Bill Overview
Title: Small Business Development Centers Improvement Act of 2022
Description: This bill reauthorizes the Small Business Development Center Program through FY2025 and otherwise revises the program. Specifically, the bill (1) generally prohibits entities other than institutions of higher education from receiving new grants under the program; (2) allows centers to collect fees related to private partnerships or cosponsorships; (3) authorizes centers to market their services directly to small businesses; and (4) modifies or establishes provisions related to program funding, operations, data collection, and reporting.
Sponsors: Rep. Golden, Jared F. [D-ME-2]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals involved with or owning small businesses
Estimated Size: 60000000
- The bill affects the Small Business Development Center Program which primarily serves small businesses.
- Small businesses in the U.S. are a significant demographic, with an estimated 31.7 million small businesses in 2020, according to the Small Business Administration (SBA).
- Institutions like universities and colleges involved in Small Business Development Centers (SBDCs) will be directly impacted since the bill specifies grant eligibility.
- The program directly supports business owners and entrepreneurs who seek guidance and resources to grow their businesses; thus, all small business owners in the U.S. could potentially be impacted.
- Since the bill is US legislation, its direct impact is primarily on US citizens running small businesses.
- The bill's reauthorizing aspect means continued support, but the limitation on grant eligibility means change for non-academic institutions.
Reasoning
- The policy mainly affects small business owners and the institutions of higher education that house Small Business Development Centers (SBDCs).
- SBDCs are critical for small businesses that rely on them for business support and advisory services.
- Not all small business owners use SBDCs; thus, direct impact varies widely based on awareness and accessibility.
- Those who do utilize SBDCs could see improvements due to new provisions allowing fees for partnerships and marketing, potentially enhancing service quality.
- The impact will also vary geographically; businesses near strong institutions of higher education might notice more benefits.
- Budget limitations mean not all small businesses will have immediate access or might only see benefits through improved institutional support, not direct financial aid.
Simulated Interviews
Small Business Owner (Austin, TX)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe more marketing by SBDCs can enhance our visibility to potential partners and clients.
- The ability to charge fees could improve the quality of service we receive if managed well.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Farmer (Rural Georgia)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I’ve heard of these centers, but they are too far from me and I don’t know much about what they offer.
- Unless they start advertising or visiting rural areas, I doubt this policy will affect me more than it does now.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Lecturer at a local university (New York, NY)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.5 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The improvements in policy might help us better serve and attract entrepreneurs.
- I’m optimistic that aligning closely with educational institutions can enhance our academic programs too.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Retired (Chicago, IL)
Age: 58 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could mean better resources and coordination at the center where I volunteer.
- As long as the partnerships they develop don’t solely focus on profit-making, it should be beneficial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Tech Entrepreneur (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our advisory center might expand its services, which is great for evolving tech needs.
- However, tech industry-specific resources are still sparse – I hope this policy won’t overlook that.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Owner of a chain of auto repair shops (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.5 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Marketing and fee collection could detract from the community focus that SBDCs should maintain.
- If the policy leads to increased funding, it will be critical during expansions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Freelance Graphic Designer (Portland, OR)
Age: 26 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- These centers could fill a knowledge gap for people like me, but they seem out of reach for a freelancer.
- Such policies need to address more personalized approaches for micro enterprises like mine.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Restaurant Owner (Miami, FL)
Age: 54 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Anything that boosts SBDCs is good, but direct financial aid would really help.
- Post-pandemic, we need more robust support to navigate new economic challenges.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
Software Developer (Boston, MA)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I value the additional workshops that might come if they partner with bigger private companies.
- Though, it needs to stay accessible – affordability could be an issue if they focus too much on fees.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Mentor for startups (Seattle, WA)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Providing more marketing and partnerships can attract dynamic talent to university-based programs.
- The changes are handy for faculties involved with student-lead entrepreneurial incubators.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $20000000 (Low: $18000000, High: $22000000)
Year 2: $21000000 (Low: $19000000, High: $23000000)
Year 3: $22000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $24000000)
Year 5: $24000000 (Low: $21000000, High: $25000000)
Year 10: $25000000 (Low: $22000000, High: $27000000)
Year 100: $27000000 (Low: $24000000, High: $29000000)
Key Considerations
- Continuation and expansion of the Small Business Development Center program may enhance support to small businesses, fostering economic growth.
- Impact on non-academic institutions is unclear, as the bill prohibits them from new grants.
- Effects on existing grant-funded projects and partnerships need evaluation to ensure financial sustainability.