Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/4851

Bill Overview

Title: National Plan to End Parkinson’s Act

Description: This bill requires the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to carry out a project to prevent and cure Parkinson's disease (a progressive brain disorder that causes unintended or uncontrollable movements) and related conditions. Among other components of the project, HHS must (1) implement and periodically update a national plan to coordinate and guide efforts to prevent and cure the disease; (2) improve diagnosis, treatment, and care of those with the disease; and (3) address health and other disparities related to the disease. HHS must also conduct annual assessments on the preparation for and response to the increased burden of Parkinson's disease. In addition, the bill establishes a council, comprised of federal and nonfederal stakeholders, to advise HHS on and make recommendations concerning the prevention and cure of Parkinson's disease. The bill's provisions terminate at the end of calendar year 2035.

Sponsors: Sen. Capito, Shelley Moore [R-WV]

Target Audience

Population: People diagnosed with or at risk of Parkinson's disease globally

Estimated Size: 1000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

retired software engineer (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 67 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 12.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm hopeful that the policy will bring more research and possibly a cure or at least better management options soon.
  • I wish the policy had come sooner, but better late than never.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 9 4
Year 20 9 3

retired teacher (Miami, FL)

Age: 72 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy gives me hope for more support services and potentially better therapies for my husband.
  • It can't come soon enough for us.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

accountant (New York, NY)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Having this policy in place makes me feel more secure about the future.
  • I think it's a necessary step towards preventing other people from experiencing what my father did.

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 8 7
Year 20 8 6

scientific researcher (Denver, CO)

Age: 39 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy is crucial for advancing research and hopefully finding a cure.
  • It will provide much-needed funds and coordination for comprehensive studies.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 9 8
Year 3 9 8
Year 5 10 8
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 8 7

healthcare administrator (Chicago, IL)

Age: 48 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Implementation will streamline processes and provide clearer directives for care.
  • I'm optimistic about the potential for reducing patient load through better treatments.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 9 5

retired lawyer (Seattle, WA)

Age: 83 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy is a positive step towards real change in dealing with Parkinson's.
  • More coordination and support might help others like me maintain quality of life longer.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 9 4
Year 10 8 3
Year 20 6 2

engineer (Austin, TX)

Age: 64 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's relieving to see attention towards preventive measures in the policy.
  • I'd like to see more educational resources as part of this initiative.

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 4

nurse (Boston, MA)

Age: 58 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Improved protocols and coordination through this policy will significantly impact treatment quality.
  • I believe it will eventually ease the burden on healthcare professionals as well.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 9 4

retired military officer (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 61 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could mean more independence and potentially lessening the progression rate for people like me.
  • I believe it might also provide more options for living arrangements and support.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 4
Year 5 8 4
Year 10 8 3
Year 20 7 3

retired nurse (Dallas, TX)

Age: 71 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm hopeful that this policy will lead to breakthroughs that could enhance quality of life.
  • I think we need more outreach and education to accompany the scientific push.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 9 4
Year 20 8 3

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $750000000 (Low: $600000000, High: $900000000)

Year 2: $800000000 (Low: $650000000, High: $950000000)

Year 3: $850000000 (Low: $700000000, High: $1000000000)

Year 5: $900000000 (Low: $750000000, High: $1050000000)

Year 10: $950000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1100000000)

Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Key Considerations