State Category: New Mexico

Seven Strategies to Support State-level Health-Promoting Policies

Reductions in federal and state funding, infrastructure, and workforce have reduced capacity for states to support communities’ health and wellbeing. With less federal support, states and localities will play an even more critical role in advancing health promoting policy.

However, state leaders and advocates face an increasingly complex policy environment to advance community health in the current landscape. As part of TFAH’s Promoting Health and Cost Control in States (PHACCS) initiative, we asked policy advocates and government staff from around the U.S. how national organizations and other non-federal partners can support efforts to advance policies and programs that can promote health and reduce healthcare spending.

The following summarizes those individuals’ responses, framed as opportunities for national-level partners to deepen their state engagement toward policy change.

Support Area 1: Increase funding for organizations, especially flexible use of funds.

Lack of flexible funding at federal, state, and local levels slows efforts to advance policy goals and address community needs. With federal funding in flux, support from philanthropic funders at community, state and national levels, as well as other national partners, can help address some of the funding gaps faced by community organizations.

National-level partners can:

  • Provide seed funds to jumpstart implementation efforts.
  • Educate grantees about how to maximize philanthropic funds for advocacy.
  • Support flexible funding mechanisms for advocacy organizations to address their structural needs.
  • Set realistic expectations for funding support through manageable timelines and goals.
  • Allow for greater flexibility in how funds can be used so that organizations can address needs specific to their community.

Support Area 2: Provide targeted technical assistance to organizations with a specific need or problem.

Even as national-level partners face their own challenges, they can also help those at the local level meet the moment, especially as local resources and staff time are more constrained. Partners can invest in people and communities who can do the work effectively.

National-level partners can:

  • Help organizations navigate the grant proposal process and identify relevant funding opportunities.
  • Assist resource-strained organizations with developing funding proposals.
  • Modify reporting requirements so that organizations can satisfy grant requirements and increase their chances for continued funding.
  • Provide policy support and advice, especially in a fast-changing policy environment.
  • Provide support for organizations to evaluate their work to demonstrate impact.

Support Area 3: Encourage capacity building that allows advocates to invest in people and communities who can do the work effectively.

Capacity building should inform community strategies to train and build skills for organizations to meet needs on their own and increase operational, programmatic, financial, or organizational capacity to advance their goals.  National-level partners can:

  • Ensure there is authentic power sharing between national and state/local advocacy groups or governments.
  • Build governance expertise by helping state/local advocacy groups or governments understand their legal authorities and identify legal and policy tools to promote health.
  • Help build coalitions and networking opportunities to enhance cross-sector collaboration and strengthen relationships.
  • Provide resources that share best practices and evidence-based strategies to promote health.
  • Offer advocacy skills, strategies, and tools to help state policy efforts gain bipartisan support.

Support Area 4: Invest in community power building that encourages deeper synergy between community, state/local government, and national partners. 

Partnering with states to advance policy strategies can ensure there is a deeper throughline with community, state/local government, and national partners. National-level partners can:

  • Develop tools to guide community power building by centering community needs.
  • Incorporate community engagement efforts into funding.
  • Help build political electoral power at state levels to harness and leverage community power to advance local, community-driven policy solutions.
  • Help disengaged community members see systemic issues as solvable.
  • Reframe wins and losses as steps for a long-term agenda to avoid burnout and create a culture of well-being.

Support Area 5: Ensure better access to and use of data and research, especially to inform stories for both decisionmakers and residents.

Even with greater mistrust in data, science, and evidence, national partners should continue supporting advocates in accessing readily available and easily interpretable data and research to build a case for evidence-based policy. National-level partners can:

  • Improve the data and evidence base, considering how data is collected and shared back with communities.
  • Ensure accountability for data sovereignty for Tribal nations and state relationships.
  • Use local research and local examples of successful policy adoption and implementation to demonstrate the possibilities and benefits of pursuing a health-promoting policy.
  • Provide support to ensure that quantitative data is paired with lived experience narratives to provide context for advocacy.

Support Area 6: Exercise empathy and awareness about the challenges faced by states and localities. 

States and localities can feel isolated and misunderstood, especially as they face unique challenges amid evolving political and funding environments. To ensure states and localities feel heard and understood, national-level partners can:

  • Recognize and acknowledge unique state and local challenges.
  • Allow flexibility in reporting requirements and language, especially as some entities may be less able to pursue explicitly equity-focused efforts.
  • Help partners build an advocacy case by sharing successful efforts and lessons learned by similar states or localities.
  • Recognize the need to balance national and state and local expertise, knowing when to share leadership responsibilities in leading local efforts to advance policy.

Support Area 7: Maintain and nurture effective collaboration with partners to advance policy.

National-level organizations are uniquely positioned to help state entities identify partners to advance policy. Specifically, national groups can help build opportunities for brainstorming, collaboration and peer learning. To support collaboration, national-level partners can:

  • Create spaces for state and local leaders to share and amplify their stories.
  • Ensure authentic partnerships that offer equitable support for community partners.
  • Use their convening power and knowledge of the field to identify a unifying goal and vision for the future.
  • Provide resources for organizations and government partners to collaborate with others in similar states, political environments, and regions.

TFAH’s Statement on the Impact of the Loss of CDC Grants

(Washington, DC – February 11, 2026) — TFAH is deeply alarmed at the most recent cancellation of hundreds of millions of dollars in CDC grants to states and communities.  These funds support the core public health infrastructure that keeps Americans safe, including early detection of outbreaks, preventing injuries and HIV, reducing health disparities, strengthening the public health workforce, and modernizing outdated data systems.

These abrupt cuts undermine the ability of health departments, clinics, researchers, and community-based organizations to protect lives and respond to health threats.

Protecting the health and well-being of all Americans requires sustained, predictable investment, not sudden reversals that leave communities vulnerable.  We urge HHS to reverse these cancellations and restore these life-saving programs.

Public Health Leaders’ Joint Statement in Response to Announced Changes to U.S. Childhood Vaccine Schedule

(Washington, DC – January 5, 2026) — Together, the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO), Trust for America’s Health (TFAH), and the Big Cities Health Coalition (BCHC) issued the following statement in response to today’s announcement by the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) of significant changes to the U.S. childhood vaccination schedule:

Our nation’s vaccine schedule has been built upon extensive scientific evidence and continuous safety monitoring to best protect children as they grow. It has been deliberated and studied to ensure safety while protecting our nation’s children from diseases that can significantly harm their health and wellbeing. For decades, each change to the schedule was discussed openly by experts, with both benefits and risks considered. However, today’s announcement places increased burden on parents and health providers to navigate an increasingly complex system and assure access to these life-saving products.

Immunizations are the most effective defense we have against a host of deadly and painful illnesses. Ensuring all children receive the vaccines they need on time stops diseases from spreading in the community and ensures healthy childhood development. We see the positive impact each day, as diseases once commonplace are now rare, and kids are in school instead of being home sick or hospitalized due to preventable illness. Creating new barriers to immunizations, as today’s announcement does, will make it harder for children to have the opportunity to grow up healthy and strong.

###

Trust for America’s Health
Trust for America’s Health is a nonprofit, nonpartisan public health research, policy, and advocacy organization that promotes optimal health for every person and community and makes the prevention of illness and injury a national priority.

About NACCHO
The National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO) represents the over 3,300 local governmental health departments across the country. These city, county, metropolitan, district, and tribal departments work every day to protect and promote health and well-being for all people in their communities. For more information, visit www.naccho.org.

About the Big Cities Health Coalition
The Big Cities Health Coalition (BCHC) is a forum for the leaders of America’s largest metropolitan health departments to exchange strategies and jointly address issues to promote and protect the health and safety of their residents. Collectively, BCHC member jurisdictions directly impact more than 61 million people, or one in five Americans. www.bigcitieshealth.org

 

 

 

New Report Examines State Policies that Support Good Health and Analyzes the Legislative Landscape for their Implementation

Federal cuts to health promoting programs will require that states and community partners innovate and work across sectors to protect and advance residents’ health

 

(Washington, DC – December 17, 2025) – Federal actions that cut funding and lead to program eliminations throughout government will slow the implementation of state-level policies that promote health, concludes a new report, Advancing Policies that Create Conditions for Good Health: Opportunities, Barriers, and Strengths, released today by Trust for America’s Health (TFAH). These program changes will create gaps that states and cross-sector partnerships could help address through support for collaboration and innovation.

The report is the newest in TFAH’s Promoting Health and Cost Control in States (PHACCS) report series highlighting evidence-based policies and programs states can pursue to improve residents’ health and reduce healthcare spending. Population-level health is influenced by a variety of social and economic factors, such as housing access, food affordability, the built environment, and workplace policies. The PHACCS Initiative, launched in 2018, identifies evidence-based policies that states can implement to promote residents’ health and create economic return on investment.

This new report considers these policies in the current legislative landscape, based on input from advocates, service providers, and government staff across different jurisdictions and policy areas. It analyzes how the changed legislative environment is impeding policy action and what new innovations and cross-sector collaborations are needed to create or protect policy momentum.

“The nation’s public health infrastructure has been changed in consequential ways that will impact states and communities across the country. These changes, including funding cuts and the elimination of effective programs, risk reversing progress in improving Americans’ health,” said J. Nadine Gracia, M.D. MSCE, President and CEO of Trust for America’s Health. “In order to fill some of these gaps, state-based organizations and policymakers are developing strategies to support health promoting policies, particularly in communities with the greatest need.”

The report is organized into three sections which encourage states and cross-sector partners to continue their work promoting good health in every community by sharing information, evidence, and innovative strategies.

“Leaders within policy areas supported by the PHACCS initiative continue to leverage strategies that help advance policies in ways that uniquely fit their states despite fiscal constraints created by the current budget environment,” said Breanca Merritt, Ph.D., Director of Policy at Trust for America’s Health. “This report identified recent progress and policy wins using these approaches, including bipartisan and community-driven efforts within multiple states.”

The first section, Creating Conditions for Good Health: A Changing Policy Environment, outlines federal policies that have supported states in advancing health promoting programs, as well as recent federal policy decisions and state actions that limit states’ ability to do so.

The second section, Creating Conditions for Good Health: What’s Working for States, summarizes input from advocacy organizations and government partners collected during national and regional level convenings. During the convenings, participants discussed effective strategies for advancing health promoting policies in states as well as barriers to their implementation.

The last section of the report, Creating Conditions for Good Health: Progress and Highlights of PHACCS Policies reviews trends in state-level adoption within policy areas highlighted by PHACCS, including:

  • Universal pre-kindergarten programs
  • School nutrition programs
  • Drug overdose and infectious disease prevention strategies, including harm reduction
  • Smoke-free policies
  • Tobacco and alcohol pricing strategies
  • Complete Streets policies
  • Housing rehabilitation and rapid re-housing programs
  • Earned Income Tax Credit
  • Earned employee sick leave
  • Paid family leave
  • Fair hiring practices

These policies have shown strong or emerging evidence for their ability to improve health and can offer return on investment for states that implement them. In the coming years, states and their community partners should strive to collaborate even more closely to support their implementation.

 

 

Statement from J. Nadine Gracia, M.D., MSCE, President and CEO of Trust for America’s Health on Changes to CDC Webpage on Vaccines and Autism:

(Washington, DC – November 20, 2025) – “The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s website has been changed to promote harmful, false claims about vaccines and autism. The science is clear: vaccines do not cause autism. Using a federal platform to promote disproven claims is a violation of public trust that jeopardizes vaccine confidence, undermines prevention efforts, and puts communities at risk of vaccine-preventable outbreaks. These myths contribute to needless illness and suffering.

Parents, patients, healthcare providers, and public health practitioners depend on CDC as a trustworthy source of verified, accurate scientific information.  Trust for America’s Health calls upon the CDC to restore the previous, science-driven vaccine webpages.”

 

 

The Number of People in the U.S. Serving as Informal Caregivers is Growing, Yet Support and Assistance for Them is Shrinking, According to New Policy Brief

Public health agencies can play vital role in supporting caregivers

(Washington, DC – September 30, 2025) – As the percentage of older adults continues to grow in the United States, so do the number of people providing informal caregiving to them. A new policy brief highlighting the role of caregivers, published by Trust for America’s Health (TFAH) today, finds that many people who provide unpaid, informal caregiving are experiencing increasing levels of economic, emotional, and physical hardships as a result. The brief highlights the many roles that public health agencies can play in supporting caregivers and that more federal and state interventions are needed to support this growing segment of the population.

The brief, Public Health’s Roles in Supporting Informal and Family Caregivers, reports that 41.8 million people served as a caregiver to an adult over the age of 50 in 2020, an increase of over 7 million people who provided unpaid care to a family member or friend in 2015.

“The prevalence of caregiving in the U.S. has grown exponentially more complex,” said Megan Wolfe, senior policy development manager at TFAH who leads its Age-Friendly Public Health Systems initiative. “As more jurisdictions work to be age-friendly communities, having a nuanced understanding of the role and challenges facing caregivers will allow public health organizations to work with community partners to advocate for and provide the support caregivers need.”

The caregiving population is a diverse one, with about 40 percent of caregivers being individuals of color (17 percent Hispanic or Latino, 14 percent non-Hispanic Black, 5 percent Asian American and Pacific Islander, and 3 percent some other race/ethnicity, including those who identified as multiracial), according to the brief.

Women that serve as caregivers and caregivers of color face greater financial stress and physical demands that can impact their health, including experiencing depressive symptoms and feeling ignored or difficulty navigating healthcare systems.

TFAH’s Age-Friendly Public Health Systems (AFPHS) provides guidance for public health practitioners on the policy and systems changes that are needed to advance healthy aging and build supportive communities. This includes programs and activities that support caregivers, including better availability and easier navigation of caregivers’ supports.

The brief provides recommendations for the roles of public health that are aligned with the AFPHS Framework, including:

  • Advocate for changes to the workplace to create supports for caregivers including leave policies and employment protections.
  • Help create cross sector initiatives that support older adult and caregiver needs.
  • Work with the healthcare sector to ensure that healthcare providers understand and can refer caregivers to non-clinical support resources in their communities.
  • Collect data on the experience of caregivers and help communities design programs that meet their needs.
  • Model the use of culturally appropriate communication strategies that recognize the diversity of the caregiving population.
  • Create programs that provide caregivers with the tools they need to care for themselves and their care recipients.

TFAH’s Age-Friendly Public Health Systems initiative is made possible with generous support from The John A. Hartford Foundation.

To learn more about the Age-Friendly Public Health Systems initiative, visit Age-Friendly Public Health Systems – Trust for America’s Health (afphs.org)

# # #

Trust for America’s Health is a nonprofit, nonpartisan public health policy, research, and advocacy organization that promotes optimal health for every person and community and works to make the prevention of illness and injury a national priority.

The John A. Hartford Foundation, based in New York City, is a private, nonpartisan, national philanthropy dedicated to improving the care of older adults. The leader in the field of aging and health, the Foundation has three areas of emphasis: creating age-friendly health systems, supporting family caregivers and improving serious illness and end-of-life care. https://www.johnahartford.org/

Nuevo análisis El presupuesto de los CDC se reduciría en un 53 % si se adopta el presupuesto propuesto por la Administración para el año fiscal 2026; más de sesenta programas de los CDC quedarían eliminados

Los programas estatales y locales de salud pública y preparación se verán considerablemente afectados

(Washington, DC – 18 de septiembre de 2025) – Los departamentos de salud en estados y localidades de todo el país están enfrentando severas reducciones presupuestarias debido a los recortes federales, recaptura de fondos, despidos y congelamiento de contrataciones, y reorganizaciones, tanto actuales como propuestos. Estas acciones debilitarán considerablemente el sistema sanitario y la preparación y respuesta ante emergencias de la nación y pondrá en peligro la salud y la seguridad económica del país. Estas son las conclusiones de un nuevo informe, Public Health Infrastructure in Crisis: HHS Workforce Cuts, Reorganizations, and Funding Reductions: Impacts and Solutions (“La infraestructura sanitaria en crisis: Recortes de personal del HHS, reorganizaciones y reducciones de financiamiento: impactos y soluciones”) publicado hoy por Trust for America’s Health (TFAH), una organización sin fines de lucro y apartidaria dedicada a la investigación y las políticas en materia de salud pública.

El informe, que incluye un análisis original de TFAH, calcula los impactos de las reducciones presupuestarias y de personal y las reorganizaciones hasta la fecha, así como también los cambios adicionales propuestos, y resalta las siguientes conclusiones:

  • El presupuesto plateado por el Presidente para el año fiscal 2026 para los Centros para el Control y la Prevención de Enfermedades (CDC) asciende al 53 % de reducción en comparación con el año fiscal 2024. Esta cifra refleja los recortes propuestos para los CDC y su hermana, la Agencia para Sustancias Tóxicas y el Registro de Enfermedades (ATSDR). Estas reducciones están pendientes de acción en el Congreso.
  • Además, dentro del recorte total propuesto, el Programa de Preparación ante Emergencias de Salud Pública de los CDC enfrenta una reducción de fondos del 52 %.
  • En total, el presupuesto presentado recorta poco más de la mitad del financiamiento para los CDC y la ATSDR y restaura alrededor de un cuarto de los fondos perdidos hacia dos divisiones del HHS recientemente creadas: la Administración para una América Sana y la Oficina de Estrategias.
  • Más de 100 programas de salud pública y líneas de financiamiento serían eliminadas bajo el presupuesto presentado por el Presidente para el año fiscal 2026, incluidos 61 programas de los CDC y 40 programas de la Administración de Salud Mental y Abuso de Sustancias. Entre los programas en riesgo de eliminación están los de prevención de cáncer, diabetes, enfermedad coronaria y accidente cerebrovascular; los de prevención de la obesidad; los de prevención del VIH/SIDA, tanto nacionales como internacionales; los de inmunización global; y los de recuperación y prevención del uso de opiáceos y otras sustancias.
  • La reorganización propuesta para las agencias del Departamento de Salud y Servicios Humanos de los Estados Unidos (HHS) reduciría en un 16 % la cantidad de personal que trabaja en programas de salud pública, incluso contando la creación de la Administración para una América Sana que se ha propuesto.
  • Este año la rescisión de fondos ya aprobados recapturó 12 000 millones de USD en subvenciones de la época de la covid-19; fondos que además de apoyar la respuesta a la pandemia estaban destinados a reforzar la infraestructura de salud pública más allá de las necesidades creadas por la pandemia, como el monitoreo de enfermedades infecciosas, la capacidad de laboratorio, la preparación ante emergencias y los servicios de salud mental.

El informe se concentra en los cambios en los CDC y otras agencias del HHS debido a su rol central en el apoyo de los programas de salud pública y la respuesta a crisis a nivel estatal y local. Alrededor del 80 % del presupuesto interno de los CDC va hacia estados, localidades, tribus y organizaciones tribales, sistemas de salud y actores comunitarios para apoyar iniciativas de salud pública estatales y locales. Los fondos federales representan cerca de la mitad de los presupuestos de los departamentos de salud estatales y locales, por lo que los recortes en el gasto federal son recortes en los presupuestos de salud pública.

“Los grandes cambios que ocurren en las agencias federales de salud pública afectan a todas las comunidades y tienen impacto sobre la vida de toda la ciudadanía. Los departamentos sanitarios estatales y locales, que están en la primera línea de protección de la salud de sus residentes, dependen del gobierno federal, en particular de los CDC, para obtener financiamiento de la salud pública, experticia y asistencia técnica. Con la pérdida de fondos, personal y programas, nuestro país estará menos preparado para futuras emergencias sanitarias, la salud de la ciudadanía sufrirá y aumentarán los costos de la salud”, dijo J. Nadine Gracia, M.D., MSCE, presidenta y directora ejecutiva de Trust for America’s Health.

El informe incluye entrevistas con dos responsables de oficinas de salud pública —el Dr. Scott Harris, Responsable de la Oficina de Salud Estatal de Alabama, y la Dra. Katherine Wells, Directora de Salud Pública de la ciudad de Lubbock, Texas—, quienes describen los impactos y los desafíos creados en el territorio por las acciones federales, tanto las que están en curso como las que se proponen. Ambas oficinas están luchando con reducciones presupuestarias de por lo menos la mitad de su presupuesto anual como resultado de los recortes federales.

El informe también reconoce que el sistema de salud pública tiene áreas por mejorar. Necesita modernizarse y fortalecerse para satisfacer los desafíos sanitarios tanto actuales como emergentes de la población. El informe hace un llamamiento a la colaboración entre la administración, el Congreso y las oficinas de salud pública para reforzar el sistema con acciones basadas en datos. Algunas de las acciones que recomienda son:

  • El Congreso y la administración deberían restaurar las agencias federales de salud, los fondos y el personal que se recortaron en 2025.
  • La administración y el Congreso deberían mantener y reforzar la estructura y las capacidades de las agencias federales de salud, que tienen roles específicos, complementarios y distintos y cuentan con experticia en la protección de la salud de la nación.
  • El Congreso, en colaboración con agencias federales y especialistas y actores externos, debería llevar adelante un proceso deliberativo bipartidista de revisión de propuestas para la reestructuración de las agencias federales de salud o el desarrollo de nuevas agencias.
  • El Congreso y la administración deberían fortalecer el CDC como una agencia de salud pública integral nacional con responsabilidades en materia de detección, prevención y mitigación de las principales causas de muerte prevenible, enfermedades y lesiones.
  • Las agencias federales deben gastar todos los fondos asignados por el Congreso, conforme a la ley, y la Oficina de Administración y Presupuesto debería liberar hacia las agencias fondos para todo el año luego de la promulgación de la ley de asignación.
  • El Congreso debería garantizar el mejoramiento continuo de las capacidades de salud pública y los servicios esenciales de la nación, como el personal, los laboratorios y los sistemas de datos en todos los niveles.
  • El Congreso debería restaurar el Fondo de Prevención y Salud Pública, un fuente crucial de fondos sostenidos para la prevención de enfermedades y actividades de promoción de la salud en cada estado y territorio, así como también en localidades y comunidades tribales, y prevenir futuros recortes.

El informe completo puede leerse en: https://www.tfah.org/report-details/funding-report-2025