Running head: POLICY ANALYSISJONES 1

[Type text][Type text][Type text]

POLICY ANALYSISJONES 2

Policy Analysis: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Farris JonesThe University of South Carolina

AbstractPart I of this paper seeks to analyze the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The basic form of the analysis will be: Delineation and overview, historical analysis, social analysis, economic analysis, political analysis, policy/program evaluation, and finally current proposals for policy reform. An overall understanding of the stimulus package is hoped to be gained from this information. Part II of this paper will look more closely at a specific program crated under the American Recovery and Reinvestment act called the Education of Homeless Children and Youths Recovery Plan and evaluate its adequacy.

PART II. Delineation and Overview of the Policy Under AnalysisThe specific policy that will be analyzed in this paper is the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (for the purposes of this paper this will be refereed to as ARRA). President Barack Obama signed the ARRA policy into law on February 17th, 2009, just four months after he was inaugurated into office (Steinbrook, 2009, p. 1). This policy is based on Keynesian economics in that it goes along with the belief that in times of economic instability the government should put more money into the economy in order to stimulate it (SOURCE). This policy was designed to be a response to the economic recession that hit our country in the late 2000s. Steinbrook (2009) states a key goal enunciated by the president elect concerning the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan is that it should save or create at least three million jobs by the end of 2010 (p.1). Along with this key goal of the act, Obama intended to help those in poverty, or who could potentially fall into poverty due to the recession, through funding welfare programs like SNAP, WIC, Unemployment Services, Job Training Funds, TANF, Social Security, and many more (Whitehouse.gov). What this means is that the target group for this policy is those who are suffering from poverty or those who could potentially fall into poverty due to the recession. The Census Bureau (2013) defines poverty as families living below a certain threshold of money and material items that is calculated based on size and general need. A certain amount of income is defined each year based on inflation that denotes what is considered to be poverty in numbers (Census Bureau, 2013). Basically, poverty is the experience of those who lack necessary resources to survive comfortably (like those who are homeless or do not have enough money to eat). Poverty is a problem for the people who suffer from the lack of jobs available in the nation; there are not enough jobs that provide a sustainable living for the number of people who need them. Poverty is also a problem for those who are physically incapable of working for a living those with disabilities, illnesses, mental illnesses, etc. There can be a number of reasons why people fall in to poverty, but these are some of the most common. The ARRA is laid out in such a way that it is basically putting money into grants, loans, federal contracts, and entitlement programs while giving tax breaks and benefits for working people (recovery.gov, 2013). The next chart illustrates the flow of money through the AARA (retrieved from recovery.gov):

From this chart, we can tell that this stimulus package originates with the money that congress budgets. It then is distributed to the government agencies that will distribute it to the states and local governments, who are the ones who distribute these funds to families and individuals.

II. Historical AnalysisPoverty has always existed, and likely will always exit. There are numerous programs that exist (that were developed over the years, from 1935-the present) that are intended to avoid the chance of falling into poverty and address the affects of poverty such as WIC, SNAP, SSI, Section 8, TANF etc. (Danzinger, 2010). These programs work to provide things such as shelter, savings, and food stamps to those in need and are primarily funded through taxes. The most notable point in history in which the government initiated a type of economic stimulus in order to bring the country out of economic troubles was Franklin Roosevelts New Deal following the great depression. Hannsgen & Papadimitriou (2009) discuss the effectiveness of the New Deal at being able to help the economy out of the Great Depression through policies such as (1) regulatory and labor relations legislation, and (2) government spending and taxation (p.1). This is very similar to the style of policy that ARRA is. They even state in their paper as the nation watches the impact of the recent stimulus bill on job creation and economic growth, a group of many academics has disputed the notion that the fiscal, job-creation, regulatory, and labor-relations programs of the New Deal helped end the Depression (p. 2). The New Deal has been widely noted by scholars and academics everywhere that this kind of policy does in fact help pull our economy out of economic hardship. Democrats initially supported this policy since it is a liberal idea to stimulate the economy in times of crisis. Republicans are likely to oppose this idea since they do not often favor putting more money into welfare type programs they believe that poverty will fix itself in time. It is no surprise that this policy was initiated under the presidency of Barack Obama since he is a democratic leader and interested in initiating more welfare type programs. As of now, this is not the most popular policy since it is seen as having been ineffective. Though if you look to Whitehouse.gov (2013) you will see that this policy played a huge role in providing tax breaks to families and preventing a heavy loss of jobs following the recession.III. Social AnalysisOur standing knowledge of poverty is pretty complete. Those who have not personally experienced the effects of poverty may not realize what poverty feels like but they certainly know it exists. All different types of populations are at risk of experiencing poverty all different races experience poverty. According to Bishaw (2012), in 2011 15.9 percent of the United States population was making less money than the poverty level. That may seem like a small percentage, but 15.9 % of our population is 48.5 million people who lived in poverty in 2011 (Bishaw, 2012). No one wants to be in poverty, and no one is in support of the existence of poverty it is just a necessary evil of society.What we do know is that it is our duty as citizens of this country (and more specifically as social workers) we need to take the necessary steps to try and keep as many people as we can out of poverty especially those who incapable of ensuring a poverty free lifestyle for themselves. Since every human has dignity and worth, it is up to us to help and ensure that those around us are taken care of and provided for. The ARRA is a huge step in strengthening our economy and ensuring the security of Americas millions of citizens.According to the US Department of Education (2009), The overall goals of the ARRA are to stimulate the economy in the short term and invest in education and other essential public services to ensure the long-term economic health of our nation (p.1). Primarily, this act was established to relieve short-term effects of the recession and to create long term efficiency in regards to the health of the economy and the improvement of our nation. IV. Economic AnalysisOne of the main goals of the stimulus package was to decrease the unemployment rate (Bane, 2010). This unfortunately did not take place following the recession. Romer (2012) states that the unemployment rate rose to about 10% following the recession. This obviously was not a desired outcome, however, Romer (2012) also states that the ARRA actually prevented unemployment from rising higher than it did. In other words, following the recession, the unemployment rate was projected to rise drastically and we can partially thank the ARRA for the fact that more jobs were saved.V. Political AnalysisThis is obviously one of the most important policies that Obama has established since he has been in office. It was one of his first major accomplishments and he could definitely be considered the biggest stakeholder regarding this program. The power of this policies supporters lie with the fact that it has been proven time and time again that government spending helps stimulate the economy; while on the other had the power of those who are not in support of this policy could argue that Obama spent $787 billion in stimulus money and that there is not much to show for it yet (University of Maryland, 2011). One important thing to note about this policy is that it was a drastic move that president Obama took in order to combat poverty, prevent the loss of jobs, and help work towards a better future. Maybe it helped, maybe something else could help more in the future, but overall this policy was a huge step in trying to help individuals from slipping into poverty and with helping to stimulate the economy during and economic downturn. This policy also has numerous resources in order to assess its accountability. Recovery.gov is a website that was specifically designed in order to be held accountable for everything that takes place due to ARRA. Through the years everything that happened is accounted for and easily accessible.VI. Policy/Program EvaluationNow, five years after the passing of ARRA, it is still difficult to determine if the stimulus package worked. You could look at this massive act from a number of different directions and argue that it did or did not succeed in the job that it set out to do. The following chart shows us the unemployment rate with the ARRA and the projected unemployment rate without it (retrieved from Penthoikus, 2014):

From this chart we can see that, in general, it can be concluded that with all of the programs and people affected by this policy, it did in fact keep unemployment rates from being as high as they would have been without this policy over the past five years. Although the effectiveness of this policy can be argued in many different ways, it is safe to conclude that overall it did some good in a bad situation. VI. Current Proposals for Policy ReformThere are not any current proposals to reform this policy. Certainly, with the next president, it is likely that necessary changes will be made to suit his style of presidency in regards to poverty and economic stimulation.

PART IIFor the second portion of this paper, we will more closely examine a specific program that is a part of ARRA and evaluate it. I have to decide to take a closer look at how ARRA has directly affected or helped education. There were 21 programs that were established under ARRA in regards to education, but the specific program that I have chosen to analyze is Education of Homeless Children and Youths Recovery Plan (EHCRYP).I. Structural ComponentsThe main purpose of this program is to ensure that every child has the same access to equal public education, whether they are homeless or more fortunate. There are three main goals established under this program; the Department of Education Recovery Plan defines these goals as assistance to (1) establish or designate an Office of Coordinator of Education of Homeless Children and Youths; (2) develop and carry out a State plan for the education of homeless children; and (3) make sub-grants to local educational agencies to support the education of those children (Department of Education, 2010, p. 5). This program is directly financed through grants coming from the money that was distributed from the ARRA stimulus package. The form of benefit that this program produces is helping homeless children go to school and receive an education. People who are eligible for the benefits of this program are homeless youth. The Department of Education (2010) states specific activities and services required and funded by the program include identification, creating awareness, and decreasing barriers to enrollment. At the local level, the program also supports such services as tutoring, transportation, and counseling and helps ensure access for homeless children to preschool programs, special education, and gifted and talented programs (p. 6). This program also financially assists local educational agencies (LEAs) at the state level in order to conduct services for homeless youth. The level of administration, therefore, exists at the state and local level for the distribution of these services.II. Alternative Program CharacteristicsThis program works towards institutional and socio-economic development since its main purpose is to ensure that homeless children have the same access to an enriching education as children who do not suffer from homelessness or poverty. This program is developing the education at an institutional level since it allows for educational institutions to better keep track of and educate the homeless youth surrounding them so that public education is accessible to every child. This program is selective since it is directly attempting to support children who are homeless instead of supporting all children.This program would be considered public since it was initiated by ARRA, which was produced by the federal government. This program would also be considered localized since it is monitored at a state and local level. This program is also considered professional since professional educators provide it; there is also a designated coordinator of education of homeless children and youths at the state level who monitors it. III. Evaluating the ProgramThis program is adequate as a whole, adequately financed and completely transparent to the public. The United States Department of Education collects performance measures on this program for each state and the nation as a whole. The Department of Education (2012) measures the success of this program on a yearly basis based on the amount of homeless youths that either meets or passes the state proficiency level in reading and mathematics (p. 6). Data, future goals, and financial information is available on the Department of Educations website so that citizens may monitor the effectiveness of this program and justify the allocation of funding.Latent consequences of this program could include failing to properly monitor its effectiveness. If the government does not keep up with where the money is going and if it is effective in what it is supposed to do then it could turn out to be a waste. Another non-evident consequence of this program is that it is difficult to reach out to all homeless children; we may be able to measure the effectiveness based of the number of homeless children that we are aware of, but there are inevitably many homeless children who are not on the governments radar and will be difficult to reach out to with services. In other words, if we do not know they are there then we will not be able to help them or accurately determine the true number of homeless youth that have been or could be helped. The NASW Code of Ethics (2008) defines social justice as one of social works main values. What this means is that social workers seek to rid our nation of injustice and work towards equality for all, especially groups of oppressed individuals. Social workers strive to ensure access to needed information, services, and resources; equality of opportunity; and meaningful participation in decision making for all people (NASW Code of Ethics, 2008). The Education of Homeless Children and Youths Recovery Plan (as set fourth by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) certainly works towards ensuring social justice for homeless children by attempting to create equality within our nations education system. In order to create a more equal opportunity to achieve in life for everyone, we must ensure that everyone has the same access to an adequate education despite his or her resources and backgrounds. This program, along with many others that were created through ARRA, help work towards social equality for everyone in the United States.ReferencesARRA Stimulus Funding Information. (2013). Retrieved from http://www.ord.umaryland.edu/stimulus/stimulus.htmlBane,M.J. (2013). Retrieved from http://www.irp.wisc.edu/publications/focus/pdfs/foc262m.pdfBishaw, A. (n.d.). Retrieved from website: http://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/acsbr11-01.pdfCensus Bureau Homepage. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://census.govHannsgen,G., & Papadimitriou,D.M. (2009). Lessons from the New Deal: Did the New Deal Prolong or Worsen the Great Depression? Retrieved from http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_581.pdfNational Association of Social Workers. (approved 1999, revised 2008). Code of Ethics of the National Association of Social Workers. Retrieved from https://www.socialworkers.org/pubs/code/code.aspPerez-Johnson, Irma, Kirk Walters, Michael Puma and others. Evaluating ARRA Programs and Other Educational Reforms: A Guide for States. Resource document developed jointly by The American Institutes for Research and Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. April 2011. Pethokoukis,J. (2014, February 17). The Obama stimulus at 5: Did it work? On humility and high-causal density | AEIdeas. Retrieved from http://www.aei-ideas.org/2014/02/the-obama-stimulus-at-5-did-it-work-on-humility-and-high-causal-density/(n.d.). Poverty Progress. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/povertyThe official U.S. Government website for theRecovery Accountability and Transparency Board. (2014). What is Recovery. Romer, C., & Bernstein, J. (n.d.). The Job Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Retrieved from http://www.illinoisworknet.com/NR/rdonlyres/6A8FF039-BEA1-47DC-A509-A781D1215B65/0/2BidenReportARRAJobImpact.pdfRomer, C. The Fiscal Stimulus, Flawed but Valuable. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/21/business/how-the-fiscal-stimulus-helped-and-could-have-done-more.html?_r=0Shanks, T., & Danziger, S. Anti-poverty policies and programs for children and families. Retrieved from http://www.sagepub.com/upm-data/37821_Chapter2.pdfSteinbrook, R. (2009). Health Care and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. New England Journal of Medicine, 360(11), 1057-1060. doi: doi:10.1056/NEJMp0900665US Department of Education. April 1st, 2009. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009: IDEA Recovery Funds for Services to Children and Youths with Disabilitie. Washington DC.