Detailed Information on the
Economic Development Administration Assessment

While EDA continues to meet or exceed performance targets, which are based on 3, 6 and 9-year reviews of private sector investment and job creation. EDA continues to undertake efforts to refine its target forecasting model. For example, while EDA projected that only 10% of total jobs would be created in the first three years after initial investment, recent performance data shows that 20% of total projected jobs were created during the first three years.

Shifting EDA's focus to promoting regional economic development solutions in distressed communities through a comprehensive study on regionalism and the development of credible measures.

Design and implement a common framework for goals and performance measures for federal economic development programs.

EDA is in the process of implementing a single application procedure.

EDA's reauthorization now provides new authority to reward outstanding performance by grant recipients who excel in carrying out projects that create jobs.

Measure: Private sector dollars (in millions) invested in distressed communities as a result of EDA investments. Measure is based on 3, 6 and 9 year anticipated private sector investment resulting from investments by EDA. Results shown for 1998 investments only and demonstrate the increased impact projects have as they are completed and attract additional private investment.

Explanation:Measure is based on 3, 6 and 9 year anticipated private sector investment resulting from investments by EDA. Results are discounted by 25% to account for non-EDA funding and other external factors. Results shown are for 1998 investments only.

Measure: Jobs created or retained in distressed communities as a result of EDA investments. Results shown for 1998 investments only.

Explanation:Measure is based on 3, 6 and 9 year anticipated number of jobs created or retained as a result of investments by EDA. Results are discounted by 25% to account for non-EDA funding and other external factors. Results shown are for 1998 investments only.

Measure: Percentage of Economic Development Districts (EDDs) and Indian Tribes implementing economic development projects from the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) process that lead to private investment and jobs

Explanation:The measure determines whether the CEDS process is market-based, and if an environment where high skill, high wage jobs is being created.

Measure: Percentage of sub-state jurisdiction members actively participating in the Economic Development District (EDD) program

Explanation:Sub-state jurisdiction participation is an indicator of the district's responsiveness to the area it serves and shows that the services they provide are of value

Measure: Percentage of University Center (UC) clients taking action as a result of the assistance facilitated by the UC

Explanation:This measure will determine the perceived value-add of the UCs to its clients. Taking action means to implement an aspect of the technical assistance provided by the UC in one of several areas.

Measure: Percentage of those actions taken by University Clients (UC) clients that achieved the expected results (e.g., projects implemented that generate private sector investment or create jobs).

Explanation:The UC Program is a partnership of federal government and academia that makes resources of universities available to the economic development community. This measure determines if the assistance is market-based and actually provided value.

Measure: Percentage of Trade Adjustment Assistance Center (TAAC) clients taking action as a result of the assistance facilitated by the TAAC.

Explanation:This measure will determine the perceived value-add of the TAACs to its clients. Taking action means to implement an aspect of the technical assistance provided by the TAAC.

Measure: EDA dollars invested per job created or retained

Explanation:Based on research conducted by Rutgers University, EDA investments are expected to mature approximately 9 years after award, making the interim 3 and 6 year values less useful estimates of efficiency. Results shown are for investments made in fiscal year 1998 and illustrate the increasing efficiency of EDA investments as they approach maturity, nine years after the initial investment.

Measure: Percentage of those actions taken by Trade Adjustment Assistance Center (TAAC) clients that achieved the expected results.

Explanation:This measure will determine the effectiveness of the TAAC's technical assistance to its clients.

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: EDA's purpose is to create wealth and minimize poverty by promoting a favorable business environment to attract private-sector capital investment and higher skill, higher wage jobs in distressed communities.

Evidence: Commerce performance documents, EDA documents, and congressional budget justifications.

Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest or need?

Explanation: EDA was established to address the fact that while the U.S. economy has experienced sustained growth, there continue to be areas suffering from economic distress in the form of high unemployment, low incomes and underemployment as well as areas facing sudden economic dislocations due to industrial restructuring and relocation. EDA addresses these problems by promoting private sector investment in distressed areas. EDA's legislation defines areas eligible for EDA assistance in terms of distress, such as levels of high unemployment, low per capita income, and special needs (e.g., loss of jobs in trade-impacted industries, significant out-migration and population loss, and military base closures). EDA targets its inivesment assistance to revitalize, expand and upgrade physical infrastructure to attract new industry, encourage business expansion, and generate or retain jobs and private sector investment. Investment awards are also made to provide technical assistance to communities to develop local knowledge and skills to make optimal economic development decisions.

Evidence: Commerce annual performance documents, EDA authorizing legislation and regulations, NOFA (which includes funding priorities and Investment Policy guidelines), and operational guidance.

Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any other Federal, state, local or private effort?

Explanation: Although EDA may have been established to address a unique problem in 1965, concerns regarding the duplication of effort exist and are well-documented. GAO recently identified 73 federal programs that can be used for economic development activities, or for activities that could be considered related to economic development. These programs cover rural and urban populations in communities across the country and include an element of local planning in the use of funds. There is evidence to suggest that the sheer multiplicity of federal programs imposes transactions costs on localities attempting to shift through the array of federal programs and creates limitations on packaging federal resources to have the greatest impact.

Evidence: Sept. 2000 GAO study. - Multiple Federal Programs Fund Similar Economic Development Activities. Ten agencies and 27 sub-agency units administer 73 programs that can be used to support one or more of the six activities directly related to economic development.

Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program's effectiveness or efficiency?

Explanation: EDA administers a competitive grant program for which applicants must qualify on the basis of need and merit of application. Applicants in most cases must match funds for which they are applying. Applicants must also demonstrate that the proposed investment is in conformance with the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy for the area. EDA's investment policy guidelines emphasize strategic investments based on risk and the expected return on the taxpayer's investment. EDA promotes cluster-based and regional economic development to build on a region's competitive strengths and help promote favorable business conditions for private sector investment.

Evidence: Per authorizing legislation and implementing regulations, EDA awards funding competitively and requires a 20% to 50% match from the applicant. Comparable economic development programs are formula-based.

Is the program effectively targeted, so that resources will reach intended beneficiaries and/or otherwise address the program's purpose directly?

Explanation: 2/3 of counties are eligible for EDA grants, but only about 35% of counties receive grants. EDA has worked through the regulatory process to ensure that the neediest counties are served; for example, EDA regulations require that EDA target its grants to communities experiencing long-term chronic distress and communities impacted by sudden and severe economic dislocation. EDA's regulations also allow EDA to focus on smaller areas where necessary, such as pockets of distress in urban areas. EDA Goverment Performance and Results Act (GPRA) and Balanced Scorecard (BSC) measures serve to target a significant portion of EDA investments to areas of highest distress, defined as areas with an unemployment rate at least 180% of the national average or per capita income of not more than 60% of the national average. EDA investment guidelines and funding priorities serve to target investments that are market based, results-driven, have strong organizational leadership, advance productivity, innovations and entrepreneurship, look beyond the immediate economic horizon, anticipate economic changes and diversify the local and regional economy.

Evidence: EDA establishing legislation, budget submission, and congressional justification.

Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?

Explanation: EDA has two goals: 1) to promote private enterprise and job creation in economically distressed communities and 2) to build community capacity to achieve and sustain economic growth. EDA has long-term outcome measures under Goal 1 - Private sector dollars invested in distressed communities as a result of EDA investments and jobs created or retained in distressed communities as a result of EDA investments. Under Goal 2, in FY 2002, EDA eliminated process measures and replaced them with outcome oriented-measures. EDA started reporting on the new outcome-oriented measures in FY 2003. These include: (1) Percentage of Economic Development Districts and Indian tribes implementing projects from the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy process that lead to private sector investment and jobs (2) Percentage of actions taken by University Center clients that achieved the expected result (3) Percentage of actions taken by Trade Adjustment Assistance Centers (TAACs) clients that achieved the expected results. In addition, EDA tracks a number of other outcome measures as part of its internal "Balanced Scorecard" (BSC) reviews. Such indicators tracked include the types of industries supported by EDA investments, increases in wages and skills in jobs created and retained, and increases in tax revenue.

Evidence: The goals and measures in the explanation are listed in Commerce's annual performance documents, EDA Annual Performance Plans DOC Performance and Accountability Report, and agency congressional justifications.

Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures?

Explanation: EDA has established baselines and targets for its long-term outcome measures: (1) number of jobs created or retained and (2) private sector dolars invested in distressed communities as a result of EDA investments. Targets are based on an analysis of types of jobs supported and past performance. Actual performance is measured on 3, 6 and 9 year assessment cycle. EDA discounts the number of jobs created or retained by 25% to account for the attribution of jobs to other funding macroeconomic conditions. This discount factor is an aggregate factor based on the Rutgers University regression models used to assess EDA's impact on economic development.

Evidence: The goals and measures in the explanation are listed in Commerce's annual performance documents, EDA Annual Performance Plans DOC Performance and Accountability Report, and agency congressional justifications. The Rutgers University study is: Public Works Program: Multiplier and Employment Generating Effects. (May 1998)

Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that can demonstrate progress toward achieving the program's long-term goals?

Explanation: EDA has eight annual performance measures. EDA's methodology for assessing performance was developed through university-led research and is long-term in scope. In addition, EDA improved annual performance measures to assess progress in improving community capacity to achieve and sustain economic growth. EDA will include an efficiency measure "cost per job created" in the FY 2006 President's Budget and the FY 2004 PAR. The Rutgers University study suggests a methodology for creating this measure and their report from 1997 showed that EDA spends approximately $3,000 for every direct job created (1997 dollars). Subsequent research indicates that cost per job varies by year of project completion and geography. For 1993 projects, the average cost per job is slightly lower in rural areas than in urban areas. For 1990 projects, the average cost per job is almost three times higher in rural areas than urban.

Evidence: Goals, measures and results are identified in Commerce's annual performance documents. Rutgers University. EDA's Public Works Program: Performance Evaluation (May 1997). Glasmeier, Amy. Cost per Job Associated with EDA Investments in Urban and Rural Areas. The Pennsylvania State University. (2002).

Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets for its annual measures?

Explanation: EDA developed new outcome-oriented annual measures for capacity building projects in FY 2002. Baselines were established in FY 2002, and EDA began reporting in FY 2003. One measure indicates whether the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategies (CEDS) help create an environment conducive to higher-skill, higher-wage jobs, as indicated by the number of projects from the CEDS that are implemented and lead to job creation and private investment. Two other measures report on clients taking action as a result of assistance provided by a University Center or a TAAC, and whether that action had the desired result. EDA has set ambitious targets in its BSC for grant job creation and private investment projections.

Evidence: Commerce performance documents, EDA documents, Balanced Score Card, and congressional budget justifications. Rutgers University. EDA's Public Works Program: Performance Evaluation (May 1997).

Do all partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) commit to and work toward the annual and/or long-term goals of the program?

Explanation: For Goal 1, grantees are required to commit to creating or retaining jobs and provide match prior to the grant award and close out of project. Grantees are also required to submit annual financial reports. During FY 02, the agency updated its performance requirements for Goal 2 based on a review and roundtable with representatives of capacity-building recipients to better connect investments with outcomes. EDA has implemented a Balanced Scorecard (BSC) that directly links to the GPRA measures, and to individual performance plans, through specific objectives and targets. For example, the BSC measures the number of jobs created or retained and private sector dollars leveraged as projected in proposal and grant documents and the percent of employees with performance goals tied to the BSC. EDA also coordinates with related and complementary economic development programs and corresponding agencies (FEMA, DoD, EPA, DOL and regional development agencies). Finally, EDA is proposing a performance-based bonus for grantee performance that exceeds certain thresholds of achievement.

Evidence: EDA receives performance data from grantees annually. EDA BSC is reported quarterly, EDA partnerships with DOL in North Carolina, and partnerships with FEMA during presidentially declared disasters.

Are independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality conducted on a regular basis or as needed to support program improvements and evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: The agency completed 17 evaluations between 1997 and 2003. A review of EDA's largest program, Public Works, was conducted in 1997 and the results were used to construct EDA's performance methodology. These studies have served to clarify and substantiate the results EDA is achieving while providing substantive suggestions for improvements or enhancements to the programs. An evaluation of the Economic Adjustment program is currently being conducted during FY 2004.As the last comprehensive program evaluation was conducted in 1998, EDA should consider an additional rigorous performance evaluations assessing program effectiveness. Such a study might look comparatively at areas benefiting from EDA assistance against similar areas that have not have not had EDA investments. Another option would be a study similar to that done for the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which examined readily available data sources such as employment levels to see if there was any statistically significant relationship between actual improvements in community and economic development with activities funded by the Community Development Block Grant program.

Evidence: EDA's authorizing legislation provides that EDA shall conduct an evaluation of each University Center and Economic Development district that receives assistance. A consortium of universities and economic development entities conduct these studies.Rutgers University. EDA's Public Works Program: Performance Evaluation (May 1997).Rutgers University. Public Works Program: Multiplier and Employment Generating Effects. (May 1998)The Urban Institute. Effective Aid to Trade-Impacted Manufacturers: An Evaluation of the Trade Adjustment Assistance Program (1998).Wayne State University. Evaluation of EDA's Planning Program Organization. (2002).The HUD study ccan be found at: www.huduser.org/publications/commdevl/cdbg_spending.html

Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget?

Explanation: EDA programs are aligned with EDA's performance goals. The EDA annual performance plan is now integrated with its budget request. The justification directly ties the funding requested to EDA's performance goals and measures.

Evidence: Commerce annual performance documents, planning documents and budget requests.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies?

Explanation: EDA has taken some steps in its strategic planning process. For example, in FY 01, EDA undertook a workforce analysis and applied its findings by re-evaluating its workforce, mission, and overall strategy. EDA adopted investment criteria that clarifies the kind of projects EDA will fund in order to achieve its mission and goals. EDA has adopted a corporate Balanced Scorecard framework to integrate management, strategic goals and objectives and performance. The HQ reorganization, and the regional business reengineering also integrate human resource planning with EDA's strategy.

Evidence: Booz-Allen Workforce study documents, EDA investment policy guidelines, and Corporate Balanced Scorecard.

Does the agency regularly collect timely and credible performance information, including information from key program partners, and use it to manage the program and improve performance?

Explanation: EDA regional offices collect and compile data quarterly for their balanced scorecards, which track the extent to which investments lead to increases in employment and private investment as well as increases in higher skill and higher wage jobs. The results are used for management oversight to improve program operations. Grantees report actual outcomes for job creation and private investment for GPRA reporting purposes. This data has been reported annually, but will now be reported quarterly. University Center have peer reviews every three years. EDA has incorporated performance into the funding formula for Trade Adjustment Assistance Centers (TAACs). EDA has started a pilot project to competitively award University Center (UC) grants and has terminated grants for non-performance.

Evidence: EDA Regional Director Performance plans, BSC, construction Blue Book, RLF guidance, operational guidance and records of termination of revolving loan funds and University Centers.

Are Federal managers and program partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results?

Explanation: Performance data for regional offices is used in evaluating the performance of the Regional Directors. Performance data being collected measures each director's success in making investments to meet the agency's funding priorities and investment guidelines. EDA is now implementing rigorous oversight of staff and grantee due diligence through the Balanced Scorecard which measures the number and percent of projects started on time and completed on time.

Evidence: Performance evaluations reflect the Regional Director's record in meeting established targets, BSC results reflect regional achievement of BSC measures and results are reflected in performance appraisals.

Are funds (Federal and partners') obligated in a timely manner and spent for the intended purpose?

Explanation: EDA historically obligates its available funds in a timely manner. Funds for which the agency is responsible are spent in accordance with appropriate authorities.

Evidence: EDA obligated 99% of the available funds by the end of FY 2002, obligating $31,119,000 of the $31,522,000 available. EDA has no negative audit findings relative to the FY 2003 Financial Statement Audit Report.

Does the program have procedures (e.g. competitive sourcing/cost comparisons, IT improvements, appropriate incentives) to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution?

Explanation: EDA has outsourced IT and Excess Capacity Studies. The agency completed a Headquarters workforce restructuring, and is now pursuing a regional business process reengineering that, when completed, will have identified skills and competencies required, gaps, and redeploy resources more efficiently and effectively. An element of the HQ restructuring was to outsource accounting technician functions, which has been accomplished. In addition, EDA will be adding a new efficiency measure to its annual performance plans to assess the average cost per job.

Evidence: 1997 Rutgers study and Commerce annual performance documents.

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: EDA coordinates with related and complementary economic development programs and corresponding agencies (FEMA, DoD, EPA, DOL and regional development agencies). For example, EDA accepts local and regional plans developed in conformance with other Federal agency requirements to satisfy the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) requirement as long as those plans meet EDA CEDS requirements. EDA continues to define its role in economic development relative to other programs to avoid duplication and ensure that federal funds are effectively leveraged to maximize the utility of complementary programs. However, it is also clear that at the federal level coordination could be improved. EDA is participating with OMB and other federal agencies in an interagency working group working to develop recommendations to improve coordination among federal community and economic development programs.

Evidence: EDA is undertaking an effort to identify how funding relates to other related economic development funding. The CEDS provision is contained in Section 302(c) of the Economic Development Administration Reform Act of 1998.

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: EDA has received unqualified opinions on its financial statements since FY 1998. The agency has moved to the Department's consolidated financial system and follows sound financial management practices.

Evidence: The Commerce annual performance documents and EDA/DOC Annual Financial Audits.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies?

Explanation: EDA has undertaken financial management improvements and efforts to reduce operational costs. EDA completed its HQ restructuring and has flattened the organization structure, increased the supervisory span of control, and aligned and streamlined functions to achieve operational efficiencies. EDA is in the process of analyzing and streamlining operational and administrative processes in the regional offices to achieve additional cost savings and operate more effectively.

Evidence: EDA is restructuring its workforce and has available its balanced corporate scorecard. EDA has implemented an integrated balanced scorecard management process in the regions and is exercising rigorous performance management.

Are grants awarded based on a clear competitive process that includes a qualified assessment of merit?

Explanation: Criteria for consideration are published and regional internal review committees review applications. The agency has instituted additional criteria for review and is further incorporating Inspector General recommendations into the review process. These recommendations include maintaining better minutes, retaining rejected proposals for three years and removing the Regional Directors from the Investment Review Committee. To further strengthen EDA's processes, EDA adopted investment policy guidelines and initiated an independent Headquarters quality assurance review of potential applications.

Evidence: Commerce IG audit, EDA investment guidelines, annual FFO, and Commerce annual performance documents. Grant applications for Development Assistance Programs under the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965, as Amended and the Trade Act of 1974, as Amended available on www.grants.gov

Does the program have oversight practices that provide sufficient knowledge of grantee activities?

Explanation: The agency has six regional offices and 75% of the staff is located in the regions. The staff work on project applications and conduct grant administration and monitoring functions. Additionally, EDA has implemented BSC measures to focus attention on monitoring activities. BSC results are incorporated into executive and staff performance evaluations. Regions verify data submitted by all grantees and perform in-depth audits of randomly-selected grantees.

Evidence: EDA has restructured its Headquarters operations and is in the process of analyzing and streamlining processes in the regions to enable more effective oversight and monitoring of projects.

Does the program collect grantee performance data on an annual basis and make it available to the public in a transparent and meaningful manner?

Explanation: Program performance data is collected on an annual basis for some measures but not for jobs and private sector leverage which is collected every 3-6-9 years. Capacity-building measures have been revised and data is collected annually. Aggregate performance data is available on the internet and presented in annual performance plans. However, EDA does not make individual grantee performance information publicly available.

Evidence: Grantee applications, Commerce performance documents, agency validation visits and 1997 Rutgers study.

Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals?

Explanation: The agency has identified the promotion of private enterprise and job creation as the primary long-term measures. While it is difficult to assess the impact of an economic development project in a larger context of economic growth and stability and in light of other macroeconomic factors influencing a community's competitiveness, private investment and new or retained jobs are valid indicators of economic improvement in an area. EDA began compiling actual long-term job creation and private investment for its programs in FY 2000 for grants awarded in FY 1997. EDA measures actual jobs created or retained on a three-year cycle. Therefore, 1997 projects are evaluated for actual jobs created in 2000, 2003 and 2006, while FY 1998 projects are evaluated in 2001, 2004 and 2007. EDA anticipated that only 10% of the jobs projected to be created over a 9-year period for FY 1997 and FY 1998 projects would be created in the first three years. However, this target was exceeded as FY 2000 and FY 2001 performance reports revealed that 20% of the projected jobs were created in the first two years. By FY 2004 EDA will have collected six years worth of data for grants awarded in FY 1997. Program-specific data on numbers of jobs created and private investment in distressed communities could be strengthened by overall national indicators of community or regional health that would assess trends in such areas as unemployment rates, poverty rates, and increases in tax revenues.

Evidence: Commerce annual performance documents.

Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals?

Explanation: In FY 2003, the agency exceeded all targets for Goals 1 and 2. The agency refined its measures in Goal 2 in 2002 to directly tie funding to actions taken as a result of EDA investments.

Evidence: Grantee performance reports, Commerce annual performance documents.

Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program goals each year?

Explanation: The EDA HQ reorganization has been completed. Headquarters is now streamlined; authorized staffing has been reduced from 94 to 71. In addition, the Investment Policy Guidelines have been implemented, which has resulted in projects with a regional scope, greater impact, and significantly improved results. From FY 2001 through FY 2003, outcome projections submitted by grantees as part of their grant applications reflect a 39% increase in the amount of anticipated private investment, and dollars of private investment generated per EDA dollar invested has more than doubled. In addition, EDA has established a process to compete the University Center grants, and developed a new funding formula for the Trade Adjustment Assistance Centers using performance as an element of the formula. EDA successfully implemented a Balanced Scorecard (BSC) and is now able to trackand measure key objectives on a quarterly basis. However, EDA does not currently track the federal cost per job created in annual performance reports to evaluate cost-effectiveness in meeting one of its major performance goals.

Evidence: The agency's management reform efforts, Headquarters restructuring and outsourcing efforts (e.g., IT, Excess Capacity Studies and accounting). EDA has been used as a case study of the application of the Balanced Score Card in the public sector by Norton and Kaplan in their latest Balanced Scorecard book, "Strategy Maps".)

Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc., with similar purpose and goals?

Explanation: In general, EDA's competitive grants structure ensures that projects with the greatest return on taxpayer investment are funded. The cost per job created as a result of EDA investment is also comparable with HUD's Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG). For example, for FY 2001, EDA reports the cost/job created or retained was $3,800; this figure is non-discounted, meaning that the agency takes credit for all jobs created in each project it funds. This unit cost was comparable to other programs as HUD's CDBG unit-cost per job was $4500* (NOTE: Current data for HUD/CDBG unit-cost per job is not available). However, while EDA coordinates quite effectively at the local level, coordination of federal community and economic development programs needs improvement. Furthermore, while EDA tracks job creation and increases in private investment it is hard to assess EDA's performance in the larger context of stimulating economic recovery and growth in distressed regions (see answer to question 4.5)

Evidence: Rutgers University. EDA's Public Works Program: Performance Evaluation (May 1997) Department of Housing and Urban Development performance reports.

Do independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?

Explanation: EDA has funded several independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality that indicate that EDA programs are effective and achieving results. A Rutgers study conducted in the mid-1990s showed that EDA's funding, though not enough to fully fund any project, was critical to project completion. Recognition of EDA's success was also noted in the 1997 Rutgers study that stated that EDA funding is critical to link and magnify private and other local sources of project funding. The study stated 'For every $1 million in funding committed by EDA, the local [tax] base increased by $7.68 million from additional private-sector and other investment.' EDA currently tracks this measure during the GPRA validation site visit by measuring the increase in local Real or Business property tax base. This measure is also included in EDA's Balanced Score Card reviews. However, it is difficult to understand how EDA's investments impact a distressed region's economy. EDA hopes that the current emphasis on investments that have regional impact and encourage cluster development will more clearly demonstrate the impact of the federal investment on an area's economic growth. Comparative evaluations assessing those regions benefiting from EDA investment with similar regions that have not had EDA investments might be one way to assess the impact of EDA's programs. In addition, "before and after" comparisons assessing trends in income, employment and tax bases might also provide additional insight.

Evidence: Rutgers University. EDA's Public Works Program: Performance Evaluation (May 1997). Rutgers University. Public Works Program: Multiplier and Employment Generating Effects. (May 1998) The Urban Institute. Effective Aid to Trade-Impacted Manufacturers: An Evaluation of the Trade Adjustment Assistance Program (1998). Wayne State University. Evaluation of EDA's Planning Program Organization. (2002).