Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 May 1;33(4):574-582.
doi: 10.1093/heapol/czy006.

Donor funding for family planning: levels and trends between 2003 and 2013

Christopher Grollman  1 , Francesca L Cavallaro  2 , Diane Duclos  2 , Victoria Bakare  3 , Melisa Martínez Álvarez  1 , Josephine Borghi  1
Affiliations

Donor funding for family planning: levels and trends between 2003 and 2013

Christopher Grollman et al. Health Policy Plan. .

Abstract

The International Conference on Population and Development in 1994 set targets for donor funding to support family planning programmes, and recent initiatives such as FP2020 have renewed focus on the need for adequate funding to rights-based family planning. Disbursements supporting family planning disaggregated by donor, recipient country and year are not available for recent years. We estimate international donor funding for family planning in 2003-13, the period covering the introduction of reproductive health targets to the Millennium Development Goals and up to the beginning of FP2020, and compare funding to unmet need for family planning in recipient countries. We used the dataset of donor disbursements to support reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health developed by the Countdown to 2015 based on the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Creditor Reporting System. We assessed levels and trends in disbursements supporting family planning in the period 2003-13 and compared this to unmet need for family planning. Between 2003 and 2013, disbursements supporting family planning rose from under $400 m prior to 2008 to $886 m in 2013. More than two thirds of disbursements came from the USA. There was substantial year-on-year variation in disbursement value to some recipient countries. Disbursements have become more concentrated among recipient countries with higher national levels of unmet need for family planning. Annual disbursements of donor funding supporting family planning are far short of projected and estimated levels necessary to address unmet need for family planning. The reimposition of the US Global Gag Rule will precipitate an even greater shortfall if other donors and recipient countries do not find substantial alternative sources of funding.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Total ODA+ disbursements for family planning
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
ODA+ disbursements for family planning, HIV, other reproductive and sexual health activities, maternal and newborn health, and child health
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
ODA+ disbursements for family planning to all recipient countries, by donor
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
(a) ODA+ disbursements for family planning to recipient countries, Sub-Saharan Africa. (b) ODA+ disbursements for family planning to recipient countries, South Asia. (c) ODA+ disbursements for family planning to recipient countries, All other recipient countries
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
Targeting of ODA+ disbursements for family planning to unmet need
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Afnan-Holmes H, Magoma M, John T. et al. 2015. Tanzania's countdown to 2015: an analysis of two decades of progress and gaps for reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health, to inform priorities for post-2015. Lancet Global Health 3: e396–409. - PubMed
    1. Ahmed S, Li Q, Liu L, Tsui AO.. 2012. Maternal deaths averted by contraceptive use: an analysis of 172 countries. Lancet 380: 111–25. - PubMed
    1. Ali M, Seuc A, Rahimi A, Festin M, Temmerman M.. 2014. A global research agenda for family planning: results of an exercise for setting research priorities. Bulletin World Health Organization 92: 93–8. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Alkema L, Kantorova V, Menozzi C, Biddlecom A.. 2013. National, regional, and global rates and trends in contraceptive prevalence and unmet need for family planning between 1990 and 2015: a systematic and comprehensive analysis. Lancet 381: 1642–52. - PubMed
    1. Arregoces L, Daly F, Pitt C. et al. 2015. Countdown to 2015: changes in official development assistance to reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health, and assessment of progress between 2003 and 2012. Lancet Global Health 3: e410–21. - PubMed