Bill Overview
Title: Supporting the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health and the Reagan-Udall Foundation for the Food and Drug Administration Act
Description: This bill increases the amount of funds each fiscal year that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) must transfer to the Reagan-Udall Foundation for the FDA and that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) must transfer to the Foundation for the NIH. Specifically, it requires each agency to increase the amount transferred to its respective foundation (1) from a minimum of $500,000 to a minimum of $1,250,000, and (2) from a maximum of $1,250,000 to a maximum of $5,000,000.
Sponsors: Sen. Lujan, Ben Ray [D-NM]
Target Audience
Population: Global population benefiting from medical and health research and development
Estimated Size: 335000000
- The foundation for the NIH supports biomedical research which impacts researchers, scientists, healthcare professionals, and patients globally, as it aids in the advancement of medical knowledge and treatments.
- The Reagan-Udall Foundation for the FDA engages in initiatives that improve public health through better validation and evaluation of new drugs, devices, and food products, affecting consumers, patients, and the healthcare industry worldwide.
- These foundations support research and development that lead to scientific advancements benefiting global health and safety.
- The enhanced funding might lead to accelerated research solutions, impacting those with healthcare needs around the world.
Reasoning
- The NIH and FDA funding impacts a broad array of individuals working in healthcare and research, as well as patients benefiting from advancements in medical treatments and drugs.
- Some simulated individuals may perceive no direct impact due to the broad and indirect nature of the benefits.
- We include individuals not actively engaged in research or with specific health conditions to gather a range of perspectives.
- Since the policy involves an increment of transferred funds, the immediate effect might be moderate but grows over time as research advancements accumulate and improve healthcare outcomes.
Simulated Interviews
Biomedical Researcher (Boston, MA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The increase in funding is crucial. It allows for more robust research projects and might open up grant opportunities for new methodologies.
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 | 10 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 8 |
FDA Regulatory Specialist (Research Triangle Park, NC)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased funding could improve the depth of drug evaluations and speed up the approval process, positively impacting health outcomes.
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 | 8 | 7 |
Graduate Student in Biomedical Sciences (Seattle, WA)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This funding boost could increase my chances of receiving grants in the future, aiding my studies.
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 | 9 | 6 |
Retired Teacher (Orlando, FL)
Age: 65 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While the policy benefits medical research, I may not see immediate personal benefits. However, it's good for future advancements.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Pharmaceutical Company Executive (Houston, TX)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased funding could streamline drug approval processes, which aligns with our business objectives and benefits public health.
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 |
Clinical Trial Manager (San Diego, CA)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Enhancements in funding are promising for the expansion and efficacy of our trials, potentially leading to breakthroughs sooner.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Primary Care Physician (Des Moines, IA)
Age: 43 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Furthering drug evaluation and medical research improves patient outcomes, which is beneficial for practitioners.
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 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Health Policy Analyst (Austin, TX)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Better funding for the NIH and FDA could translate to more effective healthcare policies and better system efficiency.
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 | 8 | 7 |
Food Safety Inspector (Chicago, IL)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased funding may enhance research into food safety and allow for more comprehensive regulation enforcement.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Patient with Chronic Disease (New York, NY)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While it's great for improving medications, I don't feel much personal impact today. Long-term benefits could be significant, though.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $8250000 (Low: $6250000, High: $10000000)
Year 2: $8250000 (Low: $6250000, High: $10000000)
Year 3: $8250000 (Low: $6250000, High: $10000000)
Year 5: $8250000 (Low: $6250000, High: $10000000)
Year 10: $8250000 (Low: $6250000, High: $10000000)
Year 100: $8250000 (Low: $6250000, High: $10000000)
Key Considerations
- The funding increase should be viewed relative to NIH's and FDA's overall budgets, as it represents a small fraction within the larger pool of expenditures.
- The impact of increased funding is contingent on the foundations effectively utilizing the additional resources to advance their scientific missions.
- Stakeholders should consider the potential need for additional appropriations or realignment within agency budgets to meet increased transfer requirements.