Background Key SBA Offices and Resource Partners Involved in Entrepreneurial Programs and Outreach The Office of Entrepreneurial Development, Office of Field Operations, and Office of Strategic Alliances are key SBA offices that administer entrepreneurial programs and manage outreach efforts that could foster entrepreneurship (see fig. 1). Office of Entrepreneurial Development. The Office of Entrepreneurial Development oversees several programs, primarily through a nationwide network of public and private resource partners that offer small business counseling and technical assistance. These resource partners include SBDCs, Women’s Business Centers, and SCORE chapters. The SBDC program receives the majority of entrepreneurial development program funding to provide technical assistance (business counseling and training) to small businesses and aspiring entrepreneurs. SBDC services include assisting small businesses access capital, develop and exchange new technologies, and improve business planning, strategy, and financial management. The entities eligible to receive SBDC funding are primarily institutions of higher education. By statute, the amount eligible entities receive is determined by a state population-based funding formula subject to the amount of an appropriation in any given fiscal year. As a condition of receiving the grant, the recipient or host institution is required to match the funding. The host institution (funding recipient) is responsible for establishing a lead center and network of service centers for a designated service area. The SBDC program has 63 lead centers (generally hosted by institutions of higher education) and more than 900 service centers, including satellite locations. SBA has identified certain special emphasis groups to be targeted for assistance by SBDCs, such as certain populations of business owners. The groups do not include institutions; thus, HBCUs are not included as special emphasis groups. According to SBA officials, SBDCs target underrepresented groups in the population of business owners near HBCUs. Office of Field Operations. SBA also provides services through a network of 10 regional offices and 68 district offices that are led by the Office of Field Operations. SBA district offices serve as the point of delivery for most SBA programs and services. Some district office staff (including business opportunity, lender relations, and economic development specialists) work directly with SBA clients. SBA’s district offices also can initiate and oversee outreach activities to foster entrepreneurship. For example, SBA district offices can implement counseling or training events on their own, participate in such events organized by third parties, or co-sponsor such activities with a third party (for-profit, nonprofit, or government entity) through a co-sponsorship agreement. Moreover, district offices can enter into a 2-year agreement with a nonprofit or government party, known as a strategic alliance memorandum, to foster a working relationship designed to strengthen small business development in a local area. Office of Strategic Alliances. The Office of Strategic Alliances, housed in SBA’s Office of Communication and Public Liaison, reviews co- sponsorship agreements and strategic alliance memorandums drafted by district or program offices. The co-sponsorship agreements and memorandums are based on an internal SBA template provided by the Office of Strategic Alliances, which also maintains records for both strategic alliance memorandums and co-sponsorship agreements. Figure 2, an interactive map, illustrates locations of SBDC lead centers and SBA district office in states with HBCUs. See appendix II for additional information on figure 2. Historically Black Colleges and Universities As of December 2018, there were 101 HBCUs, located across 19 states, the District of Columbia and the U.S. Virgin Islands. As previously discussed, HBCUs educated more than 226,000 African-American students in 2017. HBCUs also have played a critical role in supporting underserved students and communities. We previously reported that a higher proportion of students at private HBCUs (77 percent) received Pell Grants in the 2015–16 school year than students at similar private colleges or universities (43 percent). Pell Grants provide low-income undergraduates who demonstrate financial need with financial assistance to help meet education expenses. Executive Orders on the White House Initiative Executive Order 12232 (1980) established the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities to strengthen the capacity of HBCUs to provide quality education. Subsequent administrations issued executive orders to continue the initiative. Most recently, as expressed in Executive Order 13779 (2017), federal priorities for working with HBCUs encompass two missions: (1) increasing the role of private-sector entities in helping to improve capacity of HBCUs, and (2) enhancing HBCUs’ capabilities for helping young adults. The initiative has been housed in the Executive Office of the President since 2017, according to representatives from the initiative. The more recent executive orders (from 2002, 2010, and 2017) direct each department and agency designated by the Secretary of Education to prepare an annual plan on efforts to strengthen HBCU capacity. Annual plans are to describe how the department or agency intends to increase the capacity of HBCUs, including by identifying federal programs and initiatives in which HBCUs are underserved or that HBCUs may have underutilized. SBA is one of the agencies designated to prepare an annual agency plan. The more recent executive orders also state that a Board of Advisors on HBCUs (in the Department of Education) shall report annually to the President on the Board’s progress in carrying out its duties, which include advising the President on matters pertaining to strengthening the educational capacity of HBCUs. The current Board was chartered in May 2019. SBA Used Existing Programs and Mechanisms to Engage with HBCUs; Stakeholders’ Collaborative Experiences Varied SBA has used SBDCs, strategic alliance memorandums, and co- sponsored activities to foster entrepreneurship with HBCUs in recent years; stakeholders’ experiences collaborating with SBA varied. Small Business Development Centers. Two HBCUs—Howard University in Washington, D.C., and the University of the Virgin Islands in St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands—have been longstanding host institutions for SBDCs. More specifically, they have been the only host institutions for two lead SBDCs, the District of Columbia SBDC and the Virgin Islands SBDC, for more than 30 years (and remained so as of September 2019). Colleges and universities predominately have been the institutional hosts of lead SBDCs since the 1980s according to SBA officials. According to SBA officials, there is little turnover among institutions hosting lead SBDCs because SBDC program announcements for host institutions are not full and open competitions and existing host institutions often renew their cooperative agreements to continue operating lead SBDCs. Based on the statutorily defined and population- based allocation formula, the District of Columbia SBDC and the Virgin Islands SBDC together received about 1.3–1.4 percent of the total SBDC funding awarded to institutions of higher education from fiscal year 2008 through 2018. The District of Columbia SBDC and the Virgin Islands SBDC have engaged with HBCU students, alumni, or faculty. As we previously reported, District of Columbia SBDC representatives told us that as of November 2018 they were working with 10–15 Howard University student clients. They also stated they work with all students who come to their center seeking help and do not have a cap on the number of student clients. Similarly, the Virgin Islands SBDC representatives told us as of February 2019 they had made presentations to upper-level business classes and freshmen development seminars at the University of the Virgin Islands. They also counseled students who participated in an annual entrepreneurial competition. They noted that many of the SBDC clients they serve have some affiliation with the university, such as being an alumnus or having attended classes there. In addition to establishing the lead SBDC, the host institution establishes a network of service centers to deliver services, such as counseling and training, within its service area, including at HBCUs. As of September 2018, at least 16 HBCUs hosted SBDC service centers across 11 states. Three SBDC service centers we reviewed that were HBCU- hosted had engaged with HBCU students, alumni, or faculty. For example, the Alabama SBDC service center representatives (housed at Alabama State University in Montgomery, Alabama) said the center works with several faculty members who provided training at SBDC workshops and assisted the service center on specialized topics, such as marketing. Through its relationship with faculty members, the Alabama SBDC service center also conducts outreach to students. Similarly, representatives of two service centers for the North Carolina Small Business Technology and Development Center (housed at North Carolina Central University in Durham, North Carolina, and North Carolina A&T State University in Greensboro, North Carolina) said they have worked with students on the respective campuses. For example, the service center at North Carolina Central University has engaged graduate business students on marketing projects. While the number of HBCU-hosted lead SBDCs has remained unchanged in recent years, it is unclear how many HBCUs have hosted service centers. SBA officials told us that the number fluctuates but were unable to provide the list of all service centers in existence prior to 2018. We discuss SBA’s data collection efforts later in this report. Strategic alliance memorandums. From 2013 through 2018, SBA signed at least 35 strategic alliance memorandums with HBCUs (see table 1). SBA signed at least 51 such memorandums with institutions of higher education in states with HBCUs in that period. As we previously reported, strategic alliance memorandums are mechanisms to initiate and formalize a relationship with nonprofit and governmental agencies, but they are not necessary to initiate a relationship. SBA officials told us the memorandums do not authorize or fund events or activities and are largely symbolic. In August 2019, SBA officials said that numbers of strategic alliance memorandums can fluctuate due to their 2-year duration and changes in SBA administration. Representatives of six HBCUs with whom we met that signed strategic alliance memorandums varied in their assessment of the usefulness of the memorandums. Three of the six HBCUs said they had positive experiences as a result of the memorandums: Representatives of an HBCU in North Carolina said a May 2013 memorandum established a relationship with SBA and provided access to information and resources not otherwise available. Representatives of another HBCU in North Carolina said a 2013 memorandum helped recruit speakers for two entrepreneurship classes. A representative from an HBCU in Tennessee told us that a 2013 memorandum enabled the college to connect students, alumni, and faculty with the resources of SBA’s Tennessee District Office and its resource partners. The representative said a subsequent 2018 memorandum resulted in collaboration with SBA to host a 1-day small business conference on campus. In contrast, representatives of the three other HBCUs either were unaware of the memorandum or said it produced no results: Representatives of two HBCUs (one in Alabama and one in Georgia) told us they were unaware of the signed strategic alliance memorandums (March and April 2013, respectively) due to staffing changes in senior administrative positions. A representative from another HBCU in Georgia told us the school had little involvement with the Georgia SBA district office after signing a memorandum in April 2013. Officials from the district office with whom we spoke agreed with this statement but noted the college had not asked them to participate in any events. Co-sponsored activities. As shown in table 2, from fiscal years 2013 through 2018, SBA signed at least 16 co-sponsorship agreements with HBCUs to jointly conduct activities or events. Twelve of the 16 co- sponsored activities were training or counseling events related to entrepreneurship. SBA signed at least 78 co-sponsorship agreements with institutions of higher education in states with HBCUs in that period. SBA’s Recent Plan and Goals for HBCU- Related Efforts Were Not Communicated to the Field SBA Developed 2018 Plan for the White House Initiative on HBCUs but Was Unable to Provide Plans for Other Years SBA developed a fiscal year 2018 plan for the White House Initiative on HBCUs, in accordance with Executive Order 13779 (2017). SBA’s 2018 plan included two primary goals. The first goal was to raise awareness and provide information to increase the capacity of HBCUs to participate in federally funded programs. More specifically, the plan stated that SBA would engage with HBCUs and provide them with information needed to access and compete for federal grants and contracts. The second goal was to promote collaboration among HBCUs, SBA resource partners, and SBA district offices. For example, the plan stated that SBA would encourage the formation of strategic alliance memorandums between SBA district offices and HBCUs to promote and support entrepreneurship in underserved markets. The plan also stated that SBA would explore and consider partnerships with the National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education, among other organizations, to raise awareness, disseminate information, and share resources among and with HBCUs. The 2018 plan also described five measures to monitor SBA’s efforts to engage, share information, and increase the capacity of HBCUs. The measures are (1) number of outreach events, (2) number of outreach attendees, (3) number of partnerships established, (4) percentage of engaged HBCUs that pursued federal funding, and (5) percentage of HBCUs engaged that found the information useful. The two previous Executive Orders (from 2002 and 2010) on the White House Initiative on HBCUs also directed designated agencies to prepare annual plans on their efforts to support HBCUs. For years prior to 2018, SBA only could provide documentation of plans for 2011 and 2012. Officials of the Office of Entrepreneurial Development told us they were not aware of records for plans developed for the other years in the period we reviewed (2008–2018). Responsibilities of SBA Offices for Addressing the White House Initiative on HBCUs Are Unclear SBA was unclear about the responsibilities of the offices involved in the agency’s efforts for addressing the White House Initiative on HBCUs. In March 2019, SBA officials told us the SBA Administrator had designated the Office of Entrepreneurial Development as the lead office for addressing the initiative in 2018. However, the responsibilities for other offices involved in efforts that include HBCUs remain unclear. SBA could not provide documentation of roles, responsibilities, or reporting lines among offices involved in addressing the White House Initiative on HBCUs. For example, the Associate Administrator for the Office of Entrepreneurial Development stated the agency’s interaction with HBCUs occurs through SBA district offices. However, there is no documentation describing how the Office of Entrepreneurial Development and Office of Field Operations, which is responsible for SBA’s district offices, should work together to address the White House Initiative on HBCUs. Moreover, because SBA has not documented specific roles and responsibilities (to include reporting lines), it is unclear how plans prepared for the White House Initiative on HBCUs would be implemented among headquarters, field offices, and resource partners. Additionally, the role of the director of the Office of Faith Based and Community Initiatives in efforts to address the HBCU initiative is unclear. SBA officials told us the Office of Faith Based and Community Initiatives is not involved in administering the initiative. However, the director of that office serves as SBA’s representative to the Interagency Working Group of the White House Initiative on HBCUs. According to SBA officials, the director’s role is to support efforts by the Office of Entrepreneurial Development on the initiative due to staffing shortages. However, officials were unable to tell us in greater detail how the director would provide such support. Federal internal control standards state that management should establish an organizational structure, assign responsibility, and delegate authority to achieve the entity’s objectives. For example, management assigns responsibilities to discrete units to enable the organization to operate in an efficient and effective manner and to delegate authority to key roles throughout the entity. Additionally, management establishes defined reporting lines within an organizational structure so that units can communicate (up, down, and across the organization) the quality information necessary for each unit to fulfill its overall responsibilities. SBA’s uncertainty about the responsibilities of the offices involved in the White House Initiative on HBCUs may be a result of changes over the years as to which program office was chiefly responsible for the effort. According to the Associate Administrator of the Office of Entrepreneurial Development, the responsibilities for the White House initiative on HBCUs have resided in various SBA program offices over the years. Moreover, the Associate Administrator told us the Office of Entrepreneurial Development was designated the lead office for the initiative late in the planning process; therefore, it took time to transfer responsibilities for addressing the initiative to the Office of Entrepreneurial Development. As a result, the Office of Entrepreneurial Development had not yet defined the responsibilities for other offices involved in efforts related to the White House Initiative on HBCUs. In September 2019, SBA officials told us they intended to establish an intra-agency working group focused on HBCUs, which would define the roles and responsibilities of headquarters offices related to the initiative. While the Office of Entrepreneurial Development has been designated as the lead office, without clearly assigned roles, responsibilities, and reporting lines for the other offices involved in the White House Initiative on HBCUs, SBA may not be able to effectively implement future plans for the initiative. Additionally, the lack of clearly assigned roles, responsibilities, and reporting lines has resulted in and may result in future loss of institutional knowledge on efforts to implement the initiative. SBA Has Not Communicated Its Plan to Support HBCUs to Key SBDCs and District Offices SBA’s 2018 plan to support HBCUs had the goal of promoting collaboration among HBCUs, SBA resource partners, and SBA district offices. However, SBA headquarters did not communicate its plan for supporting HBCUs to SBDCs and district offices with HBCUs in their service areas. Specifically, SBA officials told us the Office of Entrepreneurial Development, which oversees the SBDC program, did not communicate the 2018 plan to support HBCUs to SBDCs, including the goal to collaborate with HBCUs. None of the SBDC representatives with whom we spoke (for six lead centers and three service centers), reported that SBA communicated information related to the 2018 plan, including goals, measures, or other HBCU-related expectations. Furthermore, none said they received guidance from SBA headquarters related to fostering entrepreneurship with HBCUs, although SBDCs deliver counseling and training to potential and existing business owners. Similarly, the Office of Field Operations, which oversees district offices, did not communicate the 2018 plan to support HBCUs to district offices, including the goal to collaborate with HBCUs, according to SBA officials. While SBA’s district offices deliver most of SBA’s programs and services, none of the representatives of the eight district offices with whom we spoke answered questions related to SBA’s planned efforts to support HBCUs because they stated they were not involved with agency plans for the White House Initiative on HBCUs or were otherwise unable to provide a response. Federal internal control standards state that management should internally communicate the necessary quality information to achieve the entity’s objectives. For example, management assigns the internal control responsibilities for key roles and communicates quality information up, down, and across reporting lines. This enables personnel to perform key roles in achieving objectives, addressing risks, and supporting the internal control system. According to SBA officials, SBA headquarters did not communicate its plan for supporting HBCUs to SBDCs and district offices due to the timing of the plan’s issuance—the 2018 plan was not finalized until near the end of the fiscal year. SBA officials told us that instead of communicating the 2018 plan at the end of the 2018 fiscal year, officials chose to focus on the upcoming fiscal year and future efforts to support HBCUs. Additionally, SBA officials stated the Office of Field Operations was not involved in addressing the White House Initiative on HBCUs, although the office is responsible for providing policy guidance and oversight to district offices in implementing agency goals and objectives. Because SBA headquarters did not communicate its plan for supporting HBCUs, SBDCs and district offices with HBCUs in their service areas were not aware of the goal to collaborate with HBCUs. Therefore, the agency may have missed opportunities to collaborate with HBCUs and work toward 2018 plan goals, even if for a brief period. As of September 2019, SBA officials told us the agency’s fiscal year 2019 plan (or update) for the White House Initiative on HBCUs had not been finalized. As a result, it was unclear when this plan would be communicated to SBDCs and district offices. If the 2019 and subsequent plans for supporting HBCUs are not communicated to SBDCs and district offices, SBA risks repeating a scenario in which SBDCs and district offices with HBCUs in their service areas are unaware of goals to support HBCUs, and therefore may miss opportunities to engage with HBCUs. SBA’s Data Collection for Its HBCU-Related Efforts Is Limited The extent to which SBA collected information about its programs and activities with HBCUs is limited. More specifically, SBA did not collect relevant information to establish a baseline for performance measures developed in its 2018 plan for the White House Initiative on HBCUs. SBA officials told us that they wanted to use the measures to establish a baseline to better assess progress towards meeting the plan’s goals to support HBCUs in fiscal year 2019. As noted earlier, the 2018 plan’s five measures are (1) number of outreach events, (2) number of outreach attendees, (3) number of partnerships established, (4) percentage of engaged HBCUs that pursued federal funding, and (5) percentage of HBCUs engaged that found the information useful. Number of outreach events and attendees. SBA collects information on the number of outreach events and the number of outreach attendees, but this information is incomplete and not specific to HBCUs. According to SBA officials, SBA district offices are required to collect and report the number of outreach events and attendees to the Office of Field Operations. However, information for outreach activities is reported on an aggregate basis to headquarters and does not specifically identify which institutions hosted or participated in the events. As such, the information reported also does not specifically identify attendees affiliated with an HBCU, such as students, faculty, or alumni. Therefore, while representatives of all eight district offices we contacted said they have conducted outreach activities with HBCUs, these activities would not be readily identifiable in the information reported to headquarters. Until July 2019, SBA district offices reported outreach events through the activity contact report. District offices were able to include optional information, such as the event location and organization name for their outreach events, as shown in figure 3. SBA officials told us they can perform manual searches for specific text (such as the specific name of an institution or “HBCU”) included in information reported by district offices that may identify HBCU-related activities. However, they said manual searches are not easy or effective or routinely performed. Therefore, manually searching for specific text that may be included in information reported by district offices does not lend itself to efficient monitoring of HBCU-related outreach. SBA officials told us a temporary reporting tool (used since late July 2019 in place of the activity contact report) includes an optional data field for district offices to identify whether their activity was HBCU-related. While this additional field may enable users to conduct manual searches for HBCU-related outreach more easily, SBA officials told us the data from the field are still reported in the aggregate to SBA headquarters and therefore continue to be not readily identifiable as HBCU-related. For more information about SBA’s systems for reporting (including district offices), see appendix IV. Additionally, SBA officials told us headquarters does not have policies or guidance for district offices for systematically collecting or reporting data on their HBCU-related outreach. At least one district office, West Virginia, voluntarily tracks its activities with the HBCUs in its region, using a spreadsheet it developed. Unlike district offices, SBDCs are not required to collect and report information related to outreach (such as the number of outreach events and attendees) to the Office of Entrepreneurial Development. As a result, although all nine SBDCs we contacted conduct outreach to HBCUs, SBA lacks data about these activities. The 2020 funding opportunity for SBDCs requires SBDCs with HBCUs in their states to report outreach events with HBCUs in their semi-annual and final year-end reports. Number of partnerships established. SBA collects information on the number of partnerships established, but this information is incomplete and not specific to HBCUs. According to SBA officials, there is no written definition defining partnerships for this measure, but it would include both informal and formal partnerships. SBA collects information related to formal partnerships: SBDCs, strategic alliance memorandums, and co- sponsorship agreements. However, these records do not allow for the ready identification of HBCU partnerships because there are no data fields to identify whether the partner is an HBCU. SBDCs. Information on the number of SBDCs hosted by HBCUs is incomplete. SBA’s records do not allow for ready identification of HBCUs as host institutions because there is no field to identify whether a host institution is an HBCU. While SBA provided information on the number of SBDC lead centers hosted by HBCUs over time, information was not available on the number of SBDC service centers hosted by HBCUs during the time frame of our review (2008–2018) because according to SBA officials, host institutions for service centers can change over time. Strategic alliance memorandums. Information on the number of strategic alliance memorandums signed with HBCUs is incomplete. In September 2018, SBA provided us a list of HBCUs that signed strategic alliance memorandums from 2008 through 2018, developed by cross-referencing records of memorandums with a list of HBCUs. SBA identified 24 such HBCUs, but we identified an additional three HBCUs that had signed strategic alliance memorandums during this period. In June 2019, SBA provided us a list of all strategic alliance memorandums signed from 2015 through 2018, but we found that a 2016 memorandum with Alabama A&M University (Huntsville, Alabama) was not included. Co-sponsorship agreements. Information on the number of co- sponsorship agreements signed with HBCUs is incomplete. In November 2018, SBA provided us copies of co-sponsorship agreements signed with HBCUs from fiscal years 2013 through 2018 by manually cross-referencing its records with a list of HBCUs. SBA identified 14 such agreements, but we identified an additional two co- sponsorship agreements signed with HBCUs. Usefulness. SBA does not collect information on the percentage of HBCUs engaged in activities that found the resources and information SBA provided to be useful. According to SBA officials, district offices are not required to collect written feedback related to the usefulness of information presented during their activities, such as counseling and training. If district offices solicit feedback, it cannot be distinguished as feedback from HBCUs. For example, SBA district offices may solicit written feedback for co- sponsored activities using a headquarters-developed form. The form does not include fields for participants to identify their affiliation with an HBCU and therefore, feedback received would not be HBCU-specific. Unlike district offices, SBDCs are required to issue evaluation forms for SBDC clients who receive continuous counseling or attend an SBDC training event. For example, representatives from the Alabama SBDC lead center told us they conduct quarterly counseling surveys, which include questions related to the timeliness of the counseling and knowledge of the business advisor. SBDCs report data on client satisfaction rates to SBA headquarters. However, SBA officials told us the feedback-related information SBDCs collect and report to headquarters is not specific to HBCUs, despite the agency’s identification of this measure as relevant in its 2018 plan. Federal internal controls standards state that management should use quality information to achieve the entity’s objectives. For example, management obtains relevant data based on the identified information requirements and relevant data have a logical connection with the identified information requirements. SBA lacks information related to programs and activities with HBCUs because district offices and SBDCs with HBCUs in their service areas have not been required by relevant program offices to collect or report information specific to HBCUs, including information relevant for measures developed in SBA’s 2018 plan. Without collection of relevant information for its HBCU-related efforts, particularly for measures developed for annual plans, SBA will not be able to establish a baseline of its efforts to support HBCUs. Moreover, without this baseline SBA cannot determine the extent or effectiveness of its efforts to support and engage HBCUs. Conclusions SBA’s priority goals include reaching emerging markets that are socially and economically disadvantaged. The agency’s efforts related to HBCUs, which educate many low-income students and help support their local communities, can assist the agency in advancing that goal. But while SBA has long participated in the White House Initiative on HBCUs, it has not clearly assigned responsibilities among relevant offices for addressing its plan for the initiative; communicated its plan to support HBCUs to SBA district offices and SBDCs (with HBCUs in their service areas), which deliver training and counseling; and collected relevant information to establish a baseline and track ongoing efforts to support HBCUs. Addressing these issues would better position SBA to assess the extent to which it is reaching its goals specific to supporting HBCUs, as well as agency-wide priority goals to more broadly reach socially and economically disadvantaged communities. Recommendations for Executive Action We are making the following three recommendations to the Small Business Administration: The SBA Administrator should assign and document clear roles, responsibilities, and reporting lines for headquarters offices’ implementation of SBA’s plan for addressing the White House Initiative on HBCUs in a timely manner. (Recommendation 1) The Associate Administrators of the Office of Entrepreneurial Development and Office of Field Operations should communicate planned efforts to support HBCUs, including expectations, goals, and related measures, to the district offices and Small Business Development Centers with HBCUs in their service areas. (Recommendation 2) The Associate Administrator of the Office of Entrepreneurial Development should take and document steps to ensure that the office’s reporting mechanisms collect the information needed to establish a baseline for, and also inform future monitoring and assessment of, efforts to support HBCUs. (Recommendation 3) Agency Comments and Our Evaluation We provided a draft of this report to the Small Business Administration for review and comment. In comments reproduced in appendix V, the Small Business Administration agreed with our three recommendations. The Small Business Administration also provided additional examples of recent accomplishments and plans in their comments. As agreed with your offices, unless you publicly announce the contents of this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from the report date. At that time, we will send copies of this report to the Acting Administrator of the Small Business Administration and other interested parties. In addition, the report will be made available at no charge on the GAO website at http://www.gao.gov. If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact me at (202) 512-8678 or OrtizA@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this report are listed in appendix VI. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology You asked us to review SBA’s entrepreneurship-related efforts with Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU). This report examines, as did two related products, (1) the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) efforts to foster entrepreneurship through key programs and activities with HBCUs in recent years, (2) SBA’s agency plans for the White House Initiative on HBCUs, and (3) the extent to which SBA collected and recorded information specific to HBCUs. Our review of efforts to foster entrepreneurship focused on counseling and training. To address the first objective, we analyzed SBA programs and activities that in previous work we identified as key for fostering entrepreneurship with HBCUs. Key programs and activities are the Small Business Development Center (SBDC) program, strategic alliance memorandums, and co-sponsored activities. We obtained data from SBA’s Office of Entrepreneurial Development and Office of Strategic Alliances for these key programs and activities, and identified the participation of institutions of higher education, including HBCUs. We reviewed and analyzed data provided to us by SBA of the host institutions and the total amount of funding obligated to administer the SBDC program in fiscal years 2008– 2018 and signed agreements (strategic alliance memorandums and co- sponsorship agreements) with institutions of higher education (HBCUs and non-HBCUs) in fiscal years 2013–2018. In addition, we conducted an on-site file review to record strategic alliance memorandums signed in fiscal years 2013–2015 that were not readily available electronically. To assess the reliability of these data, we reviewed available data, cross- walked them with publicly available information, if applicable, and requested written responses from SBA officials about the data and their limitations, if any. We determined the data were sufficiently reliable for describing the general scale of SBA’s efforts to engage with HBCUs and non-HBCUs. To address the second objective, we reviewed SBA’s 2018 plan for the White House Initiative on HBCUs and documentation of plans for 2011 and 2012, which were the only years in the period of our review (2008– 2018) for which SBA could provide documentation of such plans. We also analyzed the three most recent executive orders related to HBCUs to understand the responsibilities expected of federal agencies and identify changes over time. We also reviewed additional documents that SBA provided related to its agency plans, such as efforts to promote small business research programs, and one available annual agency submission (fiscal year 2010) to the White House Initiative on HBCUs on SBA’s efforts to support HBCUs. We interviewed SBA officials from the Office of Entrepreneurial Development, Office of Field Operations, and the Office of Strategic Alliances. We also interviewed representatives of six SBDC lead centers and three associated service centers, and eight SBA district offices (with 47 HBCUs in their areas). We selected these SBDC networks and district offices based on a combination of factors, including (1) HBCU participation in an SBDC network (hosting a lead or service center), (2) high number of HBCUs located in the state, and (3) high number of agreements (strategic alliance memorandums or co-sponsorship agreements) SBA signed with HBCUs. Based on data SBA provided of signed strategic alliance memorandums with HBCUs, we selected and contacted 12 HBCUs that had signed a strategic alliance memorandum with SBA between 2013 and 2018 or were located close to SBA offices or resource partners such as SBDCs. We interviewed staff at eight of these HBCUs and the remaining four HBCUs did not respond. We visited the District of Columbia, Maryland, North Carolina, and the U.S. Virgin Islands and met with SBDC representatives, SBA district officials, and HBCU representatives, as applicable. We also interviewed America’s SBDCs, an association for SBDCs, and representatives of the following advocacy groups: the Thurgood Marshall College Fund, the United Negro College Fund, and the National Association for Equal Opportunity. To address the third objective, we reviewed two sets of SBA standard operating procedures to understand information collected and reported for (1) the SBDC program, and (2) outreach activities that include co- sponsored activities and strategic alliance memorandums. We reviewed available program announcements or funding opportunities, and cooperative agreements for recipients of the SBDC program to identify their reporting requirements. We reviewed guidance related to the Office of Field Operations’ goals and measures to identity SBA district offices’ reporting requirements. In addition, we reviewed user manuals, data entry form templates, and data dictionaries for SBA information systems used by SBDCs and SBA district offices, such as the Entrepreneurial Development Management Information System and the Activity Contact Report, to identify the extent to which data collected and reported included HBCU-related activities. We reviewed SBA’s 2018 plan for the White House Initiative on HBCUs to identify performance measures developed to monitor SBA’s HBCU- related efforts. We then analyzed whether the information that SBDCs and SBA district offices are required to report included information for monitoring the performance measures developed in the 2018 plan. We assessed SBA’s plans and related efforts against federal internal control standards. Additionally, we interviewed SBA officials from the Office of Entrepreneurial Development, Office of Field Operations, and Office of Strategic Alliances; SBA district office officials from eight offices; and SBDC representatives from nine SBDC networks to better understand the extent to which SBA collects and records information related to their engagement with HBCUs. We conducted this performance audit, from June 2018 to November 2019 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. Appendix II: Selected Small Business Administration Resources in Historically Black Colleges and University States The Small Business Administration’s (SBA) Small Business Development Centers (SBDC) and district offices provide services that could foster entrepreneurship. The SBDC program provides technical assistance (business counseling and training) to small businesses and aspiring entrepreneurs. SBDCs assist small businesses access capital, develop and exchange new technologies, and improve business planning, strategy, and financial management, among other services. The recipient or host institution of the SBDC is responsible for establishing a lead center and a network of service centers for a designated service area. SBA district offices serve as the point of delivery for most SBA programs and services. Some district office staff (including business opportunity, lender relations, and economic development specialists) work directly with SBA clients. SBA’s district offices also can initiate and oversee outreach activities to foster entrepreneurship. As of December 2018, there were 101 Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU), located across 19 states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Table 3 lists those states (in addition to the District of Columbia and the U.S. Virgin Islands), the locations of SBDC lead centers and district offices, and the HBCUs. Appendix III: Small Business Administration Outreach to Historically Black Colleges and Universities on Two Research Programs The Small Business Administration’s (SBA) 2018 plan for the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) identifies two programs as available resources that are underutilized by HBCUs. More specifically, the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs provide research and development funding to small businesses to develop and commercialize innovative technologies. The programs are authorized by the Small Business Act, and SBA’s Office of Investment and Innovation is responsible for their oversight, including coordinating the participating agencies’ efforts for the programs. The SBIR program began in 1982 and has four main purposes: (1) use small businesses to meet federal research and development needs, (2) stimulate technological innovation, (3) increase private-sector commercialization of innovations derived from federal research and development efforts, and (4) foster and encourage technological innovation by small businesses owned by women and disadvantaged individuals. The STTR program began in 1992 and has three main purposes: (1) stimulate technological innovation, (2) foster technological transfer through cooperative research and development between small businesses and research institutions, and (3) increase private-sector commercialization of innovations derived from federal research and development. Both programs are similar in that participating agencies identify topics for research and development projects and support small businesses, but the STTR program requires the small business to partner with a nonprofit research institution, such as a college or university or federally funded research and development center. SBA has made some recent efforts to increase awareness among HBCUs about opportunities to access these programs. For example: SBA participated in the HBCU and Minority-Serving Institution Technology Infusion Road Tour, which was organized by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. As a part of this effort, SBA participated in presentations on the SBIR and STTR programs at three HBCUs: Tennessee State University (Nashville, Tennessee) in April 2017, Johnson C. Smith University (Charlotte, North Carolina) in February 2018, and Clark Atlanta University (Atlanta, Georgia) in March 2018. In 2018, SBA conducted an SBIR Road Tour to raise awareness of available research and development funding. As part of the tour, the agency conducted workshops and presentations at two HBCUs: Alabama A&M University (Huntsville, Alabama) and Jackson State University (Jackson, Mississippi). SBA participated in the 2018 National HBCU Week Conference hosted by the White House Initiative on HBCUs. SBA staff served as speakers and panelists in sessions related to access to federally funded programs (such as SBIR and STTR), and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. The North Carolina Small Business and Technology Development Center, an SBA resource partner, hosted a workshop in April 2018 at an HBCU—North Carolina Central University (Durham, North Carolina)—focused on preparing proposals for the SBIR and STTR programs. Appendix IV: Small Business Administration Information Systems and Forms on Counseling and Training Activities The Small Business Administration’s (SBA) information systems collect a variety of information about SBA’s Small Business Development Centers (SBDC) and district office activities, including counseling and training. Partner Identification Management System. SBDC lead centers are required to maintain their lead center and service center information in SBA’s Partner Identification Management System. This information includes each SBDC service location by name, host institution, and physical address. Additionally, SBDC locations are identified as the lead center, service center, or satellite location. There is no data field to identify the type of host institution (such as institution of higher education) or whether the host institution is a Historically Black College and University (HBCU). Entrepreneurial Development Management Information System. SBDCs are required to report their program data, including counseling and training activities, through SBA’s data collection system, known as the Entrepreneurial Development Management Information System. According to the user manual, the system is designed around two primary forms: SBA’s counseling information form and SBA’s management training report. These forms include data fields for users to enter demographic information on clients and training participants, such as race, gender, and veteran status. Figure 4 shows the data fields related to demographic information included in SBA’s counseling information form. Figure 5 shows data fields related to demographic information included in SBA’s management training report. There are no data fields for users to enter information related to whether a client or training participant is associated with an institution of higher education, including an HBCU. The Entrepreneurial Development Management Information System enables SBA management to generate reports based on demographic information, such as the number of minority participants trained by SBDCs, but not on the number of HBCU- affiliated clients and training participants. Activity contact report. Until July 2019, district offices were required to report activities (including training, presentations, and interactions with stakeholders) that aligned with their goals and measures to the Office of Field Operations through SBA’s activity contact report. District office staff reported their activities in categories that included general inquiries, training, presentations, counseling and technical assistance, outreach, meetings, and special initiatives. Activity contact report forms did not include data entry fields specific to the type of institution (such as institutions of higher education, including HBCUs) that hosted or participated in the district office’s activity. Additionally, the activity contact report forms did not include data entry fields to identify whether participants were affiliated with an HBCU (students, faculty, or alumni). For some activity contact report categories, the forms included additional data entry fields for the event location and name of the organization involved. For example, the activity contact report form for meetings included optional data fields for the event location and organization name, as shown in figure 6. According to SBA officials, the temporary reporting tool (used since late July 2019 in place of the activity contact report) includes an optional data field for district offices to identity whether their activity was HBCU-related. Appendix V: Comments from the Small Business Administration Appendix VI: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgements GAO Contact Staff Acknowledgments In addition to the contact named above, Lisa Moore (Assistant Director), Chir-Jen Huang (Analyst in Charge), Rachel Beers, John Karikari, Ben Licht, John Mingus, Sulayman Njie, Maria Psara, Barbara Roesmann, Jessica Sandler, Jena Sinkfield, and Andrew Stavisky made key contributions to this report.