A comparative state policy analysis of the adoption of birth defects surveillance legislation

Birth defects are the leading cause of infant mortality in the United States and are a major cause of lifetime disability. However, efforts to understand their causes have been hampered by a lack of population-specific data. During 1990–2004, 22 state legislatures responded to this need by proposing birth defects surveillance legislation (BDSL). The contrast between these states and those that did not pass BDSL provides an opportunity to better understand conditions associated with US public health policy diffusion. ^ This study identifies key state-specific determinants that predict: (1) the introduction of birth defects surveillance legislation (BDSL) onto states' formal legislative agenda, and (2) the successful adoption of these laws. Secondary aims were to interpret these findings in a theoretically sound framework and to incorporate evidence from three analytical approaches. ^ The study begins with a comparative case study of Texas and Oregon (states with divergent BDSL outcomes), including a review of historical documentation and content analysis of key informant interviews. After selecting and operationalizing explanatory variables suggested by the case study, Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) was applied to publically available data to describe important patterns of variation among 37 states. Results from logistic regression were compared to determine whether the two methods produced consistent findings. ^ Themes emerging from the comparative case study included differing budgetary conditions and the significance of relationships within policy issue networks. However, the QCA and statistical analysis pointed to the importance of political parties and contrasting societal contexts. Notably, state policies that allow greater access to citizen-driven ballot initiatives were consistently associated with lower likelihood of introducing BDSL. ^ Methodologically, these results indicate that a case study approach, while important for eliciting valuable context-specific detail, may fail to detect the influence of overarching, systemic variables, such as party competition. However, QCA and statistical analyses were limited by a lack of existing data to operationalize policy issue networks, and thus may have downplayed the impact of personal interactions. ^ This study contributes to the field of health policy studies in three ways. First, it emphasizes the importance of collegial and consistent relationships among policy issue network members. Second, it calls attention to political party systems in predicting policy outcomes. Finally, a novel approach to interpreting state data in a theoretically significant manner (QCA) has been demonstrated.^

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: A policy analysis of restricting foods with minimal nutritional value

In 2011, expenditures for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) reached an all-time high of $72 billion. The goal of SNAP is " to alleviate hunger and malnutrition…by increasing food purchasing power for all eligible households who apply for participation." It has been well established that proper nutrition is essential to good health, making SNAP an important program to public health consumers. Thus, this analysis examined whether SNAP is meeting its stated goal and whether the goal would be reduced if the purchase of foods of minimal nutritional value (FMNV) were restricted. ^ A review of existing literature found that SNAP has been shown to alleviate hunger, but the studies on the nutritional impact of the program were not sufficient to assert whether change is needed. When considering whether limiting FMNV would reduce or improve the effectiveness of SNAP at alleviating hunger and malnutrition, there is very little information on which to base a policy change, particular one that singles out a low income group to restrict purchases. ^ Several states have attempted to restrict the purchase of FMNV but, to date, no such change has been implemented or tested. Conducting pilot studies on the restriction of FMNV, along with better data collection on SNAP purchases, would guide policy changes to the program. Although there are many potential public health benefits to restricting FMNV purchase using SNAP dollars, research is needed to quantify the cost impact of these benefits.^

Policy analysis of shifting to the state-run Texas women's health program

During the 82nd Texas legislature, state leaders passed a provision stating that healthcare providers, who perform, promote, or affiliate with providers who perform or promote elective abortion services may not be eligible to participate in the Texas Medicaid Women's Health Program (WHP). The federal government reacted to this new provision by vowing to eliminate its 90% share of program support on the grounds that the provision violated a patient's freedom to choose a provider; a right protected by the Social Security Act. Texas leaders stated that the Women's Health Program would continue without federal support, financed exclusively with state funds.^ The following policy analysis compares the projected impact of the current Medicaid Women's Health Program to the proposed state-run program using the criteria-alternative matrix framework. The criteria used to evaluate the program alternatives include population affected, unintended pregnancy and abortion impact, impact on cervical cancer rate, and state-level government expenditures. Each criterion was defined by selected measures. The population affected was measured by the number of women served in the programs. Government expenditures were measured in terms of payments for program costs, Medicaid delivery costs, and cervical cancer diagnostic costs. Unintended pregnancy impact was measured by the number of projected unplanned pregnancies and abortions under each alternative. The impact on cervical cancer was projected in terms of the number of new cervical cancer cases under each alternative. Differences in the projections with respect to each criterion were compared to assess the impact of shifting to the state-only policy.^ After examining program alternatives, it is highly recommended that Texas retain the Medicaid WHP. If the state does decide to move forward with the state-run WHP, it is recommended that the program run at its previous capacity. Furthermore, for the purpose of addressing the relatively high cervical cancer incidence rate in Texas, incorporating HPV vaccination coverage for women ages 18-26 as part of the Women's Health Program is recommended.^