The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is facing scrutiny over its Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) program, which has historically aided American manufacturers. NIST is the home of the MEP program, which has provided close to $200 million per year. This critical funding helps expand domestic manufacturing operations across the U.S. and Puerto Rico. There’s concern over how these funds are being spent. In response, NIST is reexamining its priorities.
The MEP program has for decades been a vital lifeline for manufacturers, helping through a network of state and federal partners and local centers. These centers have played a pivotal role in helping businesses adopt cybersecurity measures, build more resilient factory lines, and implement innovative technology solutions. Per NIST, the cooperative agreements for the MEP program have outlived their usefulness and are misaligned with the department’s shifting priorities.
NIST previously denied to WIRED that they withheld funding. They failed to provide any further specificity in the actual signed agreement. The agency is trying to figure out how to develop these new, innovative policies and processes. Their aim is to increase the impact of manufacturing assistance throughout the United States.
Speaking on behalf of NIST, a department official said, “The department is shifting its program priorities. We want to ensure that the US remains a global leader in critical and emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence and quantum. This shift in focus reflects a broader trend within the Department of Commerce, which is evaluating how to best advance U.S. manufacturing in a rapidly changing global landscape.
Continue reading The MEP program doles out the vast majority of its money in chunks. This addendum clarifies that these payments are intended to help bolster states’ and Puerto Rico’s local manufacturing capacity. Although the shift in funding has posed its own challenges, operators at local centers continue to strive to serve and assist manufacturers. Unfortunately, most times, it is not a perfect system,” shared one employee at a local career center on the East Coast. They reiterated that committed staff are key to helping small businesses navigate their hurdles.
Having dedicated staff with deep experience breaking down obstacles can be a game-changer for small businesses. With their support, a small business can overcome the challenges that would otherwise force them to close and instead stay open and continue to succeed.
NIST has recently released a number of these case studies in partnership with states, showing the real-world impacts of the MEP program. These studies highlight how advisers have worked closely with businesses to navigate complex issues, such as adopting new technologies and aligning executive teams on company priorities. In addition, they highlight the importance of the program in supporting and growing the U.S. manufacturing supply chain.
The American Small Manufacturers Coalition, represented by president and CEO Carrie Hines, came to the MEP program’s defense during the criticisms. “This is not a handout,” she stated. We help fill that unique void of technical assistance, with boots on the factory floor. Her comments highlight the administration’s commitment to delivering the right support—beyond just cash—to help Americans thrive.
Although funding priorities have changed with the reassessment of priorities, NIST continues to be dedicated to promoting U.S. manufacturing. In February, the MEP program web page made their case very clear by including a graphic showing how this small program grows the national economy. This new inclusion further deepens the program’s importance in cultivating growth and innovation within the industry.
U.S. Representative Sarah McBride tweeted her outrage on the funding shift. She further declared on the decision, “Trump is stealing opportunity from Delaware’s working families, and I’m going to fight with every single thing I’ve got to turn back this reckless, heartless decision.” McBride’s remarks indicate a growing restiveness among legislators on both sides of the aisle. They worry that withdrawing support for advanced manufacturing will hamper our economic recovery.
Leave a Reply