Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/6860

Bill Overview

Title: Latonya Reeves Freedom Act of 2022

Description: 2022 This bill prohibits government entities and insurance providers from denying community-based services to individuals with disabilities that require long-term service or support that would enable such individuals to live in the community and lead an independent life. Specifically, these entities may not discriminate against such individuals in the provision of community-based services by such actions as imposing prohibited eligibility criteria, cost caps, or waiting lists or failing to provide a specific community-based service. Additionally, community-based services must be offered to individuals with such disabilities prior to institutionalization. Institutionalized individuals must be notified regularly of community-based alternatives. The bill requires the Department of Justice to issue regulations requiring government entities and insurance providers to offer community-based long-term services to individuals with such disabilities who would otherwise qualify for institutional placement. Government entities must ensure sufficient availability of affordable, accessible, and integrated housing that is not a disability-specific residential setting or a setting where services are tied to tenancy. Regulations shall also (1) require government entities and insurance providers to perform self-evaluation on current services, policies, and practices and concerning compliance with requirements of this bill; and (2) require government entities to submit a transition plan. The bill provides funds for FY2022 for the Department of Health and Human Services to provide technical assistance with respect to transition plans. The bill allows civil actions by individuals subjected to, or about to be subjected to, a violation of its requirements.

Sponsors: Rep. Clarke, Yvette D. [D-NY-9]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals with disabilities who require long-term services for independent living

Estimated Size: 3000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Unemployed (Boston, MA)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I've been living in a nursing home for the past three years, and while the staff are wonderful, I long for the independence I had before.
  • Access to community-based services would allow me to live in my own apartment with the support I need.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 4
Year 2 7 4
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 8 5

Part-time Accountant (Kansas City, MO)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I love where I live now, but there are waiting lists preventing my friends in similar situations from accessing the same types of services.
  • The policy seems promising but I'm worried about the actual implementation and follow-through.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 7 5

Software Developer (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 30 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I am an advocate for community living, and the option to access necessary support while living independently is crucial.
  • The act seems like a step in the right direction, but it needs strict enforcement and funding to really be effective.

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 8 7
Year 20 7 6

Retired Teacher (Miami, FL)

Age: 70 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • As my condition progresses, I might not be able to stay with family, and I'm worried about what options I'll have.
  • This policy could ensure I have the support I need to stay in my community.

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 6 4
Year 20 5 3

Freelance Writer (Austin, TX)

Age: 38 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Living in a community that caters to my needs with proper assistance services close by is crucial.
  • The policy could vastly improve my quality of life, but government commitment to enforcement is key.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 5
Year 2 8 5
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 9 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 8 5

Student (New York, NY)

Age: 26 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Finding housing that supports mental health is a massive hurdle in this city.
  • This policy could direct funding toward mental health support in living arrangements.

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 7 5
Year 10 6 4
Year 20 5 4

Retired Engineer (Chicago, IL)

Age: 62 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I've been trying to find a way back to living at home, but the services aren't readily available.
  • This policy could enable me to return home with the necessary support.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 4
Year 2 7 4
Year 3 7 4
Year 5 7 3
Year 10 6 3
Year 20 6 3

Artist (Seattle, WA)

Age: 22 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I want to be able to pursue my career and live independently without relying entirely on my parents.
  • Increasing access to support services could make my dreams a reality.

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 5
Year 20 8 5

Caretaker (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Trying to manage my son's care has been a labyrinth of red tape.
  • The freedom act could simplify and improve the quality of care available to him.

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 8 4
Year 10 7 4
Year 20 6 4

Unemployed (Boston, MA)

Age: 60 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Having limited access to services makes it hard to manage daily routines.
  • The act's focus on community-based services could vastly benefit people like me.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 4
Year 2 7 4
Year 3 8 4
Year 5 8 4
Year 10 7 3
Year 20 7 3

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $15000000000 (Low: $12000000000, High: $20000000000)

Year 2: $15500000000 (Low: $12500000000, High: $20500000000)

Year 3: $16000000000 (Low: $13000000000, High: $21000000000)

Year 5: $17000000000 (Low: $14000000000, High: $22500000000)

Year 10: $19000000000 (Low: $16000000000, High: $25000000000)

Year 100: $22000000000 (Low: $18000000000, High: $30000000000)

Key Considerations