Bill Overview
Title: Revitalizing Small and Local Businesses Act
Description: This bill establishes a competitive grant program, administered by the Economic Development Administration, for national nonprofit organizations to partner with local organizations to provide specialized technical assistance, capacity building, and related services that support small businesses and business district revitalization in low-income, rural, and minority communities.
Sponsors: Rep. Carter, Troy [D-LA-2]
Target Audience
Population: People in low-income, rural, and minority communities reliant on small businesses
Estimated Size: 3000000
- The bill focuses on providing support to small businesses through partnerships between national nonprofits and local organizations.
- The focus is on low-income, rural, and minority communities, which generally suffer from economic disadvantages.
- Small businesses are a significant part of local economies, often employing a large percentage of the local population.
Reasoning
- We need to represent a broad demographic from low-income, rural, and minority communities because these are the target groups for the policy.
- Some individuals in these communities will not be impacted by the policy, particularly those whose businesses do not qualify for or make use of the technical assistance offered.
- The policy funding is limited, so not everyone targeted will receive assistance. Successful applicants will likely see improved business operations and therefore, a potential increase in wellbeing.
- We'll evaluate both short-term and long-term effects, recognizing that initial hiccups or learning curves could affect initial wellbeing scores, while sustained benefits may enhance future scores.
- Eligibility and visibility play a role; how well these nonprofits connect with local communities could affect the reach and efficacy of the policy.
Simulated Interviews
small business owner (rural Kansas)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the policy could help level the playing field against big chains.
- Grants could help me upgrade my storefront and services.
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 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
local artisan (urban New York)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any financial help or training would be welcome to expand marketing online.
- The competition is tough, especially for small artisans.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
farmer (rural Alabama)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Grants could help us adopt new farming techniques and improve productivity.
- I hope the policy considers unique needs of agricultural businesses.
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 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 2 |
tech startup owner (urban California)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm cautious but optimistic about the technical support that could be offered.
- Startups need networking opportunities and mentoring more than anything.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
small restaurant owner (urban Chicago)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- COVID really hit us hard; any help is crucial to stay afloat.
- Training in financial management could help us better plan for the future.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 2 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 1 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 1 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 1 |
general store owner (rural Mississippi)
Age: 61 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope they come through for us; we've barely been scraping by.
- Modernizing the business could attract younger customers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
local performer (urban Miami)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Anything that helps increase venue bookings would be amazing.
- Artists are often under-supported by these kinds of programs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 2 |
craft beer brewery owner (rural Vermont)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Distribution partnerships can make or break us.
- I'm hopeful for any program that helps small producers like us reach more people.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 2 |
small business consultant (suburban Texas)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Partnering with nonprofits through this policy could mean more clients for me.
- Good policy in theory, execution matters.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
non-profit worker (urban Detroit)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could be a real game-changer if implemented well.
- Collaboration with local stakeholders is key.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $125000000, High: $200000000)
Year 2: $155000000 (Low: $130000000, High: $210000000)
Year 3: $160000000 (Low: $135000000, High: $215000000)
Year 5: $165000000 (Low: $140000000, High: $220000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Success of implementation depends on efficient collaboration between national nonprofits and local organizations.
- The reach and effectiveness of technical assistance in varying community contexts can differ significantly.
- Sustainability of businesses post-assistance is crucial for long-term impacts, thus requiring careful planning.