Bill Overview
Title: Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Act of 2022
Description: This act reauthorizes through FY2027 various activities carried out by the Health Resources and Services Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders that support screening and early intervention services for newborns, infants, and young children who are deaf or hard of hearing. The Government Accountability Office must also conduct a study of state early hearing detection and intervention programs, including with respect to disparities in accessing the programs.
Sponsors: Sen. Portman, Rob [R-OH]
Target Audience
Population: Newborns, infants, and young children who are deaf or hard of hearing
Estimated Size: 72600
- The bill impacts newborns, infants, and young children who are deaf or hard of hearing, as it supports screening and early intervention services.
- The incorporation of the Health Resources and Services Administration, the CDC, and the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders indicates a focus on healthcare and intervention.
- Approximately 130 million children are born globally each year, and conservative estimates suggest 1 to 3 in every 1,000 children are diagnosed with some level of hearing loss, translating to about 130,000 to 390,000 children globally each year who could benefit from these interventions.
- The number may be further extended when considering children who develop hearing issues beyond infancy but still qualify as young children.
- Screening and early intervention programs may vary by country in terms of reach and available technology.
Reasoning
- The Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Act primarily affects newborns, infants, and young children who are deaf or hard of hearing. Given the budget constraints, not all eligible individuals may receive services immediately, but the policy aims to ensure improved outcomes for those who do.
- The population affected is relatively small compared to the total U.S. population, but the impact on those individuals can be significant, particularly in terms of developmental opportunities and quality of life enhancements.
- The inclusion of a study to detect disparities in access hints at ongoing challenges in equitable healthcare service provision, making understanding common profiles within this scenario critical for policy success.
Simulated Interviews
Stay-at-home parent (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope the policy helps me access better hearing aids for my child.
- Screening was efficient, but the follow-up programs are costly.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Audiologist (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act will allow us to better serve families in need of early intervention.
- Funding has been tight in recent years, and this support is much needed.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Teacher of the Deaf (Chicago, IL)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased funding will enhance educational programs for deaf children.
- Long-term evaluation studies are vital for educational success.
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 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 8 |
Data Analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm interested in seeing how data will inform future policies.
- We need more emphasis on equitable access.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Hearing Aid Technician (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 25 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy can improve technology access for low-income families.
- I want to help more children with better resources.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Public Health Official (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Ensuring comprehensive coverage for early detection is key.
- This policy will provide strategic long-term benefits.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
College Student (Miami, FL)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The technology aspect of the policy fascinates me.
- I'm optimistic about positive changes but need to see clear results.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Retired Nurse (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I want the best help for my grandchild, policies like these matter.
- The system has gaps that hopefully this can address.
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 | 10 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Hearing Device Manufacturer (Boston, MA)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might boost innovation in hearing aid tech.
- Looking at potential market growth excites me.
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 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Speech-Language Pathologist (Seattle, WA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Access to early intervention can change lives drastically.
- I hope the policy reduces barriers for families needing services.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 10 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 10 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $34000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $40000000)
Year 2: $35000000 (Low: $31000000, High: $41000000)
Year 3: $36000000 (Low: $32000000, High: $42000000)
Year 5: $38000000 (Low: $33000000, High: $45000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The act primarily extends existing programs, thus the base costs referenced are in line with past expenditures.
- State variations in implementation costs may arise.
- Long-term benefits include improved early development for children with hearing loss, reducing future educational interventions.