Overview
Title
To require the Secretary of Labor to award grants for promoting industry or sector partnerships to encourage industry growth and competitiveness and to improve worker training, retention, and advancement as part of an infrastructure investment.
ELI5 AI
The BUILDS Act wants to help build things like roads and bridges by giving money to groups that teach and help workers so they can do these jobs better. It’s like a big plan to make sure people have good jobs and can build things that make our town better, while also wanting to make sure the money is spent wisely.
Summary AI
The BUILDS Act (S. 4205) aims to boost U.S. infrastructure industries by requiring the Secretary of Labor to offer grants encouraging partnerships among different sectors to promote industry growth and improve worker training, retention, and advancement. The bill focuses on fostering collaborations between businesses, educational institutions, and other stakeholders, with grants supporting both planning and implementation of strategies to meet these objectives. Funding can be used for a range of activities, including workforce training, curriculum development, and helping workers with employment barriers enter the industry. The act emphasizes geographic diversity in grant awards and prioritizes partnerships that demonstrate long-term sustainability and a diverse workforce.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The BUILD Act, officially titled the “Building U.S. Infrastructure by Leveraging Demands for Skills,” is a legislative proposal introduced to the Senate aimed at fostering industry partnerships to enhance infrastructure development. The primary goal of the bill is to improve worker training, retention, and career progression within the infrastructure industry. To achieve these objectives, the bill empowers the Secretary of Labor to distribute competitive grants to qualifying partnerships involved in infrastructure projects.
Summary of the Bill
The bill outlines an initiative to boost industry growth and competitiveness by promoting collaborations among different stakeholders in the infrastructure sector. Eligible partnerships, which consist of industry or sector alliances, can apply for grants to carry out strategic objectives like improving worker skills and aligning training programs with industry needs. The bill provides guidelines on how these grants should be used and highlights the roles of various partners, such as educational institutions and local boards, in executing these activities.
Significant Issues
A key concern with the bill is its vague language regarding appropriations, as it authorizes “such sums as may be necessary” without specifying limits on funding. This lack of clarity raises potential risks of overspending and financial mismanagement. Additionally, the broad discretion given to eligible partnerships to identify their “targeted infrastructure industries” may result in inconsistent application of grant funding.
The bill places an emphasis on geographic diversity and requires a non-Federal matching share in renewal grants, which could disadvantage smaller partnerships without ample resources. The coordination among multiple governmental bodies, such as the Secretaries of Transportation, Energy, and Commerce, could lead to bureaucratic hurdles and delays.
Broad Public Impact
If implemented effectively, the BUILD Act could have a beneficial impact on the general public by creating more skilled job opportunities and strengthening the infrastructure sector—a backbone of economic growth and community development. However, potential drawbacks include the risk of resource misallocation due to the bill's vague funding guidelines and the potential inability of smaller or less wealthy communities to benefit equally, given the requirement for non-federal matching funds.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Industry players in the targeted infrastructure sectors stand to benefit significantly from the proposed collaboration and training initiatives. Enhanced workforce development could lead to more efficient operations and innovation in infrastructure-related projects. Educational institutions and training organizations working closely with industry can also prosper through partnerships aimed at aligning educational curricula with market demands.
Conversely, smaller businesses and communities might face challenges accessing the program's benefits. The requirement for matching funds in renewal grants and the competitive nature of the grant-awarding process could limit participation from less affluent areas that might lack upfront resources.
Overall, while the BUILD Act sets a framework for workforce improvements and sector growth, key issues related to funding specificity and equitable access must be addressed to ensure that its benefits are distributed fairly and effectively.
Financial Assessment
The proposed bill, known as the BUILDS Act (S. 4205), aims to stimulate growth in U.S. infrastructure industries through a grant program managed by the Secretary of Labor. The financial aspects of this bill involve allocating funds for various strategic objectives, with specific amounts designated for different types of grants and activities. Here is an overview of the financial references and related issues within the bill.
Financial Summary
The bill authorizes the awarding of two types of grants: implementation grants with a maximum of $2,500,000 each, and renewal grants capped at $1,500,000 each. These are designed to support partnerships that engage in activities promoting industry growth, worker training, and employment opportunities in infrastructure sectors. Additionally, for planning activities within the first year of an implementation grant, up to $250,000 of the grant funds may be used.
Authorization of Appropriations
In Section 8, the Act authorizes appropriations by stating "such sums as may be necessary" to carry out its provisions. This language leaves the total potential spending open-ended, which could lead to financial concerns about budget control and accountability. Without specific funding caps or guidelines, there is a risk of overspending or misallocation of resources.
Financial Allocations and Related Issues
- Vague Appropriations Language:
The open-ended nature of appropriations in Section 8 does not specify limits, potentially resulting in overspending. This could make it challenging to maintain financial accountability, as there are no explicit restrictions on how much money can be allocated or spent.
Allocation for Wrap-around Services:
Section 6 mentions "wrap-around services," but without defining the scope or limits, there's a risk that funds could be used for expenses not directly linked to the program's strategic goals. This broad discretion could lead to financial misuse or inefficiencies.
Governor's Matching Funds Requirement:
The requirement for non-Federal matching funds as a priority for renewal grants may disadvantage smaller partnerships or those in economically weaker areas. This could skew funding distribution towards wealthier entities, affecting fairness and inclusivity in grant allocation.
Potential Misreporting Risks:
Section 5 relies on self-reported eligibility capabilities from partnerships. Without strong oversight, there is a risk of partnerships exaggerating their potential benefits, leading to wasteful spending or inaccurate reporting of outcomes.
Ambiguity in Measuring Success:
- The lack of specific benchmarks in measuring strategic goals like "industry growth" and "training improvements" raises concerns about effective fund usage. Without clearly defined success metrics, it can be difficult to ensure that financial allocations are achieving desired outcomes.
Conclusion
The BUILDS Act proposes a substantial investment in building infrastructure industry partnerships, with significant amounts earmarked for grants. However, the bill presents challenges related to financial oversight and accountability. The vague language concerning appropriations and expenditure categories highlights the need for more precise financial management to avoid inefficiencies or potential misuse of funds. Addressing these issues could improve transparency and ensure that allocated resources effectively contribute to the bill's intended objectives.
Issues
The vague language in Section 8 regarding 'such sums as may be necessary' for appropriations could lead to overspending or lack of accountability in fund allocation, as there are no explicit limits or guidelines on the amount of funds authorized, raising significant financial concerns.
The ambiguous terms and broad discretion allowed in Section 6 regarding 'wrap-around services' and 'administrative costs' could lead to expenditures that are not directly related to the strategic objectives of the grant, highlighting potential financial misuse or inefficiency.
The lack of specific criteria or benchmarks in Sections 2 and 5 for measuring outcomes such as 'industry growth and competitiveness' and 'improve worker training' raises concerns about the effectiveness and accountability in achieving the Act's goals, potentially leading to inefficiencies or favoritism.
Section 4's requirement for non-Federal matching funds in priority for renewal grants could disadvantage smaller or less wealthy eligible partnerships, potentially leading to an unfair distribution of the grants and impacting inclusivity and equality in funding.
In Section 5, the reliance on self-reported descriptions for eligibility and capacity could lead to overstating of potential benefits by partnerships, risking wasteful spending or misreporting of results without strong oversight mechanisms.
The broad discretion granted to eligible partnerships in Section 3 to identify 'targeted infrastructure industries' could lead to inconsistent interpretations or applications of grant funding, affecting financial and operational transparency.
The coordination among multiple Secretaries and agencies as described in Section 4 could lead to bureaucratic complexities and delays, posing legal and operational challenges in the timely execution of the grants.
The lack of specificity in Section 6 on 'measurable skill gains' for evaluation and progress reports could lead to inconsistent evaluations, impacting the transparency and accountability of the program's success metrics.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of the act gives the act its official short title, which is the “Building U.S. Infrastructure by Leveraging Demands for Skills” or the “BUILDS Act.”
2. Purpose Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The purpose of this Act is to support partnerships among different businesses within infrastructure industries. These partnerships aim to work together on planning, organizing resources, and offering training to help current and future workers improve their skills, stay employed, and progress in their careers, ultimately boosting industry growth and competitiveness.
3. Definitions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section provides definitions for key terms used in the act, such as "apprenticeship program," "career and technical education," and "work-based learning program," which refers to programs offering paid work experience coupled with classroom instruction aimed at future employment. It also defines roles like "Secretary" and "State board" and outlines important concepts like "eligible partnership" and "targeted infrastructure industry."
4. Grants authorized Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines that the Secretary, along with multiple agency leaders, can give grants to partnerships working on infrastructure projects, focusing on geographic diversity and prioritizing those demonstrating success and sustainability. Grants can be for up to three years, with awards up to $2.5 million for new projects and $1.5 million for renewals, while also requiring some funding from non-federal sources.
Money References
- (3) AMOUNT.—The amount of a grant awarded under this Act may not exceed— (A) for an implementation grant, $2,500,000; and (B) for a renewal grant, $1,500,000.
5. Application process Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines the requirements for partnerships applying for a grant under this Act. It includes details such as describing the partnership's capacity, the targeted infrastructure industry, recruitment strategies, strategic objectives for the industry, and performance measures. It also lists necessary collaborations and resources for achieving these objectives.
6. Activities Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines how eligible partnerships can use grant funds, designating a fiscal agent, planning activities, engaging businesses, and providing support services for individuals in work-based learning programs. It also specifies reporting and performance evaluation requirements, with a cap on administrative costs at 5% of the grant.
Money References
- (b) Planning activities.—An eligible partnership receiving an implementation grant under this Act shall use not more than $250,000 of the grant funds to carry out planning activities during the first year of the grant period.
7. Administration by the Secretary Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The Secretary is allowed to spend up to 10% of the funds appropriated each fiscal year for administrative costs associated with this Act. These expenses include providing technical help and monitoring the eligible partnerships applying for and managing the grants.
8. Authorization of appropriations Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section allows for the allocation of funds as needed to implement the provisions of the Act.