The Fund supports networks of state health policy decision makers to help identify, inspire, and inform policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund supports two state leadership programs for legislative and executive branch state government officials committed to improving population health.
The Fund identifies and shares policy ideas and analysis to advance state health leadership, strong primary care, and sustainable health care costs.
Keep up with news and updates from the Milbank Memorial Fund. And read the latest posts from our staff and guest authors.
The Fund publishes The Milbank Quarterly, as well as reports, issues briefs, and case studies on topics important to health policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund is is a foundation that works to improve population health and health equity.
August 28, 2026
Blog Post
Michelle Munroe
Peter Johnson
Aug 18, 2026
Jul 21, 2026
Jul 7, 2026
Back to The States of Health
More than 2.3 million US women of reproductive age live in maternity care deserts — counties with no hospitals offering obstetric care and no OB-GYN or certified nurse-midwife in practice. The Association of American Medical Colleges projects a shortfall of up to 86,000 physicians by 2036, with primary care and obstetrics among the hardest-hit specialties. Rural communities are bearing the brunt: nearly half of rural counties lack a single obstetric provider.
At the same time, maternal mortality in the United States far exceeds that of peer nations. The crisis is not evenly distributed: Black women die of pregnancy-related causes at more than twice the rate of White women, a disparity that persists across income and education levels. Midwives are a central part of the solution to these intertwined crises of access, outcomes, and equity. But policy change is needed to enable this workforce to contribute to meeting care needs.
Currently, there are about four midwives per 1,000 live births in the United States. In most other high-income countries, there are between 30 and 70 midwives per 1,000 births. In the US, the term “midwife” covers professionals with several distinct credentials, with variation in training pathways, scopes of practice, and practice settings. Policymakers seeking to expand the midwifery workforce need to understand these distinctions and the significant opportunity each represents. There are three primary credentialled types of midwives: a certified nurse-midwife, certified midwife, and certified professional midwife.
CNMs, CMs, and CPMs all provide individualized, relationship-based care that centers the needs and preferences of the people they serve. And all are trained to identify complications and facilitate timely transfer or consultation when needed.
Sources: Yang YT, Attanasio LB, Kozhimannil KB. State Scope of Practice Laws, Nurse-Midwifery Workforce, and Childbirth Procedures and Outcomes. Womens Health Issues. 2016 May-Jun;26(3):262-7. doi: 10.1016/j.whi.2016.02.003. Butler J, Abrams B et al. Supportive nurse-midwife care is associated with a reduced incidence of cesarean section. AJOG. May 1993;168(5):1407-1413. Janssen PA, Mitton C, Aghajanian J. Costs of Planned Home vs. Hospital Birth in British Columbia Attended by Registered Midwives and Physicians. PLOS One. July 17, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0133524. University of Washington Center for Workforce Studies. https://familymedicine.uw.edu/chws/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2025/08/American-College-of-Midwives-Certified-Midwife-Practice-Authority-Map-2023.pdf
The evidence base for midwifery care is substantial and growing. A landmark Cochrane review found that midwife-led continuity of care models are associated with reduced preterm birth, reduced likelihood of episiotomy, fewer regional anesthesia interventions, and higher rates of spontaneous vaginal birth with no increase in maternal or neonatal adverse outcomes.
On cost, midwifery care consistently delivers value. Lower rates of surgical delivery, fewer elective inductions, and shorter hospital stays translate into significant savings. Medicaid, which finances nearly half of all US births, stands to benefit substantially from broader midwifery integration.
Perhaps most importantly, expanding access to midwifery, particulary to culturally concordant clinicians, is an evidence-based strategy for reducing racial disparities in birth outcomes. Research from both domestic and international settings shows that continuity-of-care models in which patients see the same provider throughout pregnancy, labor, and the postpartum period are particularly effective at improving outcomes for Black and Indigenous people. Several community-based midwifery programs specifically designed to serve women of color have demonstrated measurable reductions in preterm birth and low birthweight rates.
Despite this evidence, midwives attend only about 10% of U.S. births, compared to more than 70% in many European countries with superior maternal outcomes. The gap reflects structural barriers, including:
Federal and state policymakers have multiple policy options to consider that would help remove barriers to practice and expand the midwifery workforce.
The United States does not lack evidence that midwifery works. It lacks the policy infrastructure to let midwives do the work. As maternity care deserts expand, as maternal mortality climbs, and as physician shortages deepen, the cost of inaction is measured in preventable deaths, unnecessary cesareans, and communities left without any provider at all.
Investing in midwives — all types of midwives, across all practice settings — is not a niche policy interest. It is one of the highest-yield investments available to policymakers serious about reversing America’s maternal health crisis. The evidence is there. The workforce is ready. The question is whether policy will catch up.
