Entrepreneurial Mentoring and Education, 32973-32975 [2010-13978]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 111 / Thursday, June 10, 2010 / Notices
Idaho, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New
Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South
Carolina, South Dakota, and Wyoming.
Oklahoma has been added for the 2011
calendar year.
DATES: Effective Date: January 1, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lynelle T. Frye, 202–606–0004.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEHB law
(5 U.S.C. 8902(m)(2)) requires special
consideration for enrollees of certain
FEHB plans who receive covered health
services in States with critical shortages
of primary care physicians. This section
of the law requires that a State be
designated as a Medically Underserved
Area if 25 percent or more of the
population lives in an area designated
by the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) as a primary medical
care manpower shortage area. Such
States are designated as Medically
Underserved Areas for purposes of the
FEHB Program, and the law requires
non-HMO FEHB plans to reimburse
beneficiaries, subject to their contract
terms, for covered services obtained
from any licensed provider in these
States.
FEHB regulations (5 CFR 890.701)
require OPM to make an annual
determination of the States that qualify
as Medically Underserved Areas for the
next calendar year by comparing the
latest HHS State-by-State population
counts on primary medical care
manpower shortage areas with U.S.
Census figures on State resident
populations.
Office of Personnel Management.
John Berry,
Director.
[FR Doc. 2010–13995 Filed 6–9–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325–39–P
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
Entrepreneurial Mentoring and
Education
Small Business Administration.
Request for information.
AGENCY:
cprice-sewell on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with NOTICES
ACTION:
SUMMARY: President Obama presented a
national innovation strategy in
September 2009 with a call to action to
increase innovation in order to propel
sustainable economic growth and create
high quality jobs. Of particular
importance to this strategy is the focus
on the role of high-growth small
businesses. At the May 2010
Presidential Summit on
Entrepreneurship, President Obama
called entrepreneurship ‘‘the most
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:40 Jun 09, 2010
Jkt 220001
powerful force the world has ever
known for creating opportunity.’’
High-growth companies for the
purpose of this request for
information—those that have
experienced high-growth already and
those that have high-growth potential—
do not have a precise definition. Some
academic literature has focused on
companies that double in revenue or
employment over a four-year period.
Others focus on companies that reach a
customer base beyond the confines of
geographic proximity (e.g., local
businesses like restaurants or dry
cleaners) to a ‘‘traded’’ sector (e.g.,
manufacturing, business services)
because that market has more growth
potential. Perhaps the simplest
definition is businesses that have the
potential to grow beyond a certain
size—beyond 500 employees or beyond
$50 million in revenue or enterprise
value.
High-growth, early stage
entrepreneurs face long odds; however,
certain programmatic initiatives could
significantly increase their chances to
succeed. Mentoring relationships
provide many benefits to a new
entrepreneur and, ultimately, to their
communities if those new companies
have a greater probability of thriving
and hiring employees. Similarly,
entrepreneurial education geared
towards the high-growth community is
imperative in reaching a wider audience
of potential entrepreneurs and
encouraging a sustainable, innovationbased ecosystem.
This RFI is designed to collect input
from the public on ideas for creating
and leveraging existing entrepreneurial
mentoring and education programs for
early stage, high-growth companies. One
objective of the RFI is to understand
how the needs of high-growth
companies and entrepreneurs may differ
from other businesses. In order to delve
into these differences, the first section of
the RFI seeks public comments on the
best structure for public-private
partnerships that can build mentoring
networks between new and seasoned
entrepreneurs. The second section of the
RFI seeks public comments on best
practices and program development for
building entrepreneurial education
programs targeted at preparing new and
serial entrepreneurs to lead high-growth
companies.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before July 12, 2010.
You may submit written
comments, identified by SBA docket
number SBA–2010–0009, by any of the
following methods:
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
32973
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Ellen E. Kim, Senior Advisor,
Investment Division, U.S. Small
Business Administration, 409 Third
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20416.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: Ellen E.
Kim, Senior Advisor, Investment
Division, U.S. Small Business
Administration, 409 Third Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20416.
SBA will post all comments on
https://www.regulations.gov. If you wish
to submit confidential business
information (CBI) as defined in the User
Notice at https://www.regulations.gov,
please submit the information to Ellen
Kim, Senior Advisor, Investment
Division, U.S. Small Business
Administration, 409 Third Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20416, or send an email to RFI_Entrepreneurship@sba.gov.
Highlight the information that you
consider to be CBI and explain why you
believe SBA should hold this
information as confidential. SBA will
review the information and make the
final determination whether it will
publish the information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ellen Kim, 202–604–3394.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
Small businesses are essential to our
nation’s economy and its recovery from
the recession. Small businesses create
two out of every three new jobs in this
country; most of those net new jobs
come from a smaller sub-segment of
companies with very high growth rates.
Data shows that these high-growth
companies are spread all over the
country and across all industries.
Nevertheless, first-time and even serial
entrepreneurs face many challenges to
creating sustainable and high-growth
companies. Seven out of ten new
employer firms last at least two years,
yet only half survive five years.
Mentorship and educational/training
programs are proven methodologies that
increase the likelihood that a first-time
entrepreneur will succeed.
The Obama Innovation Strategy lays
out several initiatives that indicate a
renewed focus on education and
training for entrepreneurs. One such
initiative is the active role the Federal
government has taken in promoting
student achievement and careers in
STEM (Science, Technology,
Engineering, and Math). These subject
areas are critical to laying the
foundation for the next generation of
innovators. Training programs are also
aligned with the Innovation Strategy as
E:\FR\FM\10JNN1.SGM
10JNN1
32974
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 111 / Thursday, June 10, 2010 / Notices
highlighted by successful support of
past Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency (DARPA) initiatives.
The U.S. Small Business Administration
(SBA) is committed to gathering
information from the most
knowledgeable sources in industry,
academia, foundations, and non-profits
in order to focus our efforts on how the
government can best foster high-growth
companies.
The SBA supports a wide array of
entrepreneurial activity through our
District Offices, resource partners such
as SCORE, Small Business Development
Centers, Women’s Business Centers,
Veteran’s Business Outreach Centers,
and special initiatives offered in
partnership with multiple organizations.
These publicly-supported services
provide valuable benefits to a full
spectrum of communities and industries
across the United States. In many
instances, SBA also works via informal
relationships through speaker
engagements, conferences, online
resources, print material and other
resources to support entrepreneurial
education.
B. Request for Information
Responses to this notice are not offers
and cannot be accepted by the
Government to form a binding contract
or issue a grant. Information obtained as
a result of this RFI may be used by the
government for program planning on a
non-attribution basis. Do not include
any information that might be
considered proprietary or confidential.
The SBA is interested in responses that
address one or more of the following
topics:
Part I: With Respect to Entrepreneurial
Mentorship
cprice-sewell on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with NOTICES
Successful Mentoring Models
1. What are successful mentoring
models that exist today to serve early
stage, high-growth companies?
(Responses may, but are not required to,
touch upon any of the following points.)
(a) How is mentoring targeted to highgrowth companies different from
mentoring targeted to ‘‘main-street’’
companies?
(b) What are key factors for success?
(c) What is the current scope of
mentoring services offered?
(d) Do the mentoring models vary by
industry and/or by region?
(e) What is the duration of the
mentoring relationship? Frequency of
meetings? Long-term support structure?
(f) How are seasoned entrepreneurs
recruited to be mentors and what
incentives do they need (if any) to stay
in a mentoring relationship?
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:40 Jun 09, 2010
Jkt 220001
(g) How are early-stage entrepreneurs
recruited, and what factors keep them
engaged in the mentoring relationship?
Do entrepreneurs tend to enlist
mentoring services on their own or
through other channels (e.g., referrals
from investors, associations, etc.)? Are
there any criteria for these companies/
entrepreneurs to participate in the
mentoring program?
(h) What are the characteristics of the
mentors and new entrepreneurs that
gain the most from participating in a
mentoring relationship?
(i) What, if any, guidelines and
regulations help ensure effective
mentoring relationships?
(2) Describe how mentoring services
can complement any comprehensive
entrepreneur service strategy.
(3) What is the level of awareness
surrounding successful mentoring
programs?
(a) What methods of outreach do these
programs use?
(4) Please describe what types of
mentoring programs have been less than
successful.
(a) To the best of your ability, please
describe what were the possible reasons
or challenges that resulted in less than
successful results.
Success Metrics
(5) How do you measure success in an
entrepreneurial mentoring relationship?
(a) What are the relevant inputs,
outputs, and outcomes for success
metrics?
(b) What is the time period needed to
measure success?
(6) What is the track record of
successful mentoring models that you
are aware of?
Program Expansion
(7) What are the constraints to scaling
an entrepreneurial mentoring program?
(8) What changes in public policy and
research should the Administration
consider that would promote increased
mentoring of high-growth companies?
(9) Is there any other information
regarding entrepreneurial mentoring
that would be helpful to the SBA?
Part II: With Respect to Entrepreneurial
Education
Successful Educational Models
(10) What are the successful models
for teaching entrepreneurship to
entrepreneurs preparing to launch highgrowth companies? (Responses may, but
are not required to, touch upon any of
the following points.)
(a) Are existing programs targeted for
high school, college, graduate, or midcareer professionals?
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(b) At what stage in a company’s
lifecycle are educational programs most
effective and/or most utilized? (e.g., prelaunch, post-launch, after reaching
certain revenue targets, etc.)
(c) What is the primary vehicle to
teach entrepreneurship? (e.g., one-onone, group, online, bricks-and-mortar
schools, self-paced, etc.)
(d) Which models have been adopted
most widely?
(e) What is the track record of
successful educational models that you
are aware of?
(11) What kinds of entrepreneurial
education programs work best at
imparting entrepreneurial skills and
knowledge?
(12) What is the level of awareness
surrounding successful educational
programs?
(a) What methods of outreach do these
educational programs use?
(13) How can existing educational
programs be modified or augmented to
encourage increased adoption of
entrepreneurial-focused curricula,
training, or experiential learning
programs?
(14) Please describe what types of
entrepreneurial education programs
have been less than successful.
(a) To the best of your ability, please
describe what were the possible reasons
or challenges that resulted in less than
successful results.
Success Metrics
(15) What are appropriate metrics for
evaluating the success or failure of
initiatives to promote entrepreneurship
through educational programs?
(16) What is the evidence that specific
educational approaches and/or curricula
are successful?
(17) What metrics of success are used
by the most successful entrepreneurial
education programs?
Program Expansion
(18) What are the constraints to
scaling an entrepreneurial education
program to high-growth entrepreneurs?
(19) How can promising
entrepreneurial education programs be
adopted more widely?
(20) What changes in public policy
and funding should the SBA consider
that would promote increased
entrepreneurial education?
(21) Beyond entrepreneurial
education programs, what else can be
done to promote entrepreneurship?
E:\FR\FM\10JNN1.SGM
10JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 111 / Thursday, June 10, 2010 / Notices
(22) Is there any other information
regarding entrepreneurial education that
would be helpful to the SBA?
Harry E. Haskins,
Deputy Associate Administrator for
Investment.
[FR Doc. 2010–13978 Filed 6–9–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–62224; File No. SR–
NYSEAmex–2010–47]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE
Amex LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Changes Deleting Rules 352(e)–
(g)—NYSE Amex Equities and
Adopting New Rule 3240—NYSE Amex
Equities To Correspond With Rule
Changes Filed by the Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
June 4, 2010.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Act’’) 2 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,3
notice is hereby given that on May 17,
2010, NYSE Amex LLC (the ‘‘Exchange’’
or ‘‘NYSE Amex’’) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
changes as described in Items I, II, and
III below, which Items have been
substantially prepared by the Exchange.
The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule changes from interested
persons.
cprice-sewell on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with NOTICES
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Changes
The Exchange proposes to delete
Rules 352(e)–(g)—NYSE Amex Equities
and adopt new Rule 3240—NYSE Amex
Equities to correspond with rule
changes filed by the Financial Industry
Regulatory Authority, Inc. (‘‘FINRA’’)
and approved by the Commission.4 The
text of the proposed rule changes is
available at the Exchange, the
Commission’s Public Reference Room,
and https://www.nyse.com.
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
U.S.C. 78a.
3 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61537
(February 18, 2010), 75 FR 8772 (February 25, 2010)
(order approving SR–FINRA–2009–095).
2 15
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:40 Jun 09, 2010
Jkt 220001
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Changes
In its filing with the Commission, the
Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for,
the proposed rule changes and
discussed any comments it received on
the proposed rule changes. The text of
those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below.
The Exchange has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections A, B, and C below,
of the most significant parts of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Changes
1. Purpose
The purpose of the proposed rule
changes is to delete Rules 352(e)–(g)—
NYSE Amex Equities (Guarantees,
Sharing in Accounts, and Loan
Arrangements) and adopt new Rule
3240—NYSE Amex Equities (Borrowing
From or Lending to Customers) to
correspond with rule changes filed by
FINRA and approved by the
Commission.
Background
On July 30, 2007, FINRA’s
predecessor, the National Association of
Securities Dealers, Inc. (‘‘NASD’’), and
NYSE Regulation, Inc. (‘‘NYSER’’)
consolidated their member firm
regulation operations into a combined
organization, FINRA. Pursuant to Rule
17d–2 under the Act, the New York
Stock Exchange LLC (‘‘NYSE’’), NYSER
and FINRA entered into an agreement
(the ‘‘Agreement’’) to reduce regulatory
duplication for their members by
allocating to FINRA certain regulatory
responsibilities for certain NYSE rules
and rule interpretations (‘‘FINRA
Incorporated NYSE Rules’’). The
Exchange became a party to the
Agreement effective December 15,
2008.5
As part of its effort to reduce
regulatory duplication and relieve firms
that are members of FINRA, NYSE and
NYSE Amex of conflicting or
5 See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 56148
(July 26, 2007), 72 FR 42146 (August 1, 2007) (order
approving the Agreement); 56147 (July 26, 2007), 72
FR 42166 (August 1, 2007) (SR–NASD–2007–054)
(order approving the incorporation of certain NYSE
Rules as ‘‘Common Rules’’); and 60409 (July 30,
2009), 74 FR 39353 (August 6, 2009) (order
approving the amended and restated Agreement,
adding NYSE Amex LLC as a party). Paragraph 2(b)
of the Agreement sets forth procedures regarding
proposed changes by FINRA, NYSE or NYSE Amex
to the substance of any of the Common Rules.
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
32975
unnecessary regulatory burdens, FINRA
is now engaged in the process of
reviewing and amending the NASD and
FINRA Incorporated NYSE Rules in
order to create a consolidated FINRA
rulebook.6
Proposed Conforming Amendments to
NYSE Amex Equities Rules
FINRA adopted NASD Rule 2370
(Borrowing From or Lending to
Customers), which governs lending
arrangements between registered
persons and their customers, as
consolidated FINRA Rule 3240, subject
to certain modifications.7 Because they
are substantially similar to consolidated
FINRA Rule 3240, FINRA also deleted
FINRA Incorporated NYSE Rules
352(e)–(g).8
To harmonize the NYSE Amex
Equities Rules with the approved
consolidated FINRA Rules, the
Exchange correspondingly proposes to
delete Rules 352(e)–(g)—NYSE Amex
Equities and replace them with
proposed Rule 3240—NYSE Amex
Equities, which is substantially similar
to the new FINRA Rule.9 As proposed,
Rule 3240—NYSE Amex Equities adopts
the same language as FINRA Rule 3240,
except for substituting for or adding to,
as needed, the term ‘‘member
organization’’ for the term ‘‘member,’’
and making corresponding technical
changes. In addition, in order to ensure
that both proposed Rule 3240—NYSE
Amex Equities and FINRA Rule 3240
are fully harmonized, the Exchange also
proposes to add Supplementary
Material .02 to Rule 3240—NYSE Amex
Equities to provide that, for the
purposes of the rule, the term ‘‘person
associated with a member organization’’
shall have the same meaning as the
terms ‘‘person associated with a
member’’ or ‘‘associated person of a
member’’ as defined in Article I (rr) of
the FINRA By-Laws.
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule changes are consistent
6 FINRA’s rulebook currently has three sets of
rules: (1) NASD Rules, (2) FINRA Incorporated
NYSE Rules, and (3) consolidated FINRA Rules.
The FINRA Incorporated NYSE Rules apply only to
those members of FINRA that are also members of
the NYSE, while the consolidated FINRA Rules
apply to all FINRA members. For more information
about the FINRA rulebook consolidation process,
see FINRA Information Notice, March 12, 2008.
7 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61537
(February 18, 2010), 75 FR 8772 (February 25,
2010).
8 Id.
9 The NYSE has submitted a companion rule
filing amending its rules in accordance with
FINRA’s rule changes. See SR–NYSE–2010–40.
E:\FR\FM\10JNN1.SGM
10JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 111 (Thursday, June 10, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32973-32975]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-13978]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
Entrepreneurial Mentoring and Education
AGENCY: Small Business Administration.
ACTION: Request for information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: President Obama presented a national innovation strategy in
September 2009 with a call to action to increase innovation in order to
propel sustainable economic growth and create high quality jobs. Of
particular importance to this strategy is the focus on the role of
high-growth small businesses. At the May 2010 Presidential Summit on
Entrepreneurship, President Obama called entrepreneurship ``the most
powerful force the world has ever known for creating opportunity.''
High-growth companies for the purpose of this request for
information--those that have experienced high-growth already and those
that have high-growth potential--do not have a precise definition. Some
academic literature has focused on companies that double in revenue or
employment over a four-year period. Others focus on companies that
reach a customer base beyond the confines of geographic proximity
(e.g., local businesses like restaurants or dry cleaners) to a
``traded'' sector (e.g., manufacturing, business services) because that
market has more growth potential. Perhaps the simplest definition is
businesses that have the potential to grow beyond a certain size--
beyond 500 employees or beyond $50 million in revenue or enterprise
value.
High-growth, early stage entrepreneurs face long odds; however,
certain programmatic initiatives could significantly increase their
chances to succeed. Mentoring relationships provide many benefits to a
new entrepreneur and, ultimately, to their communities if those new
companies have a greater probability of thriving and hiring employees.
Similarly, entrepreneurial education geared towards the high-growth
community is imperative in reaching a wider audience of potential
entrepreneurs and encouraging a sustainable, innovation-based
ecosystem.
This RFI is designed to collect input from the public on ideas for
creating and leveraging existing entrepreneurial mentoring and
education programs for early stage, high-growth companies. One
objective of the RFI is to understand how the needs of high-growth
companies and entrepreneurs may differ from other businesses. In order
to delve into these differences, the first section of the RFI seeks
public comments on the best structure for public-private partnerships
that can build mentoring networks between new and seasoned
entrepreneurs. The second section of the RFI seeks public comments on
best practices and program development for building entrepreneurial
education programs targeted at preparing new and serial entrepreneurs
to lead high-growth companies.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 12, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit written comments, identified by SBA docket
number SBA-2010-0009, by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Ellen E. Kim, Senior Advisor, Investment Division,
U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 Third Street, SW., Washington,
DC 20416.
Hand Delivery/Courier: Ellen E. Kim, Senior Advisor,
Investment Division, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 Third
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20416.
SBA will post all comments on https://www.regulations.gov. If you
wish to submit confidential business information (CBI) as defined in
the User Notice at https://www.regulations.gov, please submit the
information to Ellen Kim, Senior Advisor, Investment Division, U.S.
Small Business Administration, 409 Third Street, SW., Washington, DC
20416, or send an e-mail to RFI_Entrepreneurship@sba.gov. Highlight
the information that you consider to be CBI and explain why you believe
SBA should hold this information as confidential. SBA will review the
information and make the final determination whether it will publish
the information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Kim, 202-604-3394.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
Small businesses are essential to our nation's economy and its
recovery from the recession. Small businesses create two out of every
three new jobs in this country; most of those net new jobs come from a
smaller sub-segment of companies with very high growth rates. Data
shows that these high-growth companies are spread all over the country
and across all industries. Nevertheless, first-time and even serial
entrepreneurs face many challenges to creating sustainable and high-
growth companies. Seven out of ten new employer firms last at least two
years, yet only half survive five years. Mentorship and educational/
training programs are proven methodologies that increase the likelihood
that a first-time entrepreneur will succeed.
The Obama Innovation Strategy lays out several initiatives that
indicate a renewed focus on education and training for entrepreneurs.
One such initiative is the active role the Federal government has taken
in promoting student achievement and careers in STEM (Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Math). These subject areas are critical to
laying the foundation for the next generation of innovators. Training
programs are also aligned with the Innovation Strategy as
[[Page 32974]]
highlighted by successful support of past Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency (DARPA) initiatives. The U.S. Small Business
Administration (SBA) is committed to gathering information from the
most knowledgeable sources in industry, academia, foundations, and non-
profits in order to focus our efforts on how the government can best
foster high-growth companies.
The SBA supports a wide array of entrepreneurial activity through
our District Offices, resource partners such as SCORE, Small Business
Development Centers, Women's Business Centers, Veteran's Business
Outreach Centers, and special initiatives offered in partnership with
multiple organizations. These publicly-supported services provide
valuable benefits to a full spectrum of communities and industries
across the United States. In many instances, SBA also works via
informal relationships through speaker engagements, conferences, online
resources, print material and other resources to support
entrepreneurial education.
B. Request for Information
Responses to this notice are not offers and cannot be accepted by
the Government to form a binding contract or issue a grant. Information
obtained as a result of this RFI may be used by the government for
program planning on a non-attribution basis. Do not include any
information that might be considered proprietary or confidential. The
SBA is interested in responses that address one or more of the
following topics:
Part I: With Respect to Entrepreneurial Mentorship
Successful Mentoring Models
1. What are successful mentoring models that exist today to serve
early stage, high-growth companies? (Responses may, but are not
required to, touch upon any of the following points.)
(a) How is mentoring targeted to high-growth companies different
from mentoring targeted to ``main-street'' companies?
(b) What are key factors for success?
(c) What is the current scope of mentoring services offered?
(d) Do the mentoring models vary by industry and/or by region?
(e) What is the duration of the mentoring relationship? Frequency
of meetings? Long-term support structure?
(f) How are seasoned entrepreneurs recruited to be mentors and what
incentives do they need (if any) to stay in a mentoring relationship?
(g) How are early-stage entrepreneurs recruited, and what factors
keep them engaged in the mentoring relationship? Do entrepreneurs tend
to enlist mentoring services on their own or through other channels
(e.g., referrals from investors, associations, etc.)? Are there any
criteria for these companies/entrepreneurs to participate in the
mentoring program?
(h) What are the characteristics of the mentors and new
entrepreneurs that gain the most from participating in a mentoring
relationship?
(i) What, if any, guidelines and regulations help ensure effective
mentoring relationships?
(2) Describe how mentoring services can complement any
comprehensive entrepreneur service strategy.
(3) What is the level of awareness surrounding successful mentoring
programs?
(a) What methods of outreach do these programs use?
(4) Please describe what types of mentoring programs have been less
than successful.
(a) To the best of your ability, please describe what were the
possible reasons or challenges that resulted in less than successful
results.
Success Metrics
(5) How do you measure success in an entrepreneurial mentoring
relationship?
(a) What are the relevant inputs, outputs, and outcomes for success
metrics?
(b) What is the time period needed to measure success?
(6) What is the track record of successful mentoring models that
you are aware of?
Program Expansion
(7) What are the constraints to scaling an entrepreneurial
mentoring program?
(8) What changes in public policy and research should the
Administration consider that would promote increased mentoring of high-
growth companies?
(9) Is there any other information regarding entrepreneurial
mentoring that would be helpful to the SBA?
Part II: With Respect to Entrepreneurial Education
Successful Educational Models
(10) What are the successful models for teaching entrepreneurship
to entrepreneurs preparing to launch high-growth companies? (Responses
may, but are not required to, touch upon any of the following points.)
(a) Are existing programs targeted for high school, college,
graduate, or mid-career professionals?
(b) At what stage in a company's lifecycle are educational programs
most effective and/or most utilized? (e.g., pre-launch, post-launch,
after reaching certain revenue targets, etc.)
(c) What is the primary vehicle to teach entrepreneurship? (e.g.,
one-on-one, group, online, bricks-and-mortar schools, self-paced, etc.)
(d) Which models have been adopted most widely?
(e) What is the track record of successful educational models that
you are aware of?
(11) What kinds of entrepreneurial education programs work best at
imparting entrepreneurial skills and knowledge?
(12) What is the level of awareness surrounding successful
educational programs?
(a) What methods of outreach do these educational programs use?
(13) How can existing educational programs be modified or augmented
to encourage increased adoption of entrepreneurial-focused curricula,
training, or experiential learning programs?
(14) Please describe what types of entrepreneurial education
programs have been less than successful.
(a) To the best of your ability, please describe what were the
possible reasons or challenges that resulted in less than successful
results.
Success Metrics
(15) What are appropriate metrics for evaluating the success or
failure of initiatives to promote entrepreneurship through educational
programs?
(16) What is the evidence that specific educational approaches and/
or curricula are successful?
(17) What metrics of success are used by the most successful
entrepreneurial education programs?
Program Expansion
(18) What are the constraints to scaling an entrepreneurial
education program to high-growth entrepreneurs?
(19) How can promising entrepreneurial education programs be
adopted more widely?
(20) What changes in public policy and funding should the SBA
consider that would promote increased entrepreneurial education?
(21) Beyond entrepreneurial education programs, what else can be
done to promote entrepreneurship?
[[Page 32975]]
(22) Is there any other information regarding entrepreneurial
education that would be helpful to the SBA?
Harry E. Haskins,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Investment.
[FR Doc. 2010-13978 Filed 6-9-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
