Bill Overview
Title: To provide an additional appropriation for the Emergency Food and Shelter Program, and for other purposes.
Description: This bill makes additional appropriations for the Emergency Food and Shelter Program to provide shelter and other services to families and individuals encountered by the Department of Homeland Security (e.g., migrants).
Sponsors: Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals displaced or migrating due to emergencies or conflict
Estimated Size: 1200000
- The Emergency Food and Shelter Program (EFSP) typically supports social service agencies in their work to provide food, shelter, and other essential services to those in need.
- The primary global beneficiaries are likely to include migrants and displaced individuals, as the bill specifically mentions those encountered by the Department of Homeland Security, which often involves migrants crossing borders or seeking asylum.
- Considering global migration data, which includes millions of people displaced annually due to conflict, disasters, or economic instability, the potential global impact population is large.
- The program may also indirectly affect international agencies and governments involved in migration and asylum processes.
Reasoning
- The target budget suggests a significant aim to address urgent needs among migrants and displaced individuals by providing food and shelter immediately and sustainably over the next decade.
- The Cantril wellbeing score is used here to evaluate subjective life satisfaction, which can be improved by meeting basic needs like shelter and food, particularly for those in critical situations.
- The policy primarily targets migrants and displaced individuals, so interviews will focus on these groups, although others less directly impacted may also be included to gauge broader social implications.
- The funding scope, targeting a large portion of both domestic populations in need and new migrant arrivals in the U.S., implies a high potential for positive impact on wellbeing scores among those directly benefiting.
- Considering the population size and the provided funds, not every individual in need might be covered, especially in the initial years, but over time a systemic improvement in local agency capabilities is expected.
Simulated Interviews
Migrant Farm Worker (Texas)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could really help, especially right now when my situation is unstable.
- Access to shelter will make a big difference in how secure I feel here.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Social Worker (California)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The additional funds will allow us to help more people effectively which will improve community wellbeing.
- With better funding, migrant support programs can provide essentials faster, reducing stress on the individuals we serve.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Migrant (New York)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 2
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Finding stable shelter is critical for starting anew here.
- I hope the policy helps me find a place to stay soon.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 2 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Retired Teacher (Florida)
Age: 58 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see a lot of potential for relief with more funding, but it must be effectively allocated.
- Helping migrants also shifts focus to addressing broader issues of homelessness.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
College Student (Arizona)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope to see better support structures for migrants which will enhance our community's integration capabilities.
- This kind of funding allows us to address critical gaps in migrant support services.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Government Employee (Washington)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 17/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased funding may ease the strain on shelters dealing with large numbers of asylum seekers.
- Ensuring that we meet humanitarian needs promptly affects national security and our international reputation.
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 | 6 | 6 |
Homeless (Georgia)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 2
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry that the focus on migrants might divert resources from people like me who are also struggling.
- However, any increase in shelter capacity is positive for those in need.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 2 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Construction Worker (Nevada)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Funds should be allocated wisely to benefit both new migrants and citizens needing temporary help.
- Such policies can build stronger community support systems.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Nurse (Ohio)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Providing proper shelter and food can aid in improving the physical and mental health of migrants.
- Hospital resources are often stretched thin; proper allocation 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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Community Organizer (Illinois)
Age: 27 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy can bolster efforts to ensure every person has the right to shelter and sustenance, regardless of their background.
- There needs to be accountability in how funds are used to prevent misallocation.
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 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $300000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $350000000)
Year 2: $315000000 (Low: $260000000, High: $370000000)
Year 3: $330750000 (Low: $273000000, High: $388500000)
Year 5: $357113000 (Low: $294321000, High: $419905000)
Year 10: $404869160 (Low: $333784400, High: $475170800)
Year 100: $7407853960 (Low: $6091070640, High: $8684382920)
Key Considerations
- Persistent increase in migration and economic downturns heightens continuous needs for EFSP support.
- Previous budget allocations have proven inadequate for growing service demands, suggesting a necessary uplift in financial commitment.
- Mechanisms must be embedded to efficiently distribute enhanced funding to match areas of acute demand rapidly.