Bill Overview
Title: Small Project Efficient and Effective Disaster Recovery Act
Description: This act increases to $1 million the threshold for eligibility for assistance for what qualifies as a small project under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, thereby allowing more recovery projects to proceed under simplified procedures. The threshold must be reviewed every three years. The Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security must conduct an audit, and report to Congress, on whether there has been waste and abuse as a result of the change in the threshold.
Sponsors: Rep. Graves, Sam [R-MO-6]
Target Audience
Population: People living in disaster-prone areas that require recovery project assistance
Estimated Size: 150000000
- The bill increases the threshold for qualifying a disaster recovery project as a 'small project,' which impacts local governments, and small to medium size organizations involved in such projects.
- There are many communities across the globe that rely on expedited processes to recover from disasters and this bill's provisions aim to facilitate that.
- The world has seen a rise in natural disasters which indicates a growing number of projects that may seek assistance over the set threshold, hence the relevance of this change.
- This legislation potentially affects all citizens in disaster-prone areas where recovery efforts are necessary.
- Businesses and other organizations involved in disaster recovery operations will also be impacted by the more streamlined processes afforded by the bill.
Reasoning
- The chosen individuals for the interviews come from a variety of backgrounds and locations across the United States, particularly those that are commonly affected by natural disasters. This ensures that we cover a diversity of perspectives and potential impacts.
- The policy is likely to impact local governments, small to medium-sized organizations, and communities in disaster-prone areas. Hence, interviews focus on representations from these groups.
- Given the broad scope of potential beneficiaries, the interviews mix individuals who might directly benefit from the expedited processes and those involved in disaster recovery operations.
- The budget constraints limit the reach and extent of benefits; therefore, not everyone in the target population will see significant changes, as reflected in the 'impact' levels of responses.
- The simulation includes individuals who live in regions frequently declared as disaster areas to gauge both direct and indirect well-being impacts.
Simulated Interviews
City Planner (Miami, FL)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The SPEED Recovery Act could greatly aid our recovery efforts by streamlining processes and reducing bureaucracy.
- I hope the simplified procedures will allow us to implement recovery projects more swiftly and efficiently.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Non-profit Disaster Recovery Coordinator (Baton Rouge, LA)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The change in threshold should make it easier for us to receive funding for smaller projects, which are crucial for many communities.
- I am concerned about oversight – increased funding might lead to mismanagement if not properly monitored.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Retired Teacher (Houston, TX)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hopeful that this act will make improvements around here faster and more efficient, especially after floods.
- It's unclear how much of an impact it will have on existing bureaucracy at the local level.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Emergency Management Consultant (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act can streamline recovery processes, which is critical in the early stages post-disaster.
- The increased threshold is a positive move but must be accompanied by proper checks to prevent misuse.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Artist (New Orleans, LA)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The act might help in rebuilding community spaces quicker, which would be amazing.
- I remain skeptical if funds will reach grassroots as intended.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Farmer (Tornado Alley, OK)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Faster processing of aid could help us get back on our feet quicker, minimizing financial loss.
- We often feel forgotten; I hope this bill won't just sit on a shelf.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Small Business Owner (Charlotte, NC)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If simplified processes lead to more projects, it could mean more work for us.
- I'm worried about the potential for larger companies to still outbid us under the new rules.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Climate Scientist (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More funding for small projects is essential, but must be distributed wisely.
- Proper auditing will be key to prevent waste.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Retired Engineer (Portland, OR)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm supportive of anything that can help rural areas recover faster.
- I've seen misuses of funds in the past, which is a concern with broader eligibility.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Freelance Journalist (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The SPEED Recovery Act should make aid more accessible and projects more rapid.
- I’ll be reporting on how effectively this policy is executed - transparency is key.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $250000000)
Year 2: $220000000 (Low: $160000000, High: $260000000)
Year 3: $240000000 (Low: $170000000, High: $270000000)
Year 5: $260000000 (Low: $180000000, High: $280000000)
Year 10: $300000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $320000000)
Year 100: $500000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $700000000)
Key Considerations
- The frequency and severity of natural disasters can significantly affect cost estimates.
- Changes in administrative and procedural practices may alter both costs and savings.
- Long-term impacts on the tax base depend on the durability and effectiveness of recovery efforts.