Bill Overview
Title: Simplifying Grants Act of 2022
Description: This bill sets forth procedures for simplifying the grant process for nonurbanized areas, for both existing and new grant programs. Each agency must make publicly available a checklist for covered local governments with respect to each grant program of the agency for which such governments are otherwise eligible that includes each requirement for every step of the grant process. The Office of Management and Budget must report to Congress (1) within 270 days of this bill's enactment, evaluating the extent to which agencies have simplified the requirements and made the checklist available; and (2) each April 1st, evaluating the amount of technical assistance provided and the amount of funds awarded.
Sponsors: Rep. Franklin, C. Scott [R-FL-15]
Target Audience
Population: People in nonurbanized areas globally who could benefit from streamlined government grant processes
Estimated Size: 60000000
- The bill is aimed at simplifying the grant process for nonurbanized areas, which typically include rural and semi-rural communities.
- There's a focus on local governments, implying that any local government structure within nonurbanized areas that is eligible for grants will be impacted.
- The simplification and technical assistance can potentially increase grant acquisition capabilities of such areas, affecting any associated programs or infrastructure that would benefit from these grants.
- By specifying nonurbanized areas, the bill implicitly targets smaller communities that may be underserved or face challenges compared to urban areas in accessing grant funding.
Reasoning
- The policy targets nonurbanized areas, suggesting it will affect people in rural areas who depend on local government investments.
- The simplification of the grant process means local governments can apply more easily, possibly improving infrastructure or social programs in these areas.
- With $525,000,000 over 10 years and $75,000,000 in the first year, the program could have varied impacts in different regions depending on their existing infrastructure and grant dependency.
- The population likely to benefit includes about 60 million people living in rural areas in the U.S., though not all will experience direct changes in wellbeing immediately.
- Interviews focus on different demographics within these regions, capturing variations in how local government efficiency impacts individual wellbeing.
Simulated Interviews
Elementary School Teacher (Appalachia, Kentucky)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this makes it easier for our schools to get the funding we desperately need.
- Often, the bureaucracy just gets in the way and our community suffers for it.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Local Government Official (Rural Nevada)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a game changer; less red tape means we can act quicker to support our community's needs.
- Grant applications take too much time. Simplifying this would really streamline our work.
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 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Farmer (Great Plains, South Dakota)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If our local government can get more support, it could mean better roads and services for us.
- I just hope these changes aren't just on paper.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Tribal Government Assistant (Pine Ridge Reservation, South Dakota)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We always face challenges accessing funds. This could really open doors for economic and social improvement.
- It's about time there was focus on cutting through the red tape.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Retired (Southwest Texas)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Local programs could really use a boost in funding; simplification would help.
- It's frustrating when eligible programs can't get funded due to complex processes.
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 | 9 | 7 |
Community College Student (Upstate New York)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 17/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this means more opportunities for youth programs and educational resources.
- Access to more community funding can improve our town's overall stability.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Small Business Owner (Northern California)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improving grant access can lead to better infrastructure which directly impacts my business.
- These changes need to result in real improvements, otherwise it's just more paperwork.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Pastor (Rural Mississippi)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Church-based community programs could see more support, strengthening our community's moral fabric.
- It's critical that these new procedures actually get implemented effectively.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Healthcare Worker (Rural Minnesota)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Streamlined grants can enhance our clinic's services and outreach.
- There's always a gap between policy and practice; let's hope this gets it right.
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 |
Environmental Researcher (Rural Oregon)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is vital for sustaining our projects; simplification could mean more timely funding.
- Grants are essential, so this legislation gives hope for more support to rural projects.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $75000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $100000000)
Year 2: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $75000000)
Year 3: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $75000000)
Year 5: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $75000000)
Year 10: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $75000000)
Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $75000000)
Key Considerations
- The administrative capability and readiness of agencies to implement changes promptly.
- Efficient dissemination and awareness of the simplified processes among eligible government entities in nonurbanized areas.
- Potential resistance to change among administrative personnel who might be accustomed to traditional procedures.