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 blogs from our thought leaders, including Fund President Christopher F. Koller.
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.
September 2024 (Volume 102)
Quarterly Article
Thelma C. Hurd
Fay Cobb Payton
Darryl B. Hood
Oct 30, 2024
Oct 23, 2024
Oct 4, 2024
Back to The Milbank Quarterly
Policy Points:
The US health care system is complex and mired in rising costs, an aging population, a declining workforce, administrative inefficiency, access issues, and suboptimal health outcomes that collectively propagate health inequities.1-4 It ranks last among industrialized nations for maternal and avoidable mortality.5 Over a decade ago, value-based health care merged the medical and population health models and entrenched the social determinants of health in health care delivery by linking it to reimbursement in the public and private health sectors. The overall goal of achieving an efficient, lower-cost path to achieving health equity and improving population health would in part be realized through a deeper understanding of the intersectionality of the biomedical model of health, social contexts, social position, and systematic differences in health and health outcomes.6-8 However, incentivized Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services care delivery models to deliver value-based care amplified the problem because, in part, of 60% penetrance of value-based care, physician adoption of only 49%, and questionable improvement in patient outcomes for high-resource service lines.9, 10 With nearly a $4 trillion annual expenditure on US health care, artificial intelligence is being embraced as the solution to mitigate these problems.11 However, technology in and of itself is unlikely to resolve health care challenges because of inherent gaps, deficiencies, and exclusionary cycles within the system itself and the need for integration through biopsychosocial lenses of public and population health and medicine.12-14