SSTI Digest

There is often a disconnect between government policies to encourage entrepreneurship and the actual practice of launching fast growing companies, according to the fourth major report from the National Commission on Entrepreneurship (NCOE). Five Myths about Entrepreneurs: Understanding How Businesses Start and Grow is being released to educate policymakers about the vitally different characteristics of entrepreneurs and traditional small business owners. The report also sets out key policy implications based on these different characteristics.  NCOE argues many policies are based on misconceptions about entrepreneurship:  Myth One: Entrepreneurs take wild, uncalculated risks to start their companies. In reality, many entrepreneurs, when they start out do not have much to lose, and they have an uncanny ability to convince others -- employees, individual investors, suppliers, and landlords -- to share their start-up risks.  Myth Two: Entrepreneurial companies are all based on high tech breakthroughs. Most entrepreneurial companies are not based on…

The state-by-state results for the 2000 SBIR Phase I awards — as reported individually by the 10 participating federal agencies and compiled by SSTI --- are presented in the accompanying table. Totals may not reflect new awards or cancellations made by an agency after the initial selection announcements. Abstract information for funded SBIR projects may be obtained on each agency’s SBIR website. Easy links are available from the DOEd SBIR web side: http://www.ed.gov/offices/OERI/SBIR/links.html 

Editor’s Note: For the skeptical Digest reader that viewed our assertion in last week’s issue that there is an average of at least one incubator-related article published somewhere in the country each day. Since we have several clippings on hand, it is easy to provide more examples of the continuing explosion of communities and states using non-profit incubators as tools for developing and expanding tech-based economies. Due to space considerations, a list of 17 more local incubator stories published in the last nine days alone is provided on the accompanying web page.

President Bush has nominated Los Angeles resident Hector Barretto to serve as Administrator of the Small Business Administration.  Philip Psilos is the new Director of Economic & Technology Policy for the National Governors' Association.  Timothy A. Klein has been selected to become the Associate Administrator for Innovation, Research, and Education for the U.S. Department of Transportation.  SSTI extends its congratulations to Bruce Gjovig, Director of the Center for Innovation in Grand Forks, North Dakota, for his induction into the North Dakota Entrepreneur Hall of Fame. 

President Bush has nominated Los Angeles resident Hector Barretto to serve as Administrator of the Small Business Administration.

Philip Psilos is the new Director of Economic & Technology Policy for the National Governors' Association.

Timothy A. Klein has been selected to become the Associate Administrator for Innovation, Research, and Education for the U.S. Department of Transportation. 

SSTI extends its congratulations to Bruce Gjovig, Director of the Center for Innovation in Grand Forks, North Dakota, for his induction into the North Dakota Entrepreneur Hall of Fame. 

With the slowdown in the economy, there is widespread concern about the kind of painful belt-tightening which occurred in the states in the early 1990s. Because of this perception and the rapid change in so many states’ fiscal situations, the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) released this week a new survey to update its January 4, 2001, State Fiscal Outlook for 2001. NCSL found that 33 states -- down from 44 reported only seven weeks earlier -- still report that revenues are on target or above forecasted levels for the current fiscal year. The likely reason for the 11-state decrease is lower than anticipated November and December revenues. Medicaid and increased funding for education are the two main expenditures pressuring states’ budgets.  States most affected by the slowdown are located in the South and in the Great Lakes region: Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia.  Most states report they will not need to cut their FY 2001 budgets to…

On February 26, President Bush issued a memorandum to 21 departments, agencies and other executive offices to create an Interagency Working Group on Federalism. The group is to:  a) Identify initiatives that promote principles of federalism, such as:  federal endeavors which may more appropriately be carried out by state or local authorities;  Opportunities for flexible funding streams, regulatory waivers, and other opportunities that increase State and local flexibility, innovation, and accountability;  Measures for improving federal responsiveness to state and local concerns; and  Enforcement of rules, orders, and procedures that advance federalism.  (b) Draft a new Executive Order on Federalism, which will require departments and agencies in the executive branch to adhere to principles of federalism;  (c) Consult, as appropriate, with state and local officials on issues pertaining to federalism, including, but not limited to, the issuance of the new Executive Order on Federalism. …

Release of the first solicitation of proposals for the new $3.5 million Federal and State Technology Partnership (FAST) has been delayed until the end of March, according to attendees of the National Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Conference held in Tulsa this past week. SSTI's March 1 presentation regarding FAST (a 16-slide Powerpoint file) is available by email request to skinner@ssti.org   Independently, SSTI sources indicate that the President's FY 2002 budget request is reported to include $3.5 million for the FAST Partnership and $1.5 million for the Rural Outreach Program. The continuation level of funding for both programs marks a shift in the SBA's practices during the Clinton Administration of zeroing out programs created by Congressional initiative. The additional year of funding, if approved by Congress, also allows states better ground for designing new programs to assist small businesses in commercializing technology, planning to meet FAST matching requirements, and making hiring commitments. 

The headlines of many tech and business publications scream of massive Internet incubator layoffs, closures, and restructuring. The rapid rise and fall of these organizations has left some local tech-based economic development practitioners wondering if encouraging the growth of incubator facilities is a worthwhile strategy to pursue. Closer scrutiny of the incubator phenomenon of the last few years, however, reveals many communities and states are increasing their investments in facilities to encourage technology start-ups at the same time for-profit incubators are closing.  Whether it is called a technology incubator, business accelerator, or innovation center, the real difference seems to lie in the orientation or goals of the entity: is it intended to make money for its private investors or is it organized as a not-for-profit to encourage local technology business growth? The dire headlines and talk of incubator crashes all refer to for-profit accelerators formed in the past two years to cash in on the dot-com craze. When the craze crashed, so did many of these get-…