Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/5336

Bill Overview

Title: PREEMIE Reauthorization Act of 2022

Description: This bill reauthorizes through FY2028 research, health care provider education, and other activities focused on preventing and treating preterm birth.

Sponsors: Sen. Bennet, Michael F. [D-CO]

Target Audience

Population: People involved with or impacted by preterm births

Estimated Size: 1300000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Registered Nurse (California)

Age: 35 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think the policy is a step in the right direction.
  • Increased funding can lead to better neonatal care practices.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Medical Researcher (Texas)

Age: 30 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's great to see more funding for preterm research.
  • This could accelerate some of our ongoing projects and lead to better outcomes.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Mother and homemaker (New York)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The additional support can help mothers like me who are struggling with preterm births.
  • Access to better information and healthcare is badly needed.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Pediatrician (Florida)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could provide much-needed resources.
  • I hope it helps reduce the stress on families dealing with preterm births.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Policy Analyst (Ohio)

Age: 42 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's a necessary investment in public health.
  • The U.S. needs more policies like this to support maternal health.

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 5

Healthcare Administrator (Illinois)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy could improve resource allocation for preterm care.
  • Needs stringent monitoring to avoid misuse of funds.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Midwife (Georgia)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm hopeful the policy will increase support for at-risk pregnancies.
  • More training for healthcare workers is essential.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Retired, former OB-GYN (Massachusetts)

Age: 65 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's a positive move.
  • I worry the funds might not be enough to cover all needs.

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

Public Health Worker (North Carolina)

Age: 40 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy is likely to improve public health outcomes.
  • I think it will benefit diverse communities across the state.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

University Professor (Pennsylvania)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think this legislation strengthens national health priorities.
  • Global collaboration could extend its impact.

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 7 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 6 5

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $65000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $70000000)

Year 2: $66000000 (Low: $61000000, High: $71000000)

Year 3: $67000000 (Low: $62000000, High: $72000000)

Year 5: $69000000 (Low: $64000000, High: $74000000)

Year 10: $72000000 (Low: $67000000, High: $77000000)

Year 100: $150000000 (Low: $140000000, High: $160000000)

Key Considerations