The Fund supports networks of state health policy decision makers to help identify, inspire, and inform policy leaders.
A bipartisan group of state health policymakers from both the executive and legislative branches who are focused on improving population health.
Networks of state officials, advocates, and others aiming to invest in and transform primary care.
A program dedicated to advancing state-based efforts to make health care more affordable for residents, employers, and states.
The Milbank Memorial Fund supports two state leadership programs for legislative and executive branch state government officials committed to improving population health.
A leadership development program for early and mid-career state government officials who are committed to improving the health of all people in their communities.
A leadership program for senior state government officials who are committed to improving population health.
The Fund focuses on creating an affordable health care system built on strong primary care and partnerships that improve health outcomes for all.
Improving state leaders’ ability to enact and implement evidence-based health policies.
Advancing policies that create a more prevention- and primary care-oriented health system.
Improving population health through policies that contain health care cost growth.
Our state health policy resources offer relevant data analysis and best practices.
The Fund publishes reports, issues briefs, and case studies on state health policy issues.
Short takes on health policy issues from Milbank staff and guest authors.
Insights from Milbank President Debra Lubar on state health policymaking.
Reported articles and Q&As on timely health policy issues, as well as foundation updates.
Milbank Memorial Fund and Milbank Quarterly webinars featuring state health policymakers and researchers.
Updates and expert contact information for reporters.
The Milbank Memorial Fund is a private foundation that works to improve population health and health equity.
February 27, 2024
Policy Report
Yalda Jabbarpour
Anuradha Jetty
Hoon Byun
Anam Siddiqi
Stephen Petterson
Jeongyoung Park
Publication
Sep 24, 2026
Sep 21, 2026
Jul 23, 2026
One of the major NASEM committee recommendations centered on tracking the nation’s progress toward strengthening primary care. An initial step toward establishing accountability is conducting research to understand what is happening in primary care and what is needed: who is delivering primary care, how they are delivering primary care, what impact it’s having on health, and where gaps exist, including disparities in access and outcomes. Yet, over the past decade, federal agencies responsible for research (including the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and the Food and Drug Administration) have devoted only 0.3% of their yearly budget to studying primary care (Figure 12).
Over the past decade, federal agencies responsible for research (including the NationalInstitutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and the Food and Drug Administration) have devoted only 0.3% of their yearly budget to studying primary care.
Data Source: NIH RePORTER, 2017–2022.Notes: Federal investment includes spending from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and the Food and Drug Administration. Funding given to family medicine departments was used as a proxy for funding to primary care.
Not only is funding well under 1%, but the data sources available to track primary care are incomplete, complicated to use, expensive, and inconsistent in what data are reported year after year. Two clear examples are the data gaps around health technology in primary care and our inability to monitor progress toward hybrid payment that combines fee-for-service payment with per-patient payment (as called for in the NASEM report). Another is the dearth of timely information around current practice location and specialty of NPs and PAs, as well as information about where they trained. (The limitations of all the data sets explored for the 2023 and 2024 Scorecard are listed in the Appendix.)
Methods Note: Data Limitations
As noted in the report, the data sources available to track primary care are incomplete. We outline here the data needs that we have identified while preparing the Scorecard.
Workforce and Access Data
Training Data
Payment Data
Health Information Technology (HIT) Data
Notes
Back to Publications