Bill Overview
Title: Creating Access to Residency Education Act of 2022
Description: 2022 This bill requires the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to award matching funds to teaching hospitals or other graduate medical education training programs for medical residency training programs in states where there are fewer than 44 medical residents per 100,000 people. Recipients must cover one third of the costs for primary care residency training programs and one half of the costs for programs in other fields.
Sponsors: Rep. Castor, Kathy [D-FL-14]
Target Audience
Population: People living in states with fewer than 44 medical residents per 100,000 individuals
Estimated Size: 136800000
- The bill focuses on providing funding for medical residency training programs, specifically in states with fewer medical residents per capita.
- States with fewer than 44 medical residents per 100,000 people are directly targeted by the funding.
- The direct recipients of the funding would be teaching hospitals and graduate medical education programs in these states, but the impact extends to medical residents and the broader healthcare system.
- Nationally, the medical residency system impacts the availability of doctors, particularly in underserved areas, thereby affecting the general public in terms of healthcare access.
- Increasing the number of medical residents in underserved states is likely to lead to improved healthcare access and outcomes for populations in those regions.
- Since the bill is a federal initiative, its influence is national but concentrated in low-residency states.
Reasoning
- The policy targets states with fewer medical residents per 100,000 people, impacting healthcare access in these regions.
- The budget constraints suggest limited scope, so the policy's effects may be felt strongest in immediate years due to the high level of residency funding in underserved areas.
- People from different demographics and states will be impacted differently based on local healthcare needs and resident scarcity.
- The benefits will largely flow to new medical residents, healthcare workers, and patients in underserved areas.
- Commonness score will help indicate how typical the interviewee's situation is across the population.
Simulated Interviews
General Practitioner (Wyoming)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy brings more residents to our state.
- We've been managing with limited staff, and new residents would help.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Medical Resident (Mississippi)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is exactly the boost we need to offer more comprehensive training.
- It might attract even more talent to our state.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Nurse (Montana)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 17.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's challenging with our current staffing. Any increase in medical residents would be invaluable.
- I've seen patients have to wait longer or go elsewhere. It's not their fault.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Hospital Administrator (New York)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While our hospital isn't directly impacted, improving national medical resident distribution is positive.
- It may ease pressure in urban centers like ours by bolstering rural healthcare systems.
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 |
Medical Student (North Dakota)
Age: 30 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could make residency in states like mine more attractive.
- It's a good way to address doctor shortages here.
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 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Retired (Georgia)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 12.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Access to doctors has been tough. If more residents are around, it could mean faster care.
- I hope this means not needing to travel far for appointments.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Internal Medicine Doctor (Texas)
Age: 58 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Adding more residents would ease the pressure on my practice.
- We desperately need more hands and skills in our region.
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 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Public Health Official (California)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Focusing resources on areas with fewer residents aligns with health equity goals.
- This policy could be a game-changer in leveling access across states.
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 |
Family Medicine Resident (South Dakota)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 12.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We're already stretched thin, so additional residency positions would make a tangible difference.
- It shows the state's commitment to health improvement.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Health Economist (Alabama)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This targeted infusion of resources could have wide-reaching effects.
- I will be watching metrics closely to see the impact on regional health outcomes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 2: $52000000 (Low: $42000000, High: $62000000)
Year 3: $54000000 (Low: $44000000, High: $64000000)
Year 5: $60000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $70000000)
Year 10: $70000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $80000000)
Year 100: $200000000 (Low: $160000000, High: $240000000)
Key Considerations
- Total funding is contingent on state participation and matching fund contributions, which could vary by state capability.
- The effectiveness of this policy depends heavily on establishing new residency programs or expanding existing ones, primarily in underserved areas.
- Projected savings rely on assumed improvements in healthcare access and outcomes, particularly in underserved regions.