Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/4381

Bill Overview

Title: Ensuring Seniors’ Access to Quality Care Act

Description: This bill repeals certain restrictions under Medicare and Medicaid that prohibit the approval of nurse-aide training and competency evaluation programs in skilled nursing facilities that have been subject to specified regulatory actions (e.g., civil penalties) for substandard quality of care. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) must still disapprove such programs for up to two years; however, the CMS must rescind the disapproval upon completion of corrective action and may require additional oversight of the program for purposes of rescission. The bill also allows Medicaid and Medicare providers (e.g., skilled nursing facilities) to access, through the National Practitioner Data Bank, disciplinary information for affiliated physicians and other health care practitioners, as reported by state licensing authorities.

Sponsors: Sen. Warner, Mark R. [D-VA]

Target Audience

Population: Seniors receiving care in skilled nursing facilities

Estimated Size: 1400000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Retired teacher (Florida)

Age: 82 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think having better-trained staff is always good. It makes me feel safer knowing they have more knowledge.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Retired engineer (Texas)

Age: 76 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I welcome any policy that ensures my wife gets the best care. Knowing there's oversight and better training makes me hope for improvements.

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 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 5

Nurse Aide (Ohio)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Having continuous access to training will make our jobs easier and improve patient care.
  • It's good to know even facilities with past issues can have a chance to improve training programs.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Retired (New York)

Age: 85 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I feel assured that there will be more trained aides to help with my care needs.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Retired (California)

Age: 66 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I like knowing there will be a database for checking who is providing care. It's about time more information is available.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Volunteer (Pennsylvania)

Age: 73 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Better training means more competent staff, which I think is crucial for good care.
  • This policy gives facilities a chance to make positive changes.

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 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 5 4

Administrator at a skilled nursing facility (Illinois)

Age: 53 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy helps facilities like ours hit by past penalties to get a second chance to improve training and care.
  • There will be some costs involved, but it's necessary for long-term improvement.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Retired farmer (Minnesota)

Age: 89 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 3

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm thankful there's a push to ensure the staff knows what they're doing, even if it might be too late for me.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 4 3
Year 2 4 3
Year 3 4 3
Year 5 4 3
Year 10 4 2
Year 20 4 2

Retired nurse (Arizona)

Age: 70 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think this will set a higher standard for the care industry.
  • Access to practitioner information improves transparency, a step in the right direction.

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 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 7 5

Family caregiver (New Mexico)

Age: 63 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Seeing changes like these rolled out reassures me that the care system is becoming safer for my parent.
  • The trust in facilities has diminished over the years, but initiatives like this might restore that trust.

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 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 6 4

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)

Year 2: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $120000000)

Year 3: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $120000000)

Year 5: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $120000000)

Year 10: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $120000000)

Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $120000000)

Key Considerations