[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 91 (Monday, May 12, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26192-26198]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-12492]



[[Page 26191]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part VIII





Department of Commerce





_______________________________________________________________________



Economic Development Administration



_______________________________________________________________________



Research and Evaluation, National Technical Assistance--Request of 
Proposals; Notice

  Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Notices  

[[Page 26192]]



DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Economic Development Administration
[Docket No. 970508107-7107-01]
RIN 0610-ZA04


Research and Evaluation, National Technical Assistance--Request 
for Proposals

AGENCY: Economic Development Administration (EDA), Department of 
Commerce (DoC).

ACTION: Notice of availability of funds.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: A total of $328,500,000 is available to EDA for all of its 
programs for FY 1997 (See Notice of Funding availability for FY 1997 at 
61 FR 67434), of which approximately $1,780,000 is or will be available 
for National Technical Assistance and for Research and Evaluation for 
specific projects which will aid in better understanding the causes of 
and solutions to economic distress/underemployment and unemployment 
throughout the Nation in the specific priority areas described herein. 
Additional funding may or may not be available. EDA issues this Notice 
describing the conditions under which eligible applications for these 
National Technical Assistance under 13 CFR Part 307, Subpart C, and 
Research and Evaluation under 13 CFR Part 307, Subpart D, projects will 
be accepted and selected for funding. EDA is soliciting proposals for 
the specific projects described herein which will be funded if 
acceptable proposals are received. Remaining funding, if any, may be 
used to fund additional projects.

DATES: Prospective applicants are advised that EDA will conduct a pre-
proposal conference on May 23, 1997, at 10:00 a.m. in the Department of 
Commerce, Herbert C. Hoover Building, 14th and Constitution Avenue, 
NW., Washington, DC 20230, Room 1414, at which time questions on the 
National Technical Assistance and Research and Evaluation projects can 
be answered. Prospective applicants are encouraged to provide written 
questions (See Addresses section below) by May 20, 1997. Prospective 
applicants unable to attend the pre-proposal conference may participate 
by teleconference. Teleconference information may be obtained by 
calling (202) 482-4085 between 8:30-5:00 EST on May 22, 1997.
    Initial proposals for funding under this program will be accepted 
through June 9, 1997. Initial proposals received after 5:00 p.m. EST in 
Room 7001A, on June 9, 1997, will not be considered for funding.
    By June 20, 1997, EDA will advise successful proponents to submit 
full applications (containing complete proposals as part of the 
application), OMB Control Number 0610-0094. Completed applications must 
be submitted to EDA by July 21, 1997. EDA will make these awards no 
later than September 30, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Send initial proposals to John J. McNamee, Acting Director, 
Research and National Technical Assistance Division, Economic 
Development Administration, Room 7001A, U.S. Department of Commerce, 
Washington, DC 20230.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John J. McNamee, (202) 482-4085.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

A. Authority

    The Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 (PWEDA), 
(Pub. L. 89-136, 42 U.S.C. 3121 et seq.), as amended at Sec. 3151 
authorizes EDA to provide technical assistance which would be useful in 
reducing or preventing excessive unemployment or underemployment, and 
enhancing the potential for economic growth in distressed areas (42 
U.S.C. 3151(a)); and a program of research to assist in the formulation 
and implementation of national, state, and local programs to raise 
income levels and other solutions to the problems of unemployment, 
underemployment, underdevelopment and chronic depression in distressed 
areas and regions (42 U.S.C. 3151(c)(B)). The Omnibus Consolidated 
Appropriations Act of 1997, Public Law 104-208, makes funds available 
for these programs.

B. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

    11.303  Economic Development--Technical Assistance Program; 11.312 
Economic Development--Research and Evaluation Program.

C. Program Descriptions

    For descriptions of these programs see PWEDA and EDA's regulations 
at 13 CFR Chapter III.

D. Briefings and Workshops

    Unless otherwise noted, each of the proposals requested below 
includes a requirement that the applicant conduct a total of up to 
seven briefings and/or training workshops for individuals and 
organizations interested in the results of the project. These will take 
place when the project is completed and the results known. Potential 
applicants should be aware that the completion dates set forth below 
are for completion of the project and submission of the final written 
report. Briefings/workshops will take place no later than one year 
after completion of the project and submission of the final report, at 
seven locations and on seven dates at EDA's discretion.

E. Additional Information and Requirements

    Applicants should be aware that if they incur any costs prior to an 
award being made, they do so solely at their own risk of not being 
reimbursed by the Government. Notwithstanding any verbal or written 
assurance that may have been received, there is no obligation on the 
part of EDA to cover pre-award costs.
    The total dollar amount of the indirect costs proposed in an 
application under this program must not exceed either the indirect cost 
rate negotiated and approved by a cognizant Federal agency prior to the 
proposed effective date of the award, or 100 percent of the total 
proposed direct costs dollar amount in the application, whichever is 
less.
    If an application is selected for funding, EDA has no obligation to 
provide any additional future funding in connection with an award. 
Renewal of an award to increase funding or extend the period of 
performance is at the sole discretion of EDA.
    Unless otherwise noted below, eligibility, program objectives and 
descriptions, application procedures, selection procedures, evaluation 
criteria, and other requirements for this program are set forth in 
PWEDA and EDA's regulations at 13 CFR Chapter III., and EDA's Notice of 
Availability for FY 1997 at 61 FR 67434.
    No award of Federal funds will be made to an applicant who has an 
outstanding delinquent Federal debt until either: (1) The delinquent 
account is paid in full; (2) a negotiated repayment schedule is 
established and at least one payment is received; or (3) other 
arrangements satisfactory to the Department of Commerce are made.
    Unsatisfactory performance under prior Federal awards may result in 
an application not being considered for funding.
    Applicants should be aware that a false statement on the 
application is grounds for denial of the application or termination of 
the grant award and grounds for possible punishment by a fine or 
imprisonment as provided in 18 U.S.C. 1001.
    Applicants are hereby notified that any equipment or products 
authorized

[[Page 26193]]

to be purchased with funding provided under this program must be 
American-made to the maximum extent feasible.
    Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person is required 
to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure 
to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements 
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) unless that collection of 
information displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) control number. This notice involves a collection of information 
requirement subject to the provisions of the PRA and has been approved 
by OMB under Control Number 0610-0094.

II. How to Apply

A. Eligible Applicants

     National Technical Assistance--See 13 CFR 307.12. Eligible 
applicants are as follows: Public or private nonprofit organizations 
including nonprofit national, state, area, district, or local 
organizations; accredited educational institutions or nonprofit 
entities representing them; public sector organizations; Native 
American organizations, including American Indian tribes; local 
governments and state agencies. Technical Assistance grant funds may 
not be awarded to private individuals or for-profit organizations.
     Research and Evaluation--See 13 CFR 307.17. Eligible 
applicants are as follows: private individuals, partnerships, 
corporations, associations, colleges and universities, and other 
suitable organizations with expertise relevant to economic development 
research.

B. Proposal Submission Procedures

    The initial proposals submitted by potential applicants may not 
exceed ten pages in length and should be accompanied by a proposed 
budget, resumes/qualifications of key staff, and proposed time line. 
EDA will not accept proposals submitted by fax. Proposals must be 
received in Room 7001A at the address and by the submission deadline 
indicated above, in order to be considered.

III. Areas of Special Emphasis

A. National Technical Assistance Program

 Leveraging Capital for Defense Adjustment Infrastructure 
Assistance
    EDA invites proposals to examine the potential for using EDA's 
defense adjustment appropriations in combination with new or innovative 
techniques to leverage significant additional capital for defense 
adjustment assistance, including construction related to military base 
reuse.
Background: The capital required for most defense adjustment 
infrastructure (re)development exceeds the ability of many communities 
to raise. Public funding available for defense adjustment assistance is 
modest compared with the current need for infrastructure assistance. 
This project would develop, evaluate, and recommend, if appropriate, 
alternative ways for using EDA's defense appropriations to leverage 
other financing for defense adjustment infrastructure projects. This 
project is not to review, discuss or report on the wide array of 
development financing techniques presently available for funding public 
infrastructure. The area of interest for this project is intended to be 
highly focused on the potential use of relatively small amounts of EDA 
grant funds in innovative ways to raise or leverage larger amounts of 
other funds which, in turn, could be used to pay for infrastructure 
costs associated with the redevelopment of military bases and other 
economic development activities. In other words, this project will 
investigate the possibility of using EDA grants funds to raise or 
leverage money for public infrastructure, as opposed to the present 
practice of investing EDA grant funds, separately or in conjunction 
with other public or private funding partners, directly into 
infrastructure or other economic development activities. Such 
leveraging might involve using EDA defense appropriations to partially 
secure large bond issues, or to provide for the first several years of 
payment on large bond issues until new/future tenants, etc., can pick 
up the costs. It would also evaluate what role other Federal financing 
mechanisms might play. The feasibility of such alternatives are not 
known, but they could possibly serve to greatly extend the impact of 
limited Federal/EDA defense infrastructure funds. Alternatives 
considered need not be limited to those possible under EDA's current 
legislation and regulations, but may also include those that require 
changes to EDA's or other Federal legislation or regulations.
    Scope of Work: The successful applicant will: (1) Bring together a 
panel of public and private sector financial experts to explore the 
full range of realistic, innovative financing alternatives for using 
EDA defense adjustment funds to leverage private or other public 
financing, including the relative advantages and disadvantages of each; 
(2) determine what legislative or regulatory changes will be required 
for implementation, if any; (3) prepare a comprehensive report; and (4) 
conduct briefings and/or training workshops as set forth in Section 
I.D. above.
    Cost: If properly justified, the Assistant Secretary may consider a 
waiver of the required 25 percent local share of the total project 
costs. Part of the funding for this project will be provided by the 
Office of Economic Adjustment of the Department of Defense.
    Timing: This project should be completed and the final report 
submitted by March 31, 1998.
 Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) Program Impact Evaluation
    EDA invites proposals to develop evaluation criteria for and to 
evaluate the impact of the TAA Program on small and medium-sized 
manufacturing firms injured by increased imports.
    Background: The TAA Program is rooted in the presumption that 
increased international trade is good for the nation as a whole, but 
there are firms, communities and industries that will suffer a 
disproportionate share of the impact of changing trade patterns. Each 
new round of trade agreements has led to the lowering of trade barriers 
and increased foreign competition for U.S. manufacturers. The EDA-
administered TAA Program was developed to help U.S. manufacturing firms 
and industries injured by import competition regain the ability to 
compete in the global marketplace. The TAA Program assistance is 
provided to manufacturers through a network of twelve Trade Adjustment 
Assistance Centers (TAACs) located at universities and other nonprofit 
organizations throughout the Nation.
    In order to qualify for assistance under the TAA Program, a 
manufacturer must show a decline in sales or production and a decline 
in employment, and that imports contributed importantly to such 
declines. Once a firm is certified, TAAC staff work with the firm to 
develop and implement recovery strategies based on the firm's own 
priorities and decisions.
    EDA now seeks an evaluation of the impact of the TAA Program. EDA 
is interested in determining the measurable and ``value added'' aspects 
of the TAA Program process and in measuring overall program 
performance. In undertaking this analysis of the implementation of the 
recovery process, the applicant will need to examine selected grants. 
The target universe of assisted firms is approximately 550 firms that 
have completed at least one

[[Page 26194]]

task of their approved adjustment proposal between FY 1990 and 1995 and 
are not doing any additional tasks with TAAC assistance. The applicant 
should select a representative sample of those firms. The resulting 
data must be appropriately analyzed and the results, with 
recommendations as appropriate, presented in a final report to be 
available for use by interested Federal and state agencies and other 
interested parties. All available project records are located in, or 
are accessible through, the twelve TAAC offices. Access to client 
records may require prior client approval.
    EDA will not accept proposals for this project from TAACs, TAAC 
sponsoring organizations, or trade organizations that have received 
assistance under the TAA Program.
    Scope of Work: The successful applicant will: (1) Evaluate the 
effectiveness of the TAA Program assistance, including as assessment of 
the appropriateness of the TAA Program assistance and the impact of the 
assistance on the firms' economic recovery; (2) examine the current TAA 
Program performance measures and recommend revisions as necessary; [The 
current performance measures are Project Outcomes at 2 Years and 4 
Years After Completion: (a) The percentage of TAA Program client firms 
which have completed the adjustment process and have successfully 
restructured, and (b) Sales and employment after completing assistance 
compared to sales and employment two years before entering the program 
and at the time they entered the program.] (3) measure and assess the 
value and impact of the diagnostic and adjustment proposal process; (4) 
make recommendations for maintaining the status quo and/or improving 
both the assistance process and the TAA Program; (5) identify the 
features of the TAA Program that make the program effective in meeting 
the needs of its clients, the best practices in the TAACs and the best 
practices in other business assistance programs that could be 
incorporated into the TAA Program; and (6) conduct briefings and/or 
training workshops as set forth in Section I.D above.
    Cost: If properly justified, the Assistant Secretary may consider a 
waiver of the required 25 percent local share of the total project 
costs.
    Timing: An interim report on sections (1) (3) and (5) of the scope 
of work should be provided by February 28, 1998. The project should be 
completed and the final report submitted by June 30, 1998.
 Update Overall Economic Development Program
    EDA seeks proposals for a cooperative agreement through which the 
successful applicant will review, evaluate, and make recommendations on 
the Overall Economic Development Program (OEDP) comprehensive planning 
process. The goal of this effort is to increase the benefits of the 
OEDP process and optimize the economic development capacity created at 
the local level with the assistance provided by the EDA planning 
programs. A lead applicant may partner with one or more other 
organizations.
    Background: The OEDP is a process that requires a community or 
region to conduct an inclusive and comprehensive review of the factors 
and resources affecting the economic development of its area. The OEDP 
process:
     is intended to maximize the benefit of investments by 
responding to a locally-initiated economic development plan;
     should incorporate, when feasible, a number of recent or 
emerging approaches to comprehensive economic development, such as 
sustainable development, cluster development, and regionalism;
     should take into account planning processes that other 
Federal programs (EZ/EC, RDC, ISTEA, EPA, etc.) are initiating, to 
reduce the total administrative burden on planning entities and local 
communities.
    Scope of Work: A cooperative agreement will be awarded to implement 
the scope of work. The work includes identifying and using diversified 
expertise from the many sectors dealing in economic development, 
conducting a series of working meetings, or contracts under the co-
operative agreement, if necessary, for specific studies, preparing 
recommendations and a final report, and conducting briefings. Actions 
included are:
    (1) Developing an agenda and selecting a panel of participants. The 
number of participants should not exceed 30, and should include:

--Economic development practitioners (representatives of Economic 
Development Districts, counties, Indian tribes, cities, states, 
university centers, and urban and rural areas);
--EDA staff (Planners, Regional Directors, Economic Development 
Representatives, Program Directors);
--Academicians (planning schools, experts in the field);
--National organizations such as for example, (NADO, NARC, CUED, NASDA, 
APA, Nature Conservancy, Wilderness Society, etc.);
--Other Federal agencies (USDA, HUD, EPA, DOT, DOD, etc.);

    (2) Convening an initial meeting of all participants to determine 
what should be looked at, what issues or topics should be explored, 
what path to follow;
    (3) Conducting specific studies or, if necessary, issuing contracts 
under the co-operative agreement for specific studies identified in the 
initial meeting, such as: research and analysis of issues; best 
practices, models, and success stories; definition of regions and 
planning areas; and identification of recommendations.
    (4) Convening a final meeting to review and discuss the studies and 
recommendations, selecting best practices, and formalizing 
recommendations to be incorporated in the final report;
    (5) Conducting briefings and/or training workshops as set forth in 
Section I.D. above.
    The expected outcomes of this effort are:
     Incorporate the latest and most effective approaches to 
comprehensive economic development planning into a revitalized OEDP 
process;
     Maximize the economic benefit of Federal, other public, 
and private investments based on a comprehensive local economic 
development process;
     Standardize the use of a single comprehensive plan to 
guide the growth and development of the community, as well as to serve 
to qualify the area to receive assistance from EDA and other Federal 
and state programs.
    Cost: If properly justified, the Assistant Secretary may consider a 
waiver of the required 25 percent matching share of the total project 
cost. The recipient organization (or group of organizations) will 
receive an award to cover the following activities:
     Coordinating the overall process;
     Conducting two general meetings, including the costs of 
meeting facilities, and the travel expense, lodging, and professional 
fees of the participants;
     If necessary, contracts under the co-operative agreement 
for specific studies, not to exceed an aggregate for all such contracts 
of $100,000;
     Preparing a final report, including recommendation;
     Conducting briefings and/or training workshops as set 
forth in Section I.D. above.
    Timing: The project should be completed and the final report 
submitted by September 30, 1998.

[[Page 26195]]

 Demand for Economic Development Infrastructure
    EDA requests proposals for conducting a study of the nature and 
approximate cost of the infrastructure that is needed for the economic 
development of (1) areas with high unemployment or low average income 
and of (2) areas impacted by defense downsizing.
    Background: The study's purpose is to determine the demand for 
public works assistance in such areas. One of the principal ways that 
economic development assistance fosters the creation of private sector 
jobs in areas of economic distress is through financing critical public 
infrastructure. In recent years a number of efforts have been 
undertaken to assess the infrastructure needs of the United States. For 
example, in the late 1970s, EDA funded a study, at the direction of 
Congress, of historical public works investments in the United States 
and the implications for the then-current trends in such investments. 
In 1988, the National Council on Public Works Improvement issued a 
report on the nation's infrastructure, entitled Fragile Foundations. In 
1990, the House Committee on Public Works and Transportation tasked the 
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to compile abstracts of significant 
infrastructure studies, which resulted in Infrastructure Reports: 
Summaries (1992). Studies such as these deal with nationwide needs. 
EDA's current interest in learning the extent of infrastructure needs 
is more limited: EDA is interested in determining the critical 
infrastructure needs of areas suffering long-term economic distress or 
that are reasonably anticipated to experience defense downsizing, and 
therefore need such infrastructure in order to grow their local 
economies so private sector jobs can be created/retained and the 
economic vitality of the area restored and sustained. EDA is cognizant 
of the fact that well-defined infrastructure investment needs grow out 
of a local planning process where the community or region identifies, 
among other needs, the type of infrastructure that is needed for the 
economic development or economic adjustment of the area.
    This request has two aspects:
     Under its Public Works program, EDA grants help distressed 
communities attract new industry, encourage private investment and 
business expansion, diversify local economies, and generate long-term, 
private sector jobs. It does so by funding critically-needed 
infrastructure such as water and sewer facilities for industry and 
commerce, access roads to industrial sites, business incubators, skill 
training facilities, and modern technological improvements. EDA's 
public works assistance is focused on areas experiencing significant 
economic distress, defined principally as unemployment substantially 
higher than the national average or per capita income substantially 
lower than the national average. Under this request, EDA is interested 
in assessing the infrastructure needs of these economically-distressed 
areas.
     Under its Defense Adjustment program, EDA helps areas to 
meet the serious structural economic changes caused by or threatened by 
the closure of military bases or the impacts of reduced defense 
expenditures by (1) Working with DoD's Office of Economic Adjustment to 
design adjustment strategies, and (2) helping to implement those 
strategies through a variety of types of projects, including 
infrastructure projects. While the process of fully implementing a 
base-reuse implementation strategy may take as long as twenty years and 
require significant private development financing, the early projects 
and access to public financing, such as through EDA's programs are 
widely viewed as very critical to successful long-term reuse. Under 
this request, EDA is interested in (a) assessing the actual and 
anticipated infrastructure needs growing out of defense downsizing at 
BRAC 88, 91, 93 and 95 base closure sites, (b) assessing the average 
timeframe from the date of BRAC announcement that is envisioned for 
full implementation of infrastructure-type projects related to base 
reuse strategies, and (c) determining an average timeline and level of 
investment related to the most critical early phase infrastructure for 
which base-reuse communities look to public funding sources, such as 
EDA for assistance. This request seeks to determine initially whether 
there is a relatively simple, and inexpensive, way to assess 
infrastructure needs in areas of actual economic distress or in areas 
affected by defense downsizing.
    Scope of Work: The scope of work will take place in two phases.
    A. In the first phase, EDA will select a grantee to determine 
whether there is a valid and cost-effective methodology to determine 
the demand for economic development infrastructure. The potential 
grantee would:
    (1) Propose a method to assess (a) actual and anticipated defense 
adjustment needs growing out of base closing and realignment and 
defense downsizing; and (b) the timing when actual infrastructure 
financing needs will occur;
    (2) Propose a method to assess public works needs of areas of 
economic distress;
    B. If an acceptable, cost-effective methodology is developed in the 
first phase, in the second phase EDA will select a grantee to:
    (1) Assess defense adjustment infrastructure needs and estimate the 
length of time from development of an adjustment strategy to actual 
financing of the resulting infrastructure;
    (2) Assess public works infrastructure needs in areas of economic 
distress.
    (3) Prepare a report; and
    (4) Conduct briefings and/or training workshops as set forth in 
Section I.D. above.
    Upon completion of the first phase, EDA may opt not to complete the 
second phase of the grant, or may extend the grant with the first phase 
grantee on a non-competitive basis to complete the second phase, or may 
make a competitive selection of a new grantee to complete the second 
phase. Completion of the second phase is dependent also on availability 
of funds in FY 1998.
    Cost: If properly justified, the Assistant Secretary may consider a 
waiver of the required 25 percent local share of the total project 
cost.
    Timing: The first phase of this project should be completed by 
February 27, 1998.
 Performance Measures for EDA's Planning and Local Technical 
Assistance Programs
    EDA invites proposals to develop performance measures for EDA's 
planning and local technical assistance programs.
    Background: EDA recently established a set of core performance 
measures for each of its grant program areas, and has begun to 
systematically test how effective the standards measure each program's 
performance, and what adjustments to the core measures may be 
necessary. EDA is interested in developing/validating measures for the 
performance of the 301(b) Economic Development District and Indian 
Planning Program, 302(a) State and Urban Planning Program and 301(a) 
Local Technical Assistance Program. Some types of measures are easy to 
define. These would include: input measures, such as the number of 
full-time employees administering the program, the total amount of 
grants awarded; output measures--the number of applications processed; 
and efficiency measures--the cost per client served. It is much more 
difficult to measure the success or outcomes of EDA's planning and 
local technical

[[Page 26196]]

assistance programs, whose outcomes often cannot be measured in easily 
quantifiable ways, such as measuring the number of jobs created or 
saved.
    The value of planning per se is difficult to measure. Planning 
activities include: the bringing together of community stakeholders 
with diverse interests to work in a collaborative manner; the gathering 
of comprehensive economic information; the identification of strengths, 
weaknesses, opportunities, and threats; the identification and 
agreement on goals, measurable objectives and strategies; ongoing 
feedback and evaluation; and communication of the collaborative process 
and the plan. Attempts to measure planning performance could focus on 
planning activities per se, or on the accomplishment of the measurable 
objectives that are developed as part of the planning process, or a 
combination of both.
    It is also difficult to measure the performance of local technical 
assistance projects. They are often single-client and/or single-issue 
focused, such as technical or market feasibility studies, and grantees 
have little or no control over the outcomes of the projects.
    Scope of Work: The successful applicant will: (1) Research the 
literature and consult with appropriate experts and practitioners; (2) 
examine a cross-section of EDA planning and local technical assistance 
projects; (3) develop proposed performance measures; (4) test the 
proposed performance measures on a sample of planning and local 
technical assistance grants; (5) prepare a report which identifies 
performance measures and provides the justification for their 
selection; and (6) conduct briefings and/or training workshops as set 
forth in Section I.D. above.
    Cost: If properly justified, the Assistant Secretary may consider a 
waiver of the required 25 percent local share of the total project 
cost.
    Timing: The project should be completed and the final report 
submitted by April 30, 1998.

B. Research and Evaluation Program

 State Incentives Evaluation
    EDA invites proposals to develop a tool to evaluate state 
incentives.
    Background: Incentives have been used in various forms since the 
founding of the nation to launch business enterprises, improve and 
settle states and territories, and open up the West. Following World 
War I, states used incentives to diversify their economies, provide 
work for their populations and improve the quality of life. 
``Smokestack chasing'' began with the South to recruit companies to 
locate where operating and labor costs would be lower, and encouraged 
the substantial industrial shift which took place after World War II as 
companies searched for ways of reducing business costs. During the 
1970s, foreign competition began to substantially affect American 
industry, and some communities lost much or all of their manufacturing 
base. Incentives packages assumed new importance as states, regions and 
localities competed with one another to develop strategies to attract 
and retain companies and assist them in expanding and creating jobs. 
Examples of controversial incentives packages are the location of a BMW 
plant in South Carolina and of a Mercedes Benz plant in Alabama. In 
these and similar cases, critics argue that immediate and long-term 
loss to the taxpayers and tax base are excessive and not justified by 
the job gains. What is now seen by some observers as a new ``war 
between the states,'' may have become too costly in the long-term: 
communities and states commit themselves to provide essential public 
services from a reduced tax base due to abatements to individual 
companies.
    Communities do not have an adequate tool(s) to use in evaluating 
the potential impact of proposed incentives packages. EDA is interested 
in developing such a tool (or tools) for evaluating incentives packages 
that would help communities determine whether the outcomes, over the 
long-term, are commensurate with the investment.
    Scope of Work: The successful applicant will: (1) Develop 
methodologies for analyzing incentive packages to determine, among 
other things, the costs/benefits, fiscal impact, and return on 
investment; (2) develop guidelines which state and local officials can 
use to craft, evaluate and negotiate recruitment policies; (3) develop 
recommendations on the appropriate role of the Federal Government with 
regard to incentives; and (4) conduct briefings and/or training 
workshops as set forth in Section I.D. above.
    Cost: No local match is required for this project.
    Timing: This project should be completed and the final report 
submitted by June 30, 1998.
 Outmigration/Population Loss as Indicator of Economic Distress
    EDA invites proposals to assess outmigration/population loss as an 
indicator of economic distress and recommend an appropriate measure.
    Background: EDA's primary and least controversial eligibility 
criteria are high unemployment and low income. In addition, areas may 
be eligible for assistance if they have had ``a substantial loss of 
population due to lack of employment opportunity.'' Elsewhere, EDA's 
authorizing legislation refers more specifically to ``outmigration,'' 
which is a component of population loss.
    Some rural areas of the United States, such as Appalachia, 
experience outmigration and population loss in addition to high 
unemployment and/or low income. However, other areas, primarily in the 
Plains and Rocky Mountains, experience outmigration and population loss 
in the absence of high unemployment and low income. It is hypothesized 
that such population loss, by itself, constitutes economic distress, 
because of the loss of tax base, reduced services, school closures, 
expensive care for the remaining elderly who do not migrate, and so on.
    Scope of Work: The successful applicant will:
    (1) Examine all significant forms of dislocation and distress that 
accompany population loss/outmigration and the adverse effects of the 
loss/outmigration on the community. The hypothesis of population loss/
outmigration as economic distress should be tested against the 
contrasting view that it is an alleviator of economic distress and its 
many symptoms. In this view, outmigration is the relief valve that 
allows the unemployed, underemployed, and those of low income to seek 
better circumstances elsewhere.
    (2) Compare and contrast population loss/outmigration with other 
measures of economic distress, including high unemployment and low 
income. Any significant distress-based distinctions between population 
loss and its outmigration component should be examined and described.
    (3) If population loss/outmigration is found to be an indicator of 
economic distress, evaluate and recommend specific measurements that 
can be used to quantify this indicator. For example, a high-
unemployment-rate threshold can be set at some level above the 
prevailing national or state rate; and a low-income threshold can be 
set at some percentage of per-capita income. What threshold can be used 
to define areas experiencing excessive population loss/outmigration?
    (4) Prepare a comprehensive final report containing the project 
background, methodology, findings, and recommendations.

[[Page 26197]]

    (5) Conduct briefings and/or training workshops as set forth in 
Section I.D. above.
    Cost: No local match is required for this project.
    Timing: The project should be completed and the final report 
submitted by March 31, 1998.
 Socioeconomic Data Needed for Economic Development 
Practitioners
    EDA invites proposals to assess the need for and quality of state, 
regional, and local socioeconomic data that are essential for effective 
economic development.
    Background: The many kinds of data used by the economic development 
community are collected by a variety of agencies. Just at the Federal 
level, these include decennial population and quinquennial economic 
censuses by the Bureau of the Census, macroeconomic figures on output 
and its components and other much more industrially and geographically 
detailed income and employment data by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, 
and labor force data by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. All three 
agencies are variously responsible for the income/poverty data and 
unemployment data that are crucial to economic development programs. 
Local and state agencies are also important data sources.
    Improvements in data are needed, but budget limitations require 
that they be prioritized so that the most broadly needed and useful are 
implemented first. The kinds of improvements most often discussed fall 
into four categories: (1) Additional topics: Among the many 
possibilities are improved breakdowns of poverty and unemployment data 
by minority status, gender status, industry, etc. (2) Greater 
frequency: Population Census data are collected only every ten years. 
Some advanced countries conduct their censuses more often. Since the 
usefulness of decennial data declines rapidly, and to address this 
concern, the Census Bureau has begun the start-up phase of the American 
Community Survey, which will start to provide data for sub-state areas 
in 2001 and, by late in the next decade, will provide annual social and 
economic profiles about the population for areas as small as city 
neighborhoods. (3) Finer geographical detail: Many data are available 
at the national level only. Other data are available no lower than the 
state or multistate regional levels. The Census Bureau has recently 
developed statistical models for the county level to produce income and 
poverty data (small area income and poverty estimates). This program is 
in its first stages and the first set of estimates is currently being 
evaluated. Even data available at the county level can be too coarse 
for purposes of inner-city/poverty-pocket program eligibility and 
analysis. (4) Greater accuracy: Accuracy can be improved in various 
ways, but it often involves larger samples, and attendant greater cost 
for the surveys in which the size is increased. Census Bureau plans for 
Census 2000 call for the use of sampling in place of some costly door-
to-door visits and as a quality check. This will both reduce census 
costs and improve the accuracy of the totals. With the increased use of 
sampling, Census 2000 will be more accurate than past decennial 
censuses, which missed many millions of U.S. residents. Still other 
categories of data improvement beyond these four--through statistical 
modeling, for example--are possible and can be addressed by the 
respondents to this request.
    Scope of Work: The successful applicant will:
    (1) Be both bold and realistic in the needs assessment and 
recommendation of data augmentation. For example, a more frequent 
Census of Population is unlikely and would be extremely expensive. Many 
of its objectives would be met by the American Community Survey and 
modifications of the monthly Current Population Survey. Finer 
geographical detail is both expensive and statistically problematical; 
most data for small sub-populations have wide error ranges, wherein the 
reported figures are merely the midpoints. Additional data topics 
require new questions in the underlying surveys and censuses, bringing 
up questions of citizen privacy and inconvenience, as well as added 
expense.
    (2) Where data are collected by different levels of government or 
by different entities, such as states, at the same level of government, 
examine the difficulties of data comparability and the need for data 
standards. For example, unemployment data collected by one state should 
not have biases towards higher or lower values that make such data 
incompatible with that collected by other states.
    (3) Assess how existing data are used, or not used, by the economic 
development community, in order to understand how demands for new data 
might be partly satisfied by greater practitioner awareness of the data 
already available.
    (4) Prepare a comprehensive final report containing the project 
background, methodology, findings, and recommendations.
    (5) Conduct briefings and/or training workshops as set forth in 
Section I.D. above.
    Cost: No local match is required for this project.
    Timing: The project should be completed and the final report 
submitted by June 30, 1998.
 Microenterprise as an Economic Adjustment Tool
    EDA invites proposals to evaluate the role of microenterprise as an 
economic adjustment tool.
    Background: Microenterprise programs provide entrepreneurial 
assistance and small loans, sometimes as small as $100, to low and 
moderate income people, especially women and minorities, who would not 
be eligible for loans from traditional lending institutions. The 
programs active in the United States basically fall into two categories 
(1) Entrepreneur training and technical assistance and (2) access to 
capital, with many programs offering both services. Many of the 
programs, especially those which deal exclusively with low-income 
groups, also provide personal effectiveness assistance, mentoring, and 
peer support groups to promote and sustain in their clients the 
discipline of focus, self-confidence, and commitment, among other 
factors. The supportive environment assists the borrowers in developing 
the skills needed to start and grow a business, as well as to manage 
capital financing activities. Some programs also assist in promoting 
alliances among microenterprises and in connecting them with 
traditionally inaccessible markets.
    For purposes of this evaluation, micro enterprises are defined as 
businesses with five (5) or fewer employees, and in programs offering 
access to capital, businesses receiving loans in the amount of 25 
thousand dollars or less.
    While microenterprise programs no doubt help to promote personal 
development and self-sufficiency among low income people who have had 
little opportunity to enter and participate in more traditional ways in 
the mainstream economy, the question remains as to what extent 
microenterprise programs meet the more conventional economic 
development objectives. For example, EDA presently makes grants to 
establish Revolving Loan Funds (RLFs) under the authority of its 
Economic Adjustment Program, which is directed at assisting communities 
struggling with structural economic change. Such changes can occur when 
significant sectors of a community's economic base are seriously 
damaged, such as by a natural disaster, or eliminated altogether, such

[[Page 26198]]

as by a military base closing. The community's objective is to 
stabilize, diversify and replace the economic activity that was lost. 
To what extent can microenterprise activity offset such losses and 
contribute to economic recovery? Can microenterprise programs assist in 
the alleviation of the problems of unemployment and underemployment in 
distressed areas and make a contribution to job creation, creation of 
wealth, and tax base enhancement? Should microenterprise development be 
viewed as an appropriate part of overall structural economic recovery, 
perhaps encouraging the development of adequate services within a 
community to keep pace with other efforts to rebuild economies? Should 
EDA assistance, other than RLFs, focus on microenterprise, e.g., 
microenterprise incubator or technical assistance projects? These 
questions will be considered in an assessment of the impact of 
microenterprise programs, and whether they can be an effective tool for 
addressing the economic adjustment needs of communities facing 
structural economic problems.
    Scope of Work: The successful applicant will: (1) Choose a broad 
sample of microenterprise programs to analyze, compare, and evaluate in 
terms of their impact on job creation and income enhancement for 
targeted groups in distressed areas; (2) assess the utility of 
microenterprise programs in different environments, e.g., urban, 
suburban, and rural; (3) determine whether, the extent to which, and 
under what conditions microenterprise is an effective economic 
adjustment tool; (4) present these matters in a final report, which 
will be available to interested parties; and (5) conduct briefings and/
or training workshops as set forth in Section I.D. above.
    Cost: No local match is required for this project.
    Timing: This project should be completed and the final report 
submitted by September 30, 1998.

IV. Selection Process and Evaluation Criteria

    Proposals will receive initial reviews by EDA to assure that they 
meet all requirements of this announcement, including eligibility and 
relevance to the specified project as described herein. The Office of 
Economic Adjustment of the Department of Defense will participate in 
evaluating proposals submitted for Leveraging Capital for Defense 
Adjustment Infrastructure Assistance and Demand for Public Works and 
Defense Adjustment Infrastructure projects described above. If a 
proposal is selected, EDA will provide the proponent with an 
Application form, and EDA will carry out its selection process and 
evaluation criteria as described in 13 CFR Chapter III, part 304 and 
Sections 307.13, 307.14, 307.18, and 307.19.
    From the full proposals and applications, EDA will select the 
applicants it deems most qualified and cost effective. EDA anticipates 
that more full proposals and applications will be invited than will 
eventually be funded.

    Dated: May 8, 1997.
Phillip A. Singerman,
Assistant Secretary for Economic Development.
[FR Doc. 97-12492 Filed 5-9-97; 1:29 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-24-P