Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/4482

Bill Overview

Title: Coordinating Substance Use and Homelessness Care Act of 2022

Description: This bill requires the Department of Housing and Urban Development to award competitive grants to improve coordination of health care and homelessness services for individuals who are homeless, have significant behavioral health issues (e.g., substance use disorders), and voluntarily seek assistance. Entities eligible for these grants include local and tribal governments, public housing agencies that administer housing choice vouchers, and certain nonprofits.

Sponsors: Sen. Padilla, Alex [D-CA]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals who are homeless and suffer from substance use disorders

Estimated Size: 150000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Unemployed (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 35 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 3

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope the policy will finally give me a stable place to stay and regular treatments.
  • It's been hard to navigate services on my own; coordination could make a big difference.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Retired nurse (New York City, NY)

Age: 62 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy sounds promising, but I've seen many programs come and go.
  • I'm concerned about how long services will be available.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Construction worker (Chicago, IL)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 2

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Any help is better than none, but I wonder if the coordination will actually help me find work.
  • Getting housing quickly would be a miracle.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 4 2
Year 2 5 2
Year 3 5 1
Year 5 4 1
Year 10 3 1
Year 20 2 0

Service industry (Austin, TX)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If they can help coordinate better mental health and addiction services, that'd be helpful.
  • I'd love to find a stable job and home someday.
  • I want to make sure policies don't make assumptions about why all people like me are in these situations.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Freelancer (Seattle, WA)

Age: 50 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Better access to health care would change things for me.
  • I hope this policy makes that access consistent and reliable.
  • I feel like the policy could help, but only if they actually implement it well.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Former IT specialist (Philadelphia, PA)

Age: 38 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 3

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'd like to see more focus on not just housing, but really helping us get back on our feet.
  • I'm skeptical about the policy unless it creates more job opportunities or skill development.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Retiree (Baltimore, MD)

Age: 55 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 2

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Coordination sounds good, but I need to see it to believe it.
  • I've been burned by the system before, so I'm cautious.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Day laborer (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 41 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If this policy means better access to addiction counseling, I am all for it.
  • Help needs to be consistent, because sporadic support doesn’t lead to change.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Part-time retail (Portland, OR)

Age: 27 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 16/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I want a chance to go back to school and start fresh.
  • Housing is one thing, but personal growth can change my life.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Street vendor (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 48 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 3

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 17/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think any effort to coordinate services can be beneficial, but it must reach all who need it.
  • I'm concerned the policy won't include people like me who aren't consistently in shelters.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)

Year 2: $515000000 (Low: $410000000, High: $618000000)

Year 3: $530450000 (Low: $422300000, High: $636540000)

Year 5: $561556350 (Low: $446086450, High: $673867620)

Year 10: $628894626 (Low: $499115700, High: $754673551)

Year 100: $1530286060 (Low: $1214913973, High: $1837196351)

Key Considerations