U.S. Manufacturing: Federal Programs Reported Providing Support and Addressing Trends
Published: 2017-03-28T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: The U.S. manufacturing sector—representing about 12 percent of the economy and employing 12 million workers in 2015—has undergone changes over the last several decades. With increased productivity and technological innovation, the sector experienced a decreasing number of jobs and share of the economy. GAO was asked to examine how the federal government supports manufacturing.
This report examines (1) how selected federal programs and tax expenditures provide support to U.S. manufacturing; (2) how programs are addressing manufacturing trends; and (3) the extent to which agencies measure performance and assess effectiveness in support of manufacturing generally, and advanced manufacturing specifically. GAO reviewed selected programs with a focus on manufacturing, among other criteria, and conducted a survey of these selected programs to collect data on their budget, activities, and effects. GAO also reviewed reports and interviewed agency officials and experts.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: GAO identified 58 programs in 11 federal agencies that reported providing support to U.S. manufacturing by fostering innovation through research and development, assisting with trade in the global marketplace, helping job seekers enhance skills and obtain employment, and providing general financing or business assistance. Twenty-one of these programs reported using all of their obligations in fiscal year 2015 to support U.S. manufacturing. For these 21 programs, obligations of each program ranged from $750,000 to $204 million in fiscal year 2015, the most recent full year of data. Twenty-six other programs reported using funding to support manufacturing—in addition to other sectors—and provided ranges of estimates for the obligations directly supporting manufacturing. The remaining 11 programs either did not provide an estimate of their support to manufacturing or reported no program obligations in fiscal year 2015. GAO also identified nine tax expenditures that can provide benefits to manufacturers, amounting to billions of dollars in incentives for both the manufacturing sector and other sectors of the economy.
Most (51) of the 58 programs reported addressing trends toward an increase in advanced manufacturing (e.g. activities using automation, software, or cutting edge materials), the need for a higher-skilled workforce, and more global trade competition for U.S. manufacturers by providing funds and resources, sharing information, and promoting coordination. Survey responses from the 58 programs indicated that more than two-thirds of them are addressing the shift toward advanced manufacturing, approximately half are taking steps to address increased globalization and competition, and fewer than half are addressing the need for a higher skilled workforce.
Forty-four of the 58 programs reported having performance goals or measures related to the support of manufacturing, but agencies that comprise an interagency group have not identified the information they will collect from agencies and use to report progress in supporting advanced manufacturing. Ten of the 11 agencies that administer programs GAO reviewed participate in a federal interagency initiative to coordinate activities and report on progress in the area of advanced manufacturing. The Subcommittee on Advanced Manufacturing—co-chaired by the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and that coordinates advanced manufacturing efforts—supports the updating and reporting on a National Strategic Plan for Advanced Manufacturing. The plan, which was published in 2012, identifies objectives and potential measures that could be used to assess progress. The subcommittee plans to report in 2018 on progress in achieving the strategic plan's objectives, as required by the Revitalize American Manufacturing and Innovation Act of 2014. However, OSTP has not worked with the subcommittee member agencies to identify the information needed to report progress in achieving the strategic objectives, such as what measures will be used. While subcommittee officials said the subcommittee does not provide top-down direction to federal agencies on how to measure effectiveness, specifying the information it will collect from federal agencies would better position it to report consistent and comprehensive information on the progress in achieving the plan's objectives.
section_title: What GAO Recommends
paragraphs: OSTP should identify the information it will collect from agencies to determine their progress in achieving the objectives of the National Strategic Plan for Advanced Manufacturing. In commenting on a draft of this report, OSTP neither agreed nor disagreed with the recommendation and suggested alternative language. In response, GAO revised the recommendation to focus on the identification of information, as discussed in the report.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: Manufacturing provides important benefits to the nation, such as  employing 12.3 million U.S. workers and generating $2.2 trillion in  economic activity in 2015. U.S. manufacturing is comprised of  businesses engaged in the mechanical, physical, or chemical  transformation of materials, substances, or components into new  products, and includes various sectors of the economy, such as  machinery, textiles, apparel, food production, and chemicals. Over the  last several decades, U.S. manufacturing has undergone changes  marked by increased productivity and technological innovation. However,  these changes have been accompanied by a decline in the number of  jobs in manufacturing and increased competition from other countries.
The federal government employs a broad range of programs and tax  expenditures that can influence the manufacturing sector by helping  businesses improve their efficiency, update their technologies, export  their products, train their workers, and that can offer financial support in  the form of loans or loan guarantees, among other things. These  programs and tax expenditures are administered and overseen by a  variety of federal agencies, and there is limited information on how they  support manufacturing.
You asked us to provide information on how the federal government  supports manufacturing. This report examines the following four  questions:  1. How do selected federal programs provide support to U.S. manufacturing? 2. How do selected federal tax expenditures provide support to U.S. manufacturing? 3. How, if at all, do selected federal programs address manufacturing trends, and what, if any, challenges do they face? 4. To what extent do federal agencies measure performance and assess effectiveness in support of manufacturing generally, and advanced manufacturing specifically?
To answer these questions, we identified selected manufacturing-related  federal programs and tax expenditures, surveyed program officials,  reviewed relevant reports, interviewed selected experts and agency  officials, and conducted two site visits. To select programs and tax  expenditures, we reviewed relevant GAO and Congressional Research  Service (CRS) reports and the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance,  and we identified federal agencies that, according to those sources,  administered programs that supported manufacturing. We then  contacted each of these agencies to obtain input about their programs.  Programs included in our analysis met the following criteria: The program  (1) was operational in fiscal year 2014 and at the time of selection in  2015, (2) had an identifiable focus on manufacturing, and (3) was not  part of a larger manufacturing program. Next we contacted each agency  again and requested that they confirm the programs we identified support  manufacturing.
In addition, we administered a web-based survey to the identified  program officials and collected, among other data, descriptive program  information, budget and participation data, information on efforts to  address manufacturing trends, and performance and evaluation  information. All of the categorizations of the programs in this report are  based on our review of program descriptions and programs officials’  responses to our survey. In developing this report, we did not conduct a  legal analysis to confirm the various descriptions of the programs,  including information on their budgetary obligations, program goals, or  intent. Further, we did not review or analyze agencies’ financial data or  materials prepared by the agencies in connection with the annual budget  and appropriations process.
To gather further insight into federal programs that support  manufacturing, we conducted site visits to Chicago, IL and Knoxville, TN,  interviewed local program officials, and visited manufacturers who  participate in some of these programs. We selected these cities because  several of the manufacturing programs we identified were operating there.
To identify tax expenditures that provide support to manufacturing, we  reviewed relevant reports from CRS and estimates from the Department  of the Treasury (Treasury) and the U.S. Congress Joint Committee on  Taxation to characterize the scope and cost of tax code provisions related  to manufacturing.
To identify manufacturing trends, we reviewed reports from the  President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) and  the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC), and we spoke to  seven experts about the manufacturing sector. These experts were  selected for their knowledge of the manufacturing sector, and they came  from nonprofit institutions such as the National Academy of Engineering,  federal agencies such as the Department of Commerce (DOC) and  National Science Foundation, private companies such as Palo Alto  Research Center, and think tanks such as the Information Technology  and Innovation Foundation. We also collected data through our survey  about how federal programs are responding to trends in the  manufacturing sector.
To examine the extent to which federal agencies measure their  performance and assess their effectiveness in support of manufacturing  generally and advanced manufacturing specifically, we asked program  officials in our survey what manufacturing-related performance goals and  metrics they used and what program evaluations had been conducted or  planned in the past 5 years to assess any impact that the program had on  the U.S. manufacturing sector. We also analyzed efforts to coordinate  federal advanced manufacturing support by reviewing relevant federal  legislation, prior GAO reports on interagency collaboration, and by  interviewing officials with the Office of Science and Technology Policy  (OSTP). Appendix I contains additional information about our scope and  methodology.
We conducted this performance audit from March 2015 to March 2017 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.
subsections: section_title: Background
subsections: section_title: The United States Manufacturing Sector
paragraphs: The Automobile Industry  The automobile industry affects industries that  manufacture steel, glass, plastics, and rubber.  The sector also supports the refining and  selling of gasoline and road construction, as  well as maintaining, repairing, and selling  motor vehicles. In 2008, the automobile sector  employed 1.7 million people in the United  States, according to the Center for Automotive  Research. Employment in the automobile  sector reaches beyond manufacturing,  including 686,000 people employed by the  automotive parts sector and 737,000  salespeople and service repair professionals  at auto dealers. Further, the 1.7 million direct  jobs contributed to an estimated 8 million total  private sector jobs accounting for more than  $500 billion in annual compensation and more  than $70 billion in personal tax revenues,  according to the Center for Automotive  Research.
Manufacturing plays a key role in creating high-wage jobs, fueling  exports, and driving innovation. In 2015, according to the Bureau of Labor  Statistics (BLS), manufacturing employees earned on average $74,785  annually, including pay and benefits, while workers in all U.S. industries  earned on average $63,045. Manufacturing companies have also  traditionally hired more employees with lower levels of education than  other parts of the economy, according to the Economic Policy Institute,  making these companies an option for individuals whose job choices may  be limited by higher education degree requirements.
Also in 2015, manufacturing firms shipped $1.3 trillion of goods abroad,  according to DOC. In addition, the sector supported the development of  new technologies in the United States by performing 75 percent of private  sector research and development (R&D) and issuing the vast majority of  new patents, despite the fact that manufacturing made up 12 percent of  U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2014, according to the Executive  Office of the President. The influence of the manufacturing sector  reaches many industries, as demonstrated by the automobile industry,  which can be viewed as a barometer and beneficiary of American growth  and economic achievement, according to BLS (see text box).
section_title: Manufacturing Economic Performance
paragraphs: The size of the workforce in U.S. manufacturing decreased from more  than 17 million employees in 1997 to approximately 12 million in 2015,  according to BLS data (see fig. 1). The recent decline in manufacturing  employment included sectors such as apparel, computers and  electronics, and furniture, according to CRS.
Manufacturing’s share of U.S. economic output has decreased over the  last decade as well, according to Bureau of Economic Analysis data. As a  fraction of U.S. GDP, manufacturing declined from 16.1 percent in 1997  to 12.1 percent by 2015 (see fig. 2).
section_title: Role of the Federal Government
paragraphs: There are a number of roles that the federal government plays and a  variety of tools that it uses to influence the manufacturing sector and the  broader economy, including:
Providing funds. The federal government funds programs that  support manufacturing in different ways, such as by providing grants  or awarding contracts.
Assuming risk. The federal government assumes risk (and potential  costs associated with risk) by making direct loans, guaranteeing  loans, and providing insurance.
Collecting or forgoing revenue from taxes. The federal government  collects revenues through the tax system, and forgoes revenues  through tax expenditures such as exemptions, deductions, credits,  and deferrals, as well as preferential tax rates.
Directly procuring goods and providing services. The federal  government procures manufactured products, such as weapons  systems, and provides services, such as technical assistance, directly  through government agencies.
Setting standards and requirements. Federal laws and regulations  also set standards and requirements that can influence manufacturing  activities. Standards, like energy, environmental, and workplace  safety standards, can help to enhance the societal benefits of  manufacturing, but they may also affect the costs related to  manufacturing.
In some cases, the tools the federal government uses to influence the  manufacturing sector are applied directly, such as in the case of a grant  provided to a specific company. In other cases, the federal government  influences the manufacturing sector in a more indirect way. For example,  the federal government delivers tools and technical assistance that  manufacturers use to help invent, innovate, and create new products and  services. Specifically, the mission of DOC’s National Institute of  Standards and Technology (NIST) is to promote U.S. innovation and  industrial competitiveness by advancing measurement science,  standards, and technology in ways that enhance economic security and  improve quality of life. As part of this mission, NIST administers  measurement science research programs across five laboratories and  two national user facilities, which provide industry with precision  measurement technologies, tests, protocols, and scientific and  engineering knowledge, according to NIST officials. The outputs of the  NIST laboratories include scientific data and methods that are used in the  processes, products, and services of nearly every U.S. manufacturing  industry, as well as the national service sector, according to agency  officials.
The federal government established advisory groups and an office that  promote coordination across federal agencies and programs to better  support manufacturers. In recent years, these groups have made  recommendations, formed partnerships, and developed a strategic plan  for advanced manufacturing. For example:
The Manufacturing Council, established in 2004, serves as the  principal private sector advisory committee to the Secretary of  Commerce on the U.S. manufacturing sector. It typically meets  several times a year and develops recommendations for the Secretary  of Commerce.
The America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (COMPETES  Act) called for a committee to plan and coordinate federal programs  and activities in advanced manufacturing R&D, and NSTC designated  the Committee on Technology to take on this task. The COMPETES  Act required this committee to (1) develop a strategic plan for  advanced manufacturing, (2) update the plan every 5 years, and (3)  specify and prioritize near-term and long-term R&D objectives, the  anticipated time frame for achieving the objectives, and the metrics for  use in assessing progress toward the objectives, among other things.
In 2011, PCAST recommended that the federal government work to  better coordinate efforts to support advanced manufacturing, among  other things. In general, advanced manufacturing includes activities  that depend on the use and coordination of information, automation,  computation, software, sensing, and networking. Or advanced  manufacturing can use cutting edge materials and emerging  capabilities enabled by the physical and biological sciences.
In 2011, DOC established the Advanced Manufacturing National  Program Office, which is designed to support public-private  partnerships to increase advanced manufacturing.
In 2012, OSTP published the National Strategic Plan for Advanced  Manufacturing with five objectives: (1) accelerating investment in  advanced manufacturing technology; (2) expanding the number of  workers with the skills needed by a growing advanced manufacturing  sector and making education and training systems more responsive;  (3) creating and supporting national and regional public-private  partnerships among government, academia, and the private sector;  (4) taking a portfolio perspective and coordinating investments across  agencies; and (5) increasing total U.S. public and private investment  in advanced manufacturing R&D.
In 2014, the Revitalize American Manufacturing and Innovation Act of  2014 (RAMI Act) was enacted as part of the Consolidated and Further  Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015. The RAMI Act amended the  requirements for the strategic plan for advanced manufacturing to say  that the Committee on Technology shall develop, and update as  required, a strategic plan to improve government coordination and  provide long-term guidance for federal programs and activities in  support of U.S. manufacturing competitiveness, including advanced  manufacturing R&D. The RAMI Act also requires that the strategic  plan describe the progress made in achieving the objectives from prior  strategic plans, including a discussion of why specific objectives were  not met. The next update of the strategic plan is due by May 1, 2018.
In 2015, NSTC’s Committee on Technology reestablished a  Subcommittee on Advanced Manufacturing (SAM) to identify gaps in  the federal advanced manufacturing R&D portfolio and policies,  identify and evaluate policies and programs that support technology  commercialization, and identify and promote opportunities for public- private collaboration, among other things. The SAM’s scope includes  support for implementation of recommendations from PCAST as well  as support for implementation of and updates to the national strategic  plan for advanced manufacturing. According to the SAM’s charter, it  was previously known as the Advanced Manufacturing Subcommittee.  The SAM’s charter expired on March 1, 2017, and has not been  renewed by the Chair of the Committee on Technology.
section_title: Selected Federal Programs Reported Supporting U.S. Manufacturing by Fostering Innovation, Strengthening Competitiveness in the Global Marketplace, and Assisting Workers
subsections: section_title: Federal Programs We Identified Reported Supporting U.S. Manufacturing
paragraphs: We identified 58 programs in 11 federal agencies that reported they  support U.S. manufacturing. Based on our review of survey responses,  these programs support manufacturing by fostering innovation, helping  manufacturers compete in the global marketplace, helping workers  enhance skills and obtain employment, and providing general financing or  general business assistance. All of the categorizations of the programs in  this report are based on our review of program officials’ responses to our  survey. Most of the manufacturing-related programs we identified are  administered by the Departments of Commerce, Defense, Energy, or the  National Science Foundation (see table 1).
The 58 programs we identified that support manufacturing obligate  varying amounts of funds. (See app. II for a full list and description of  these programs, including obligation amounts for 2014-16 and estimated  proportions of these obligations used to support U.S. manufacturing.) In  some cases, agency officials were able to estimate for our survey the  amount of funds that supported manufacturing because they considered  the entire program to be supporting manufacturing. In other cases,  officials did not estimate the amount their programs obligated to support  U.S. manufacturing, and instead they provided us with a range. Officials  with 21 programs reported that 100 percent of their program’s obligations  were used to support manufacturing. Reported obligations for these  programs ranged from $750,000 to $203,568,000 in fiscal year 2015.  For example, the National Science Foundation’s (NSF)  Nanomanufacturing program provides grants that support fundamental  research that may lead to the production of useful nano-scale materials,  structures, devices, and systems. According to our survey, the program  obligated $8,912,533 in fiscal year 2015, and agency officials estimated  that all of the obligations supported U.S. manufacturing.
Twenty-six other programs reported using funding to support  manufacturing—in additional to other sectors—and provided ranges of  estimates for the obligations directly supporting manufacturing. For  example, agency officials told us the Department of Labor’s (DOL)  Registered Apprenticeship Program prepares American workers to  compete in a global 21st century economy by training millions of them  through a network of 21,000 Registered Apprenticeship programs  consisting of over 150,000 employers. Also according to agency officials,  the program obligated $34,000,000 in fiscal year 2015, and because  manufacturing programs make up approximately 20 percent of all  Registered Apprenticeship programs managed by federal staff, they  estimated that between 10 and 20 percent of federal staff resources are  used to assist with the establishment of new manufacturing programs and  to support existing manufacturing programs. The remaining 11 programs  either did not provide an estimate of their support to manufacturing or  reported zero program obligations in fiscal year 2015. Table 2 indicates  the obligations, by agency, for the 58 programs reported by agency  officials.
section_title: Thirty Programs We Identified Reported They Help Foster Innovation by Supporting Basic and Applied Research and Development
paragraphs: Among the 58 programs we identified, 30 fostered innovation through  their support for basic and applied R&D, based on our analysis of survey  responses. (See table 3.) Advocates of targeted innovation policy argue  that it is important because the manufacturing sector depends on  continually creating new ideas for products and strategies.
Supporting basic R&D by providing grants to educational institutions and  others. Ten of the 30 programs support basic R&D—that is, research that  is conducted without a specific commercial application but which may  spur private sector innovation—based on our analysis of survey  responses. The public sector, through government scientific agencies,  public universities, and other research institutions, may be well-suited to  support basic R&D, as we reported in our July 2013 report on global  manufacturing. Basic R&D supports innovation by creating opportunities  for technological advances, according to the National Strategic Plan for  Advanced Manufacturing.
Eight of the 10 programs that seek to support basic R&D are directed  by NSF. For example, the Design of Engineering Material Systems  program seeks to support research to inform the accelerated design  and development of materials that can be used in manufacturing  processes. In fiscal year 2015, this program obligated $3,223,434,  according to agency officials, and provided grants to approximately 12  educational institutions, which supported about 140 students and  other individuals conducting research.
Another NSF program, the Manufacturing Machines and Equipment  program, aims to support basic research in engineering and science  that enables the development of new manufacturing machines and  equipment, among other things. These machines and equipment are  used to manufacture mechanical and electromechanical products.  According to our survey data, in fiscal year 2015, this program  obligated $10,461,608 and supported approximately 45 educational  institutions and 440 students and other individuals.
Supporting applied R&D. Twenty of the 30 programs fostered innovation  by supporting applied R&D—that is, research designed to solve practical  problems or develop and commercialize new products—based on our  analysis of survey responses. Applied R&D helps to bridge the gap  between new ideas and commercially viable products or processes. We  visited locations where two of these programs—the Hollings  Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) program and the  Manufacturing USA program—were operating to obtain more specific  information on how they were supporting manufacturing:
The MEP program, with reported obligations of $144,556,000 in fiscal  year 2015, consists of a national network of centers located in all 50  states and Puerto Rico that seeks to help small- and medium-sized  manufacturers adopt new technologies and commercialize their  products. The centers are funded through a cost-sharing  arrangement. In addition to federal funding from NIST, the centers  receive funding from state and local governments, and from fees  charged to manufacturers. Officials from the Illinois center reported  they observed production processes at a local manufacturer and  made suggestions to improve efficiency. For example, they identified  an instance where equipment could be used to free up a worker for  other purposes. Center officials also said they had plans to support  local manufacturers by providing “market intelligence” or estimating  how much the market would value a particular product or feature.
The Manufacturing USA program aims to support manufacturing  through applied R&D by coordinating a network of institutes where  public and private sector stakeholders work together to, among other  things, resolve technical barriers to innovative manufacturing  technologies or processes. As of 2016, the program supported nine  institutes, and five or six additional institutes will be announced in  fiscal year 2017, according to agency officials. The Manufacturing  USA program is overseen by DOC, and as of 2016, each institute was  funded by either the Department of Defense or the Department of  Energy, with other agencies planning to fund additional institutes,  according to Commerce officials. The Manufacturing USA institute we  visited in Knoxville, Tennessee, conducts research related to  advanced composites and utilizes a manufacturing demonstration  facility that conducts research on additive manufacturing (also known  as three dimensional (3D) printing). Officials at the institute told us  that private companies may find it difficult to purchase manufacturing  machines, such as 3D printers, due to their size and cost. They said  that the combination of resources available through the institute and  the Manufacturing Demonstration Facility allows members to use  these machines at a fraction of the normal purchase cost to test or  demonstrate new manufacturing technologies. (See fig. 3.) Similarly,  the Manufacturing USA institute we visited in Chicago, Illinois, allows  its members to use its advanced technology machines to demonstrate  the benefits of digital manufacturing, which involves using an  integrated computer-based system to improve manufacturing. An  institute official noted that allowing its members to use machines at  the institute may increase the pace of R&D by allowing manufacturers  to quickly create prototypes to test designs.
section_title: Eleven Programs We Identified Reported They Assist Manufacturers with Trade in the Global Marketplace
paragraphs: Eleven of the 58 programs assist manufacturers to trade in the global  marketplace, based on our analysis of survey responses. These  programs engage in activities like promoting U.S. exports and open trade,  providing financial support, providing technical assistance, and enforcing  trade laws and supporting policy formulation (see table 4). According to  our survey data, DOC administers all but one of these programs, and they  devote a majority of their resources and activities to manufacturing.
Promoting U.S. exports. Export promotion programs can assist U.S.  companies with trade in the global marketplace by helping them  overcome barriers to entry in foreign markets, as we have previously  reported. Of the 11 programs we identified that help manufacturers with  trade in the global marketplace, 6 reported promoting U.S. exports. For  example, 1 of these 6 programs, DOC’s Domestic Field program,  reported providing services in partnership with the Export-Import Bank  and the Small Business Administration (SBA), through a network of U.S.  Export Assistance Centers. These centers seek to provide customized  assistance to local small-and medium-sized companies, including  manufacturers, by helping to identify relevant partners and markets and  by assisting with export mechanics and financing options, according to  program officials. With 108 offices in 48 states and Puerto Rico, these  centers served about 25,000 businesses in fiscal year 2015, according to  agency officials. We visited a center located in Knoxville, Tennessee,  which, according to local officials, worked with a company to create an  outreach seminar and develop an invitation list for it in Mexico. According  to local officials, the seminar helped increase the company’s sales of  manufactured medical products to Mexico. The Knoxville center also  seeks to assist local companies with the export process by helping to  locate distributors for their products, according to local officials.
Providing financial support. Based on our survey, 2 of the 11 programs  we identified provide various types of financial support to companies or  their customers that are unable to obtain financing from the private sector  or have been affected by import competition. For example, according to  the Export-Import Bank, it supports companies by using three main types  of financial products:  fixed-rate loans directly to foreign buyers of U.S. goods and services;  loan guarantees to commercial lenders to cover repayment risks on  foreign buyers’ debt obligations incurred to purchase U.S. exports;  and export credit insurance, which supports U.S. exporters selling goods  overseas by protecting them against the risk of foreign buyer or other  foreign debtor default.
According to the Export-Import Bank’s fiscal year 2015 annual report, the  Bank authorized 41 loans and 344 loan guarantees, in a range of sectors,  including, but not limited to, manufacturing. In one instance, the Export- Import Bank guaranteed commercial loans to support the export of  bridges manufactured by a U.S.-based company. According to the  Export-Import Bank, these guarantees allowed the manufacturer to gain  entry into foreign markets, and they also supported jobs in the United  States.
Another program we surveyed that seeks to provide financial support,  among other things, is the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms  program, which is administered by DOC. According to our survey, the  program supports a network of trade adjustment assistance centers that  work with manufacturers that have been affected by competition from  imported products. These centers aim to help manufacturers develop and  implement business recovery plans, among other things, and provide  matching funds for consultants to work with manufacturers to implement  projects in business recovery plans, according to agency officials.
Enforcing trade laws and agreements and supporting policy formulation.  Based on our analysis of survey responses, DOC administers three  programs that enforce trade agreements and support policy formulation  and negotiations. One of the three programs, the Industry Trade Policy  and Analysis program, seeks to provide analysis and expertise to conduct  policy formulation or represent industry members in trade negotiations.  These activities aim to help expand exports and bolster foreign direct  investments in the United States, which can assist many industries,  including manufacturing. Another program, the Trade Enforcement and  Compliance Policy and Negotiations program, oversees policies and  programs related to the negotiation of and pursuing foreign compliance  with trade and investment disciplines in international agreements, the  administration of U.S. antidumping and countervailing duty laws, and the  negotiation and administration of suspension agreements of U.S.  antidumping and countervailing duty investigations. The Antidumping and  Countervailing Duty Operations program investigates if petitions provide  sufficient evidence that dumping or unfair subsidization is occurring.  Generally, if the results of an investigation indicate that goods are being  dumped or unfairly subsidized, and the U.S. International Trade  Commission determines that U.S. industry is being injured, DOC will  issue an order requiring importers subject to the order to make cash  deposits equal to the amount of dumping and/or subsidization found.  Later, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations program officials  might conduct an administrative review to determine the actual amount of  dumping or subsidization and calculate a final duty rate. According to  our analysis of the survey, these activities help manufacturers by  promoting fair competition in the marketplace, and by ensuring that U.S.  firms are not adversely affected by actions of foreign producers and  governments. The Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations  program reported that it assisted at least 440 U.S. companies and unions  in fiscal year 2015. According to agency officials we surveyed, other U.S.  manufacturing companies also may have benefited from actions taken by  the program. For example, as we found in 2013, trade remedy duties,  such as those determined by the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty  Operations program, add to the price of foreign products imported into the  United States, and they can benefit domestic producers of these products  regardless of whether the producers file a petition.
section_title: Eight Programs We Identified Reported They Help Job Seekers Enhance Skills and Obtain Employment
paragraphs: Of the 58 programs, we identified 8 in the training policy area that help job  seekers enhance skills and obtain employment, based on our analysis of  survey responses. (See table 5). Some of these programs help job  seekers bolster their skills in response to technological advances in the  manufacturing sector, while others help job seekers find reemployment  when laid off from their manufacturing jobs. Most training programs we  identified are administered by the Departments of Labor and Education,  and while manufacturing workers may be eligible for such training, the  programs generally address workforce changes across many sectors of  the economy.
Supporting the enhancement of job seekers’ skills. Seven of the eight  programs help job seekers enhance job skills, based on our analysis of  survey responses. For example, one program, the Trade Adjustment  Assistance Community College and Career Training Grant (TAACCCT)  program, provided multi-year grants to universities and community  colleges to support education and career training programs that aim to  help job seekers bolster their skills and obtain employment in higher  skilled jobs. This program is administered by the Department of Labor  (DOL) and implemented in partnership with the Department of Education  (Education), and while it currently oversees existing grants, it has stopped  providing new grant funding. In fiscal year 2014, the program obligated  $463,994,493, according to agency officials. Community colleges use  these grants to develop workforce training programs that are aligned with  the needs of local industry. The grants are also used to develop  workforce training programs that prepare job seekers for employment in a  range of industries, and many community colleges identified  manufacturing as a significant industry in their area, according to  responses made by agency officials in our survey. For example, an  official from a network of community colleges we visited in Illinois that  received a TAACCCT grant said that the grant served as a catalyst for  discussions between local manufacturers and community colleges.  According to this official, these discussions helped community colleges  identify topics to include in their curriculum and the skillsets required in  the manufacturing sector, and as a result, the grant aimed to ensure that  job seekers are adequately prepared for employment in the  manufacturing sector.
Providing support for job seekers who have been laid off from their job in  the manufacturing sector. One of the eight programs, the Trade  Adjustment Assistance (TAA) program, administered by DOL, provides  benefits and employment services for job seekers who have lost their jobs  due to global trade, based on our analysis of the survey. According to  information provided by agency officials in our survey, job seekers are  eligible to participate in the TAA program if they have been adversely  affected by increased imports or a shift in production to other countries,  among other factors. Job seekers in the TAA program can receive a skills  assessment, training, and individual career counseling, among other  things, to help train them for new jobs in fields that may require advanced  skills. In fiscal year 2015, states obligated $507 million to serve TAA- eligible workers in all industry sectors, according to DOL. Although  funding was not targeted specifically for the manufacturing sector, agency  officials estimated that approximately 86 percent of certified workers in  fiscal year 2015 were from the manufacturing sector. Although most job  seekers obtain employment in other sectors after participating in the TAA  program, DOL officials reported that about 4,500 job seekers were  reemployed in the manufacturing sector after participating in the TAA  program in fiscal year 2015.
section_title: Nine Programs We Identified Reported They Support Manufacturing by Providing General Financing or General Business Assistance or by Developing Manufactured Products
paragraphs: We identified nine programs that provide general financing or general  business assistance that cuts across all three policy areas (innovation,  trade, and training) or that support the manufacturing of public health  products, based on our analysis of survey responses (see table 6). Some  of these programs provide general financing through loans or loan  guarantees to businesses in all sectors, including manufacturing, or  provide direct payments to specific manufacturing industries, such as  defense and bioenergy. A few programs also assist the health care  sector by supporting the manufacturing of public health products.
Providing general financing. Six of the nine programs we identified  support manufacturing by providing various types of general financing,  including loans, loan guarantees, or direct payments, based on our  analysis of survey responses. For example, according to the survey, the  Department of Agriculture’s Business and Industry Guaranteed Loan  Program, the SBA’s 7(a) and Certified Development Company (CDC)/504  Loan programs, and the Department of Energy’s Advanced Technology  Vehicles Manufacturing Loan program provide loans or loan guarantees  but each agency targets different types of manufacturers and has  different eligibility requirements. The Business and Industry Guaranteed  Loan Program generally supports rural businesses by issuing loan  guarantees, while both SBA programs generally provide loan guarantees  to eligible small businesses to finance a wide range of needs, including  working capital, revolving credit, asset acquisition, and re-financing.  Further, the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan program  supports the manufacturing of advanced technology vehicles by providing  direct loans to automotive and component manufacturers.
In addition to providing loans or loan guarantees to assist manufacturers,  the Defense Production Act Title III program, for example, provides direct  payments to manufacturers by purchasing advanced materials and  technologies that develop their production capabilities. According to our  survey, the program obligated $203,568,000 in fiscal year 2015, all of  which supported U.S. manufacturing. Another program, the Bioenergy  Program for Advanced Biofuels, supports the production of advanced  biofuels by providing payments to advanced biofuel producers. In fiscal  year 2015, the program provided payments to 225 manufacturers,  according to our survey data.
Providing general support to manufacturing across the areas of  innovation, trade, and training. We identified one program—the Investing  in Manufacturing Communities Partnership (IMCP) program—that  supports manufacturing by cutting across all three policy areas. Based on  our survey, as of calendar year 2015, the IMCP program had designated  24 locations across the country as manufacturing communities through a  competitive selection process. As part of the IMCP program, locations  designated as manufacturing communities receive technical assistance  from 12 federal agencies—in addition to DOC—and are eligible for  preferential consideration for funding consistent with each agency’s  program eligibility requirements and evaluation criteria, according to  DOC. According to program officials we met with in Knoxville, an  advantage of being designated a manufacturing community is the  increased level of collaboration among federal, state, and regional  stakeholders, which has helped create new business opportunities, attract  businesses to the region, and provide manufacturing training to workers.  The IMCP community we visited in Chicago focuses on metal  manufacturing, and its members collaborate with other organizations to  provide such training to workers. For instance, the Jane Addams  Resource Corporation, a training provider, administers a training  curriculum that addresses the specific skills required for employment in  the manufacturing sector. Officials told us that they provide students with  hands-on training and adjusted their training curriculum to match industry  trends. For instance, they said that they acquired a robotic welder and  used it to train their students on this new, automated technology (see fig.  4).
Supporting the manufacturing of public health products. Two of the nine  programs we identified support the development, acquisition, and testing  of public health supplies, according to our analysis of survey responses.  The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) awarded contracts  to establish the Centers for Innovation in Advanced Development and  Manufacturing, which is composed of three manufacturing organizations.  These organizations develop and manufacture medical countermeasures,  such as influenza vaccines and protections against chemical, biological,  radiological and nuclear threats. Contractors for another program, the Fill  Finish Manufacturing Network, provide packaging support for medical  countermeasure products. Among other things, HHS has engaged with  the Fill Finish Manufacturing Network to transfer sterile drug products that  would be required in a public health emergency, according to our survey  data.
section_title: Selected Federal Tax Expenditures Can Provide Benefits to Manufacturers but Their Overall Effects Are Difficult to Quantify
paragraphs: Nine tax expenditures provide benefits to manufacturers, according to a  CRS report and Treasury officials. These tax expenditures provide  incentives to manufacturers through tax deductions, deferral, credits, and  other methods. These tax expenditures are available to manufacturers, as  well as other corporations or individual taxpayers that meet the qualifying  requirements. (See table 7.)
Tax Expenditures  Tax expenditures are reductions in an  individual or corporate taxpayer’s tax liability  that are the result of special exemptions and  exclusions from taxation, deductions, credits,  deferrals of tax liability, or preferential tax  rates. They often aim to achieve policy goals  similar to those of federal spending  programs.
There are three general trends in the manufacturing sector: movement  toward advanced manufacturing, need for workers with higher skills, and  more globalization and competition for U.S. manufacturers, according to  our analysis of selected reports and experts we interviewed. The U.S.  manufacturing sector is changing from a traditional manufacturing sector  (i.e., one based on assembly lines and large numbers of employees) to  an advanced manufacturing sector, according to PCAST. PCAST also  reported that a highly skilled workforce will be critical to the deployment of  an advanced manufacturing sector in the United States. At the same time,  the manufacturing sector is becoming more globalized. PCAST reported  that supporting advanced manufacturing innovation in the United States is  critical to U.S. global competitiveness. U.S. manufacturers are  increasingly competing with manufacturers in other countries as supply  chains are becoming global and other countries are providing support for  their manufacturing sector to make them more competitive, according to  an expert we spoke to.
subsections: section_title: Most Programs We Identified Reported They Have Addressed Manufacturing Trends in Different Ways
paragraphs: Fifty-one of the 58 federal programs selected for our review are  addressing one or more of the manufacturing trends in different ways,  according to our survey of agency officials. Our analysis of survey  responses shows that more than two thirds of programs are addressing  the shift toward advanced manufacturing, approximately half of the  programs are taking steps to address increased globalization and  competition, and less than half are addressing the need for a higher  skilled workforce. Table 8 shows how many programs reported  addressing each of these trends. Programs reported addressing trends in  several ways, including providing funding and resources, sharing  information, and promoting coordination.
Programs Reported Providing Funding and Resources  Programs have provided funding and resources to address trends in the  manufacturing sector, according to agency officials surveyed. Funding  and resources include providing grants for R&D or training programs,  targeting research funding through public-private partnerships, or  supporting the development and testing of training tools related to new  manufacturing technologies. Providing funding and resources was used  to address all three of our identified manufacturing trends, though it was  most commonly used to address advanced manufacturing, based on our  survey results, as shown in table 9.
Examples of programs that reported providing funding and resources,  according to officials:
The Manufacturing USA program was identified by multiple experts  we spoke to as a prominent federal effort addressing the advanced  manufacturing trend. Federal agencies funded nine innovation  institutes through a public-private partnership model to support R&D  projects and workforce development in advanced technologies such  as additive manufacturing and digital manufacturing, among others.
The Department of Defense’s (DOD) Mentor2 program seeks to  ensure that training remains relevant to workforce needs by funding  training programs in digital manufacturing that can also be accessed  by a wider cross-section of the DOD workforce.
The Department of Energy’s (DOE) Concentrating Solar Power and  Photovoltaics programs fund research, development, and  demonstration of innovation technologies that have largely moved  overseas. According to DOE officials, applicants to these programs  must demonstrate a commitment to promoting domestic  manufacturing to receive grant funding. More specifically, funding  applicants must develop a U.S. manufacturing plan that commits to,  among other things, investing in new or existing U.S. manufacturing  facilities, keeping certain activities such as final assembly in the U.S.,  and supporting a specific number of manufacturing jobs in the United  States, according to DOE officials.
Programs reported sharing information to address trends in the  manufacturing sector, including developing training materials and  preparing industry sector reports, among other things. Programs are  sharing information to address all three trends, with the largest number  addressing advanced manufacturing, based on our survey results, as  shown in table 10.
Examples of programs that reported sharing information, according to  agency officials:
Officials with the MEP program told us that they developed training  materials on new technologies and created a community of practice to  promote information sharing across the national network of MEP  Centers. MEP also collaborated with the NIST Engineering Lab to  hold a regional workshop for clients to share information about  advances in emerging advanced manufacturing technologies such as  collaborative robotics.
As part of the IMCP program, officials told us that the Department of  Commerce (DOC) has worked with the Departments of Education and  Labor to build working groups to prepare panels and content for  annual IMCP summits. These groups focused on addressing the  workforce skills gap and identifying successful models for skill  development, providing technical assistance, and sharing federal  funding opportunities to help communities build a workforce with the  skills that their employers need.
Officials from the International Trade Administration’s Manufacturing  program told us that they developed the Top Markets Report series— a collection of sector-specific reports designed to help U.S. exporters  compare markets across borders. The reports highlight future export  opportunities for advanced manufacturing technologies such as in  additive manufacturing and smart grid products.
Some agency officials reported that their programs promote coordination  among stakeholders in the manufacturing community by convening  representatives from industry and academia to address manufacturing  issues, and reaching out to communities to stimulate manufacturing in a  specific region, among other activities. Coordination was used to address  all three manufacturing trends, based on our survey results, as shown in  table 11.
Examples of programs that reported promoting coordination, according to  agency officials:
DOE’s Clean Energy Manufacturing Initiative has convened  stakeholders from industry, academia, and leadership from DOE  national laboratories and DOE to discuss how public and private  entities can partner to boost manufacturing competitiveness, train the  advanced manufacturing workforce, and promote innovative energy  technologies. It has also partnered with DOE’s Clean Energy  Manufacturing Analysis Center, which works with industry and  academia to provide research and analyses of factors driving  manufacturing strategy in the United States.
DOL’s H-1B Technical Skills Training Grant Program has  implemented several cross-sector initiatives to promote a higher  skilled workforce. For example, DOL has facilitated a partnership  among its Employment and Training Administration, DOE, and  Oklahoma State University, among others, to provide training in  advanced manufacturing and design tools related to working in the oil  and gas industry. The agency has also partnered with the Peralta  Community College District’s Laney College to create the Advanced  Manufacturing Medical/Biosciences Pipeline for Economic  Development, which promotes technology transfer, economic  development, and workforce development in medical device and  bioscience manufacturing.
DOC’s IMCP program has established collaboration among different  public and private entities within identified communities to stimulate  manufacturing and attract investment from global manufacturers. In  particular, the program focuses on regions working across the public,  private, and academic sectors to address issues related to workforce  development, trade and international investment, and access to  capital, among other things.
section_title: Some Programs Reported Facing Challenges in Addressing Trends in the Manufacturing Sector
paragraphs: According to our survey, 28 of the 51 programs that reported addressing  manufacturing trends also reported facing challenges in addressing the  changing manufacturing sector. Most of the challenges reported by these  programs related to the trends we identified—advanced manufacturing,  higher-skilled workforce, and globalization and competition—with some  reporting multiple challenges related to a single trend. As shown in table  12, the most frequently-mentioned challenge for programs that are  addressing the advanced manufacturing sector was a lack of resources  and funding. For example, most of NSF’s programs, which are primarily  basic R&D programs, receive many more competitive proposals than can  be funded by the available budget, according to NSF program officials.  Challenges mentioned by other programs included a lack of information  about advanced technologies, technical challenges, and difficulty in  coordinating across agencies. We have identified technical challenges  related to advanced manufacturing in our previous work on additive  manufacturing. For example, in 2015 we found there were limited  materials available with which the technology could be used, and  technical limitations on the speed of production and the ability to build  items of varying sizes. Experts in additive manufacturing told us that  these challenges could be addressed through additional R&D.
As the U.S. manufacturing sector becomes more oriented toward  advanced manufacturing, the federal government faces challenges in  helping workers develop the skills for the advanced manufacturing sector,  according to some experts we interviewed. Program officials who told us  that they are addressing the need for a higher skilled workforce said that  they are primarily facing challenges in keeping training relevant to the  current workforce (see table 13). For example, DOD’s Mentor2 program  officials reported encountering challenges ensuring not only that training  for jobs in new manufacturing technologies is continually being updated,  but also that it remains relevant as requirements change over time.
Program officials told us their programs face a variety of challenges in an  increasingly globalized and competitive manufacturing sector. As shown  in table 14, programs addressing the increased globalization trend most  frequently mentioned challenges related to promoting domestic  production, while also pointing to limited resources and information, as  well as issues with supply chain management. Among the programs,  DOE’s Photovoltaics and Tech-to-Market programs reported encountering  challenges because manufacturing of key components has largely moved  overseas. Program officials said that the globalized nature of photovoltaic  manufacturing makes it challenging to incentivize companies to produce  them in the United States when the much larger scale of production for  these panels overseas results in lower costs. However, as manufacturing  costs further decline and shipping costs become a larger fraction of the  total panel cost, there will be opportunities for onshoring of manufacturing  and implementation of the U.S. manufacturing plan that promotes  domestic production of renewable technologies, according to program  officials.
section_title: Most Programs Reported Goals or Measures Related to Support of Manufacturing, and an Interagency Group Has Not Identified the Information It Needs to Report on Progress in Supporting Advanced Manufacturing Most Programs Reported Having Performance Goals or Measures Related to Supporting Manufacturing
paragraphs: Most of the 58 programs reported having performance goals or measures  related to the support of manufacturing. In addition, 4 programs had  performance evaluations that specifically examined their effects on  manufacturing. Apart from agency efforts to assess the performance of  individual programs, a federal interagency initiative coordinates activities  and assesses progress in the area of advanced manufacturing. However,  agencies that comprise an interagency group have not identified the  information needed to determine progress in meeting strategic plan  objectives.
Forty-four of the 58 programs reported having at least one performance  goal or measure related to the support of manufacturing. These goals and  measures cover a range of areas, which reflects differences in each  program’s mission. Half of the 44 programs reported goals or measures  related to advancing scientific knowledge or improving technologies.  Fewer programs reported goals or measures in other areas, such as  providing technical assistance to manufacturers, enhancing national  security or medical countermeasures preparedness, promoting U.S.  exports or open trade, or workforce development.
Advancing scientific knowledge or improving technologies.
Twenty-two of the 44 programs reported at least one performance  goal or measure related to supporting fundamental scientific research  in areas such as nanomanufacturing and robotics. Such research has  the potential to support manufacturing to the extent that it is  subsequently applied to products or manufacturing processes. In  addition, several programs reported performance goals or measures  related to improving technologies, such as developing an energy- saving technology or alternative fuel to the point that it becomes cost- competitive with existing technologies. Table 15 provides examples of  reported performance goals and measures in this area.
Providing technical assistance to manufacturers. Four of the 44  programs reported at least one performance goal or measure related  to providing technical assistance to manufacturers. These include  goals and measures that quantify how assistance provided to  manufacturing firms helped them. Table 16 provides examples of  reported performance goals and measures in this area.
Maintaining national security or medical countermeasures  preparedness. Six of the 44 programs reported performance goals or  measures pertaining to the maintenance of production and  manufacturing capabilities for national defense, or medical  countermeasure preparedness for emerging infectious diseases and  other threats. Table 17 provides examples of reported performance  goals and measures in this area.
Promoting U.S. exports or open trade. Six of the 44 programs  reported performance goals or measures related to promoting U.S.  exports or open trade. Such goals and measures include removing,  reducing, and preventing trade barriers. Table 18 provides examples  of reported performance goals and measures in this area.
Developing the workforce. Seven of the 44 programs reported  performance goals or measures related to workforce development,  such as developing occupational profiles and obtaining and retaining  employment. Table 19 provides examples of reported performance  goals and measures in this area.
Other areas. Three of the 44 programs reported performance goals  or measures in other areas, such as holding successful  manufacturing-related events and tracking the amount of loans  provided for manufacturing.
subsections: section_title: Four Programs Reported Having Evaluations That Examined Their Impact on Manufacturing
paragraphs: Of the 58 programs in our survey, 4 specifically estimated their effects on  manufacturing with an independent performance evaluation that met our  definition of a program evaluation.
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms (TAAF, DOC)—In 2012,  we examined, among other things, the program’s data and  performance measures and what they indicated about the program’s  effectiveness. The review found that although the program provides  limited data about outcomes, manufacturing firms that have  participated in the program have experienced small, positive, and  statistically significant increases in sales.
Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP, DOC)— There have been three evaluations of the program, all conducted by  independent groups. Two of the evaluations, conducted in 2012 and  2015 by the Center for Economic Studies (CES) at the U.S. Census  Bureau, examined how manufacturing establishments have been  affected by MEP’s assistance. In 2013, the National Research  Council conducted a meta-analysis of previous program evaluations  of MEP going back to the early 1990s. Each of the three evaluations  found that MEP had some positive effects, such as increased  establishment productivity and productivity per worker.
Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO, DOE)—This program,  which supports the manufacturing of bioproducts, has received  biennial peer reviews that assess BETO’s individual projects and the  overall management, performance, and strategic direction of the  Office. In 2013 and 2015 peer reviews, external reviewers delivered a  positive overall assessment of BETO and validated much of the  office’s current approach and technical strategy. The reviews noted  that BETO is funding high-impact projects that have the potential to  significantly advance the state of technology for the industry and  made recommendations for further improvement.
Manufacturing Machines and Equipment (MME, NSF)—The  program was evaluated in 2013 by the independent Science and  Technology Research Institute. The study concluded that, among  other things, the NSF, through the MME program, has positively  “contributed to the emergence of additive manufacturing over the last  25 years.”
section_title: An Interagency Subcommittee Coordinates Agencies’ Advanced Manufacturing Efforts but Has Not Identified the Information Needed to Report Progress toward Achieving Strategic Objectives
paragraphs: Apart from these efforts to assess the performance of individual  programs, there is an interagency subcommittee—the Subcommittee on  Advanced Manufacturing (SAM)—which was tasked by the NSTC’s  Committee on Technology with, among other things, coordinating federal  agencies’ activities and reporting on the federal government’s progress in  a particular area—advanced manufacturing. SAM is co-chaired by OSTP.  Ten of the 11 agencies that administer programs in this review are  represented on the SAM and, as we discussed earlier regarding  agencies’ actions to address manufacturing trends, 42 of the 58 programs  in this review reported addressing advanced manufacturing. SAM  provides support for implementation of the National Strategic Plan for  Advanced Manufacturing, a plan developed in 2012 in response to the  America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010. The strategic plan  included five objectives (see sidebar). The strategic plan also included  suggested indicators or metrics for tracking progress over the short-term  and long-term and identified the federal agencies that should implement  actions to achieve them.
Federal agencies identified in the strategic plan are to implement actions  to achieve one or more of the plan’s objectives. For example, the fourth  objective of the plan is to optimize the federal government’s advanced  manufacturing investment by taking a portfolio perspective across  agencies and adjusting accordingly. To achieve this objective, the plan  lists actions that agencies can take, including: (1) coordinating federal  agency investments in the knowledge and capabilities shared across the  manufacturing sector and (2) targeting and balancing investments in  advanced materials, broad production technology platforms, advanced  manufacturing processes, and design and data infrastructure. The  strategic plan then identifies the Departments of Commerce, Defense,  Energy, and the National Science Foundation as the agencies  responsible for implementing these actions. The plan notes that the  federal government has current investments in advanced manufacturing  R&D as well as plants and equipment that help to position promising  technologies for broad adoption and commercialization or to meet certain  essential national security needs. By coordinating the federal  government’s portfolio of these investments, the plan envisions that these  investments will increase the global competitiveness of U.S.  manufacturing and help to create a fertile domestic environment for  innovation.
The strategic plan identifies potential measures that could be used to  measure progress toward these objectives but does not specify what  information should be submitted by agencies. For example, the plan  identifies short-term measures for achieving objective four: (1)  development and implementation of a framework for managing the whole- of-government portfolio, and (2) number and scale of multi-agency  advanced manufacturing funding solicitations. Long-term measures  include: (1) balance of federal advanced manufacturing R&D investment  across portfolio dimensions, including basic research, applied research,  demonstration facilities, and others and (2) accelerated time-to-market of  new advanced manufacturing processes and products. While the plan  identifies these short and long-term metrics, it does not include reporting  requirements for agencies on these metrics to measure their progress  toward the objective.
The RAMI Act requires NSTC’s Committee on Technology to periodically  update the strategic plan for advanced manufacturing and to describe the  progress made in achieving the objectives from prior strategic plans,  including a discussion of why specific objectives were not met. Under its  charter, one of the SAM’s purposes is to provide support for  implementation of and updates to the strategic plan for advanced  manufacturing. As required by the RAMI Act, the SAM plans to update the  strategic plan on May 1, 2018, including reporting on the progress made  in achieving the objectives from prior strategic plans. However, it has not  identified the information it will collect from federal agencies to determine  the extent to which the strategic plan objectives are being achieved.
One of the key practices for enhancing and sustaining interagency  collaborative efforts is developing mechanisms to monitor, evaluate, and  report results. As we previously reported, federal agencies engaged in  collaborative efforts need to create the means to monitor and evaluate  their efforts to enable them to identify areas for improvement. As a part  of this effort, agencies should consider whether there is a way to track  and monitor progress toward the short and long-term outcomes.
According to SAM officials, the information to be collected to evaluate  progress in achieving the objectives of the strategic plan has not yet been  determined. The SAM’s role, according to its charter, is to serve as a  forum for information sharing, collaboration, and consensus-building  among agencies regarding federal policy, programs, and budget guidance  for advanced manufacturing. The SAM generally holds two to three  meetings per year with between 30 and 50 officials across 13 different  agencies, where officials have conversations about their programs and  investments, and the SAM helps to put these efforts into a broader  context, according to SAM officials. While these discussions include  leading practices regarding measuring program effectiveness, according  to SAM officials, the SAM’s role is not to provide top-down direction to  agencies regarding how to measure effectiveness. While the SAM’s role  under its charter includes collaboration and consensus-building among  agencies, OSTP, as a co-chair of the subcommittee, has not worked with  SAM member agencies to specify the information needed to report  progress in meeting strategic plan objectives, which is inconsistent with a  key practice for interagency collaboration. Without specifying the  information it will collect from federal agencies, SAM may lack consistent,  comprehensive information that would help it fully report on the progress  in achieving the objectives of the National Strategic Plan for Advanced  Manufacturing.
section_title: Conclusions
paragraphs: The health of the U.S. manufacturing sector has long been a concern,  and the vast majority of the 58 programs we identified that support  manufacturing reported taking steps to address trends in the sector, most  prominently the movement toward advanced manufacturing. Federal law  requires a government-wide strategic plan for advanced manufacturing to  improve government coordination and provide long term guidance in  support of manufacturing competitiveness. The next update of the  strategic plan, which is required by 2018, must describe the progress  made in achieving the objectives of the plan and include a discussion of  why specific objectives were not met. SAM has worked to facilitate federal  agency collaboration on advanced manufacturing and plans to report in  2018 on progress in achieving the strategic objectives. However, OSTP  has not worked with SAM member agencies to identify the information it  will collect from federal agencies to determine the extent to which the  strategic objectives are being achieved. Consistent with a key practice for  interagency collaboration, identifying the information needed from federal  agencies would better position the federal government to report  consistent, comprehensive information on the progress in achieving the  objectives of the National Strategic Plan for Advanced Manufacturing.
section_title: Recommendation for Executive Action
paragraphs: To enhance the ability of the Executive Office of the President to  implement RAMI Act requirements related to reporting on advanced  manufacturing, we recommend that the Director of the Office of Science  and Technology Policy, working through the National Science and  Technology Council and agency leadership, as appropriate, identify the  information they will collect from federal agencies to determine the extent  to which the objectives outlined in the National Strategic Plan for  Advanced Manufacturing are being achieved.
section_title: Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
paragraphs: We provided a draft of this report to USDA, DOC, DOD, DOE, DOL,  Education, EPA, the Export-Import Bank, HHS, NSF, OSTP, SBA, and  the Treasury for review and comment. We received the following  comments:
USDA did not provide any comments.
DOC provided technical comments, which we incorporated as  appropriate.
DOD’s GAO Liaison stated via e-mail that it concurred and had no  comments on the report.
DOE, DOL, and Education provided technical comments, which  we incorporated as appropriate.
EPA stated that it had no comments on the report.
The Export-Import Bank, HHS, and NSF provided technical  comments, which we incorporated as appropriate.
OSTP’s General Counsel provided comments via e-mail, which  we discuss below.
SBA provided technical comments, which we incorporated as  appropriate.
The Treasury stated that it had no comments on the report.
OSTP did not state whether it agreed or disagreed with the  recommendation in our draft report but raised an issue related to the  recommendation and suggested several revisions to its wording. Our draft  report had recommended that OSTP, working through relevant agencies,  develop a mechanism to collect information from federal agencies needed  to determine the extent to which the objectives in the National Strategic  Plan for Advanced Manufacturing are being achieved. OSTP stated that  there is such a mechanism. According to OSTP, NSTC’s subcommittees  coordinate and agree on how to measure progress toward strategic plan  goals and establish mechanisms to monitor, evaluate, and report results.  OSTP cited the SAM’s charter, which specifies that a function of the SAM  is to provide periodic updates on the implementation of the strategic plan,  among other things, to the Committee on Technology and the Assistant to  the President for Science and Technology.
While we agree that the SAM charter provides for periodic updates on the  implementation of the strategic plan, the focus of the draft  recommendation was on the need to identify the specific information to be  collected from federal agencies to report on progress made in achieving  the objectives of the 2012 strategic plan. Without identifying such  information, the federal government may not be prepared to report  consistent and comprehensive information on progress in meeting  strategic plan goals. In response to OSTP’s comments, we modified the  report and the wording of our recommendation to be more precise by  deleting the reference to developing a “mechanism” for collecting  information and focusing on the need to identify the information to be  collected.
OSTP also suggested several revisions to the wording of the  recommendation, which we are not making for the following reasons:
OSTP suggested directing the recommendation to the Assistant to  the President for Science and Technology rather than the Director  of the Office of Science and Technology Policy. We directed the  recommendation to the Director of the Office of Science and  Technology Policy because that is the office responsible under  federal law for establishing the Committee on Technology, which  is required to update the strategic plan.
OSTP also suggested revising the recommendation to specifically  mention the SAM. We did not specifically mention the SAM  because its charter expired March 1, 2017, and the legal  requirement to update the strategic plan is the responsibility of the  Committee on Technology, established by the Director of OSTP.  Also, while OSTP’s General Counsel indicated that, as of March  2017, an extension to the charter was being considered, it was not  clear whether any extension would include the period of time in  which the update to the strategic plan is required to be completed  under the RAMI Act.
OSTP also suggested revising the recommendation to focus on  the extent to which the objectives of the Advanced Manufacturing  Partnership (AMP) recommendations are being achieved in  periodic updates to the implementation of the National Strategic  Plan for Advanced Manufacturing. The AMP recommendations  are sets of recommendations proposed in a series of reports by  PCAST. These recommendations were not all covered in the  scope of our report. Instead, the focus of our recommendation  was on reporting on the progress in achieving the objectives of the  strategic plan, as required by the RAMI Act.
As agreed with your offices, unless you publicly announce the contents of  this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from the  report date. At that time, we will send copies to the appropriate  congressional committees; the Director of the Office of Science and  Technology Policy; the Secretaries of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense,  Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Labor, and the Treasury;  the Director of the National Science Foundation; the Administrators of the  Environmental Protection Agency and the Small Business Administration;  the Acting Chairman of the U.S. Export-Import Bank; and other interested  parties. In addition, the report will be available at no charge on the GAO  web site at http://www.gao.gov.
If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact  Andrew Sherrill at (202) 512-7215 or sherrilla@gao.gov or John  Neumann at (202) 512-3841 or neumannj@gao.gov. Contact points for  our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs are on the last  page of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions to this report  are listed in appendix III.
section_title: Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
paragraphs: Our objectives were to examine (1) how selected federal programs  provide support to U.S. manufacturing; (2) how selected federal tax  expenditures provide support to U.S. manufacturing; (3) how, if at all,  selected federal programs address manufacturing trends and what, if any,  challenges they face; and (4) the extent to which federal agencies  measure performance and assess effectiveness in supporting  manufacturing generally, and advanced manufacturing specifically.
subsections: section_title: Identifying Federal Agencies
paragraphs: To address these objectives, we first identified federal agencies (i.e. any  federal organization) that administered programs that support the  manufacturing sector. We defined “support the manufacturing sector”  broadly, including support for U.S. and foreign manufacturers that  manufacture in the United States; programs that support U.S.  manufacturers who manufacture or export their goods overseas, and  programs that train workers who lose their jobs in manufacturing, whether  they are being trained for other jobs in manufacturing or in another sector  of the economy. To identify these agencies, we reviewed prior GAO and  Congressional Research Service (CRS) reports, the President’s 2016  budget, and the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA). We  identified 11 agencies that administered programs that support the  manufacturing sector. We initially met with officials with the Departments  of Commerce, Defense, and Energy. In our meetings with these three  agencies, and in our interviews with experts at CRS and the Information  Technology and Innovation Foundation, we asked officials if these 11  agencies were the main agencies that administer programs to support  U.S. manufacturing, and if there were any other agencies that did so.  After considering their input, we added 4 more agencies, bringing the total  to 15 agencies that we contacted: The Departments of Agriculture,  Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services,  Housing and Urban Development, Labor, Transportation, and the  Treasury; the National Aeronautics and Space Administration; the  National Science Foundation; the Environmental Protection Agency; the  Export-Import Bank; and the Small Business Administration. After  contacting Department of Housing and Urban Development officials, we  eliminated the agency from consideration because the officials informed  us that the sole manufacturing program that the team had identified no  longer existed.
section_title: Identifying Programs
paragraphs: We then developed a list of programs administered by the 14 agencies on  our list that appeared to directly target or indirectly support U.S.  manufacturing. To identify programs, we searched prior GAO and CRS  reports and program inventories developed by agencies, CFDA,  www.manufacturing.gov, as well as agency web sites. We conducted  keyword searches using words such as “manufacturing” and  “manufacturers” to compile the initial list of programs. We then contacted  each of the 14 agencies with an initial list of potential programs  administered by their agency. We asked the officials if any programs  administered by their agency should be added or removed from the list.  We reviewed the agencies’ input and determined whether the programs  should be included in this review. To be selected as a program that  supports manufacturing, the program had to meet the following criteria:  (1) have an identifiable focus on manufacturing, (2) be operational in  fiscal year 2014 and at the time of selection in 2015, and (3) not be part of  a larger program that was selected. We then confirmed with each of the  agencies the programs identified for their agency. Based on the agencies’  input and our application of the criteria, we identified 58 programs  administered by 11 agencies that met the criteria.
section_title: Identifying Tax Expenditures
paragraphs: To identify tax expenditures, we reviewed a 2013 CRS report titled  “Federal Tax Benefits for Manufacturing: Current Law, Legislation in the  113th Congress, and Arguments For and Against Federal Assistance” and spoke with experts from CRS and officials from the Department of the  Treasury (Treasury). We asked Treasury officials if any tax expenditures  should be added or removed from the list. The team then reviewed the  agencies’ input and determined whether the tax expenditure should be  included in this review. To be selected as a tax expenditure that supports  manufacturing, it had to meet the following criteria: (1) have a benefit for  manufacturing, and (2) be operational in fiscal year 2014 and at the time  of selection in 2015. Based on the agency’s input and internal  discussions, we selected nine tax expenditures that met the criteria. We  then reviewed reports from the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) to  obtain estimates of federal revenue forgone for each of the tax  expenditures. We reviewed, but did not verify, the procedures reported  by JCT to estimate the magnitude of revenues forgone through tax  expenditures.
section_title: Program Survey
paragraphs: We administered a web-based survey to agency officials for these  programs to collect, among other data, descriptive information, budget  and participation data, and information on efforts to address trends in  manufacturing. To minimize errors arising from differences in how  questions might be interpreted and to reduce variability in responses that  should be qualitatively the same, we conducted pretests with six  programs at six agencies, and we revised the survey based on pretest  feedback. We conducted an additional pretest with two of the programs to  ensure that revised questions used in the survey were understandable.
In February 2016, we notified agency officials that the survey was  available online. We also made telephone calls to officials and sent them  reminder messages, as necessary, to ensure their survey response. We  analyzed and grouped the data we collected to describe the 58 programs  and provide information on their size and scope. We did not conduct a  legal analysis to confirm the various descriptions of the programs in this  report, including information on their budgetary obligations, program  goals, or intent. Further, we did not review or analyze agencies’ financial  data or materials prepared by the agencies in connection with the annual  budget and appropriations process in developing this report. We used  standard descriptive statistics to analyze responses to the survey.
Because this was not a sample survey, there are no sampling errors. To  minimize other types of errors, commonly referred to as nonsampling  errors, and to enhance data quality, we employed recognized survey  design practices in the development of the survey and in the collection,  processing, and analysis of the survey data. On the basis of our  application of recognized survey design practices and follow-up  procedures, we determined that the data were of sufficient quality for our  purposes.
For the obligations data we used in this report, our survey asked program  officials to provide their program’s total obligations (federal amount only)  for fiscal years 2014, 2015, and 2016. The survey also asked programs to  estimate the proportion of obligations the program used to support U.S.  manufacturing, and it also asked for an explanation of how the  proportions were determined. To assess the reliability of these data, we  took the following steps. First, the survey question on the proportion of  obligations that support U.S. manufacturing allowed programs to provide  ranges or other approximate percentages if they did not know the precise  numbers. Second, because we asked the programs to explain how they  determined the proportion of obligations that supported U.S.  manufacturing, we were able to understand, in a limited way, the reliability  and validity of the proportions provided. In general, the programs that  provided numbers and proportions also provided explanations that  suggested the numbers were broadly reliable and accurate. Third, we  checked the obligations data for a number of programs against publicly  available budget data. The funding amounts provided by programs in our  survey generally corresponded well. Fourth, we performed common data  testing steps to assess the reliability of the data, including identifying  outliers and missing data. Fifth, our questions requesting obligations  funding were framed in terms of the programs’ overall funding and  budgets, rather than asking specifically for the amounts related to  manufacturing. This made it more possible for programs to provide  accurate numbers based on existing data sources.
We used these data to provide a broad understanding of funding levels  across the population of 58 programs in this report. More specifically we  report these numbers in two primary ways. First, in appendix II, we  provide total obligations and the proportion going to manufacturing for all  programs reporting these numbers. Second, in tables 2 through 6, we  provided counts of the numbers of programs and aggregated obligation  totals for each agency in categories of programs. We aggregated by  summing the totals reported for these programs and categories by  agency. We reported non-rounded obligations for programs mentioned in  the text of the report, and we rounded numbers in the tables and in  appendix II. Based on the data reliability steps described above, we  determined that these data were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of  this report.
section_title: Site Visits
paragraphs: To observe and obtain information on how selected programs support  manufacturing, we conducted site visits to two locations: Chicago, IL and  Knoxville, TN in October and November 2015. We selected these  locations based on the following criteria: Each was a city where: (1) a  Manufacturing USA institute was currently operating, (2) an Investing in  Manufacturing Communities Partnership (IMCP) community was  designated, and (3) a Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership  (MEP) Center was currently operating. For variety in administering  agencies, we determined that one city we selected had to have a  Manufacturing USA institute that was overseen by the Department of  Defense (DOD), and the other had to have an institute that was overseen  by the Department of Energy (DOE). To obtain information across  multiple policy areas, the IMCP had to have a workforce training and  international trade component of their program to meet our criteria. At the  time of our selection, there were six currently operating manufacturing  institutes each overseen by either DOD or DOE. During each site visit,  we visited and toured the institute, interviewed IMCP and MEP officials,  visited two manufacturers, and toured their facilities. For additional  information on programs that train workers in manufacturing, we  interviewed officials with two other organizations in Chicago, and we  toured training facilities for one of them: the Jane Addams Resource  Corporation (see table 20). The information we obtained on our site visits  was not generalizable to all locations where these programs operated.
section_title: Identifying Manufacturing Trends
paragraphs: We identified manufacturing trends by reviewing reports addressing  manufacturing policy in the United States produced by the White House’s  Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and interviewing experts  in the manufacturing sector. The reports were produced by the  President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) and  National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) and written by experts  in industry, academia, and government agencies tasked with helping the  Executive Branch develop manufacturing policy in the United States.  Specifically, PCAST and NSTC address the future of federal science and  technology investments and make recommendations to improve policy in  science, technology, and innovation. As table 21 shows, all of the reports  we reviewed identified the advanced manufacturing capabilities and  higher skilled jobs trends, while four of the five reports mentioned the  increasingly complex and globalized nature of manufacturing. We  interviewed seven experts in the manufacturing sector, and they agreed  that these were three manufacturing trends. To select these experts, we  selected an initial group of experts after we attended the Manufacturing  and Innovation: Making Value for America webinar on January 19, 2016.  The webinar enabled us to identify three experts from the National  Academy of Engineering (NAE) with specific knowledge regarding  manufacturing trends. After speaking to the NAE experts, we asked if  there were other experts in the sector that we should speak to. This  afforded us the opportunity to identify additional experts from the private  sector, non-profit organizations, and agency officials from the Department  of Commerce and the National Science Foundation. The views of these  experts cannot be generalized, but they provided additional perspectives.
To determine the extent to which programs are addressing manufacturing  trends, we included survey questions asking which trends programs are  addressing, steps they have taken to address them within the past 3  years, and challenges they face in doing so. To analyze programs’ survey  responses, we categorized program responses based on what trends  they were addressing, which allowed us to identify how many programs  are taking steps to address each trend. We further categorized program  responses by analyzing steps programs are taking to address each trend  and organized all program responses into three broad strategies: (1)  providing funding and resources, (2) sharing information, and (3)  promoting coordination. To determine challenges programs face in  addressing manufacturing trends, we analyzed program responses to our  survey questions related to challenges and determined how many  programs reported challenges related to each of the trends. To further  categorize the types of challenges programs face, we organized all  program responses into three broad challenge categories: (1) lack of  funding and resources, (2) lack of information, and (3) coordination  challenges. To ensure the consistency and accuracy of this analysis, one  analyst conducted the primary categorization and a second analyst  reviewed that categorization and raised questions about particular results.  The two analysts then discussed and resolved the questions. Additionally,  a GAO social science methodologist with expertise in qualitative data  analysis reviewed the underlying documentation for the analysis as a  broad check on its accuracy and consistency.
section_title: Performance and Effectiveness
paragraphs: To examine the extent to which federal agencies measure the  performance and assess the effectiveness in support of manufacturing  generally and advanced manufacturing specifically, we asked agencies in  our survey what manufacturing-related performance goals and metrics  they used and what program evaluations had been conducted or planned  in the past 5 years to assess any impact that the program had on the U.S.  manufacturing sector. To analyze the evaluations identified by program  officials, we obtained copies of the evaluations and reviewed them to see  if they met GAO’s definition of a program evaluation and whether they  specifically evaluated the program’s effect on manufacturing. To analyze  federal efforts to assess the effectiveness of support for advanced  manufacturing specifically, we reviewed relevant federal legislation and  prior GAO reports on interagency collaboration. We also interviewed  officials with OSTP’s Subcommittee on Advanced Manufacturing about  their efforts to coordinate advanced manufacturing efforts across the  federal government and evaluate progress in implementing the National  Strategic Plan for Advanced Manufacturing.
section_title: Appendix II: Additional Information Reported by Programs We Identified That Support U.S. Manufacturing
paragraphs: This appendix provides information about the 58 programs that support  U.S. manufacturing selected for our review. All of the information about  budgetary obligations, descriptions, and activities (including any  statements about the program goals or intent) is based on information  provided by agency officials. In some cases, agency officials may have  estimated or rounded their program’s obligations for our survey. See  appendix I for more information about our survey.
We did not conduct an independent analysis of this information. Further,  we did not review agencies’ financial data or materials prepared by the  agencies in connection with the annual budget and appropriations  process in developing this report. The programs are organized by the  federal agency that administers them, listed alphabetically.
subsections: section_title: Bioenergy Program for Advanced Biofuels
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2008  Program category: General financing  Program description: The Bioenergy Program for Advanced Biofuels  supports expanded production of advanced biofuels by awarding  payments to eligible advanced biofuel producers, thereby promoting  sustainable economic development in rural America. Awards are based  on producers’ requests and the amount of biofuel they produce.  Examples of awardees include producers of biodiesel from canola oil,  greases, and soybean oil; ethanol from milo or sorghum; electricity from  an on-farm anaerobic digester that uses animal waste as the feedstock;  and manufacturing facilities that produce wood pellets.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Payments: The program awards payments to manufacturing facilities that  produce advanced biofuels.
Manufacturing Trends Addressed by the Program  The Bioenergy Program for Advanced Biofuels did not report it addressed  GAO’s identified manufacturing trends (advanced manufacturing, move to  a higher skilled workforce, and increased globalization and competition).
section_title: Business and Industry Guaranteed Loan Program
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1972  Program category: General financing  Program description: The Business and Industry Guaranteed Loan  Program seeks to improve the economic health of rural communities by  bolstering the existing private credit structure by guaranteeing loans for  rural businesses, which enables private lenders to provide more  affordable financing for businesses in eligible rural areas. Examples  include loans for purchasing and developing land; purchasing equipment,  machinery, or other supplies; and business repair, modernization, or  development.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Loans: The program issues Loan Note Guarantees to private lenders  enabling rural businesses, including manufacturers, to obtain loans. The  loans provide better rates and terms to the businesses that receive them.
Manufacturing Trends Addressed by the Program  The Business and Industry Guaranteed Loan Program did not report it  addressed GAO’s identified manufacturing trends (advanced  manufacturing, move to a higher skilled workforce, and increased  globalization and competition). The Business and Industry Guaranteed  Loan Program provides loans but this role does not directly relate to  manufacturing trends, and the program’s mission is much broader than  just manufacturing.
section_title: Advocacy Center
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1993  Program category: Trade, Export promotion  Program description: The Advocacy Center serves as the primary  interagency coordinator across 14 different agencies to execute “whole of  government” approach to help U.S. exporters win business overseas.  According to program officials, the center coordinates federal resources  to assist U.S. businesses as they compete against foreign firms for  specific foreign government contracts. The Center helps support and  retain U.S. jobs through promoting U.S. exports and is essential in the  success of initiatives from the International Trade Administration’s (ITA)  Global Market unit. Global Markets overseas staff counsel companies on  advocacy, perform and coordinate advocacy efforts overseas, and  provide key market intelligence that helps determine national interest and  advocacy campaigns. Global Markets domestic staff reach out to clients  and counsel companies on advocacy services.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Advocates: According to program officials, the center offers government- to-government support for qualified U.S. business interests and acts as a  counterweight to foreign governments that advocate for their national  businesses. The intent of the advocacy, according to these officials, is to  promote fairness in foreign markets. Engagement by U.S. government  officials with overseas governments may take the form of official  correspondence, focused meetings or in-person meetings, talking points  in a bilateral meetings or dialogue, and/or press releases or meetings with  foreign press.  Conducts market intelligence: The company seeking advocacy fills out  a questionnaire to provide the Center with details of the project  description, type of assistance requested, foreign government decision  makers, and timeline. The Advocacy Center then verifies the information  with the assistance and concurrence of the U.S. mission abroad.  Verifies that the companies adhere to the Foreign Corrupt Practices  Act: According to program officials, companies seeking advocacy must  sign the anti-bribery agreement attesting that they adhere to the Foreign  Corrupt Practices Act.  Conducts due diligence: The Center conducts due diligence on the  company seeking assistance to confirm that the company can conduct  the service or provide the products needed to successfully compete for  and complete the foreign project.  Makes a national interest determination: When the U.S. business  contribution is less than 50 percent of the total value of the project, the  following is considered: U.S. materials and equipment content, U.S. labor  content, contributions to the U.S. technology base, and potential for  follow-on business benefiting the U.S. economy.  Participates in interagency task force: The Secretary of Commerce  chairs the interagency task force on commercial advocacy, which  comprises 15 other federal agencies. The purpose of the task force is to  provide increased support for U.S. exporters beyond traditional  commercial advocacy and take a “whole of government” approach.
section_title: Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: Not reported  Program category: Trade, Enforce trade laws and agreements and  support policy formulation  Program description: The Antidumping and Countervailing Duty  Operations program enforces the U.S. trade laws by conducting  investigations, administrative reviews, new shipper reviews, sunset  reviews, changed circumstances reviews, and scope and anti- circumvention inquiries. The program also assists in the defense of  determinations made by the Enforcement and Compliance office in U.S.  courts, the World Trade Organization, and in North American Free Trade  Agreement dispute settlement panels, according to program officials. The  program conducts investigations in response to U.S. industry petitions  alleging that imports are being dumped or unfairly subsidized and that  those imports are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to,  competing U.S. industry.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Administration and enforcement of the antidumping and  countervailing duty laws: The Enforcement and Compliance Office  investigates U.S. firms’ claims that they are being injured by dumped or  unfairly subsidized imports. If the final result of an investigation is  affirmative and the International Trade Commission makes a final finding  of injury, the Enforcement and Compliance Office will impose an order  that requires importers of the merchandise make cash deposits equal to  the estimated amount of dumping and/or subsidization.
section_title: Domestic Field
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1980  Program category: Trade, Export promotion  Program description: The Domestic Field program includes a network of  108 U.S. Export Assistance Centers across the United States that focus  primarily on the exporting needs of small and medium-sized businesses.  At Assistance Centers, Domestic Field trade specialists help identify  opportunities for U.S. exporters, clarify foreign regulations and standards,  provide support to clients who have business disputes abroad or  encounter foreign market barriers, and counsel U.S. companies on the  best strategies to succeed in overseas markets. The Domestic Field also  plays a primary role in educating U.S. firms about their rights, obligations,  and opportunities in foreign markets, or of the assistance the International  Trade and Investment Administration can provide in resolving their trade  problems. Working with other International Trade and Investment  Administration programs, the Domestic Field program organizes  educational outreach programs to U.S. businesses and industry  associations across the country.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Providing export counseling to U.S. exporters or companies  interested in exporting: The network of U.S. Export Assistance Centers  includes 108 offices in 48 states and Puerto Rico that work with U.S.  companies on a one-by-one basis, including manufacturers, to focus on  their exporting needs and plans. This often involves customized  assistance, including market identification, export mechanics, financing  options, and partner identification.  Fee-based services: These services include matchmaking and vetting  services, as well as single company promotions, to help connect U.S.  manufacturers with opportunities overseas.  Trade show assistance: This includes counseling on-site, and facilitating  business-to-business meetings.  Export training: It organizes trade promotion conferences as well as  numerous webinars and seminars on all aspects of exporting for U.S.  manufacturers. The Domestic Field also partners with the Manufacturing  Extension Partnership program to deliver the ExporTech export training  program in locations across the country. This intensive export education  program is delivered to five to seven manufacturers at a time with the end  goal being the development of an actionable exporting plan for each  manufacturer.
section_title: Foreign-Trade Zones in the United States
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1934  Program category: Trade, Export promotion  Program description: According to program officials, the Foreign-Trade  Zones program helps encourage commercial activity and value added at  U.S. manufacturing and distribution facilities that compete with foreign  alternatives by allowing delayed or reduced duty payments on foreign  merchandise transferred from the zones, as well as other savings.  Officials also stated that the Foreign-Trade Zones program can reduce  costs through delayed or reduced duties, allow special entry procedures,  and encourage activity closer to market. Reducing costs through the  program can lead to more competitive U.S. operations, thereby helping to  maintain U.S.-based activities and jobs. Program staff serve as the  operational arm of the Foreign-Trade Zone Board, an interagency body  chaired by the Secretary of Commerce. The Board was established to  license and regulate foreign trade zones, and licenses primarily public or  non-profit corporations to administer zones on a local level.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Processing requests for manufacturing (production) authority:  According to program officials, under the Board’s regulations, companies  may conduct manufacturing operations within foreign trade zones if they  have obtained approval in advance. Officials stated that the Board  approves requests for manufacturing authority under procedures and  criteria delineated in the Board’s regulations.  Pre-application counseling for manufacturing applicants: Companies  may conduct manufacturing operations within foreign-trade zones if they  have obtained approval in advance from the Board. Specifically, the  Board staff responds to questions presented via telephone or e-mail and  reviews and provides feedback on draft requests submitted by potential  applicants.   Education and outreach on potential for Foreign-Trade Zone  manufacturing: Through information available on the Board’s website  and shared at industry events, the Board staff conducts education and  outreach activities regarding potential benefits to manufacturers under the  Foreign Trade Zone program.
Manufacturing Trends Addressed by the Program  The mission of the Foreign-Trade Zones program is broader than just  manufacturing. Additionally, program officials explained that although not  specifically targeting the manufacturing trends GAO identified, in 2012 the  Foreign-Trade Zone Board completed a total overhaul of its regulations.  They further stated that although the revised regulations dramatically  streamline procedures for potential program users—including potential  users that could fall under one or more of the manufacturing trends—that  change was effective as of April 2012 and, therefore, fell outside GAO’s  3-year scope of review. While the program may have addressed the three  manufacturing trends in recent years, there is nothing explicit in the  program design that is intended to address or affect these developments.
section_title: Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1988  Program category: Innovation, Applied research and development  Program description: The Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership  is a federal-state-industry partnership that provides U.S. manufacturers  with access to technologies, resources, and industry experts. The  program consists of Manufacturing Extension Partnership Centers located  across the country that work directly with local manufacturing  communities to strengthen their competitiveness. Funding for the Centers  is a cost-sharing arrangement consisting of support from federal, state,  and local governments and fees charged to the manufacturing clients for  services provided by the Centers. may be conducted in conjunction with local community colleges and  technical schools.  Support for Manufacturing Day: The program supports the annual  Manufacturing Day to raise awareness for manufacturing and attract  younger workers to manufacturing jobs.   Export assistance: The program partners with the U.S. Export  Assistance Centers of the Department of Commerce (DOC) to deliver the  ExporTech export training and consultation program in locations across  the country. This intensive export education program includes peer  counseling and is delivered to five to seven manufacturers at a time to  develop an exporting plan for each manufacturer, according to agency  officials.
Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2013  Program category: Trade, Enforce trade laws and agreements and  support policy formulation  Program description: The Industry Trade Policy and Analysis program  supports U.S. government trade policy formulation and negotiations by  providing the trade and economic analysis and issue expertise needed to  expand exports and foreign direct investment in the United States. The  objectives are to benefit U.S. businesses and provide new opportunities  to expand U.S. exports of goods and services. The program also serves  as the primary source of trade data within ITA and is responsible for  undertaking cross-sectoral economic analysis, such as the number of  annual jobs supported by exports.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Represent U.S. industry in trade negotiations: The program  maximizes U.S. gains in trade negotiations by evaluating industry  positions and foreign market access offers and recommending policy  actions that best support the interests of U.S. industry.  Protect U.S. intellectual property: The program advances U.S.  commercial interests on international intellectual property laws, policies,  practices and assists U.S. companies to overcome intellectual property- related trade barriers.  Standards policy: The program addresses standards-related market  access barriers and leads ITA’s involvement in standards policy issues,  which may include those important to U.S. manufacturers.  Economic analysis: The program evaluates potential economic effects  of statutory and regulatory programs on trade-dependent industries,  including those engaged in manufacturing.  Data programs: The program provides publicly accessible online trade  and tariff information to help companies (including manufacturers) assess  the market opportunities available for their products.
Manufacturing Trends Addressed By the Program  Many of the issues that the Industry Trade Policy and Analysis program  cover touch on the three manufacturing issues GAO identified, but little of  what the program produces is explicit to U.S. manufacturing. The  program is targeted toward exporters, although these exporters are  neither explicitly “U.S.” companies or explicitly manufacturing firms. The  program does not isolate the impact that it has on these trends, as its  efforts are more broadly focused.
section_title: International Field
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1980  Program category: Trade, Export promotion  Program description: The International Field program includes foreign  service officers, locally engaged staff, and headquarters-based experts  who advance U.S. commercial interests, identify opportunities for U.S.  exports, clarify local regulations and standards, engage foreign  government officials in commercial diplomacy to help resolve market  access and/or trade compliance problems affecting U.S. exporters or  investors, and counsel companies on the best strategies to succeed in  overseas markets. The program assists companies of all sizes to identify  target markets for entry or expansion and develop effective strategies to  succeed in those markets. This includes bringing foreign buyers and U.S.  companies together through business matchmaking services, promotional  support and representation at trade shows and fairs, trade events,  product launches, and technical seminars.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Technical assistance: The program provides pre-export logistics  information and assistance, matchmaking with foreign companies, and on  the ground advocacy on market access and/or compliance issues.
section_title: Investing in Manufacturing Communities Partnership
paragraphs: Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration  Program Funding: The program is overseen by DOC, but DOC does not  obligate additional funds specifically for the program. Instead, 12 federal  agencies participating in the program and DOC provide funds to selected  manufacturing communities through existing funding sources.
Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2013  Program category: General support across the areas of innovation, trade,  and training  Program description: According to program officials, the Investing in  Manufacturing Communities Partnership (IMCP) is designed to  strengthen communities’ ability to attract inbound investment by fostering  regional collaboration and designating manufacturing communities to  receive preferential consideration for federal funding, among other things.  DOC has not allocated ongoing grant funding for this program because it  was designed to enhance coordination and strategic investment of  existing funding and technical assistance to manufacturing communities,  according to agency officials. Benefits of the program include increasing  capacity for U.S. innovation and manufacturing, higher skills for the  American workforce, attracting and retaining small businesses that serve  as suppliers, and expanding opportunity for U.S. exports.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Providing grants: In September 2013, IMCP awarded $7 million in  planning grants to 44 communities nationwide to support the development  of their strategies. Under IMCP, 12 federal agencies and DOC with more  than $1 billion in grant funding can use the awardees’ plans to make  targeted investments to strengthen regional manufacturing.  Technical assistance: To advance U.S. manufacturing and provide all  communities with tools for success, DOC and the interagency team  creates strategic programming and technical assistance opportunities.
Community Mentorship Program: The mentorship program aims to  cultivate relationships among communities, create mutual vested  interests, and encourage ownership in each other’s success.  IMCP national summit: DOC hosts an annual manufacturing summit for  manufacturing communities.  Federal liaison: The Economic Development Administration assigns  each IMCP community to a federal liaison in one of the 13 partnering  federal agencies.
section_title: Manufacturing
paragraphs: Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration,  Industry and Analysis  Program Funding: Not reported  Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2004  Program category: Trade, Export promotion  Program description: The Manufacturing program ensures appropriate  industry and other stakeholder input into trade and investment policy  development, as well as trade negotiations and implementation. Among  other efforts, it supports exports and foreign direct investment in the  United States by leveraging industry expertise and an understanding of  the dynamics of global competition to develop and implement policies and  improve U.S. business competitiveness globally in high-growth export  sectors and markets and opportunities for foreign direct investment. The  program develops industry-specific negotiating priorities for the U.S.  government and develops and recommends strategies that further open  foreign markets. The Manufacturing program also works closely with the  Office of the United States Trade Representative in negotiating trade  agreements and policy outcomes affecting these industries, providing key  technical support. In addition, the Manufacturing unit analyzes and  reports on potential benefits to U.S. producers and consumers, devises  programs to capitalize on opportunities, and supports compliance with  trade agreement provisions.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Export assistance (trade policy): The Manufacturing Unit works to  develop trade policy positions that support the U.S. manufacturing sector  and promote exports.  Export assistance (trade promotion): The Manufacturing Unit works to  develop trade promotion activities for the U.S. manufacturing sector to  promote exports.
section_title: Manufacturing USA
paragraphs: Departments of Defense and Energy, and the obligations for them are in those agencies’ budgets and  not included here.
Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2014  Program category: Innovation, Applied research and development  Program description: Manufacturing USA is a network of institutes where  researchers, companies, and entrepreneurs can collaborate to develop  new manufacturing technologies with broad applications. Each institute  has a unique technology focus and helps support manufacturing activity  in local areas. The Manufacturing Innovation Institutes allow minimization  of cost and risk to an industry in developing new manufacturing  processes and technologies that take the nation’s basic research to  implementation in manufacturing, according to agency officials.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Agency coordination: The network coordinates the activities of the  program with programs and activities of other federal agencies whose  missions contribute to or are affected by advanced manufacturing.  Network support: The network supports the institutes within the network  with services to increase administrative efficiency and impact.  Open topic institutes: The Department of Commerce holds competitions  for institutes where the topic is identified by industry via their proposals. It  manages the institutes afterward.
section_title: Textiles, Consumer Goods, and Materials
paragraphs: Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration,  Industry and Analysis  Program Funding: Not reported.
Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2013  Program category: Trade, Export promotion  Program description: The Textiles, Consumer Goods, and Materials  program includes the Office of Textiles and Apparel and the Office of  Consumer Goods and Materials. The Office of Textiles and Apparel  administers and enforces agreements and preference programs  concerning the textile, apparel, footwear, and travel goods industries and  works to ensure fair trade and a level playing field for these industries to  enhance their competitiveness in international markets. The office’s  promotion export program assists small and medium-sized U.S. textile  and apparel firms to develop and expand their export markets, attempting  to help job retention and creation in this and related sectors. The Office of  Consumer Goods and Materials provides industry expertise, trade policy  guidance, and market access advocacy for a wide variety of consumer  goods and materials industry sectors. Industry experts in the Office of  Consumer Goods and Materials identify issues of strategic and  commercial interest to those industry sectors and work with its  stakeholders to enhance their international competitiveness.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Policy advocacy and development: Program offices work with trade  associations, companies, advisory committees, and individual companies  to identify trade issues that need resolution so that U.S. industry is  globally competitive. Activities include support for negotiation of trade  agreements in concert with U.S. Trade Representatives and  representation of U.S. policy and interests in bilateral and plurilateral  trade for development of U.S. trade policy by objectively representing  U.S. industry in internal U.S. government discussion.  Policy implementation: Program offices work with trade associations,  companies, advisory committees, individual companies, and federal  agencies to implement trade agreements and contribute to enforcement  of trade agreements through work with industries and provide technical  expertise on industry-related issues that are essential to developing policy  and strategy for consultations and dispute settlement.  Trade promotion: Program offices work with trade associations,  companies, and state and local governments to promote exports of U.S.  textile, apparel, footwear, and consumer goods products, as well as  materials (e.g., chemicals, building products, cosmetics, aluminum, and  forest products). The program promotes products through trade missions,  trade shows, International Buyer Programs, certified trade fairs, and  Market Development Cooperator Program awards.  Technical assistance: The program provides U.S. industries with data  and market analysis so companies can make better strategic decisions  about exports and trade in general and counsels companies on foreign  market conditions and trends based on trade data and qualitative  analysis.  Administer cooperative agreements: Program offices currently  administer seven Market Development Cooperative Programs, most of  which are aimed at entry or expansion in key and growing markets (e.g.,  China).
section_title: Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1965  Program category: Trade, Financial support  Program description: According to agency officials, the Trade Adjustment  Assistance for Firms program is a trade remedy mechanism that is used  rather than relying on tariffs, quotas, or duties. This assistance targets  U.S. firms experiencing a decline in sales and employment, resulting  directly from the increase in imports of like or directly competitive articles.  The program works in partnership with a national network of Trade  Adjustment Assistance Centers, and provides technical assistance to  U.S. manufacturing, production, and service firms affected by import  competition to develop and implement projects to regain global  competitiveness, increase profitability and create jobs.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Petitioning for certification: The program assists firms with submitting a  petition to be certified as a trade-impacted firm. Generally, certification  specialists in the Trade Adjustment Assistance Centers work with the firm  at no cost to the firm to complete and submit a petition.
Program Evaluations That Assessed Any  Impact on the U.S. Manufacturing Sector
Trade Adjustment Assistance:  Commerce Program Has Helped  Manufacturing and Services Firms, but  Measures, Data, and Funding Formula  Could Improve. GAO-12-930.  Washington, D.C.: September 13, 2012.
Recovery planning: The program-certified firms work with Trade  Adjustment Assistance Centers staff to develop a customized business  recovery plan for approval.  Recovery plan implementation: The firm works with consultants to  implement projects in an approved business recovery plan.  Providing grants: The program provides grants to independent, non- profit or university-affiliated Trade Adjustment Assistance Centers that  help U.S. manufacturing, production, and manufacturing service firms in a  public-private collaborative framework apply for certification of eligibility  for program assistance and prepare and implement strategies to guide  firms’ economic recovery.   Technical assistance: The program provides direct technical assistance  to import-impacted U.S. manufacturing, production, and service firms by  providing matching funds to Trade Adjustment Assistance Centers. The  centers use the funds to match the costs for third-party consultants to  help firms expand markets, strengthen operations, and increase  competitiveness.
section_title: Trade Enforcement and Compliance Policy and Negotiations
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2013  Program category: Trade, Enforce trade laws and agreements and  support policy formulation  Program description: The Policy and Negotiations program oversees a  variety of activities and policies related to the negotiation of trade and  investment disciplines in international agreements, the administration of  U.S. antidumping and countervailing duty laws, the negotiation and  administration of suspension agreements of U.S. antidumping and  countervailing duty investigations, as well as the improvement of access  to export markets for U.S. companies.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Trade agreements negotiation and compliance: The program office  negotiates trade and investment international agreements, conducts  outreach and assistance to U.S. companies or industries confronting  foreign government trade actions or barriers that block or impede U.S.  exports or investment, and administers the Trade Agreements  Compliance Program, which involves all business units in ITA and the  Office of the General Counsel.  Antidumping and Countervailing Duties Petition Counseling and  Analysis Unit: This program office reaches out to and assists U.S.  industries and workers (especially small and medium-sized enterprises)  seeking to use U.S. antidumping and countervailing duty law to remedy  injury from unfairly traded imports.  Support antidumping and countervailing duty cases: A program office  applies policies and procedures in antidumping/countervailing duty  proceedings while ensuring that broader policy objectives and statutory  and international obligations are respected. They assist U.S. businesses  by reviewing case determinations and developing new policies for major  or emerging issues and ensuring consistent application of the trade  remedy laws.  Trade remedy compliance: Staff monitor and conduct outreach and  advocacy to address potentially unfair application of foreign trade  remedies. Staff members provide a wide range of services and tools to  assist U.S. companies that find themselves subject to trade remedy  actions.  Subsidies Enforcement Office: This office assists U.S. businesses by  providing a range of services to confront foreign subsidies that impede  U.S. companies’ and workers’ ability to compete and expand into  domestic as well as overseas markets.
Steel import monitoring and analysis: The office administers the Steel  Import Licensing program and provides steel import statistics and  analyses to the U.S. government and industry stakeholders.  Interagency Trade Enforcement Center: The office provides expert  support to trade enforcement undertakings by the U.S. government,  including research on foreign laws and measures.
section_title: Basic, Applied, and Advanced Research in Science and Engineering
paragraphs: Department of Defense, Office of the Secretary  Program Funding: Not reported  Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: Not reported  Program category: Innovation, Basic research and development  Program description: The Basic, Applied, and Advanced Research in  Science and Engineering program (1) supports basic, applied, or  advanced research and technology development in mathematical,  physical, engineering, environmental, and life sciences, in addition to  other fields with good, long-term potential for contributing to technology  for Department of Defense missions; (2) facilitates transition of research  results to practical application for defense needs; (3) improves linkages  between defense research and the civilian technology and industrial  bases to promote commercial application of the results of defense  research and commercial availability of technology for defense needs; (4)  fosters education of future scientists and engineers in disciplines critical  to defense; and (5) strengthens the infrastructure for research and related  science and engineering education in those disciplines.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Technology maturity: The program invests in emerging manufacturing  processes for enabling defense technologies required for national  defense.
Industrial base: The program actively supports a connected U.S.  defense industrial base.  Infrastructure: The program actively supports a healthy defense  infrastructure.  Workforce: The program actively supports an educated workforce to  support national defense.
section_title: Commercial Technologies for Maintenance Activities
paragraphs: Department of Defense, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense  for Logistics Maintenance and Readiness  Program Funding: Not reported  Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1998  Program category: Innovation, Applied research and development  Program description: The Commercial Technologies for Maintenance  Activities program is a joint Department of Defense (DOD)/National  Centers for Manufacturing Science effort that promotes collaborative  technology development, demonstration, and transition within DOD. Its  objective is to ensure American troops and their equipment are ready to  face any situation, with the most up-to-date and best-maintained  platforms and tools available. The program is based on a collaborative  model for manufacturers, academia, and DOD, and it creates  relationships and opportunities, drives cutting edge research and  development, and conducts industry intelligence from a unique  perspective. Through partnerships, training, software, and business  operations, the program can help achieve industry objectives while  satisfying DOD needs through demonstration of new technologies prior to  full deployment.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Facilitates industry and DOD collaboration regarding maintenance  technology: On occasion, the program advances maintenance  capabilities that have directly benefited the manufacturing industrial base  due, in part, to a large overlap between manufacturing technologies used  by original equipment manufacturers and the tools and procedures  employed by DOD maintenance depots. Examples of these capabilities  include advanced machine controls, additive manufacturing and repair,  complex electronics testing and troubleshooting, product lifecycle  management applications, and advanced welding techniques, among  other things.
section_title: Defense Production Act Title III
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1950  Program category: General financing  Program description: According to agency officials, when essential to the  national defense, Title III authority enables the U.S. government to apply  financial incentives to encourage private industry to create new domestic  sources of supply for key advanced materials and technology items and  to accelerate deployment of new product and manufacturing process  technology. According to agency officials, Title III authorities may be  employed when domestic industrial capabilities that impact essential  government requirements do not exist, are at risk of being lost, or are  insufficient to meet essential governmental needs. According to agency  officials, Title III actions stimulate private investment in production  resources by reducing the risks associated with the capitalization and  investments required to establish the needed production capacity.  Projects range from process improvements and emerging technologies to  construction of complete industrial production facilities.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Purchase and develop production capabilities: The program  purchases for government use or resale to create, maintain, protect,  expand, or restore domestic industrial base capabilities essential for the  national defense.  Installation of equipment in industrial facilities: The program  purchases, installs, and transfers title of production equipment.  Purchase commitments: The program guarantees market to incentivize  companies to establish production capability.  Loans/loan guarantees: According to agency officials, the President  may authorize a guaranteeing agency to provide guarantees of loans by  private institutions to finance any contractor, subcontractor, provider of  critical infrastructure, or other person in support of production capabilities  or supplies that are necessary to the national defense to reduce current  or projected shortfalls of industrial resources, critical technology items, or  essential materials needed for national defense purposes.  Development of substitutes: The program strengthens the production  and technological capabilities of key industrial sectors and ensures  affordable and assured access to critical materials and technologies.
section_title: Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment Program
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2014  Program category: Innovation, Applied research and development  Program description: The Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment  program provides the Department of Defense with a comprehensive  ability to monitor and assess the industrial base, to address critical issues  relating to urgent operational needs and industrial base vulnerabilities,  and to support industrial base expansion. This program maintains or  improves the health of critical and fragile industry capabilities that are at  risk of being lost but are needed to support the National Defense  Strategy. The goal of the program is to avoid loss of critical capabilities  and resultant reconstitution costs wherever affordable; innovative  mechanisms are available to the producers in the interim.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Contracts: The program funds contracts with constituents of the National  Technology and Industrial Base for specific at-risk goods and services to  address critical issues in the industrial base, expand the industrial base,  and address defense supply chain vulnerabilities.  Minimize risks to industrial base: The program supports the warfighter  by minimizing risks from industrial base capability issues.
section_title: Manufacturing Applied Research
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: Fiscal Year 2014  Program category: Innovation, Applied research and development  Program description: The Manufacturing Applied Research program  supports innovation-based efforts that will provide technology options for  future Navy and Marine Corps capabilities. Efforts focus on advanced  Naval materials, biocentric technologies, environmental quality, human  factors and organizational design, medical technologies, and Naval  training technologies.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Providing contracts: The program contracts for technical work in  manufacturing applied research.
section_title: Manufacturing Experimentation and Outreach Two (MENTOR2)
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2014  Program category: Training, Enhancing job seekers’ skills  Program description: The Manufacturing Experimentation and Outreach  Two (MENTOR2) program seeks to enhance defense readiness by  improving both the training and the tools available to those who will be  called on to utilize, maintain, and adapt high-technology systems in low- technology environments. The program pursues this goal by developing  and demonstrating new training tools, new materials, and new  manufacturing technologies in the fields of electromechanical design and  manufacturing. It is envisioned that project-based curricula employing  MENTOR2 design and prototyping tools will teach a deeper  understanding of high-technology systems and better enable future  competence in maintaining and adapting such systems through the  manufacture of as-designed components or the design and manufacture  of new components.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Training: The program develops instructor-led and independent training  (along with supporting materials/equipment) to Department of Defense  personnel to support understanding and hands-on experience with  prototyping equipment, computer-aided design, and simulation systems.
section_title: Manufacturing Technology Program
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: more than 50 years ago  Program category: Innovation, Applied research and development  Program description: The Manufacturing Technology Program focuses on  the needs of the warfighter and weapons systems by helping to  implement affordable, low-risk manufacturing solutions. The program  provides a crucial link between technology and industrial base  applications; matures and validates emerging manufacturing technologies  to support affordable, timely, and low-risk implementation in industry; and  addresses production issues from system development through transition  to production sustainment. In addition, this program funds the Department  of Defense-led Manufacturing USA institutes.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Technology maturity: The program invests in emerging manufacturing  processes for enabling defense technologies required for national  defense.  Industrial base: The program actively supports a connected U.S.  defense industrial base.
Infrastructure: The program actively supports a healthy defense  infrastructure.  Workforce: The program actively supports an educated workforce to  support national defense.
section_title: Navy Manufacturing Science
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: Fiscal Year 2009  Program category: Innovation, Basic research and development  Program description: The Navy Manufacturing Science program  addresses basic research efforts including scientific study and  experimentation directed toward increasing knowledge and understanding  in national security related aspects of physical, engineering,  environmental and life sciences.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Providing grants: The program awards grants to research institutions to  carry out research in novel manufacturing and process control  technologies.
section_title: Prototype Integration Facilities
paragraphs: Department of Defense, Army, Research, Development, and  Engineering Command  Program Funding: Not reported  Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2012  Program category: Innovation, Applied research and development  Program description: Prototype Integration Facilities are buildings where  engineers develop and test various manufacturing products and generate  related data to help meet warfighter needs. The facilities assist in the  transition of technologies from the laboratory to the field. The specific  core mission and related competencies of each prototype integration  facility is unique depending upon the engineering support required by  their specific customers.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Execute Army Manufacturing Technology Program: The Army  Manufacturing Technology program addressed manufacturing technology  gaps. When developing Army weapon systems, the facilities identify  manufacturing technology gaps and develop manufacturing processes to  promote affordability. Prototype integration facilities execute this work  using in-house facilities and in collaboration with industry. The facilities  are able to transfer manufacturing technologies to both the commercial  and organic industrial base using a variety of contracting instruments and  agreements.  Training: The program provides training to organic industrial base  personnel in newly developed manufacturing processes (e.g., welding of  titanium) and provides specialized training in manufacturing technologies  for Army personnel.  Manufacturing technology transfer: The program validates engineering  data through manufacturing prototypes and captures manufacturing  process data. The program also makes these data available to the  organic and commercial industrial base.  Cooperative research and development agreements: The program  works directly with industry to develop and transition new manufacturing  technologies.
section_title: Career and Technical Education—Basic Grants to States
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1984  Program category: Training, Enhancing job seekers’ skills  Program description: The Career and Technical Education—Basic Grants  to States program helps develop the academic, career, and technical  skills of secondary and postsecondary students who elect to enroll in  career and technical education programs.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Providing grants: Grant recipients and subrecipients may use grant  funds to improve programs that prepare individuals for careers in  manufacturing. The decision to use grant funds for this purpose is made  by the recipient and subrecipient. About 5 percent of students  concentrated in manufacturing in program year 2010-2011, according to  officials from the Department of Education.
section_title: Career and Technical Education—National Programs
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1984  Program category: Training, Enhancing job seekers’ skills  Program description: The Career and Technical Education—National  Programs provide support directly—or through grants, contracts, or  cooperative agreements—for research, development, demonstration,  dissemination, evaluation, assessment, capacity-building, and technical  assistance activities aimed at improving the quality and effectiveness of  career and technical education programs.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Technical assistance: In 2015, program funds were used to support a  series of webinars (“Skills on Purpose”) to provide technical assistance to  those seeking to build the education and skills of the manufacturing  workforce through partnerships between educational institutions and  industry.
section_title: Advanced Manufacturing Office
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2011  Program category: Innovation, Applied research and development  Program description: The mission of the Advanced Manufacturing Office  is to reduce the energy intensity and life-cycle energy consumption of  manufactured products by researching, developing, and demonstrating  energy-efficient manufacturing processes and materials and to promote  continuous improvement in energy efficiency among existing facilities and  manufacturers. Its goal is to reduce energy consumption of manufactured  goods across targeted product life-cycles by 50 percent over 10 years.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Research and development facilities: The program works with National  Laboratories to competitively select research, development, and  demonstration activity investments in foundational energy-related  advanced manufacturing technologies through large scale public-private  consortia. As noted previously, the program also oversees and funds  Department of Energy institutes under the Manufacturing USA program.  Research and development projects: These projects support  innovative, clean-energy manufacturing projects cost-shared with  companies and research organizations that focus on specific high-impact  manufacturing technology materials and process challenges. These  activities fund the development of next-generation manufacturing  materials, information, and process technologies that facilitate the  transition of emerging clean energy technologies to domestic production  and improve energy efficiency in energy-intensive and energy-dependent  manufacturing processes.  Technical assistance: The program provides critical technical  assistance for the deployment of advanced energy efficiency technologies  and practices. Technical assistance activities help individual  manufacturers reduce their energy intensity by 25 percent over 10 years;  demonstrate the viability of improved energy management approaches;  and provide targeted energy efficiency, productivity, and waste/water use  reduction technical assistance to small and medium-sized manufacturers.
section_title: Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2007  Program category: General financing  Program description: The Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing  loan program was established to support the production of fuel-efficient,  advanced technology vehicles and qualifying components in the United  States. The purpose is to originate, underwrite, and service loans to  eligible automotive manufacturers and component manufacturers to  finance the cost of (1) re-equipping, expanding, or establishing  manufacturing facilities in the United States to produce advanced  technology vehicles and qualifying components and (2) engineering  integration performed in the United States of advanced technology  vehicles and qualifying components.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Provides direct loans to automotive or component manufacturers:  The program provides direct loans to automotive manufacturers and  component suppliers to support domestic manufacturing of fuel-efficient,  advanced technology vehicles and qualifying components.
section_title: Bioenergy Technologies Office
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1992  Program category: Innovation, Applied research and development  Program description: The Department of Energy’s Bioenergy  Technologies Office forms cost-share partnerships with key stakeholders  to develop, demonstrate, and deploy technologies for advanced biofuels  production. The program works with industrial, academic, national  laboratory, agricultural, and nonprofit partners to develop and deploy  commercially viable, high-performance and sustainable biofuels,  biproducts, and biopower from renewable biomass resources in the  United States to reduce dependence on imported oil, enhance energy  security, create domestic jobs, improve ecosystem health, and reduce  carbon emissions.
Program Evaluations That Assessed Any  Impact on the U.S. Manufacturing Sector
U.S. Department of Energy, Energy  Efficiency & Renewable Energy,  Bioenergy Technologies Office, 2013  Review Panel Summary Report and  Program Results, DOE/EE-1014 (2014).
Efficiency & Renewable Energy,  Bioenergy Technologies Office, 2015  Review Panel Summary Report and  Program Results, DOE/EE-1386 (2016).
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Competitive research and development awards: The program  regularly issues funding opportunity announcements that target research  and development needs identified through workshops with industry and  academia, which identify key technical barriers to commercialization of  biofuel and enabling technologies.   Competitive pilot and demonstration awards: The program regularly  issues funding opportunity announcements designed to provide financial  assistance to industry in construction of pilot and demonstration facilities.  National laboratory research and development: The program directly  funds research and development on applied and enabling technology at  several national laboratories with core and key capabilities to address  cross-cutting technical barriers.  Enhancing sustainability of bio-based systems: The program’s  sustainability activities include analysis and research and development  focused on understanding and promoting the positive environmental,  economic, and social effects and reducing the potential negative impacts  of bioenergy production activities. Efforts include developing scientific  methods and models for measuring bioenergy sustainability across the  full supply chain, demonstrating improved environmental performance  and social benefits relative to conventional or business-as-usual energy  systems, and disseminating practical tools for analyses and technology  development that enhance sustainable bioenergy outcomes.   Resource assessment: The program’s resource assessment work uses  a comprehensive spatially-explicit modeling framework to estimate  county-level supply curves for all major traditional crop and biomass  feedstock resources, including energy crops. In fiscal year 2015, the  focus was on the analysis of the current and future economic availability  of biomass feedstocks.   Workforce development: The program is developing and will implement  an education and workforce development program to improve public  accessibility to information on bioenergy production and the bioenergy  industry, support formal and informal education including STEM and  vocational programs in exploring issues relevant to sustainable  production of biofuels and bioproducts, and develop and enhance  pathways to bioenergy-related training and careers.
section_title: Clean Energy Manufacturing Initiative
paragraphs: Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable  Energy  Program Funding: This initiative is a crosscutting activity leveraging  other programs’ funded activities, according to Department of Energy  (DOE) officials.
Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2013  Program category: Innovation, Applied research and development  Program description: The Clean Energy Manufacturing Initiative is an  effort across DOE to strengthen U.S. clean energy manufacturing  competitiveness. The objectives are to increase U.S. competitiveness in  manufacturing clean energy technologies and increase U.S.  manufacturing competitiveness across the board by boosting energy  productivity and leveraging low-cost domestic energy resources and  feedstocks.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Analysis: The program provides objective analysis and up-to-date data  on global clean energy manufacturing.  Public-private partnership pilots: As a part of its mission, the program  builds partnerships to increase U.S. manufacturing competitiveness. DOE  currently supports partnership efforts across the country through a range  of pilots, initiatives, institutes, and facilities.   Engagement and communications: The program engages leaders from  industry, universities, national laboratories, and the broader innovation  and economic community to identify ways in which the public and private  sectors can partner to enhance U.S. clean energy competitiveness. For  advancing clean energy manufacturing, the program engages  stakeholders through regional and national summits and through new  partnerships. Further, at Clean Energy Manufacturing Initiative Days,  leaders from the Department of Energy and the participating  manufacturing companies discuss manufacturing technology research  and development priorities and strategies for increasing U.S.  manufacturing competitiveness.  Crosscutting coordination: The program coordinates the Clean Energy  Manufacturing Tech Team. The team formulates and develops a strategy  to leverage existing budget authorities to strengthen U.S. clean energy  manufacturing competitiveness and advance progress toward the nation’s  energy goals.
section_title: Concentrating Solar Power
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1977  Program category: Innovation, Applied research and development  Program description: The Concentrating Solar Power program provides  competitive awards to industry, national laboratories, and universities with  the shared goal of making large-scale dispatchable solar energy systems  cost competitive without subsidies by the end of the decade. As part of  this effort, the program supports research and development of  concentrated solar power technologies to achieve SunShot Initiative cost  targets, which seeks to make solar energy more affordable by using  systems that can supply solar power on demand through the use of  thermal storage.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Funding opportunity announcements: The program provides financial  assistance for research, development, and demonstration to assist in  getting technology to market.  Workshops/conferences: The program holds and participates in  workshops and conferences to stimulate discussion of the market, trends,  priorities, and to identify opportunities, among other things.
Technical assistance: The program provides technical assistance to  awardees during the course of projects.  Interagency collaboration: The program collaborates with other  agencies to perform studies of potential environmental impacts of the  technologies.
section_title: Photovoltaics
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2012  Program category: Innovation, Applied research and development  Program description: The Photovoltaics program specifically supports the  research and development of photovoltaics technologies to improve  efficiency and reliability and to lower manufacturing costs to make solar  electricity cost-competitive with other sources of energy.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Providing cooperative assistance: The program funds research and  development activities that, if successful, are intended to transition to  domestic manufacturing.
section_title: Solid State Lighting Program
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2005  Program category: Innovation, Applied research and development  Program description: The Solid State Lighting Program focuses on  research and development breakthroughs in efficiency and performance  of solid-state lighting technology, and it equips buyers to successfully  apply solid-state lighting. The program includes the following elements:  (1) core technology research projects focused on applied research for  technology development, with particular emphasis on meeting efficiency,  performance, and cost targets; (2) product development projects that use  the knowledge gained from basic or applied research to develop or  improve commercially viable materials, devices, or systems; (3)  manufacturing research and development projects to reduce costs and  enhance quality in solid-state lighting products and to address the  technical challenges that must be overcome to enable solid-state lighting  to compete with existing lighting on a first-cost basis; and (4) technology  application research and development projects to monitor solid-state  lighting technology advances and provide field and laboratory evaluations  of emerging products, particularly LED lighting systems that involve  advanced controls. Technology application research and development  projects address broad issues related to technology performance with a  view that spans the entire industry.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Financial assistance agreements for research and development: The  program provides financial assistance for competitive research and  development to maximize the energy-efficiency of solid-state lighting  products in the marketplace; remove market barriers by improving  lifetime, color quality, and lighting system performance; reduce costs of  solid-state lighting sources and luminaires; improve product consistency  while maintaining high-quality products; and encourage the growth,  leadership, and sustainability of domestic U.S. manufacturing within the  solid-state lighting industry. Applicants seeking assistance must submit a  manufacturing plan that includes substantial domestic manufacturing.  Email postings: The program disseminates information that focuses on  solid-state lighting companies manufacturing in the United States, in a  series called “SSL  in America.” This is not intended to  endorse or promote any of the companies, but rather to describe  advances in energy-efficient solid-state lighting.
Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2012  Program category: Innovation, Applied research and development  Program description: The Tech-to-Market program within the Solar  Energy Technology Office aims to make solar energy more cost- competitive. The program helps move technologies to the market by  targeting two known funding gaps: (1) those that occur at the prototype  commercialization stage and (2) those at the commercial scale-up stage.  The program funds recipients so that they are able achieve technical  milestones and commercialize the funded technology, while also helping  them to find follow-on funding and form strategic partnerships.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Provide funding opportunities: The program provides funding  opportunities to selected and awarded applicants who are working on  cutting edge technology within the United States. The recipients must be  working toward the Sunshot goal and contributing to the latest and  greatest technologies in the solar industry.
section_title: Windows and Building Envelope
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1974  Program category: Innovation, Applied research and development  Program description: The Windows and Building Envelope program  research and development efforts focus on ways to reduce energy  consumption in buildings by supporting projects that develop energy- efficient windows and envelope projects. Program activities address  technologies like highly insulating materials and systems; methodologies  and analysis tools to measure and validate building envelope  performance; and market-enabling efforts, such as creating an  organization to rate, certify, and label related products to better inform  consumers.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Competitively awarded research and development projects: The  program provides funds to support research and development projects  that include advanced manufacturing processes for energy-efficient  window and building envelope components. The sub-program also  provides earlier stage applied research and development funding for  technologies that might indirectly impact the U.S. manufacturing sector,  such as advanced window coatings or advanced insulation materials that  could be adopted by U.S. manufacturers in the future.  Annual operating plan for Department of Energy national  laboratories: The program provides direct funding to some national  laboratories to support the development of physics-based software  models of building envelope components, including windows, as well as  facilities used by manufacturers to test the physical properties of building  envelope components. The sub-program also supports research and  development projects at the national laboratories that have indirect impact  on U.S. manufacturers as they have the potential to be incorporated in  future manufacturing processes.
section_title: Centers for Innovation in Advanced Development and Manufacturing
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2012  Program category: Manufacturing public health products  Program description: The Centers for Innovation in Advanced  Development in Manufacturing is a core service that provides advanced  development and manufacturing capabilities for developing medical  countermeasures for emerging infectious diseases; chemical, biological,  radiological, and nuclear threats; as well as the manufacturing of  pandemic influenza vaccine doses augmenting the current national  capacity. The Centers will increase the nation’s preparedness for  bioterrorism and influenza pandemic by using modern technologies for  accelerating production, improving quality, and expanding vaccine  manufacturing capacity. The Centers are comprised of three companies  that provide advanced development and manufacturing capabilities.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Funding for manufacturing sites: The program is currently funding the  establishment and operation of domestic manufacturing sites located in  Baltimore, MD; Holly Springs, NC; and College Station, TX.  Workforce training and development: Aside from providing core  services for the advanced development and manufacture of biological  medical countermeasures, this program supports the creation or  enhancement of specialized workforce training and development  approaches to reestablish the U.S.-based expertise necessary for  developing and producing chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear  medical countermeasures. These approaches are intended to develop a  highly-skilled biotechnology and pharmaceutical workforce proficient in  bioprocess engineering, production, quality systems, and regulatory  affairs.
section_title: Fill Finish Manufacturing Network
paragraphs: in the future to non-US manufacturing contractors, dependent on task orders awarded in the next 5  years, though all 100 percent could support U.S. manufacturing.
Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2013  Program category: Manufacturing public health products  Program description: The Fill Finish Manufacturing Network provides  packaging support for medical countermeasure distribution. The program  is comprised of four companies that are industry experts in the area of  filling and finishing bulk products into sterile vials, syringes, and  cartridges. They also complete the kitting, labeling, and packaging  services as needed. These four companies maintain commercial clients  and perform these services on a routine basis. As members of the  network, they can respond to U.S. government funded project needs  where a product developer does not have these capabilities in-house.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Domestic manufacturing capacity: The four providers of the biological  fill and finish manufacturing services maintain a significant domestic  capacity. Facilities exist in Alachua, FL; Bloomington, IN; Rochester, MI;  and Greenville, NC.  Addressing critical sterile drug shortage concerns: In collaboration  with the Food and Drug Administration, the Department of Health and  Human Services has engaged contractors in the Fill Finish Manufacturing  Network to manufacture and transfer specific sterile drug products found  on the drug shortage list. The intent is to train the network to perform an  effective and efficient manufacturing technical transfer for any sterile drug  product, along with all the quality and regulatory administration tasks that  would be required in a public health emergency. This pilot program has  the added benefit of potentially alleviating sterile drug shortage concerns  by increasing domestic capacity.
section_title: National Occupational Research Agenda Manufacturing Sector
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2006  Program category: Innovation, Applied research and development  Program description: The mission of the program is to eliminate  occupational injuries, illnesses, hazardous exposures, and fatalities  among individuals working in manufacturing through a focused program  of research, intervention, and prevention. Program officials also co-chair  the Manufacturing Sector Council, which has representatives from  academia, trade/professional organizations, industry, insurers, unions,  and government. This Council is charged with maximizing the impact of  occupational safety and health research through partnerships and to  promote widespread adoption of improved workplace safety and health  practices based on research findings.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Research: The program helps generate new knowledge on occupational  safety and health through an intramural/research program; develop  innovative solutions for difficult-to-solve problems in high-risk industrial  sectors; and track work-related hazards, exposures, illnesses and injuries  for prevention.  Provide grants: The program provides grants to extramural investigators  to conduct research on occupational safety and health. These  investigators generate new knowledge and test the efficacy of innovative  solutions.  Training: The program builds capacity to address traditional and  emerging hazards through training.
Information dissemination: The program delivers occupational safety  and health communication to inform decisions towards safe work  practices and to improve workplace safety and health.
section_title: H-1B Jobs Training Grants
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1998  Program category: Training, Enhancing job seekers’ skills  Program description: The H-1B Job Training Grant Program funds  projects that provide training and related activities to assist workers in  gaining the skills and competencies needed to obtain or upgrade  employment in high-growth industries or economic sectors. Over time,  these education and training programs will help businesses reduce their  use of skilled foreign professionals permitted to work in the U.S. on a  temporary basis under the H-1B visa program.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Funding training through grants: The program competitively awards  grants to public and private partnerships to provide training and related  services that support employment in high-growth and economic sectors  that currently use H-1B visas to employ foreign workers, many of which  are manufacturing occupations.
section_title: Registered Apprenticeship Program
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1937  Program category: Training, Enhancing job seekers’ skills  Program description: The Registered Apprenticeship program prepares  American workers to compete in a global 21st Century economy.  Registered Apprenticeship has already trained millions of U.S. workers  through a network of 21,000 Registered Apprenticeship programs across  the nation, consisting of over 150,000 employers.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Training/technical assistance: The Department of Labor’s (DOL) Office  of Apprenticeship works in conjunction with independent State  Apprenticeship Agencies to administer the program nationally. These  state agencies are responsible for registering apprenticeship programs  that meet federal and state standards, protecting the safety and welfare of  apprentices, issuing nationally recognized and portable Certificates of  Completion to apprentices, promoting the development of new programs  through marketing and technical assistance, assuring that all programs  provide high quality training and produce skilled and competent workers.  Industry grants: The program awards grants as part of a broader  commitment to create more opportunities by advancing job-driven training  initiatives that help workers acquire the skills to succeed in currently  available jobs. Under the American Apprenticeship Initiative Grant, 46  grantees have committed to expanding apprenticeship programs in new  and growing industries, to align apprenticeships with further education  and career advancement, and to expand the use of proven  apprenticeship models that work.
section_title: Trade Adjustment Assistance
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1974  Program category: Training, Supporting workers who have been laid off  from their job in manufacturing  Program description: DOL’s Trade Adjustment Assistance program funds  employment and training services to manufacturing and other eligible  workers who lose their jobs as a result of the impact of global trade.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Employment and case management services: Program participants  receive employment and case management services, which include: (1)  comprehensive assessments of skill levels and service needs; (2)  development of an individual employment plan to identify employment  goals and objectives; (3) information on available training and counseling,  and how to apply for financial aid; (4) short-term prevocational services  such as development of learning skills, communications skills,  interviewing skills, among others; (5) individual career counseling; (6)  provision of labor market information; (7) job referral and placement; and  (8) information relating to the availability of supportive services.  Training that includes tuition-based courses or work-based learning:  The program provides training, such as classroom training; on the-job  training; customized training designed to meet the needs of a specific  employer or group of employers; apprenticeship programs; post- secondary education; prerequisite education or coursework and remedial  education, which may include General Equivalency Diploma preparation;  literacy training; basic math; or English as a Second Language.  Relocation allowances and job search allowances: The program  provides participants job search and relocation allowance  reimbursements when seeking a job outside of the worker’s commuting  area or moving to a job that earns family-sustaining wages.   Trade readjustment allowances: Upon exhaustion of Unemployment  Insurance benefits, program participants may be eligible to receive trade  readjustment allowances that provide income support while participating  in full-time training.   Reemployment trade adjustment assistance: Reemployment trade  adjustment assistance provides wage supplements to reemployed  program participants age 50 or older who do not earn more than $50,000  annually in their new employment. A qualified participant receives a wage  supplement consisting of a portion of the difference between a worker’s  new wage and their old wage when they accept new employment at a  lower wage than their previous employment.  Trade adjustment assistance program-related state administration  funds: The program provides funds to cover related administration costs  the state would incur in the provision of the program’s benefits and  services to trade-affected workers.
section_title: Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training Grant
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2009  Program category: Training, Enhancing job seekers’ skills  Program description: The Trade Adjustment Assistance Community  College and Career Training Grant program provides community colleges  and other eligible institutions of higher education with funds to expand  and improve their ability to deliver education and career training programs  that can be completed in 2 years or less; are suited for workers who are  eligible for training under the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Workers  program; and prepare program participants for employment in high-wage,  high-skill occupations. These multi-year grants help ensure that  institutions of higher education are helping adults succeed in acquiring  the skills, degrees, and credentials needed for high-wage, high-skill  employment while also meeting the needs of employers for skilled  workers. DOL implements the program in partnership with the  Department of Education.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Workforce training related to manufacturing jobs: Grantees’ capacity- building activities may include developing or enhancing programs of study  that lead to industry-recognized credentials, purchasing approved training  equipment, or renovating classroom or lab space to support training  programs.  Information-sharing: The program makes all curriculum developed with  program grant funds available as open educational resources using a  creative commons copyright, and the curriculum is uploaded to the  program’s repository. This allows nonfunded training providers to further  adapt and reuse grant-funded curriculum.   Providing training to trade-eligible workers and other unemployed or  under-employed adults: According to program officials, program  grantees are required to provide training to participants during their grant  period of performance and to track certain performance metrics for those  participants, and the training must lead to stackable credentials that are  also industry-recognized, such as a certificate or associate’s degree.  Strengthening relationships between manufacturing employers and  community colleges: Grants support strengthening relationships  between community colleges and manufacturing employers. Grantees  engage employers in the manufacturing sector to create or strengthen  programs of study through the design of curriculum and credentials;  delivery of training; provision of internships and other work-based learning  opportunities; contributions of equipment, facility, faculty, mentors; and  hiring graduates of the training programs.
section_title: E3 - Economy, Energy and Environment
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2009  Program category: Innovation, Applied research and development  Program description: The E3 - Economy, Energy and Environment  program is a federal technical assistance framework comprising six  federal agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),  to provide support to small and medium-sized manufacturers. The  program’s mission is to help communities, manufacturers, and  manufacturing supply chains adapt and thrive in today’s green economy.  In providing technical assistance, the program connects agencies and  organizations in local communities and small and medium-sized  manufacturers with experts from federal agencies, states, and regions.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Technical assistance: EPA, in concert with five other federal agencies,  provides technical reviews of manufacturing processes at small and  medium-sized manufacturers and provides customized assessments  detailing how participating manufacturers can incorporate practical  sustainability approaches. The program’s assessments aim to reduce  energy consumption, minimize carbon footprints, prevent pollution,  increase productivity, and drive innovation.
Manufacturing Trends Addressed by the Program  E3 has not directly engaged with advanced manufacturing work because  the program is primarily targeted toward smaller manufacturers for whom  a lack of environmental and lean manufacturing knowledge is an  impediment to improving their operations. Some of these companies may  supply other companies in the advanced manufacturing sphere. Agency  officials at DOL, who also support E3, may be engaged in enhancing  workforce skills, but EPA is primarily concerned with improvements to  manufacturing processes themselves.
section_title: Export-Import Bank of the United States
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1945  Program category: Trade, Financial support  Program description: The Export-Import Bank of the United States is the  official export credit agency of the United States. The Bank is an  independent, self-sustaining (for budgetary purposes) federal agency that  exists to support the export of U.S. goods and services, and thereby  American jobs. The Bank’s charter states that it should not compete with  the private sector. Rather, the Export-Import Bank’s role is to assume the  credit and country risks that the private sector is unable or unwilling to  accept, while still maintaining a reasonable assurance of repayment. In  fiscal year 2015, the Export-Import Bank authorized 2,630 transactions  supporting an estimated $17 billion in U.S. exports.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Loans: Under this program, the Export-Import Bank provides fixed-rate  loans directly to foreign buyers of goods and services.  Loan guarantees (including Working Capital Guarantees): These  programs provide guarantees to commercial lenders to cover repayment  risks on foreign buyer’s debt obligations incurred to purchase U.S.  exports. As described by program officials, under Working Capital  Guarantees, the Export-Import Bank provides repayment guarantees to  lenders on secured, short-term working capital loans made to qualified  exporters.  Export credit insurance: The Bank explained that export credit  insurance supports U.S. exporters selling goods overseas by protecting  the businesses against the risk of foreign buyer or other foreign debtor  default for political or commercial reasons. This risk protection permits  exporters to extend credit to their international customers where  otherwise not possible, according to program officials.
Manufacturing Trends Addressed by the Program  The Export-Import Bank does not directly address manufacturing trends.
section_title: Advanced Technological Education Program
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1993  Program category: Training, Enhancing job seekers’ skills  Program description: With an emphasis on 2-year colleges, the Advanced  Technological Education program focuses on the education of technicians  for the high-technology fields that drive our nation’s economy. The  program involves partnerships between academic institutions and  industry to promote improvement in the education of science and  engineering technicians at the undergraduate and secondary school  levels. The program supports curriculum-development, professional  development of college faculty and secondary school teachers, career  pathways to 2-year colleges from secondary schools and from 2-year  colleges to 4-year institutions, and other activities. Another goal is  articulation between 2-year and 4-year programs for K-12 prospective  science, technology, engineering, and mathematics teachers that focus  on technological education. The program invites research proposals that  advance the knowledge base related to technician education.
section_title: Biotechnology and Biochemical Engineering
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: mid 1980s  Program category: Innovation, Basic research and development  Program description: The Biotechnology and Biochemical Engineering  program supports fundamental engineering research that advances the  understanding of cellular and biomolecular processes. This research  eventually leads to the development of enabling technology for advanced  manufacturing and/or applications in support of the biopharmaceutical,  biotechnology, and bioenergy industries, or with applications in health or  for the environment. A quantitative treatment of biological and  engineering problems of biological processes is considered vital to  successful research projects in the program. The program encourages  highly innovative and potentially transformative engineering research,  which may lead to novel bioprocessing and manufacturing approaches  and proposals that address emerging research areas and technologies  that effectively integrate knowledge and practices from different  disciplines while incorporating ongoing research into educational  activities.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Providing grants: The grants enable fundamental research toward  developing new manufacturing technologies based on engineering  biology.
section_title: Design of Engineering Materials Systems
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2012  Program category: Innovation, Basic research and development  Program description: The Design of Engineering Material Systems  program supports fundamental research intended to lead to new  paradigms of design, development, and insertion of advanced  engineering material systems. For the purposes of this program,  fundamental research includes research that develops and creatively  integrates theory, processing/manufacturing, data/informatics,  experimental, and/or computational approaches with rigorous engineering  design principles, approaches, and tools to inform the accelerated design  and development of materials. The program seeks research proposals  that strive to develop systematic scientific methodologies to tailor the  behavior of material systems in ways that are driven by performance  metrics and incorporate processing/manufacturing. Ultimately it is  expected that research outcomes will be methodologies to enable the  discovery of materials systems with new properties and behavior and to  also enable their rapid insertion into engineering systems.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Providing grants: The grants support fundamental research in  engineering and science. Awards may include research that leads to  advanced engineering materials systems for manufacturing.
section_title: Engineering and Systems Design
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1982  Program category: Innovation, Basic research and development  Program description: The Engineering and Systems Design program  supports fundamental research ultimately leading to new engineering and  systems design methods and practices for specific global contexts. In  particular, the program seeks intellectual advances in which the  theoretical foundations underlying design and systems engineering are  operationalized into rigorous and pragmatic methods for a specific  context. In addition, the program funds the rigorous theoretical and  empirical characterization of new or existing methods for design and  systems engineering, identifying which global contexts and under which  assumptions these methods are effective and efficient. Research in  engineering and systems design should advance the state of knowledge  of design methodology by adapting existing methods to a new context or  by carefully characterizing existing or new design methods in a new  context.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Providing grants: The grants support fundamental research in  engineering and science. Awards may include research that ultimately  leads to new engineering and systems design methods and practices for  manufacturing.
section_title: Industry/University Cooperative Research Centers Program
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1973  Program category: Innovation, Applied research and development  Program description: The Industry/University Cooperative Research  Centers program develops long-term partnerships among industry,  academe, and government. The centers are catalyzed by a small  investment from the National Science Foundation (NSF) and are primarily  supported by industry center members, with NSF taking a supporting role  in the development and evolution of the center. Each center is  established to conduct research that is of interest to both the industry  members and the center faculty. The program contributes to the nation’s  research infrastructure base and enhances the intellectual capacity of the  engineering and science workforce through the integration of research  and education.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Providing grants: The program enables partnership between academia  and industries to carry out pre-competitive research benefiting multiple  industrial sectors, including manufacturing.
Training: The program helps train students and other researchers in  industrially relevant research and prepares them as the workforce for U.S.  industries, including manufacturing.
section_title: Manufacturing Machines and Equipment
paragraphs: Program description: The Manufacturing Machines and Equipment  program supports fundamental research that informs the development of  new and/or improved manufacturing machines and equipment—and  optimization of their use—with a particular focus on equipment  appropriate for the manufacture of mechanical and electromechanical  devices, products, and systems featuring scales from microns to meters.  The program promotes proposals that relate to the manufacturing of  equipment and facilities that enable the production of energy products.  Other areas of research interest include a wide range of manufacturing  operations, including both subtractive and additive processes, forming,  bonding/joining, and laser processing.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Providing grants: The grants support fundamental research in  engineering and science. Awards may include research that leads to new  manufacturing machines and equipment.
section_title: Materials Engineering and Processing
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2013  Program category: Innovation, Basic research and development  Program description: The Materials Engineering and Processing program  supports fundamental research addressing the processing and  mechanical performance of engineering materials by investigating the  interrelationship of materials processing, structure, properties and/or life- cycle performance for targeted applications. As part of its mission, the  program focuses on manufacturing processes that convert material into  useful forms as either intermediate or final composition. These include  processes such as extrusion, molding, casting, deposition, sintering and  printing.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Providing grants: The grants support fundamental research in  engineering and science. Awards may include research that ultimately  leads to advanced engineering materials processing and performance for  manufacturing.
section_title: Nanomanufacturing
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2001  Program category: Innovation, Basic research and development  Program description: The Nanomanufacturing program seeks to explore  transformative approaches to nanomanufacturing. Nanomanufacturing is  the production of useful nano-scale materials, structures, devices, and  systems in an economically viable manner. The approaches supported by  this program include, but are not limited to: micro-reactor and micro- fluidics enabled nanosynthesis, bio-inspired nanomanufacturing,  manufacturing by nanomachines, additive nanomanufacturing,  hierarchical nanostructure assembly, continuous high-rate  nanofabrication, and modular manufacturing platforms for nanosystems.  The program encourages the fabrication of nanomaterials by design,  three-dimensional nanostructures, multi-layer nanodevices, and multi- material and multi-functional nanosystems. Also of interest is the  manufacture of dynamic nanosystems, such as nanomotors, nanorobots,  and nanomachines, and enabling advances in transport and diffusion  mechanisms at the nano-scale.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Providing grants: The grants support fundamental research in  engineering and science. Awards may include research that leads to the  manufacture of useful nano-scale materials, structures, devices, and  systems.
section_title: National Robotics Initiative
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2011  Program category: Innovation, Basic research and development  Program description: The goal of the National Robotics Initiative is to  accelerate the development and use of robots in the United States that  work beside or cooperatively with people. Innovative robotics research  and applications emphasizing the realization of such co-robots working in  symbiotic relationships with human partners is supported by multiple  agencies of the federal government including NSF. The purpose of this  program is the development of this next generation of robotics, to  advance the capability and usability of such systems and artifacts, and to  encourage existing and new communities to focus on innovative  application areas. It will address the entire life cycle from fundamental  research and development to manufacturing and deployment.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Providing grants: The program supports basic research in co-robots  (robots that work with, or help, people). Much of the research is  applicable to manufacturing; some of it is specifically aimed at improving  the ability of robots to aid in manufacturing processes.
section_title: Service, Manufacturing, and Operations Research
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 2014  Program category: Innovation, Basic research and development  Program description: The Service, Manufacturing, and Operations  Research program supports fundamental research leading to the creation  of innovative mathematical models, analysis, and algorithms for decision- making related to design, planning, and operation of service,  manufacturing, and other complex systems. Specifically, the program  supports two main types of research: (1) innovations in general-purpose  methodology related to optimization, stochastic modeling, and decision  and game theory; and (2) research grounded in relevant applications that  require the development of novel and customized analytical and  computational methodologies. Application areas of interest include supply  chains and logistics; risk management; healthcare; environment; energy  production and distribution; mechanism design and incentives; production  planning, maintenance, process monitoring, and quality control; and  national security. Of particular interest are methods that incorporate  increasingly rich and diverse sources of data to support decision-making.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Providing grants: The grants support fundamental research in  engineering and science. Awards may include research that leads to  advances in modeling and optimization for manufacturing.
Small Business Administration, Office of Capital Access  Program Funding: Not reported.
Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1953  Program category: General financing  Program description: The 7(a) loan program is the largest of the Small  Business Administration’s (SBA) business loan programs. The mission is  to assist small businesses in obtaining financing when they do not qualify  for conventional credit by providing the credit enhancement of a federal  guaranty. Loan guarantees can help underserved businesses that  traditionally have trouble accessing capital through conventional credit  markets. SBA loan guarantees are flexible enabling small businesses to  obtain financing of up to $5 million for various business uses, with loan  maturities up to 25 years depending on the type of assets being financed.  SBA guarantees a portion of 7(a) loans made and administered by private  sector commercial lending institutions. Loans can be guaranteed for most  legitimate general business purposes to businesses classified as small.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Loans: The 7(a) program provides loan guarantees to small  manufacturers. Loans can be made to start-up or existing manufacturers  for many legitimate costs related to the opening, operations, and  expansion of independent small manufacturing companies.
section_title: Certified Development Company (CDC)/504 loan program
paragraphs: Small Business Administration, Office of Capital Access  Program Funding: Not reported.
Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1958  Program category: General financing  Program description: The 504 loan program is SBA’s premier economic  development program, providing “brick and mortar” and/or major  equipment financing. The program has particular features, such as a  statutorily-mandated job creation component, a community development  goal, or a public policy goal achievement component, that help the  agency facilitate job creation and enable the establishment and viability of  small businesses.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Loans: Fixed-rate, long-term financing for land, building, and equipment.
Manufacturing Trends Addressed by the Program  The Certified Development Company (CDC)/504 Loan Program provides  financing for major fixed assets, such as equipment or real estate for the  purpose of job creation/retention without regard to manufacturing trends  in any one industry group. Loan proceeds used for the acquisition of  equipment could result in addressing manufacturing trends. However,  SBA does not track the types of equipment purchased.
section_title: Small Business Innovation Research
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1982  Program category: Innovation, Applied research and development  Program description: SBA establishes the policy guidance for the Small  Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program. The federal agencies that  participate in the program must obligate a minimum percentage of  extramural research and development funds for awards to small  businesses. Funding from the participating agencies helps drive small  research and development companies to innovate, strengthen U.S.  competitiveness, and create jobs. The program helps small businesses  develop innovations to meet the research and development needs of the  federal government and then commercialize those innovations in the  marketplace.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Providing grants and contracts: Eleven federal agencies participate in  the program by funding research and development in the manufacturing  space.  Implement Executive Order 13329: According to agency officials,  Executive Order 13329 requires SBIR/Small Business Technology  Transfer (STTR) agencies to give high priority to manufacturing-related  research and development and it further states that the federal  government has an important role in advancing innovation, including  innovation in the manufacturing sector, through small businesses.  According to agency officials, the program Policy Directive states that  participating agencies must, to the extent permitted by law, and in a  manner consistent with the mission of that agency and the purpose of the  SBIR program, give priority in the SBIR program to manufacturing-related  research and development in accordance with Executive Order 13329.  SBA collects information, as part of the annual reports submitted by  participating agencies, regarding agency efforts to advance  manufacturing through the programs.
section_title: Small Business Technology Transfer
paragraphs: Program Information Reported in Survey  Year program created: 1992  Program category: Innovation, Applied research and development  Program description: SBA establishes the policy guidance for the STTR  program. The federal agencies that participate in the program must  obligate a minimum percentage of extramural research and development  funds for awards to small businesses. The purpose of the program is to  stimulate a partnership of ideas and technologies between innovative  small business concerns and research institutions through federally  funded research and development. By providing awards to small business  concerns for cooperative research and development efforts with research  institutions, the program assists the small business and research  communities by commercializing innovative technology. Central to the  program is expansion of the public/private sector partnership to include  joint venture opportunities for small businesses and nonprofit research  institutions. The unique feature of the program, according to agency  officials, is the requirement for the small business to formally collaborate  with a research institution in early phases of the research and  development cycle.
Program activities that support manufacturing:  Providing grants and contracts: Five federal agencies participate in the  program by funding research and development in the manufacturing area,  as well as other areas.  Implement Executive Order 13329: According to agency officials,  Executive Order 13329 requires SBIR/STTR agencies to give high priority  to manufacturing-related research and development and it further states  that the federal government has an important role in advancing  innovation, including innovation in the manufacturing sector, through  small businesses. The program gives priority in the STTR program to  manufacturing-related research and development. SBA collects  information, as part of the annual reports submitted by participating  agencies, regarding agency efforts to advance manufacturing through the  programs.
section_title: Appendix III: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contacts
section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to the contacts named above, Kimberly Gianopoulos  (Director), Blake Ainsworth (Assistant Director), Kim Frankena (Assistant  Director), Laura Heald (Assistant Director), Christopher Murray (Assistant  Director), Pierre Toureille (Assistant Director), Paul Schearf (Analyst-in- Charge), Jeffrey Arkin, Jeffrey Barron, Anthony Costulas, David Dornisch,  Holly Dye, Alexander Galuten, Tobias Gillett, Rich Hung, Stephen  Komadina, Zina Merritt, Mimi Nguyen, Nhi Nguyen, Oliver Richard,  Timothy Persons, Rachel Pittenger, William Shear, Almeta Spencer, Amy  Suntoke, Daren Sweeney, Brian Tremblay, and Marilyn Wasleski made  key contributions to this report.