Bill Overview
Title: ARPA–H Act
Description: This bill establishes within the National Institutes of Health (NIH) the Advanced Research Projects Authority for Health to accelerate innovation in health and medicine by investing in high-risk, high-reward research projects. The bill also establishes an interagency advisory committee to inform the authority's activities. The authority director shall be appointed by the President and report to the NIH director. The authority director must, among other duties, designate personnel to serve as program managers who select projects to support, make recommendations about terminating or continuing projects, and otherwise administer authority programs. The authority may use a variety of mechanisms to support the research projects, including grants, contracts, and prize competitions. To receive funding, an applicant must demonstrate sufficient, unsuccessful attempts to secure private funding for its project and other criteria. Furthermore, the authority's budget is separate from the NIH budget. In addition, the authority must (1) develop and periodically update a strategic plan, (2) annually report on its activities, and (3) seek to contract with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to evaluate the authority's performance. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) may meet with the authority and other federal partners to discuss actions to facilitate the development of medical projects and products prioritized by the authority. The authority must reimburse the FDA for the costs associated with supporting authority activities. The bill also requires the Government Accountability Office to report on issues related to the authority's hiring and staffing.
Sponsors: Sen. Murray, Patty [D-WA]
Target Audience
Population: People globally who could benefit from medical and healthcare innovations
Estimated Size: 331000000
- The ARPA-H Act aims to accelerate innovation in health and medicine.
- High-risk, high-reward research projects in health and medicine will be a focus, affecting researchers and institutions involved in such work globally.
- Patients and populations that may benefit from advancements in medical sciences and healthcare innovations will be impacted.
- The establishment of this authority could lead to new treatments or medical technologies that might benefit individuals worldwide.
- The research areas supported could potentially address global health challenges, influencing a global audience.
Reasoning
- The ARPA-H Act focuses on advancing high-risk, high-reward medical research, likely affecting researchers and healthcare professionals directly involved in such projects.
- Potential long-term impacts include significant medical breakthroughs that could improve patient outcomes and healthcare practices, influencing individuals who rely on medical advancements for better health.
- The policy does not directly affect the everyday life of individuals unless they are involved in or benefiting from specific research projects funded by ARPA-H.
- There will likely be a higher impact on individuals and institutions dedicated to medical research than on the general population.
- Those involved in high-risk medical research may see increased opportunities and funding, while patients with conditions targeted by such research may see indirect benefits through improved treatments and technologies.
Simulated Interviews
Medical Researcher (Boston, MA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The ARPA-H could revolutionize how we approach funding for high-risk research projects.
- It offers a unique opportunity for projects that typically struggle to get funding through conventional means.
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 | 10 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 8 |
Biotech Startup Founder (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The establishment of ARPA-H could provide the lifeline needed for our work.
- Innovative projects require bold support, and this seems like a step in the right direction.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Clinical Trial Coordinator (Austin, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The ARPA-H likely won't change my day-to-day work in the short term.
- Long-term benefits could arise from an increase in innovative drugs entering clinical trials.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Family Physician (Columbus, OH)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- New medical advancements are always welcome, but I don't expect ARPA-H to directly impact my practice soon.
- Patients might benefit from improved treatments down the line.
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 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 9 |
Retired Nurse (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 66 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's promising to see these kinds of initiatives, but the effects might take years to trickle down.
- I hope ARPA-H will drive meaningful health improvements.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Hospital Administrator (New York, NY)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More funding for innovative projects could help us adopt new technologies faster.
- The policy might indirectly lead to cost savings and better care methods eventually.
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 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 8 |
Graduate Student (Miami, FL)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could open doors for early career researchers like me.
- Having more avenues for funding will encourage pursuing bold ideas, effectively accelerating medical breakthroughs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 8 |
High School Biology Teacher (Chicago, IL)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I follow medical advancements closely for my students' benefit.
- This might lead to more exciting content about breakthroughs in classes.
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 | 9 |
Patient Advocate (Chicago, IL)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies like ARPA-H are encouraging because they prioritize neglected areas.
- This could directly lead to new treatments for the patients I advocate for.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 10 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 9 |
Retired Industrial Worker (Birmingham, AL)
Age: 70 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy brings new treatments to market that can help people like me.
- Immediate effects might not be visible, but there's potential for future 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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $800000000 (Low: $700000000, High: $1000000000)
Year 2: $900000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1100000000)
Year 3: $1000000000 (Low: $900000000, High: $1200000000)
Year 5: $1200000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $1500000000)
Year 10: $1400000000 (Low: $1100000000, High: $1700000000)
Year 100: $3000000000 (Low: $2500000000, High: $3500000000)
Key Considerations
- Ensuring the authority's projects align with critical and unmet medical needs to optimize public health impact and economic benefits.
- The necessity for a continuous review and adaptation of the strategic plan as new medical challenges and technological opportunities arise.
- Balancing between risk and reward in funding decisions to ensure financial sustainability and maximized impact.
- Coordination with existing health entities to prevent overlap and promote complementary actions and cost savings.