D Romero1, W Chavkin, P H Wise, C A Hess, K VanLandeghem. 1. Center for Population and Family Health, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York 10032, USA. drr6@columbia.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Welfare reform (Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996) resulted in dramatic policy changes, including health-related requirements and the administrative separation of cash assistance from Medicaid. We were interested in determining if changes in welfare and health policies had had an impact on state MCH services and programs. METHODS: We conducted a survey in fall 1999 of state MCH Title V directors. Trained interviewers administered the telephone survey over a 3-month period. MCH directors from all 50 states, Washington, DC, and Puerto Rico participated (n = 52; response rate = 100%). RESULTS: Among the most noteworthy findings is that similar proportions of respondents reported that welfare policy changes had either helped (46%) or hindered (42%) the agency's work, with most of the positive impact attributed to increased funding. MCH data linkages with welfare and other social programs were low. Despite welfare reform's emphasis on work, limited services and exemptions were available for mothers with CSHCN. Almost no efforts have been undertaken to specifically address the needs of substance abusers in the context of new welfare policies. CONCLUSIONS: Few MCH agencies have developed programs to address the special needs of women receiving TANF who either have health problems themselves or have children with health problems. Recommendations including increased MCH and family planning funding and improved coordination between TANF and MCH to facilitate linkages and services are put forth in light of reauthorization of PRWORA.
OBJECTIVES: Welfare reform (Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996) resulted in dramatic policy changes, including health-related requirements and the administrative separation of cash assistance from Medicaid. We were interested in determining if changes in welfare and health policies had had an impact on state MCH services and programs. METHODS: We conducted a survey in fall 1999 of state MCH Title V directors. Trained interviewers administered the telephone survey over a 3-month period. MCH directors from all 50 states, Washington, DC, and Puerto Rico participated (n = 52; response rate = 100%). RESULTS: Among the most noteworthy findings is that similar proportions of respondents reported that welfare policy changes had either helped (46%) or hindered (42%) the agency's work, with most of the positive impact attributed to increased funding. MCH data linkages with welfare and other social programs were low. Despite welfare reform's emphasis on work, limited services and exemptions were available for mothers with CSHCN. Almost no efforts have been undertaken to specifically address the needs of substance abusers in the context of new welfare policies. CONCLUSIONS: Few MCH agencies have developed programs to address the special needs of women receiving TANF who either have health problems themselves or have children with health problems. Recommendations including increased MCH and family planning funding and improved coordination between TANF and MCH to facilitate linkages and services are put forth in light of reauthorization of PRWORA.