HomeMy WebLinkAbout030923 FW_ EDA Request for Information for new Recompete grant program
________________________________
From: karen noprcd.org
Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2023 4:57:33 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: Joe Allen; Suzy Ames; Eron Berg; Thera Black; Karlena Brailey; Cindy Brooks; Siobhan Canty; Navarra Carr; Betsy Davis; Kate Dean; Charisse Deschenes; Aislinn Diamanti; Rick Dickinson;
Mike Doherty; William Dowling; Casey Duff; Kenna Eaton; Heidi Eisenhour; Dunia Faulx; Rod Fleck; Kevin Gallacci; Carol Hasse; Matthew Huish; Geoff James; Darrell Jenkins; Cherie Kidd;
Brian Kneidl; Pete Langley; Erika Lindholm; John Mauro; Colleen McAleer; Jim McEntire; Caleb McMahon; Monica MickHager; Mark Ozias; Daniel Pailthorp; Beth Pratt; Michelle Pruden; Steve
Raider-Ginsburg; Jeff Randall; Lowell Rathbun; Melanie R Roberts; Clea Rome; Tom Sanford; Haley Schanne; Lindsey Schromen-Wawrin; Jill Silver; Jan Simon; Mike Skinner; Danny Steiger;
Richard Tucker; Meggan Uecker; Jim Waddell; Deb Wallace; Sean Worthington; Erika Lindholm; Ken Hays x513
Subject: EDA Request for Information for new Recompete grant program
________________________________
ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
________________________________
Hi everyone,
As many of you know Representative Kilmer championed a new grant program called Recompete that will be administered through the Economic Development Administration. The program is designed
to provide up to $10 million in funding pre year for up to 10 years to selected regions in order to increase labor force participation of “prime age” individuals. Here’s a brief overview
of the program:
The Recompete Pilot Program will invest in distressed communities across the country to create, and connect workers to, good jobs and support long-term comprehensive economic development.
The Recompete Pilot Program specifically targets areas with lower than the U.S. average labor participation by prime-age (25 to 54 years of age) workers ( i.e., high prime-age employment
gap) and strives to make targeted interventions to spark economic activity in such areas.
The program focuses on eligible geographic areas—Tribal lands, local labor markets, and local communities [1] —that are experiencing low labor force participation. Part of the goal
of this RFI is to identify the different interventions and approaches capable of making a discernible impact on prime-age employment and related indicators of economic distress, such
as low household or per capita income.
EDA has issued a “request for information” to help with planning and design of the program as they work to develop program guidelines. Responses to the Request for Information are due
by March 27th. NODC is planning to submit a response and I would love to hear from you if you have suggestions about how to respond to the questions below:
Specific Request for Information: Recompete Characteristics
1. For those who live or work in areas with high prime-age employment gaps, what barriers should be addressed to increase job placement/retention and/or job creation? What unique challenges
and opportunities do you see in your community?
2. How might EDA determine how large of an investment is necessary to meaningfully advance the economy of a local labor market or community with a high prime-age employment gap? What
data and information are important to that determination?
a. If implementation awards were limited to the statutory minimum of $20 million, what types of initial investments would most significantly increase employment rates?
3. What scale and types of economic development interventions would be most likely to advance the economy of a locality or region with a high prime-age employment gap? For example,
should the program emphasize industry sectors or be sector agnostic?
a. Are there limitations due to what's currently allowable with EDA funding?
b. Given that each eligible community will bring its own unique set of challenges and opportunities, how should EDA evaluate whether any such investments, interventions, and/or policies
would be most effective in an eligible community?
c. What features of existing block grant programs should EDA adopt or avoid to increase the likelihood of alleviating persistent economic distress and increasing employment? What about
these features makes them effective or ineffective?
4. What economic development assets are most predictive of long-term success from a Recompete intervention?
5. What economic development assets does a local labor market and/or community need to have to take advantage of the Recompete Pilot Program?
6. What are best practices for building local public capacity that would prepare local labor markets and/or communities for Recompete implementation and other future funding?
7. What are the most significant distinctions in the interventions needed in smaller versus larger geographic areas, or local communities versus local labor markets as defined by the
statute?
8. Please provide research and evidence of interventions that work in highly distressed labor markets and/or communities to create good jobs and/or connect un- or underemployed residents
to good jobs.
Specific Request for Information: Recompete Pilot Program Design
9. Are there measures in addition to prime-age employment gap (for local labor markets) and prime-age employment gap and median household income (for local communities) recommended
to reach areas that are either (a) most persistently distressed, or (b) most likely to show sustained economic development progress after intervention?
10. How can federal grants and cooperative agreements be structured to ensure the impacts of the Recompete Pilot Program are shared broadly and equitably?
11. The statute permits implementation investments only in areas with an approved Recompete Plan. What elements should Recompete Plans include, and against what criteria should EDA
evaluate them?
12. How should EDA evaluate Tribal prime-age population given that data from the Department of the Treasury's Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund programs under title VI
of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 802 <https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/42/802> et seq.) are unlikely to be available?
13. What should EDA consider in designing the program for its current funding level of $200 million given the $1 billion vision in the program's statutory authorization? How should
those considerations affect EDA's design of the program now and potentially into future years?
14. What else should EDA consider when building this program?
Specific Request for Information: Recompete Pilot Program Administration
15. What types of administrative or technical assistance will help the recipients of Recompete funding to be more successful during implementation?
16. How should EDA measure the success of the Recompete Pilot Program?
a. What would be the indications of a successful implementation investment under the Recompete Pilot Program?
17. How can the Recompete Pilot Program best complement and leverage other Federal, State, and local economic development investments ( e.g., HUD's Community Development Block Grant
program, American Rescue Plan Act, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Inflation Reduction Act, CHIPS and Science Act, etc.) so that persistent economic distress is alleviated successfully?
18. What is a realistic time period ( e.g., 5, 10, 15 years, other?) over which to evaluate the economic development impacts of the Recompete Pilot Program and why?
Please get your suggestions to me by the end of the day on Monday, March 20th. I can also pull together a meeting to discuss this if any of you are interested. It would be helpful for
EDA to hear from a lot of us, so once NODC’s response is prepared I can send out some talking points that you could include in individual responses.
All best,
Karen
Karen Affeld (she/her)
Executive Director
North Olympic Development Council (NODC)
360-477-1593
karen@noprcd.org <mailto:karen@noprcd.org>
www.noprcd.org
85AF67E2982028E5F8-HEIDI EJulie Shannon