Bill Overview
Title: Eleanor Smith Inclusive Home Design Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires certain newly constructed, federally assisted housing, including single-family homes and town houses, to contain at least one level that complies with specified minimum standards of accessibility for individuals with disabilities. An aggrieved person may commence a civil action with respect to a violation of this requirement.
Sponsors: Sen. Duckworth, Tammy [D-IL]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals with disabilities requiring accessible housing
Estimated Size: 48500000
- The bill targets newly constructed, federally assisted housing projects.
- The focus is on ensuring accessibility for individuals with disabilities.
- Accessibility features are often incorporated to benefit individuals who have mobility issues, such as those who use wheelchairs or other mobility aids.
- Though the bill specifies housing in the United States, the overall need for accessible housing is global and affects millions of people with disabilities.
Reasoning
- The policy's primary impact is expected on individuals with mobility-related disabilities who qualify for federally assisted housing.
- The budget constraints focus on newly constructed housing, limiting the immediate scale but offering long-term benefits through improved accessibility.
- The Cantril wellbeing scale is used to measure perceived changes in day-to-day life quality for residents affected by accessibility improvements.
- With a large potential target population, the immediate impact is proportional to the construction pace of qualifying housing projects.
- Some individuals without visible disabilities may experience indirect benefits from living in environments more universally designed.
- Given geographic and economic distribution, urban areas with higher density of federally assisted housing may see earlier benefits.
Simulated Interviews
Retired (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 65 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a step forward for people like me who struggle with accessibility in their own homes.
- Finally, housing will reflect the actual needs of its residents, allowing easier living.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Software Developer (New York, NY)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While my house doesn't fall under this, I can see this policy pushing broader societal inclusion.
- An essential move for those who do need these changes in their daily environment.
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 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Construction Worker (Chicago, IL)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't need these features myself but see the value in them for others.
- Any construction work directed by this policy may be beneficial for my job as well.
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 |
Advocate (Boston, MA)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy can greatly reduce daily obstacles for my children as they grow up.
- It's a reminder that change starts with basic facility design.
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 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Retired Veteran (Miami, FL)
Age: 78 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Changes like these should have been standardized years ago.
- The focus on all disabilities will be wonderful, especially for future generations.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Nurse (Austin, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Many assisted living facilities could improve from this policy.
- I'm hopeful it encourages thoughtful renovation and design in private settings too.
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 |
Community Planner (Detroit, MI)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill provides new benchmarks for projects I work on, promising more inclusive communities.
- It represents an understanding of true living needs.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Tech consultant (Seattle, WA)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Accessibility is significant; hopefully, this manifests more universally.
- I might not need it, but it's impactful for parts of society that do.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
School Teacher (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 59 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's relieving to know future homes will anticipate my wife's needs automatically.
- This approach should lessen home modification stress.
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 | 9 | 7 |
Graduate Student (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 24 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Knowing I've rights to accessible housing comforts me as my needs change.
- For students like me, this is critical in continuing education unimpeded.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $32000000 (Low: $28000000, High: $38000000)
Year 2: $32000000 (Low: $28000000, High: $38000000)
Year 3: $32000000 (Low: $28000000, High: $38000000)
Year 5: $32000000 (Low: $28000000, High: $38000000)
Year 10: $32000000 (Low: $28000000, High: $38000000)
Year 100: $32000000 (Low: $28000000, High: $38000000)
Key Considerations
- Determining cost-sharing structures between federal funding and housing developers.
- Ensuring compliance with accessibility standards without dramatically escalating overall project costs.
- Long-term savings on retrofitting and healthcare should be balanced against immediate implementation costs.