New federal sits at the center of this dementia and brain health question.

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced on January 29, 2026 that Michelle Branham, former Florida Secretary of Elder Affairs, has been appointed as the new Chair of the Advisory Council on Alzheimer’s Research, Care, and Services. Alongside Branham, Katheryn Newkirk was appointed Vice-Chair, and ten additional public members joined the council to help shape federal policy on Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias.

This expanded leadership team brings decades of clinical expertise, research credentials, and lived experience with dementia—a shift designed to strengthen the federal government’s approach to one of America’s most pressing public health challenges. The Advisory Council, established under the National Alzheimer’s Project Act in 2011, meets quarterly to advise the HHS Secretary on strategies to reduce the burden of Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias. The new appointments reflect a broader expansion through the NAPA Reauthorization Act, which added more voices from individuals living with dementia, enhanced research expertise, and representatives from additional federal agencies. This article explores who these new members are, what their expertise brings to the table, and why their appointments matter for the future direction of Alzheimer’s care and research in America.

Who Is Michelle Branham and What Brings Her to the Federal Council?
The Clinical Expertise of the New Appointments—What Researchers Bring to Policy
How the Council Expansion Reflects Changing Priorities in Dementia Policy
When New Leadership Makes a Difference—What the Council Actually Does
The First Meeting and What It Signals About Council Direction
Why Neurosurgical Expertise Matters in Dementia Policy
Looking Forward—The Council’s Role in Addressing Ongoing Challenges
Conclusion

Who Is Michelle Branham and What Brings Her to the Federal Council?

Michelle Branham brings more than 25 years of experience in Alzheimer’s disease policy and public health to her new role as Chair. She previously served as Secretary of the Florida Department of Elder Affairs, appointed by Governor Ron DeSantis in 2021. In that position, Branham oversaw policies affecting elderly Floridians, a state where the aging population is both substantial and increasingly impacted by Alzheimer’s and related dementias.

Her appointment to the council represents a significant shift toward leadership that understands the real-world challenges families and healthcare systems face when managing dementia care at scale. What sets Branham apart is not just her tenure in state government, but her specific focus on Alzheimer’s disease policy. State-level experience matters in federal advisory roles because it bridges the gap between what works (and doesn’t work) in real communities and what national policy frameworks recommend. Branham’s background suggests she can advocate for practical solutions rather than theoretical ones—an important distinction when advising on issues as complex as dementia care, which involves coordination between Medicare, Medicaid, private insurance, hospitals, primary care providers, and long-term care facilities.

Who Is Michelle Branham and What Brings Her to the Federal Council?

The Clinical Expertise of the New Appointments—What Researchers Bring to Policy

Among the notable new appointees is Randall Bateman, MD, Director of the DIAN-TU (Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network Trials Unit) and a neurologist at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis. Bateman’s research focuses on Alzheimer’s disease pathophysiology and diagnostics—the underlying biological mechanisms and how clinicians can detect the disease earlier. Having a researcher of his stature on the council matters because many policy decisions affect how clinical trials are conducted, which biomarkers get funded for development, and how quickly new diagnostic tools reach patients. However, it’s important to note that while cutting-edge research informs the best long-term strategies, it doesn’t always translate quickly to community care settings where many patients are still diagnosed late or not at all.

Also appointed is Ricardo A. Hanel, MD, PhD, a neurosurgeon and Director of the Baptist Neurological Institute in Jacksonville, Florida. Hanel’s background bridges surgical neurology with broader neurological care and leadership in a major healthcare system. His presence on the council represents the perspective of clinicians who work directly with advanced Alzheimer’s patients and their families—a viewpoint that keeps federal policy grounded in clinical reality. The combination of a basic science researcher like Bateman and a clinician-leader like Hanel creates the kind of intellectual diversity that advisory councils need to make well-informed recommendations.

How the Council Expansion Reflects Changing Priorities in Dementia Policy

The NAPA Reauthorization Act’s expansion of the council membership signals an intentional shift in how federal leadership approaches Alzheimer’s disease. By adding more individuals living with dementia, the council now includes voices that can speak directly to patient experience—not just clinical outcomes or research metrics. This is a meaningful change because for decades, policy discussions have been dominated by researchers, physicians, and administrators, while the perspectives of people who live with dementia daily have been either absent or filtered through caregivers and advocacy organizations.

The expansion also adds more representation from different federal agencies, which reflects recognition that Alzheimer’s policy cannot be siloed within the National Institute on Aging or even within HHS. Dementia intersects with housing policy (assisted living and nursing homes are regulated differently by states), employment law (workers diagnosed with Alzheimer’s need protections and accommodations), Social Security disability determinations, and even immigration policy as some countries have citizenship requirements affected by cognitive status. A more diverse council membership means these intersections are more likely to be noticed and addressed in advisory recommendations.

How the Council Expansion Reflects Changing Priorities in Dementia Policy

When New Leadership Makes a Difference—What the Council Actually Does

It’s worth understanding what the Advisory Council’s recommendations actually influence and where limitations exist. The council meets quarterly and provides advice to the HHS Secretary on policy and research priorities. This can shape which research initiatives get funded through the National Institutes of Health, how Medicare and Medicaid policies around dementia care are structured, and how federal resources are allocated for training healthcare providers in dementia recognition and management. When the council identifies a gap—for instance, that primary care physicians aren’t receiving adequate training in early cognitive decline—that recommendation can influence funding for medical education programs.

However, the council’s power has limits. It advises the Secretary; it does not make law or directly control budgets. Congress controls most federal healthcare spending, and Congress is where major policy changes like expanding Medicare coverage for early cognitive testing or increasing payments for dementia specialist visits actually happen. The council’s recommendations carry weight and can influence the Administration’s legislative proposals and appropriations requests, but they are one voice among many in the policy ecosystem. Understanding this distinction helps explain why having highly credible members like Branham, Bateman, and Hanel matters—their reputation and expertise make their recommendations more likely to be taken seriously by policymakers.

The First Meeting and What It Signals About Council Direction

The council held its first 2026 meeting on February 9, 2026, from 10:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. for introductions and the formal swearing-in of new members. While ceremonial in nature, these initial meetings set the tone for how a reconstituted body will function. With such extensive turnover and expansion in membership, the early meetings likely focused on aligning the diverse group around shared priorities and understanding each member’s area of expertise and perspective.

One limitation to keep in mind is that advisory councils only function well if their members can actually attend meetings and engage in the ongoing work. Quarterly meetings mean only four touchpoints per year, and the substantive work happens between meetings through committees and working groups. For a council addressing a disease as complex and evolving as Alzheimer’s—where new biomarkers, drugs, and care models emerge regularly—the ability of members to stay current and connected is crucial. Burnout and turnover on advisory councils is common, particularly for members who hold demanding clinical or administrative roles elsewhere. The true test of this new council’s impact will be how effectively these members translate their expertise into actionable recommendations over the next few years.

The First Meeting and What It Signals About Council Direction

Why Neurosurgical Expertise Matters in Dementia Policy

Ricardo Hanel’s appointment as a neurosurgeon might seem unusual on an Alzheimer’s advisory council—neurosurgeons typically work on brain tumors, aneurysms, and structural abnormalities, not neurodegenerative diseases. However, his role as Director of the Baptist Neurological Institute positions him at the intersection of surgical and medical neurology.

Some patients with dementia also develop conditions requiring neurosurgical consultation, such as normal-pressure hydrocephalus (which can mimic dementia but is sometimes surgically treatable) or subdural hematomas from falls. More broadly, neurosurgeons in leadership roles within large healthcare systems see the full spectrum of neurological disease and understand how institutional protocols, training pathways, and care coordination either help or hinder patient outcomes.

Looking Forward—The Council’s Role in Addressing Ongoing Challenges

The appointment of this new leadership team comes at a critical moment in Alzheimer’s disease research and treatment. Several disease-modifying drugs targeting amyloid and tau pathology have entered the market or are in advanced clinical trials, fundamentally changing what “treatment” means for early-stage Alzheimer’s disease. These new therapies require biomarker testing, sometimes multiple office visits, and careful monitoring for side effects—logistical and clinical challenges that policy can either support or hinder.

The council will likely grapple with questions about how to expand access to biomarker testing in primary care, how to train the healthcare workforce for earlier detection, and how to ensure equitable access to new treatments across different geographic regions and socioeconomic groups. The expanded council membership suggests federal leadership is preparing for a future where Alzheimer’s is increasingly preventable or treatable if caught early, rather than inevitably progressive. This optimistic outlook, anchored by experienced leaders like Branham and informed by cutting-edge researchers like Bateman, signals a shift toward proactive rather than reactive dementia policy. However, the success of this council ultimately depends on whether its recommendations lead to concrete changes in how care is funded, delivered, and evaluated across the country.

Conclusion

The appointment of Michelle Branham as Chair, Katheryn Newkirk as Vice-Chair, and ten additional members to the Advisory Council on Alzheimer’s Research, Care, and Services represents a meaningful investment in federal Alzheimer’s policy. These appointments bring clinical expertise, research credentials, leadership experience, and—critically—the voices of people living with dementia themselves to the table. The council meets quarterly and serves as the primary advisor to the HHS Secretary on strategies to reduce the burden of Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias.

If you are a family member navigating Alzheimer’s diagnosis, a healthcare provider seeking to improve your clinical approach, or an advocate working on dementia policy, these council appointments may eventually affect the resources, treatments, and support systems available to you. The council’s influence on research funding, clinical practice guidelines, and Medicare/Medicaid policy will unfold over the coming years. Staying informed about the council’s recommendations and priorities—which are published in meeting minutes and federal registers—can help you understand where federal leadership is directing attention and resources within dementia care.