Research and Evaluation, National Technical AssistanceRequest for Proposals

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