Recovering Routine Immunization Rates — State Strategies to Move beyond COVID-19
/in COVID-19 Relief and Recovery Resource Center Blogs, Featured News Home Immunization /by Rebecca Cooper and Sandra WilknissTwo States’ Approaches to Leveraging Data for Equitable COVID-19 Vaccine Distribution
/in COVID-19 State Action Center Blogs, Featured News Home COVID-19, Immunization, Vaccines /by Rebecca CooperFederal and state governments are continuing to vaccinate residents as quickly as possible, while working to ensure they reach populations experiencing barriers to vaccination. Access to high-quality data to track and identify under-vaccinated areas and populations is critical to this goal. States have a variety of data systems at their disposal, with vaccine registries at the center.
The National Academy for State Health Policy (NASHP) spoke to state officials in Minnesota and North Carolina, two states who took different approaches to developing COVID-19 immunization data systems, to learn about their experiences, including data challenges, successes, and implications for ensuring an equitable vaccine roll out now and in the future.
“The focus on equity must be intentional, ongoing, and embedded across vaccine operations.” – State Official
Tracking and reporting of COVID-19 vaccine distribution and administration data requires collaboration and integration across various systems that are administering and distributing the vaccine. To collect and track data for the COVID-19 vaccine, states are using their existing immunization information systems (IIS), adopting the CDC’s newly developed Vaccine Administration Management System (VAMS), creating a new system specifically designed for the COVID-19 vaccine, or some combination of these different approaches. The ability to connect IIS with other data sources, like Medicaid claims, and hospitals’ and health systems’ electronic health records (EHRs), is critical to identifying gaps and opportunities for improvement.
In addition to aggregating data across data systems, the completeness of patient records affects efforts to address the gaps. Because Black and LatinX communities have been disproportionately affected by the pandemic, complete patient data, including race and ethnicity data, can help target vaccination outreach to vulnerable communities.
Can you give an overview of the system you use to track and collect COVID-19 specific immunization data?
Minnesota: Minnesota uses an immunization information system (IIS), called Minnesota Immunization Information Connection (MIIC). MIIC-enrolled pharmacists are the only providers who are mandated to collect or upload data into the system. However, all health care staff at provider’s offices can access MIIC, so they have flexibility to input data. And, our health systems are excellent partners that share high quality data to MIIC via the electronic health record (EHR). Additionally, MIIC can capture patients’ vaccine refusal comments and has a reminder/recall function that allows providers to assess which patients are overdue for which vaccine. Minnesota also has data sharing laws that allow schools, childcare providers, purchasers, and community health boards to access MIIC. The ability for schools and childcare providers to review data in the system will be important as children get vaccinated. Our IIS has been working well during the pandemic; we can track and enter data into the system, and it can handle the volume of data without issue. We have been able to onboard new providers expediently and have created a more consolidated process that has been extremely useful.
North Carolina: North Carolina developed the COVID-19 Vaccine Management System (CVMS) instead of using our state’s IIS to create a single end-to-end system for COVID-19 vaccinations. CVMS gives us the ability to add or subtract fields at our discretion. For example, we were able to incorporate North Carolina’s vaccine eligibility determinations and include provider enrollment directly into the system. The system also has the ability to configure to meet provider’s needs, It does not have a reminder/recall system like North Carolina’s Immunization Registry (NCIR). However, CVMS does send proactive e-mail reminders to recipients to get their second doses. CVMS is Version 1 of an iterative software, so all enhancements can be developed in an agile manner.
How are you using data to track areas in need of targeted vaccination approaches?
Minnesota: We have pinpointed a growing list of individuals who have not yet received their second dose. We created this list using our data but have been grappling with how we ensure they actually get vaccinated. One solution we are working to implement is a pilot texting reminder/recall program through a partnership with one of our large health systems and are hoping to make this available more broadly across the state. We have also implemented a change in the data system to allow providers to set parameters to see who in a population needs a vaccine. They will be able to define age parameters and see who in that age bracket has not been vaccinated yet (such as seniors). They can also set product-specific parameters to see who in a county needs a second dose of a specific vaccine and do targeted outreach.
North Carolina: We have geospatial and demographic data for everyone who has received the vaccine, and demographic data and Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) data for all census tracts across the state, so we are able to see where vaccination rates are keeping up with the state average, and which regions are in need of more proactive engagement and partnership.
We are building equity into every aspect of vaccine distribution in order to close the vaccination gap between white populations and Black/African American, Hispanic/Latinx, and American Indian populations in North Carolina, including prioritizing data transparency. We require all vaccine providers to collect and report race and ethnicity data; provide a bi-weekly report to each vaccine provider on their vaccination rates by race and ethnicity; update a public dashboard daily that shows vaccine rates by race and ethnicity at the state and county level, and use this data to inform strategies.
How do COVID-19 immunization data systems interact with EHRs?
Minnesota: MIIC created a unique partnership with the state’s 10 largest EHRs through the EHR consortium. Through partner phone calls, we realized EHR systems collected race/ethnicity and other demographic and comorbidity data while MIIC collected individual patients’ full vaccine history. We partnered to share information across systems to create a full data set. MIIC also gets immunization data directly from the EHRs, which avoids double data entry. And, providers can also query MIIC to get vaccine history and forecast recommendations.
North Carolina: CVMS does not conform with HL7 message structure to exchange immunization information with health systems’ electronic health records and IIS but the platform enables imports of data from EHRs using a standardized file format, which prevents the need for double data entry. We are developing a system that will be able to push the COVID-19 vaccine data into the state IIS, which is critical to having one source of vaccine data for providers, schools, etc. The state IIS is also connected to EHRs, and allows providers that have been onboarded to check for vaccine status through the EHRs.
What are some challenges you have seen in accurately identifying areas of need?
Minnesota: Previously, vaccine supply and inconsistency with delivery had been an external factor that created challenges to accurately identify areas of need, though this is less of an issue now given more consistent supply. In terms of data, because we do not have a mandate to enter data into the IIS, we accept many different types of data, and we have heard from individuals that it has been a barrier to use full-scale EHRs in vaccine clinics because of the technology hurdles.
North Carolina: When supply was more limited, we set aside doses for vaccine providers and events focused on historically marginalized populations (HMP) and relied upon provider data of vaccinating these populations to determine allocation strategy. We track equity gaps – i.e., the difference between HMP vaccination rates and proportion of population – at the provider type, county, and individual provider level, and we share this information back with vaccine providers. We found that equity gaps have steadily declined across geographies as a result of this and other equity-focused vaccination strategies. External barriers like internet access, limited interpretation services, and transportation have also created challenges in ensuring access to vaccinations. We have invested in strategies for people to access information without having to go online – i.e., set up a call center with English- and Spanish-speaking agents who can answer common vaccine questions and help people find vaccine providers near them. We also have had to make it clear up front that identification and insurance are not required, and that data collection relies on self-attestation.
What are some “best data practices” you have found to ensure an equitable distribution of the vaccine?
Minnesota: We use data from MIIC to look at vaccine uptake by SVI. A Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) site was placed in St. Paul which targets zip codes with high SVI. FEMA sites can distribute a small percentage of their allocated vaccine doses off-site, and have utilized some mobile vaccinations for the distribution processes.
North Carolina: We regularly review provider race and ethnicity data internally to evaluate progress and share externally. We promote accountability through data transparency and use of data; we share bi-weekly reports to vaccine providers on their race/ethnicity and publish public dashboards that are updated daily with vaccine rates by race/ethnicity at the state and county levels. We use the data to identify census tracts with high SVI and low vaccination coverage to recruit and allocate to new providers and inform micro-targeting of related resources, such as public communications/media or the support of community health workers. Our data platform is also flexible; it is able to handle new requirements over time.
How have you used federal funding to enhance your data capabilities and ensure full vaccination coverage?
Minnesota: We have a cooperative agreement through the CDC on the business and operational side of the IIS and technical funding comes from the HITECH 90/10 match. We used our previous funding to implement the reminder/recall function, as well as other IIS enhancements, like a COVID-19 assessment report, that will be available soon, improvements to geocoding, implementing COVID-19 vaccine ordering in MIIC, and automating our reporting to the CDC.
North Carolina: We fund CVMS through a variety of funding sources, but primarily through the CARES Act Coronavirus Relief funds. We plan to use American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding to support continued vaccine implementation efforts, including strategies that ensure greater equity and access to the COVID-19 vaccine by those disproportionately affected by COVID-19. The new ARPA funding will also be used to support local communities through local health departments, community-based organizations, and current community vendors to provide mobile vaccination. In addition, we are planning to sponsor vendors to go into neighborhoods to provide vaccine education and administer vaccines to historically marginalized populations that have had challenges accessing vaccines.
What lessons have you learned from the pandemic that you will be able to use to improve vaccination rates (both for COVID-19 and for routine immunizations) moving forward?
Minnesota: There continues to be concern around the gap in childhood immunization rates that has developed as the result of children missing primary care visits, and the MN Immunization program is in the process of determing the best method to help close those gaps. In general, we’ve had new funding conversations that could not have happened without our strong partnerships with health systems and are hoping these partnerships will have built a foundation for immunizations that we can continue past the pandemic.
North Carolina: As we move from very limited supply to increased volume, our approach to using data to achieve vaccine equity is evolving. Moving forward, we are focusing even more intently on census tracts with low vaccination rates and high social vulnerability to determine tailored strategies for identifying providers (including state-sponsored vendors) who can vaccinate in those census tracts, paired with trusted community partners and community health workers to optimally establish mobile or fixed vaccination sites. It can be tricky to balance data sharing and transparency with the critical requirement (and value) of preserving privacy, but it is possible. Overall, our team has learned to be flexible and to openly communicate within the team and with partners.
Acknowledgements: This blog is supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) of the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) as part of a financial assistance award totaling $250,000 with 100 percent funded by CDC/HHS. The contents are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of, nor an endorsement, by CDC/HHS or the US government. CDC General Terms and Conditions for Non-research Awards, Revised: February 2021.
States Adapt COVID-19 Vaccination Strategies for Adolescents Ages 12-15
/in COVID-19 State Action Center Blogs, Featured News Home Back to School, COVID-19, Immunization /by Ariella Levisohn, Jill Rosenthal and Rebecca CooperFollowing the May 10, 2021 approval from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorizing the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine for adolescents aged 12-15, approximately 17 million adolescents are now able to get vaccinated, about half of whom are adolescents of color. States are using lessons learned from earlier vaccination efforts and adapting the planning and implementation process of vaccinating individuals aged 16 and older against COVID-19 to inform the process for those 12 and older and ensure an equitable and efficient approach.
This authorization raises new considerations for states as they work to increase vaccination rates among their populations, including where children and adolescents will get vaccinated, how to build vaccine confidence among parents and adolescents, what the consent process looks like, and appropriate messaging strategies.
Vaccination Locations
To reach adolescents ages 12-15, states are both drawing on existing vaccination locations, from mass vaccination clinics and pharmacies to medical offices, as well as setting up new vaccine sites in a variety of settings. For example, Alaska changed its vaccine allocation for evening drive-thru sites to Pfizer to increase access for adolescents after school and work hours. Some states are also newly engaging pediatricians. Washington State is working to get the Pfizer vaccine into pediatricians’ and primary care providers’ offices so trusted and familiar providers can educate children and their parents about the vaccine together, and family members can receive their vaccinations at the same time.
Many states are also leveraging schools as a critical vaccination setting and are developing plans for pop-up vaccination sites at summer camps and other recreational programs. In Virginia, the Department of Health began reaching out to school systems and meeting with superintendents prior to the FDA’s authorization. The state was able to help educate and prepare the schools to hit the ground running so that they could immediately schedule vaccine clinics upon FDA approval. This process was especially important given the short window of time before the school year ends. Earlier in May, South Carolina announced plans to hold vaccination events at schools intended for both students and their parents, with an added incentive of school supply giveaways for those who receive the vaccine. Additionally, some high schools in Maine are hosting vaccine clinics at the end of May, which provides just enough time to administer second doses before the school year ends. Oregon state officials are encouraging schools to provide the venue and help with outreach and scheduling, while facilitating partnerships with federally qualified health centers, pharmacies, and local public health authorities to provide the vaccination services on campus.
As states roll out the vaccine to new providers and locations, providers are also identifying a need for smaller vaccine packaging to avoid any potential vaccine waste. Vaccine waste has varied among states. Some state officials noted that they removed previous requirements for providers to use a certain percentage of doses within a given timeframe to ensure all opportunities to administer the vaccine are taken and to reduce barriers to vaccination, especially in areas with lower vaccination rates.
Consent Requirements
Requirements for parental consent to vaccinate minors vary among states, and even across vaccination sites. In Maine, parents or guardians do not have to be on site to provide consent. Rather, Maine allows parents to sign a form and either mail or email the form to the provider in advance, or have the child bring a hard copy to the vaccine site. Maine parents can also provide verbal consent over the phone. A small number of youth in Maine may provide their own consent for the vaccine, including those who are living separately from their parent/legal guardian, are legally married, are a member of the armed forces, or have been emancipated by the court. The state has already used this process for 16- and 17-year-olds.
In Alabama, adolescents aged 14 and older can consent for themselves in clinics, like mass vaccination sites or provider offices, but require parental consent for vaccinations in school. The state has existing processes in place to obtain consent for children to receive other routine childhood immunizations through the school; it is using the same process for the COVID-19 vaccine. Other states, like Kentucky, are also using existing processes for obtaining consent for routine immunizations and adapting them for the COVID-19 vaccine.
Vaccine Outreach and Messaging
Because studies have shown children have a lower risk of serious illness and death from COVID-19, polling has indicated that parents are confused about the benefits and risks of vaccination and hesitant to vaccinate themselves and their children. However, over the first two weeks of May, there was a 3 percent increase in the total number of COVID-19 cases in children, and a jump of over 20 percent of new cases in children under 19. The CDC is emphasizing that vaccinating eligible children is of the utmost importance to help protect both children and families, and move towards the goal of herd immunity to protect vulnerable community members who cannot get vaccinated.
Vaccinating children and adolescents brings an additional challenge for states and providers, who are tasked with building vaccine confidence among both parents/guardians and their children. State officials note that one important strategy is providing the vaccine in familiar settings with trusted providers, who can engage in conversations with families to understand their concerns and educate about the vaccine’s safety and efficacy. State officials also note the importance of messaging to both youth and adults, because children can be effective health advocates for their parents as well.
States are using trusted messengers and venues to communicate with adolescents. For example, the Louisiana Department of Health circulated flyers to the Department of Education encouraging vaccinations for adolescents 12 and above and providing relevant information. Some health departments are capitalizing on parents’ motivation to ensure their children can continue to play sports by messaging through sports teams that getting vaccinated eliminates the need for students to quarantine (thereby missing practices and games) if there is a school exposure. Other states are using football games that draw large crowds of teens as an opportunity to educate about the benefits of vaccination.
The Oregon Youth Authority (OYA) created resources in different languages tailored to adolescents from different populations and those in OYA custody. The flyers include first-hand accounts of COVID-19 vaccination experiences from individuals who identify as Latino, Black, and Native American, and information about the Indian Health Services’ involvement in the vaccine planning and development process. The Michigan Department of Health & Human Services is using social media advertising designed for parents and children, including Snapchat, Instagram, and TikTok. The Alaska Department of Health and Human Services has created opportunities to ensure adolescents can communicate with each other using peer-to-peer platforms to give unvaccinated teens the opportunity to ask questions of vaccinated teens and share why they chose to get vaccinated.
As states vaccinate more adolescents and adults against COVID-19, they continue to use multi-pronged strategies in order to reach the greatest number of people in the most efficient and equitable way. With more populations now eligible, states are figuring out how to tailor vaccination strategies developed for adults to younger children and adolescents. As the vaccine distribution progresses, NASHP will continue to share promising strategies and support states in these efforts.
State Plans for Vaccinating their Populations against COVID-19
/in COVID-19 State Action Center, Policy Charts, Featured News Home, Maps COVID-19, Health Equity, Immunization, Maternal, Child, and Adolescent Health, Population Health, Social Determinants of Health, Vaccines /by Rebecca Cooper, Ariella Levisohn and Jill RosenthalThe State of the States: Amid the Pandemic, Governors Tackle Health, Social, and Economic Issues
/in Policy Blogs, Featured News Home Chronic Disease Prevention and Management, COVID-19, Eligibility and Enrollment, Equity, Health Coverage and Access, Health Equity, Housing and Health, Immunization, Maternal, Child, and Adolescent Health, Population Health, Social Determinants of Health /by Allie Atkeson, Anita Cardwell, Rebecca Cooper, Gia Gould and Elinor HigginsGovernors use their annual state of the state addresses to showcase recent successes and define their policy priorities for the year ahead. By late February, 45 governors had delivered speeches outlining plans to address a wide range of health and related issues in the coming months. All mentioned their states’ responses to COVID-19, frequently praising frontline responders and public health agencies and applauding their states’ agile interagency actions to address the pandemic.
Echoing their 2020 health care and social determinant priorities, many governors continued to address social drivers of health. In 2021, they again prioritized education, livable wages, and justice – all areas that have been exacerbated by the pandemic. Meanwhile, topics such as prescription drug costs, Medicaid expansion, and access to affordable and healthy food, while important, did not dominate the governors’ narratives this year.
View a chart highlighting governors’ goals on a variety of health-related policies here.
However, the issues governors addressed do not exist in silos. Many of these important topics, including equity, broadband, mental health, and justice, are themes woven throughout their addresses. Below are highlights of the key themes that governors raised.
COVID-19 Recovery
Every governor framed his or her state of the state address through the lens of COVID-19. Of those, 34 governors discussed specific plans for COVID-19 recovery. Twenty-seven focused on plans for expedient and equitable vaccine distribution and 11 governors discussed plans for community recovery.
Governors emphasized the importance of getting doses into arms quickly while prioritizing an equitable distribution – they highlighted state plans to build pop-up and mass vaccination clinics and deploy their National Guard units to aid in vaccination efforts. Several governors also highlighted innovative plans for community recovery both during and after the public health emergency ends. For example, Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York announced his plan to build a public health corps to facilitate vaccination operations and share learnings and best practices to ensure New York is better prepared for future crises.
Governors also highlighted the importance of partnerships during the pandemic – between a state’s executive and legislative branches to pass emergency relief bills, as well as collaboration with other states to share workforce and supplies, such as the Northeast partnership between Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York.
Education
Forty-one governors discussed education in their state of the state speeches — up from 34 last year. It is well documented that individuals with more and better education experience improved health outcomes, and Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf identified education as a critical social determinant of health, saying “universal high-quality education leads to healthier people and healthier communities.”
The majority of governors addressed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on children, educators, and families. Fourteen governors underscored the importance of fully funding K-12 schools despite the tight budgets that states are facing this year and 11 governors emphasized the importance of safely opening schools. Governors proposed a variety of approaches to encourage schools to reopen so that children could get back to learning in-person:
- Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey proposed tying school funding to in-person learning as a way to incentivize schools to re-open their doors.
- Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker said his team has been “working with a number of lab partners to develop a weekly COVID testing program for kids, teachers and staff.”
- Nevada Gov. Steve Sisolak said that getting back to the classroom was the reason his state had “prioritize[d] our educators for vaccinations.”
Fifteen governors expressed support for expanded early childhood education programs, pre-kindergarten options, and improved childcare for young children. Participation in early childhood education programs has been linked to better health, higher educational achievement, and higher socioeconomic status in adulthood. But this year, two governors were also promoting it as a necessary childcare option for working parents, particularly mothers, who have had to leave the workforce to take care of children during the pandemic.
Recognizing the contributions that teachers have made throughout the pandemic was also a recurring theme. Fifteen governors proposed additional compensation for teachers through raises, bonuses, or increased pensions. Though some of these pay increases are aimed at improving teacher recruitment and retention, several governors framed them as a way to acknowledge the additional job challenges presented by COVID-19. Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey, for example, proposed a budget that included “a 2 percent pay increase as a way to express our state’s gratitude to our teachers who rose to the challenge during an unprecedented time for our state.”
In addition to acknowledging the challenges of the past year, governors also emphasized the variety of supports that children and families would need to recover from the pandemic. Ten governors proposed new college scholarships to alleviate financial stress for students and families, five introduced plans to increase support for low-income students and English-language learners, and four discussed the need for increased mental health supports as students return to school.
Broadband
Thirty governors discussed broadband and the internet access during their state of the state addresses, up from 16 last year. The issue of broadband and internet access became a significant issue during the pandemic, especially as it related to equity in accessing on-line education and telehealth services. Maine Gov. Janet Mills noted that, “high-speed internet is as fundamental as electricity, health, and water. It is the primary way of connecting with others in the 21st century.” Though the digital divide existed prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the public health emergency highlighted the importance of access to reliable Wifi and exacerbated existing disparities. Seven governors specifically commented on the need to reduce the digital divide, with New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy commenting on the state’s progress from 2020, noting that in the past year it had worked to close the digital divide and today, 95 percent of students have the tools they need, and the state is working to close the gap to zero.
Thirteen governors also connected reliable broadband to education. Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont noted how COVID-19 revealed that, “…too many students are left on the wrong side of the digital divide that exacerbates the achievement gap. Computers, internet access, and broadband – these are the tools essential to students’ success during COVID and for the foreseeable future.” At least 10 governors noted their fiscal support to ensure equitable access to broadband has increased across the state. Idaho Gov. Brad Little reiterated that for children to have a future, they need equal access to education. He spoke about how Idaho could benefit for years from a $50 million investment in broadband infrastructure, to support remote working and learning, especially in rural Idaho.
Eight governors also cited the urban/rural divide in broadband access and shared plans to expand broadband in rural areas. Oregon Gov. Kate Brown’s budget proposal would invest over $100 million in broadband expansion statewide, focusing specifically to provide access to rural communities that have been disproportionately impacted during the pandemic. Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers noted that Wisconsin ranked 36th in the country for accessibility in rural areas and declared 2021 the “Year of Broadband Access.” His 2021-23 biennial budget proposes to invest around $200 million into broadband — nearly five-times the amount invested in the past three budget cycles combined.
Jobs, Livable Wages, and Unemployment Insurance
A total of 28 governors spoke about employment-related issues, focusing primarily on local economic growth efforts and workforce development to help connect individuals to higher-paying jobs. A few governors also commented on how their states’ unemployment systems were strained to capacity due to pandemic-related need.
Many governors mentioned planned investments in job training initiatives. Gov. Steve Sisolak commented on the creation of the Nevada Job Force that would engage leading businesses to fund and develop employment training programs, and also mentioned plans to establish a Remote Work Resource Center to connect individuals to job opportunities in other regions. Montana’s governor indicated that the current budget allocates funds for trades education by offering up to 1,000 scholarships a year and providing businesses with a 50 percent tax credit if they have employees who participate in the program. South Carolina’s Gov. McMaster proposed directing $60 million towards job skills training for high-demand manufacturing jobs and another $37 million for workforce scholarships and grants at technical colleges. Indiana’s governor advocated for continued investment in successful existing workforce development programs that have helped many individuals complete post-secondary education and obtain higher-paying employment.
In recognition of pandemic-caused job loss and the greater number of individuals relying on unemployment insurance (UI) who sometimes had difficulty accessing these benefits, governors in Illinois, Kansas, Wisconsin pledged to invest resources into UI system improvements. Governors in Delaware, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Tennessee stressed the importance of continuing to support small businesses as they begin to rebuild post-pandemic. Georgia’s governor commented that the state should promote “…job creation from those industries that are critical to health care and building on Georgia’s momentum to become a leader in all sectors of the health care industry.”
Environmental Actions
Twenty-three governors addressed environmental issues — down from 30 in 2020. Only Gov. Jay Inslee of Washington drew the explicit connection between the changing climate and the emergence of novel diseases like COVID-19, while most governors focused on the economic opportunity of investing in clean and alternative energy. Among governors’ top priorities was improving access to clean water:
- Gov. John Carney of Delaware: “We’ll again propose a $50 million investment in a new Clean Water Trust Fund. We will make sure that all Delaware families have access to clean drinking water. And we will place a special focus on those hard-to-serve families across our state.”
- Gov. Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan: “Last year, I announced the MI Clean Water Plan, a $500 million investment in Michigan’s water infrastructure. Direct dollars to communities for safe, clean water to residents. And it supports over 7,500 Michigan jobs. It’s time for the legislature to pass these bills so we can start rebuilding Michigan’s water infrastructure. I will keep working so every family in Michigan has clean, safe water.”
Behavioral Health
Twenty-two governors mentioned behavioral health in their state of the state speeches, including the effect of COVID-19 on mental health and substance use disorder. Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey identified impacts of COVID-19 “beyond the disease itself… opioid abuse, alcoholism, addiction, mental health issues, the sheer loneliness of isolation, suicide: there has been no daily count of these human costs, but they are real and they are devastating.”
Nine governors mentioned significant investments in their state’s behavioral health care infrastructure and services and eight governors addressed substance use disorder (SUD) prevention and treatment as a priority.
- Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey said the state is investing “$46 million investment to expand 96 beds at the Taylor Hardin facility in Tuscaloosa and another $6 million for an additional crisis diversion center.”
- In Montana, Gov. Greg Gianforte plans to use tax revenues from the sale of recreational marijuana, state and federal funding to create a $23.5 million fund to provide a continuum of SUD services.
- Missouri Gov. Michael Parson plans to invest in their workforce with “$20 million for 50 new community mental health and substance use disorder advocates and six new crisis stabilizations centers across the state.”
- Maine Gov. Janet Mills announced, “$7.5 million for mental health and substance use disorder, including community mental health and $2 million for our OPTIONS Initiative to dispatch mobile response teams to those communities that have high rates of drug overdoses — something that is more important than ever, given the increase in overdose deaths in Maine and the rest of the nation during the pandemic.”
Ten governors emphasized the impact of school closures on children’s mental health and made commitments to addressing the problem. Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee’s budget includes “$6.5 million in our mental health safety net which will be focused on providing services for school-aged children struggling with mental health issues.” South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster’s budget includes a proposal so that all children in school have access to a mental health counselor.
Governors identified technology as an important tool in the delivery of behavioral health services. Four governors identified telehealth to increase access to behavioral health services and two governors mentioned support lines for their residents.
- Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, discussing telehealth stated, “….which isn’t just a useful innovation in a time of social distancing. It’s a convenient tool for folks who want to receive care from the comfort of their own homes, and it’s literally a lifesaver for many Coloradans in rural areas who may live far away from doctors and clinics and hospitals.”
In her state of the state address, New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham announced, “the nation’s first text-only abuse and neglect hotline for New Mexico children, providing them an outlet that research has shown they may be more comfortable using.”
Legal System Reform
In 2020, the murders of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor highlighted the need for criminal justice reform. This year, 22 governors referenced justice in their state of the state speeches, more than in 2020. Criminal system reform is a key health issue as corrections-involved individuals have high rates of chronic conditions and poor mental health outcomes.
In addition to legal system reform, governors addressed infrastructure investments in correctional facilities, expanding re-entry programs and treatment courts and the death penalty. Governors in four states, Connecticut, Kentucky, New Jersey and Virginia, have plans to legalize marijuana.
Ten governors mentioned reforming their state’s criminal legal system through a variety of policies, including banning chokeholds, limiting no-knock warrants, and eliminating mandatory minimums for nonviolent crimes. Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam addressed expungement in his speech stating, “rooting out inequities includes expunging the records of people who were convicted of this and certain other crimes in the past.”
Governors in Alabama, North Dakota and Tennessee addressed re-entry programs. Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee’s budget includes “$4.7 million for additional day reporting centers and evidenced-based programming for community supervision. This approach ensures that re-entry to society is done in the most safe and effective way possible for those who were formerly incarcerated.” Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte’s budget includes an investment in [drug] treatment courts. He stated, “…we must prioritize and invest in treatment courts. Treatment courts work. They reduce recidivism. They reduce drug use. They increase public safety. And they are much more cost effective than incarceration.”
Health and Social Equity
COVID-19 has laid bare health and social inequities, and 2021 state of the state addresses shows that achieving equity is a bipartisan goal – 21 governors discussed strategies to work towards equity. Reducing racial and ethnic disparities is of great interest to governors, several discussed racism and racial injustice, describing how communities of color, including tribal communities, were disproportionately impacted by COVID-19, and they expressed their commitment to improvement. To address this, two governors announced new positions dedicated to increasing equity:
- Delaware Gov. John Carney created a new position, Director of Statewide Equity Initiatives, designed to make sure those in state government are leading with equity. He noted, “…We’ve also worked hard to build a cabinet that looks like Delaware. We created the position of Chief Diversity Officer to focus on recruitment and retention of a diverse state workforce.”
- Indiana Gov. Eric Holcomb announced, “We’ll get our state’s first-ever cabinet-level Chief Equity, Inclusion, and Opportunity Officer to improve and report on diversity outcomes across state government.” He also announced the state’s plan to launch a diversity data dashboard.
Equity was also woven into governors’ speeches around various topics. Eleven governors addressed equity in access to jobs and health care, seven governors addressed the impact of inequities and education, five governors discussed the intersection of equity and women and children’s health – including New Jersey and Indiana’s governors announcing programs to reduce infant and maternal mortality. Seven governors discussed increasing equity in broadband and internet access and closing the digital divide:
- Hawaii Gov. David Ige announced that his legislative package includes a bill to create a Broadband and Digital Equity Office. This office will help enable the state to identify and secure Hawaii’s share of federal funds to enhance broadband infrastructure and digital equity programs.
New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham stated, “We will enact an equity-first budget for public education, ensuring money reaches students and schools in proportion to the socioeconomic needs of families in the community, laying the path to a public education system that truly delivers for students now and a hundred years from now, no matter their zip code, their family circumstances or the color of their skin.”
Medicaid, Coverage and Access to Care
While all states have experienced Medicaid enrollment growth due to the pandemic’s economic effects, only nine governors explicitly mentioned Medicaid in their speeches. Only Nevada’s Gov. Steve Sisolak commented on the program’s increased enrollment, and he indicated that the upcoming budget would reverse provider rate reductions due to revenues surpassing initial projections. Governors in Missouri and Oklahoma mentioned their states’ plans to implement Medicaid expansion in response to ballot initiatives that were passed last year, and as in the prior year, Gov. Laura Kelly in Kansas again advocated for the state to take up expansion.
Tennessee’s governor highlighted the state’s recently approved Medicaid block grant waiver and also noted planned investments in the health care safety net and extensions of Medicaid coverage for adopted youth and during the postpartum period. Oklahoma’s Gov. Kevin Stitt mentioned the state’s move toward Medicaid managed care as “the best way forward” and Indiana’s governor commented that implementing a managed long-term services and supports program within Medicaid would help families more easily navigate care options.
The broader topic of health coverage and access to care was cited more frequently than Medicaid, with 17 governors commenting on this issue. Most commonly, governors focused on the crucial role that telehealth has served over the past year in maintaining access to both health and behavioral health services. Governors in Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Missouri, New York, and Texas advocated that expanded telehealth capacity should be sustained and strengthened after the pandemic, and Gov. Charlie Baker commented on Massachusetts’ recent actions to make its telehealth changes permanent.
Colorado’s Gov. Jared Polis noted plans to once again try to pursue a public option to expand coverage, commenting: “And we look forward to adding an affordable Colorado Option that will give Coloradans — especially in rural communities — more choice and savings, when it comes to selecting a health care plan.” Gov. Andrew Cuomo proposed expanding access to affordable coverage by eliminating premiums for 400,000 low-income New Yorkers, and New Mexico’s Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham mentioned plans to create a Healthcare Affordability Fund that could potentially provide health coverage to 23,000 uninsured New Mexicans within a year.
Housing and Homelessness
Sixteen governors addressed housing or homelessness in their 2021 speeches. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated the United States’ existing affordable housing crisis. Additionally, people experiencing homelessness are at an increased risk of contracting COVID-19. The CARES Act Emergency Rental Assistance Program allocated funding to states for rent and mortgage relief.
Six governors discussed their eviction prevention programs and eviction moratoriums. New Jersey Gov. Chris Murphy commented “as the pandemic literally hit people where they live, we instituted strong prohibitions against evictions and utility cutoffs to protect our families. We provided rental assistance to nearly 20,000 individuals and families facing immediate challenges.” In addition to eviction prevention, Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker “dedicated a record $275 million to help pay utility bills for those suffering COVID-related income loss. Homelessness is never acceptable, but in a pandemic it’s downright barbaric.” Two Governors, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Oregon Gov. Kate Brown addressed homelessness, Gov. Andrew Cuomo stating, “homeless shelters must be available, safe and secure. It’s not just our moral obligation, it is our legal obligation.”
Eight governors addressed expanding access to affordable housing. Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam stated, “it’s also time to help people by taking more action on affordable housing. We have made record investments in the Virginia Housing Trust Fund that helps make more affordable housing available.” Oregon Gov. Kate Brown’s budget includes a $250 million dollar investment in affordable housing, homelessness prevention and rental assistance. Governors also identified strategies to address property taxes, exclusionary zoning and the cost of land as barriers for affordable housing.
Health Care Costs
Eleven governors addressed health care cost and affordability — down significantly from 2020, when 21 governors addressed the issue. This year, governors focused on lowering health costs for consumers affected by the economic impact of the pandemic. Several introduced strategies to lower consumers’ premium costs:
- Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York proposed the elimination of health care premiums for more than 400,000 low-income New Yorkers.
- Gov. Phil Scott of Vermont directed his Department of Health Insurance Regulation to determine whether Vermonters are eligible for premium rebates due to low health care utilization during the pandemic.
- Gov. Phil Murphy of New Jersey highlighted the state’s successful launch of its State-Based Marketplace, which has lowered premiums for hundreds of thousands of New Jersey residents.
- Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico mentioned plans for a Healthcare Affordability Fund that would dedicate resources to lowering health insurance premiums and protect consumers from burdensome out-of-pocket costs.
Governors in Connecticut, Oregon, Vermont, and Utah seek to curb their state’s health care spending through cost and/or quality benchmarks. Vermont Gov. Phil Scott proposed setting a cap on annual price increases for health costs. In New Jersey and Utah, governors expressed their commitment to improving price transparency and data sharing, emphasizing the importance of building resources to help consumers better understand health care costs.
Only four governors addressed rising prescription drug prices – a significant decrease from last year when 12 governors addressed the issue.
Health Care Workforce
This year, eight governors addressed health care workforce issues, with most proposing solutions to meet the increasing demand for providers during the pandemic. Governors in three states proposed educational initiatives to bolster health care workforce development, including a grant program introduced by Gov. Mike Parson of Missouri to fund new health care associate degree programs at community colleges. Gov. Pete Ricketts of Nebraska shared plans to expand the health care workforce by formalizing flexibilities implemented during the pandemic that allow licensed health care professionals from other states to practice in Nebraska, and governors from Kentucky, Idaho, and Nevada committed increased funds to address provider shortages. Two governors remarked on the importance of their volunteer workforce, with Gov. Ralph Northam of Virginia calling on retired nurses and doctors to contribute to the COVID-19 vaccination effort.
Other Health-Related Issues
A sampling of other health-related topics that governors mentioned included:
- Transportation: Twelve governors talked about the need for modernized and healthy transportation systems. Indiana’s governor promoted his plan to convert old train tracks into hiking and biking trails, and Colorado’s governor made the connection between multi-modal transit options, electrification of transportation, and cleaner air.
- Child Welfare: Six governors discussed the child welfare system, highlighting progress and the need for more reform. Arkansas’ governor made a commitment to preventing abuse and protecting vulnerable children in the foster care system. Tennessee’s governor announced an extension of Medicaid coverage for foster children that would ensure a more seamless transition to family’s health plans during the adoption process.
- Violence prevention: Arkansas’ governor urged state legislators to pass hate crimes legislation, Georgia’s governor highlighted the need to address sex trafficking, and Alaska’s Gov. Mike Dunleavy indicated that his budget fully funds the state’s domestic violence and sexual assault programs and includes $7 million to help prosecute individuals who commit sexual assault and domestic violence crimes. Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte addressed the crisis of missing and murdered indigenous individuals, who make up 7 percent of the population but account for 26 percent of missing persons.
- Medical supplies: New York’s Gov. Andrew Cuomo commented on the state’s medical supply chain being too reliant on overseas manufacturing and noted plans to incentivize state businesses to produce medical supplies.
- Food: Eight governors discussed food security, production, and distribution. Several governors commended the additional food security supports that were put in place to meet families’ needs during the pandemic. Oregon’s governor talked about new funding for wrap-around services in schools, including nutrition support.
- Wellness promotion: Oklahoma’s governor said that state leaders should address the high rates of obesity, diabetes, and heart disease among state residents.
Despite the significant challenges of addressing COVID-19, states are continuing to pursue innovative policies and initiatives to address a wide range of health and health-related issues, with many proposals developed directly in response to disparities highlighted by the pandemic. The National Academy for State Health Policy will continue to track many of these topics in the coming months.
2021 State of the States: Amid the Pandemic, Governors Tackle Health, Social, and Economic Issues
/in Policy Charts, Maps Chronic Disease Prevention and Management, Consumer Affordability, COVID-19, Eligibility and Enrollment, Equity, Health Coverage and Access, Health Equity, Health System Costs, Housing and Health, Immunization, Maternal, Child, and Adolescent Health, Population Health, Social Determinants of Health /by NASHP StaffStates Begin to Incorporate Children into their COVID-19 Vaccine Distribution Plans
/in COVID-19 State Action Center Blogs, Featured News Home Children/Youth with Special Health Care Needs, Children/Youth with Special Health Care Needs, Chronic and Complex Populations, COVID-19, Health Equity, Immunization, Maternal, Child, and Adolescent Health, Population Health, Social Determinants of Health, Vaccines /by Olivia RandiTo date, there have been more than 2 million COVID-19 infections in US children and 8,000 pediatric hospitalizations. As states begin vaccinating those age 16 and older, many are drafting plans and applying lessons learned from their existing vaccination initiatives for the day when a vaccine is authorized for younger children.
As the Biden Administration rolls out its comprehensive plan to vaccinate 100 million American adults in the next 100 days and reopen schools in 100 days, states are already taking actions to include children in their vaccine distribution plans and tackling issues, such as:
- Should schools require students to get the COVID-19 vaccine, similar to other immunization requirements?
- How should they prioritize children with medical conditions or living in congregate settings that put them at higher risk of infection?
Background
Children are at lower risk of illness from COVID-19 than adults, yet this population can still develop symptoms and spread the virus to others. Though children have experienced fewer severe physical illness than adults, the pandemic has significantly impacted their emotional and social development. Children and their families have been stressed by social distancing, disruptions in schooling, unemployment, and loss of family members due to COVID-19.
Last October, states submitted COVID-19 vaccine distribution plans to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that outlined their approaches, including how they will collaborate with stakeholders, enroll providers, and track vaccinations. The federal Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) has recommended vaccinations first for health care personnel and long-term care facility residents, people 65 and older, essential workers, and those with high-risk medial conditions. States are using these recommendations to guide their approaches to prioritizing populations for vaccine distribution.
ACIP is currently discussing vaccine trials in pediatric populations and has indicated it may update its recommendations once a vaccine is authorized for children under age 16. Meanwhile, several states have already identified a distribution phase for children in their current plans.
Youth age 12 and older have just begun enrolling in vaccine trials. If the vaccine is authorized for this age group, it will next be tested in a younger pediatric population. While there have been barriers to clinical trials for the vaccine in this population and the timeline is unclear, it will be months before any children under age 16 are eligible for vaccination. As states grapple with challenges in distributing the vaccine to currently eligible populations, they may be able to leverage the lessons they are now learning to improve distribution for younger children in the future.
Additionally, there are already systems in place to deliver vaccines to children, and many states plan to use the Vaccines for Children (VFC) infrastructure for enrolling and verifying providers, distributing, and tracking COVID-19 vaccine administration for all populations, including adults. States may find that these established protocols will facilitate vaccinating children.
States differ in how they have – or have not yet – included children in their vaccine distribution plans while the vaccine undergoes pediatric clinical trials. State approaches include:
- Incorporating child health agency representatives in COVID-19 vaccination planning teams;
- Designating roles for child health programs and providers to facilitate distribution; and
- Prioritizing children or subpopulations of children for when the vaccine is authorized.
Several states have indicated their pediatric vaccination plans may be updated once the vaccine is authorized for children. (See the table for a list of states that have included pediatric-specific approaches in their vaccine distribution plans.)
Including Child Health Stakeholders in Vaccination Planning
States have developed organizational structures that include internal and external agency representation to facilitate COVID-19 vaccination planning. At least 31 states have included child health stakeholders on their vaccine planning teams and advisory councils. These stakeholders include state chapters of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and other provider groups, children’s hospitals, other pediatric providers, state education agencies, local school districts, and others. Including these representatives in vaccine distribution planning early offers an important perspective for distributing the vaccine when it is authorized for children.
- Washington, DC’s vaccine planning team includes representatives from the District’s chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, pediatric providers, public schools, Families USA, and March of Dimes.
- Ohio’s vaccine planning team includes representatives from Ohio Children’s Hospital Association, Ohio Department of Education, and select local school districts.
Designating Roles for Child Health Programs and Providers
Beyond their vaccine planning teams, states have identified and partnered with child health programs and providers to support implementation of their distribution plans. These partners include pediatric practices, local school districts, and state public health agencies, including Title V Maternal and Child Health programs. Forming partnerships with these entities early in the planning process can facilitate rapid vaccine deployment once it is authorized. The specific roles designated to these partners include promoting the vaccine, facilitating communication with children and their families, identifying eligible children, and administering the vaccine.
- Connecticut has identified vaccine administration locations that will specifically serve children. These include school-based health centers and pediatric medical practices.
- North Carolina plans to partner with schools to help identify children for vaccination once it is authorized. The state is also engaged with the state’s AAP and the Pediatric Society to support education and communication about the vaccine.
Prioritizing Children Pending Authorization
Six states (GA, HI, ME, NC, OH, and RI), to date, have identified children as a priority population within Phase 3 of their vaccine distribution plans. During this phase, states anticipate having adequate supply of the vaccine to meet demand. At this point, it is expected that Phase 1 and 2 populations will largely have been vaccinated. Several states have also noted that they will update their vaccine distribution plans to include children when the vaccine is authorized for those under age 16, pending ACIP recommendations. States have also prioritized sub-populations of children, including those in congregate settings and those at higher risk of illness due to COVID-19.
Children and youth in congregate settings:
While children and youth are at a lower risk of illness from COVID-19, those residing in a congregate setting (e.g., residential treatment facilities) are at an increased risk of exposure and transmission, prompting some states to prioritize vaccination of children in youth-specific congregate settings in their distribution plans. Additionally, children and youth residing in congregate settings often have special needs and may have underlying conditions that increase their risk of symptoms due to COVID-19 in addition to their increased risk of exposure. Several states have included children in congregate settings in Phase 1 of their distribution plans. However, if the vaccine is not authorized for those under age 16 during Phase 1, these children would receive the vaccine during a later phase.
- Louisiana’s plan prioritizes residents of psychiatric residential treatment facilities and therapeutic group home facilities, which typically serve youth under age 21. Eligible youth in these facilities are in Phase 1B of the state’s vaccine distribution plan.
- New Mexico identifies residents at county juvenile justice centers and other congregate settings, including residential treatment centers, to receive a vaccine in the later part of Phase 1. The state also works with state agencies to identify critical populations, including youth in shelters, as part of its COVID-19 response.
States with Child-Related Provisions in their COVID-19 Vaccine Distribution Plans as of Jan. 6, 2021
| Child-related component* | States |
| Child health agencies included in vaccination planning teams | AL, AZ, AK, CO, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, KS, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MT, NH, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, OH, OR, PA, RI, SC, UT, VA, WA, WY |
| Designated roles for child health programs and providers | CT, HI, LA, ME, NE, NJ, NC, OR, VT, WA |
| Prioritizes children for Phase 3** | GA, HI, ME, NC, OH, RI |
| Prioritizes children in congregate settings** | FL, LA, NM, OK, PA |
| Prioritizes children at higher COVID-19 risk** | HI, KY, ME, NY, OK |
| Specifies that the plan may be updated to include or reprioritize children** | CO, DC, IA, NV, NC |
| * The states listed here have included these provisions in their vaccine distribution plan as of Jan. 6, 2020. Other states may have taken or plan to take these actions, but they are not specified in their plans.
** Pending authorization of the vaccine for children and Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommendations. |
|
Children at higher risk of illness due to COVID-19: While the distribution phase differs, most states have categorized people with chronic conditions that increase their risk for illness due to COVID-19 as a priority group for vaccine receipt. Because most states do not specify the age range for this prioritized group in their distribution plans, some of these states may implicitly plan to include children, including children and youth with special health care needs (CYSHCN) who are at increased risk of COVID-19 illness, within this group when the vaccine is authorized for pediatric populations. However, five states (HI, KY, ME, NY, and OK) have specifically included children at higher risk as a prioritized population.
- Oklahoma has prioritized students including those in K-12 schools, childcare facilities, and early childhood facilities for Phase 3 of their vaccination distribution. Within their distribution plans, they specify that students at higher risk due to comorbid conditions will be prioritized among all students.
- Maine’s distribution plan specifies that “people of all ages” with conditions that put them at higher risk will be prioritized for earlier phases of vaccination. Anyone with a condition that puts them at significantly higher risk will be prioritized for Phase 1b, and those with conditions that put them at moderately high risk will be prioritized for Phase 2.
Key Considerations
As the vaccine is tested for safety in the pediatric population, states are considering how they will further incorporate children into their distribution plans if it is authorized.
- Including child health stakeholders in planning for the vaccine for children. Many states have leveraged the existing VFC infrastructure and partnered with child health agencies to support planning and implementation for distribution of the currently available vaccine. This important perspective will be increasingly critical if the vaccine is authorized for use in children. States can consider collaborating with additional stakeholders that represent the broad range of child health services to effectively support vaccine administration for the pediatric population.
- Leveraging lessons learned from distribution of the adult vaccine. States have faced various challenges in distributing the vaccine to those who are currently eligible. Given that children under age 16 will not be eligible for the vaccine for at least several months, states may be able to draw from their experiences to improve their strategies for distributing the vaccine to children while also considering the challenges and opportunities that are unique to the pediatric population.
- Prioritizing caregivers of children with underlying conditions. Many CYSHCN who may have underlying conditions that increase their susceptibility to COVID-19 symptoms are cared for by family members. To reduce the risk for CYSHCN, states can prioritize vaccinating these family members by classifying them as health care workers.
-
- Prioritizing sub-populations of children. Children who are at higher risk of COVID-19 due to underlying medical conditions and/or those in congregate facilities are important populations for states to consider for prioritization. Additionally, states can consider how to distribute the vaccine to minimize learning losses due to school closures. CYSHCN may face unique challenges in accessing virtual learning compared to other children, whether or not they are at greater risk of COVID-19 illness. This is particularly true for children of color, those with high socioeconomic needs, and those with limited access to technology. Prioritizing children with greater virtual learning challenges could more equitably facilitate a safe return to in-person learning.
- Determining whether the vaccine will be a school requirement. Several state vaccine distribution plans include language about their state statutes that currently require certain vaccines for children to enter schools. While these plans do not specify that the COVID-19 vaccine is a school requirement, this will be an important consideration for states if the vaccine is authorized for use in pediatric populations.
- Distributing the vaccine across pediatric age groups. Vaccination authorization in children will likely be authorized in stages, with current trials for those ages 12 and older, and subsequent trials for younger age groups. This may impact states’ decisions governing how they prioritize vaccine distribution, when and which schools reopen for in-person instruction, and who, if anyone, is required to have received the vaccine to attend school in person.
The National Academy for State Health Policy will continue to monitor states’ COVID-19 vaccine distribution plans, and how states’ plans change once the vaccine is authorized for children under age 16.
Acknowledgements: This blog was supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) of the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) as part of a financial assistance award under the National Organizations of State and Local Officials co-operative agreement. The contents are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of, nor an endorsement, by HRSA/HHS, or the US government.
Six States Join NASHP and AcademyHealth’s Community of Practice to Boost Immunization Rates in Medicaid-Enrolled Pregnant Women and Children
/in Policy Louisiana, Michigan, Washington, Wisconsin, Wyoming Blogs, Featured News Home Chronic Disease Prevention and Management, Health Equity, Immunization, Maternal Health and Mortality, Maternal, Child, and Adolescent Health, Population Health /by Rebecca Cooper, Jill Rosenthal and Ariella LevisohnThe National Academy for State Health Policy (NASHP) and AcademyHealth, with support from Immunize Colorado, are facilitating a new community of practice (CoP) comprised of state health officials from six states interested in improving their immunization rates.
Funded by a US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) cooperative agreement, the Immunization Barriers in the United States: Targeting Medicaid Partnerships program is engaging six state Medicaid agencies (LA, MI, TX, WA, WI, WY) in collaboration with their public health and immunization information system partners. Through this CoP, states are working to improve Medicaid policies and outreach to increase immunization rates among low-income children and pregnant women. The project will build on the work and lessons learned from the previous CoP of five states, which ended in late 2020.
Despite coverage of vaccines through Medicaid, immunization rates among children and pregnant women enrolled in Medicaid remain lower than those who are privately insured and have higher incomes. Disparities in vaccine coverage exist for Black women and people living in poverty. Additionally, CDC data shows a significant reduction in routine vaccines administered to children during the COVID-19 pandemic. While vaccination rates are slowly returning to pre-pandemic rates, national experts are concerned that the missed vaccine doses may have future health implications and lead to outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases.
Through virtual and in-person meetings over the course of the three-year project, AcademyHealth and NASHP will provide technical assistance to states, identify barriers, and share promising practices for increasing immunization rates.
State Immunization Services and Policies Resource Page
/in Policy Toolkits Chronic Disease Prevention and Management, Healthy Child Development, Immunization, Maternal, Child, and Adolescent Health, Population Health, Social Determinants of Health Immunization /by Rebecca CooperSign Up for Our Weekly Newsletter
Sign Up for Our Weekly Newsletter
Washington, DC Office:
1233 20th St., N.W., Suite 303Washington, DC 20036
p: (202) 903-0101
f: (202) 903-2790
Contact Us
Phone: 202-903-0101

For individuals living with complex, often chronic conditions, and their families, palliative care can provide relief from symptoms, improve satisfaction and outcomes, and help address critical mental and spiritual needs during difficult times. Now more than ever, there is growing recognition of the importance of palliative care services for individuals with serious illness, such as advance care planning, pain and symptom management, care coordination, and team-based, multi-disciplinary support. These services can help patients and families cope with the symptoms and stressors of disease, better anticipate and avoid crises, and reduce unnecessary and/or unwanted care. While this model is grounded in evidence that demonstrates improved quality of life, better outcomes, and reduced cost for patients, only a fraction of individuals who could benefit from palliative care receive it. 























































































































































