Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/3506

Bill Overview

Title: Strengthening the Public Health Workforce Act

Description: This bill reauthorizes through FY2025 and makes changes to the Public Health Workforce Loan Repayment Program (a program that awards student loan repayment to individuals with qualifying degrees who commit to work full-time for a federal, state, tribal, or local public health agency for a period of obligated service). Changes to the program include increasing the maximum repayment amount; eliminating the option for individuals to complete the service obligation in a federal public health agency; and expanding the scope of qualifying degrees to cover, for example, those in statistics, computer science, and programs related to information technology. In addition, the Department of Health and Human Services may take actions to equitably distribute awards across geographic regions, among jurisdictional levels, and between urban and rural areas. The bill also requires the Government Accountability Office to conduct an evaluation of the public health workforce.

Sponsors: Sen. Smith, Tina [D-MN]

Target Audience

Population: Public health workers and potential entrants into the public health workforce

Estimated Size: 250000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Epidemiologist (Austin, Texas)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope it's beneficial for people like me who need financial relief to continue working in public health.
  • It's a step in the right direction for expanding scope, but I wish we could serve in federal agencies too as part of the obligation.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Statistical Analyst (Chicago, Illinois)

Age: 35 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This is an excellent opportunity for someone in my field to clear student loans.
  • It's a pity there's a budget constraint, so not everyone will benefit immediately.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Public Health Nurse (Rural, Kentucky)

Age: 30 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy means a lot to us in rural areas who have fewer resources.
  • If I can have my student loans repaid, it would relieve a lot of stress.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Public Health IT Specialist (New York City, New York)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy might encourage more IT professionals like me to consider public health roles.
  • I'm curious to see how the policy will be distributed in urban areas.

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

Public Health Director (Seattle, Washington)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's important to see steps being taken to resolve workforce shortages.
  • I hope the policy will result in increased retention of qualified professionals.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Data Scientist for Public Health (Denver, Colorado)

Age: 27 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This is a big deal for those of us crossing over from tech to public health.
  • I'm optimistic that my loans will be addressed, allowing me to focus on the work.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Public Health Educator (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While it won't directly benefit me now, it's a great initiative for the younger workforce.
  • Equitable distribution is key to addressing disparities.

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

Public Health Policy Analyst (Houston, Texas)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It will be interesting to see the evaluations from the Government Accountability Office.
  • These policy changes might set new precedents for other sectors.

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

Biostatistician (San Francisco, California)

Age: 32 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If the policy includes PhD candidates or degree holders, it will be life-changing.
  • People in data roles are crucial and should be supported.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Health Informatics Specialist (Miami, Florida)

Age: 29 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • There needs to be ongoing support for IT professionals moving into public health.
  • This policy could provide much-needed financial alleviation.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)

Year 2: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)

Year 3: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)

Year 5: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)

Year 10: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)

Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)

Key Considerations