Bill Overview
Title: Wounded Warrior Research Enhancement Act
Description: This bill requires the Department of Defense to award grants to advance orthotic and prosthetic care for members of the Armed Forces, veterans, and civilians who have undergone amputation, traumatic brain injury, and other serious injuries resulting from combat or military experience. The grants must fund research on (1) outcomes for such patients, (2) materials used in orthotics and prosthetics, and (3) improving existing orthotic and prosthetic technology and the development of new technology.
Sponsors: Rep. Cartwright, Matt [D-PA-8]
Target Audience
Population: People who rely on orthotic and prosthetic care due to combat-related injuries and associated research advancements
Estimated Size: 500000
- This bill will impact military service members and veterans who have suffered injuries in combat and military experiences, particularly those with amputations and traumatic brain injuries.
- The bill will also impact civilians who have experienced similar injuries in a military context, including contractors or other personnel working with the military in combat zones.
- Research and advancements funded by the bill could also have broader applications for civilians in the general population who use orthotic and prosthetic devices due to injuries, disabilities, or conditions not related to military service.
- Orthotic and prosthetic technology development could improve the quality of life for individuals globally who rely on such devices.
Reasoning
- The policy targets a specific population that includes veterans and service members who have experienced combat-related injuries such as amputations and traumatic brain injuries.
- The policy's research and technology advancements may also indirectly benefit civilians who require orthotic and prosthetic care, though they are not the primary target.
- The policy budget is extensive, allowing for significant research and development in prosthetic and orthotic technologies, but resources will need to be prioritized for those most affected by combat injuries.
- Given the focus on the military and relevant civilians, key respondents include veterans, active service members at risk, as well as some civilians who might benefit indirectly from technology improvements.
- Improvements may not be immediately visible for all affected as research and development take time, hence the need to assess both short-term and long-term impacts on wellbeing.
Simulated Interviews
Veteran (San Diego, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy could bring much needed improvements in the prosthetics we use.
- Upgrading outdated technology can significantly improve daily life for veterans like me.
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 | 9 | 6 |
Military Contractor (Seattle, WA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Excited about potential research funding that could improve rehab techniques.
- Policy should prioritize soldiers with critical injuries.
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 |
Retired Veteran (Richmond, VA)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- New research could mean better options instead of being stuck with old tech.
- Investing in better materials is crucial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Physical Therapist (Boston, MA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill could empower therapists with better tools for patient care.
- Mix of military focus can still benefit our civilian patients.
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 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Active Duty Soldier (Fort Bragg, NC)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's reassuring to know future injuries might be less debilitating.
- Hope this bill covers a broad range of injuries.
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 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Civil Engineer (Denver, CO)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While not military myself, improvements in prosthetics would help many like me.
- Glad to see government investing in tech that benefits everyone eventually.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Veterans Liaison (Las Vegas, NV)
Age: 31 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This grant means a lot for future advocacy.
- Having more data helps push for further policy improvements.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Prosthetic Manufacturer (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The bill is likely to drive innovation and create opportunities in prosthetics manufacturing.
- Good news for industry that supports rehabilitation.
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 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Civilian Aid Worker (New Orleans, LA)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Even though I'm civilian, seeing military prioritization can lead to civilian benefits later.
- Hope the policy encourages broad accessibility improvements.
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 | 6 | 5 |
Research Scientist (Philadelphia, PA)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Research grants like these are essential for breakthrough innovations.
- Long-term research is the key to reducing costs for quality prosthetics.
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 | 9 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $120000000)
Year 2: $105000000 (Low: $85000000, High: $125000000)
Year 3: $110250000 (Low: $89250000, High: $130250000)
Year 5: $121550000 (Low: $98550000, High: $143550000)
Year 10: $148840000 (Low: $120240000, High: $177440000)
Year 100: $3918776000 (Low: $3165524000, High: $4672028000)
Key Considerations
- The funding level needs to be sufficient to cover both immediate R&D expenses and long-term innovation goals.
- The scope of the target population and their specific needs will significantly influence program design and funding adequacy.
- Coordination with other federal agencies and private sector partners could maximize the impact of allocated resources.