Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/8803

Bill Overview

Title: IGNITE HBCU, TCU, and MSI Excellence Act

Description: This bill establishes a grant program to support long-term improvements of historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs), graduate programs at HBCUs, and other minority-serving institutions (MSIs). Specifically, the bill requires the Department of Education (ED) to award grants to HBCUs and MSIs to improve campus facilities. A recipient must use grant funds for certain activities, such as constructing or renovating facilities, carrying out major repairs, and strengthening the safety and security of a campus. Any new construction, modernization, or renovation projects must meet building code and energy and water conservation requirements. Further, HBCUs and MSIs must seek to procure contracts from certain small businesses, including those owned and controlled by veterans and service-disabled veterans. The bill prohibits the use of grant funds for specified activities, including for the payment of routine and predictable maintenance costs, minor repairs, and utility bills. The Government Accountability Office must study the implementation of the grant program. The bill also requires ED to repay the outstanding balance of principal, interest, fees, and costs and any related reimbursements for certain capital financing loans.

Sponsors: Rep. Adams, Alma S. [D-NC-12]

Target Audience

Population: Students and administration at HBCUs, TCUs, and Minority-Serving Institutions

Estimated Size: 5000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Professor at an HBCU (Atlanta, GA)

Age: 42 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could significantly improve our campus facilities, likely making it a better environment for both students and faculty.
  • I hope the updated facilities will lead to an increase in student engagement and academic performance.

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 5
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 7 4

Undergraduate student at an HBCU (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 20 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • An improvement in our dorms and libraries could boost our campus life, making us more competitive with non-HBCU peers.
  • I am hopeful for better facilities that could enhance our learning experience.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 9 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 4

Small business owner (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 30 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I’m looking forward to the contracting opportunities this policy might bring to veteran-owned businesses like mine.
  • Working with educational institutions can boost my business's profile and sustainability.

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 6 5
Year 10 6 4
Year 20 5 4

Graduate student at an MSI (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 25 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Improved campus facilities could mean better equipment and labs for my research.
  • I hope the policy also accounts for sustainable building practices reflective of our field of study.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Community activist (Chicago, IL)

Age: 29 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy seems promising for educational equity if effectively implemented at local MSIs.
  • Facilities improvements are crucial, but I’m concerned about equitable distribution of funds.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 9 6
Year 5 9 5
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 7 4

First-year student at an HBCU (Durham, NC)

Age: 18 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • New buildings and resources could enhance my experience, making me more excited about my college choice.
  • I hope this helps in getting new lab equipment for my science courses.

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 4
Year 10 7 4
Year 20 6 3

Administrator at a TCU (Albuquerque, NM)

Age: 47 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The grant could ease our funding shortages, potentially allowing us to finally complete much-needed renovations.
  • I'm optimistic but anxious about how fund distribution will impact our projects.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 9 7
Year 3 9 7
Year 5 9 6
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 8 4

Retired educator (Montgomery, AL)

Age: 62 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I’m pleased to see efforts to support institutions that have given so much to the African-American community.
  • As an alumnus, I hope this leads to lasting improvements and draws more students to HBCUs.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Public policy expert (New York, NY)

Age: 38 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's a positive step, but there needs to be rigorous oversight to ensure these grants are used effectively.
  • The prioritization of projects is crucial to maximize impact across underfunded schools.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 4

Economist (Houston, TX)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy is potentially transformative within its budgetary constraints, but its long-term success hinges on strategic implementation.
  • Regular evaluations are necessary to ensure efficient use of funds and scalable impact.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 4

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $1500000000 (Low: $1300000000, High: $1700000000)

Year 2: $1400000000 (Low: $1200000000, High: $1600000000)

Year 3: $1200000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $1400000000)

Year 5: $1000000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1200000000)

Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Key Considerations