Bill Overview
Title: John Lewis NIMHD Research Endowment Revitalization Act of 2021
Description: This bill expands eligibility for research endowments available through the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities to include former centers of excellence at health professional schools and biomedical and behavioral research institutions that meet criteria related to the inclusion of underrepresented minority individuals in programs and activities.
Sponsors: Rep. Barragan, Nanette Diaz [D-CA-44]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals associated with Minority Health and Health Disparities institutions
Estimated Size: 3000000
- The bill is focused on expanding research endowments through the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD).
- The NIMHD targets minority health, aiming to eliminate health disparities by providing research opportunities.
- The expansion includes former centers of excellence at health professional schools and research institutions, broadening the target group.
- Individuals working at or affiliated with these centers and institutions will benefit, especially those who are from underrepresented minority groups.
- Such beneficiaries are likely to include minority faculty, researchers, and students at these institutions.
- Minority communities that are represented by these individuals may indirectly benefit from improved health research and outcomes.
Reasoning
- The John Lewis NIMHD Research Endowment Revitalization Act of 2021 aims to impact individuals linked to minority research institutions, focusing on minority researchers, students, and faculty.
- The current budget limitations imply that the first year may only support a limited number of institutions and individuals; as the budget increases over ten years, the impact could broaden.
- Given the large target population of 3,000,000, it's likely a relatively small percentage will be directly impacted initially, with more indirect benefits emerging over time as research translates to community health improvements.
- For the simulation, interviews target a mix of individuals likely to be directly impacted and those from minority communities who might experience indirect benefits from broader health research advancements.
- Not all simulated interviews will reflect positive or high-level direct impacts to reflect diversity in individual circumstances, perceived policy reach, and mixed indirect benefits.
Simulated Interviews
Biomedical Researcher (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could open new funding opportunities that were not previously available to our center, potentially leading to significant advancements in our research.
- The endowment could offer financial stability for long-term projects that aim to address health disparities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 7 |
Dean of Health Sciences (New York, NY)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy is a great step towards restoring vital funding for minority-serving institutions, though actual financial impact will depend on the funds awarded over time.
- It could help improve recruitment and retention of minority faculty and students.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Medical Student (Miami, FL)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could result in more scholarship opportunities and expanded programs that would help students like me.
- Long-term benefits might depend on how well this funding improves the quality of education and research opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Public Health Researcher (Houston, TX)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our institution could potentially benefit if recognized as a former center of excellence, providing resources to expand programs targeting health disparities.
- Immediate changes might not be felt, but future potential is promising.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Nursing Faculty (Chicago, IL)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy sounds promising, but I am cautiously optimistic given past challenges in accessing funding.
- If successful, the funds could support projects aimed at reducing health disparities in indigenous communities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Postdoctoral Fellow (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 12.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The Act could provide more stability and resources to pursue my research, potentially leading to breakthrough findings that impact minority communities.
- The first few years might involve adjusting to new funding landscapes, but potential is there.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Community Health Worker (Tucson, AZ)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Although direct impact might not be visible at community level in the short term, the ripple effect of improved research might enhance community programs over time.
- The effectiveness will depend on how well institutions apply and utilize these resources.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Health Policy Analyst (Baltimore, MD)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The revitalization act could improve institutional capabilities, allowing for broader impact assessments and development of effective health policies from minority perspectives.
- Monitoring and evaluation will be critical in assessing the true impact over time.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Professor Emeritus (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having seen institutional impacts over decades, this policy renews hope for those institutions struggling to maintain their research infrastructure.
- Long-term sustainability will be crucial for it to make lasting changes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Graduate Student (Detroit, MI)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am optimistic about the policy possibly expanding resources for my research projects.
- The timeline for seeing direct benefits might be a little longer given my current academic status.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 2: $10500000 (Low: $8500000, High: $12500000)
Year 3: $11025000 (Low: $8925000, High: $13125000)
Year 5: $12166500 (Low: $9733200, High: $14602500)
Year 10: $14960262 (Low: $11968210, High: $17952314)
Year 100: $67673939 (Low: $54139151, High: $81208727)
Key Considerations
- Expanding research endowments can improve minority representation in health and biomedical fields.
- There is a need to ensure equitable distribution of funds and track their impact on health outcomes.