This survey of states’ Medicaid family planning policies under fee-for-service finds wide coverage of most prescription contraceptives among 40 states and the District of Columbia (DC), but variable coverage of emergency contraceptives and other family planning-related services. It is the first published report on state coverage of family planning benefits since the passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
- view as grid
- view as list
This new KFF Factsheet reviews the available methods, use, and insurance coverage of male and female sterilization. It also discusses the potential affect of the ACA on sterilization rates as well as the growing presence of religious providers and its affect on the provision of sterilization services.
This fact sheet reviews current national and state policies around Emergency Contraception, including methods, patient awareness, access and availability, and insurance coverage. Among methods discussed are ulipristal acetate (including ella), copper IUDs (including Copper-T IUDs), and progestin-based pills (including Plan B, Next Choice,Levonorgestrel and Fallback Solo).
On May 18, 2016, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) published a final rule to implement Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which prohibits discrimination in health coverage and care based on race, color, national origin, age or disability, and, for the first time sex. This Issue Brief provides a technical summary of Section 1557 and the final rule and highlights new protections and provisions included in the law and rule. Notably, Section 1557 is the first federal civil rights law to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex in health care. Moreover, the proposed rule extends the definition of sex discrimination to include discrimination on the basis of gender identity. In addition, the final rule establishes regulations related to the provision of language assistance services based on long-standing HHS policy guidance.
This fact sheet provides a snapshot of global maternal and child health (MCH) and examines the U.S. government’s role in addressing MCH worldwide, including current programs, funding, and key issues.
The U.S. government has a long history of supporting efforts to improve the health of women and families around the world. While many U.S. programs address women and family health generally, several are focused on them directly, including: maternal and child health (MCH), which includes immunization activities; family planning and reproductive health (FP/RH); and nutrition. This overview paper presents key findings for accompanying papers examining U.S funding for each of these sectors. They look at funding trends over time, the top country recipients of aid, the share of funding provided to the sector within the larger U.S. global health funding portfolio, and the role of the U.S. as a donor in the context of overall donor support.
Terrorism, Human Rights, and Climate Change Top the Public’s Priority List for U.S. Engagement in World Affairs; Other Issues, Including Health, Rated Important
Strong Support for U.S. Role in Combatting Zika At Home and Abroad When it comes to world affairs, majorities of Americans list fighting terrorism (64%), protecting human rights (60%), and protecting the environment and fighting climate change (51%) as top priorities for the president and Congress, finds a new Kaiser…
The 2016 Survey of Americans on the U.S. Role in Global Health is the latest in a series of surveys designed, conducted, and analyzed by the Kaiser Family Foundation in order to shed light on the American public’s perceptions, knowledge, and attitudes about the role of the United States in efforts to improve health for people in developing countries. This most recent survey updates trends on Americans’ perceptions of the most urgent problems facing developing countries, views on U.S. spending on health, and U.S. priorities for women’s health in developing countries. It also explores new questions on Americans’ awareness of the Zika virus outbreak and recent U.S. efforts to combat the outbreak both at home and in developing countries.
In this Medium post, Alina Salganicoff outlines the legal arguments in the U.S. Supreme Court case Zubik v. Burwell and discusses what the case could mean for contraceptive coverage.
In this post on The Huffington Post, Alina Salganicoff and Laurie Sobel offer a Q&A on “contraceptive-only” plans, an approach mentioned during oral arguments in the U.S. Supreme Court case Zubik v. Burwell. In the Zubik case, a group of religiously affiliated nonprofits with religious objections to providing birth control coverage seek an exemption from the Affordable Care Act’s provision requiring most plans to offer such coverage without cost-sharing.