Bill Overview
Title: Fostering Success in Higher Education Act of 2022
Description: 2022 This bill requires the Department of Education to provide formula grants to states for activities to improve college access, retention, and completion rates for foster and homeless youth. States that receive such grants must award subgrants to institutions of higher education to carry out these activities in partnership with child welfare agencies and organizations serving homeless youth.
Sponsors: Sen. Casey, Robert P., Jr. [D-PA]
Target Audience
Population: Foster and homeless youth who are transitioning into higher education
Estimated Size: 1724000
- The bill is aimed at foster youth, who are individuals under 18 that have been placed in foster care due to various circumstances.
- Homeless youth, generally defined as minors who lack a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence, are also specifically mentioned as a target group in the bill.
- The bill intends to improve college access, retention, and completion rates for these groups, meaning it focuses on youth transitioning into higher education.
- Statistics indicate that about 424,000 children and youth were in foster care in the United States as of 2019.
- The number of homeless youth in the United States was estimated at 1.3 million as of 2018, although this can fluctuate due to various factors.
Reasoning
- The target population size is estimated at approximately 1.7 million youth in foster care and homeless situations.
- To simulate accurately, it's important to diversify the profiles across various demographics and areas of impact, spanning different levels of socioeconomic status, education goals, and current life situations.
- The commonness score of 1 to 20 represents how typical each scenario might be within this population.
- Due to budget constraints, not everyone in the target group will be affected equally; some will see significant benefits while others may not notice any changes.
- Given the focus on college access and completion, we will include scenarios of people at different stages of their education journey.
Simulated Interviews
High School Student (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 18 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's a great initiative. Many of us didn't have a stable home life or guidance, so support for college is a blessing.
- The bill could help with the financial aspects and mentor connections, which I really need.
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 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
College Student (New York, NY)
Age: 21 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If the funds are effectively distributed, it can truly be life-changing for many.
- It would be helpful if colleges had programs specifically for students like me. A program like this sounds like it could contribute a lot.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
College Dropout (Chicago, IL)
Age: 23 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I wish this had been available when I was trying to integrate into college life.
- The transition was tough, and without funds or guidance, it's easy to get disheartened.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 3 |
Graduate Student (Houston, TX)
Age: 26 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having been through such a rough start, I see how new policies may open doors I struggled to find.
- These grants can make higher education attainable for so many.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Community College Student (Philadelphia, PA)
Age: 19 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Feels reassuring that systems are recognizing students like me.
- Could help with counseling and legal support which is often needed.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Social Worker (Seattle, WA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill could streamline many support services I've been advocating for.
- Could fill gaps that leave people falling through the cracks post-teens.
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 | 7 | 8 |
Trade School Student (Miami, FL)
Age: 20 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's too focused on 'traditional' college diplomas, but it might help with other educational pathways too.
- Worried it'll benefit some but leave others without similar needs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 3 |
Freelancer (Detroit, MI)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Programs like this might encourage youth to see college as a real option.
- Eligibility criteria need to be clear so kids don't miss out based on technicalities.
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 |
Non-profit Volunteer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 24 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Funding needs to go beyond initial tuition aid and cover comprehensive support.
- This could influence policy and improve metrics in the long term.
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 | 5 | 5 |
Full-time Farm Hand (Rural Iowa)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Education grants aren't directly useful to those who didn't finish high school first.
- Assistance for GED completion could align with this program's objectives.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $4500000000 (Low: $4000000000, High: $5000000000)
Year 2: $4530000000 (Low: $4030000000, High: $5030000000)
Year 3: $4560000000 (Low: $4060000000, High: $5060000000)
Year 5: $4620000000 (Low: $4120000000, High: $5120000000)
Year 10: $4720000000 (Low: $4220000000, High: $5220000000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Ensuring adequate coordination between educational institutions and child welfare organizations for effective implementation.
- Monitoring the program to ensure funds are effectively used to impact the target population.
- Evaluating long-term impacts on the target group’s educational attainment and subsequent economic contributions.