Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/7459

Bill Overview

Title: DHS Rural and Remote Hiring and Retention Strategy Act of 2022

Description: This bill requires the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to issue a strategy and implementation plan to improve the hiring and retention of individuals by ICE and CBP in rural or remote areas. DHS must periodically report to Congress and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) on the extent that the strategy and implementation plan has improved hiring and retention. After receiving each DHS report, the GAO must submit to Congress an assessment of the effectiveness of the actions described in the DHS report.

Sponsors: Rep. Golden, Jared F. [D-ME-2]

Target Audience

Population: Current and potential federal employees in rural and remote areas

Estimated Size: 1000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Customs and Border Protection Officer (Rural Texas)

Age: 34 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy seems to focus on tackling the long-standing issues of employee turnover here. I hope it means better resources for us.

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 8 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 8 6

Seeking employment with ICE (Rural Arizona)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I've always wanted to work for ICE, but opportunities here are thin. If this brings more jobs, that'd be amazing.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

DHS Administrative Staff (Remote Montana)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This could mean more work and potential stress if staffing changes come through inadequately.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Community Business Owner (Rural New Mexico)

Age: 53 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If more people are hired or stay due to this policy, it could benefit businesses like mine.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

ICE Field Agent (Rural Idaho)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Improving job conditions could encourage staying longer if implemented well.

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

Retired former CBP Agent (Remote Nebraska)

Age: 62 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm hopeful this will keep younger agents from leaving the force too soon.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Unemployed (Rural South Dakota)

Age: 39 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 6.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If this means more jobs in my area, it could be a lifesaver for my career.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 4
Year 2 6 4
Year 3 6 4
Year 5 7 4
Year 10 7 4
Year 20 6 4

Local Government Employee (Rural Alabama)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The community may benefit indirectly, so it's a positive change if handled right.

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 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 6 5

College Student (Rural Oklahoma)

Age: 25 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Better opportunities and support would definitely sway my career decisions.

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 6
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 8 5

CBP Officer (Rural West Virginia)

Age: 31 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Career advancements have been slow; any improvement would be welcomed.

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $7500000 (Low: $5000000, High: $10000000)

Year 2: $8000000 (Low: $5500000, High: $10500000)

Year 3: $8500000 (Low: $6000000, High: $11000000)

Year 5: $8500000 (Low: $6000000, High: $11000000)

Year 10: $8500000 (Low: $6000000, High: $11000000)

Year 100: $8500000 (Low: $6000000, High: $11000000)

Key Considerations