Maximizing Access to Medications through Efficient Use of CARE Act Resources

HRSA\u27s HIV/AIDS Bureau (HAB) contracted with the George Washington University to conduct a series of studies regarding various aspects of HIV medications funding through the Ryan White Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency (CARE) Act, including the Title II-funded AIDS Drug Assistance Program and Title I-funded AIDS Pharmaceutical Assistance Programs. The goal of the studies was to inform HAB regarding (1) opportunities to promote more efficient use of scarce resources for HIV-related medications and (2) policy options that might ensure equitable access to life-saving therapies for low-income people living with HIV (PLWH). The three key issues addressed and the related study questions are shown in Table 1 on page 3. This report summarizes the methods, limitations, major findings, and recommendations of these studies. The contents of this report are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of HRSA

Developing Standardized Language for Use in LGBT Health Research

BACKGROUND: In the past two decades, the LGBT community in the United States has been more visible, active, and positively accepted by society. As acceptance progresses, research interests on the LGBT population have increased, driving the need for standard language for researchers to share for comparative and community-based participatory research. What term is right? is often the question researchers ask a very diverse LGBT community. In August 2012, the District of Columbia\u27s Office of LGBT Affairs identified incongruent language in a number of published reports commissioned by the Mayor\u27s Office. The Office realized the importance of standardized language for health services research in order for studies and findings to be generalized. OBJECTIVE: To create an executive document for the Mayor\u27s Office of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Affairs (GLBT) of standardized LGBT language that can be distributed and used by DC Government agencies in survey questions and other data collection tools in order to assess reliability and gain fidelity. METHODS: Three previous research reports were analyzed along with the Philadelphia LGBT Community Assessment Report (2006) that presents the results of data collection and analysis about LGBT populations in the City of Philadelphia. These reports expanded upon a growing body of work being done nationally that examined the demographics and trends of LGBT communities and their cultures. The new ACA guidelines regarding HHS standards for data collection was also analyzed for this research. About 15-20 current studies, reports, and surveys on the LGBT community were also analyzed to gain knowledge of current language usage in LGBT research. Finally, a literature review was conducted to gather terms used in published works. RESULTS: A glossary of thirty new standardized terms were created defining words, including homophobia, sexual identity, intimate partner, among others. The glossary was provided to the Mayor\u27s Office for utilization during data collection within the LGBT community and was distributed to DC Government agencies for drafting LGBT surveys, in-take forms, and other data collection tools. CONCLUSIONS: The current climate surrounding LGBT issues calls for both politically correct and culturally sensitive language. Minimal research has been conducted to strengthen LGBT terminology for health services research. Creating a standardized glossary of terms for the Office of LGBT affairs was necessary to bring clarity and consistency to research conducted in the LGBT community