Bill Overview
Title: Campus Prevention and Recovery Services for Students Act of 2022
Description: 2022 This bill reauthorizes through FY2028 and revises the illicit drug and alcohol abuse prevention program, including by expanding the program to include efforts to prevent substance misuse on campuses.
Sponsors: Rep. Leger Fernandez, Teresa [D-NM-3]
Target Audience
Population: College and university students globally
Estimated Size: 20000000
- The bill is focused on preventing substance misuse on campuses, which specifically targets student populations.
- There are millions of college and university students globally, and a significant portion of these students are in countries with campuses impacted by US educational policies.
- In the United States, there are approximately 20 million college and university students.
- The bill's reach may extend to international students studying in the US, who account for over a million individuals.
Reasoning
- The policy targets college and university students in the United States, estimated to be around 20 million individuals.
- The budget constraints suggest the program will impact a considerable number of students, but certainly not all of them.
- Students in areas with existing infrastructure for substance misuse prevention might experience little change, limiting the policy's impact.
- The policy’s effects are more likely observed in students prone to substance misuse or attending campuses with higher incidents of misuse.
- Students focused purely on academia without participation in substance misuse or without substance misuse impressions in their environment may be largely unaffected.
- International students studying in campuses where this policy is enacted may still experience the effects, though less directly than native students.
- Students involved in recovery may show marked improvement in wellbeing scores if support systems are expanded effectively.
- Perceptions of the policy's success may hinge on how integrated and visible these programs are in the educational ecosystem.
- The long-term impact would be dependent not just on the program's introduction, but also its sustained application and evolving adaptations to emerging student needs.
- Considering funding allocation, it could directly impact only certain universities or colleges at first with potential scale-up in later years.
Simulated Interviews
Undergraduate Student (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 20 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm optimistic about these new programs because our campus has had some issues with substance misuse, and it seems like external support could help.
- If it helps some of my peers stay on track or find recovery, that's a good thing.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Graduate Student (Austin, TX)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I have noticed some substance misuse at parties and events, but I haven’t felt it affected me personally.
- The idea of having more support for friends who might need it seems beneficial.
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 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Undergraduate Student (Raleigh, NC)
Age: 19 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's good to see programs specifically aimed at helping students with these issues; college can be really overwhelming.
- I hope they are accessible to everyone on campus and not just those already in trouble.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Graduate Student (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 24 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having experienced substance misuse personally and seen it in my peers, I believe this sort of initiative is crucial.
- I hope this is done with inclusivity in mind, considering how different students experience things.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Undergraduate Student (Seattle, WA)
Age: 21 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't feel like substance misuse is a big part of my life, but I recognize it's a problem for a lot of students.
- If it can keep things from spiraling out of control, that's good policy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Doctoral Student (Boston, MA)
Age: 26 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could provide fantastic real-world contexts for applying research in prevention strategies.
- It would be meaningful if it integrates with academic research and provides data for improvement.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 9 |
Undergraduate Student (Chicago, IL)
Age: 20 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Given that I'm not on campus often, I don't think it'll be directly relevant to me, but for those who stay on campus, it should help.
- It might make parents feel better about their kids being at college.
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 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Undergraduate Student (Miami, FL)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As an RA, I've seen alcohol abuse happen first-hand a lot, so this sort of program is much needed.
- If it improves campus-wide awareness, that could really change student lives.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 9 |
Undergraduate Student (Columbus, OH)
Age: 19 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could really shake up Greek life dynamics, and that could be for the better if done right.
- Clear messaging and actual implementation are keys to success.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Post-doctoral Researcher (New York, NY)
Age: 30 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Though I'm beyond my student years mostly, I see this as potentially bridging some support gaps.
- Policies tend to be most effective when they are backed by rigorous assessment. It’s essential this program includes such evaluations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)
Year 2: $525000000 (Low: $420000000, High: $630000000)
Year 3: $551250000 (Low: $441000000, High: $661500000)
Year 5: $605531250 (Low: $484425000, High: $726637500)
Year 10: $741314203 (Low: $593051250, High: $889577155)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Initial costs will be high as program is expanded and scaled across campuses.
- Continual evaluation and adjusting for effectiveness and impact of programs will be necessary.
- Sustaining political and institutional support for the program is crucial for long-term success.