Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/9279

Bill Overview

Title: Smart Act

Description: This bill removes the capacity limit for enlisted members of the Armed Forces to receive graduate-level instruction in a Naval Postgraduate School program. The Department of Defense must brief Congress on the effects of increasing enrollment of enlisted members at the school.

Sponsors: Rep. Panetta, Jimmy [D-CA-20]

Target Audience

Population: Enlisted members of the Armed Forces eligible for graduate-level education

Estimated Size: 1000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Navy Petty Officer (San Diego, CA)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy is a great opportunity for someone like me who wants to specialize further.
  • I believe having more educated enlisted personnel will improve operations.
  • Cost is always a concern, but the benefits in terms of career advancement are worth it.

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 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 8 6

Marine Sergeant (Virginia Beach, VA)

Age: 34 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Graduate studies were something I thought were out of reach, but this policy might change that.
  • I see the potential for more educated personnel to transform our approaches.

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 6 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 5 5

Army Staff Sergeant (Austin, TX)

Age: 41 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Further education can help me pivot to a civilian career, making this policy very beneficial.
  • The availability of funds will dictate how many of us can actually attend the courses.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Air Force Senior Airman (Colorado Springs, CO)

Age: 25 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The chance to pursue advanced engineering studies is a game-changer for my career.
  • I hope this policy encourages others to pursue higher education too.

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 8 6
Year 20 7 6

Coast Guard Petty Officer (Pensacola, FL)

Age: 38 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Such opportunities for growth through education can improve our efficiency and knowledge.
  • My family fully supports me in pursuing this educational advancement.

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 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 6 7

Veteran, formerly Army Sergeant (Chicago, IL)

Age: 45 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I wish such a policy had been in place when I was serving.
  • Nevertheless, it's reassuring to see a focus on education for current members.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Navy Seaman (Honolulu, HI)

Age: 27 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy could provide me with opportunities that might otherwise take years to afford.
  • It will be interesting to see how many can actually participate due to budget constraints.

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 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 8 5

Army Sergeant (Seattle, WA)

Age: 31 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Education is a pathway to innovation in the Army; this policy supports that.
  • I am excited about the potential, though realistically, not all will have access immediately.

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 8 6
Year 20 7 6

Air Force Airman (Boston, MA)

Age: 24 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 18/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • A significant benefit to early career service members; eager for what this policy allows.
  • Hoping for mentoring from senior officers with graduate-level insights.

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 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 9 5

Pentagon Analyst (formerly Marine Corps Sergeant Major) (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Having been part of these decisions, I support initiatives that enhance educational opportunities.
  • I will be monitoring the outcomes affecting service readiness and retention.

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 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)

Year 2: $52000000 (Low: $31000000, High: $73000000)

Year 3: $54000000 (Low: $32000000, High: $75000000)

Year 5: $58000000 (Low: $34000000, High: $79000000)

Year 10: $65000000 (Low: $38000000, High: $89000000)

Year 100: $130000000 (Low: $76000000, High: $178000000)

Key Considerations