Including Children in Immigrant Families in Policy Approaches to Reduce Child Poverty.

Although they are an increasing share of the US child population (26% in 2020) and have much higher poverty rates than children in nonimmigrant families (20.9% vs 9.9%), children in immigrant families have much more restricted access to the social safety net, which can lead to increased economic hardship and health and developmental risks. More than 90% of children in immigrant families are US citizens, but they are excluded from the safety net due to restrictions that affect their parents and other family members. Exclusions that affect children in immigrant families include restricted categorical eligibility based on immigrant status, stricter income eligibility, reduced benefit levels, high administrative burden, and interactions with immigration policy such as public charge. These exclusions limit the ability of both existing and enhanced social programs to reduce child poverty among this population. Results derived from the Transfer Income Model simulations for the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine's 2019 report A Roadmap to Reducing Child Poverty show that the poverty-reducing effects of potential enhancements to three main antipoverty programs result in unequal poverty reduction effects by family citizenship/immigration status with disproportionate negative effects on Hispanic children, 54% of whom live in immigrant families. Policy principles to improve equitable access and poverty-reduction effects of social programs for children in immigrant families include basing eligibility and benefit levels on the developmental, health and nutrition needs of the child instead of the immigration status of other family members, reducing administrative burden, and eliminating the link between immigration policy and access to the safety net.

Restoring An Inclusionary Safety Net For Children In Immigrant Families: A Review Of Three Social Policies.

Since the enactment of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, known as "welfare reform," in 1996, US social policy has increasingly stratified immigrants by legality, extending eligibility exclusions, benefit limitations, and administrative burdens not only to undocumented immigrants but also to lawful permanent residents and US citizens in immigrant families. This stratification is a form of structural discrimination, which is a social determinant of health. Children in immigrant families, most of whom are US citizens, have not been able to fully realize the benefits from social safety-net programs-including the 2020 Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act stimulus payments. Policy deliberations over pandemic recovery, the equity focus of the Biden administration, and proposals to address child poverty provide an opportunity to reexamine immigrant exclusions, restrictions, and administrative burdens in public programs. We discuss immigrant stratification by legal status in social policy and review how it affects citizen children in mixed-status families in three safety-net programs: the Earned Income Tax Credit, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and Child Care and Development Block Grant. We provide eight policy recommendations to restore equity to the social safety net for children in immigrant families.

Integrating racial/ethnic equity into policy assessments to improve child health.

The US child population is rapidly becoming more racially and ethnically diverse, yet there are persistent racial/ethnic gaps in child health. Improving and expanding policies to reduce these gaps is increasingly a mandate of government agencies. Identifying effective policies requires a rigorous approach, yet there is a lack of information about which policies improve equity. This article introduces the Policy Equity Assessment, a framework that combines policy assessment and rigorous equity methods to both synthesize existing research and identify and conduct new analyses of policies' ability to reduce racial/ethnic inequities. We applied the Policy Equity Assessment to three policies: Head Start, the Family and Medical Leave Act, and a federal housing assistance program known as Section 8. Our results show racial/ethnic inequities in access to benefits and substantial data and evidence gaps regarding the impact of policies in improving racial/ethnic equity. These results should motivate policy makers to strengthen equity analysis.

Do Social and Economic Policies Influence Health? A Review.

Although social and economic policies are not considered part of health services infrastructure, such policies may influence health and disease by altering social determinants of health (SDH). We review social and economic policies in the US that have measured health outcomes among adults in four domains of SDH including housing and neighborhood, employment, family strengthening/marriage, and income supplementation. The majority of these policies target low-income populations. These social policies rarely consider health as their initial mission or outcomes. When measuring health, the programs document mental health and physical health benefits more than half the time, although some effects fade with time. We also find considerable segregation of program eligibility by gender and family composition. Policy makers should design future social policies to evaluate health outcomes using validated health measures; to target women more broadly across the socioeconomic spectrum; and to consider family caregiving responsibilities as ignoring them can have unintended health effects.

Evaluating the labour costs associated with pharmacy adaptation services in British Columbia.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacists' scope of practice has been steadily expanding across Canada to encompass clinical activities. In January 2009, pharmacists in British Columbia (BC) were given the authority to adapt prescriptions for renewals; change in dose, formulation or regimen; and therapeutic substitutions. This study evaluated the labour costs associated with pharmacy adaptation services in BC. > METHODS: Ten high-adapting pharmacies participated in the study. Through workflow observations, we measured the time incurred for adapted and nonadapted prescriptions. RESULTS: We observed 91 adapted prescriptions and 1081 nonadapted prescriptions. The total average time to provide adapted prescriptions was 6:43 minutes (SD 3:50) longer than to provide nonadapted prescriptions. The total average cost of an adapted prescription was $6.10 greater than a nonadapted prescription. Renewals took the least amount of time to complete, and therapeutic substitutions took the most time to complete. DISCUSSION: Through workflow observations, it was determined that 10 stages of activity occur when adapting a prescription, with the most time being expended during the documentation and processing phases. Labour costs associated with adapted prescriptions were higher than for nonadapted prescriptions.