Bill Overview
Title: Southeast Alaska Regional Health Consortium Land Transfer Act
Description: This bill directs the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to convey specified property in Sitka, Alaska, to the Southeast Alaska Regional Health Consortium for use in connection with health and social services programs. The conveyance shall not require any consideration from, or impose any obligation, term, or condition on, the consortium or allow for any U.S. reversionary interest in the property. The consortium shall not be liable for any environmental contamination that occurred before the conveyance. Further, HHS shall not be liable for any environmental contamination from the date on which the consortium assumes control of, occupies, and uses the property.
Sponsors: Rep. Young, Don [R-AK-At Large]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals in Southeast Alaska who are receiving or may receive health services from the Southeast Alaska Regional Health Consortium
Estimated Size: 16000
- The bill specifically impacts the Southeast Alaska Regional Health Consortium, which is responsible for health services in the region.
- The transfer of land will directly affect the operations of the healthcare services provided by the consortium.
- The quality and accessibility of health and social services in Sitka, Alaska, are likely to improve due to a better control over the land and facilities.
- Individuals receiving healthcare services from the Southeast Alaska Regional Health Consortium are predominantly Alaska Natives and American Indians in the region.
Reasoning
- The Southeast Alaska Regional Health Consortium Land Transfer Act predominantly affects individuals in Southeast Alaska, specifically those who utilize the healthcare and social services provided by the consortium. The primary benefits likely occur due to increased facility control and potentially expanded services.
- The $1,000,000 budget constraint for the policy implementation may limit the extent and speed of potential upgrades or new services at the health facilities acquired by the consortium, influencing interviews with minor or no impact.
- Population distribution includes not only potential beneficiaries of the policy (primarily Alaska Natives and other residents of Southeast Alaska who use the consortium's services) but also those who are largely unaffected (individuals outside of the region or those not using these services).
- Interview responses are designed to cover diverse perspectives: from those directly benefiting (higher impact and improved wellbeing) to those unaffected (no significant change).
Simulated Interviews
Nurse (Sitka, Alaska)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The land transfer may help us improve the facilities and provide better care to our patients.
- I see this as a positive move, allowing us more autonomy and room to expand services tailored to community needs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Fisherman (Ketchikan, Alaska)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As an occasional user of the consortium's services, I hope the transfer improves care quality.
- Whether this transfer leads to any visible change remains to be seen.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Policy Analyst (Anchorage, Alaska)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This land transfer is a strategic move to improve healthcare autonomy for Native communities in the region.
- It will be interesting to monitor the long-term impacts on health outcomes here.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Retired (Juneau, Alaska)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It’s good to see focus on healthcare quality and reachable facilities in Sitka.
- As a senior, improved services will be beneficial, though implementation and effectiveness remain key.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Teacher (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy seems beneficial for the Sitka community, particularly for accessing healthcare.
- While it doesn’t affect me directly in Seattle, I'm optimistic for my hometown.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Stay-at-home parent (Sitka, Alaska)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Hopeful that policy leads to better healthcare for our community and for my family.
- Supports anything that strengthens local health resources and autonomy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Local Business Owner (Hoonah, Alaska)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The land transfer might indirectly help local businesses through improved community health.
- I’m watching with cautious optimism.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Construction Worker (Sitka, Alaska)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This transfer could mean more work and better facilities here.
- I'm expecting some immediate benefits in the form of jobs and infrastructure.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Community Healthcare Advocate (Wrangell, Alaska)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act brings potential for substantial improvements in health services accessibility for Native communities.
- Limited funds may pose challenges but the direction is promising.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Environmental Scientist (San Francisco, California)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Environmentally, this transfer looks well-managed with clear liability terms.
- Good to see policies supporting community autonomy; likely a minor direct effect on my day-to-day.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1000000 (Low: $800000, High: $1500000)
Year 2: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- There are no significant immediate costs associated with the conveyance aside from administrative logistics.
- Environmental liabilities before the conveyance are exempted, potentially reducing legal risks for both parties involved.
- Long-term benefits center around potential improvements in healthcare delivery, which are difficult to quantify.