Last Wednesday, the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs marked up the Streamlining Federal Grants Act of 2023, which was introduced by Sens. Gary Peters (D-Mich.), James Lankford (R-Okla.), and John Cornyn (R-Texas) on July 17. In his introductory remarks, Sen. Peters thanked Sens. Lankford and Cornyn for their hard work on the bipartisan bill. He lauded the bill’s potential to help nonprofits apply for and manage grants, reduce government waste, and promote language access. After a series of amendments were introduced and voted down, the bill passed out of committee, clearing the way for a vote before the entire Senate in the months to come.

Social Current has been a strong and outspoken champion of the bill, which would simplify the grant application process for the social sector, particularly nonprofits, which face the most challenges in applying for grants. After the bill’s introduction, Social Current President and CEO Jody Levison-Johnson said:

“I am thrilled to see the introduction of the Streamlining Federal Grants Act of 2023 in the Senate, which reflects in part the Relief4Charities policy asks to strengthen and support the nonprofit sector. This legislation will greatly improve access to federal grants for underserved communities and streamline the application process.”

The bill would create a Grants Council with representatives from all federal grantmaking agencies, which would guide reforming complex and outdated procedures. Proposed reforms include everything from streamlining the application, administrative, and reporting processes to enhancing user experiences and soliciting grantee feedback. The legislation also requires federal agencies to seek input from non-federal agencies, including nonprofits, in the development and implementation of their agency plans. Finally, funding opportunities will be required to provide short, clear, and accessible summaries, so that potential applicants can readily understand them.

Social Current will continue to advocate for the passage of the Streamlining Federal Grants Act of 2023 and to keep the network updated on its progress through congressional negotiations.

Learn more about the legislation’s provisions that benefit charitable nonprofits in this one-pager from Social Current and the National Council of Nonprofits.

Institutions for Mental Disease (IMD) Compromise Passes the Energy and Commerce Committee

On July 19, the House Energy and Commerce Committee voted unanimously to pass H.R. 4531, the Support for Patients and Communities Reauthorization Act. The bill included a compromised version of H.R. 4056, the Ensuring Medicaid Continuity for Children in Foster Care Act, which would grant federal Medicaid coverage to children in foster care receiving treatment from Qualified Residential Treatment Programs (QRTPs) classified as Institutions for Mental Disease (IMDs).

A QRTP is typically classified as an IMD if it has over 16 beds. Currently, states cannot receive federal Medicaid payments for services provided to individuals in an IMD setting. This means that while a Medicaid-eligible child in an IMD does not lose their Medicaid benefits, states must bear the total cost. The classification of large QRTPs as IMDs aims to discourage congregate care for foster children and encourage states to increase the use of family and foster family care, which has been shown to have significantly better outcomes for children.

H.R. 4056 aimed to remove this IMD exclusion for children in foster care and allow states to draw from federal Medicaid funds to pay for their treatment while in a QRTP, regardless of whether it is classified as an IMD. The compromise, Sec. 304, would permanently lift the IMD exclusion for substance use disorder and permit QRTPs to bill Medicaid for health care services outside these facilities’ walls. Essentially, the compromise allows QRTPs to bill Medicaid for the treatment a child receives elsewhere, such as doctor appointments, but still does not allow a QRTP to use federal Medicaid funds to pay for in-house treatment provided by the QRTP. While Reps. Gus Bilirakis (R-Fla.) and Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), sponsors of H.R. 4056, both made it clear that they do not believe this compromise goes far enough to support QRTPs, they described the move as a step forward.

HHS Proposes New Rules to Achieve Parity for Mental Health Care

On July 25, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services proposed new rules to ensure people seeking coverage for mental health care and substance abuse disorder can access these services as quickly and affordably as people can access coverage for medical treatments. The Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act was enacted in 2008 and built on the Mental Health Parity Act of 1996 to lessen the barriers faced by those seeking mental health care. However, these barriers still exist 15 years later. To combat illegal restrictions on mental health and substance abuse treatment benefits, the U.S. Department of Health and Human proposes that plans and issuers make NQTL (Non-Quantitative Treatment Limitations) comparative analyses available to the Department of Treasury, the Department of Labor, the Department of Human Services, and eventually to Congress. If enacted, these new rules would be added to the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act and ensure plans and issuers are not putting unnecessary barriers in the way of receiving coverage for mental health care.

Family First Prevention Services Clearinghouse Posts New Ratings

The Family First Prevention Clearinghouse has posted new ratings for nine prevention services. Seven were found to be “promising,” and two were rated as “does not currently meet criteria.” The programs included mental health and in-home parent skill-based services. So far, 148 programs and services have been reviewed, and 76 have been rated as promising, supported, or well-supported. The new ratings are:

Proclamation Will Establish Monuments to Emmett Till and Mamie Till-Mobley

Last week, on what would have been Emmett Till’s 82nd birthday, President Joe Biden signed a proclamation to establish a monument honoring Till and his mother Mamie Till-Mobley. The racially motivated murder of 14-year-old Till and the subsequent activism of his mother played key roles in the civil rights movement.

The monument, the fourth national monument designated by the Biden administration, will span three sites in Illinois and Mississippi that hold historical importance. The first site will be in Graball Landing, Mississippi, where Till’s body was discovered in the Tallahatchie River. The second site will be Roberts Temple Church of God in Christ in Chicago’s Bronzeville neighborhood, where Till-Mobley held her son’s open-casket funeral. The monument’s third site will be the Tallahatchie County Second District Courthouse in Sumner, Mississippi, where an all-white jury acquitted Till’s killers.

In his remarks at the proclamation signing ceremony, Biden raised the importance of understanding our country’s history of racism as a means for moving toward social justice and rejected moves, such as those in Florida, to erase and twist it.

Biden noted, “At a time when there are those who seek to ban books, bury history, we’re making it clear — crystal, crystal clear — while darkness and denialism can hide much, they erase nothing. They can hide, but they erase nothing.”

Subscribe to the Policy and Advocacy Radar to receive our biweekly policy roundup, which includes commentary on issues in Social Current’s federal policy agenda, opportunities to take action, and curated news and opportunities.

On July 17, the Streamlining Federal Grants Act of 2023 was introduced by Sens. Gary Peters (D-Mich.), James Lankford (R-Okla.), and John Cornyn (R-Texas). This bill would help enhance the efficiency and performance of federal grants and cooperative agreements. It proposes the establishment of a Grants Council composed of grantmaking federal agencies, which would guide reforming complex and outdated procedures.

Leaders from across the social sector shared statements of support for the bill in a press release from the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs. Among the quotes endorsing the bill was this one from Social Current President and CEO Jody Levison-Johnson:

“I am thrilled to see the introduction of the Streamlining Federal Grants Act of 2023 in the Senate, which reflects in part the Relief4Charities policy asks to strengthen and support the nonprofit sector. This legislation will greatly improve access to federal grants for underserved communities and streamline the application process.”

Social Current and the National Council of Nonprofits highlight the legislation’s provisions that benefit charitable nonprofits in this one-pager. Those provisions include:

VIEW ONE-PAGER

Social Current is monitoring the progress of the Streamlining Federal Grant Act of 2023 and will share updates in our Policy and Advocacy Radar newsletter. Subscribe online.

Social Current Leadership on Grant Reform

Social Current has been active in advocating for federal grant reform and educating our network about the issue. Earlier this summer, we hosted a policy briefing about the issue, which can be viewed on demand.

Blair Abelle-Kiser, senior director of government affairs at Social Current, discussed how we can set the nonprofit sector up for financial success through government contracting and grant reform. The conversation was inspired by the op-ed, “Government contract reform is a must for social sector nonprofits,” authored by Social Current President and CEO Jody Levison-Johnson in New York Nonprofit Media in February 2023. While there is still advocacy work to be done, this bipartisan bill is a significant step forward.

Upcoming Opportunity: Igniting Advocacy Training and Hill Day

SPARK 2023 will feature the Igniting Advocacy Training and Hill Day. Build foundational skills and learn about advanced advocacy strategies during the two-day training. Then, put what you’ve learned into action when meeting with members of Congress in Washington, D.C. We will take care of the logistics so you can focus on having meaningful interactions with key decision makers. Learn more about SPARK 2023, Oct. 16-17 in Bethesda, Maryland, and Hill Day, Oct. 18. Register by Sept. 18 to save with the early bird rate.

In response to the Supreme Court’s decision to scrap affirmative action in college admissions, President Joe Biden delivered searing criticism against the ruling and the court, even saying, “This is not a normal court.” He cited instances where the court has undermined or ignored precedents that have stood for decades, including last year’s ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade. Rebuking the court’s ruling, Biden said, “Discrimination still exists in America. Today’s decision does not change that. It’s a simple fact.”

In remarks that his team had prepared in anticipation of the outcome of the affirmative action case, Biden described the outline of a plan to ensure diversity and opportunity within higher education. He called on the Department of Education to explore ways to bolster diversity on college campuses by accounting for hardships that applicants had overcome in their lives. This would include prioritizing applicants from less advantaged ZIP codes, with lower financial means, and who have experienced unique personal challenges. A similar admissions model, based on a “socioeconomic diversity index,” is utilized at the School of Medicine at the University of California, Davis, which is one of the most diverse medical schools in the country. Next month, the DOE will host a national summit on diversity in college admissions.

Bidenomics: The President’s Economic Vision for America

On Wednesday, June 28, President Biden gave a speech in Chicago touting his economic accomplishments and presenting his plan for the future. He defined his administration’s key slogan for his 2024 campaign: “Bidenomics,” a term coined by the Wall Street Journal and Financial Times and embraced by the administration. Bidenomics, as defined by the White House, has three pillars:

Biden criticized trickle-down economics, claiming that the philosophy failed the American middle class and contending that his plan will grow the economy from the “middle out and bottom-up.” In his speech, the president repeatedly emphasized his work with unions, calling himself “the most pro-union president in American history.” He detailed several successes of the economy under his administration, including low unemployment, high job satisfaction, declining inflation, and growing wages. He also mentioned some of his administration’s work, such as eliminating junk fees, reducing the cost of insulin, investing in education, limiting non-compete clauses, and supporting small businesses. He credited the American Rescue Plan Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law with much of the success of the American economy and praised his administration for reducing the federal deficit by $1.7 trillion.

For much of the speech, Biden looked toward the future, discussing goals to make the federal tax system fairer by placing a higher tax on billionaires while keeping his promise not to raise taxes for the middle class and continuing to invest in infrastructure and American jobs. In his conclusion, he summarized his plan, “It’s rooted in what’s always worked best in this country: investing in America, investing in Americans. Because when we invest in our people, we strengthen the middle class, we see the economy grow. That benefits all Americans. That’s the American Dream.” While “Bidenomics” is a relatively new term in the media, it is clear it will be a centerpiece in his 2024 reelection campaign and will be a key priority of the administration going forward.

New HHS Rule Would Lower Child Care Costs

The Department of Health and Human Services proposed a new rule to lower child care costs and financially support child care providers. The rule covers the Child Care and Development Fund, which subsidizes care for 1.5 million children and impacts 230,000 providers. Specifically, the rule would cap co-payments by families at 7% of income and allow states to eliminate co-payments for families at or below 150% of the federal poverty level. The rule would also cut down on bureaucracy and streamline eligibility criteria and the enrollment process for families. Finally, the rule would bring more providers into the program by offering higher payment rates and guaranteeing timely payments. In announcing the proposed rule, HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra said, “Our country cannot function without a strong child care system. … Child care is vital to the health and well-being of our nation’s families, businesses, and economy.” HHS encourages the public to submit comments on the proposed rule by Aug. 28.

Biden’s New Student Debt Relief Plan

On June 30, President Biden announced a new plan to provide student debt relief following the Supreme Court’s rejection of Biden’s original proposal to cancel up to $20,000 worth of federal student loans per person. Biden called upon the secretary of the Department of Education to open an alternative path for debt relief that could impact unprecedented borrowers. Moreover, the DOE finalized a new affordable payment plan to waive monthly payments for some borrowers and reduce yearly payments by at least $1,000 for others. There will also be a 12-month “on-ramp” to repayment from Oct. 1, 2023 to Sept. 30, 2024. Those who miss payments during this time will not be “considered delinquent, reported to credit bureaus, placed in default, or referred to debt collection agencies.”

LGBTQ+ Youth Suffer High Rates of Depression, Especially Youth of Color

A new study from Yale University provides scientific evidence that LGBTQ+ youth have higher rates of depression compared to their heterosexual counterparts. Those from Black and Hispanic households were 32% more likely to have symptoms of depression in states without anti-bullying legislation and conversion therapy bans. LGBTQ+ youth of color consistently experience higher rates of mental health challenges than their white peers. For example, while 12% of white youth had suicide attempts; more than 15% of Indigenous, Middle Eastern, Black, Multiracial, and Latinx youth had attempted suicide, with Middle Eastern and Indigenous ranking at 20% and 21%, respectively. Nearly 1 in 5 transgender and nonbinary youth attempted suicide, and LGBTQ youth of color reported higher rates than their white peers.

Youth of color deal with multiple sources of oppression, which leads to increased rates of depression. When LGBTQ+ youth of color are exposed to support, specifically in a school environment, there is measurable improvement socially, academically, and emotionally. There are ways to alleviate these youths’ struggles, such as establishing gay-straight alliances in schools, having staff trained in inclusivity, setting aside safe spaces, and implementing anti-harassment policies.

Subscribe to the Policy and Advocacy Radar to receive our biweekly policy roundup, which includes commentary on issues in Social Current’s federal policy agenda, opportunities to take action, and curated news and opportunities.

In the case of Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, the Supreme Court ruled against affirmative action in college admissions. The historic 6-3 decision last Thursday overturned decades of precedence. The majority ruled that “Affirmative Action,” the practice of considering the race of prospective students when determining admission, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. Chief Justice Roberts wrote, “The Harvard and UNC admissions programs cannot be reconciled with the guarantees of the Equal Protection Clause. Both programs lack sufficiently focused and measurable objectives warranting the use of race, unavoidably negatively employ race, involve racial stereotyping, and lack meaningful endpoints. We have never permitted admissions programs to work that way, and we will not do so today.”  

In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Kentanji Brown Jackson, wrote, “The result of today’s decision is that a person’s skin color may play a role in assessing individualized suspicion, but it cannot play a role in assessing that person’s individualized contributions to a diverse learning environment. That indefensible reading of the Constitution is not grounded in law and subverts the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection.”  

President Joe Biden condemned the decision, along with many public figures, including Barack and Michelle Obama, saying that he “strongly, strongly” disagrees with the ruling and urging that the “decision must not be the final word” on the matter. Former President Trump applauded the ruling, calling it “a great day for America.” Former Vice President Mike Pence, Florida Gov. Ron Desantis, and other conservative politicians expressed similar sentiments.   

Some states have already banned race-based affirmative action, resulting in declining enrollment of students from underrepresented communities. Public opinion polls have shown mixed approval for the practice, with many voters conflicted. Knowing that the ruling would likely not rule in their favor, elite colleges and universities have been preparing for a change in their admission processes, with one dean stating, “We don’t want tools taken away from us or our hands tied behind our back. … I’m extremely worried.”

Supreme Court Releases Batch of New Decisions

The Supreme Court released a batch of new opinions last week in the final days of its term. On Wednesday, it released opinions ruling against the Independent State Legislature theory, clarifying when online harassment can be prosecuted, and upholding a Pennsylvania law allowing any company doing business in the state to be sued there. Later in the week, the court also ruled on cases dealing with trademark infringement, religious liberty, affirmative action, and President Biden’s student loan forgiveness program.

In the two cases involving the law and religion, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of religious liberty and freedom of expression in certain contexts. In Groff v. DeJoy, the court sided with Gerald Groff, an evangelical Christian suing the U.S. Postal Service for religious discrimination. Groff, who observes the Sabbath, faced punishment for refusing to work on Sundays. Lower courts ruled in favor of the Postal Service, agreeing that accommodating Groff’s beliefs would cause an “undue hardship” for the employer. However, in a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court ruled that under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, “it would not be enough for an employer to conclude that forcing other employees to work overtime would constitute an undue hardship. Consideration of other options, such as voluntary shift swapping, would also be necessary.” The lower courts will now decide Groff’s case under the new clarified standard.

In 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, the Court ruled 6-3 that an evangelical Christian website designer had the right to refuse service to LGBT customers under the first amendment. The Court ruled that a Colorado anti-discrimination law requiring the wedding website designer to create wedding websites for same sex couples was a violation of the designer’s right to freedom of speech. In the majority opinion, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote “The First Amendment’s protections belong to all, not just to speakers whose motives the government finds worthy”, continuing “In this case, Colorado seeks to force an individual to speak in ways that align with its views but defy her conscience about a matter of major significance”. In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote “Today, the Court, for the first time in its history, grants a business open to the public a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class”.

Two other cases, Department of Education v. Brown and Biden v. Nebraska, overturned President Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan. While the decision on the first case concluded that the respondents lacked standing to bring a procedural claim against the program, Biden v. Nebraska ruled that the program was unconstitutional.

Once again in a 6-3 vote, the Court ruled that Biden’s plan to forgive up to $20,000 in student loan debt relief to borrowers under the HEROES Act, which gives the executive branch the ability to waive or modify student loan debt terms during a national emergency, exceeded his authority. The majority opinion, written by Justice Roberts, stated that the plan was in violation of the highly subjective “major questions doctrine”, that states that any executive action not approved by Congress which the Court declares to be too “major” of a policy is unconstitutional. In her dissent, Justice Elena Kagan accused the court of “once again ‘substituting’ itself for Congress and the Executive Branch – and the hundreds of millions of people they represent – in making this Nation’s most important, as well as most contested, policy decisions.”

New Bill Introduced to Ensure Continuity of Exemptions to SNAP Work Requirements

On June 13, Ranking Member on the House Agriculture Subcommittee on Nutrition Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.) and Representatives Yadira Caraveo (D-Colo.) and Emilia Sykes (D-Ohio) introduced the Food Access and Stability Act. The proposed legislation would make permanent specific changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) implemented in the recent bipartisan budget deal. Though the agreement required more adults without children to work to receive SNAP benefits, it exempted veterans, unhoused people, and former foster youth from work requirements until 2030. The Food Access and Stability Act would ensure that these exemptions become permanent. In introducing the legislation, the representatives reminded the public that over 41 million people, or 1 in 8, relied on SNAP benefits last year to avoid hunger.

Appropriations Process Already Hitting Hurdles

Just a month after reaching a bipartisan deal on the outlines of next year’s federal budget, members of Congress are already nervous about the prospects of passing a full budget by the end of the year. According to the debt limit deal, Congress must pass the 12 bills that are part of the federal budget by New Year’s Eve or else trigger an automatic 1% reduction across all areas of the federal government, also called sequestration. There is even disagreement over the deadline, with some lawmakers arguing that the bills can be passed as late as April of next year. Another issue is the spending caps included in last month’s debt deal. Republican House members are marking up bills that spend $119 billion less than the targets—a symbolic protest against the debt deal, which didn’t cut spending enough in their view. The Senate, on the other hand, is preparing bills that go above the agreed-upon spending targets. How these approaches will be reconciled into a final budget package is unclear. Rumors are already swirling that each chamber will spend the summer marking up its bills, and then a handpicked team of negotiators will come together in the fall to hammer out the final deal.

Federal Judge Shoots Down Arkansas Gender-Affirming Care Ban

On June 20, a federal district court judge struck down an Arkansas gender-affirming care ban after finding the law violates the constitutional rights of transgender youth, their parents, and health care providers. A coalition made up of parents of transgender youth, as well as doctors and major medical organizations, opposed Arkansas House Bill 1570 (also known as Act 626) and sued the state (Brandt et al. v. Rutledge et al.). Act 626 was enacted by the Arkansas state legislature, overriding the previous veto by the Gov. Asa Hutchinson in 2021. The bill barred state funds and insurance coverage for gender-affirming care and allowed private insurance to refuse coverage. Act 626 also prohibited health care professionals from providing “gender transition procedures” to individuals under 18. The federal district court judge found Act 626 to be unconstitutional.

Administration Rolls Out New Broadband Funding

Last week, the Biden administration announced the launch of Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD), a $42.45 billion grant program to fund high-speed internet infrastructure for each state, territory, and the District of Columbia. Each state will receive a minimum of $107 million. The funding for the program was authorized under the $1 trillion infrastructure law that President Biden passed through Congress in 2021. To receive the first 20% of the funding, states have until the end of the year to submit proposals to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) on how the money will be allotted. By the end of 2025, all the funds will be dispersed. The Biden administration argues that the internet is as vital of a utility as water and gas, and all families should have access to reliable and affordable internet.

Broadband companies have hesitated to provide internet access for rural areas, as it is not a lucrative venture, even though over 8 million homes need access. During the COVID-19 shutdown, the lack of stable internet access in rural areas emphasized the crucial need for these areas of the country to have broadband access. Earlier this month, NTIA announced $930 million for 35 “middle-mile” broadband construction projects connecting large fiber and local networks. NTIA administration Alan Davidson said earlier this month, “Middle Mile infrastructure brings the capacity to our local networks and lowers the cost for deploying future local networks.”

Subscribe to the Policy and Advocacy Radar to receive our biweekly policy roundup, which includes commentary on issues in Social Current’s federal policy agenda, opportunities to take action, and curated news and opportunities.

Last week, the Indian Child Welfare Act, a guiding light of child welfare policy for over 40 years, survived a legal challenge that was brought before the Supreme Court, earning the applause of Native American tribes and child well-being advocates across the country. The Supreme Court voted 7-2 to uphold the law, which was passed in 1978 in response to investigations that found over one-third of Native children had been taken from their homes and placed with non-Native families. The law required officials to strive to place Native children with extended family, other members of the tribe, or another tribe, before considering placement in non-Native homes or institutions. The law defends long-held convictions backed up by mountains of empirical evidence that family preservation, community connection, and cultural affinity are cornerstones of child well-being.

Social Current President and CEO Jody Levison-Johnson released the following statement on the Supreme Court’s Decision:

“The Indian Child Welfare Act is consistent with best practice and child welfare’s shift towards strengthening families and promoting family preservation,” said Social Current President & CEO Jody Levison-Johnson. “By prioritizing the placement of children within their families, communities or tribal nations, we also prioritize stability and the opportunity to maintain continuity in schools, healthcare, and community participation. Today’s Supreme Court decision affirms this and ensures that we carry forward the practices and policies that we know create better outcomes for children.”

New Opioid Settlement Toolkit for Community-Based Organizations

Social Current is pleased to announce the release of the updated Opioid Settlement Toolkit for Community-Based Organizations. This toolkit offers strategy, resources, and advice to effectively advocate for over $50 billion in funds that have become available through settlements with opioid pharmaceutical companies, manufacturers, and retailers. States are currently deciding how these dollars are spent, so it is critical community-based organizations understand how the process works and use their expertise to influence policy makers.

Hearing on Anti-Poverty Tax Provisions

Last Wednesday, the Senate Committee on Finance held a hearing called “Anti-Poverty and Family Support Provisions in the Tax Code.” In his opening remarks, Chairman Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) called for the restoration of the one-year Child Tax Credit (CTC) expansion from the 2021 American Rescue Plan, which increased the credit and made it fully refundable, allowing the lowest income Americans to receive the full amount. A study by Columbia University claims that the CTC expansion lifted 3.7 million children out of poverty. In his opening remarks, Ranking Member Crapo (R-Idaho) argued against the CTC because it also benefited parents who did not work, undermining the lessons of welfare reform in the 1990s, which encouraged work, self-sufficiency, and workforce training.

The first witness, Amy Matsui of the National Women’s Law Center, spoke to the positive impact of refundable tax credits on low-income households. She said during the pandemic the enhanced Child Tax Credit, the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit together lifted 9.7 million people out of poverty, including 2.9 million women and 4.9 million children. Matsui was followed by Melissa Lester, a mother of two from Ohio, who told her story of struggling to pay for ever-increasing expenses, including child care, which costs more than her mortgage. She testified the $300 per month, per child from the enhanced Child Tax Credit gave her more breathing room and urged the committee to pass such family-friendly policies.

Another witness, Grant Collins of Fedcap, Inc., a nonprofit organization that helps individuals attain economic well-being, discussed the Earned Income Tax Credit saying it provides various positives for the children of beneficiaries, including improved birth outcomes, higher likelihood of college enrollment, and increased food security. The final witness, Bruce Meyer of the Harris School of Public Policy at the University of Chicago, urged against restoring the enhanced Child Tax Credit from the American Rescue Plan, because it did not tie benefits to work.

Freedom Caucus Cedes Blockade

The House floor is once again functioning, following negotiations between Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and the conservative Freedom Caucus.

Last week, a small group of Republicans joined Democrats in voting to prevent debate on a set of bills relating to gas stove regulation. Despite the issue’s popularity among Republicans, members of the Freedom Caucus “blindsided” Speaker McCarthy and paralyzed the House floor, preventing other popular party bills from passing as well. It appears that this rebellion was done in protest against the recent debt ceiling deal negotiated by President Biden and Speaker McCarthy, which some members feel violated the private deal made in January ensuring McCarthy’s election as speaker and did not go far enough to cut spending. Others say that the rebellion is not related to the January deals, and instead is a protest against threats made by House leadership to ensure that the debt ceiling bill would pass. On Monday afternoon, an agreement was reached and the blockade was ended after days of negotiations, with conservatives agreeing to help advance bills limiting gas stove and pistol brace regulations, two priorities of the Republican party.

However, the nearly week-long obstruction has made clear the power the Freedom Caucus holds in the House, which Republicans hold by a narrow majority. This power seems to be growing, as two new members were added to the Freedom Caucus just last week. While the standoff is over for now, the group made no promises for the future. In fact, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fl.) seemed to state the group is willing to block House bills again, saying “perhaps we’ll be back here next week.”

Hearing on Postsecondary Innovation

On Wednesday, June 14, the House Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Development held a hearing entitled “Postsecondary Innovation: Preparing Today’s Students for Tomorrow’s Opportunities.” Witnesses presented innovations in the higher education field that could advance equity, accessibility, and quality in postsecondary education, although some warned that funding innovative strategies without guardrails could lead to resources being wasted on low-quality programs.

Key Hearing Takeaways

Subcommittee Chairman Burgess Owens (R-Utah) opened the hearing by highlighting the importance of America’s colleges and universities and addressing the poor graduation rates these schools currently face. Owens contends one of the reasons higher education is “unaffordable, inflexible, and outdated” is the Higher Education Act (HEA), which provides a legislative framework for higher education and has not been fully updated since 2008. He argues the HEA needs to be revisited to reflect the modern university experience, in which over 30 percent of students are non-traditional. Owens references innovations such as competency-based education, three-year degree programs, and online education, which can advance education but are constrained by the HEA.

Ranking Member Frederica Wilson emphasized the importance of equality, and the opportunities higher education provides in her opening statement. Wilson argues although higher education can be the key to the American dream and lead to significantly higher income, students and families are being forced to shoulder more of the costs, a problem that particularly burdens black college students. In emphasizing the importance of affordable college and wraparound student services, she praises some innovations in higher education while warning against sacrificing equal access and opportunity.

The first witness, Dr. Tim Renick, executive director for Georgia State’s National Institute for Student Success (NISS), discussed the success of Georgia State, particularly in implementing technology to provide personalized attention to students. As one of the largest Minority Serving Institutions in the country, Georgia State has used predictive analytics and AI to monitor students for risk factors and proactively provide support to those at risk of dropping out, leading to a massive increase in graduation rates, especially for minority students. Renick explained how this technology, along with working with community colleges, has helped Georgia State rank among top institutions for social mobility, and how NISS has helped other organizations to do the same.

Keith Shoates, chief operating officer for the Student Freedom Initiative (SFI), after giving a shout-out to company donors, explained the pillars of SFI: alternatives to Parent PLUS loans, internships and certifications, comprehensive supports, and Minority Serving Institution (MSI) capacity building. Shoates states the overarching purpose of SFI is to attract private sector resources and create partnerships to alleviate the wealth gap in America through education. SFI is partnered with 56 institutions across 20 states with plans to expand. As an alternative to Parent PLUS loans, SFI provides Juniors and Seniors in STEM majors at participating organizations flexible loans with low interest rates, assists with obtaining certifications and paid internships, provides microgrants to students facing unexpected circumstances, and provides support for participating MSIs. Shoates contended that SFI’s model should be considered as an “effective, scalable, long-term solution to addressing the wealth gap through the lens of education.”

Lanae Erickson, senior vice president for social policy, education and politics at Third Way, a national policy think tank, explained the importance of improving the quality of education, not just access. After praising the increased access of higher education and the financial benefits it provides, Erickson pointed out the low graduation rates and lack of success some graduates face. She warned against innovative or experimental programs not backed by evidence, including expanding Pell Grants to short-term programs and funding online education. While these programs can be beneficial, Erickson recommends guardrails and transparency requirements that will ensure a high payout on taxpayer money invested in education.

Dr. Lori Carrell, chancellor of University of Minnesota Rochester and co-director of the College-in-3 Initiative, explained the work done through the College-in-3 experiment. Twelve campuses have experimented with pilot programs for the College-in-3 project and have found not only do these programs decrease financial burdens, but they can also be successful with evidence-based learning design and partnerships with employers. The group recommends the Department of Education initiates “Experimental Sites” for the project and that Congress supports the initiative through the fiscal year 2024 appropriations process as well as through HEA reauthorization by ensuring financial aid flexibility for accelerated learning pathways.

Following their statements, witnesses fielded questions regarding details of their programs and recommendations to Congress. Dr. Renick expanded on Georgia State’s use of technology to identify and assist struggling students, the importance of partnering with local community colleges, and areas in which other institutions would benefit from similar models. Mr. Shoates provided details on SFI programs, including which schools are currently sponsored and how microgrant and loan programs work. Dr. Carrell detailed the ways in which universities can retain quality degree programs while limiting the time it takes to complete them as well as the financial benefits doing so would provide. Ms. Erickson made recommendations for expanding dual enrollment, increasing equity in the K-12 system, and the importance of guardrails when implementing competency-based education programs.

Artificial Intelligence was a frequent topic of discussion, with questions about future degrees in AI and even how to prevent students from using ChatGPT to cheat. The hearing brought to light a seemingly bipartisan support for programs such as dual-enrollment and three-year degree programs that could advance both accessibility and quality of education in postsecondary schools.

HHS Secretary Goes before House Committee

On June 13, the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, chaired by Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.), hosted a hearing called “Examining the Policies and Priorities of the Department of Health and Human Services.” Secretary Xavier Becerra of Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) opened by stating the department’s commitment to keeping healthcare affordable and providing mental healthcare on par with physical healthcare to all Americans, especially minors.

Key Hearing Takeaways

A significant focus of the meeting revolved around the New York Times article, “Alone and Exploited, Migrant Children Work Brutal Jobs Across the U.S.” Committee members questioned Secretary Becerra on how HHS keeps migrant children safe and out of exploitative situations, such as human trafficking. Secretary Xavier Becerra assured the committee the department is doing everything possible to protect migrant children in their care. HHS places migrant children with vetted sponsors, typically the child’s family or close relatives, but once they are placed with a guardian, HHS does not have jurisdiction to oversee those sponsors. HHS tries to contact children placed with sponsors to ensure their safety, but it does not have the authority to make the sponsors, or the children, respond. In the future, HHS plans to work with the Department of Labor to ensure safe workplaces in compliance with child labor laws.

Gender Affirming Care Upheld by Federal Judge

A U.S. District Judge in Florida has upheld the right of three minors to continue receiving gender-affirming care, despite recently passed legislation barring most transgender children from such care, like puberty blockers and hormone therapy. Judge Robert Hinkle also blasted the reasoning behind Florida’s ban on gender-affirming care for trans minors as likely unconstitutional. Judge Hinkle’s preliminary injunction only applies to the three families that brought the lawsuit. These families attest the ban violated their constitutional right for parents to make health-conscious decisions for their children. Hinkle states the plaintiff’s children will suffer irreparable harm if denied treatment. The ruling brings a temporary sense of relief to patients and families who have been denied access to gender-affirming care, but the legal path forward remains uncertain.

Judge Hinkle’s order comes in contrast to the series of anti-trans laws passed in Florida restricting transgender people’s access to medical care, school sports, and the ability to change names on IDs. The American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Medical Association support gender-affirming care for adults and adolescents.

Subscribe to the Policy and Advocacy Radar to receive our biweekly policy roundup, which includes commentary on issues in Social Current’s federal policy agenda, opportunities to take action, and curated news and opportunities.

Last weekend, after weeks of negotiation, Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and President Joe Biden agreed to a deal, in principle, regarding the debt ceiling and the federal budget. Bipartisan majorities in the House of Representatives and the Senate voted in favor of the bill, which was then signed into law by President Biden on Saturday. The bill suspends the debt ceiling until 2025, after the next presidential election, in addition to freezing nonmilitary discretionary spending for fiscal year 2024 and granting a one percent increase in 2025. Both sides conceded they did not get everything they wanted, but, given the makeup of Congress and the occupant in the White House, a compromise was necessary to avert default and economic catastrophe.

Here are some of the bill’s major takeaways of interest to the social sector community:

The legislation introduces new work requirements on older recipients of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance program (SNAP), or food stamps. Adults ages 50-54 without dependents will now be required to work or volunteer 80 hours per month. Previously, the work requirement was capped at age 49. The bill, however, exempts veterans, homeless people, and young adults aging out of foster care from work requirements. Though the White House claims these exemptions will result in the same amount of people being eligible for food stamps, poverty advocates say the new requirements will leave many adults worse off. The bill also incorporates stricter work participation requirements in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program.

The compromise also terminates the pandemic-induced pause on student loan repayments and interest at the end of Aug., though it does not touch President Biden’s student loan forgiveness program, which is currently under consideration by the Supreme Court. Additionally, it rescinds $10 of $80 billion the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) received through the Inflation Reduction Act last year, though much of that money will be repurposed to offset the cuts to nondiscretionary spending. Furthermore, the bill claws back $30 billion of unspent COVID-19 relief funds, but it does not impact the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds which many nonprofits have relied upon.

Key Hearing Takeaways: Solving the Child Care Crisis: Meeting the Needs of Working Families and Child Care Workers

On Wed., May 30, the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions held a hearing entitled “Solving the Child Care Crisis: Meeting the Needs of Working Families and Child Care Workers.” Although the data is incomplete, evidence suggests pandemic relief funds allowed states to stabilize child care industries and improve accessibility for families; however, discussion of extending or expanding these programs amid the federal debt negotiation was contentious.

Key Hearing Takeways

Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders (D- VT) opened the hearing by calling out the nation’s “broken and dysfunctional childhood system.” He emphasized the high cost of child care, citing a survey showing 40 percent of parents in America have gone into debt to pay for it. Additionally, he highlighted the difficulty American parents face even in finding an available slot for daycare services as well as the low wages, or “starvation wages,” child care providers earn. Sanders also addressed the negative economic result of this crisis, stating there are hundreds of thousands of people, primarily women, who would like to join the workforce but cannot do so without accessible and affordable childcare. He concluded that while the American Rescue Plan was important progress, Congress needs to do more than just renew this funding; it needs a vision for the future in which every American family has access to high-quality, affordable health care and child care workers are given the wages they deserve.

Ranking Member Bill Cassidy (R- LA) began by acknowledging child care in America is far too expensive for many families while disagreeing that an increase in federal funding is the appropriate solution. Cassidy centered his argument around the theme: “Don’t just do something, think,” pointing out the Government Accountability Office will not be able to report on how federal child care funding has been spent for several years, and there is still $18 billion in COVID-19 relief funds that has not yet been spent. Additionally, Cassidy reminded the committee that American parents do not want a one-size-fits-all approach to child care, as 51 percent prefer informal child care over formal. He also contends it is ironic to discuss a $600 billion “government-run institutionalized child care system” while the federal government is potentially days away from defaulting on its debt.

The first witness, Elizabeth Groginsky, New Mexico’s first Early Childhood Education and Care Department Cabinet Secretary, attested to the success of New Mexico’s use of federal funding to save the child care industry from collapse during the pandemic and create a high-quality, equitable, and affordable child care system. As one of only several states to create a cabinet secretary position and state agency for early childhood programs, New Mexico was able to stabilize the child care industry, increase employee compensation, reduce cost, and expand access. The popular program was implemented using federal pandemic relief funds, and Groginsky warned that continued federal investment is necessary to maintain the transformational gains her state achieved.

Lauren Hogan, Managing Director of Policy and Professional Advancement for the National Association for the Education of Young Children, explained the child care crisis by relating it to a deep hole in the ground surrounded by quicksand, in which parents and educators are standing on the edge, struggling to build a bridge across the chasm where public funding should be. Hogan explained child care is an example of market failure; neither families nor educators can absorb the true cost, leaving parents paying more for child care than college tuition and educators making poverty-level wages. She suggested relief funds stabilized the sand around this hole, but as these grants end, the cost will be passed to families and providers, who will be forced to increase costs, cut wages, and serve fewer children. She ended her statement by stating “The hole is deep, the quicksand is strong, and parents and educators can’t build the bridge alone. Thankfully, we know federal investments in child care work, and Congress must make them before it’s too late”.

Cheryl Morman, Family Care Provider and President of the Virginia Alliance for Family Child Care Associations, detailed the challenges of owning a family child care business and the relief provided by federal funding during the pandemic. Mormon was able to continue to provide care throughout the pandemic due to stabilization funds, with six of the eleven families in her care receiving financial assistance to subsidize care. She attested relief funding was critical to saving the child care industry, her own business included, but more is needed. For instance, she has vacant spots she could fill if she were to hire another employee, but she is not able to offer a wage that qualified employees will accept.

Carrie Lukas, President of the Independent Women’s Forum, argued American parents want choices when it comes to child care, not a “one size fits all government daycare regime,” and many Americans are satisfied with the child care arrangements they currently have. Lukas warned against day care centers operating like the K-12 system, contending that debates over curriculums, pronouns, sex-ed, and masking policies will soon be a part of American preschools if the government becomes the primary funder. Instead, Lukas believes the government should make child care more affordable by eliminating regulations not directly related to safety and quality of care and financially support families through tax relief or direct support to parents that is not conditional on whether the family pays for child care.

Kathryn Larin, Director in Education, Workforce, and Income Security in the Government Accountability Office explained what is currently known about how federal relief funds have been used by states and when more data will be available. Of the $52.5 billion allotted for pandemic relief child care funds and flexibilities, about $34.5 billion has been spent by states. Most of the funds, about $11.7 billion, were allocated through the American Rescue Plan, meaning states have until Sept. of 2024 to spend it. The rest must be spent by Sept. of 2023. There is some evidence these funds were successful at stabilizing child care industries, although state officials did face challenges in adapting their subsidy programs quickly after such a large increase in funding. Because not all the funding has been spent and because of significant lags in reporting of data, a full account of how funding was used will not be available until 2025 or 2026.

Following the witness statements, many Democrats called on Secretary Groginsky, Ms. Hogan, and Ms. Morman to affirm the need for increased federal funding for child care. Secretary Groginsky reemphasized the popularity and success of New Mexico’s program. She also expanded on details of the program and clarified families now have more choices than ever, and there is not a “one size fits all” approach as was suggested by Ms. Lukas and several Republican Senators. Ms. Hogan emphasized the need for federal funding to assist parents and educators and explained the failure of the market that necessitates such intervention. Ms. Morman expressed the importance of access to home-based care for all Americans, particularly families in rural areas, low-income families, and families of color.

Several Republican Senators called on Ms. Lukas, who expressed concern about federal funding, pointing to the cost of government programs and threats to religious education, as well as worries that preschools will function similarly to the K-12 system and that parents will be disincentivized from staying at home with their children. The discussion of curriculum was raised by Republican Senator Mullin, who read passages from a book entitled Our Skin: A First Conversation on Race and a lyric from the song “Jesus loves the Little Children,” and asked several of the witnesses which was better to teach. Senator Cassidy also raised concerns about curriculum, asking Ms. Hogan if she formally recommends educators tell parents about the content of material introducing children to the concept of “transgenderism.”

Amidst contentious partisan debate, including several interruptions of Senators and witnesses as well as Senator Mullin stating he is baffled Senator Sanders was chosen as the Committee Chair as a “self-proclaimed socialist,” Alaskan Republican Senator Murkowski seemed to agree federal funding was necessary to increase access to child care. Murkowski pointed out the lack of access to child care was not simply a workforce issue, but a military readiness issue as well, explaining the Coast Guard informed her they are struggling to remain in Alaskan communities without child care.

Senator Sanders concluded the hearing by reiterating the points from his opening statement, saying “I don’t think it’s too much to ask that in the richest country in the history of the world, all of our children, no matter where they live, no matter what their background is, get the quality child care and early childhood education they need in order to flourish later in life. I don’t think that’s a radical, socialistic, if you like, statement. I think that’s something that the vast majority of the American people believe in.”

Momnibus Bill Introduced

On Mother’s Day, May 15, Reps. Lauren Underwood (D-IL), Alma Adams (D-NC), and Sen.Cory Booker (D-NJ) introduced the Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act of 2023, the most comprehensive legislation to tackle the appallingly high rate of maternal mortality in the United States. The United States has the highest rate of maternal mortality in the developed world, and the rate has increased by 89% in recent years, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The Momnibus Act would commit over one billion dollars to ensure all mothers have the support and resources they need to be safe and healthy. Among other things, the legislation would address the social determinants of health that affect maternal health outcomes, including housing and transportation. It would also make the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) accessible during the postpartum and breastfeeding periods. Community based organizations that work with mothers would obtain new funding, and the perinatal workforce would receive funds to grow and diversify. Finally, the bill would put more emphasis on data collection and quality to ensure informed decision making and policy in the future. 181 members of the House of Representatives have endorsed the bill, as well as 200 organizations.

New Federal Housing Initiative Announced

On May 18, the Biden-Harris administration announced the launch of ALL INside, an initiative of All In: The Federal Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness, with the goal to decrease homelessness by 25 percent by 2025. The ALL INside initiative will coordinate efforts between the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness, its 19 federal member agencies as well as state and local governments, including Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles, Phoenix Metro, Seattle, and the state of California. The initiative will send one federal official to each community to ensure coordination with local officials on federal programs as well as to identify regulatory flexibilities and advance best practices. ALL INside will leverage Medicaid housing support and behavioral health care, as well as rental assistance and housing programs in the Department of Housing and Urban Development. It will also engage other agencies, including the Social Security Administration, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and the Department of Labor to speed the transition to permanent housing and provide wrap-around services. ALL INside builds upon the administration’s past efforts to tackle homelessness, including the historic investments made in the American Rescue Plan.

New Study Shows the Futility of TANF Work Requirements

A new study from the Center on Poverty and Social Policy at Columbia University shows that strengthening work requirements in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program – one of the key pillars of the budget deal reached this week – could cost society up to $30 billion per year, rather than reduce the budget. In the negotiations, the House GOP caucus, led by Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), pushed to decrease the debt by enforcing stricter work requirements in numerous federal benefits programs, including TANF, Medicaid, and food stamps. The study illustrates, however, that the TANF work requirements could lead to loss of benefits, which in the short and long-term carry immense social costs. Specifically, each dollar lost in TANF benefits translates into eight dollars in societal costs per year, in the form of increased spending on children’s health and child protective services, as well as decreased tax receipts from children’s future earnings. The exact number of families that will lose access to TANF is unclear at this point; however, the study offers numerous estimates. If 25 percent of families lose monthly TANF cash benefits, the economic and social costs could amount to $7.4 billion per year; if 50 percent lose benefits, the cost could equal $15 billion per year. At worst, the cost could rise to $29.6 billion per year if states cut TANF benefits to all families over strict work requirements.

Subscribe to the Policy and Advocacy Radar to receive our biweekly policy roundup, which includes commentary on issues in Social Current’s federal policy agenda, opportunities to take action, and curated news and opportunities.

After repeated warnings from the Treasury Department that the federal government could run out of money and default on its debts as soon as June 1, lawmakers are scrambling to come up with a deal to keep the government solvent. In exchange for raising the debt ceiling, Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and the House GOP caucus insist the president agree to spending cuts for fiscal year 2024 – a non-starter, according to the president. However, given the prospect of a default, top staffers of McCarthy and President Joe Biden are working around the clock to come up with a compromise, with both sides hinting progress has been made. The outline of a potential deal revolves around the following issues:

An agreement on top-line spending numbers for fiscal year 2024 must be reached; however, members of both parties are opposed to decreasing portions of the discretionary budget, including military, environmental, and health care spending. Unspent funds of approximately $56 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office, from previous COVID-19 packages are on the table for clawbacks, risking money already allocated to economic assistance. While Biden says he will not consider any changes to Medicaid access, McCarthy is pushing to include new work requirements for benefits programs, including Medicaid, food stamps, and TANF. Finally, members of both parties support reform to the permitting process for energy and other projects, but disagreements remain over the details.

President Biden cut his trip to Japan for the G7 meeting short so he could be back in Washington, D.C. to finalize the deal early this week.

HHS Reveals New Website to Find Mental Health Resources

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) launched a new website, FindSupport.gov, to help the public find resources and treatment for challenges related to mental health, drugs, or alcohol. The website offers visitors information on coping strategies, types of treatment, ways to help others, and payment options for treatment. The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services partnered to create the website after research showed the public sought a reliable and objective resource for dealing with mental health and substance use issues. Over the course of the project, HHS engaged 50 subject matter experts and collected feedback from people of all races, ethnicities, genders, education levels, and ages. FindSupport.gov is another national resource in addition to SAMHSA’s national helpline, 1-800-662-HELP, and the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline. According to SAMHSA, almost one in three adults suffer from mental health and/or substance use isues.

New Fact from HHS on the End of the Public Health Emergency

To mark the end of the public health emergency (PHE) on May 11, 2023, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) released a new fact sheet called “End of the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency,” which details what will stay the same and changes to occur after over three years of the COVID-19 pandemic. In the fact sheet, the administration touted its accomplishments: 270 million people who received at least one dose of the vaccine as well as 750 million free COVID-19 tests, among other things. Since Jan. 2021, COVID-19 deaths are down by 95 percent and hospitalizations have decreased by 91 percent. With the end of the PHE, HHS says certain factors will remain the same, including telehealth flexibilities under Medicare through Dec. 2024 and indefinitely under Medicaid. However, Medicare and Medicaid will no longer have some of the other major flexibilities implemented during the pandemic. Certain waivers that expanded access and facility capacity, for example, will be halted. Moreover, the requirement of private insurance companies to cover COVID-19 testing without cost sharing ended on May 11.

New Low-Income Housing Bill Gains Bipartisan, Bicameral Support

On May 11, the Affordable Housing Credit Improvement Act made a comeback in the House of Representatives and the Senate with bipartisan support. Reps. Darin LaHood (R-Ill.), Suzan DelBene (D-Wash.), Don Beyer (D-Va.), Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio), Jimmy Panetta (D-Calif.), and Claudia Tenney (R-N.Y.), along with Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Todd Young (R-Ind.), and Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) introduced the bill, which would increase the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit, an important tool for incentivizing private investment in the construction and renovation of affordable housing. The Affordable Housing Credit Improvement Act would increase the available credits by 50 percent, spurring the construction of 1.94 million additional affordable homes over the next ten years. It would also create almost three million jobs, increase tax revenue by $115 billion and support $333 billion in wages and business income. The bill would also incorporate stronger protections for veterans, victims of domestic and dating violence, as well as other underserved communities into the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit.

Subscribe to the Policy and Advocacy Radar to receive our biweekly policy roundup, which includes commentary on issues in Social Current’s federal policy agenda, opportunities to take action, and curated news and opportunities.

On Tuesday, May 2, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hosted an “Improving Access to Federal Grants for Underserved Communities” hearing. There is a growing interest at the federal level in reforming the federal grants space to make it more transparent, efficient, and accessible, particularly for entities that don’t have the resources or capacity to apply but need access the most.

Social Current CEO Jody Levison-Johnson and Senior Director of Government Affairs Blair Abelle-Kiser submitted written testimony detailing the challenges and opportunities in the federal grants space. We will continue to gain insights from our network and build upon the increasing attention to this topic from our federal elected officials.

Key Hearing Takeaways

Continue reading for more takeaways on the witness statements and the questions from senators on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

Child Care Bill Introduced in Congress

On April 22, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, and Rep. Robert C. “Bobby” Scott (D-Va.), chair of the House Education and Labor Committee, introduced the Child Care for Working Families Act (CCWFA), which would provide considerable resources to expanding the child care sector and making child care more affordable. According to the press release, in 29 states and the District of Columbia, infant care costs are more than the average cost of in-state college tuition at public four-year institutions. Child care workers–disproportionately women of color–are unfairly paid and forced to participate in public assistance programs. 50 percent of families live in so-called “child care deserts.” The CCWFA would create federal-state partnerships to ensure no family living under 150 percent of the state median income would pay more than seven percent of their income on child care. The bill would also give 3- and 4-year-olds access to preschool programs, increase salaries for child care workers, and bolster Head Start programs. The bill’s proponents say the bill would lift one million families out of poverty and create 700,000 new child care jobs.

U.S. Surgeon Gen. Presents National Framework to Combat Loneliness

U.S. Surgeon Gen. Vivek H. Murthy published an op-ed in the New York Times entitled “We Have Become a Lonely Nation. It’s Time to Fix That.” Murthy wrote about his own struggles with loneliness as well as the fact that at any time one out of every two Americans experiences loneliness. He stated loneliness leads to increased risk of heart disease, dementia, and stroke, and that the risk of death associated with loneliness is similar to that of smoking daily or suffering from obesity. Murthy introduced his “national framework to rebuild social connection and community in America,” which provides advice to individuals, parents, community-based organizations, schools, workplaces, public health professionals, governments, and researchers on how to invigorate relationships and connection. The framework calls on community-based organizations to create programs aimed at inclusive social connection, to build partnerships with other social institutions that foster relationships, and to elevate the topics of connection and loneliness in their communities. It also urges governments to make social connection a public health priority by reversing policies that encourage detachment and incorporating social connection into the health care system.

Debt Ceiling Negotiations Update

After the House GOP released its proposal to cut the budget for FY2024 in exchange for lifting the debt ceiling, President Joe Biden invited House and Senate leadership to the White House for negotiations on Tuesday, May 2. The Treasury Department said the federal government could be in default as soon as June 1, ramping up calls for a deal to be reached. Democrats are reiterating calls to immediately lift the debt ceiling without conditions and to negotiate the budget later in the year. House GOP, who recently passed a bill including their desired budget cuts, are hoping to get concessions from President Biden as the deadline fast approaches. The Council of Economic Advisers released an analysis stating a prolonged default could lead to a GDP contraction of 6.1 percent and the unemployment rate to rise by five percentage points.

Subscribe to the Policy and Advocacy Radar to receive our biweekly policy roundup, which includes commentary on issues in Social Current’s federal policy agenda, opportunities to take action, and curated news and opportunities.

On Tuesday, May 2, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hosted an “Improving Access to Federal Grants for Underserved Communities” hearing. There is a growing interest at the federal level in reforming the federal grants space to make it more transparent, efficient, and accessible, particularly for entities that don’t have the resources or capacity to apply but need access the most. Social Current CEO Jody Levison-Johnson and Senior Director of Government Affairs Blair Abelle-Kiser submitted written testimony detailing the challenges and opportunities in the federal grants space. We will continue to gain insights from our network and build upon the increasing attention to this topic from our federal elected officials.

Key Hearing Takeaways

Committee Chairman Gay Peters (D-Mich.) opened the hearing by emphasizing the enormous impact of federal grants. Specifically, over $1 trillion in federal grant money was awarded last year to 131,000 recipient organizations by over 50 different federal agencies. There are over 1,900 grant programs with their own application procedures, portals and technical assistance capabilities, and award processes. He acknowledged that the current system is plagued by complex language, demanding applications, and technical challenges – all of which deter many organizations from applying in the first place. Chairman Peters stated that the purpose of the hearing was to address these barriers and present opportunities to reform the grants system to allow enhanced accessibility.

The first witness, Jeff Arkin, director of strategic issues with the Government Accountability Office, outlined the main challenges in the grant-making process. He said that grant recipients’ human capital, organizational and financial capacity is sometimes limited. He proposed that federal technical assistance at the front end and administrative and oversight assistance during grant implementation could be the answer. He also said that streamlining and creating more transparency in the grant process would reduce redundancies, enable data-driven decision-making, and ensure accountability.

Meagan Elliott, deputy chief financial officer of the City of Detroit, spoke about her office’s comprehensive strategy towards bringing more efficiency and transparency to the grant application process. The city combined all grant staff into one entity, which worked closely with federal, state, and local funders, including charitable and corporate partners. These changes led to an increased success rate for grant applications and more efficient communications through a centralized office. Drawing from her experience, Elliot recommended that federal grants enhance flexibility, allowing local leaders to decide how best to allocate funds based on the community’s pressing needs. She cited the American Rescue Plan Act State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds as a model for this. She also stressed the need for clarity around grant expectations and consistency across federal portals.

Matthew Hanson, associate managing director at Witt O’Brien’s LLC, detailed his experience assisting federal, tribal, state, local, and community-based organizations to access government grants for the past 30 years. In his experience, the federal government has expanded technical and training assistance for grantees, but not uniformly. Moreover, little effort has been invested in helping new entities apply for grants, especially those with limited resources. Hanson recommended, among other things, mandates for technical assistance, more grant management capacity, and the creation of a grant Helpdesk for pre- and post-award support.

The witness statements were followed by an enlightening question period from senators on the committee. In response to a question from Senator James Lankford (R-Ok.) about the ease of search terms on the grants.gov portal, Mr. Arkin said that recommendations had been made to the Office of Budget and Management concerning the simplification of search parameters within the portal. Senator Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) noted that her state continues to underperform in federal dollars per capita. Mr. Arkin testified that the GREAT Act passed in 2019 helped standardize grant language and ease prepopulated information, which should help increase the number of grant applications. However, he also urged that lack of awareness about grants is a continuing issue.

Senator John Ossoff (D-Ga.) discussed the challenges facing rural and Black communities in his state regarding accessing federal grants. Mr. Arkin responded that the new Rural Partners Network, a group of federal agencies and states, was created to overcome barriers to grants and opportunities in rural communities and that some aspects of the American Rescue plan have emphasized racial equity and should be explored in the context of grant awards.

Social Current submitted a statement to the Senate Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs Committee from President and CEO Jody Levison-Johnson and Senior Director of Government Affairs Blair Abelle-Kiser on the challenges faced by the nonprofit social sector in responding to federal grants. Among the challenges highlighted were federal contracts that don’t cover the actual cost of service delivery, the complexity of the contracting process, and a lack of funding flexibility that hampers the ability of nonprofits to innovate and address root causes. The testimony highlighted a number of solutions, including simplifying the application process, offering more consistency and transparency regarding grant application procedures and criteria, and allowing greater flexibility in the use of grant funds. It comes on the heels of an article by Jody Levison-Johnson that was published on March 30 entitled “An Urgent Response is Needed to the Dire Staff Shortages Facing NonProfit Government Contractors.”

The Senate hearing “Improving Access to Federal Grants for Underserved Communities,” took place on Tuesday, May 2, at 10 a.m. ET. For those of you who couldn’t make it, read the key takeaways Social Current put together from the hearing.

READ STATEMENT