In early 2024, the Biden Administration announced a new campaign, spearheaded by First Lady. Dr Jill Biden, with the goal of fundamentally changing how the United States approaches and funds research on women’s health.
“Women are over half the population, but research on women’s health has ALWAYS been underfunded and under-studied,” the press release from the White House states, adding “Too many medical studies have focused on men and left women out.”
The symbolic power of seeing this issue being raised by the Biden administration is huge, but it’s also important to recognize the organizations and leaders who have been working on this for years, paving the path for a more widespread conversation to happen.
One woman who has been leading the way is media mogul turned women’s health advocate and funder Kay Koplovitz. She is the founder of USA Network, and the visionary who created the business model for cable networks by introducing the concept of two revenue streams – licensing and advertising. Kay was also the first woman to head a television network.
In 2000 she pivoted, and launched a different venture altogether, called Springboard Enterprises, which is renowned for being the first accelerator for women-led startups in healthcare. Given the current state of disparities around women’s health funding and research, Kay and her team at Springboard Enterprises have already been in the trenches, working to raise awareness and close the gap through funding initiatives.
To further this work, Springboard Enterprises recently teamed up with Accenture to create a comprehensive report that highlights significant disparities in women’s health funding, research, and understanding. Titled ‘State of Women’s Health‘, they aim to redefine women’s health by “shedding light on the multifaceted landscape, addressing both challenges and opportunities.” The report is is designed to raise awareness, drive action, and promote positive change around funding, research and innovation in women’s health.
A few highlights from the study show that this is not just a health issue, but also an economic one. A $300 million investment in women-centric research is estimated to generate a $13 billion return, cutting healthcare costs and boosting productivity and quality of life.
With compelling data points such as women are twice as likely to die during the first 30 days post-heart attack compared to men, and that on average, women receive a diagnosis 4 years later than men for over 700 diseases, including 2.5 years later for cancer, is it clear there is an urgent urgent need for tailored healthcare solutions.
The report outline some stark disparities that lead to these adverse health outcomes:
Funding Disparities:
- In 2023, only $1.1 billion of the $26.5 billion VC capital invested in healthcare went to women’s health companies, despite a 59% increase from the previous year.
- The budget for the NIH Office for Research on Women’s Health increased by only 9.7% over 17 years, from $41 million in 2003 to $45 million in 2020.
- FemTech, addressing issues primarily impacting women and girls, accounts for only 4% of all healthtech funding.
Research Gaps:
- Women make up 49.7% of the population but are significantly underrepresented in clinical trials. For example, they constitute only one-third of clinical trial subjects for cardiovascular disease, the leading cause of death for women.
- Only 5% of medicines approved by the FDA in 2022 were for female-specific conditions.
- During a 20-year period, only 43% of clinical trials reported sex and ethnicity data.
Wanting to understand Kay’s passion for change in women’s health, we had the chance to ask her more about the study, how the growing Femtech landscape is helping to move the needle, and why women deserve better when it comes to healthcare.
You are well known for your media career, as the founder and former CEO of USA Networks. What made you change your career path eventually?
I loved the media business, which started with my academic study of satellite technology and how it could improve international communications in the 60s. That evolved into cable program networks in the 70s, with the launch of Madison Square Garden Sports nationally and then into USA Network. Being on the frontier of an industry was a challenge and great fun, but after 25 years, I wanted to look for something else to challenge me.
I served on several public and private corporate boards, which gave me insight into the governing bodies of companies across many sectors. That led to my interest in technology-driven companies and the obvious lack of capital for women founders in technology and life science. Hence, Springboard Enterprises was born and launched in late 1999, leading to the first demo day in January 2000. It was apparent then that those companies represented an untapped asset class.
Today, there is a lot of focus on funding women’s health, but Springboard was well ahead of the curve launching in 2000. What was the landscape like for funding women’s health startups when you first launched Springboard?
There wasn’t a market, even though 35% of the companies in our first class of 26 companies were in science. Most of them got funding from federal grants for R&D. A few broke through, but generally, the VC market had no connection to them.
Why do you think there has been such a reluctance for the funding world to understand the great need and opportunity in women’s health?
Men control most decisions in health research, clinical trials, and funding. Drug tests are mostly done on men, not women. Women are not “small men.” We have a different biological construction. Further, research on conditions only applied to women’s life cycle has not been a priority for funding. After decades of women scientists and advocates pressing for specific research and funding for women’s health, the tide is starting to turn, but the path in front of us is still long.
In the new comprehensive report Springboard spearheaded with Accenture, what are some of the biggest and most shocking disparities you found?
I think one of the most significant disparities is in heart health. The symptoms of heart disease are quite different for men and women, and unfortunately, many physicians are not aware of these differences. Therefore, women with heart health problems are often overlooked and sent home without qualified treatment. This is part of the explanation of why heart failure is the leading killer of women today. It’s undiagnosed.
What are some of the potential changes we will see to women’s health when funding disparities are eliminated?
We will see better diagnostics for women’s health conditions, which will lead to better outcomes. I think we will also see more personalized treatments, as not all women are responsive to the same across-the-board treatment for a condition.
What does it mean to you personally to take on this cause?
Women deserve the highest level of diagnostics and treatment, the same as men, only differentiated by our biological differences.
How is the Femtech landscape helping to shift the priorities of the funding landscape overall?
Clearly, treatment focused on women-only conditions, such as fertility, menopause, and all the cycles of life in between, are being addressed by Femtech.
Can you tell us why you partnered with Accenture on this report?
Accenture is a global company directed to apply the latest technology to transform companies. Their research and depth of knowledge in the health field are among the best in the world. We want Springboard alumnae to have access to the best technology guidance. The partnership is very meaningful for us, and the innovation of our alumnae companies is a pulse on the next level for Accenture.
What are the key outcomes you hope to see with the release of the data from this report?
We are in the process of follow-up reports that will focus on more specific health conditions experienced by women and focus on research and funding to bring companies with viable solutions to market.
As we head into a presidential election where women’s reproductive health is under attack, how do you hope this comprehensive report will impact the way voters and everyday people think about the importance of access to healthcare?
There is a groundswell of women who believe decisions about their health should be their decisions in consultation with their doctors and family members—not dictated by a court of law limiting their options, which could decide between life and death.
If you can predict the future 10 years from now, what do you hope the status quo of women’s health will be across America?
Healthcare, in general, has been a laggard of industries incorporating the latest technological advances, but that is about to change with massive databases, Ai advances, and quantum computing. Even though healthcare is highly regulated, some barriers will come down. Healthcare will become more preventive instead of cure after the fact. This is easy to say, not easy to execute, but the next 10 years will put us in better healthcare for all conditions and possibly eliminate some prevalent conditions today.
You can learn more about the incredible work of Kay Koplovitz on her website, take a look at what Springboard Enterprises is currently doing, and read the State of Women’s Health Report.
