Senate Bill 906, titled the MOMnibus 3.5 Act, is a broad maternal and infant health package focused primarily on reducing maternal mortality and severe maternal morbidity, especially among Black women and other underserved populations. The bill creates several new grant programs administered by the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), including a Maternal Care Access Grant Program for community-based organizations, a Perinatal Education Grant Program for rural, underserved, and low-wealth areas, and a Momni-Bus Initiative to expand access to maternal and infant health services in areas with limited or no maternity care. It also directs funding to HBCU-based lactation support training programs and to the March of Dimes for maternal and infant health work.
The bill also makes major changes to health care policy by requiring DHHS to create or identify an evidence-based implicit bias training program for health care professionals involved in perinatal care. Health care professionals would be required to complete the training as a condition of licensure renewal or initial licensure timelines, and the bill adds a new patient-rights section for perinatal care facilities requiring written notice of rights, including nondiscrimination, informed discharge information, pain treatment, participation in care decisions, and complaint procedures. The bill further requires DHHS to collect maternal mortality data and report on grant outcomes, outreach effectiveness, and program impact.
In terms of fiscal impact, the bill appropriates recurring and nonrecurring General Fund dollars totaling tens of millions across multiple years, including $5 million recurring for the maternal care access grant program, $2.5 million recurring for implicit bias training, $3 million nonrecurring for HBCU lactation training programs, $3 million nonrecurring for the perinatal education grant program, and $6.5 million nonrecurring for the Momni-Bus Initiative. It also authorizes new DHHS staffing and administrative spending, and it sets reporting deadlines to evaluate whether the funded programs improve maternal health outcomes and diversify service delivery.
The overall sentiment reflected in the bill text is strongly supportive of maternal health equity, with an emphasis on dignity, culturally responsive care, and reducing racial disparities in birth outcomes. Although there were no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, the structure and findings language suggest the bill is framed as a public health and civil rights measure aimed at addressing preventable harms in pregnancy and childbirth. The bill’s tone is affirmative and programmatic rather than punitive, relying on grants, training, and reporting to drive change.
Potential points of contention are likely to center on the mandatory implicit bias training requirement for licensed health care professionals, the use of state funds for race-targeted grant programs, and the administrative burden placed on DHHS and licensing authorities. Some may also question the directed grant to the March of Dimes, the scope of the patient-rights provisions, or whether the bill’s focus on Black maternal health and culturally specific programming is the best policy approach. However, no explicit opposition or debate is included in the provided materials.
The bill would amend North Carolina law by adding new statutory sections in Chapter 130A governing implicit bias training for perinatal care professionals and patient rights in perinatal facilities, while also creating multiple DHHS-administered grant programs and reporting requirements. It would appropriate recurring and nonrecurring General Fund dollars to DHHS and UNC System institutions, establish new state-funded training and outreach efforts, and require health care professionals and facilities to comply with new training, disclosure, and reporting obligations. The bill would also affect community-based organizations, HBCUs, lactation support professionals, nonprofit service providers, and perinatal care facilities across the state.
The bill appears to have a generally positive, reform-oriented sentiment, with its findings and structure emphasizing maternal health, racial equity, and improved access to care. It is presented as a response to preventable maternal deaths and disparities in outcomes, especially for Black women, and it relies on supportive mechanisms such as grants, education, technical assistance, and patient protections. No vote totals, committee remarks, or recorded opposition were provided, so the available context shows strong pro-bill framing but no direct evidence of legislative debate or consensus.
The most likely areas of contention are the mandatory implicit bias training requirement for all health care professionals involved in perinatal care, the bill’s race-conscious grant criteria and special consideration for Black women-led organizations, and the level of state spending required. Critics could also object to the state directing funds to specific institutions and organizations, the compliance burden on licensing authorities and facilities, and whether the bill’s approach appropriately balances equity goals with provider autonomy and administrative feasibility. Supporters, by contrast, are likely to view these provisions as necessary responses to documented disparities in maternal outcomes and access to care.