Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/6825

Bill Overview

Title: Nonprofit Security Grant Program Improvement Act of 2022

Description: This bill modifies the Nonprofit Security Grant Program of the Department of Homeland Security and reauthorizes appropriations for such program through FY2028. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) must establish an office, headed by a senior FEMA official, to administer the program. Office responsibilities include those related to outreach, engagement, education, and technical assistance. FEMA must also publish grant guidelines and may prohibit states from closing application processes before the publication of the guidelines. FEMA must seek to enter into a contract or other agreement with an independent research organization for the conduct of a study that analyzes and reports on (1) the effectiveness of the program for preparedness against terrorism and other threats; (2) the risk-based formula and allocations under the program; and (3) the risk profile of and any identifiable factors leading to the low participation of traditionally underrepresented groups and states under the program.

Sponsors: Rep. Thompson, Bennie G. [D-MS-2]

Target Audience

Population: people affiliated with or served by nonprofit organizations

Estimated Size: 25000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Nonprofit Manager (New York, NY)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I am hopeful for the new resources to enhance our security.
  • The grant will help us focus on our mission without constantly worrying about safety.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 6 5

Nonprofit Board Member (Seattle, WA)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm not sure how much this will change things for us.
  • Our area isn't targeted much, so our need for security upgrades is less urgent.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 8
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Volunteer Coordinator (Houston, TX)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Security improvements could help us retain volunteers.
  • Current conditions sometimes make volunteers anxious.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Nonprofit CEO (Chicago, IL)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The program is vital for managing security threats.
  • I hope the application process is not overly cumbersome.

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 8 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 7 5

Community Advocate (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 40 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Improved security helps us focus on advocacy without security distractions.
  • Long overdue policy change.

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 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 6 5

Retired Police Officer (Cleveland, OH)

Age: 62 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The grant offers reassurance by addressing security gaps.
  • Hopefully, it will deter past issues we've faced.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 6 6
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 6 5

Volunteer (Atlanta, GA)

Age: 23 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I feel safe already, but more security wouldn't hurt.
  • I hope this security upgrade doesn't affect operational budgets for other needs.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 8
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Nonprofit Fundraiser (Miami, FL)

Age: 47 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Enhanced security may increase donor trust and contributions.
  • More secure facilities might also attract more volunteers.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 6 5

Nonprofit Educator (Boston, MA)

Age: 30 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 6.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Security upgrades will create a more conducive learning environment.
  • I'm relieved there's a focus on these needs.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 9 7
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 7 6

Security Consultant (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This program expands opportunities for nonprofits to address security vulnerabilities.
  • Could create more demand for consultancy work.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)

Year 2: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)

Year 3: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)

Year 5: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)

Year 10: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)

Year 100: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)

Key Considerations