Virginia: Baseline Report - State Level Field Network Study of the Implementation of the Affordable Care Act

This report is part of a series of 21 state and regional studies examining the rollout of the ACA. The national network -- with 36 states and 61 researchers -- is led by the Rockefeller Institute of Government, the public policy research arm of the State University of New York, the Brookings Institution, and the Fels Institute of Government at the University of Pennsylvania.By and large, Virginia opponents of the Affordable Care Act have been able to thwart full implementation at the state level. This can be seen in Virginia's decision to default to a federally facilitated marketplace and refusal to close the coverage gap. Having control of the executive branch and legislature until 2014 allowed lawmakers to minimize the impacts of the ACA, implementing only what was legally required of them and ignoring calls from advocates for low-income people who called for fuller implementation.There remains the possibility for significant changes, including the structure and functioning of the marketplace as well as closing the coverage gap that would alter the state and national policy landscape. There remains serious debate about if and how Virginia will close the coverage gap. If Virginia moved forward, nearly 400,000 Virginians could get access to quality, affordable health care. Moreover, some advocates have asserted that Virginia could be the linchpin in opening up the South to Medicaid expansion

Adapting the ADVANCE group program for digitally-supported delivery to reduce intimate partner violence by men in substance use treatment: a feasibility study

IntroductionCOVID-19 restrictions created barriers to “business as usual” in healthcare but also opened the door to innovation driven by necessity. This manuscript (1) describes how ADVANCE, an in-person group perpetrator program to reduce intimate partner violence (IPV) against female (ex)partners by men in substance use treatment, was adapted for digitally-supported delivery (ADVANCE-D), and (2) explores the feasibility and acceptability of delivering ADVANCE-D to men receiving substance use treatment.MethodsFirstly, the person-based approach and mHealth development framework were used to iteratively adapt ADVANCE for digitally-supported delivery including conceptualization, formative research, and pre-testing. Then, a non-randomized feasibility study was conducted to assess male participants’ eligibility, recruitment, and attendance rates and uptake of support offered to their (ex)partners. Exploratory analyses on reductions in IPV perpetration (assessed using the Abusive Behavior Inventory; ABI) and victimization (using the revised ABI; ABI-R) at the end of the program were performed. Longitudinal qualitative interviews with participants, their (ex)partners, and staff provided an understanding of the program’s implementation, acceptability, and outcomes.ResultsThe adapted ADVANCE-D program includes one goal-setting session, seven online groups, 12 self-directed website sessions, and 12 coaching calls. ADVANCE-D includes enhanced risk management and support for (ex)partners. Forty-five participants who had perpetrated IPV in the past 12 months were recruited, forty of whom were offered ADVANCE-D, attending 11.4 (SD 9.1) sessions on average. Twenty-one (ex)partners were recruited, 13 of whom accepted specialist support. Reductions in some IPV perpetration and victimization outcome measures were reported by the 25 participants and 11 (ex)partners interviewed pre and post-program, respectively. Twenty-two participants, 11 (ex)partners, 12 facilitators, and 7 integrated support service workers were interviewed at least once about their experiences of participation. Overall, the program content was well-received. Some participants and facilitators believed digital sessions offered increased accessibility.ConclusionThe digitally-supported delivery of ADVANCE-D was feasible and acceptable. Remote delivery has applicability post-pandemic, providing greater flexibility and access. Given the small sample size and study design, we do not know if reductions in IPV were due to ADVANCE-D, time, participant factors, or chance. More research is needed before conclusions can be made about the efficacy of ADVANCE-D

Toward More Effective Judicial Implementation of Treaty-Based Rights

This Article argues that the approach to treaties taken early in the history of the Republic is more consistent with the intended meaning of the Supremacy Clause than the approach reflected in recent judicial practice

Quality of antenatal care and associated factors in a rural county in Kenya: an assessment of service provision and experience dimensions.

BackgroundThis study aimed to assess the quality of antenatal care (ANC) women received in Migori county, Kenya-including both service provision and experience dimensions-and to examine factors associated with each dimension.MethodsWe used survey data collected in 2016 in Migori county from 1031 women aged 15-49 who attended ANC at least once in their most recent pregnancy. ANC quality service provision was measured by nine questions on receipt of recommended ANC services, and experience of care by 18 questions on information, communication, dignity, and facility environment. We summed the responses to the individual items to generate ANC service provision and experience of care scores. We used both linear and logistic regression to examine predictors.ResultsThe average service provision score was 10.9 (SD = 2.4) out of a total of 16. Most women received some recommended services once, but not at the frequency recommended by the Kenyan Ministry of Health. About 90% had their blood pressure measured, and 78% had a urine test, but only 58 and 14% reported blood pressure monitoring and urine test, respectively, at every visit. Only 16% received an ultrasound at any time during ANC. The average experience score is 27.3 (SD = 8.2) out of a total score of 42, with key gaps demonstrated in communication. About half of women were not educated on pregnancy complications. Also, about one-third did not often understand the purposes of tests and medicines received and did not feel able to ask questions to the health care provider. In multivariate analysis, women who were literate, employed, and who received all their ANC in a health center had higher experiences scores than women who were illiterate (coefficient = 1.52, CI:0.26,2.79), unemployed (coefficient = 2.73, CI:1.46,4.00), and received some ANC from a hospital (coefficient = 1.99, CI: 0.84, 3.14) respectively. The wealthiest women had two times higher odds of receiving an ultrasound than the poorest women (OR = 2.00, CI:1.20,3.33).ConclusionQuality of ANC is suboptimal in both service provision and experience domains, with disparities by demographic and socioeconomic factors and facility type. More efforts are needed to improve quality of ANC and to eliminate the disparities