Displaying 1-20 of 66 results for

Search Filters: Arizona cancel

Embedded: Reflections from Disability and Preparedness Specialists

Blog,
Guam,

After a year and a half of work as embedded disability specialists, 5 program participants share their reflections on important lessons learned and why disability inclusion is critical to the future of emergency preparedness.

States Use Data Visualization Tools to Address Health Concerns

Blog,

Geographic Information Systems and other data visualization tools have become integral parts of public health decision-making workflows and provide crucial support to topic areas such as environmental health, the COVID-19 pandemic response, and chronic disease investigation and prevention.

States Using Policy to Remove Barriers to HIV Testing

Blog,
STIs,
HIV,

National HIV Testing Day is observed each year on June 27, the goal is to encourage people to get tested and know their HIV status. Recent legislation on this topic speaks to its prioritization and importance; themes include: consent for HIV testing, site-specific processes for routine screening, increased access to testing.

Scarce Medical Resources Caused by COVID-19 Lead to Difficult Allocation Decisions

Blog,

As the Delta variant spreads across the country and increases the number of COVID-19 cases, the strain it is placing on the nation’s health system continues to grow. The surge of COVID-19 patients is contributing to a shortage of the medications and equipment used to treat the disease. As these limitations grow, decisions will need to be made as to which patients receive resources and care and which patients don’t. To guide these decisions, policies called crisis standards of care are often established to maximize resource benefit and ensure they are distributed equitably.

Ending the HIV Epidemic: 40 Years of Progress

STIs,
HIV,
Blog,

This June marked the 40-year anniversary of the first five cases of what later became known as AIDS reported in CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. Since then, more than 32 million people have died from the disease worldwide and nearly 38 million currently live with the HIV virus (including 1.2 million people in the United States). Over that period, tremendous strides have been made in HIV testing, prevention strategies, and treatment of individuals living with the virus to ensure that they can lead healthier and longer lives. While these advancements have led to significant progress in reducing HIV/AIDS-related deaths and new infection rates, HIV/AIDS continues to be a persistent problem in the United States. The federal government and state legislatures are taking significant steps toward ending the HIV epidemic, including steps to reduce new infections, combating stigma, and advancing access to care and HIV prevention

Shifting Legal Landscape of Public Health and Places of Worship

Blog,
Ohio,
Utah,

Reconciling the tension between public health and civil liberties is one of the most significant challenges of public health law and ethics. The Supreme Court of the United States historically upheld state authority to enact and enforce public health laws that temporarily limit a person’s civil liberties, such as quarantine and isolation powers that restrict a person’s freedom of assembly in order to prevent the spread of contagious disease. There have been many legal challenges to the public health orders issued to slow the spread of COVID-19—many of the claims asserting violations of First Amendment rights of assembly, association, and expression—but they’ve largely been rejected by the courts. However, courts have treated claims asserting violations of the free exercise of religion more favorably, which may indicate an impending shift in how courts analyze the impact state and territorial actions may have on religious organizations.

How States Are Addressing the Public Health Crisis of Racism

Blog,

An increasing body of research finds racism can have a significant impact across one’s lifespan. Research shows that persistent exposure to racial discrimination may result in premature aging, poor health outcomes, and increased prevalence of certain chronic diseases. At every level of government, policymakers are seeking to acknowledge the systemic oppression of people of color that persists and to elevate racism as an urgent public health crisis comparable to other public health emergencies.

Arizona Department of Health Services Pursues Policies to Advance Data Sharing with Tribal Nations

Arizona Department of Health Services Pursues Policies to Advance Data Sharing with Tribal Nations Erik Skinner, Christina Severin, Reema Mistry The Arizona Department of Health Services is pursuing policies to advance data sharing with tribal nations, centered around partnerships, education, and more. With leadership support and funding to modernize its public health infrastructure, the Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS) is pursuing policies to advance data sharing with tribal nations. This includes investing in partnerships with tribal leaders, educating the public health workforce about tribal governments and tribal health care, and working to improve data identification processes to support effective data sharing between the state and tribal nations. Data sovereignty is an important consideration for ADHS, as there are 22 federally recognized tribal nations in Arizona. ADHS recognizes the inherent right of tribal nations to access their citizens’ public health data and is developing a tribal data sovereignty policy that both acknowledges their unique data needs and aligns with state requirements around tribal engagement. Leadership Support and Effective Tribal Engagement ADHS leadership understands the importance of making strong connections with tribal nations and recognizing each nation’s public health priorities while meeting its statutory requirement to develop tribal consultation policies. To that end, ADHS developed the tribal liaison position to serve as a resource, advocate, and communication link between ADHS and Arizona’s Native American health care community partners, including tribal community leaders, health and epidemiology directors, Indian Health Service (IHS), and Tribal Epidemiology Centers (TECs). Understanding cultural norms is essential to building trust with tribal partners; the tribal liaison role has been vital to ADHS engagement with tribal nations on data sovereignty topics. People and processes are important to establishing data sharing policies, and a well-informed workforce is essential for effective collaboration with sovereign tribal nations. ADHS is working with the Native Nation Institute to provide training on tribal sovereignty and cultural humility for staff. It has also developed a tribal handbook for public health staff on sovereignty, cultural trauma, and the roles of IHS and TECs. Identifying Tribal Affiliation within Datasets and Tribal Public Health Priorities ADHS conducted a data assessment to identify instances in which data sharing was active and ongoing between ADHS and tribal nations, and instances in which it had expired. A notable technical challenge was identifying tribal members within existing datasets, as many public health datasets are incomplete (e.g., do not include tribal affiliation) or rely on IT systems that are unable to aggregate data appropriately—making it difficult to ensure tribal authorities receive relevant, comprehensive public health data for their communities. In addition, because each tribal nation’s public health priority areas and data needs could differ from the data that state health information systems collect, sharing relevant data with tribal nations can be challenging. ADHS is working with each nation to identify tribal public health priority areas, find solutions to identify tribal data within state collected datasets, and share it with the respective nations. Ken Komatsu - Brief - AZ DHS Pursues Policies to Advance Data Sharing with Tribal Nations Honoring Sovereignty in Data Sharing Relationships Data sharing agreements with public health agencies often establish that the state agency controls the disposition and use of the data, and that each party benefits. Acknowledging that tribal partners are entitled to their citizens’ data without conditions differs from how ADHS has historically approached data-sharing relationships with others. ADHS plans to formally establish a non-transactional data sharing policy with tribal public health partners, and establish data sharing agreements that align with this approach going forward. Implementation Considerations Considerations for state health agencies in fostering strong relationships and effective engagement with tribal partners around data-sharing efforts include: Center tribal sovereignty when framing data sharing agreements with tribal nations. Engage tribal liaisons in data-sharing efforts with tribal nations. They maintain close relationships with tribes and can help develop mutual cultural understanding, which is essential to engaging tribal partners. Assess datasets to determine data completeness with regards to tribal affiliation and identify opportunities to improve comprehensive data sharing with tribal authorities. Invest in state health agency staff training on tribal sovereignty and cultural humility, so staff can be well-prepared when engaging in data sharing conversations with tribal partners. Gerilene Haskon - Brief - AZ DHS Pursues Policies to Advance Data Sharing with Tribal Nations OT18-1802 website yes

Tobacco Control Programs Use Business Process Mapping to Strengthen Workforce

Blog,

Tobacco Control Programs Use Business Process Mapping to Strengthen Workforce tobacco control programs, preventable disease, tobacco industry, diverse workforce, grants management, mapping workshops, technological support, united states, tobacco product, young people, comprehensive tobacco control programs, public health, tobacco company, department of health, cigarettes and smokeless tobacco, smokeless tobacco products, health care system, youth and young adults, smoking cessation, reduced smoking, tobacco related disparities, astho, association of state and territorial health officials Amy Ciarlo Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, public health agencies have experienced significant turnover across leadership and staff throughout various programs, including tobacco control. Between 2021 and 2023, nearly 30% of all state and territorial program managers were experiencing turnover (e.g., in some cases, vacancies lasted months) or were new to this role, having less than two years of experience. This decline in workforce reduces capacity to address tobacco use—the nation’s number one cause of preventable disease, disability, and death. Tobacco control program staff require a level of knowledge that can take time to build, including: Historical context of tobacco industry marketing influence. Policy, systems, and environmental change strategies. Emerging products and changing regulations. The complexity that goes into helping people who use tobacco to quit. Finding qualified applicants that will stay in these roles long term has been challenging across jurisdictions. In response to this need, the Tobacco Control Network, in collaboration with CDC’s Office on Smoking and Health, convened a nine-month learning community with three state tobacco control programs (Alaska, Arizona, and New Jersey) to address hiring and onboarding challenges, which concluded in March 2024. Subject matter experts Health Management Associates (HMA) supported by educating participants on business process improvement (BPI) methods, facilitating business process mapping workshops, and consulting on the development of individual state implementation plans to address key challenges identified during the mapping processes. A similar model with specific OD2A grant recipients focused on procurement, contracting, and helping address spend-down of funding. Business Process Mapping and Implementation Planning Each state participated in a two-day, in-person BPI workshop to outline all steps, from filling a vacancy to completing the onboarding of new hires. This was a lengthy exercise, as agencies often have many elaborate processes in place, due to an organizational requirement, an expectation held by leadership, or a past purpose that is no longer relevant. Understanding why the process happens and visualizing the steps in sequential order helped teams identify “waste” or areas for improvement, including overwork (e.g., too many meetings), waiting (e.g., on an approval, for a training to become available), extra processing (e.g., duplicating efforts), and unused talent (e.g., insufficient training and alignment of skillsets). States then drafted implementation plans to address key issues, outlining steps with detailed timelines and tasks assigned to individuals to increase accountability. Each state team finalized their plans as part of the learning community, with some activities in progress or already completed. However, all three varied in their processes, their approaches to solutions, and the activities outlined in their implementation plans: One state’s BPI workshop focused on grantees at the county-level and streamlining onboarding, as counties lacked consistency in their hiring and onboarding approach. Their implementation plan focuses on a team of state health agency staff and local partners establishing a guidance document that assists new local staff in their first three months. Another state’s BPI workshop centered on addressing challenges in building a diverse workforce, with goals to establish a standardized practice for job postings and reduce re-posting of vacancies. The mapping process allowed collaboration across multiple departments and with health agency leadership. During the final state BPI workshop, the team identified excess meetings as a pain point and are reworking them to reduce redundancy and streamline the onboarding process. The implementation plan also prioritizes making training materials more engaging and better understanding training needs among new program staff. Lessons Learned The state teams gathered to share key takeaways from the learning community, as reported by HMA, informing recommendations for other programs looking to address hiring and onboarding challenges. Successes Participation led to team building and a mutual understanding of the process. Participants trusted one another to share with transparency. The mapping activities remained agnostic by highlighting inefficiencies in the process and not the people. Individuals with new perspectives had the opportunity to comment on system improvements. Teams recognized the numerous demands on team members and grantees, how much duplication existed across processes, and the number of approvals or layers in the hiring procedures. Teams created clearly identified roadmaps to improve hiring and onboarding staff. The learning community brought together partners across the state to address challenges that impacted their work but were not part of their everyday tasks. Challenges Staff representatives from HR or Grants Management were not present during the mapping workshops, causing gaps in information during these sessions. Power dynamics created difficulty for all participants to contribute equally. There was a lack of consideration for equity and challenges from new hire perspectives. More structured technical assistance and check-ins following the development of implementation maps were needed to support follow-through. Some participants had a sense of ownership or attachment to the established process and were protective of maintaining the status quo. Recommendations Ensure all participants understand the vision by providing an example of similar work in advance as reference material. Prior to the mapping activities, conduct a series of key informant interviews to ensure the right people are in the room, gain an understanding and awareness of organizational and interpersonal dynamics that may impact the process, and identify opportunities to establish bidirectional communications between state and local staff. Plan for ongoing technical assistance follow-up to ensure understanding of the initiative and support implementation. Ensure logistics can accommodate the process, such as proper room size and technological support. In Conclusion Given the challenges identified in this pilot learning community, states would likely benefit from change management prior to beginning BPI activities. Having intentional conversations up front can prevent these common challenges, as outlined previously. Overall, all state participants agreed that the learning community was valuable to their work, increased their organization’s knowledge and capacity, strengthened their relationships within their agency, and they intend to continue working on their improvement plans. One state team shared, “A major success from this mapping workshop was understanding the significance of engaging and listening to colleagues from diverse departments. The workshop facilitated a clearer understanding of civil service and HR operations, emphasizing the hurdles faced by hiring managers.” While business process mapping and implementation plan development can be laborious, the results are well worth the effort. website yes

Health Agencies Keeping Cottage Foods Safe

Blog,

Health Agencies Keeping Cottage Foods Safe Heather Tomlinson Rows of homemade jams at the local farmer’s market and a neighbor’s birthday cake on social media have something in common: they are both cottage (or homestead) food products. Cottage foods are home-based, home-made food products prepared outside of a commercial kitchen and sold to the public. Cottage food producers operate on a small scale, often from a home kitchen, selling goods locally. Although cottage foods provide opportunities to small, locally owned businesses, they also create complexity in selling food products to the public that are not inspected and may not meet basic food safety standards. And while home kitchens are not considered food establishments in the FDA Food Code, states are able to define “food establishments” by amending provisions in their food code adoption process or enacting legislation or regulations. In addition to regulating, state health agencies can play a role in keeping cottage foods safe through education, training, and other mechanisms. Cottage Food Regulation Currently, all 50 states and Washington, D.C. allow the sale of cottage food products directly to consumers. Several foodborne illnesses have been linked to products improperly prepared at home, such as botulism outbreaks in home-canned products and E.coli contamination of jerky. Many foodborne illnesses can be prevented by safely preparing, processing, and storing foods, processes often outlined by health regulations. Health agencies use a variety of tools to regulate cottage food production. Types of Foods: The types of foods permitted can vary across jurisdictions with some allowing only non-time/temperature controlled for safety (TCS) foods (e.g., baked goods, jams, candies), while others allow a wide range of products including TCS foods and items that require specialized processes (e.g., pickled vegetables). Some jurisdictions may use an exhaustive or illustrative list outlining permitted foods, while others limit specific food production processes but allow all other food items. Licensing and Inspection: Cottage food producers must follow a variety of rules in the form of permits, licenses, and registration. Although cottage foods are exempt from many inspection requirements, at least fifteen states require an initial inspection of home kitchens before they can sell items. All states allow the investigation of foodborne illness complaints; some states require annual licensure. Food Safety Training: States can require a food safety course to ensure that all cottage food producers understand the basic food safety requirements. Sales Caps: Gross sales caps limit the scale of operations allowed without full food safety precautions. After a cottage food operation exceeds their gross sales cap, they would be required to register as a food establishment and permitting rules would take effect. Sales Venues: States typically only allow direct-to-consumer sale of cottage foods (e.g., farmers’ markets) but some states permit online sales. Federal food safety regulations, which prohibit cottage foods, apply when food products are sold across state lines. Cottage food sales, whether in-person or online, should remain within the state they were created to avoid violating federal regulations. Labeling: All states have a labeling requirement for cottage foods. These labels can vary but typically include the food producer’s name and address, the product name, an ingredients list, allergens, product weight, date of production, and a disclaimer identifying that the product was prepared in a home kitchen that is not inspected. Recent Cottage Foods Legislation in the States Legislators often face tension in weighing the balance between maintaining food safety regulations and supporting small cottage food businesses by reducing the entry barriers (e.g., leasing commercial kitchen space). In recent years, there has been an increase in legislation expanding cottage food parameters ranging from product and preparation inclusions to modifying the gross sales cap. The Arizona House of Representatives passed and the Senate is currently considering HB 2864, which would expand the state’s cottage food item list to include precut and processed freeze-dried fruits and vegetables. Arizona enacted HB 2042, which expands the definition of cottage foods to include foods that require time and temperature control if they're exempt under federal regulations. The Hawaii legislature passed HB 2144 which is now awaiting action from the Governor, which would expand the definition of cottage foods to include pickled products and non-hazardous products that do not contain dried meat or seafood, permit the sale of products in retail stores, and allow for customer delivery via third party vendors or shipping. Several states have introduced legislation to increase the gross sales cap for those who qualify as a cottage food producer. Mississippi (MS SB 2638) and Washington (WA SB 5107) introduced bills that proposed to increase the annual gross sales cap, but both failed in session. There has also been legislation surrounding cottage food preemption. Massachusetts is considering S 2761, which would establish a cottage food regulatory framework and prohibit local health agencies from being able to establish their own cottage food regulations. Microenterprise Home Kitchens In expanding cottage food production, there has been increased legislation on microenterprise home kitchens. Microenterprises typically allow the production of more types of foods, including fully prepared hot meals, but also require stricter regulations (such as preparing and selling the food on the same day). Minnesota (MN SF 4501) and Hawaii (HI HB 1591) have introduced legislation that would allow microenterprise home kitchens and establish a regulatory framework for licensing and safety standards. Raw Milk Considerations Raw milk is an animal milk that has not gone through pasteurization (process of heating milk to a specific temperature for a set period of time) to kill harmful bacteria. Raw milk can carry dangerous bacteria that can cause food poisoning and has recently been shown to test positive for the recent highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus. As of March 2024, 30 states allow the interstate sale of raw milk. This session, West Virginia passed legislation (WV HB 4911) and at least six states, Michigan (MI HB 5603), Hawaii (HI HB 1989), Missouri (MO HB 1711), Massachusetts (MA S 43), Louisiana (LA HB 467), and New Jersey (NJ A 1086), considered legislation that would allow unpasteurized, raw milk to be sold to consumers. How State Health Agencies Can Keep Cottage Foods Safe Health agencies consider cottage food inclusions based on food production risks. For instance, many agencies will allow baked goods but do not permit pickling due to the botulism risk associated with pickling. Health agencies evaluate food science to educate their legislatures on the considerations of cottage foods and where they would recommend public health regulations. Health agencies also ensure cottage food guidance is easily accessible and written in plain language, so producers have the needed information to follow regulations. Relevant information may include the permitted products, how to become a cottage food producer, and food safety considerations when preparing home-made foods. For example, the Illinois Department of Health, in collaboration with a diverse collection of stakeholders, created a robust cottage food guide to help producers and regulators understand state requirements and cottage food safety standards. Author card spacing 4 State policy surrounding cottage foods is constantly evolving. ASTHO will continue monitoring these changes and provide relevant updates. website yes

Wraparound Services for All: How Public Health Departments are Connecting Communities to Critical Support

Blog,

Wraparound Services for All: How Public Health Departments are Connecting Communities to Critical Support ASTHO, Association of State and Territorial Officials, wraparound services, astho delph, diverse executives, linkage to care, medical care, health care, community well being, public health, health outcomes, evidence based, quality of life, strength based, local community, health promotion, improvement health, infectious diseases, maternal and child health, local health departments, public health services, mental health services, public health practices, public health leaders, public health systems, behavioral health ASTHO Staff How health departments across the country are working to link clients to diverse public health services and supports to address their specific challenges and help them succeed in different aspects of life. As the heartbeat of community well-being, health departments find strength in collaboration. Services provided by health departments cannot stand alone when supporting their residents and communities significantly, as several simultaneous and interrelated factors can influence health. In this blog post, ASTHO’s DELPH scholars from cohort #3, Tosha Bock and Sam To, share how their organizations across the country are striving to implement systems to link clients to a diverse range of public health services and supports to address their specific challenges and help them succeed in different aspects of life. Give an overview of your organization and the ‘linkage to care’ efforts. TOSHA: The Oregon Health Authority (OHA) is a government agency in Oregon. OHA oversees Oregon’s health-related programs, including behavioral health (addictions and mental health), public health, Oregon State Hospital for individuals requiring secure residential psychiatric care, and the state's Medicaid program called the Oregon Health Plan. The nine-member Oregon Health Policy Board oversees its policy work. OHA’s goal is to eliminate health inequities in Oregon by 2030. Addressing health inequities in Oregon is crucial as it ensures everyone has equal access to healthcare resources regardless of socio-economic status or background, promoting a more just and inclusive society while improving public health outcomes. One way OHA does this is by supporting investments in Community Information Exchange (CIE). CIE is a network of collaborative partners using a multidirectional technology platform to connect people in Oregon to services and support. Through CIE technology, users can search a shared resource directory, document consent, and make and hear back on the referral status (closed loop). Communities across Oregon are implementing CIE. SAM: Within the Division of Preparedness at the Arizona Department of Health Services, the Office of Rapid Response Disease Investigation (ORRDI) was established during the COVID-19 pandemic and launched statewide case investigation and contact tracing (CI/CT) to support local health jurisdictions (LHJs) with critical investigative support. Soon after, a referral process to connect residents to community organizations was incorporated into all investigations; this provided the ability to directly link residents with vital resources and assistance programs while they navigated their situation. Give an example of the work and why it's impactful. TOSHA: Below is an example of the importance of CIE expressed by a Community-Based Organization interviewed for the CIE: Community Engagement Findings and Recommendations Report. Community-based organizations, peer-run organizations like ours, we are, you know, feet on the ground organizations, we're grassroots, and I think this tool to be able to reach out because we're always underfunded, we're always understaffed, you know, and this cuts down on hours and hours and hours of time that we would be on the phone, we have to do one referral, we can send it out, we can make notes, we can talk back and forth with other people, we only have one consent form, you know, all these things have made it a lot easier for us to operate, making it to where we can spend more time with our feet on the ground. – Interviewee SAM: Throughout Arizona, especially for the state’s most vulnerable populations, isolating or quarantining was found to be a hardship, with adherence to guidance greatly dependent on each individual’s ability to access medical care, attend work, pay for rent and utilities, and to acquire food or medication; those who struggled became a risk for increasing the spread of COVID-19. Community navigators offered a personalized approach to providing services and programs aimed at helping residents achieve self-sufficiency. During one of the most substantial periods of COVID-19 response (between July 2021 and June 2022), ORRDI connected 17,290 cases and 939 contacts to community navigator organizations and successfully administered 18,229 referrals. The top three requested resources across the state were utility assistance, eviction prevention or rental assistance, and emergency food box delivery. This partnership connected various established services and magnified trust with the ORRDI team and within Arizona communities. What do you wish could be done to enhance your programs? TOSHA: CIE networks are foundational to building a more equitable system in Oregon. Additional funding must be provided to implement systems change and expand these networks to create statewide coordination across organizations, sectors, and systems. These investments should also include technical assistance, training, education, and advancing privacy and data protection. SAM: The ADHS ORRDI programs continue to manage COVID-19 CI/CT for much of the state and leverage this partnership to support the needs of Arizona residents affected by COVID-19. However, they have also taken on several other morbidities of public health significance. The objective of the Office is to maintain current community navigator partnerships by offering supportive services, continually improving outreach efforts to cases and contacts, and encouraging enrollment in referrals. Concluding Thoughts In conclusion, breaking down the silos between public health and health care opens avenues for a more holistic approach to community well-being. By simultaneously addressing various determinants of health, organizations can create a comprehensive and interconnected system that fosters lasting improvements. This collaborative effort enhances the effectiveness of interventions and paves the way for a healthier and more resilient community. In embracing this integrated approach, we move closer to a future where the boundaries between public health and health care are blurred, giving rise to a more cohesive and impactful model for community health and wellness. website yes

Increasing Access to Doulas will Ease the Maternal Health Crisis

Blog,

State and federal actions to expand the doula workforce and improve maternal health.

Supporting the Public Health Workforce with Trauma-Responsive Leadership Skills

Blog,

This blog from ASTHO’s PH-HERO team touches on the importance of trauma-responsive leadership in the public health workforce.

How States Can Leverage JUUL Settlement Funds to Promote Public Health

Blog,
Iowa,

To address the youth tobacco epidemic, jurisdictions filed lawsuits against JUUL to end their marketing practices aimed at youth and to obtain compensation from the financial toll experienced by communities.

States Pursue Policy Options to Support Access to Over-the-Counter Contraception

Blog,

States Pursue Policy Options to Support Access to Over-the-Counter Contraception State Policy to Support Over-the-Counter Contraception Access Christina Severin Learn about state policy options that can help to support over-the-counter contraception access including levers within Medicaid programs. Effective contraceptive care improves maternal health outcomes by helping individuals plan if and when they become pregnant. Additionally, some contraceptive methods may reduce the risk of certain cancers and protect against sexually transmitted infections. While the most effective methods generally require a visit to a health care provider, over-the-counter (OTC) options may address certain barriers to accessing contraception (e.g., taking time off work for a medical appointment and lack of health insurance or access to health care providers/settings). The New Age of Nonprescription Oral Contraceptives A significant change in the marketplace of OTC options occurred in 2023 when FDA approved the first daily non-prescription oral contraceptive. This progestin-only pill —known as Opill — is considered both safe and highly effective at preventing pregnancy when taken correctly. Opill reached stores in early 2024 and has a suggested retail price of about $20 per month or $50 for a three-month supply. While OTC oral contraceptives like Opill may improve access among individuals not currently using contraception or those using a less effective method, high out-of-pocket costs can be a barrier. One way to limit out-of-pocket costs is to require private health insurance coverage of contraception without cost-sharing. ACA requires most private health insurance plans to do this, but it does not extend to all health insurances or contraceptives. For OTC contraceptives, the landscape is even more complex: While plans are encouraged to cover OTC emergency contraception at no cost and without a prescription, it is not required. HHS and the Departments of Labor and Treasury issued a proposed rule in 2023 that would have required broader coverage of OTC contraception without a prescription or cost-sharing, but the rule was later withdrawn. Without a federal mandate, states can pursue coverage requirements through the health insurance products they regulate. Jurisdictions can also support OTC contraception access in their Medicaid programs. While Medicaid requires coverage of family planning supplies without cost-sharing, jurisdictions have some flexibility in how they design this benefit, and the scope of coverage depends on jurisdiction and state plan-specific factors. Jurisdictions also have flexibility in determining how they provide prescription drug coverage for contraceptive medications and what OTC products are covered. State Legislative Action Legislation is one way for states to promote access to OTC contraceptives, including hormonal contraceptives, through state-regulated plans and provider scope of practice considerations. Since 2024, several states have enacted laws requiring coverage of OTC hormonal contraception, including Delaware (SB 232), which directs insurance carriers to cover FDA-approved OTC contraception with or without a prescription, and Maine (LD 163), which requires coverage of nonprescription oral hormonal contraception. At least two states have clarified the role of pharmacists in supporting access to OTC contraceptives. Massachusetts (HB 4800) allows pharmacist dispensing of OTC oral contraception per a standing order and provides liability protections, while California (AB 50) allows pharmacists to furnish self-administered OTC hormonal contraception without complying with the state’s protocols for prescription-only oral contraceptives. States have also enacted laws to explore or support broader access to OTC contraception, including at least three bills enacted in Maryland since 2024: HB 367/SB 527 requires community colleges to develop an OTC contraception access plan and allows the health department to serve as a resource, including for consultation on vending machine access. HB 1171/SB 944 allows local health department registered nurses to dispense OTC contraception. SB 674/HB 939 creates a collaborative tasked with studying and making recommendations on OTC contraceptive access, with a final report due to the governor and legislature by Jan. 1, 2027. Other Policy Levers Legislation isn’t the only policy lever available to jurisdictions looking to support OTC contraception access. A number of states have taken executive actions to improve access, including (but not exclusively) through Medicaid. While jurisdictions already have the flexibility to support OTC contraceptive access in their Medicaid programs, Medicaid rules require a prescription even for OTC products, which may present a barrier for some individuals. One potential solution is to use standing orders, which allow individuals direct access to OTC products at a pharmacy, without having to visit a separate provider for a prescription first. To ease access to OTC hormonal contraception specifically, several states have recently utilized standing orders that facilitate Medicaid coverage, including Wisconsin, Massachusetts, and New Mexico. Additionally, in 2024, North Carolina announced that it was removing barriers to OTC oral contraception, and would cover condoms and spermicide as OTC products. Outside of Medicaid, several other states have taken action to support access to OTC hormonal contraception: In 2024, the Governor of Arizona issued an executive order directing the Department of Administration to designate Opill and OTC hormonal contraception as a no-cost essential health benefit for state employees, among other actions to expand coverage and access. Also in 2024, Pennsylvania issued guidance to health insurers encouraging coverage of OTC hormonal contraception and highlighting two insurers intending to comply with the guidance. Finally, Michigan’s health agency, in partnership with the Governor’s office, implemented a Take Control of Your Birth Control campaign. This initiative distributed OTC contraception at hundreds of community sites across the state, with a stated goal of connecting individuals to insurance coverage, including Medicaid. While the campaign recently ended, the state distributed more than 400,000 OTC contraceptive resources (e.g., condoms, emergency contraception, and oral contraceptives) and saw an increased number of Medicaid applications. Jurisdictions can play a significant role in connecting public health and health care industry leadership, providers, and other experts — promoting awareness, increasing utilization, and encouraging connection to existing resources. Related Content - Blog - State Policy to Support OTC Contraception Access article yes