Abortion access is important to McCoomb. She wants her daughter to grow up in a state where the option is available if needed, and the sign was a keepsake from the day Missourians voted to reverse the state’s near-total ban. McCoomb also couldn’t shake the feeling that she’d need to display the sign in her yard again soon.

“I have little faith in our Missouri government,” McCoomb said, sitting on her front porch.

Sure enough, just two years later, the state’s Republican-dominated legislature is asking Missouri voters to overturn the abortion protections they recently supported. The conflicting measures even have the same title: Amendment 3. But while a “yes” vote in 2024 supported adding protections to the state constitution, a “no” vote in 2026 would keep them. McCoomb covered the “YES” on her yard sign with a “NO” made from black duct tape before placing the sign back in her yard.

Voters will weigh in on abortion in Missouri, and three other states, in the November general election. Missouri is also one of two states voting on it for the second time since 2024. Nevada will vote again, too.

The spate of referendums comes after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned federal abortion protections with its 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, leaving each state to make its own abortion policy. The result has been a patchwork of state rules of bans or limitations, and even a series of “shield laws” in states where abortion remains legal that aim to protect providers from prosecution in states where it’s not.

“I just think there’s a constitutional crisis that’s coming,” said , vice president of media and policy for the anti-abortion organization Students for Life Action.

“Can you have 50 state standards on whether or not a human being is a human being? Can you have 50 state standards on whether human beings have legal protection?” Hamrick said.

Advocacy Groups Work To Clarify Ballot Measures

That patchwork of abortion protections is the reason Nevadans for Reproductive Freedom introduced the 2024 ballot measure to enshrine the state’s law allowing abortions up to 24 weeks after conception into the state constitution, said , president of the coalition.

The measure received strong support two years ago, with 64% of voters in favor. Nevada law requires two majority votes to enshrine constitutional amendments, so voters will need to support the expanded protection again in November for it to be enacted.

The Nevada ballot measure wouldn’t change the state’s existing law allowing abortions up to 24 weeks after conception. But the proposal would make it more difficult to overturn abortion access, requiring voter approval of any new ban in two elections.

Lopez said Nevadans for Reproductive Freedom has been campaigning to ensure voters are still mobilized.

“Folks care about it,” she said. “They’re seeing what’s happening at the national level, and they want to make sure that whatever’s happening in our neighboring states, like Idaho and Utah, doesn’t happen here in Nevada.”

Idaho, where a ballot measure establishing abortion rights to go before voters in November, has one of the strictest abortion bans in the country. Voters will decide whether state statute should allow abortion through fetal viability, the point when a fetus can survive after birth, which is generally considered to be around 24 weeks.

In Utah, abortion is allowed up to 18 weeks while legal challenges to the state’s ban continue.

In Virginia, where abortion is already allowed through two trimesters of pregnancy, until 28 weeks, voters will decide whether to amend their state constitution to codify those rights.

Missouri is the only state voting this year on removing abortion protections already on the books. The the 2024 amendment that guaranteed abortion access through fetal viability in the state and replace it with a ban on abortions with exceptions for medical emergencies, fetal anomalies, and pregnancies resulting from rape or incest. Abortions for rape and incest would have to occur before 12 weeks of pregnancy.

Missouri was the first state to ban abortion after the Dobbs decision in 2022. At that time, abortions had already mostly ceased in the state after three decades of state regulations targeting the practice, including a , minimum dimensions for procedure rooms and hallways in clinics that provide abortions, and a mandate that the clinicians have at nearby hospitals, among others. Only were performed in Missouri in 2021, down from , state records show.

Even though Missouri voters backed the abortion amendment in 2024, it took nearly two years for medication abortions to resume in the state.

A Second Vote Causes Confusion

, CEO of St. Louis-based Planned Parenthood Great Rivers, said the whiplash of a second statewide vote on abortion mirrors the confusion that patients have experienced about whether abortion is available in the state.

“Chaos is kind of the point here,” Riphagen-Dunn said, “and it is absolutely a tactic that gets in the way of being able to provide.”

The confusion has presented problems for abortion opponents in the state as well.

“I think it’s unfortunate,” said Reagan Barklage, who is a vice president of Students for Life of America and the treasurer of the Missouri Students for Life Ballot Committee. “People need to be very clear on what they’re voting for.”

Barklage said she has had to correct anti-abortion voters while out canvassing to remind them that they are voting “yes” on Amendment 3 this year even though they voted “no” on Amendment 3 last time.

“It is crazy that it ended up being even the same number. I do not think that was intentional, but we’ve got to deal with what we’ve got,” Barklage said, adding, “I hope the pro-choicers kept their yard signs from last time.”

In Maplewood, Missouri, McCoomb said she was happy that her repurposed sign supporting abortion access had been noticed.

“I hope lots of people see and remember to revote,” McCoomb said.

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

Emery is director of New River’s Breathing Center and chair of the .

The disaster she’s reminded of started in 1930, when on a 3-mile tunnel through Gauley Mountain in West Virginia. Over the course of 18 months, some 3,000 miners, most of them Black, spent long hours drilling through sandstone, engulfed in a cloud of its toxic byproduct, silica dust. More than 750 men died from that exposure.

The risk still exists, and advocates for workers say the government should do more to rein it in.

In April of last year, the Trump administration paused the enforcement of a rule designed to help protect coal miners from an aggressive form of coal workers’ pneumoconiosis, commonly known as black lung disease, the primary cause of which is exposure to silica dust.

(Other occupations at high risk of include construction, countertop fabrication, and oil and gas work. The new rule would reduce the permissible limit of exposure in coal mining to the existing level in other industries.)

This April, the Labor Department’s Mine Safety and Health Administration announced an indefinite delay in enforcement of the rule.

Gary Hairston sits on New River Health’s board. For decades, Hairston, a retired coal miner and president of the national , has been an advocate for miners struggling with the debilitating effects of black lung, including extreme fatigue, an incessant cough, and a sensation of drowning. He regularly lobbies legislators for improved working conditions and black lung benefits. His entreaties, he said, seem to fall on deaf ears. He rarely gets an audience with the legislators themselves.

“I’d just like them to look me in the face,” Hairston said.

Evidence from just-released research underscores the urgency of his appeals for a safer work environment.

In August, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, an agency within the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, on the results of testing conducted over the past five years on miners in central Appalachia — eastern Kentucky, southwestern Virginia, and West Virginia — with 25 or more years underground. Almost 1 in 3 tested positive for black lung disease, the highest rate in nearly 50 years.

The rate in 2018, the last time the agency reported results, was 1 in 5. The lowest reported rate, in 1999, was less than 1 in 10.

“We knew this would happen,” said Sam Petsonk, a West Virginia attorney who has represented thousands of miners in the region. “It’s surprising to me that they only found one in three.”

Silica Dangers

Exposure to silica has increased as more-accessible coal seams are depleted, requiring mining operations to probe deeper, often through sandstone. The stone breaks into sharp particles that are than a grain of sand and, according to National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health research, are than coal dust. Trapped in lung tissue, those particles can cause a debilitating, sometimes fatal condition.

Kenny Thompson, a retired West Virginia miner who now lives in Richmond, Kentucky, was employed in the mines for 22 years. He would sometimes cut into four feet of sandstone to reach a coal seam.

“You ate a lot of dust,” Thompson recalled. It induced nausea. It took a toll.

In October 2025, he had his left lung removed. Post-surgery, he was in a coma for three months; he flatlined three times, he said. “They were about to really give up on me.”

He had to relearn to walk and to talk. Trekking to the mailbox still leaves him winded, lightheaded, and blurry-eyed.

The new silica rule would cut the allowable level of silica dust in half, thereby meeting the standard of other industries. Miner advocates laud the fact that it would require operators to deploy engineering controls, such as improved ventilation systems and water sprays.

But the National Mining Association and other industry trade groups argue that reaching and maintaining compliance would also require supplementing those controls with workforce measures, such as requiring personal protection equipment and rotating miners from particularly dusty areas. Many miners, and their advocates, say such measures are impractical — because respirators can impede breathing, can limit vision, and often malfunction, and because smaller mines don’t have enough workers to support rotating schedules.

In April 2025, the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted an emergency stay of the rule to give operators more time to comply.

In May of this year, the Labor Department sent the White House Office of Management and Budget a on the proposed rule. And in July, the department’s regulatory agenda included a new , indicating its intent to amend the rule.

The department’s Mine Safety and Health Administration “recognizes it has a clear duty under the law to impose stricter silica standards,” said Petsonk, the attorney representing coal miners. “They’re failing to provide that measure of protection to American coal miners, so they’re going through bureaucratic motions to make it seem like they’re doing something, when, in fact, they’re just perpetuating an illegal and lethal status quo.”

The Labor Department declined to comment on ongoing rulemaking or litigation.

‘It’s On the Books’

The rule is, in fact, in effect, said Chris Williamson, head of the Mine Safety and Health Administration in the Biden administration — it’s just not being enforced. He and his team filed a legal brief in the closing days of the administration defending the rule.

“It’s on the books,” Williamson said, adding that the prohibits weakening existing protections for miners. “I’m just genuinely curious,” he said. “I want to know how they can address the issues that the industry’s raised without weakening protections for miners.”

Meanwhile, younger miners, with a decade or less in the mines, are being diagnosed with advanced stages of black lung. New River Health’s Emery said the youngest person her clinic had diagnosed with was 30. He’d worked underground for 10 years.

This is no longer just your “papaw’s disease,” she said. “It’s your husband’s disease. It’s your son’s disease.” (More than 90% of coal miners are men.)

With families to support, Emery said, “what do these guys do when they’re disabled in their 30s?”

She told of a man who sat in her office with his wife, describing his symptoms. As he spoke, he began to cry. His wife was taken aback. “‘I didn’t know it was that bad,’” Emery recalled her saying. “And he said: ‘That’s why I haven’t fixed the deck. I haven’t fixed the deck because I can’t breathe, and I’m just so tired.’”

Thompson can relate. “For 22 years, you’re used to getting up, putting your boots on every day, and going to work,” he said. “I’d been in great health shape and 160 pounds. And here I am now, I don’t work at all and I’m 115 pounds.”

Still, he recognizes what the job afforded.

“You know, it put my girls through college,” he said. “And to me, as a dad, that was the best reward that I can give them, to move forward in life, to be successful at what they chose to be and not work like a dog like I had to.”

President Donald Trump said in an : “Our Nation’s beautiful clean coal resources will be critical to meeting the rise in electricity demand due to the resurgence of domestic manufacturing and the construction of artificial intelligence data processing centers.”

Six months later, the Energy Department announced a to “expand and reinvigorate America’s coal industry.”

Should the administration announce a weaker rule, it would be “an unconscionable crime against American coal miners,” Petsonk said. “But I fear that’s going to happen.”

In June, Hairston spoke at a reception for a photo exhibit titled “.”

“It seems like coal miners, we’re just a number,” he said. “Just a number.”

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

Can’t see the audio player? Visit kffhealthnews.org to listen.

When Josh Fleig, Louisiana’s chief innovation officer, learned his state had set aside $20 million a year, for five years, to invest in startup rural health companies, his reaction was not surprising: “Wow!”

In rural America, where people are often reported to be sicker with poor access to healthcare, the cash influx is a relief. In the economic development space where Fleig operates, it’s an opportunity.

“Look, that’s a lot of money for what we do,” said Fleig, whose state-funded economic development office invests in corporate launches, ranging from software startups to shipbuilders.

Louisiana and a handful of other states set aside money from their share of the $50 billion federal Rural Health Transformation Program to quickly invest in new technologies, mirroring private industry moves. Lawmakers added the rural health program to offset more than $900 billion in reduced Medicaid spending expected over 10 years from Republicans’ sweeping 2025 tax and spending law.

But rather than filling the budget hole, the rural program’s assignment is to find new approaches for revitalizing rural communities where doctors are in short supply and hospitals have been downsizing and closing for decades. The federal government doled out the first-year rural health program awards to states this year, with pots ranging from $147 million in New Jersey to $281 million in Texas.

Modernizing technology infrastructure is a key pillar of the federal rural health program, and the catalyst money epitomizes the administration’s strategy to move fast and experiment with untested technology — much like the “move fast and break things” mantra during the heyday of Silicon Valley.

Instead of breaking things, though, the goal is to “move fast, fast-fail, innovate quickly, and move to sustainability,” said Aaron Bujnowski, a managing director with the healthcare industry group at the consultancy Alvarez & Marsal. “This is a transformation that is still meant to serve the people.”

Rigorous Rules and Tight Deadlines

Beyond Louisiana, Timothy Foster, a spokesperson for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, confirmed that Delaware, Georgia, Massachusetts, Nebraska, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia are also creating rural health tech catalyst funds.

Every year, states must compete for rural funding in the five-year federal program. Federal regulators will take money away from states that do not meet the goals promised in their applications, including whether they designated money to companies for tech innovations.

CMS, which is overseeing the program, released a seven-step for states to follow when creating the tech catalyst operations. No more than 10% of each state’s award can be spent on a rural tech catalyst fund.

States’ initial annual progress reports for the rural fund were due at the end of August. CMS has declined to publicly post those reports; it plans to publish an annual report on state progress. States must show that first-year funds will be obligated — but not necessarily spent — by Oct. 30, according to the CMS guidance document.

Daniel X. O’Neil, a technology consultant who advocates for open data and open government, created a and parsed the original state applications to find dozens that mention catalyst awards and technology funds.

O’Neil said he is “looking forward to the clawbacks and the craziness of October because, you know, that’s serious stuff.”

For the rural health catalyst funds, CMS requires states to submit the list of finalists “at least 15 business days” before announcing winners, along with “sufficient information” for the agency to “assess each proposed project,” according to the guidance document.

The document outlines intellectual property and federal rights but does not provide guidance or standards for patient rights or protections. CMS spokesperson Foster stated in an email that the technology investments must comply with federal “privacy, security, interoperability, and patient safety” requirements.

Protecting Patients

Maya Sandalow, director of the health program at the Bipartisan Policy Center and one of the leading analysts watching the rural fund, said the catalyst funds are “public dollars” and has called for more transparency in the overall rural health program. The center is a nonprofit think tank in Washington, D.C.

Accurate and timely reporting must be done to ensure “the necessary guardrails are in place” to protect patients, she said, adding that the innovation needs to be “tested in a way that’s safe for the patients that they are going to be used on.”

To apply, startups must be less than 10 years old and have raised less than $50 million in early funding. Companies that win a portion of state catalyst funds must meet predetermined milestones before being paid — and federal officials will make “targeted reviews as needed,” according to the guidance document.

Louisiana officials announced the state’s tech catalyst fund with an event in rural Natchitoches, known as the filming location of the 1989 film Steel Magnolias. The fund quickly drew more than 200 companies competing for between $250,000 and $3 million in seed money.

Tiny startup Greens Health was invited to the event. The 2-year-old company analyzes Medicare claims to identify patients with chronic diseases, such as diabetes, and works with local home health nurses and senior facilities to improve care.

“We’ve been looking for a way to launch in Louisiana,” said Kehlin Swain, co-founder and chief executive of Greens Health. The company serves about 100 patients across Texas, Alabama, and Florida and hopes to get a $250,000 investment from Louisiana.

Louisiana’s Fleig said his state is “at a really interesting turning point.” The state secured $208.4 million for the first year of the rural health program and quickly created its catalyst fund using the state’s already established innovation department.

At the same time, nearly 1.1 million people live in Louisiana’s rural parishes and the state ranks as the “least healthy” in the nation, according to its own application. State rates of diabetes, obesity, and cardiovascular disease are among the highest in the nation.

Fleig believes Louisiana is an ideal place to test technology solutions. So, while Silicon Valley has “not needed much of what Louisiana has had to offer” for much of its existence, it does now, he said.

Caret Health is one of those companies. Co-founders Riya Pulicharam, who is a physician-researcher, and Kevin Zhao, an engineer, met in Silicon Valley. Together, they created a technology platform that identifies patients who need help getting to their appointments, having scans done, or picking up prescriptions. That technology flags a human, who then contacts the patient with a call or text.

Zhao said Caret had successful pilots at large health systems, but those places also had other vendors and “it was a pretty big uphill battle” to get in and scale. Then, in 2024, the company began paying attention to rural places.

“There wasn’t a lot of existing infrastructure. And that was really good for us because we were able to come in very quickly,” Zhao said. “A lot of the hospitals really needed this kind of service.”

Fast-forward to 2026: Caret Health is about 4 years old and has contracted with about 60 hospitals in 16 states. Pulicharam and Zhao hope to win $3 million to expand into Louisiana.

Louisiana’s Fleig said the state will take an equity stake in each company it invests in. “The dream” is that selected startup companies will also help the state make money to reinvest. If some companies fail — or fail fast — that’s to be expected, but the state should still make money because of “the law of averages,” he said.

“If we are good, we’ll make more money than we spent,” Fleig said. “Either way, it’s going to go back into improving healthcare outcomes.”

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

MILLVILLE, Pa. — In an open field, arrows whizzed through the humid June air and struck their targets. Campers and counselors cheered.

It was archery hour at . Operations director Drew Meyer watched, a few tears escaping from behind his dark sunglasses.

“They will surprise you, like, flat out,” he said of the campers, who have all survived brain injuries. “They’ll come out here, and they’ll shoot for three hours and start hitting the target.”

Campers, ranging in age from 10 to 21, have been coming to Camp Cranium in Pennsylvania’s rural Columbia County since 2008. Some of their brain injuries are so severe that they have to relearn basics, from talking to tying their shoelaces. Some use wheelchairs or crutches. But during a week at camp, they climb rock walls, swim, and whiz down a zip line through the lush forest.

The existence of Camp Cranium, and a handful of others like it, is a response to a decades-long national trend: More people, including children, now survive crises resulting in brain injury than did in the 1980s. The improvements in survival are largely due to seat belt laws and and trauma centers that can treat injuries quickly.

But recently, efforts to track and prevent one type of brain injury, traumatic ones, are in flux after Congress didn’t renew a and prevention of traumatic brain injuries, and the Trump administration fired hundreds of employees at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, including the team tracking traumatic brain injuries, or TBIs.

“Brain injury can happen to anybody,” said , executive director of the . “This community deserves more.”

Tracking Brain Injuries

Lucas Hardy, 14, smiled at the encouraging crowd below. In a shady clearing in the woods, he climbed the 30-foot rock wall, aided by a hoist that pulled him out of his wheelchair and helped support his moves. Hardy suffered a traumatic brain injury at age 3, when a tree branch fell on him at a birthday party.

Annually, an estimated 2.8 million Americans experience a TBI — including about 475,000 children, according to the .

Recent data suggests those are undercounts. In 2018, a CDC team piloted a household survey asking about TBIs in a sample of U.S. children and adults. The results concluding that such injuries, which are often considered “hidden” because the damage is internal and unseen, are more widespread than hospitalization numbers suggest.

The mass firings at the CDC in early 2025 studying TBI, right before they were expected to launch a . A spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services, Emily Hilliard, did not respond to questions about the number of employees terminated, or if they were reinstated or replaced.

In a statement, she said: “The Trump Administration remains committed to supporting efforts to prevent traumatic brain injuries, improve surveillance, and ensure Americans have access to practical, evidence-based information that can help protect their health and safety.”

She said the agency’s TBI work is now handled by other staff members at the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control.

Hilliard said the CDC is deciding how to establish a cost-effective national concussion surveillance system within the bounds of current funding, and said the agency in 2026 dedicated funds to support, among other things, an about concussions, an , and concussion surveillance.

But Wolfkiel still worries about how the CDC firings and the impasse over federal funding will affect brain injury research and prevention efforts in the long term.

“The lack of resources and programs and information that’s out there is really just sort of appalling,” Wolfkiel said.

Federal Funding Uncertainty

Tony Sadowski, the camp’s , remembers when his son, Bryan, suffered a brain bleed that caused a hemorrhagic stroke at age 6. “You’re in the emergency room,” he recalled, “not knowing what version of your son’s going to wake up.”

Now 18, Bryan Sadowski has attended the camp for years.

“We’re very lucky to be able to be here,” the elder Sadowski said.

In 1996, before Bryan was born, Congress passed the Traumatic Brain Injury Act, which has provided many states with grants for TBI research, advocacy, and services. Since then, Congress reauthorized the act four times, largely with bipartisan support, until 2024.

It has remained lapsed since then. Trump’s secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, , supported when he was a senator. Congress is whether to reauthorize funding through 2030.

Despite the lapse in funding, money is still flowing to TBI programs at the CDC and in states, according to , president and CEO of the Brain Injury Association of America.

Congress did appropriate $8.25 million for TBI program activities through the . That’s far less than the $23 million Congress provided for each fiscal year, from 2020 through 2024, the last time it .

“The TBI Act is the only piece of federal funding for traumatic brain injury at the federal level,” Willis said. “We’re aiming to preserve what we have.”

The funding uncertainty has not affected the handful of brain injury camps, including Camp Cranium and in Alabama, because they are nonprofits that mostly rely on private donations.

Back at Camp Cranium, bursts of laughter, whoops of delight, and distant chatter punctuated the humid summer air.

While her fellow campers did archery or art, Brianna Engleman moved between groups, collecting song requests for a dance that evening. When she was 5, doctors performed a to relieve her of debilitating seizures. But the surgery itself can injure other parts of the brain.

She lives in Northern Virginia and first attended Camp Cranium as a teen in 2018. It was her first time being around so many people like her, said Engleman, now 21.

“I’ve gotten more confident,” Engleman said. “It made me think, well, there’s actually good people out there.”

Next time she returns to camp, she said, she plans to do so as a counselor.

This article is from a partnership that includes , , and Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News.

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

Transparency “is really important to help protect the integrity of the program, ensure funds are reaching the communities they’re meant to serve,” said Maya Sandalow, director of health policy for the Bipartisan Policy Center, a nonprofit think tank.

The federal government and states are compelled by public records laws to share documents when requested. But those requests can take months to fulfill, making their release too late for meaningful oversight as states rush to spend their allotments under tight federal deadlines.

In the meantime, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services — which oversees the Rural Health Transformation Program — and some states aren’t proactively sharing information about where the funding is going and how it will be used.

CMS spokesperson Timothy Foster said the agency “will publish an annual report on state progress.”

States’ individual reports to CMS are “intended to be” shared upon request, but the agency won’t be proactively publishing the individual state reports, according to a CMS document.

Foster didn’t respond to questions about whether the agency will share examples of projects that are and aren’t working or create a tracker of funding recipients, award amounts, and what organizations plan to do with their funding — ideas that health and government transparency advocates have requested.

Instead, much of the program’s transparency thus far has been up to state governments, and “the level of details that states have publicized really varies,” said Sandalow, who co-wrote a on how the federal government can strengthen the rural health program, including through transparency.

Some states are sharing information with lawmakers, holding public meetings, and explaining where organizations plan to invest their money.

Others are more secretive, with multiple states declining to release public records in response to Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News’ requests. Mississippi’s governor , West Virginia holds closed-door advisory meetings, and a South Dakota official wrote that he hoped CMS would keep its application from public view.

“I just don’t believe in all this secrecy,” said Mississippi state Sen. Hob Bryan, who chairs his chamber’s public health committee. “If they’re not up to something nefarious, why do they have to do it all in secret?”

Bryan, a Democrat, said there’s about the lack of transparency in his state.

Reaching Rural Patients

Congressional Republicans created the five-year Rural Health Transformation Program last summer as an eleventh-hour sweetener to President Donald Trump’s signature One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The money was intended to offset concerns about the anticipated in rural communities from the law, which is expected to by more than $900 billion over a decade.

Sandalow said some states may be struggling to share information since they’re busy rushing to hire staff and meet the program’s tight deadlines, including an annual report due Aug. 31.

In the meantime, a slew of media outlets, nonprofits, and businesses are stepping in to make it easier for the public to track the rural health program.

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News is collecting states’ applications and approved plans and budgets, not all of which have been posted on state websites.

Rural Health Payout

Tracking Applications for Rural Health Transformation Funds

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News is working to collect and post complete application materials, by state, here and will update this repository as new materials, released in response to public records requests, arrive.

Dec. 4, 2025

Rural Health Payout

Tracking State Rural Health Transformation Plans

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News is working to collect and post approved plans as more states respond to emails and public records requests for their documents.

July 27, 2026

And several and have created trackers that , post funding opportunities, or list award recipients. But some resources are available only through paid services, aimed at helping businesses interested in applying for money.

Sandalow said previous federal programs “tend to draw attention for gaps in transparency and oversight rather than for doing it well.”

As an example, she pointed to the lack of oversight and transparency with the CARES Act and other covid relief programs, which saw .

In March, CMS published proposed quarterly and annual state reporting requirements for the rural health program, and a . At least three groups replied with letters expressing concerns about transparency.

CMS should share states’ progress reports, funding recipients, and what organizations plan to do with their awards, , the Bipartisan Policy Center’s vice president for health policy.

Sharing this information would make it easier to track progress, identify successful programs that other states may want to replicate, and “ensure funds reach the rural communities they are intended to serve,” he wrote.

Molly Smith, group vice president for public policy at the American Hospital Association, “to be as detailed as possible” about the “final destinations of these funds, given the complexity of the grant funding process.”

In , Charlene MacDonald, who leads the Federation of American Hospitals, noted that some funding recipients, such as large health systems and academic medical centers, will be distributing their awards to other entities.

CMS should collect those “downstream subrecipients,” wrote MacDonald, whose group represents for-profit hospitals and healthcare systems.

Without this information, she said, it will be difficult to know if “funding is reaching the rural hospitals, providers, and communities primarily intended to benefit from the program.”

It can also be difficult to know which for-profit companies are being paid with rural health money.

For example, and have listed hospitals and other health facilities that received funding to purchase telehealth, scanning devices, and other health technology. But the states list only some of the companies from which recipients will buy those products.

States won’t have to report “downstream” funding in their August reports to CMS but will have to do so for all future reports, according to the agency’s recently finalized .

The CMS documents say states must list subrecipients that receive subawards as well as vendors or contractors paid by an organization using rural health funding. Although states must report how much money these downstream recipients receive, they don’t have to describe which specific services or products the recipient is providing.

DIY Dashboards

As groups ask CMS to share more information, some states have created their own rural health spending dashboards or recipient lists, with varying levels of detail.

Alaska, , and other states list which organizations receive funding, their award amounts, and detailed descriptions of how recipients will spend the money.

and , however, are among the states that don’t share what awardees plan to do with their funding.

New Hampshire is that detail projects and their budgets on its Rural Health Transformation Program website. Some other states have uploaded contracts and grants on general procurement or award databases, which can be difficult to navigate.

, , and have used press releases to announce awards. But the announcements aren’t posted on their Rural Health Transformation Program websites, which could make it difficult to find this information.

Many states created advisory groups to provide transparency and accountability for their programs. Most committees host public meetings and upload minutes, recordings, or other materials from the discussions.

But the West Virginia Department of Health won’t share what’s discussed in its rural health advisory panel’s closed-door meetings, according to spokesperson Gailyn Markham.

“The panel is intended to serve as an informal forum for discussion and feedback among invited participants and program staff,” Markham said.

South Dakota, North Dakota, and Mississippi are among the states without advisory committees.

In response to public records requests, South Dakota released a nearly completely redacted version of its budget for the rural health program while Mississippi declined to release its budget.

Mississippi’s he vetoed a because it would “create an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy” that would have slowed the award process, which could cause the state to lose out on future funds. Mississippi is “ in all this secrecy,” Bryan, the state lawmaker, told Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News.

Sandalow said it’s important for states to publish the impact of their rural health projects, adding that CMS should share which rural health projects are and aren’t working.

She said national and state health organizations are creating networks and holding conferences to help spread this information. States should “be able to learn from each other, get a sense of lessons learned and best practices, and then be able to pivot their initiatives accordingly,” Sandalow said.

Michael Cannon, who oversees health policy studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, said people should know how their $50 billion in taxes is being spent on the rural health program, and whether state projects are making rural patients healthier.

If investors put that much money into a project, there is “no way” they “would let the recipients of those funds get away with the shoddy approach to transparency and accountability that the states are taking,” he said.

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

Comfortable couches in one area invite expectant parents to settle in for birth education classes. In another, a colorful pile of toys await the babies and toddlers. And there’s a free supply of diapers and food. Years ago, as Iglesias was giving birth and expressing her wish not to have an epidural for pain, she felt isolated and that her preferences were dismissed by the medical staff. Today, she works hard to make sure other parents can have the support of a doula.

“We kind of created this to fill the gaps that we realized existed because we had to go through it,” Iglesias said. She’s the founder of , a doula agency dedicated to giving parents care throughout the perinatal process.

Iglesias said one of the widest gaps is the lack of access to doula care for parents on Medicaid.

Doula care has been initiation and less maternal anxiety. The perinatal doula care covers education about pregnancy and birth, advocacy for new parents in the hospital, and help after delivery with lactation and recovery. Doulas often work alongside doctors or midwives who provide medical care.

“The doula is the person that already knows what you want. We know what your dream birth is,” Iglesias explained. “We’re somebody that is standing on the side of the parent.”

Can’t see the audio player? Visit kffhealthnews.org to listen.

In 2022, Virginia became the fourth state to start reimbursing doulas through Medicaid. A push to address the country’s maternal mortality rates, which are , has been an engine for lawmakers looking to give women on Medicaid the support of doula care. For example, another hospitals to allow an extra person, other than a family member, in the delivery room.

The services offered and the number of visits covered by Medicaid vary by state, but today doulas are covered in . An additional 20 states have considered proposals or are in the process of implementing similar policies.

In Virginia, doulas say the administrative and logistical challenges they encounter are trickling down to moms. A review of the Virginia Certification Board’s Doula Registry this June found based in Northern Virginia accept payment from Medicaid.

Doulas say that while Medicaid coverage of their services is a good first step, the amount of paperwork required in the approval process and the low reimbursement rates mean that fewer doulas participate in the Medicaid program, reducing access for beneficiaries.

that extended doula benefits to Medicaid enrollees sought to improve the health of Virginia parents and decrease the number of mothers who die during the time surrounding birth. The state’s maternal mortality rate is among .

As co-chair of the state’s task force on doula regulations, Iglesias helps shape policies that make it easier for moms on Medicaid to get doula care through the program.

To access doula services in Virginia, parents on Medicaid must have a referral from a doctor, and their doula must be approved by the state to care for Medicaid beneficiaries. Iglesias would like to see that process be quicker and less costly for doulas, who pay $75-$150 for certification.

While the policy debates continue, Iglesias has decided not to get certified to care for parents on Medicaid. Instead, she raises money to provide doula care for parents on Medicaid outside the system.

“I don’t want to be state-certified with a training that I feel is not full and complete, a training that doesn’t touch on that community aspect of work,” she said.

Iglesias said the services covered are too limited and Medicaid does not allow her to work with clients as she sees fit. Virginia’s payment covers up to eight doula visits. All but the first visit are limited to one hour, which Iglesias said isn’t enough time.

“If you want to actually build a relationship with this person that you’re going to be standing in with in their most vulnerable moment, it ain’t happening,” Iglesias said.

While pursuing her PhD at George Mason University, studied the initial implementation of the doula reimbursement policy in Virginia.

Mensah from 2022 to 2024 for a study published this year. She interviewed doulas eager to serve clients on Medicaid. But some told her they got bogged down in the paperwork and never were certified. Doulas report similar struggles with the certification process today.

Mensah said the mismatch between the size of the Medicaid population in Northern Virginia and the low number of doulas available leads to fewer parents receiving doula care.

Coverage is a good first step, Mensah noted, but it doesn’t translate to enough access. During the first two years of implementation, in Virginia used doula services. That study is the latest available.

Kenda Denia, executive director of , a statewide doula collective in Virginia, welcomed the law at first.

“But now we’re looking at certain logistics that are not working,” Denia said.

Private-pay doulas in Virginia $1,200 to $3,000 per pregnancy. For families wanting more extensive prenatal or postpartum services, the fee can be as much as $6,000. Virginia’s Medicaid program, also known as Cardinal Care, per pregnancy. They receive an additional $100 if their client attends prenatal and postpartum doctors’ visits.

The pay is too low and does not reflect the value of the services they provide, Denia said. “Midwives don’t get paid this. Doctors don’t get paid this,” she explained. “We are driving to people’s homes for postpartum and prenatal care.”

Doulas might wait weeks or months for reimbursement, and the pay is not flexible. The Medicaid reimbursement rate is the same across the state and does not capture the in areas like Alexandria. It’s roughly 32% more expensive in Alexandria than the average cost of living in Virginia, according to ERI Economic Research Institute, a private data analytics group.

Despite the barriers, Denia applauded parts of the policy. Medicaid coverage of doulas means that more parents can have a “birthing bestie,” she said.

Before getting pregnant, Juliana Navia had no idea what doulas did. But while at a free clinic for her prenatal checkups, Navia connected with Iglesias. Later, Iglesias became Navia’s doula and helped her navigate a difficult situation when she wasn’t getting the kind of care she wanted at the hospital.

“I was stressed giving birth, but my doula helped me,” Navia said. “I was advocated for.”

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

That could change. In June, the Department of Justice issued saying federal disability rights laws don’t require states to provide services that allow people with disabilities to remain in their homes rather than institutions.

It’s a sharp reversal from 1999, when a held that unjustified institutionalization constituted discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Previous administrations have relied on that ruling to enforce civil rights for disabled people, but the Trump administration says that long-held interpretation is wrong.

Advocacy groups say legal protections for about and 5 million children who have disabilities could be undermined, and they worry that the new interpretation may herald a return to forced institutionalization.

The stage is also now set for a legal fight between advocates, states, and the federal government. Some states with ongoing lawsuits challenging disability rights requirements are already citing the DOJ opinion in hopes it will help them prevail.

In a case in Texas, for example, that a rule instituting a 1973 civil rights law that led to community and home integration of people with disabilities is costly and infringes on states’ rights.

People like DeSimone-Shabrack are especially worried because, they say, the opinion follows a spate of White House and Republican-led initiatives that have already begun eroding hard-won protections for people with disabilities.

“I’m worried. Am I going to have to put him in an institution, and what’s that going to be like for him?” said DeSimone-Shabrack, whose personal home care help was recently reduced from 30 to 18 hours a week by the state. “As he gets older, am I going to be able to care for him without this support?”

The Department of Health and Human Services remains steadfast in enforcing federal civil rights laws, agency spokesperson Emily Hilliard said in an email.

“Our commitment to ensuring that individuals with disabilities are treated with dignity, afforded equal opportunity, and are able to meaningfully access community services remains unchanged,” she said.

But advocacy groups say the DOJ opinion could have sweeping repercussions. The opinion doesn’t change existing law, but advocates worry that HHS and the DOJ could begin that mandate integration for people with disabilities.

They’re concerned that agencies will stop enforcing disability laws that ensure people aren’t. HHS, for example, has historically investigated disability discrimination claims at hospitals and in states that get federal funding, enforcing compliance with home and community integration through . Disability rights experts say those agreements could now be imperiled.

And some states facing financial pressures may roll back Medicaid services that enable people with disabilities to stay in their homes and communities — a trend that’s already happening following last year’s passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which cuts a projected from the safety net program over a decade.

Democrats are seizing on the opinion, which was released in a DOJ memo, to portray President Donald Trump and Republicans as a threat to people with disabilities. Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) and other Senate Democrats led the calling on the DOJ to rescind the opinion.

“The Trump Administration’s memo is an outrageous attack on the rights and independence of the disability community,” Duckworth said in a statement.

The DOJ didn’t return emails seeking comment.

According to the DOJ’s interpretation, regulations that give disabled people the right to demand certain services for daily living — bathing, mental health counseling, and financial budgeting help, for instance — and that require states to extend to mentally disabled individuals are unlawful, a view the agency acknowledged “is out of step with the common understanding of that decision within the federal courts.”

States may have legitimate reason to treat mentally disabled people in institutions, “including resource constraints, capacity limitations in community-based facilities, and safety concerns for both the patient and the community,” the memo reads.

The Supreme Court case, Olmstead v. L.C., has long shaped federal policy. And while it remains to be seen how courts will respond to the DOJ, some states seeking to curtail disability protections see the opinion as significant.

Consider the in federal court in the Northern District of Texas by Republican-led states arguing that an HHS rule about the integration mandate is unlawful. The lawsuit began with broader claims and 17 state plaintiffs. Following significant advocacy from the disability community, only Texas, Alaska, and Florida remain.

Following the new DOJ interpretation, the states filed documentation to inform the court about the memo as a new and relevant development. Similar documentation citing the memo has been filed in disability rights cases in Florida and New Hampshire, according to The Arc of the United States, a disability advocacy group.

Advocates for people with disabilities say the speed at which plaintiffs are citing the opinion underscores how it may be used to justify the erosion of protections.

“The administration’s attempt to dismantle decades of progress in community integration is alarming and inconsistent with federal disability rights laws and Supreme Court precedent as well as the critical enforcement work of prior administrations,” said , senior executive officer of legal advocacy and general counsel at The Arc.

Forced institutionalization led to human rights violations, segregation, and a eugenics movement in the late 19th and early 20th centuries that included involuntary sterilization.

Exposure of the abuses, legal battles, and an caused a major shift toward integration. Fewer than 1% of people with intellectual or developmental disabilities lived in state-run facilities in 2021, down from almost 30% in 1967, from the University of Minnesota’s , which maintains metrics on such long-term services and supports.

The Trump administration has already taken steps to reverse that trend, advocates say.

Trump signed that addresses homelessness by expanding involuntary treatment and institutionalization, reversing a championed by the Biden administration.

Much of the special education program office is moving from the Department of Education to HHS, raising concerns among advocates that the administration is reverting to a view that disabilities are a medical issue to be fixed rather than differences that can be accommodated.

And cuts in federal funding for Medicaid, a federal-state insurance program for people with low incomes or disabilities, also portend fewer resources and services. States have responded by reducing some optional benefits such as home health aides and support. In addition, qualifying for an exemption from the program’s work requirements, which take effect Jan. 1 in most states, will pose significant hurdles for people with disabilities.

The June DOJ opinion, advocates say, could accelerate the shift and result in court rulings that chip away at disability rights.

“While it doesn’t overnight change the law, it’s very troubling and very dangerous,” said , director of the Disability Rights Program at the American Civil Liberties Union. “It reflects a really deeply held disrespect for disabled people from this administration and a total lack of awareness of the lived experiences of people with disabilities who are living in their homes.”

Data shows there can be benefits to involuntary institutionalization. Relative to those voluntarily admitted, people with psychiatric illness who were involuntarily admitted “experienced greater improvements in symptoms and function,” according to a in Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, a peer-reviewed academic journal.

Deinstitutionalization has created new challenges. More hospitals have been forced to board people with psychiatric illness in emergency rooms because of a dearth of available beds. And moving people into home- and community-based living was supposed to be accompanied by an increase in outpatient care and treatment that never materialized, creating gaps in support.

But advocates for the disabled community say involuntary institutionalization and poses a higher risk of neglect and abuse.

, 57, of Cleveland, spent two years in a nursing home. She has spinal muscular atrophy, a genetic disease that kills motor neurons, leaving her able to move only part of her left arm and her head.

At the institution, she said, she felt bored and trapped and developed intense itching from scabies, which is caused by microscopic mites.

For more than a decade, however, she has lived in an apartment with the help of caregivers who come in the morning to get her dressed and ready and return to put her to bed. She works at a disability rights group, and her care is covered by Medicaid.

“The two years I lived in the nursing home, it was the most horrible time in my life,” said Kucera, who worries about the DOJ opinion on Olmstead. “My future is a shaking floor beneath me. With the stroke of a pen, they could get rid of everything I’ve built for myself.”

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

The federal government is capping the amount graduate students can borrow. The Department of Education says the new rules are designed to help curb student debt and pressure schools to lower tuition. But some loan experts fear those good intentions could leave many at the mercy of private lenders with higher interest rates. Saddling healthcare graduate students with pricier debt burdens can narrow their career choices.

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News correspondent Lauren Sausser joined WAMU’s Health Hub on July 22 to explain how the loan caps could make healthcare provider shortages worse or compromise the diversity of the workforce. Plus, she discusses how some states are pushing back against the new rules.

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

Source: <a href=”; target=_”blank”>Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services</a>

---

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News will update this database as more states respond to emails and public records requests for their documents.

Note: Data collected as of Sept. 11, 2026. Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News reporters searched state websites, requested documents, and filed public records requests. Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News continues to collect documents.

Sources: Documents publicly posted online or released in response to Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News requests; <a href=”; target=_”blank”>Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services</a>

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

Overnight, a nurse aide walked into their room and saw blood splattered on the floor, walls, and ceiling, according to a grand jury transcript. Cecchetto’s face “looked twisted and smashed,” the aide testified. A Banning city police officer testified that Timaloa, 77, told him that he had punched Cecchetto twice.

“He just kept saying that Attilio was being too loud: ‘He talks too much,’” the officer said.

Cecchetto died two days later from blunt force facial trauma.

“You get placed in a facility like this to be taken care of, not to be murdered,” one of his sons, Gino Cecchetto, said in an interview. “This was completely preventable at many different points.”

Timaloa pleaded not guilty to assault. The charges were later upgraded to murder, and a judge ordered a mental health evaluation. The judge will rule as early as August on whether Timaloa is competent to stand trial.

PACS Group, the nursing home chain that owns Sunrise, denied negligence. “We strive to provide quality care to everyone we serve, and our hearts continue to go out to the Cecchetto family for their loss,” PACS spokesman Brooks Stevenson said in an email.

In nursing homes primarily occupied by impoverished people as well as posh assisted living facilities that cost upward of $10,000 a month, agitated residents have shoved, punched, bit, and kicked others. They have wielded canes, walkers, pens, a plate, a mop stick, a shoe, a belt buckle, and even the footrests of wheelchairs as weapons, federal inspection reports show.

How often these altercations take place nationwide is unknown, but an of 14 assisted living facilities in New York state led by Cornell University researchers estimated 1 in 7 residents experienced aggression within a month, including verbal, physical, or sexual acts. Their of 10 New York state nursing homes estimated 1 in 5 residents experienced an altercation in a month. Researchers have found that these assailants are to have dementia.

The diseases that cause dementia can impair brain circuits involved in impulse control and threat perception, raising the risk of aggressive behavior. Residents with Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias constitute more than living in these settings, many of which include specialized units.

Often, altercations involving a resident with dementia erupt after danger signals are missed or ineffectively addressed, according to a Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News examination of court records, police reports, and state and federal inspection reports.

Since the start of 2024, the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has faulted nursing homes at least 700 times for failing to protect residents from physical, sexual, or verbal abuse by other residents, CMS inspection reports show. The federal records do not include assisted living facilities, which are regulated by states.

In the first three months of this year, CMS cited nursing homes more often for resident-to-resident abuse than for any other type of abuse, neglect, or exploitation, including abuse by employees, the reports show.

Resident Clashes Are the Most Frequent Type of Nursing Home Abuse or Neglect

The federal government requires that nursing homes keep all residents free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, and exploitation. In the first three months of 2026, federal inspectors cited nursing homes over resident-to-resident altercations more often than other types of mistreatment.

Note: Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News analyzed inspection citations for violations of the federal requirement to keep residents free of abuse, neglect, or exploitation. Only citations for actual harm or immediate jeopardy were examined. The analysis included inspection reports from January 2026 through March 2026.

Source: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services nursing home <a href=” statement of deficiencies</a>, May 2026

The long-term care industry says not every clash can be averted. Presbyterian Homes & Services, a nonprofit Christian chain of senior living facilities, said in a statement: “Caring for individuals living with advanced dementia is complex, and behaviors can change in ways that are difficult to fully predict or prevent, even with clinical interventions in place.”

Eilon Caspi, a and researcher who studies resident-on-resident altercations, said that usually there is a specific unmet need that precedes an altercation. “In the vast majority of incidents,” he said, “there are warning signs in the months, weeks, days, hours, and sometimes minutes and seconds prior.”

Fertile Battlegrounds

One about Alzheimer’s, the most common dementia disease, holds that as the brain’s networks deteriorate, the balance shifts between the prefrontal cortex, which helps govern judgment and self-control, and limbic regions including the amygdala, which helps process fear and threat responses.

As cognition clouds, people lose the ability to understand what is happening around them and to put distress into words, researchers say. Pain, infection, medication side effects, and other physical and emotional distresses through shouting, intimidating gestures, kicking, pushing, or punching. Long-term care facilities can be triggering environments, with intimate care often delivered by a changing stream of aides whom residents can’t recognize. Amid noise, close quarters, and rigid routines, interactions become flash points.

“You don’t feel safe, because you don’t know these strangers who are coming in and taking off your clothes,” said Al Power, a geriatrician and an advocate for alternative models of care for people with cognitive issues. “These things will be distressing to anybody.”

The Cornell researchers found verbal altercations were the most common type of aggressive interaction but estimated 4% of assisted living residents and 5% of nursing home residents in their studies experienced physical assaults in a month.

Another Cornell study found that Connecticut police were called to nursing homes for more often than allegations of staff abuse, theft, and residents wandering away without supervision combined. A national analysis of survey data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention calculated in assisted living facilities engaged in physical aggression or abuse toward other residents or staff members.

Many of the physical aggressions Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News identified in CMS inspection reports were perpetrated by residents with diagnoses of dementia, schizophrenia, or other cognitive disorders. In some physical altercations, both residents were aggressors, while other fights were one-sided. Sometimes the residents were roommates.

Laura Mosqueda, a geriatrician at the University of Southern California’s Keck Medicine in Los Angeles and a senior adviser to the National Center on Elder Abuse, said: “What worries me is that we just end up blaming two people who have either cognitive impairment or severe, uncontrolled mental health issues, when they’re supposed to be in an environment where people are safe.”

‘Only a Matter of Time’

Gladys Lynch, a retired department store accountant, transferred into the memory care unit at Harbor Crossing in White Bear Lake, Minnesota, in September 2025. Her monthly cost was more than $10,000, according to an invoice provided by the family.

One of Lynch’s daughters, Rebecca Norton, installed web cameras in her room and often saw another resident inside. “Every day I looked at it, this woman would be walking into my mom’s room, harassing her, digging through her things, using her bathroom, yelling at her,” Norton said in an interview. She informed Harbor Crossing’s administration, and the facility said it would start locking her mother’s door.

Norton emailed a Harbor Crossing administrator a list of issues with her mother’s care. “My biggest concern,” she wrote, was that her mother’s door was not consistently locked and the webcam showed the woman had again entered, rummaged through the bathroom, and taken a couple of adult diapers.

Unknown to Norton, Harbor aides had raised concerns about the other resident, who like Lynch was new to Harbor Crossing’s memory unit, according to a . Diagnosed with Alzheimer’s, severe dementia with agitation, depression, and anxiety, the woman was confused, had difficulty communicating her needs, and hit aides.

Aides repeatedly reported that the woman had “ongoing aggression, entered other residents’ apartments, invaded others’ personal space, and was difficult to redirect,” the health report said. They said medications had been ineffective and pressed for new ones. The report said one nurse told the woman’s doctor it was “only a matter of time before” she “hurts another resident.”

Captured on Camera

On the last day of September, she entered Lynch’s room and resisted leaving, the state report said. The next morning, she reappeared. Video of the incident was described in the police and state reports and reviewed by Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News. It shows Lynch guided the woman out and appeared to attempt to lock the door, but the woman opened it and returned once more.

The woman declared it was her house, went into Lynch’s bathroom, used the toilet, and then returned to the room Lynch was in. Lynch can be seen repeatedly pressing the alert pendant around her neck to signal nurses for help.

The video shows the woman was almost out of her apartment door when she attempted to touch an object near the door. Lynch put her hands up to block her. The woman slapped at her hands and said, “I’m going to kill you if you don’t quit it.” She pushed Lynch, who fell, her head hitting the floor and blood seeping out.

Aides arrived 13 minutes after she had initially pressed her pendant, the state report said. Lynch suffered a brain hemorrhage and fractures to her eye socket and ribs, according to the state report. She died in the hospital five days later at age 96; the medical examiner’s office declared it a homicide.

Norton said her mother was kind and pleasant and never combative. “My mom deserved better than what they gave her,” she said.

Prosecutors declined to bring charges, according to the police report. The Harbor Crossing was responsible for neglect because it was aware the woman “exhibited violent and aggressive behaviors” and yet had failed to put in place effective interventions. Harbor Crossing has requested the state reconsider its findings.

In June, Suzanne Scheller, the attorney for Lynch’s family, filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Presbyterian Homes, which owns Harbor Crossing.

Presbyterian said in a statement: “We are deeply saddened by the loss of Ms. Lynch, and our thoughts remain with her family and all those impacted.” It declined to comment further on the incident or the lawsuit.

Preventive Tactics

Geriatricians, researchers, and resident advocates say long-term care homes should to reduce the risk of altercations, including closer supervision of residents at high risk, relocating them closer to nursing stations, separating residents with repeated conflicts, and adjusting roommate assignments or seating in shared spaces.

Each resident should have a care plan, and homes should train staff to be alert to a resident’s triggers and intervene quickly, dementia specialists say. Organized activities are essential to keep residents occupied and engaged. Antipsychotics and other psychotropic medications are often prescribed, but they can increase the risk of falls, strokes, and .

An aide can be assigned to watch a particularly challenging resident one-on-one, but many places lack enough staff for protracted, dedicated supervision. Some assisted living facilities will tell a resident’s family they must hire a personal aide, who can cost thousands of dollars extra each month. In extreme situations, facilities might send a resident to an emergency room for evaluation or to a psychiatric hospital, or .

Camille Russell, who served as Kansas’ long-term care ombudsman until 2024, said she observed nurses and aides were often “woefully undertrained” in basic elements of dementia care.

“We’ve gotten too far away from making decisions that are caring decisions,” Russell said. “There has to be a balance, and the balance has gotten too far to the profit side.”

A Debilitating Kick

Many physical altercations between residents result in a scratch or a bruise, but nonfatal scraps can leave permanent damage on deeply frail residents.

Linda Twiddy’s first weeks in a Chesapeake, Virginia, memory care unit in August 2024 were happy, her daughter, Barbara Howerin, said in a May interview. Twiddy, a former church secretary with vascular dementia, sang along with a visiting church choir, decorated pumpkins, and visited a cat cafe. The facility, The Vero at Chesapeake, charged Twiddy a one-time $6,825 move-in fee and monthly charges of $7,475, according to the lease.

Seven weeks after Twiddy started living there, a nurse called Howerin. She told her that her mother had been kicked in an altercation with another resident and was being sent to the hospital.

When Howerin arrived at the hospital, she was shocked by the extent of the injury. “It was like 10 inches long by 6 inches wide, the whole front of her shin,” she said. “The calf was just like dangling down.”

According to an internal facility incident report the family obtained, an aide heard Twiddy scream for help and raced over to see a male resident with dementia trying to hit Twiddy as she sat on the floor in “a pool of blood.” The report said, “Linda was screaming get him away from me, he pushed and kicked me.”

The man had prior episodes of aggression, according to documents Twiddy’s family obtained in a lawsuit they brought against The Vero in Chesapeake Circuit Court. At his previous facility, a progress note from 2023 stated, he was “becoming very aggressive in tone and actions to residents and staff.” He “grabbed another resident by the wrists and pushed her,” according to the note. He was sent to an emergency room for evaluation of agitation, according to a hospital report. It did not make clear whether he was discharged back to the facility or elsewhere.

Agitation Tied to Pain

The male resident’s medical records at The Vero said he was diagnosed with late-onset Alzheimer’s disease, agitation, and anxiety, according to his doctor’s deposition. He had chronic pain in his back and trouble sleeping. He could answer simple yes-or-no questions but had trouble providing more extensive answers and couldn’t communicate that he was in pain, she testified. His behavioral changes usually occurred when he had a urinary tract infection, the doctor said.

When he was agitated, aides could sometimes calm him by turning on the television so he could watch his beloved New England Patriots, one aide testified in a deposition. A former aide said she tried to avoid dealing with him altogether. “If you go up to him and he was agitated, he’d reach out to try to grab you,” she testified. “If he had that cane, he would swing that cane or he would punch at you.”

In a court filing, The Vero denied allegations by Twiddy’s family that it should have protected residents from him. The filing said The Vero complied with all standards of care and that any injuries Twiddy sustained “were caused by her own negligence” or acts of others.

In their investigation of the incident, Virginia regulators alleged The Vero had for the health, safety, and well-being of its residents. The inspection report said The Vero pledged to appropriately staff the memory care unit based on the number of residents and to ensure someone completed rounds at least every two hours during sleeping hours.

Twiddy underwent three surgeries at the hospital for her leg, including a skin graft, then spent a month in rehabilitation. “She was never able to walk again,” her son, Doug Twiddy, said in a May interview.

The family moved Linda Twiddy to a different memory care facility where the nursing station had a clear view of all the rooms. She lived there until her death earlier this year.

The lawsuit was settled on confidential terms in early June. Carlton Bennett, the family’s attorney, declined to comment. In an email, Lauren Rogers, a spokesperson for Sinceri Senior Living, which operates The Vero, said the company was pleased the legal case had been resolved but could not comment further, citing confidentiality and patient privacy.

“The Vero at Chesapeake is committed to providing a caring, supportive environment where resident health, safety, and well-being remain our highest priorities,” she said.

A History of Violence

After Attilio Cecchetto was fatally bludgeoned at Sunrise Post Acute, his adult children and their attorney, Jody Moore, discovered disturbing details about Sam Ato Timaloa. He had been imprisoned in 1999 after being convicted of raping an underage girl and sentenced in 2008 to 24 years in prison for attempted murder involving domestic violence, according to Riverside County court records. His public defender declined to comment.

Cecchetto’s sons, Moore, and her colleagues at Moore Hutchins Moore also learned more about the home’s owner, PACS Group, a publicly traded company with more than 300 long-term care facilities. Last year, PACS earned $191 million on revenue of $5.3 billion, according to its .

In the Cecchettos and their father’s widow filed against PACS, they accused the company’s founders, Jason Murray and Mark Hancock, of draining resources from their nursing homes to pay for the chain’s expansion and swell their personal wealth.

The two had earned more than $650 million through stock sales since taking the company public and bought two private luxury jets, according to the lawsuit and securities filings. PACS has also purchased corporate sponsorships for Utah sports teams even though it owns no nursing homes in the state, the lawsuit said.

California regulators fined Sunrise $120,000 for Cecchetto and for not taking Timaloa’s articulated dislike of noise into account when assigning rooms. Medicare issued its own $62,810 fine.

In responding to the Cecchettos’ lawsuit, PACS denied negligence for his death and alleged he “failed to exercise ordinary care on his own behalf for his own safety.” It has sued to overturn the $120,000 state fine, saying it was issued too late and that Sunrise “did what might reasonably be expected of a long-term health care facility licensee acting under similar circumstances” to comply with state rules.

The Cecchettos’ lawsuit asks for a judge to impose robust procedures PACS homes must follow for admissions, staff training, room changes, and the reporting of altercations between residents. The suit asks for a court-appointed monitor to oversee compliance. In its written statement to Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News, PACS said “important context” would come out during the process and declined further comment.

In an interview, Cecchetto’s three sons, Dino, Gino, and Marco Cecchetto, described their father’s life. He spent his childhood on a farm in Italy, growing up under Benito Mussolini. After World War II he moved to Canada, where he learned to tile and lay marble and terrazzo, a decorative flooring material made of chips of stone, glass, or other materials embedded in cement or resin. He relocated to California in the early 1960s, became naturalized, and worked as a tile journeyman and a contractor for decades.

“We don’t want this to happen to somebody again,” Gino Cecchetto said. “With the life he led, he deserved a quiet, dignified death. Instead, he ended his life in pain and fear.”

Data Methodology

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News’ analysis of federal nursing home inspection reports focused on citations for violations of stating that each resident has the right to be free of abuse, neglect, and exploitation.

The analysis looked at the most serious levels of citations, those in which inspectors determined that one or more residents had been harmed, or that the facility’s actions caused — or were likely to place residents in immediate jeopardy of — serious injury, harm, impairment, or death. We reviewed the reports since January 2024 and tallied those that explicitly described resident-to-resident altercations.

We conducted a more granular analysis of a subset of the inspection reports from January through March 2026 involving harm or immediate jeopardy. Each report was reviewed and categorized by the type of abuse, neglect, or exploitation.

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .