Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/6955

Bill Overview

Title: Learn and Serve American Reinvestment Act

Description: This bill provides appropriations to the Corporation for National and Community Service for the Learn and Serve America program. The program supports service-learning programs, which integrate community service projects with classroom learning.

Sponsors: Rep. Kim, Andy [D-NJ-3]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals involved in or benefitting from service-learning programs

Estimated Size: 5000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

High School Student (New York, NY)

Age: 17 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm excited to see what projects we could do through this funding, as our school always struggled with resources for extracurricular activities.
  • I think it would also be a plus for my college applications if I've had more service-learning experiences.

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 7 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 7 7

High School Teacher (Des Moines, IA)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • As a teacher, I think service-learning is the perfect opportunity to make subjects more engaging for students.
  • This funding could finally allow us to launch some ideas we've had for years.

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 8 5
Year 20 6 5

Community Organization Leader (Dallas, TX)

Age: 52 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While we regularly engage with schools already, more structured programs can only deepen the impact of our community projects.
  • With more resources, we can expand our capacity to host student projects.

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 9 8
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 8 7

College Student (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 23 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • These programs provide critical insights into how policy can practically improve communities and education simultaneously.
  • I hope my university leverages this funding to develop new partnerships.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

School Administrator (Chicago, IL)

Age: 38 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • We are always on the lookout for funding opportunities to bolster our extracurricular and community service options.
  • Integrating theory with practice for students is crucial, and this might help us finally achieve that.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Parent and Community Volunteer (Atlanta, GA)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 16/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Programs like this could enrich my child's school experience, making it more practical and engaging.
  • I hope it encourages more parents to get involved with school projects.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Non-profit Education Program Director (Austin, TX)

Age: 35 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Receiving these funds might help us extend our reach to more schools in the community.
  • Increased engagement could result in more measurable outcomes from our projects.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

High School Student (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 15 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • These service-learning projects sound like a fun way to learn and help our community too.
  • I've never had such opportunities at school, so I'm curious how they'll work out.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

College Professor (Seattle, WA)

Age: 28 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • These funds might help structure more rigorous and impactful projects for my students.
  • Such programs reinforce the importance of applied learning in higher education.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Retired Educator (Boston, MA)

Age: 67 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm thrilled to see continued emphasis on programs that blend learning with real-world experience for students.
  • The changes may be slow, but they're essential for meaningful educational development.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)

Year 2: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)

Year 3: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)

Year 5: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)

Year 10: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)

Year 100: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)

Key Considerations