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.
March 1975 (Volume 53)
Quarterly Article
Anne-Marie Foltz
Nov 5, 2024
Oct 30, 2024
Oct 23, 2024
Back to The Milbank Quarterly
This paper examines why Congress’s first major program for comprehensive health care to needy children took five years to begin even partial operation. An examination of the 1967 program’s legislative history reveals that Congress paid little attention to EPSDT’s implications: it was left ambiguous whether health (Title V) or welfare (Title XIX) would administer; costs were never clearly stated; eligibility and scope of services to be provided were left vague. Despite pressure from welfare rights interest groups, these ambiguities delayed the preparation of regulation and guidelines which never did succeed in resolving the question of overlapping jurisdiction and costs. In addition, many states’ resistance to paying for the program further held up implementation. The paper concludes that: (1) Congress’s and HEW’s unwillingness to face up to the real costs of health programs threatens long-term public and state support for such programs; (2) division of responsibility between health and welfare lessens the impact of a program; (3) grant-in-aid programs give states the power to distort the intent of federal health policies; and (4) where states fail to implement such policies, initiatives may pass to consumer advocacy groups.
Author(s): Anne-Marie Foltz
Download the Article
Read on JSTOR
Volume 53, Issue 1 (pages 35–64) Published in 1975