally and in each region served by such an organization............... 29

Conclusion.................................................................................................................................................... 30

Examples of TAAF Program Benefits to Manufacturing Firms............................................................31
Page 6 of 34

Program Description

The TAAF program is authorized by Chapters 3 and 5 of Title II of the Trade Act and is one 

of four distinct programs authorized under the Trade Act. The other Trade Adjustment 

Assistance (TAA) programs are TAA for Workers and TAA for Community College and 

Career Training, which are both administered by DOL, and TAA for Farmers, which is 

administered by USDA.

Exhibit 1: TAA Programs

The responsibility for administering the TAAF program has been delegated to EDA by the 

Secretary of Commerce. 

The mission of the TAAF program is to help import-impacted U.S. manufacturing, 

production and service firms develop and implement projects to regain global 

competitiveness, expand markets, strengthen operations, increase profitability, and create 

jobs.

Import-impacted U.S. manufacturing, production, and service firms can receive direct 

technical assistance through matching funds provided to TAACs, which the TAACs then use 

to match the costs for third-party consultants to help firms expand markets, strengthen 

operations and increase competitiveness. Funds are not provided directly to firms.

The program provides assistance to support the development of business recovery plans, 

commonly referred to as “Adjustment Proposals” or “APs,” under Section 252 of the Trade 

Act, and matching funds to implement projects outlined in the APs. These projects may 

cover a range of functional areas to improve a firm’s market position and increase its overall 

competitiveness, including engineering, information technology, management, market 

development, marketing, new product development, quality improvement and sales. 

The national network of 11 independent non-profit or university-affiliated TAACs serve U.S. 

manufacturing, production firms, and service firms in all 50 States, the District of Columbia 

and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Import-impacted firms work with the TAACs in a 
Page 7 of 34

public-private collaborative framework to apply to EDA for certification of eligibility for 

TAAF assistance and to prepare and implement strategies to guide their economic recovery.

Exhibit 2: TAACs and their Service Areas6

TAAC Service Areas

Great Lakes Indiana, Michigan and Ohio

Mid-America Iowa, Kansas, Missouri and Nebraska

MidAtlantic

Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and 

West Virginia

Midwest Illinois, Minnesota and Wisconsin

New England

Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and 

Vermont

New York, New Jersey and the 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico New York, New Jersey and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico

Northwest Alaska, Idaho, Oregon and Washington

Rocky Mountain Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming

Southeastern

Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, 

South Carolina, and Tennessee

Southwest Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, New Mexico and Texas

Western Arizona, California, Hawaii and Nevada

 6 On September 25, 2015, through Grants.Gov, EDA published a Federal Funding Opportunity (FFO) 

announcing the availability of funding for the TAAF program. The geographic service areas of TAACs reflect 

the cooperative agreements for each of the 11 selected TAACs that began May 1, 2016.
Page 8 of 34

Exhibit 3: Program Phases

There are three main phases to receiving technical assistance under the TAAF program: 

(1) petitioning for certification, (2) recovery planning and (3) AP implementation. 

Phase I - Petitioning for Certification

The first step to receiving assistance is the submission of a petition to EDA to be certified as 

a trade-impacted firm. A petition is comprised of Form ED-840P, titled Petition by a Firm 

for Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance, and required 

supporting documentation. Generally, certification specialists in the TAACs work with the 

firm at no cost to the firm to complete and submit a petition to EDA. 

Upon receipt of the petition, EDA performs an analysis of the petition and supporting 

documents to determine if the petition is complete and may be accepted. EDA is required to 

make a final determination on the petition within 40 days of accepting a petition. 

To certify a firm as eligible to apply for adjustment assistance, EDA must determine that the 

following three conditions are met:

1. A significant number or proportion of the workers in the firm have been or are threatened 

to be totally or partially separated; and

2. Sales and/or production of the firm have decreased absolutely, or sales and/or production 

of an article or service that accounted for at least 25 percent of total production or sales of 

the firm have decreased absolutely, during the 12, 24, or 36 months preceding the most 

recent 12-, 24-, or 36-month period for which data are available; and

3. Increased imports of articles like or directly competitive with articles produced or 

services provided by the firm have “contributed importantly” to both the decrease or 

threatened decrease in employment and the decline in sales and/or production.
Page 9 of 34

Phase II - Recovery Planning

Certified firms work with TAAC staff to develop a customized AP for submission to EDA 

for approval. Once an AP has been submitted, EDA is required to make a final determination 

within 60 days. 

Phase III - AP Implementation

The firm works with consultants to implement projects in an approved AP. For an AP in 

which proposed projects will cost $30,000 or less, the TAAF program provides up to 75 

percent of the cost and the firm is responsible for the balance. For an AP in which proposed 

projects will cost more than $30,000, the TAAF program pays 50 percent of the total cost and 

the firm pays the remaining 50 percent. In order to most efficiently and effectively utilize 

limited program funds, the TAAF program limits its share of technical assistance to a 

certified firm to no more than $75,000. After a competitive procurement process, the TAAC 

and the firm generally contract with private consultants to implement the AP.

As projects are implemented, the firm will first pay their match to the consultant, and then 

send a notice to the TAAC stating that they are satisfied with the work and that they have 

paid their matching share. The TAAC will then pay the Federal share. Firms have up to five 

years from the date of an AP’s approval to implement the approved business recovery 

strategy contained therein, unless the firm receives EDA approval for an extension. 

Generally, firms complete the implementation of their APs over a two-year period.

Results/Findings 

Data for This Report

For the purposes of this Report, data are reported only for firms for which all data were 

available. Data used in this Report were collected through the TAACs on behalf of firms as 

part of their reporting requirements, petitions for certification, and the APs. Complete data 

sets of firm-level data including information on sales, employment, and import impacts are 

needed to do the analysis in this report. However, companies are not required under the 

Trade Act to provide post-completion data to EDA and a significant number of firms choose 

not to do so, mainly due to privacy concerns. In FY 2014, 129 firms completed the program, 

but only 49 (38%) provided the complete data sets necessary for the analysis in this report. 

This response rate is generally consistent with that of previous reports. 

Eligibility reviewers at EDA recorded data from these sources into a central database. The 

data presented in this Report have been verified by the TAACs. Results for average 

processing times were derived by EDA. Data in this report reflect data as of the end of FY 

2016. Therefore, data in this Annual Report may differ from previously published data that 

were based on different periods.

(1) The number of firms that inquired about the program.

In FY 2016, the TAACs received 1,093 inquiries about the program.
Page 10 of 34

Exhibit 4: Inquiries about the TAAF program by TAAC

TAAC

No. of Firms that 

Inquired about the 

TAAF program

Great Lakes 48

Mid-America 216

Mid-Atlantic 78

Midwest 83

New England 48

New York, New Jersey and Puerto Rico 90

Northwest 35

Rocky Mountain 61

Southeastern 36

Southwest 144

Western 254

Total 1,093

(2) The number of petitions filed under Section 251.

(3) The number of petitions certified and denied by the Secretary.

(4) The average time for processing petitions after the petitions are filed.

Petitions are certified on a rolling basis. A petition filed in one fiscal year may not result in 

certification until the next fiscal year. Therefore, it is possible that some states or TAACs 

will show fewer petitions filed than certified.

In FY 2016, EDA filed (accepted for investigation) 73 petitions and certified 68 petitions

under Section 251 of the Trade Act. Due to the technical assistance provided by TAACs 

during the petition process, in addition to the fact that EDA provides firms the opportunity to 

withdraw petitions rather than be denied, no petitions were denied in FY 2016. Five petitions 

were withdrawn prior to certification due to the firms’ inability to demonstrate eligibility.

EDA’s average processing time for petitions (from filing [acceptance] to certification) was 

19 business days. 

Exhibit 5: Petitions Filed (Accepted), and Certified by TAAC/State: FY 2016

TAAC/State

Petitions Filed

(Accepted)

Petitions 

Certified

Great Lakes 8 8
Page 11 of 34

TAAC/State

Petitions Filed

(Accepted)

Petitions 

Certified

IN 1 1

MI 6 6

OH 1 1

Mid-America 9 10

IA 0 0

KS 0 0

MO 7 7

NE 2 3

MidAtlantic 5 6

DC 0 0

DE 0 0

MD 0 0

NJ 0 0

PA 5 6

VA 0 0

WV 0 0

Midwest 8 9

IL 7 7

MN 0 1

WI 1 1

New England 12 10

CT 1 1

MA 5 4

ME 1 0

NH 1 1

RI 2 2

VT 2 2

New York, New Jersey 

and Puerto Rico 0 0

NJ 0 0

NY 0 0

PR 0 0

Northwest 6 6

AK 0 0

ID 2 1

OR 2 2

WA 2 3

Rocky Mountain 4 3

CO 2 1

MT 0 0
Page 12 of 34

TAAC/State

Petitions Filed

(Accepted)

Petitions 

Certified

ND 0 0

SD 0 0

UT 2 2

WY 0 0

Southeastern 5 4

AL 1 0

FL 1 1

GA 0 1

KY 0 0

MS 0 0

NC 2 1

SC 1 1

TN 0 0

Southwest 13 10

AR 1 1

LA 5 4

NM 0 0

OK 4 3

TX 3 2

Western 3 2

AZ 0 0

CA 3 2

NV 0 0

Total 73 68

(5) The number of petitions filed and firms certified for each Congressional District in 

the United States.

Exhibit 6: Petitions Filed (Accepted) and Certified by Congressional District: FY 2016

TAAC/State 

Congressional District

Petitions Filed

(Accepted)

Petitions 

Certified

Great Lakes 8 8

IN 1 1

2 1 1

MI 6 6

1 1 0

6 1 1
Page 13 of 34

TAAC/State 

Congressional District

Petitions Filed

(Accepted)

Petitions 

Certified

7 1 1

8 1 1

10 2 3

OH 1 1

9 1 1

Mid-America 9 10

IA 0 0

KS 0 0

MO 7 7

1 1 0

2 0 1

3 1 1

4 1 1

8 4 4

NE 2 3

1 1 1

3 1 2

MidAtlantic 5 6

DC 0 0

DE 0 0

MD 0 0

PA 5 6

3 2 2

5 1 2

8 2 2

VA 0 0

WV 0 0

Midwest 8 9

IL 7 7

5 2 2

8 2 2

10 1 1

12 1 1

16 1 1

MN 0 1

1 0 1

WI 1 1
Page 14 of 34

TAAC/State 

Congressional District

Petitions Filed

(Accepted)

Petitions 

Certified

New England 12 10

CT 1 1

2 1 1

MA 5 4

1 2 2

3 1 1

6 1 0

8 1 1

ME 1 0

1 1 0

NH 1 1

1 1 1

RI 2 2

1 1 1

2 1 1

VT 2 2

At-Large 2 2

New York, New Jersey 

and Puerto Rico 0 0

NJ 0 0

NY 0 0

PR 0 0

Northwest 6 6

AK 0 0

ID 2 1

1 1 0

2 1 1

OR 2 2

1 1 1

5 1 1

WA 2 3

3 1 2

10 1 1

Rocky Mountain 4 3

CO 2 1

1 1 1

2 1 0

MT 0 0
Page 15 of 34

TAAC/State 

Congressional District

Petitions Filed

(Accepted)

Petitions 

Certified

ND 0 0

SD 0 0

UT 2 2

2 2 2

WY 0 0

Southeastern 5 4

AL 1 0

7 1 0

FL 1 1

25 1 1

GA 0 1

4 0 1

KY 0 0

MS 0 0

NC 2 1

3 1 1

11 1 0

SC 1 1

4 1 1

TN 0 0

Southwest 13 10

AR 1 1

4 1 1

LA 5 4

1 2 2

3 3 2

NM 0 0

OK 4 3

1 1 0

4 2 2

51 1 1

TX 3 2

2 1 0

15 1 1

31 0 1

35 1 0

Western 3 2
Page 16 of 34

TAAC/State 

Congressional District

Petitions Filed

(Accepted)

Petitions 

Certified

AZ 0 0

CA 3 2

42 1 1

44 1 1

52 1 0

NV 0 0

Total 73 68

(6) Of the number of petitions filed, the number of firms that entered the program and 

received benefits.

7

For this metric, benefits are defined as technical assistance provided to firms certified in FY 

2016 in preparing a business recovery plan (AP) that resulted in EDA approval of that AP in 

FY 2016.

In FY 2016, of the 73 petitions accepted and 68 petitions certified by EDA, 45 firms met this 

definition of benefits received.

Exhibit 7: Petitions Certified and APs Approved: FY 2016

TAAC

No. of Firms Receiving 

Benefits (Certified and 

Approved AP in FY 2016) 

Great Lakes 4

Mid-America 7

MidAtlantic 4

Midwest 7

New England 6

New York, New Jersey and 

Puerto Rico 0

Northwest 5

Rocky Mountain 1

Southeastern 4

Southwest 5

Western 2

Total 45

 7 EDA defines “entering the program” as receiving a certification.
Page 17 of 34

(7) The number of firms that received assistance in preparing their petitions.

In FY 2016, 246 firms received assistance in preparing petitions. Firms may receive 

assistance in all phases of preparing petitions more than once in a single year. Petition 

assistance rendered may not result in the submission of a petition in the fiscal year.

Exhibit 8: Petition Assistance Activity: FY 2016

TAAC Petition Assistance

Great Lakes 20

Mid-America 11

MidAtlantic 30

Midwest 67

New England 14

New York, New Jersey and 

Puerto Rico 20

Northwest 18

Rocky Mountain 19

Southeastern 20

Southwest 23

Western 4

Total 246

(8) The number of firms that received assistance developing business recovery plans.

In FY 2016, 94 firms received assistance in developing APs. Additionally, 629 firms 

received assistance in implementing projects in their APs. Firms may receive assistance in 

developing and implementing APs more than once in a single year. Additionally, AP 

assistance rendered may not result in the submission or implementation of an AP in the 

current fiscal year.

Exhibit 9: AP Development Activity: FY 2016

TAAC

AP Development 

Assistance

Great Lakes 13

Mid-America 9

MidAtlantic 13

Midwest 11

New England 10

New York, New Jersey and Puerto 

Rico 2

Northwest 8
Page 18 of 34

TAAC

AP Development 

Assistance

Rocky Mountain 7

Southeastern 9

Southwest 8

Western 4

Total 94

Exhibit 10: AP Implementation Activity: FY 2016

TAAC

AP Implementation 

Assistance

Great Lakes 40

Mid-America 39

MidAtlantic 58

Midwest 133

New England 64

New York, New Jersey and Puerto 

Rico 21

Northwest 56

Rocky Mountain 89

Southeastern 54

Southwest 47

Western 28

Total 629

(9) The number of business recovery plans approved and denied by the Secretary.

In FY 2016, EDA approved 75 APs. While EDA did not deny any APs in FY 2016, EDA did

find some APs submitted to be unacceptable. In these cases, EDA worked with the TAAC 

and firm to make any necessary revisions to make the AP acceptable to EDA. 

Exhibit 11: APs Approved by TAAC/State: FY 2016

TAAC/State No. of APs Approved

Great Lakes 8

IN 1

MI 5

OH 2

Mid-America 9

IA 0
Page 19 of 34

TAAC/State No. of APs Approved

KS 1

MO 6

NE 2

MidAtlantic 13

DC 0

DE 0

MD 0

PA 13

VA 0

WV 0

Midwest 8

IL 7

MN 1

WI 0

New England 8

CT 0

MA 3

ME 0

NH 1

RI 2

VT 2

New York, New Jersey 

and Puerto Rico 2

NJ 0

NY 2

PR 0

Northwest 6

AK 0

ID 1

OR 3

WA 2

Rocky Mountain 3

CO 1

MT 1

ND 0

SD 0

UT 1

WY 0

Southeastern 8

AL 0
Page 20 of 34

TAAC/State No. of APs Approved

FL 1

GA 3

KY 0

MS 0

NC 2

SC 2

TN 0

Southwest 7

AR 1

LA 0

NM 0

OK 4

TX 2

Western 3

AZ 0

CA 3

HI 0

NV 0

Total 75

(10) Average duration of benefits received under the program nationally and in each 

region served by an intermediary organization (the TAAC) referred to in Section 

253(b)(1) of the Trade Act.

For this metric, EDA defines benefits as technical assistance provided to firms from the time 

of petition certification to the time of program completion. Nationally, firms receive on 

average 65 months of benefits under the TAAF program.

Exhibit 12: Average Duration of Benefits Received: FY 2016 by TAAC (Region)

TAAC

Average No. of Months Firms 

Received Benefits Under TAAF 

program by TAAC

Great Lakes 67

Mid-America 40

MidAtlantic 86

Midwest 71

New England 67

New York, New Jersey and Puerto 

Rico 71

Northwest 59
Page 21 of 34

TAAC

Average No. of Months Firms 

Received Benefits Under TAAF 

program by TAAC

Rocky Mountain 68

Southeastern 64

Southwest 65

Western 60

Average for All TAACs 65

(11) Sales, employment, and productivity at each firm participating in the TAAF 

program at the time of certification.8

See Exhibit 13.

(12) Sales, employment, and productivity at each firm upon completion of the program 

and each year for the two-year period following completion.

EDA analyzes the extent to which client firms increased their sales, productivity, and 

employment levels, allowing the implementation of TAAF-supported projects (program 

completion). One year after completing the program, firms participating in the TAAF 

program reported that average sales had increased by six percent, average productivity had

decreased by three percent,9 and average employment had increased by eight percent from 

the prior year. By comparison, the Census Bureau reported that,10 during the same time 

period, the national manufacturing industry in aggregate experienced an average sales 

decrease of six percent, while BLS reported an average employment increase of one

percent.

11

 

Two years after completing the program, these same firms reported average sales had 

increased by nine percent, average productivity had decreased by two percent, and average 

employment had increased by 11 percent from 2014. Meanwhile, BLS reported that the 

manufacturing industry experienced an average employment increase of one percent from 

2014.

12 Therefore, while not all firms complete the program (see page 27), the 49 firms that 

completed the TAAF program in FY 2014 and provided complete data to EDA performed 

 8 For this FY 2016 Report, in order to compare sales, productivity and employment outcomes from the time of 

certification (data point #11 above) to program completion as well as one and two years after program 

completion (data point #12 above), EDA uses data for firms that completed the program in FY 2014 (the “base 

year,” which is two years prior to FY 2016).

9 Since the certified firms are in various industries, which have a variety of ways to measure productivity, sales 

per employee was chosen as the productivity measure. This measure is used because it can be generally applied 

to all certified firms. However, since BLS defines productivity differently than simple sales per employee, no 

comparison is provided between firms that completed the TAAF program and the manufacturing industry as a 

whole in terms of productivity.

10 Ibid. Footnote 3. 11 Ibid. Footnote 4. 12 Ibid. Footnote 5. 
Page 22 of 34

better on average in terms of employment growth than the manufacturing industry as a whole 

during the first two years following program completion.

Please note: For the final row of the table below, all total averages are calculated using the 

data in the column above (i.e. vertical calculation of average), except for the last four 

columns (total averages for productivity), which instead calculate total average productivity 

using the total average sales and total average employment at the bottom of the table (i.e. 

horizontal calculation of average). This provides the most accurate representation of total 

average productivity, as a vertical calculation would introduce additional degrees of error as 

it represents the average of averages.

The base year used for this Report is FY 2014, as this allows EDA to compare these 

measures looking back both one and two years from the date of this FY 2016 Report. 129 

firms completed the program in FY 2014. EDA was able to collect complete data sets from 

49 of these firms. The following exhibits indicate changes in sales, employment and 

productivity at these firms at intervals of one and two years following program completion.
Page 23 of 34

Exhibit 13a: Sales, Employment, and Productivity at Each Firm at Certification, Completion of the Program and Two-Year 

Period Following Completion.13

TAAC/Firm ID

Sales at 

Certification 

Sales at 

Completion 

(FY 2014)

Sales

1st Yr. 

Following 

Completion 

(FY 2015)

Sales

2nd Yr. 

Following 

Completion 

(FY 2016)

Average 

Employment 

at 

Certification

Average 

Employment 

at 

Completion 

(FY 2014)

Average 

Employment 

1st Yr. 

Following 

Completion 

(FY 2015)

Average 

Employment 

2nd Yr. 

Following 

Completion 

(FY 2016)

Average 

Productivity 

at 

Certification

Average 

Productivity 

at 

Completion 

(FY 2014)

Average 

Productivity

1st Yr. 

Following 

Completion 

(FY 2015)

Average 

Productivity

2nd Yr. 

Following 

Completion 

(FY 2016)

GLTAACCMP-001 $32,608,321 $48,000,000 $56,844,000 $62,008,400 116 145 146 155 $281,106 $331,034 $389,342 $400,054

GLTAACCMP-002 $16,198,088 $33,000,000 $27,000,000 $24,800,000 149 127 125 120 $108,712 $259,843 $216,000 $206,667

GLTAACCMP-003 $46,462,846 $80,034,000 $97,000,000 $102,000,000 263 450 530 580 $176,665 $177,853 $183,019 $175,862

GLTAACCMP-004 $100,962,620 $131,000,000 $148,996,538 $204,359,555 296 397 629 757 $341,090 $329,975 $236,878 $269,960

MamTAACCMP-001 $48,091,453 $29,262,797 $33,000,000 $22,686,515 352 267 180 186 $136,623 $109,598 $183,333 $121,971

MamTAACCMP-002 $8,412,115 $20,000,000 $18,700,660 $19,520,443 77 76 66 73 $109,248 $263,158 $283,343 $267,403

MamTAACCMP-003 $16,688,000 $24,194,000 $27,825,000 $33,625,000 174 225 265 349 $95,908 $107,529 $105,000 $96,347

MamTAACCMP-004 $10,016,000 $13,199,731 $13,516,862 $17,300,000 34 71 74 82 $294,588 $185,912 $182,660 $210,976

MamTAACCMP-005 $1,322,000 $242,000 $355,000 $432,511 12 6 8 8 $110,167 $40,333 $44,375 $54,064

MamTAACCMP-006 $442,494 $575,000 $670,000 $700,000 5 6 5 6 $88,499 $95,833 $134,000 $116,667

MamTAACCMP-007 $38,721,946 $52,000,000 $47,449,217 $51,302,455 103 171 183 164 $375,941 $304,094 $259,285 $312,820

MamTAACCMP-008 $38,890,972 $38,000,000 $38,749,731 $36,304,237 341 307 384 390 $114,050 $123,779 $100,911 $93,088

MamTAACCMP-009 $1,447,000 $1,196,561 $1,050,249 $959,834 18 12 11 12 $80,389 $99,713 $95,477 $79,986

MamTAACCMP-010 $4,151,000 $15,011,000 $18,143,000 $20,614,000 91 102 119 142 $45,615 $147,167 $152,462 $145,169

MamTAAC-

(MW)-CMP-011 $8,760,000 $116,000,000 $122,000,000 $130,000,000 69 850 877 890 $126,957 $136,471 $139,111 $146,067

MWTAACCMP-001 $10,345,000 $10,900,000 $11,400,000 $12,000,000 44 77 83 81 $235,114 $141,558 $137,349 $148,148

MWTAACCMP-002 $31,000,000 $47,500,000 $49,000,000 $50,000,000 123 105 110 108 $252,033 $452,381 $445,455 $462,963

MWTAACCMP-003 $2,867,841 $5,388,000 $4,455,000 $6,100,000 28 39 37 40 $102,423 $138,154 $120,405 $152,500

 13 Ibid. Footnote 12.
Page 24 of 34

TAAC/Firm ID

Sales at 

Certification 

Sales at 

Completion 

(FY 2014)

Sales

1st Yr. 

Following 

Completion 

(FY 2015)

Sales

2nd Yr. 

Following 

Completion 

(FY 2016)

Average 

Employment 

at 

Certification

Average 

Employment 

at 

Completion 

(FY 2014)

Average 

Employment 

1st Yr. 

Following 

Completion 

(FY 2015)

Average 

Employment 

2nd Yr. 

Following 

Completion 

(FY 2016)

Average 

Productivity 

at 

Certification

Average 

Productivity 

at 

Completion 

(FY 2014)

Average 

Productivity

1st Yr. 

Following 

Completion 

(FY 2015)

Average 

Productivity

2nd Yr. 

Following 

Completion 

(FY 2016)

MWTAACCMP-004 $1,325,123 $818,000 $475,237 $770,000 7 7 6 4 $189,303 $116,857 $79,206 $192,500

MWTAACCMP-005 $1,444,014 $1,768,344 $2,000,000 $1,800,000 7 11 11 14 $206,288 $160,759 $181,818 $128,571

MWTAACCMP-006 $1,484,759 $2,350,000 $2,802,614 $3,300,000 16 25 28 36 $92,797 $94,000 $100,093 $91,667

MWTAACCMP-007 $30,960,408 $14,000,000 $2,786,000 $3,100,000 131 18 23 25 $236,339 $777,778 $121,130 $124,000

MWTAACCMP-008 $4,523,240 $4,250,000 $3,900,000 $4,300,000 14 25 22 25 $323,089 $170,000 $177,273 $172,000

MWTAACCMP-009 $1,220,258 $1,909,204 $3,000,000 $3,100,000 16 20 35 35 $76,266 $95,460 $85,714 $88,571

MWTAACCMP-010 $3,546,000 $2,919,600 $3,624,372 $4,200,000 26 19 21 21 $136,385 $153,663 $172,589 $200,000

MWTAACCMP-011 $257,184 $243,000 $277,504 $377,500 1 2 2 2 $257,184 $121,500 $138,752 $188,750

MWTAACCMP-012 $1,120,000 $2,555,000 $3,624,370 $4,200,000 17 17 21 21 $65,882 $150,294 $172,589 $200,000

MWTAACCMP-013 $4,818,304 $6,204,998 $875,014 $7,882,880 24 24 25 25 $200,763 $258,542 $35,001 $315,315

MWTAACCMP-014 $2,823,473 $2,680,079 $2,700,000 $2,856,278 33 25 25 21 $85,560 $107,203 $108,000 $136,013

NWTAACCMP-001 $409,000 $1,902,928 $3,049,150 $3,840,000 86 196 175 56 $4,756 $9,709 $17,424 $68,571

NWTAACCMP-002 $66,000 $1,000,000 $600,000 $500,000 2 6 9 7 $33,000 $166,667 $66,667 $71,429

NWTAACCMP-003 $1,983,000 $3,530,000 $6,500,000 $6,600,000 16 36 41 41 $123,938 $98,056 $158,537 $160,976

NWTAACCMP-004 $211,834,000 $246,900,000 $271,600,000 $209,700,000 766 806 680 655 $276,546 $306,328 $399,412 $320,153

NWTAACCMP-005 $1,458,000 $1,200,000 $1,700,000 $1,800,000 14 16 20 20 $104,143 $75,000 $85,000 $90,000

NYNJPRTAAC

-CMP-001 $4,717,220 $4,347,025 $4,538,092 $3,480,223 56 52 59 36 $84,236 $83,597 $76,917 $96,673

NYNJPRTAAC

-CMP-002 $743,119 $1,027,952 $1,191,020 $1,079,585 8 9 10 12 $92,890 $114,217 $119,102 $89,965

NYNJPRTAAC

-CMP-003 $25,421,539 $27,150,000 $27,000,000 $28,010,595 174 100 205 200 $146,101 $271,500 $131,707 $140,053

RMTAACCMP-002 $2,221,435 $2,613,000 $2,800,000 $2,400,000 25 16 15 16 $88,857 $163,313 $186,667 $150,000

RMTAACCMP-003 $660,126 $1,512,353 $1,799,291 $1,830,205 10 13 15 13 $66,013 $116,335 $119,953 $140,785

RMTAACCMP-004 $10,112,336 $10,079,167 $8,763,775 $11,900,000 78 59 84 95 $129,645 $170,833 $104,331 $125,263
Page 25 of 34

TAAC/Firm ID

Sales at 

Certification 

Sales at 

Completion 

(FY 2014)

Sales

1st Yr. 

Following 

Completion 

(FY 2015)

Sales

2nd Yr. 

Following 

Completion 

(FY 2016)

Average 

Employment 

at 

Certification

Average 

Employment 

at 

Completion 

(FY 2014)

Average 

Employment 

1st Yr. 

Following 

Completion 

(FY 2015)

Average 

Employment 

2nd Yr. 

Following 

Completion 

(FY 2016)

Average 

Productivity 

at 

Certification

Average 

Productivity 

at 

Completion 

(FY 2014)

Average 

Productivity

1st Yr. 

Following 

Completion 

(FY 2015)

Average 

Productivity

2nd Yr. 

Following 

Completion 

(FY 2016)

RMTAACCMP-005 $3,558,934 $5,031,480 $5,743,155 $7,040,127 22 24 25 31 $161,770 $209,645 $229,726 $227,101

SETAAC-CMP001 $1,096,375 $1,091,929 $1,278,798 $1,412,323 11 17 19 12 $99,670 $64,231 $67,305 $117,694

SETAAC-CMP002 $771,216 $2,100,000 $2,750,000 $1,767,000 8 10 10 10 $96,402 $210,000 $275,000 $176,700

SETAAC-CMP003 $33,774,621 $36,415,262 $28,391,368 $39,716,461 227 150 155 165 $148,787 $242,768 $183,170 $240,706

SWTAAC(Mam

)-CMP-001 $1,650,000 $1,100,000 $1,100,000 $1,117,465 22 16 11 19 $75,000 $68,750 $100,000 $58,814

SWTAAC(RM)-

CMP-002 $7,810,700 $10,400,000 $9,281,031 $6,000,000 49 71 52 33 $159,402 $146,479 $178,481 $181,818

SWTAAC(RM)-

CMP-003 $3,753,221 $1,770,910 $2,088,360 $2,973,500 40 19 21 35 $93,831 $93,206 $99,446 $84,957

WTAAC-CMP001 $222,222 $1,343,609 $2,502,963 $4,026,649 5 13 16 18 $44,444 $103,355 $156,435 $223,703

WTAAC-CMP002 $8,700,000 $16,294,715 $16,670,915 $17,187,307 85 101 130 105 $102,353 $161,334 $128,238 $163,689

Total Average $16,160,684 $22,081,870 $23,297,312 $24,142,470 89 109 118 121 $181,581 $202,586 $197,435 $199,525

Exhibit 13b: # of Firms that Increased/Decreased Sales, Employment and Productivity After Program Completion

Comparison to Time of 

Completion

# of Firms 

with 

Increase 

# of Firms 

with Decrease

# of Firms 

with No 

Change Total

Sales at 1 Year After Completion 34 14 1 49

Sales at 2 Years After Completion 35 14 0 49

Employment at 1 Year After 

Completion 32 13 4 49

Employment at 2 Years After 

Completion 31 11 7 49

Productivity at 1 Year After 

Completion 30 19 0 49

Productivity at 2 Years After 

Completion 29 20 0 49
Page 26 of 34

(13) The number of firms in operation as of the date of this Report and the number of firms 

that ceased operations after completing the program in each year during the two-year 

period following completion of the program.

As of September 30, 2016, 689 active firms with combined sales of $10.5 billion and a workforce 

of 55,688 were participating in the TAAF program. While not all firms complete the program 

(e.g. 50 left the program prior to completion in FY 2016, 2 of which went out of business), all

firms that completed the program in FY 2014 and provided data on their post-completion 

performance were in operation at the end of FY 2016.

(14) The financial assistance received by each firm participating in the program.

(15) The financial contribution made by each firm participating in the program.

Financial assistance is not provided directly to firms. In FY 2016, firms received $8.7 million 

worth of technical assistance provided to prepare petitions and to develop and implement APs 

(often through business consultants and other experts). EDA funds the TAACs, which either 

provide technical assistance themselves or pay a portion of the cost to secure specialized business 

consultants, for which firms pay a matching share. The firms represented in this report paid 

$5.4 million to match TAAF funds towards the development and implementation of APs. 

Exhibit 14: Summary of TAAC Assistance and Matching Firm Contributions: FY 2016

TAAC

Total TAAC 

Assistance14

Financial 

Contribution 

by the Firms

Great Lakes $603,485 $297,009

Mid-America $651,284 $430,650

MidAtlantic $765,643 $631,447

Midwest $1,395,144 $1,086,060

New England $1,300,444 $1,193,574

New York, New Jersey and 

Puerto Rico $366,089 $208,689

Northwest $1,030,295 $516,633

Rocky Mountain $1,036,195 $504,423

Southeastern $757,423 $287,980

Southwest $370,519 $192,202

Western $448,348 $89,589

Total $8,724,869 $5,438,256

 14 This does not include the amount expended by the TAACs for outreach to potential new firms.
Page 27 of 34

(16) The types of technical assistance included in the business recovery plans of firms 

participating in the program.

Types of technical assistance included in the business recovery plans of firms participating in the 

program include financial, management, marketing/sales, production and support systems.

Exhibit 15: Types of Technical Assistance in APs: FY 2016

Project 

Classification Sample Types of Projects

Financial

• Accounting systems upgrade

• Cost Control tracking system

• Automatic Data Processing development

Management

• Strategic business planning

• Succession management

• Management development

Marketing/Sales

• Sales process training

• Market expansion and feasibility

• Website design and upgrade

Production

• Lean manufacturing and certification

• New Product Development

• Production and Warehouse automation

Support Systems

• Enterprise Resource Planning

• Management Information Systems 

upgrades

• Computer Aided Design software

(17) The number of firms leaving the program before completing the project or projects in 

their business recovery plans and the reason the project or projects were not 

completed.

In FY 2016, the number of firms leaving the program before completing the project or projects in

their business recovery plans was 50, 2 of which went out of business. The reasons the project or 

projects were not completed include:

• Firm sold - 11

• Firm out of business - 2

• Firm declared bankruptcy - 2

• Business decision to not continue - 35
Page 28 of 34

(18) The total amount expended by all intermediary organizations referred to in Section 

253(b)(1) and by each organization to administer the program.

Exhibit 16: Summary of Expenditures by TAAC Across Budget Categories: FY 2016

TAAC

Personnel 

(including 

Fringe 

Benefits)

Contracts 

(Federal 

Share) Travel

Equipment 

and Supplies Other

Indirect 

Costs15

Total TAAC 

Expenditures

Great Lakes $416,186 $311,875 $7,388 $7,223 $6,069 $194,959 $943,700

Mid-America $441,551 $387,116 $4,108 $2,455 $42,684 $207,625 $1,085,539

MidAtlantic 16 $498,666 $545,272 $36,576 $18,093 $202,696 $0 $1,301,303

Midwest 17 $525,832 $1,143,170 $7,014 $4,432 $129,937 $0 $1,810,385

New England 18 $372,542 $1,146,382 $12,882 $13,076 $26,878 $0 $1,571,760

New York, New 

Jersey and Puerto 

Rico $344,116 $214,990 $3,146 $6,071 $53,588 $53,500 $675,411

Northwest 19 $439,038 $522,880 $8,569 $16,565 $165,733 $0 $1,152,785

Rocky Mountain $616,043 $521,908 $2,421 $9,495 $50,878 $163,268 $1,364,013

Southeastern $541,997 $332,561 $8,916 $5,233 $0 $278,033 $1,166,740

Southwest $517,456 $212,668 $19,311 $8,149 $17,201 $112,568 $887,353

Western $372,759 $197,193 $10,602 $3,736 $10,824 $124,852 $719,966

Total $5,086,186 $5,536,015 $120,933 $94,528 $706,488 $1,134,805 $12,678,955

 15 University-affiliated TAACs have indirect cost rate agreements that cannot exceed the current rate negotiated with 

their cognizant Federal agency (non-EDA/DOC). Indirect (facilities and administrative) costs are costs incurred for a 

common or joint purpose benefitting more than one cost object (e.g., a particular project, facility, function, or 

product).

16 Non-profit TAACs do not have indirect cost rate agreements as they do not receive other Federal funds; instead, 

they categorize similar expenditures in their “Other” budget line item. 17 Ibid. Footnote 16. 18 Ibid. Footnote 16. 19 Ibid. Footnote 16.
Page 29 of 34

(19) The total amount expended by intermediary organizations to provide technical 

assistance to firms under the program nationally and in each region served by such an 

organization.

In FY 2016, TAACs expended $8.7 million to provide technical assistance to firms in preparing 

petitions and developing and implementing APs. 

Exhibit 17: TAAC Expenditures to Provide Technical Assistance: FY 2016

TAAC

Total TAAC 

Expenditures20

Great Lakes $603,485

Mid-America $651,284

MidAtlantic $765,643

Midwest $1,395,144

New England $1,300,444

New York, New Jersey and 

Puerto Rico $366,089

Northwest $1,030,295

Rocky Mountain $1,036,195

Southeastern $757,423

Southwest $370,519

Western $448,348

Total $8,724,869

 20 Ibid. Footnote 14.
Page 30 of 34

Conclusion

The findings in this report indicate the 49 firms that completed the TAAF program in FY 2014 

and provided post-completion sales and employment data to EDA performed better on average in 

terms of sales and employment levels than U.S. manufacturing industry in the first two years 

following program completion. 

For FY 2016, EDA’s TAAF program produced the following results:

One year after completing the program, firms participating in the TAAF program reported that 

average sales had increased by six percent, and average employment had increased by eight 

percent from the prior year. By comparison, the Census Bureau reported that,21 during the same 

time period, the national manufacturing industry in aggregate experienced an average sales 

decrease of six percent, while BLS reported an average employment increase of one percent.22. 

Two years after completing the program, these same firms reported average sales had increased 

by nine percent, and average employment had increased by 11 percent from 2014. Meanwhile, 

BLS reported that the manufacturing industry experienced an average employment increase of 

one percent from 2014.

23

Therefore, while not all firms complete the program (see page 27), 49 firms that completed the 

TAAF program in FY 2014 and provided complete data to EDA performed better in terms of 

employment growth than the manufacturing industry as a whole during this time period. 

 21 Ibid. Footnote 3. 22 Ibid. Footnote 4. 23 Ibid. Footnote 5.
Page 31 of 34

Examples of How the TAAF Program Is Helping U.S. 

Manufacturing Firms Compete Against Increasing Imports

The 11 TAACs work with individual firms to develop a deep understanding of their unique

competitive strengths and weaknesses and, based on this understanding, build and implement 

competitiveness strategies customized for each particular firm. 

Great Lakes Trade Adjustment Center (GLTAAC)

An 80-worker Indiana precision machining company was hit hard by the 2008-2009 recession and 

strong, persistent foreign competition. GLTAAC developed the client’s Adjustment Proposal in 

2010, focused on filling open capacity, rebuilding sales, market diversification, and improving 

both manufacturing and non-manufacturing systems. When the firm exited the program at the 

end of 2015, they had completed nine cost-shared projects. With an 80 percent sales increase, the 

company is once again profitable, exports have grown significantly, and it has added 15 jobs. 

A $25 million Ohio manufacturer of hardwood products was losing business to low cost imports 

from Canada and China. The company’s Adjustment Proposal was approved in 2012, focusing on 

development and implementation of a comprehensive new marketing and sales plan, improving 

Enterprise Resource Planning and Customer Resource Management systems (including employee 

training), and initiation of Lean Six-Sigma practices. The firm exited TAAF in 2016 with 

impressive results: a 50 percent sales increase, improved productivity, a return to profitability, 

and the addition of more than 30 jobs. The firm is now fully recovered from the negative import 

impacts it was facing prior to engagement with the TAAF program. 

Mid-America Trade Adjustment Assistance Center (MamTAAC)

When a Missouri manufacturer of awnings and banners entered the TAAF program in 2010, the 

company had experienced a 36 percent drop in sales and laid off a substantial portion of its 

workforce due to cheap import competition. TAAF funds assisted with a wage analysis, 

workforce and management training, marketing and sales improvements, upgrading software 

systems, and ISO certification. The firm exited the TAAF program in 2014. Since participating in 

the program, the company’s annual sales have increased 120 percent and employment has 

increased 81 percent. 

A Kansas manufacturer of agriculture products for tilling and harvesting crops entered the TAAF 

program in 2009 and completed the TAAF program in 2014. In an effort to improve the quality 

and capacity of their harvesting products, the company used TAAF funds for marketing projects 

and research and development projects including the prototype development of two new products. 

Between the time of entrance to completion of the TAAF program, sales increased from 

$16 million to $24 million and the company hired eight new employees.
Page 32 of 34

MidAtlantic Trade Adjustment Assistance Center (MATAAC)

A Pennsylvania maker of wood products and furniture entered the TAAF program in 2011 after 

sales decreased by six percent, jobs decreased by 12 percent, and earnings had decreased by 155

percent. With TAAF assistance, the firm implemented 19 knowledge-based projects in 

Management Information System, Managerial Finance, Human Resources, and Product Design. 

Results included a 60 percent increase in sales, a 56 percent increase in jobs, a 134 percent

increase in profits, and a three percent improvement in productivity. The firm completed the 

program in 2016.

A textile manufacturer in Maryland entered the TAAF program in 2015 after sales had declined 

17 percent, jobs decreased by 24 percent and earnings dropped to a loss of half a million dollars at 

the bottom line. Nine knowledge-based projects covering Managerial Finance, Information 

Technology, Branding and Marketing and Website development are currently being implemented. 

Results so far include 24 percent sales growth, two percent job growth, 184 percent profit growth 

and a 22 percent increase in productivity.

Midwest Trade Adjustment Assistance Center (MWTAAC)

An Illinois-based furniture manufacturer was having product designs copied and sold for less than 

half the cost by firms located in Asia. Both sales and employment dropped by nearly 50 percent

in a short period, which was further exacerbated by the recession. The firm entered the TAAF 

program in 2010. The MWTAAC provided technical assistance focusing on new product 

development. TAAF assistance was used to brand and market the new products in both domestic 

and export markets. The results were a 13 percent increase in sales and the addition of new 

employees. The firm exited the program in 2016.

A Wisconsin-based manufacturer of industrial and machine control panels had its products copied 

and sold for nearly half the cost by competitors based in China. Sales had declined by 33 percent

and the firm had laid off nearly 22 percent of its skilled production workers prior to entry into the 

TAAF program in 2010. The program provided technical assistance with product development, 

inventory management, lean methodology, and marketing. As a result, the firm has more than 

doubled employment and increased sales by nearly $7 million. The firm exited the program in 

2016.

New England Trade Adjustment Assistance Center (NETAAC)

A New Hampshire manufacturer of subassemblies for machining and fabrication entered the

TAAF program in 2009 due to rising imports. Projects included website, plant layout, product 

flow study, software upgrade, project development, and ISO/AWS certification. Technology 

capabilities were expanded throughout, allowing the delivery of innovative new products into 

core markets. Program funding allowed focus on new technology, which led to the expansion of 

markets. When the firm completed the program in 2012, sales had increased from $9 million to 

over $13 million, and employment had increased by 37 percent.

A Massachusetts manufacturer of dust monitoring instrumentation for environmental and process

control applications entered the TAAF program in 2010. Foreign competition decreased sales to

$1.6 million. After program assistance, sales increased to $2.8 million, employment grew 66 

percent and export sales to China, the UK, India and Canada significantly increased. Projects 

included marketing, product certifications and product redesign critical for increasing exports.
Page 33 of 34

Northwest Trade Adjustment Assistance Center (NWTAAC)

A Washington manufacturer of wheelchair positioning products that lost business to imports from 

China and Mexico entered the TAAF program in 2013. The firm developed a strategy to improve 

operations. TAAF technical assistance was employed for market research, promotional 

implementation, succession planning, website revision, and manufacturing process improvements. 

The firm’s sales increased in each year of implementation. At the conclusion of three years of 

TAAF implementation in 2016, the firm had increased sales and employment by 16 percent with 

gains in sales and productivity projected for the coming years.

An Oregon manufacturer of electric grills that had experienced a decline in business due to 

imports from China entered the TAAF program in 2009. The firm’s recovery strategy focused on 

new products and new targeted markets. TAAF technical assistance was employed to understand 

target markets and to implement aspects of its marketing program. The company increased sales 

in every year of TAAF implementation. At the conclusion of five years of TAAF implementation, 

the company had increased sales by 241 percent and increased employment by 140 percent with a 

sharp rise in productivity. 

The Trade Adjustment Assistance Center serving New York, New Jersey and the 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (NYNJPRTAAC)

A New York wind-controlled musical instrument manufacturer entered the TAAF program in 

2012. At the time the firm entered the program, it had total sales of only $700 and employed two

individuals. After technical assistance provided by the NYNJPRTAAC, the firm is now reporting 

annual sales in excess of $100,000 and employment is now three. The firm recently completed all 

of the projects in its Adjustment Proposal.

A New Jersey manufacturer of scenery and specialty fabrications for theater, television, special 

events and themed environments entered the TAAF program. At the time the firm entered the 

program, its annual sales had declined by over 12 percent to $10.7 million and employment had 

dropped nearly 21 percent to an average of 84 employees. The Adjustment Proposal called for an 

upgrade to the firm’s support systems, most notably Material Requirements Planning and 

Manufacturing Computer Numerical Control. Early success has led the firm to bid on projects that 

previously would not have been possible due to cost. Phase one of the support system 

improvements was completed in August 2016.

Rocky Mountain Trade Adjustment Assistance Center (RMTAAC)

A Colorado aerospace component manufacturer struggling with low-cost foreign competition 

from China entered the TAAF Program in 2010. The firm’s sales had declined by 31 percent and 

employment had dropped by 47 percent. Projects were undertaken to significantly streamline 

production and improve efficiency over the next four years before the company completed the 

program in 2015. The firm’s competitive position improved dramatically over this timeframe, 

resulting in a 54 percent increase in sales and a 52 percent increase in employment. The firm 

moved to a larger facility for future growth.

A North Dakota manufacturer of fabricated steel products entered the TAAF program in 2011 

after suffering a 12 percent decline in sales and seven percent decline in employment due to 

increased Chinese imports. RMTAAC helped the firm develop a comprehensive marketing plan 

with a re-branding strategy aimed at integrating the company’s diverse business units under a 

single platform. As a result, increased cross-selling opportunities among business units helped 
Page 34 of 34

boost the firm’s sales by 32 percent. The firm added 250 employees to meet increased demand 

before exiting the program in 2016.

Southeastern Trade Adjustment Assistance Center (SETAAC)

A North Carolina manufacturer of amplifier cabinets opened in 2000 and experienced steady 

growth for 13 years. However, feeling the effects of import competition, the firm entered the 

TAAF program in 2013 and was able update its website to improve consumer usability, make 

improvements to manufacturing processes, as well as ISO9000 training and certification. When 

the firm completed the program in 2016, annual sales had increased by over $400,000, and it was

able to rehire/add 29 employees.

A Tennessee firm with over 30 years of manufacturing multilayer co-fired electronic packages 

turned to SETAAC for assistance when it started experiencing stiff import competition and lost 

more than $1,000,000 in sales over a 24-month period. The firm received $75,000 worth of 

technical assistance through the TAAF program in 2013, helping the firm to obtain its AS9100 

quality control certification and update its website to improve consumer usability. Upon 

completion of the program in 2016, the firm had increased its annual sales by over $3,000,000 

and had added 39 full-time employees.

Southwest Trade Adjustment Assistance Center (SWTAAC)

A Louisiana manufacturer of hand-crafted gas and electric lanterns was being impacted by 

cheaper imports from China, Mexico, and Canada. Sales had declined by 13 percent and the 

company had laid off five percent of its skilled production workforce. The firm entered the TAAF 

program in February 2010 and successfully completed all of its projects in the area of marketing. 

Employment has increased by 15 percent and sales have increased by 244 percent. The firm 

exited the program in September 2015.

A Texas manufacturer of active sportswear was encountering competition from imports because 

of cheaper prices from China, India, Indonesia, and Pakistan. Its sales had declined 18 percent,

and its workforce had been reduced by 10 percent before it entered the TAAF program in 

July 2012. To date, the firm has successfully completed some of its Adjustment Proposal projects 

and is working to complete more. Already, employment has increased by 45 percent and sales 

have increased 68 percent.

Western Trade Adjustment Assistance Center (WTAAC)

A California manufacturer specializing in designed architectural glass and glass surfacing was 

facing stiff important competition and turned to the TAAF program for assistance in 2015. At the 

time, annual sales had decreased 53 percent to under $870,000 and employment had decreased by

19 percent to 13 employees. Since receiving marketing technical assistance through the TAAF 

program, sales have increased by over 500 percent and employment has increased 138 percent to 

31 employees.

A California manufacturer that designs, tests, and markets a highly specialized line of arc and 

flame resistant safety apparel and equipment faced negative impact from foreign goods. Due to 

lower-cost imports, sales decreased 26 percent and employment decreased seven percent. The 

firm entered the TAAF program in 2013. Through TAAF-supported marketing and information 

technology technical assistance, sales have increased 99 percent to $3 million, employment has 

increased by 27 percent to 14 employees and exports have increased from three percent of sales to

44 percent.