According to the paper, has it or has it not?
I read the abstract and the last paragraph. Yes, it failed but 84 pages is a little sadistic.
The whole question is silly for several reasons the first being that ithe job of the Fed is almost impossible and the second being that success is relative.
The purpose of the Federal Reserve System is not to provide monetary stability, low inflation, price stability, full employment, etc. Number one is that some of these contradict oneanother. Even worse is that the goal/s are not easy to acheive. There is no group of humans and computers that can centrally plan the financial system of the USA. The only system of money that can provide the best information to market actors and hold its value is market based commodity money. In this sense even the Gold Standard although superior to the alternative of a Central Bank is lacking.
The real purpose of the Federal Reserve is two fold: 1. Act in the interest of its member banks through bailouts, last resort lending, etc and 2. Justify itself by stealing money through inflation and giving use of that money to the Federal Government to keep it depending on the system. So the Fed looks like a huge success to those benefiting from its actions namely politicians who love to spend other peoples moneys but hate to tax those same people.
I would also add that success, and non-success or failure, are value judgements and are not for economics, especially Austrian Economics to decide. If economics is supposed to be a true science like the Austrian Economists believe that it is, then there are only economic actions or policies and their effects. Economic science can/should not judge the virtue or value of the effects.