Bill Overview
Title: CHIP-IN Improvement Act of 2022
Description: This bill modifies the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) pilot program that authorizes the VA to accept property donations from certain entities (e.g., private entities), including by authorizing the VA to provide additional unobligated funds to finance, design, or construct a facility proposed to be accepted by the VA if specified requirements are met.
Sponsors: Sen. Lankford, James [R-OK]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals involved or benefiting from VA facilities worldwide
Estimated Size: 18000000
- The bill affects the Department of Veterans Affairs, which primarily serves U.S. military veterans.
- The pilot program allows the VA to accept property donations from private entities, thereby involving private sector participants.
- Any modifications to this program could directly affect private entities looking to donate property.
- Veterans who use VA facilities could be directly impacted by improvements or the construction of new facilities facilitated by these property donations.
- VA facilities are primarily located in the United States, thus impacting U.S. residents.
Reasoning
- The policy mainly affects U.S. military veterans who utilize VA facilities. Therefore, the primary population includes veterans either using or likely to use these facilities in the near future.
- Private entities, as potential donors, could see an indirect effect, especially in the construction and design sectors, given increased opportunities to contribute as well as potential tax benefits.
- Since the policy is about accepting donations for VA facilities, its direct effect is localized to areas with VA facilities under consideration for improvements or new constructions.
- Veterans residing near these facilities are likely to have improved access to care, potentially affecting their wellbeing scores positively.
- The impact on wellbeing will differ based on individual usage of VA facilities, current wellbeing, and specific facility enhancements they could receive.
- Given the financial limits, the policy will not affect all VA facilities or veterans uniformly. Some might see considerable improvements while others might notice little to no change.
- Considering the estimated 18 million veterans, we expect a range of 1-10% to be directly impacted depending on facility location and project selection.
- The likelihood of private sector impact is moderate, given involvement in design and construction services.
Simulated Interviews
retired veteran (Texas)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The CHIP-IN program could improve the waiting times and quality at the VA hospital I visit.
- Overall, new equipment and better facilities will make healthcare more bearable.
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 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
architect (California)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could present more job opportunities for us if more VA projects come up.
- I see it as a chance to give back to the community that served our country.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
software developer (New York)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope the policy leads to better care for my dad when he visits VA clinics.
- I personally might not see a big change but if the VA centers improve, it's beneficial for families like mine.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
nurse (Ohio)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We need more resources at our clinic, this program might help.
- Both personally and professionally, I think it will make a difference if things are executed well.
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 | 7 | 5 |
retired contractor (Florida)
Age: 72 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- VA facilities are in dire need of upgrades, I see this policy as a positive step.
- Many of my peers have suffered due to poor VA services, any improvement is welcome.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
civil engineer (North Carolina)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Business-wise, this could mean more projects and more work for the company.
- The impact on the communities served is what excites me the most. This is why we do what we do.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
financial consultant (Colorado)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The financial aspect of the policy is promising if managed correctly.
- Aligning public and private efforts can be quite effective in boosting VA capacities.
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 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
real estate developer (Virginia)
Age: 40 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could open doors for the real estate market to get more involved in community projects.
- It's like investing back into our heroes' futures.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
VA facility administrator (Illinois)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our facilities could greatly benefit from donations and improved funding via this policy.
- The potential is there to enhance both the infrastructure and the services we offer.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
graduate student (Washington D.C.)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies like CHIP-IN serve as case studies for my research and future work applying theory to practice.
- I hope this encourages more balanced public-private partnerships.
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 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 3: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 5: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 10: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Key Considerations
- The actual cost and savings will depend on the number and value of property donations and the VA's usage of unobligated funds.
- The administration of these property donations could introduce additional costs beyond those associated directly with facility projects.
- Long-term operational efficiencies might arise if the improved facilities significantly enhance service delivery.