Bill Overview
Title: Ensuring Accurate and Complete Abortion Data Reporting Act of 2022
Description: 2022 This bill requires states, as a condition of federal payment under Medicaid for family planning services, to report certain abortion data to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (Currently, reporting is voluntary.) The CDC must develop standardized questions for states with respect to specified variables (e.g., maternal demographics and methods of abortion).
Sponsors: Sen. Ernst, Joni [R-IA]
Target Audience
Population: Women of reproductive age globally who may require family planning services
Estimated Size: 64000000
- The legislation focuses on gathering more comprehensive abortion data, which inherently affects healthcare providers and facilities offering abortion services as they will be responsible for data reporting.
- Women who undergo abortions may be indirectly impacted as the data related to their demographics and method of abortion will be compiled and reported, albeit anonymized.
- The policy targets state health departments because they will have to coordinate the reporting of data to the CDC.
- Public health researchers and policymakers will be impacted since more comprehensive data could influence further studies and potential policy adjustments.
- All states receiving Medicaid funds for family planning services must comply, therefore all women of reproductive age that might require family planning are considered as indirectly impacted due to potential changes in service provision or privacy measures.
Reasoning
- The population affected by this policy includes several key groups: healthcare providers, women seeking abortions, state health departments, and public health researchers. Considering budget constraints, the policy likely focuses on establishing systems for consistent data reporting rather than large-scale service improvements.
- Healthcare providers will need to adopt new data collection and reporting protocols, which could require additional resources and staff training, potentially affecting their workload and operational efficiency.
- Women seeking abortions might experience indirect impacts such as changes in how their data is handled and possibly how family planning services are structured due to new data requirements.
- State health departments will bear the responsibility of ensuring comprehensive data is collected and shared with the CDC, possibly impacting their resource allocation and focus.
- Public health researchers and policymakers stand to benefit from richer datasets, which could influence future policies and healthcare strategies.
- The policy mainly impacts those directly involved in abortion-related services and data management but indirectly could influence the larger reproductive healthcare landscape.
Simulated Interviews
OB-GYN (Kansas)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Concerned about increased administrative burden and potential delays in patient care due to added reporting requirements.
- Appreciates the value of comprehensive data for improving public health policies, but worries about implementation challenges.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Public Health Researcher (California)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Excited about the potential for richer data sets to inform future research and policy initiatives.
- Acknowledges potential privacy concerns but believes they can be managed with proper anonymization.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
College Student (Texas)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Concerned about data privacy and how her personal experiences are recorded and reported.
- Worries that increased reporting might make accessing services more difficult or less private.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
State Health Department Official (New York)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Sees the policy as a valuable step towards comprehensive health data collection.
- Concerned about the logistics and additional resources needed for implementation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Registered Nurse (Illinois)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- A bit apprehensive about the additional workload and its effect on patient interaction time.
- Values the goal of the policy but questions its feasibility given current staffing levels.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Director of Women's Health Clinic (Florida)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Worried about compliance costs and potential disruptions to clinic operations.
- Understands the need for data but fears additional red tape could hinder service delivery.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Data Analyst (North Carolina)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Sees the new policy as potentially overwhelming due to increased data workload.
- Eager to work with new comprehensive data sets that could improve public health strategies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Graduate Student (Ohio)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Believes the policy could offer invaluable insights for public health research.
- Concerned about maintaining ethical standards and privacy in data reporting.
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 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Policy Advisor (Washington)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Optimistic that better data can guide policy improvements, but mindful of the challenges faced by clinics and states.
- Supports the end goal of the policy but stresses the need for supporting resources.
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 |
Medicaid Program Manager (Oregon)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Aware of the importance of data for funding and program adjustments, but cautiously optimistic about the policy's impact.
- Concerned about short-term disruptions during the transition to new reporting systems.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 2: $10500000 (Low: $8500000, High: $12500000)
Year 3: $11000000 (Low: $9000000, High: $13000000)
Year 5: $12000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $14000000)
Year 10: $13000000 (Low: $11000000, High: $15000000)
Year 100: $15000000 (Low: $13000000, High: $17000000)
Key Considerations
- The need for robust IT systems to handle data collection and reporting.
- Coordination between state health departments and the CDC to ensure data accuracy and compliance.
- Potential resistance from states or organizations due to privacy concerns or increased reporting burdens.
- Continual training requirements for personnel involved in data collection and reporting.