What does the future hold for public health funding?
Indiana State Health Commissioner Lindsay Weaver discussed the advantages of flexible public health funding. She is pictured at a state budget hearing on Dec. 16, 2024. (Whitney Downard/Indiana Capital Chronicle)
In a tight budget year when state-funded entities have been told that a flat appropriation is a win, Health First Indiana came off relatively well with only a modest $25 million cut over the next two-year budget cycle.
Health First Indiana, a statewide effort to increase public health funding, launched in 2023 and earmarked $75 million in state funds the first year followed by $150 million in the next year. The current version of the budget sets funding at $100 million each year.
But earlier this month, a handful of senators flagged concerns about the program and whether it was too flexible, openly musing about whether to introduce constraints on the funds. One questioned how long it would take to see results.
Supporters of the program point to the flexibility as an advantage, allowing communities to spend their funds in whatever way meets six core public health services.
'Those big metrics move in five, maybe ten years in some instances. But at the same time, I recognize that people want to see (if) what's happening is making a difference,' said Public Health Commissioner Lindsay Weaver. 'And it is.'
She noted that every county had key performance indicators to meet, whether it was reducing their tobacco rate or reducing fall-related emergency visits for senior citizens.
'I know there was a concern about oversight but there's lots of layers of oversight,' Weaver said. 'Us sitting in Indianapolis and saying, 'Everybody in the state do the same thing' has not been successful. But I do truly believe we are already seeing results at the local level and these locally driven initiatives will make the biggest difference.'
Specific rumors about questionable spending on undocumented immigrants hadn't yet crossed the building from the Senate into the House, where House Speaker Todd Huston said on Thursday that he hadn't heard 'any concerns' from his members other than the funding level.
Rep. Matt Hostettler, R-Patoka, said the issue of money was why he voted against the proposal in 2023.
'When I voted against the public health spending, it was because it was one time money and we didn't know if it could continue,' said Hostettler. 'I don't mean to be prophetic, but here we sit and there's less and less money.'
He pointed to an amendment he filed, but ultimately didn't call for a vote, that would have sunsetted the bill after two years, ensuring the program was a one-time appropriation. While he hasn't personally heard about whether undocumented immigrants had accessed the program, he said that it needed to be addressed if it was hindering access for Hoosiers.
'When this money was originally allocated, it was to support more healthy communities. And how do we measure that?' Hostettler asked. 'If there are people that are not Hoosiers that are taking advantage of it — and that's keeping Hoosiers from taking advantage of it — that's an issue.'
An Indiana Capital Chronicle review of all 95 public health department expense reports didn't find any explicit public health funding for immigrants — undocumented or not — though the City of Fishers partnered with Hamilton County Immigration Welcome Center. However, 25 other local public health departments reported using their dollars to contract with translation services.
Hostettler did flag one expense he found to be questionable: a $600 condom purchase in LaPorte County to prevent the spread of infectious diseases.
'Is that what we need to be doing? Was that the best expense of those $600 for that community? Maybe it was,' Hostettler said. 'When the expenditures range from that to possibly translation services — what do we really want to do?'
Rep. Robin Shackleford, who serves as the ranking minority member on the House Public Health Committee alongside Hostettler, urged lawmakers with questions or concerns to visit the program's website. Each county's health goals and expenditures are publicly available for scrutiny.
'I think we have legislators that are so afraid that we're using any type of public assistance to go towards someone that is not from Indiana or not from this country … that it is fogging their vision,' said Shackleford, D-Indianapolis. 'What we really should be focusing on is the health of our state. And that is what I think these health departments are trying to focus on.'
Though dollars were allotted in 2023, funds didn't start getting out in communities until January 2024, with 86 counties opting into the public health funding in the first year. Since then all have joined.
As the new budget cycle approached quickly, the state reached out to the Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health at Indiana University's Indianapolis campus in late 2024 to estimate the return on investment so far. With just eight months of data, from January to August, researchers estimated that the less than $75 million distributed so far had reaped $95 million in benefits, according to a December 2024 report.
Valerie Yeager, the interim director of the university's Center for Health Policy, said that number was a 'conservative underestimate' that primarily focused on three key activities: blood pressure screenings, prenatal care and fall prevention services.
At eight months, or two-thirds of the way through the first year, the departments received roughly $50 million in public health funding, Yeager observed.
'There's already a $95 million return. So that's (almost) a 200% return on the investment for just three of the activities that they've been doing,' Yeager told the Indiana Capital Chronicle.
But payoffs may not be quick or even easy to measure. Reducing the number of falls in a community — one of the top reasons why an elderly Hoosier might enter long-term care — helps reduce community health care costs long-term by keeping a senior citizen in their home and out of a nursing home.
Prenatal care, on the other hand, can be a quicker turnaround. Getting a pregnant mother connected with those health care services, which can include screenings for gestational diabetes or vitamin access, can result in a baby with a higher birth weight. A heavier baby is more likely to be born at full-term and spends less time in an intensive care unit.
'We take all of those potential … dollars saved as a result of avoided health care services,' said Yeager. 'What we will also begin to see are things like reductions in maternal deaths and reductions in infant deaths if we can increase the number of women in Indiana who also receive prenatal care early in their pregnancy.'
Nearly one-quarter of pregnant Hoosiers don't receive prenatal care in the first trimester while another seven percent never get any care at all, Yeager said. The report further expands on this statistic by citing research estimating $4,113 in savings for each birth when women access prenatal care.
In the eight months analyzed, public health funding was used to provide or refer 11,918 women to prenatal services, generating an estimated $49,000 in savings.
'It's a really comprehensive and very basic — but essential — service that we need to make sure is provided,' Yeager said. 'Previously, public health agencies were working at such a deficit that … the Health First Indiana dollars are strategic investment for Hoosiers because it creates opportunities for the agencies to add essential services that they weren't previously able to provide.'
Much of the efforts include partnerships with outside organizations, such as pregnancy resource centers to connect women to prenatal care. Other connections include school health services to target youth vaping and teaching local Amish communities how to Stop The Bleed, a life-saving emergency skill.
'I think of it as the foundation of our house was broken and it needs to be repaired. The Health First Indiana dollars are lifting the house back up to have a stable foundation. It's not building a massive new addition or making a mega mansion, it's fixing the foundation so that public health is resourced to do the crucial work necessary to reduce health care needs and health care spending by keeping people healthy,' said Yeager.
'It costs far less to keep people healthy than it does to make them well again,' she continued.
And while a few senators, albeit influential ones, have questions about the program, the public funding has an 'excited' supporter in Senate Majority Leader Rodric Bray.
'I've heard and talked to a number of local health departments. They're enthused about the money and things that they're able to do with it. They're talking about hitting on some things that really matter to the health of Hoosiers and they're excited about that. Frankly, I'm excited about that,' Bray, R-Martinsville, told reporters on Thursday.
He pointed to the possibility of improved health rankings but acknowledged funding difficulties in this budget cycle. Many local public health departments have used the dollars to hire nurses dedicated to maternal and infant health or to limiting the spread of infectious diseases.
CONTACT US
'I'm not trying to argue that we'll give it more money than we did in 2023 but there's value in, at least, giving as much money. Because those folks have invested their time and people are there working,' Bray said. 'They want to make sure that those jobs are going to continue to be there and continuing to have funding for that is important. At least to me.'
Weaver also noted that the program had the support of Gov. Mike Braun himself, whose budget first included that $100 million annual appropriation for public health funding. On the campaign trail, Braun identified public health as 'a good place' for investing state funds.
'Frankly, in Indiana, we can't afford not to invest in public health and those prevention programs. We've had poor health outcomes, including infant mortality and maternal mortality, for some time. We need to do something different and we need to make a difference,' Weaver said.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

an hour ago
Former Tennessee football coach Derek Dooley eyes GOP Senate run against Jon Ossoff in Georgia
DALTON, Ga. -- Derek Dooley, a former University of Tennessee football coach, said Friday that he is considering a Republican run for U.S. Senate in Georgia in 2026 against Democratic incumbent Jon Ossoff. The trial balloon shows how Gov. Brian Kemp's decision not to run for the seat has left Georgia Republicans looking for other options to face off against Ossoff, considered the most vulnerable Democratic incumbent up for reelection next year. Dooley, 56, said he would decide on a bid in coming weeks. 'Georgia deserves stronger common-sense leadership in the U.S. Senate that represents all Georgians and focuses on results — not headlines,' Dooley said in a statement. 'I believe our state needs a political outsider in Washington — not another career politician — to cut through the noise and partisanship and get back to real problem solving.' The announcement, first reported by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, came as other declared candidates stumped before the state Republican convention in the northwest Georgia city of Dalton. Among Republicans who have declared their candidacies are U.S. Rep. Buddy Carter, Insurance Commissioner John King and activist Reagan Box. Other Republicans who could run include U.S. Reps. Mike Collins and Rich McCormick, Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and state Sen. Greg Dolezal. Attacks on Ossoff were among the most reliable applause lines during Friday afternoon speeches at the convention. 'Folks, President Trump needs backup, he needs backup in the Senate,' King said. Dooley has never run for office before. His appeal wouldn't be based on his career 32-41 record at Louisiana Tech and Tennessee, but his status as the son of legendary University Georgia coach Vince Dooley and Kemp's long ties to the Dooley family. As a teenager, Kemp was a frequent guest in the Dooley home, and roomed with Derek's older brother, Daniel Dooley, at the University of Georgia. Kemp has the most effective Republican political organization in Georgia, and he would likely give Dooley a big credibility boost. Kemp and President Donald Trump have been trying to agree on a mutual candidate to back for Senate in 2026, hoping to avoid the conflict that plagued Kelly Loeffler's unsuccessful run, where she lost to Democrat Raphael Warnock in a 2021 runoff. That, along with Republican David Perdue's loss to Ossoff on the same day handed control of the U.S. Senate to Democrats. Trump had preferred then U.S. Rep Doug Collins instead of Loeffler. Then in 2022, Trump anointed Georgia football legend Herschel Walker as the Republican nominee, but Warnock turned back Walker's flawed candidacy in another runoff. Kemp only swung in to help Walker in the runoff. The effort to screen 2026 candidates has already produced some results, with U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene saying she wouldn't bring her right-wing positions to the Senate campaign trail. Dooley would be far from the first sports figure to run for office. His father was frequently discussed as a possible candidate, but never took the plunge. But other coaches have gone far. Former Auburn University football coach Tommy Tuberville was elected to the Senate in 2020 from Alabama and is now running for governor. Former Ohio State University coach Jim Tressel is currently that state's lieutenant governor. And University of Nebraska coaching legend Tom Osborne served three terms in the U.S. House. Dooley walked on in football at the University of Virginia and earned a scholarship as a wide receiver. He earned a law degree from the University of Georgia and briefly practiced law in Atlanta before working his way up the college coaching ladder, becoming head coach for three years at Louisiana Tech and then moving on to Tennessee. Dooley recorded three consecutive losing seasons in Knoxville before he was fired in 2012 after losing to in-state rival Vanderbilt. After that, he has worked as an assistant coach for the NFL's Miami Dolphins and Dallas Cowboys, the University of Missouri and the New York Giants. Most recently, Dooley was an offensive analyst with the University of Alabama.


Bloomberg
2 hours ago
- Bloomberg
Trump's Patience With Putin Leaves Senate Sanctions Push on Hold
President Donald Trump's suggestion that he may let Russia and Ukraine keep fighting has left US lawmakers in an awkward spot over their plan to force a ceasefire with 'bone-crushing' sanctions against Moscow. The Senate bill has more than 80 co-sponsors, an all-but-unheard-of level of bipartisan support. Yet although that kind of veto-proof backing is enough for the Senate to press ahead without White House backing, supporters show no sign they're ready to challenge the president.

4 hours ago
Democratic states double down on laws resisting Trump's immigration crackdown
As President Donald Trump's administration targets states and local governments for not cooperating with federal immigration authorities, lawmakers in some Democratic-led states are intensifying their resistance by strengthening state laws restricting such cooperation. In California alone, more than a dozen pro-immigrant bills passed either the Assembly or Senate this week, including one prohibiting schools from allowing federal immigration officials into nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant. Other state measures have sought to protect immigrants in housing, employment and police encounters, even as Trump's administration has ramped up arrests as part of his plan for mass deportations. In Connecticut, legislation pending before Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont would expand a law that already limits when law enforcement officers can cooperate with federal requests to detain immigrants. Among other things, it would let 'any aggrieved person' sue municipalities for alleged violations of the state's Trust Act. Two days after lawmakers gave final approval to the measure, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security included Connecticut on a list of hundreds of 'sanctuary jurisdictions' obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws. The list later was removed from the department's website after criticism that it errantly included some local governments that support Trump's immigration policies. Since taking office in January, Trump has enlisted hundreds of state and local law enforcement agencies to help identify immigrants in the U.S. illegally and detain them for potential deportation. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement now lists 640 such cooperative agreements, a nearly fivefold increase under Trump. Trump also has lifted longtime rules restricting immigration enforcement near schools, churches and hospitals, and ordered federal prosecutors to investigate state or local officials believed to be interfering with his crackdown on illegal immigration. The Department of Justice sued Colorado, Illinois and New York, as well as several cities in those states and New Jersey, alleging their policies violate the U.S. Constitution or federal immigration laws. Just three weeks after Colorado was sued, Democratic Gov. Jared Polis signed a wide-ranging law expanding the state's protections for immigrants. Among other things, it bars jails from delaying the release of inmates for immigration enforcement and allows penalties of up to $50,000 for public schools, colleges, libraries, child care centers and health care facilities that collect information about people's immigration status, with some exceptions. Polis rejected the administration's description of Colorado as a 'sanctuary state,' asserting that law officers remain 'deeply committed' to working with federal authorities on criminal investigations. 'But to be clear, state and local law enforcement cannot be commandeered to enforce federal civil immigration laws,' Polis said in a bill-signing statement. Illinois also has continued to press pro-immigrant legislation. A bill recently given final approval says no child can be denied a free public education because of immigration status — something already guaranteed nationwide under a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision. Supporters say the state legislation provides a backstop in case court precedent is overturned. The bill also requires schools to develop policies on handling requests from federal immigration officials and allows lawsuits for alleged violations of the measure. Democratic-led states are pursuing a wide range of means to protect immigrants. A new Oregon law bars landlords from inquiring about the immigration status of tenants or applicants. New laws in Washington declare it unprofessional conduct for bail bond agents to enforce civil immigration warrants, prohibit employers from using immigration status to threaten workers and let employees use paid sick leave to attend immigration proceedings for themselves or family members. Vermont last month repealed a state law that let law enforcement agencies enter into immigration enforcement agreements with federal authorities during state or national emergencies. They now need special permission from the governor to do so. As passed by the House, Maryland legislation also would have barred local governments from reaching immigration enforcement agreements with the federal government. That provision was removed in the Senate following pushback from some of the seven Maryland counties that currently have agreements. The final version, which took effect as law at the start of June, forbids public schools and libraries from granting federal immigration authorities access to nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant or 'exigent circumstances.' Maryland Del. Nicole Williams said residents' concerns about Trump's immigration policies prompted her to sponsor the legislation. 'We believe that diversity is our strength, and our role as elected officials is to make sure that all of the residents within our community — regardless of their background — feel safe and comfortable,' Williams said. Though legislation advancing in Democratic states may shield against Trump's policies, 'I would say it's more so to send a message to immigrant communities to let them know that they are welcome,' said Juan Avilez, a policy associate at the American Immigration Council, a nonprofit advocacy group. In California, a law that took effect in 2018 already requires public schools to adopt policies 'limiting assistance with immigration enforcement to the fullest extent possible.' Some schools have readily applied the law. When DHS officers attempted a welfare check on migrant children at two Los Angeles elementary schools in April, they were denied access by both principals. Legislation passed by the state Senate would reinforce such policies by specifically requiring a judicial warrant for public schools to let immigration authorities into nonpublic areas, allow students to be questioned or disclose information about students and their families. 'Having ICE in our schools means that you'll have parents who will not want to send their kids to school at all,' Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener said in support of the bill. But some Republicans said the measure was 'injecting partisan immigration policies' into schools. 'We have yet to see a case in California where we have scary people in masks entering schools and ripping children away,' said state Sen. Marie Alvarado-Gil. 'Let's stop these fear tactics that do us an injustice.'