Tech to Save Moms Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Williams, Nikema [D-GA-5]
- Committees
- Energy and Commerce Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Apr 15, 2026
Bottom line
This bill aims to improve maternal health outcomes, especially for underserved populations and racial/ethnic minority groups, by leveraging telehealth, digital tools, and collaborative learning models, backed by federal grants and research.
What it actually does
The "Tech to Save Moms Act" authorizes new grant programs and amends existing law to expand the use of technology in maternal healthcare. Specifically, it allows states to use Medicaid waivers to adopt telehealth tools for pregnancy and postpartum care, establishes grants for technology-enabled collaborative learning models to train maternal healthcare providers, and creates grants to increase access to digital tools to reduce maternal health disparities. It also mandates a study by the National Academies on technology and patient monitoring devices in maternity care, focusing on racial and ethnic biases.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that technology and telehealth are critical tools to address the ongoing maternal mortality and morbidity crisis, particularly for vulnerable populations in rural, underserved, and health professional shortage areas. They contend that these tools can improve access to care, enhance provider training on critical issues like implicit bias and mental health, and help reduce significant racial and ethnic disparities in maternal health outcomes. The bill's focus on data collection and best practices will ensure effective implementation.
Opponents contend
Critics might raise concerns about the potential for technology to exacerbate existing digital divides if not implemented carefully, or the privacy and security risks associated with increased digital health information exchange. Some may question the effectiveness of grant programs versus direct funding for healthcare services, or the administrative burden on providers to adopt new technologies and participate in training. There could also be concerns about the cost of these programs without a clear, long-term funding strategy beyond the initial authorization.
The bill is relatively short and clearly structured, making it accessible for an informed reader to understand its core provisions within a reasonable timeframe.
Section 2(a)
Medicaid Telehealth for Maternal Care
This provision amends the Social Security Act to allow states to use Medicaid waivers (specifically under Section 1115A(b)(2)(B)) to adopt and use telehealth tools. These tools are for screening, monitoring, and managing common health complications for individuals receiving Medicaid during pregnancy and for up to one year postpartum.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this expands critical access to care for low-income pregnant and postpartum individuals, addressing gaps in care and improving outcomes by leveraging telehealth.
Critics contend
Some may express concern about the potential for telehealth to replace in-person care where it might be more appropriate, or the administrative burden on states to develop and implement new waiver programs.
Tradeoffs
Balances expanding access to care through technology with ensuring quality and appropriate use of telehealth services within the Medicaid framework.
Section 3 (Public Health Service Act, new Section 330Q)
Grants for Technology-Enabled Collaborative Learning Models
This section establishes a grant program, administered by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, to evaluate, develop, and expand the use of "technology-enabled collaborative learning and capacity building models" to improve maternal health outcomes. These grants are specifically targeted at health professional shortage areas, areas with high maternal mortality/morbidity, rural/underserved areas, areas with significant maternal health disparities, and for medically underserved populations and American Indians/Alaska Natives.
Section 3(b)(1)(A)
Required Training Topics for Grant Recipients
Grant recipients under Section 330Q are required to use funds to train maternal health care providers, students, and other professionals on specific topics. These include increasing safety and healthcare quality, implicit bias, racism, and discrimination, best practices for maternal mental health and substance use disorders, maternity care during public health emergencies, screening for social determinants of maternal health risks, and using remote patient monitoring tools for pregnancy complications.
Section 4
Grants to Promote Equity in Maternal Health Outcomes Through Digital Tools
This section establishes another grant program, also administered by the Secretary, to reduce maternal health disparities by increasing access to digital tools. These tools include provider-facing technologies like early warning systems and clinical decision support mechanisms. Priority is given to entities in areas with elevated rates of maternal mortality/morbidity, health professional shortage areas, and those promoting technology addressing disparities.
Section 5
National Academies Study on Technology in Maternity Care
This section directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to seek an agreement with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to conduct a study. The study will examine the use of innovative technology (including AI) and patient monitoring devices (like pulse oximeters) in maternal health care, specifically assessing their effects on racial or ethnic biases. It will also identify best practices for reducing bias, for use with minority groups, and for privacy/security safeguards. A report is due to Congress within 24 months.
Amends Section 1115A(b)(2)(B) of the Social Security Act to include a new item (xxviii) allowing for telehealth tools in Medicaid waivers for pregnancy and postpartum care (up to 1 year).
Section 2(a)
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice for modifying existing law.
Case for: Allows states flexibility to innovate and expand access to care through telehealth for a vulnerable population, leveraging an existing mechanism.
Case against: Reliance on state waivers means implementation may be inconsistent across states, and it doesn't mandate telehealth coverage, only enables it.
Estimated impact: Potentially significant, as Medicaid covers a large portion of births in the US, but actual impact depends on state adoption.
The Secretary may not award more than 1 grant under Section 3 (Expanding Capacity for Maternal Health Outcomes) and not more than 1 grant under Section 4 (Promote Equity in Maternal Health Outcomes Through Digital Tools).
Section 3(d)(1) and Section 4(d)(1)
Why it matters:Could be a legislative strategy to consolidate funding or focus impact, or to limit the administrative burden of managing many small grants. It could also be a way to ensure a large, impactful grant rather than many smaller ones.
Case for: Focusing resources on a single, large-scale grant recipient for each program could allow for more comprehensive and impactful initiatives, potentially leading to better data collection and evaluation. It might also reduce administrative overhead for the federal agency.
Case against: Limiting to a single grant per program could restrict the diversity of approaches, limit geographic reach, and potentially exclude smaller, innovative entities that might struggle to compete for a very large, singular award. It could also create a single point of failure.
Estimated impact: Significantly concentrates the impact of the authorized funding, making the success of each program highly dependent on the chosen single grantee.
Grant recipients must use funds to train maternal health care providers on "implicit bias, racism, and discrimination."
Section 3(b)(1)(A)(ii)
Why it matters:It's a specific, but potentially sensitive, training requirement nestled among other clinical and operational topics.
Case for: Supporters argue that addressing implicit bias, racism, and discrimination is fundamental to improving maternal health outcomes and reducing disparities, especially for racial and ethnic minority groups.
Case against: Some might argue that mandating specific training topics could be seen as overreach or that the effectiveness of such training is debated, though this is less common in the context of maternal health equity.
Estimated impact: Aims to directly influence the cultural competence and equitable care practices of trained providers.