Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/4158

Bill Overview

Title: Encouraging Small Business Innovation Act

Description: This bill expands and otherwise revises certain requirements for Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Programs. Specifically, it includes small business investment companies (SBICs) in such programs. SBICs are included as a type of investor whose investment must be considered for various purposes under the programs. The bill requires the Small Business Administration (SBA), when calculating the outstanding leverage of an SBIC, to exclude investments made in SBIR and STTR participants. Under current law, SBICs are subject to a limit on their outstanding leverage. Finally, the bill sets forth provisions to increase participation of states to which a low level of SBIR awards have historically been awarded.

Sponsors: Sen. Padilla, Alex [D-CA]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals associated with small and medium-sized businesses globally

Estimated Size: 60000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Biotech Entrepreneur (Austin, TX)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy seems like a positive change. Including SBICs could mean more funding opportunities for us.
  • Changes to leverage rules may facilitate enhanced support from investors, which is crucial when scaling operations.
  • I'm also hopeful that the bureaucracy in funding processes might lessen.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 7 6

Venture Capitalist (Boston, MA)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Including SBICs is a win-win, facilitating more investment.
  • The change in leverage calculations can allow for more aggressive investments.
  • I anticipate seeing more innovative projects reach market-readiness, thus improved return on investment.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 9 8
Year 2 9 8
Year 3 9 8
Year 5 9 8
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 7 6

Research Scientist (Jackson, MS)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Our state hasn't been successful securing SBIR funds so far.
  • I hope this policy improves our chances, enabling more R&D and hiring opportunities.
  • The potential for increased state participation makes me cautiously optimistic.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 6 4
Year 20 5 4

Software Developer (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • We're not really involved in SBIR, so I don't see direct impacts from this policy.
  • The broader industry might benefit from increased innovation indirectly.
  • I don't expect this policy will directly affect my lifestyle or job security.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 6 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 5 5

Small Business Owner (Seattle, WA)

Age: 37 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This could incentivize us to apply for SBIR funding, offering potential growth.
  • I'm excited about possible investor interest due to SBIC involvement.
  • The policy could help small businesses in innovative fields.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 9 8
Year 5 9 8
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 7 6

Retired Engineer (Detroit, MI)

Age: 62 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • My involvement is indirect now, but the potential innovation boost could benefit the economy.
  • I'd like to see manufacturing technologies evolve with more funding support.
  • I hope my consulting firm might benefit from the spread of new technologies.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 5 5
Year 20 4 4

State Economic Development Officer (Albuquerque, NM)

Age: 40 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy aligns well with state initiatives to secure more innovation funding.
  • Seeing an uptick in SBIR applications could boost our local economy significantly.
  • I expect more collaborative opportunities across businesses and sectors.

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 6

Small Business Advisor (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Including states with low SBIR awards could balance opportunities better across regions.
  • Small businesses I advise could greatly benefit if they can secure funding easier.
  • I anticipate more companies seeking advice on leveraging new funding avenues.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 6 5

Freelance Product Designer (Boulder, CO)

Age: 29 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I work across multiple startups, so more funding means more projects.
  • The policy might facilitate more tech innovations, leading to greater employment and client opportunities.
  • Having SBICs involved could mean startups raise funds more quickly.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 9 7
Year 3 9 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 7 6

Research and Development Manager (Raleigh, NC)

Age: 33 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This could provide our firm with longevity and financial stability.
  • I'm enthusiastic about the technological advances we can achieve with more funding.
  • Overall, this policy seems like it could significantly boost our R&D projects.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 6
Year 2 9 6
Year 3 9 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 7 5

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)

Year 2: $525000000 (Low: $420000000, High: $630000000)

Year 3: $551250000 (Low: $441000000, High: $661500000)

Year 5: $608812500 (Low: $486000000, High: $730650000)

Year 10: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)

Year 100: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)

Key Considerations