Assembly Concurrent Resolution (ACR) 117 names a day to focus attention on maternal health in California and to recognize statewide efforts that have reduced pregnancy‑related deaths. The resolution summarizes recent data, credits multistakeholder efforts such as the California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative (CMQCC), and calls for continued attention to maternal mental health, postpartum care, and racial disparities.
Although purely symbolic and not a funding or regulatory measure, the resolution matters because it consolidates the Legislature’s public position on priority actions (surveillance, screening, care coordination, and culturally relevant outreach) and elevates specific targets—especially reducing disparities that disproportionately affect Black women. For health officials, providers, and advocacy groups, the document creates a clear rhetorical and policy frame they can use in outreach, program design, and requests for resources.
At a Glance
What It Does
The measure is a nonbinding concurrent resolution that recognizes California efforts to reduce maternal mortality, documents the work of agencies and collaboratives (notably CMQCC and CA‑PAMR), and endorses continued surveillance, screening, and care coordination as priorities. It does not create regulatory duties, appropriate funds, or change statutory authorities.
Who It Affects
The resolution primarily signals to public health agencies, hospital systems, maternity‑care providers, maternal‑health advocates, and community organizations that the Legislature prioritizes maternal health and racial‑equity interventions. It gives those actors a legislative reference point for outreach campaigns and grant or budget requests.
Why It Matters
As a policy signal, the resolution consolidates California’s narrative of progress while focusing attention on remaining gaps — especially perinatal mental health and racial disparities. That signal can shape agency agendas, philanthropic priorities, and provider quality‑improvement efforts even though the measure imposes no direct obligations.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
ACR 117 compiles the Legislature’s findings about maternal health in California and sets out the problems the state should keep addressing. The resolution highlights a multiyear effort led by organizations such as the California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative (CMQCC) and the California Pregnancy‑Associated Mortality Review (CA‑PAMR), describing their research, toolkits, and the Maternal Data Center as central to reducing preventable maternal deaths.
It underscores that these efforts correlate with meaningful improvements in statewide outcomes and that those initiatives remain core resources for ongoing work.
The text draws attention to specific clinical and public‑health priorities: better screening and treatment for postpartum depression and psychosis, improved coordination between obstetrics and psychiatry, continuity of insurance coverage following diagnosis, and comprehensive postpartum and interconception care (including breastfeeding support and home visiting for vulnerable families). It also flags screening for substance use, adverse childhood experiences, infectious disease, and intimate‑partner violence as part of a holistic approach to reducing risk.A prominent strand of the resolution is equity: it points to persistent racial and ethnic disparities, with a particular emphasis on the disproportionate share of pregnancy‑related deaths among Black women.
The measure urges culturally and linguistically relevant public awareness and targeted supports for groups at higher risk. Because the resolution is symbolic, its practical value lies in giving public health leaders and advocates a legislative endorsement they can cite when designing programs, seeking funding, or coordinating cross‑sector responses to maternal‑health challenges.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The resolution credits CMQCC—founded in 2006 at Stanford in coordination with CA‑PAMR and the Public Health Institute—for using research, toolkits, collaboratives, and a Maternal Data Center to drive improvements in maternal safety.
California achieved roughly a 65% reduction in maternal mortality between 2006 and 2016, a figure the resolution cites as evidence of progress tied to statewide quality efforts.
The measure cites California’s pregnancy‑related mortality ratio as 12.8 deaths per 100,000 live births in 2019, down from 16.1 in 2018.
The resolution highlights racial disparities: Black women account for about 5% of pregnancies in California but 21% of pregnancy‑related deaths, with a pregnancy‑related mortality ratio three to four times higher than other groups.
The text encourages sustained public‑health surveillance, improved postpartum and interconception care (including home visiting and breastfeeding support), enhanced screening for mental‑health and substance‑use conditions, and better coordination between obstetrics and psychiatry.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Legislative findings on maternal mortality, causes, and program responses
This section catalogs national and state statistics, named causes of pregnancy‑related death (cardiovascular disease, hemorrhage, sepsis, thrombotic pulmonary embolism, amniotic fluid embolism), and trends (including the decline in hypertensive‑disorder deaths). It also records the state’s experience with CMQCC and CA‑PAMR as the organizing entities for data, toolkits, and quality improvement. For practitioners, the findings serve as the Legislature’s diagnostic frame — what lawmakers see as the problem, its likely drivers, and which interventions they consider credible.
Formal recognition and policy priorities
This clause expresses the Legislature’s intent by proclaiming a Maternal Health Awareness Day and by emphasizing priority actions: surveillance, screening and treatment for maternal mental health, postpartum visits and interconception care, culturally and linguistically appropriate outreach, home visiting for vulnerable pregnant women, and coordination between obstetrics and psychiatry. Legally, this is an expression of policy preference rather than a directive; practically, it signals to state agencies and stakeholders the topics legislators expect to be advanced.
Transmittal for distribution
A short administrative provision directs the Chief Clerk of the Assembly to transmit copies of the resolution to the author for distribution. That language creates the usual channel for sharing the Legislature’s statement with stakeholders, agencies, and community groups — an operational detail that makes the resolution usable as an advocacy and outreach tool.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Healthcare across all five countries.
Explore Healthcare in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Maternal‑health advocacy organizations — gain a legislative endorsement they can cite to elevate campaigns, justify grant applications, and push for programmatic expansion targeted at maternal mental health and racial equity.
- Public health agencies (state and local) — receive a clear legislative signal prioritizing surveillance, maternal mental‑health screening, and coordination with clinical partners, which can be folded into planning and grant proposals.
- CMQCC and CA‑PAMR — the resolution publicly recognizes their methods (toolkits, data center, collaboratives), strengthening their convening authority with hospitals and funders.
- Black maternal‑health initiatives and culturally specific community organizations — the resolution’s explicit focus on racial disparities gives these groups a policy lever to demand targeted programs and culturally competent outreach.
- Obstetric and mental‑health providers — the emphasis on care coordination and screening can accelerate clinical adoption of integrated pathways and funding requests for workforce and training.
Who Bears the Cost
- State and local public‑health agencies — while the resolution does not appropriate funds, it raises expectations for continued surveillance and program expansion that may require staff time, data investments, or new contracts.
- Hospital systems and clinics — may face pressure to expand postpartum visits, screening protocols, and coordination with behavioral‑health providers without direct new funding or reimbursement changes.
- Insurers and public payers — advocacy spurred by the resolution could translate into demands for extended postpartum coverage or payment for integrated services, shifting cost and negotiation burdens to payers.
- Authors and policymakers — the symbolic nature of the resolution creates political and administrative pressure to produce measurable follow‑up, which can require time, data reporting, and interagency work to demonstrate impact.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is symbolic recognition versus resourced action: the Legislature signals clear priorities for reducing maternal mortality and racial disparities, but a nonbinding proclamation that contains no funding or regulatory change can raise expectations without providing the financial or administrative tools necessary to deliver measurable improvements.
The resolution is emphatic about priorities but leaves major implementation questions unanswered. It endorses surveillance, screening, and care coordination without allocating funding or changing regulatory authority; that means the practices it favors will rely on agencies, providers, and funders to convert rhetorical support into concrete programs.
Data‑driven gains cited in the text (for example, the CMQCC’s contributions) are real, but the resolution does not address data‑quality issues, reporting lags, or how smaller hospitals and community clinics will access and act on Maternal Data Center insights.
There is also a tension between statewide progress and persistent localized disparities. The resolution highlights statewide reductions and specific clinical gains while also calling attention to much higher pregnancy‑related mortality among Black women.
Translating recognition into equitable outcomes requires targeted investments, culturally competent workforce development, and measurement strategies that go beyond a single awareness day. Finally, some recommended actions—expanded postpartum visits, integrated obstetrics‑psychiatry care, home visiting—depend on workforce capacity, payment reform, and sustained funding; without those, the resolution’s priorities risk remaining aspirational rather than operational.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.