Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Welcome to the United Methodist Health Ministry Fund Podcast, Pioneers in Health. We hope to bring you inspiring stories of pioneering health leaders who led important efforts to improve health. We’ll bring you guests from our state, from our nation and from your backyard to tell their stories of how they broke new ground and changed the landscape of health care.
Dr. Donna Ginther, Roy A. Roberts & Regents Distinguished Professor of Economics, Director of the Institute for Policy & Social Research at the University of Kansas, and a Research Associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research
Pioneers in Health
David Jordan
David Jordan 0:00
Welcome back to Pioneer's in Health, a podcast from the United Methodist Health Ministry fund. Pioneer's in Health is designed to bring you stories of innovation and progress in the healthcare landscape in Kansas. At the Health Fund, we work to improve the health of Kansans and we're fortunate to work hand in hand with innovative leaders who share this mission. Today, we're excited to be joined by Dr. Donna Gither. Dr. Gither is the Roy A. Roberts and Regents Distinguished Professor of Economics and the Director of the Institute for Policy in Social Research at the University of Kansas. Dr. Gither is also a research associate for the National Bureau of Economic Research. Dr. Gither, thank you so much for joining me today.
Donna Ginther 0:42
Thank you, David. It's a pleasure to be here.
David Jordan 0:45
Well, to kick things off, we usually like to get a little background from our guests on what led you to your career. So, I'm really curious as to what led you to your career in economics and what your career journey looked like leading up to now where you recognize isn't leading researcher in the field.
Donna Ginther 1:02
Well, Well, thank you for that question. I became interested in economics when I saw the economy affect my family. My dad was working for an automobile manufacturer and lost his job for several months in 1982 when we had a very deep recession and I realized that the economy has an impact on everyday people. And I went to college and I was first a communications major but then after that, I realized I could learn that by reading a book, but I couldn't learn economics by reading a book. So I switched my majors and started studying economics and then I wanted to learn more about economics. So after I graduated from undergrad, I worked at the Federal Reserve Board as a research assistant to see what economists actually do and didn't quite fit there. So I worked for a bank and that was good either. So I went to graduate school in 1989 and got my PhD and started studying the labor market and that is branched out into health economics. I had several jobs but I ended up in Kansas in 2002 and have been at the university since then.
David Jordan 2:13
Excellent. Well, you recently received the American Economics Association Award, the Carol Shaw Bell Award that honors individuals who have further the status of women in economics. Congratulations on this important recognition. And I know this topic of women in economics is a research focus of yours as well as really an important issue. I remember you've been listening to a Thorough In The Doctorate episode on the challenge of having women enter the field of economics, the disparity of the number of women in economics and then barriers that exist. Can you talk a little bit both about your your research focus on this topic and what you see ways to address the challenge?
Donna Ginther 3:02
Yes. I was very uh gratified to visit the Carol Shaw Bell Award in January for my work on Praveying the Status of Women and it all started back in 2000 when I was very curious about whether or not I as a woman in the economics profession would get promoted. So I started down the road of looking at gender differences in promotion in academia looking across several different fields and we published our first paper in 2004 that showed that women in economics were less likely to get promoted than women in political science, statistics and biology for example. And that was after controlling for research publications. Around that time the American Economic Association and the National Science Foundation funded mentoring intervention where women attended a two-day workshop to learn about you know publishing, getting grants, work-life balance and getting tenure. And this was a randomized controlled trial so we studied it in 2010, 2020 and 2021. So you know the bad news is there was a huge promotion gap but we found that this two-day mentoring workshop gave the mentored women the skills they needed to be successful. We found that women in the top 50 departments were more likely to get tenure than those who didn't get them entering. They published more top publications and more publications in general. Then in 2021 I studied the co-authorship relationships with a graduate student of mine and we found that it wasn't that they were meeting new people at the workshop but that they were learning how to manage their careers better at the workshop and that provided their success. Unfortunately, we still continue to have a large promotion gap in the economics profession, both for associate and full professor, but I think that mentoring over time, hopefully, will help close it.
David Jordan 5:07
Well, that's excellent that you're able to really drill down to look at some real potential solutions on ways to address the challenge. I know another research focus, and you had the position at working with the Atlanta Fed has been on labor markets. Can you talk a little bit about this focus of your work?
Donna Ginther 5:28
Sure. I've been very interested over my career in the drivers of any quality. And so my labor market work is really focused on education and the effect of education on labor market outcomes. And so what we found is that family structure affects education outcomes. So if you grow up with both of your biological parents, you're more likely to attend college and as a result have higher earnings. But if you grow up in a blended family, even with if you're with both of your biological parents, but you have step siblings or half siblings from a previous relationship of one of your parents, you're less likely to go to college. And so family structure and those investments in childhood and family stability seem to pay dividends in terms of labor of market outcomes going forward. Our most recent paper on that topic looked at families where dads had a prior family in Norway, but then remarried and had a second family in the kids because you can look at Norwegian registry data and map every residence of kids. Those kids from the first family never lived with the second family, but still they had a negative impact on the educational outcomes of the children in the second family. So this is a important research about sort of trying to unpack the black box and look at educational outcomes. I do have some recent working papers looking at Board of Regents data in Kansas and looking at graduation success in terms of whether or not starting at a community college or a four-year institution affects your outcomes. And we use a new methodological approach and find that there is no penalty to starting in a community college at in Kansas on getting your four-year bachelor's degree, which we find is really good news.
David Jordan 7:32
That is interesting and I'd be it would be interesting to explore how that may differ from other states across the country, you know whether or not it's a social construct or in Kansas or it's a universal finding.
Donna Ginther 7:47
I I think I think there are some evidence. My suspicion is that it will generalize beyond Kansas. So it would be great if we could use another state's data to look at this as well.
David Jordan 8:01
You talked about research in the area of children. I know you have a deep interest in tax policy. Have you looked at policies like child tax credits or child care, I believe, the ISPR did some work on child care availability in recent years.
Donna Ginther 8:25
We've we've looked at we've mapped child care deserts in the state of Kansas in a collaboration with child care aware. In terms of child tax credit, that's my meeting after this discussion. We're going to be talking about we have a new project where we're looking at the effects of the earned income tax credit, the child tax credit, and the child independent care tax credit on children's health outcomes and hospitalizations. We're also looking at the impact of having a minimum wage higher than the national minimum wage. So in about 18 months, we might have some results, but we're just getting started on that one. I do have another branch of research looking at the social safety net and child outcomes in terms of child maltreatment and foster care placements. So we find if a state is more generous in providing access to snaps, so broad-based categorical eligibility, simplified applications and things of that nature, you have reductions in child maltreatment, victim substantiating cases, and foster care placements. Conversely, Conversely, we find that states that add restrictions to access on TANF, such as shortening the time that a family can get TANF or making the application process more challenging. Those states that impose these kinds of restrictions have higher rates of child abuse neglect and foster care placements. So the state level policy environment really matters for child outcomes.
David Jordan 10:02
And I know that we were able to see some of those impacts in very directly in Kansas as we restricted access to family support programs like snap TANF and Medicaid. And then you saw the burden fall to the child welfare system where, you know, I think we had a much higher utilization of the child welfare system compared to other states where these families weren't reporting the same level of economic stress. Or days of months experiencing stress.
Donna Ginther 10:36
Yes, Yes, and I think that, you know, we did a cost benefit analysis using Kansas data, you know, you can take the TANF data and it's from the federal government and you can give that to families. Or if you take remove a child, you pay about 75% of that in terms of state money. So we had estimates between that restrictions on TANF were associated between 90 million or 130 million in extra cost to Kansas taxpayers because because of removal associated with restrictions on TANF.
David Jordan 11:14
Right now in the legislature, just last week in the middle of February, actually a bill was being heard by the Senate Committee on Government efficiency that would really make it tougher for Kansas to access snap TANF and Medicaid by introducing for Medicaid policies that would require quarterly re-determination of benefits for children of the largest covered population, even though federal losses, you only need to do annual renewal or annual re-determination that would eliminate self attestation for the enrollment process and that would add a number of other bureaucratic hurdles. It seems like and we already know because of the hope act that you touched on this before the Kansas already have fewer residents taking advantage of these programs. It's just important to just lift back up some of those consequences that we saw on the child welfare system. And while we may try to restrict access on the side, it may cost us more money down the road.
Donna Ginther 12:18
The economists make our living in research by looking at the unintended consequences of government policy and this example of restricting access to snap TANF, this body of research shows that if you restrict access on one hand, it may create problems in downstream effects. So I'm very concerned that first of all, the federal government has added restrictions to to access to snap. Second of all, that the state is even doubling down and trying to make some of the access to these policies more restrictive.
David Jordan 12:59
Go ahead, sorry.
Donna Ginther 13:00
Yeah. And so, you know, I hope that. You know, I heard that there were a lot of people in opposition, who testified in opposition to the one, I hope that the legislature listens.
David Jordan 13:14
It was interesting last summer, we did some survey research with four other foundations nationally, but we conducted focus groups in Kansas, and then did we started. We did some quantitative research as well on Kansas in national and then in Kansas support for these programs and overwhelming, we found the public regardless of political party supportive of programs that help make life easier for families. And there was a recognition that there was concern about waste fraud and abuse. However, 75% of folks then followed up by saying they think politicians overstate the waste fraud and abuse is a way to justify making it tougher to access programs. So, it really shows an imbalance of where policymakers may be thinking both nationally in Kansas about policies to make it harder to access programs when the vast majority of Kansas and Americans support these programs and support making it easier to access programs in universally opposed things like cuts to Medicaid and snap. So I suspect this will be an ongoing focus for the health fund, but I'm sure for researchers.
Donna Ginther 14:28
Yes, Yes, yes, well, this part of the new research, we're also looking at the impact of the social safety net on child hospitalization.
David Jordan 14:38
Well, I appreciated your comments about research, economists focus on the unintended consequences of policies. And in the last year, you know, in the realm of labor markets, but federal policy, when Doge was looking at cutting a number of positions, you really had some thoughts on how the federal, the loss of federal jobs in the Kansas City market in Kansas region could impact our economy. I don't know if you have any thoughts on where we are, you know, 13 months out.
Donna Ginther 15:12
Well, I think that, you know, there were a lot of notices and trying to reduce the federal workforce in Kansas City, but then they realized they need people to work for the IRS. So they hired a lot of people back. So I just, you know, I had it craft the numbers to date. I do think that employment dropped, federal employment dropped in Kansas City, but I'm not sure it dropped by as much as we were expecting when we were talking about it a year ago. You know, the federal workforce is what I would call an automatic stabilizer. Right? So if the economy enters a downturn, if a federal employee has a job, the federal government is not going to go bankrupt and said they keep working and keep contributing to the economy. So to the, you know, I think the estimates that we've lost close to 200,000 federal workers across the country. And, you know, some of those retire, but those who are finding new jobs, they may not be able to get that secure employment that was offered by the federal government, which makes their economic outlook more precarious going forward. So I think that it would be, you know, I should go back and look at the data and see what, what has happened in metro in terms of federal employment, because to the extent that, you know, we lose that federal employment and those people aren't rehired, it's going to be a drag on the local economy.
David Jordan 16:37
You know, it's interesting in terms of just looking at some of the economic data. I read over the weekend that we're at a relatively at a high or a low of the number of Americans looking for new jobs. At the same time, inflation seems to have stabilized a little bit. We've added jobs over the last month. I mean, what is your sense in terms of the labor market and what to expect over the next 12 to 18 months?
Donna Ginther 17:09
It It is, it's very uncertain times right now for a number of reasons. If you saw what we added jobs in the economy, it was in the health sector, that's a sector that's not to be affected by artificial intelligence. Artificial intelligence is already reducing the demand for entry level college graduates. So So there are some us to, I saw a paper that showed that estimates for computer science graduates were down 8% starting in 2022 with the introduction of CHAPG PT. It's also affecting customer service. It's going to affect different fields of specialty from undergrads differently, but there is ample evidence that firms are scaling back, hiring, and for level worker, which for a higher education institution like the University of Kansas is very concerning. So that's the first thing that's contributing to the uncertainty is the unequal effects of AI. The The uncertainty associated with economic policy and tariffs also creates, you know, the tariffs are inflationary, even though inflation is moderated a little bit. You've seen goods, you know, retail prices increase, partly because of the tariffs. And a recent study that came out last week shows that 90 percent of the burden of tariffs are being borne by US companies and US consumers. So that also creates a drag on the economy, which has weakens the employment outlook. In terms of labor, nobody's quitting and nobody's hiring. So our labor market is kind of frozen, which which so far looks good. But six months from now, given the disruption from AI, it is really, we're in very economic uncertainty. time, pretty good.
David Jordan 19:08
Yeah, the interesting comment that I heard from a commentator was that if the technology sector, in the AI sector in particular, sneeze, it could cause pneumonia across the economy. And I think-
Donna Ginther 19:22
Yeah. Yeah, I mean, there were three or four thought-liter pieces that came out last week, warning about how this is going to really be disruptive. And you know, we've had technological disruptions before, like you think of the internet or the personal computer. Those were tech disruptions that we've lived through that the economy absorbed and became more productive. And you know, people were reallocated away from being, you know, type-setters and printing to desktop publishers as an example. The thing that is different about AI is that it's happening fast. I mean, so fast. And then the, you know, there were op-ed pieces last week that said that I'm quitting working for this AI company because AI is making me obsolete and there's no check on how AI is running. So that it's kind of like highly uncertain and potentially harmful. So, and fast And, and that's -- from me, my perspective thinking about AI and the future of the economy and the future of the students that we're trying to educate at the university is very concerning because it's happening at warp speed. And I don't think outside of Silicon Valley, we fully appreciate how dramatic this change will be.
David Jordan 20:57
Yeah, I think that's a really important perspective to have. The other piece that we touched on earlier that was, that really stuck out to me as I was catching up on the news was just the level, the, in this lines with your research, the magnitude of inequality that exists and how we're reaching on inequality indexes, highs that in, we've seen revolutions take place at different thresholds that we've thus surpassed. So as we're seeing this change technologically, we're seeing an acceleration of inequality.
Donna Ginther 21:35
Right. Right, all right. So, you know, if robots replace workers, you know, or AI replaces workers, those workers need jobs, so you know, if they're going to compete, you know, not everybody can be a healthcare provider, if they're going to be competing for a shrinking pool of jobs, that means that wages will be big down. So, So what are, you're going to have the owners of the AI, and the owners of, you know, the robots making lots and lots of money. Those are very few people, and then you're going to have people who are competing for fewer and fewer jobs. So I am concerned about how the economy is going, you know, going to grow out of this going forward without creating huge inequality. It is, I mean, it's happening in real time and it's happening at warp speed. So, But but inequality is not good for our economy and it's not good for health.
David Jordan 22:45
I just dove into a number of these big topics.
Donna Ginther 22:48
Alright, I think you...
David Jordan 22:49
I neglected to just ask some sort of key background on, in addition to being a research professor and economist, you also leave the Institute for Social Policy Research at KU. Can you talk about the work that the institute does?
Donna Ginther 23:08
Oh, sure. IPSR, the Institute for Policy and Social Research, is a faculty-forward research institute at the university. Our first job is to support faculty and students in obtaining strong funding for their research. Then we provide consulting support or contract research support for companies and governments in the state of Kansas. And finally, and also we work with a number of research think tanks because I have a specialty in the economics of science. So, we work with the American Society for Micro Biology, the Chancellor Oregon Institute, looking at the impact of their science funding programs. And finally, we just provide public support about the economy of Kansas. We run the annual Kansas Economic Policy Conference. We are the home of the state data center for Kansas for the Census Bureau. So, one my colleagues, San Wiedel, is the expert on Census data in the state of Kansas. So, we provide support to the state in terms of economic data and economic development opportunities.
David Jordan 24:21
Actually, and... and we've had the fortune of doing some some smaller projects with ISPR. But... I think all of these, the research that you're doing in Kansas has real importance to both state policy makers and local government, as well as business and, and ultimately, Kansas. Uh, I know that you were engaged in discussions around tax policy, the impacts of tax policy implemented during the brown back era, but, and then now we know that we're seeing a number of different proposals around property tax. I don't know if you have any thoughts on, and not any specific proposals, but efforts to really cut property tax and the impacts that may have on communities and local government services.
Donna Ginther 25:10
Well, Well, I mean, I property taxes are hard, right, because they fund schools, they fund local governments. Our Our property taxes are assessed at market value. That That is a policy which I strongly encourage that we maintain. You know, the alternative is something like what happened in California with Proposition 13 in the 1970s, which which froze property taxes in the 1970s until you saw the house. So So, what it, what's happened is it's created weird distortions so that people don't sell their houses. They keep them in the family, they pay really low property taxes, housing, there's a housing shortage in California, there's a tax problem that creates huge distortion. Now, Now, our property taxes were okay until you know, we were coming out of COVID and everybody started working from home. So, everybody started upgrading their house and there were lots of housing sales and coupled with a housing shortage coming out of the 2008, 2010 recession. So, we have a housing shortage, housing prices are going up, meaning top property taxes are going up. So, some people on a fixed income are extremely disadvantaged when their property taxes go up. So, I'm thinking about senior citizens, and we could, you know, do create larger homestead exemptions to make sure that these people aren't taxed out of their house without selling out the entire property tax system. We could also do a rolling average of tax rate increases. So, it's not this year's increase but, you know, maybe it's three to five year rolling average. So, the assessed levels move more smoothly and you won't have the dramatic jumps that you've seen recently. Putting Putting artificial property caps on property taxes that local governments can charge will mean that, you know, again, an unintended consequence those local governments have obligations and in order to pay for those obligations, they're going to start messing with the sales tax. And so, you're going to get even higher local sales taxes to account for that.
David Jordan 27:30
I mean, it's really just an important thing to recognize that revenue to maintain services needs to come from somewhere. So,
Donna Ginther 27:39
that.
David Jordan 27:40
what is the best mix of how we can generate that revenue? And I think there's always challenges when you look at more aggressive taxes like sales taxes to fund more and more of government
Donna Ginther 27:54
Right,
David Jordan 27:54
versus
Donna Ginther 27:55
right.
David Jordan 27:55
property or income taxes. And,
Donna Ginther 27:58
as a bet, to have a referendum on this where they're to lower property taxes, they're going to increase the sales tax, which they're replacing a somewhat progressive tax, in terms of the property tax because the property tax, you have to own property to get taxed. Whereas, Whereas, you know, lower income households spend all of their money and they're actually spending a larger share of their money on the sales tax, if you increase sales taxes. So, you know, the distributional effects, in my opinion, are moving in the wrong direction and not referendum.
David Jordan 28:35
Yeah, it's interesting. I mean, it's interesting that states have different states that have looked at property taxes. And I know that you referenced California from several decades ago, Massachusetts at the time followed California and instituted proposition two and a half, which is a little bit different than California, but the way they made up the revenue was on a state lottery that is enormously successful but some may say that's regressive as well. But the amount of, on a per capita basis, what Massachusetts tells us spending on the lottery is, I think, four times the per capita basis of the next state. So it's--
Donna Ginther 29:17
Oh, good-huh.
David Jordan 29:19
. It's really fascinating as you sort of look at policy trade offs. Another piece that I know we're, we're starting some work together with you on this as we think about revenue, but more for this worst state government though it does impact local government as well is, you know, federal funding safety net programs. We certainly do not take advantage of matching federal dollars across safety net programs, but it's beyond that that just puts Kansas 1 at the bottom of the list or near bottom, I think 47th and percentage of our state budget that's made up of federal funds and then we also don't have the best track record of drawing down federal dollars. You know, I know you're starting to look at the trend of federal dollars coming to Kansas. How do federal dollars both impact state economy, but the state budget and in policy decisions.
Donna Ginther 30:07
So So, you could think of federal dollars as, you know, just a money coming into the economy. And And so for every federal dollar that we get in the state, the multiplier on federal money is about two. So we're giving up two dollars of economic activity for every dollar that we don't take advantage of. That's kind of the rule of thumb. As As a state, we get more federal dollars than we send to Washington, DC with the exception of three counties, which are Johnson, Sedgwick and Blee's doubles. So, So, every other county in the state is getting more federal money than tax revenue that they're sending to the federal government. That said, the fact that we haven't expanded Medicaid, that we don't take advantage of SNAP, there there were like 48th in the nation in terms of SNAP participation. These These dollars mean that we have lower economic activity than we could potentially have if we were more willing to accept federal money.
David Jordan 31:20
I know you, you just mentioned Medicaid. This is certainly top of mind for us at the health fund, both how policy changes made in HR, one will impact health spending in Kansas because it will, I mean, our estimates shows that Kansas will lose about $3. 97 billion in Medicaid spending over the next decade, hospitals directly $2. 5 billion. At the same time, we're a state that hasn't expanded Medicaid. Can you talk about what that might mean, both to the broader economy and to the health care sector in Kansas?
Donna Ginther 32:00
Well, Kansas has a number of rural rural hospitals that are at risk of closure because we haven't expanded Medicaid, right? So, those dollars that would have come in for Medicaid dollars at uncompensated care puts a financial burden on those hospitals. We did a study that was funded by the REACH Foundation a few years ago that showed in counties that provide public support for hospitals, middle levies went up between 2014 and 2022 by about 30% in terms of supporting in order to support those hospitals. So, if we close a rural hospital, it means that somebody with illness has to travel further to get care, maybe at risk of dying if they're having an acute event. So, you know, there's that concern about expanding Medicaid. It had been probably probably close to 700 studies of looking at the partial expansion of Medicaid states that expanded versus states like Kansas that didn't expand. And they've shown consistently that there's mortality reduction estimates of about 70 people a year since 2014, have passed away because of lack of expanding Medicaid. There is not a negative impact on the state budget. In some cases, it actually pays for itself, so it's a positive impact. Then there's the economic benefit of those dollars coming in from Medicaid expansion. Again, multiply those spending by two and that's the economic benefit of having that additional funding coming into the state. I think that it's very important for the health of our citizens and for access to healthcare and rural Kansas to expand Medicaid.
David Jordan 34:00
I can't agree with you more.
Donna Ginther 34:03
Medicaid. We'll keep fighting the good fight.
David Jordan 34:06
It's critical that we keep that conversation
Donna Ginther 34:10
alive,
David Jordan 34:12
you know, you touched on it, but I mean I think the average hospital in Kansas is a negative operating margin of negative 9.9% and we have more financial aid risk hospitals than any other state. But I know beyond what it means to the health of Kansas, that hospitals are a really key part of the Kansas economy and. and you do research on that front as well.
Donna Ginther 34:37
Right, I think that, you know, hospital workers are well paid, and that affects the economic vitality of their communities. So if a hospital closes, that's going to be a negative economic shock, probably more profound than if a school closes. So these are important considerations about the overall help of the state in terms of expanding that okay.
David Jordan 35:04
Yeah, absolutely. Well, I know you had mentioned this before, but I know that ISPR hosts the Kansas Economic Policy Conference each year. I know last year you covered water which is a major issue for the future of the state. What's on what's on your radar from last year for this year and any key learnings from past conferences that you want to pull out?
Donna Ginther 35:29
Well, I'm so glad asked because 2026 is the 50th anniversary of the Kansas Economic Policy Conference and it's on October 29th at the University of Kansas in the new conference center that was constructed next to the football stadium. So we're going to be focusing on the next 50 years of the Kansas economy talking about sort of what we've talked about in the past. The first Kansas Economic Policy Conference I organized was in 2008 and it was on the topic of ensuring a healthy Kansas. This is pre-ACA. It was talking about the Kansas health authority and how Kansas was being very innovative and trying to keep health care costs, manage our state health care costs and health care access. and healthcare So we're going to be talking about the future of Kansas in terms of industry, how natural resources, energy and water play a role, how technology is going to affect the future of the economy. So it's going to be sort of like looking back and then looking forward and talking about how we can envision the future of the Kansas economy.
David Jordan 36:43
That's great. Well, I know we covered a lot of ground and the research really does span just so many important pieces of our economy.
We're certainly living through tumultuous times, but in closing, I was just curious is what excites you and gives you hope for the future. And I think ties into the conference too.
Donna Ginther 37:04
What excites me is that you from a research perspective, it's a wonderful time to do the type of work I do because data is everywhere and we get to ask and answer such interesting questions. So it's such a privilege to be an economic researcher these days. I'm very excited about my work looking at higher education in state of Kansas, we partnered with the Kansas supportive regions to look at how higher education promotes economic mobility. So I'm hoping to continue that line of research and continue the good work we do at IPSR to support Kansas. I think it's very important to bring data to policy. And that's what we try to help people like the Kansas health ministries and other organizations and firms in the state use their data to make informed decisions to help promote economic growth and higher quality of life in the state. So it's been such a pleasure to be able to do that as the leader of IPSR in the past five years. And I hope to continue doing so.
David Jordan 38:15
Excellent. Well, thank you so much for the conversation and for all the work that you do and we look forward to continue to work work with you and benefit from the research you do.
Donna Ginther 38:25
Well, thank you David. It's been my pleasure.
David Jordan 38:27
Thank you for joining us for this episode of Pioneers and Health. We hope you found it interesting and inspiring. Please share with family, friends and colleagues who may be interested to learn more about the health challenges our state faces. How we're working and partnering to improve health for all cancens and how you can take action to help. Please visit our website healthfund. org where you can sign up for email updates. We also encourage you to follow us on social media at UM Health Fund or through the links on our homepage. We'd like to give a special thanks to Christopher Acker at Salt City Sound for helping with recording, editing and hosting this podcast. Also thanks to the health fund team, especially Jeff Gamber for his help with this production. Join us next time for a fresh episode of Pioneers and Health.