Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/8688

Bill Overview

Title: To establish a grant program for certain institutions of higher education to plan and implement projects for economic and community development in economically distressed communities, and for other purposes.

Description: This bill requires the Economic Development Administration to award grants to designated institutions of higher education located in distressed communities for use in projects including developing commercial infrastructure, building municipal broadband networks, and training health care professionals.

Sponsors: Rep. Costa, Jim [D-CA-16]

Target Audience

Population: People in economically distressed communities where beneficiary institutions are located

Estimated Size: 50000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

student (Flint, MI)

Age: 22 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope access to better facilities at my college will improve our learning environment.
  • Improved broadband would really help my online studies and exams.
  • Training more healthcare professionals could help my community's overall health.

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 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 7 5

factory worker (Appalachia, KY)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If this policy brings better internet, it would mean more opportunities for my kids.
  • Having a local college improve its offerings could provide an alternative path for young people here.

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

unemployed (Detroit, MI)

Age: 30 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 3

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Job training in healthcare could offer me new career opportunities.
  • Better broadband might help me look for jobs more effectively.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

retired teacher (Rural Texas)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Training healthcare professionals is crucial here as we lack doctors.
  • Broadband infrastructure improvements won't affect me much, but they are important for younger families.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

freelancer (New Orleans, LA)

Age: 28 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 6.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Enhanced broadband could increase work opportunities for me and others in digital fields.
  • Community development projects would make our area more attractive for artists and entrepreneurs.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

high school senior (South Side Chicago, IL)

Age: 19 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm excited that the nearby college might offer more resources for my major.
  • If the policy leads to job training, it could help me and my friends find work faster.

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

nurse (Baltimore, MD)

Age: 52 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • More trained healthcare workers are always needed in Baltimore.
  • Infrastructure improvements would be a plus, but focus on health is crucial.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

small business owner (Rural Tennessee)

Age: 40 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Bringing broadband could spark new business and service opportunities in our area.
  • I don't see much personal benefit beyond possible broadband changes.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

public school teacher (Bronx, NY)

Age: 34 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Local colleges receiving grants can improve job prospects for my students.
  • Improved infrastructure like broadband is essential, but how much will really reach my neighborhood?

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

community organizer (East St. Louis, IL)

Age: 55 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy seems like a good step toward revitalizing our community.
  • I worry about how the funds will be distributed and if they'll actually reach those of us here on the ground.

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 7 5
Year 20 6 5

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $1000000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1200000000)

Year 2: $1020000000 (Low: $820000000, High: $1220000000)

Year 3: $1040000000 (Low: $840000000, High: $1240000000)

Year 5: $1080000000 (Low: $880000000, High: $1280000000)

Year 10: $1160000000 (Low: $940000000, High: $1360000000)

Year 100: $1500000000 (Low: $1200000000, High: $1800000000)

Key Considerations