Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What ongoing programs are funded by the American Rescue Plan Act as of 2024?
Executive Summary
The available analyses show that as of 2024 the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funded a wide, multi-sector portfolio of ongoing programs spanning K‑12 education, Home and Community‑Based Services (HCBS) in Medicaid, local nonprofit relief and community grants, research initiatives through ARPA‑H/ARPA‑E (programmatic openings), and targeted workforce, technology, housing, and mental‑health investments. The strongest, most detailed program inventories come from education and HCBS spending plans and implementation reports that list specific categories (school facility upgrades, tutoring, educator pay, HCBS workforce bonuses, telehealth, housing supports) while other analyses note local grant programs and research funding streams without tying every initiative directly to ARPA funding [1] [2] [3] [4] [5].
1. Education Rescue Funding — Schools Bought Time and New Services, Not Just One‑Off Grants
The NEA School Rescue Funds Implementation report catalogs an extensive set of ongoing K‑12 and early‑childhood programs funded by ARPA, including implementation grants to hire ARPA coordinators, expanded summer and after‑school learning, $7.2 billion for E‑Rate broadband and devices, ventilation and HVAC upgrades, hiring of counselors and nurses, mental‑health telehealth services, expanded pre‑K/3‑K, universal school meals, and educator pay increases and residencies; multiple state examples (Vermont, Virginia, Nevada, New York City, Colorado, Flint) illustrate both large capital projects and recurring personnel costs. This inventory treats ARPA dollars as enabling sustained program lines through 2024 and as seeding efforts intended for continuity beyond ARPA’s deadline [1]. The NEA framing emphasizes systemic investments — infrastructure, staffing, and program expansion — rather than only short‑term remediation.
2. HCBS and Medicaid — A Coordinated Push on Workforce, Tech, and Housing
Section 9817’s ARPA HCBS provisions produced a recognizable pattern across state spending plans: workforce development and retention payments, telehealth and IT upgrades, temporary rate increases for providers, housing and homelessness initiatives, quality‑improvement pilots, and waiver expansions to reduce waitlists. Analysts report ARPA’s 10‑percentage‑point FMAP bump being used to match state investments in these categories and fund competitive grants and pilots aimed at durable system changes, including remote monitoring grants and EVV upgrades [2] [3]. These activities are described as ongoing programs in 2024 because states used ARPA to create multi‑year pay enhancements, tech platforms, and capacity expansions rather than strictly one‑time expenditures.
3. Local Relief and Community Grants — Patchwork of Competitive and Non‑Competitive Programs
Local community foundations and counties used ARPA to stand up competitive/non‑competitive grant programs for nonprofits, small businesses, nutrition, and social services, with explicit spend and allocation deadlines noted in some plans (e.g., Hendricks County’s programs require allocation by December 31, 2024, and expenditure by December 31, 2026). These local programs vary considerably in scope and permanence: some are short emergency relief streams while others seed ongoing services that local actors intend to sustain. The documentation shows heterogeneity—some jurisdictions treated ARPA as one‑time stabilization, others as an opportunity to create ongoing programmatic lines [6].
4. Research and Innovation Funding — ARPA‑H and ARPA‑E Activities Differ from ARPA Social Spending
Analyses identify ARPA‑H programs (Genetic Medicines/GIVE, MOCS, and multiple ISOs) and ARPA‑E solicitations as active funding streams in 2024, but caution that ARPA‑E activities are not funded by the American Rescue Plan Act and that ARPA‑H receives appropriations distinct from direct ARPA social‑stabilization funds. ARPA‑H’s portfolio supports ongoing research competitions and programmatic pilots; these are ongoing in 2024 but represent a different policy axis (biomedical innovation) than the social‑service and HCBS investments cataloged elsewhere. The distinction matters because conflating ARPA research offices with ARPA social‑spending can misattribute funding sources and program intent [4] [5].
5. Conflicts, Uncertainties, and What’s Missing — Deadlines, Durability, and Varied Documentation
The reporting shows clear programmatic patterns but also important uncertainties: many ARPA‑funded items are temporary enhancements (bonuses, temporary raises, one‑time capital projects), some local plans set strict allocation and expenditure deadlines, and documentation quality varies by state and sector. Several analyses warn that while ARPA seeded ongoing services, long‑term sustainability often depends on state/local budgets or other federal funding transitions; some program lists are granular (NEA, HCBS plans) while others are high‑level or ambiguous about whether programs are directly ARPA‑funded [1] [7] [8]. These gaps create ambiguity about which programs will persist after ARPA funds are exhausted.