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.
June 2024 (Volume 102)
Quarterly Article
Tracy Lam-Hine
Sarah Forthal
Candice Y. Johnson
Helen B. Chin
Oct 30, 2024
Oct 23, 2024
Oct 4, 2024
Back to The Milbank Quarterly
Policy Points:
Racial inequities in health and well-being began in the United States with colonization and slavery and have persisted as direct consequences of historic and ongoing systemic racism.1, 2 The use of racial categories to describe such disparities has been closely tied to the Census Bureau’s definitions of race and has evolved with the changing demographics of the country.3, 4 In 2000, the Census allowed respondents to select multiple races for the first time; since then, the number of people who have done so has increased by 276%, from 9 million in 2000 to 34 million in 2020 (approximately 10% of the US population).5 Multiracial people face some of the highest prevalences of adverse childhood experiences,6, 7 asthma,8 obesity,9 substance use,10 mental illness, hopeless feelings, and serious psychological distress11 of all racial groups, but studies attempting to explain these patterns are rare. Today, many medical and public health researchers view race as a socially structured marker of relative (dis)advantage rather than of biological difference,12-16 but because of long-standing institutionalized practices and for methodologic simplicity, they often continue to be measure race in mutually exclusive categories.17 However, the growing size of Multiracial populations, whose identities do not fit neatly into these categories and which have distinct racialized social experiences, draw these practices into question.18 A frequent line of questioning from those who work in these fields is, “What do I do about Multiracial people? Where do they fit into my work?” As a group of Multiracial epidemiologists (see positionality statements in Box 1), we are excited by and encourage greater engagement with these kinds of questions given present opportunities to improve equity through visibility in health data.19 We hope our framework will spur conversation and help practitioners, researchers, and policymakers think through their answers to these questions as they relate to racial health equity work.