Bill Overview
Title: Opportunities for Success Act of 2022
Description: 2022 This bill permanently reauthorizes the Federal Work-Study Program and otherwise revises the program, including by allocating program funds to institutions of higher education (IHEs) based on the amount of Pell Grant funds received by each IHE. The bill also establishes a pilot program that provides work-based learning opportunities for students who demonstrate exceptional financial need.
Sponsors: Rep. Bonamici, Suzanne [D-OR-1]
Target Audience
Population: students eligible for the Federal Work-Study Program or Pell Grants
Estimated Size: 14000000
- The bill impacts students who are eligible for the Federal Work-Study Program which typically includes undergraduate and some graduate students in the U.S.
- Pell Grant recipients are generally undergraduate students who exhibit exceptional financial need, thus the bill impacts this group as it reallocates funding to favor these students' institutions.
- The reauthorization of the Federal Work-Study Program impacts all current and future students eligible for this program across the United States.
- The pilot program targets students with exceptional financial need, indicating a focus on low-income students who are seeking work-based learning opportunities.
Reasoning
- The policy predominantly affects students at institutions receiving Pell Grants and those eligible for federal work-study, targeting around 14 million students nationwide.
- Because the program has a finite budget, not every student eligible may directly benefit, especially as immediate resources are focused on institutions with higher Pell Grant allocations.
- The policy impact is likely to be high among students from low-income backgrounds who gain work-study positions or access to new work-based learning programs.
- Over time, the pilot program might expand, but initially, it will only reach a subset of those demonstrating exceptional financial need.
Simulated Interviews
Undergraduate student (Austin, TX)
Age: 19 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The reauthorization of financial aid opportunities is crucial for students like me who depend on these to afford college.
- I am excited about more work-based learning opportunities as they will help me gain experience in my field.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Community college student (Chicago, IL)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The increased funding will take pressure off my finances and allow me to focus on succeeding in my courses.
- Expanding work opportunities means potentially more flexibility finding a suitable position.
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 | 5 | 5 |
Graduate student (Seattle, WA)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am hopeful the reallocation won't negatively impact graduate students.
- It's important to see if the pilot program opens up opportunities for graduate-level positions.
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 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Recently graduated unemployed (Boston, MA)
Age: 26 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If the policy had existed while I was in school, I might have benefited from more job opportunities post-graduation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 3 |
High school senior (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 18 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Knowing there are stable resources for work-study and that work-based learning is supported gives me confidence starting college.
- I'll definitely apply since I need to contribute financially.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Full-time student and intern (Miami, FL)
Age: 21 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Adjusting funds to match Pell Grant distributions feels right as it clearly targets those who need it.
- The work-based aspect could improve my resume.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
PhD candidate (New York, NY)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It’s unclear if this will affect graduate or international students much.
- Many rely on departmental assistantships rather than federal work-study positions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Artist and freelance designer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Programs like this indirectly affect the environment within which I find jobs post-college.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Student athlete with a focus on education (Columbus, OH)
Age: 20 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My sports scholarship covers a lot, but having more work opportunities assures I can aid my family if needed.
- The policy might widen access for others like me in less funded areas.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
IT support, part-time student (Raleigh, NC)
Age: 24 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I wish more work opportunities came with meaningful pathways for career entry.
- The policy’s expansion seems driven by financial urgency rather than holistic student engagement.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $550000000)
Year 2: $510000000 (Low: $460000000, High: $560000000)
Year 3: $520000000 (Low: $470000000, High: $570000000)
Year 5: $540000000 (Low: $490000000, High: $590000000)
Year 10: $600000000 (Low: $550000000, High: $650000000)
Year 100: $1000000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1200000000)
Key Considerations
- The policy could lead to increases in federal budget allocations for higher education if not counterbalanced by savings or increased revenues.
- The pilot program's success is contingent on adequate partnership with employers and effective implementation.
- Long-term impacts highly depend on the economic value of better-educated graduates who engage in the workforce.