Bill Overview
Title: HBCU Research, Innovation, Security, and Excellence Act
Description: This bill directs the Department of Defense (DOD) to establish a pilot program to increase capacity for historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) that are designated as high research activity status to achieve and maintain very high research activity status. High research activity status (known as R2 status) and very high research activity status (known as R1 status) are classifications by the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education. DOD must award grants to support research activities in the areas of science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) and critical technologies. DOD may expand the program to other HBCUs beyond those that are classified as high research activity status if DOD determines that the program can support such an expansion. DOD must annually establish a list of research areas for STEM and critical technologies for which grant applicants may seek funding.
Sponsors: Rep. Adams, Alma S. [D-NC-12]
Target Audience
Population: Students, faculty, and staff at HBCUs with enhanced research opportunities
Estimated Size: 300000
- The bill primarily targets HBCUs, of which there are about 100 in the United States.
- The primary impact will be on those HBCUs with high research activity status (R2) and potentially other HBCUs if the program is expanded.
- Faculty and staff involved in STEM fields at these HBCUs will be directly impacted as they may receive increased funding for research projects.
- Students at these institutions, particularly those pursuing degrees in STEM fields, will benefit from enhanced research opportunities, potentially leading to better educational outcomes and career prospects.
- The broader communities around these HBCUs may see indirect benefits in terms of economic boosts from increased investment and enhanced educational prestige.
Reasoning
- The policy targets HBCUs with high research activity, potentially expanding to other HBCUs, focusing on STEM and critical technologies.
- It's anticipated to directly impact faculty, researchers, and students at these institutions by providing more funding and resources for research.
- Indirect effects may include improved educational outcomes and increased prestige for the involved HBCUs, possibly influencing local communities economically.
- Since the budget is considerable and the policy spans 10 years, impacts should be assessed over both short and long terms to understand the complete picture.
- A diverse range of interviews across roles at these institutions will help assess overall impact on wellbeing and professional opportunities.
Simulated Interviews
Undergraduate Student (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 21 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy can provide more research opportunities and resources for students like me.
- It might help my university achieve R1 status, which would be a big deal for my future career prospects.
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 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Assistant Professor (Washington, DC)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've been hoping for more funding to pursue my research in renewable energy tech.
- This bill could help attract more talented students to my lab.
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 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Freshman (Durham, NC)
Age: 19 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Additional funding could lead to more lab equipment and resources for students.
- I'm not sure how soon the changes would affect undergraduates like me.
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 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Dean (Houston, TX)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a positive step towards strengthening our research programs.
- Sustained funding is essential to keep us competitive.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 9 |
Graduate Researcher (Baltimore, MD)
Age: 24 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I wish to continue my education in a more research-intensive setting, this bill might help attract such opportunities here.
- Hope it leads to better infrastructure for research.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Adjunct Faculty (Tuskegee, AL)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased funding for research could result in more teaching opportunities and eventually a full-time position.
- It's critical for our community's growth.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
STEM Program Coordinator (New Orleans, LA)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am keen on seeing more women in STEM leadership roles, this could facilitate that.
- Policy seems beneficial if implemented effectively.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
PhD Candidate (Austin, TX)
Age: 27 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is excellent news for maintaining our competitive edge in my research field.
- Such programs ensure continuity in high-level research activities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Parent (Philadelphia, PA)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope these enhancements make my child's educational experience better when they start college.
- I believe this policy can boost the appeal of HBCUs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Community Leader (Tuscaloosa, AL)
Age: 63 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased prestige and resources for my alma mater are beneficial for our entire community.
- Such programs can spark a ripple effect beyond academia.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $180000000)
Year 2: $150000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $180000000)
Year 3: $150000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $180000000)
Year 5: $150000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $180000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The ability to attract and retain high-quality research faculty at HBCUs could impact the program's effectiveness.
- Potential increases in administrative and oversight costs associated with managing the grant distribution.
- The bill's success may hinge on adequate funding levels and strategic partnerships with other research institutions.