Users of Title X family planning services are disproportionately…
Source Office of Population Affairs.
The independent source for health policy research, polling, and news.
KFF’s policy research provides facts and analysis on a wide range of policy issues and public programs.
KFF designs, conducts and analyzes original public opinion and survey research on Americans’ attitudes, knowledge, and experiences with the health care system to help amplify the public’s voice in major national debates.
KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the organization’s core operating programs.
Source Office of Population Affairs.
The Trump Administration has taken numerous steps to significantly alter the Title X program, the federal grant program that supports family planning services to low-income women. This brief provides an overview of the Title X program, discusses the new 2018 funding announcement and related litigation, and reviews the Trump Administration’s proposed regulations and the implications of these changes.
A new Kaiser Family Foundation report finds that donor government funding for family planning declined in 2016 for the second year in a row, decreasing to US$1.19 billion compared to US$1.34 billion in 2015. While the declines over this two-year period were largely due to exchange rate fluctuations and the timing of donor disbursements which accounted for 78 percent of the overall decrease, there were actual cuts in funding from some donor countries which accounted for 22 percent. Among the 10 donors profiled in the report, four donors decreased funding, including the two largest donors (the U.S. and the U.K.); five increased funding; and one remained flat.
Before the ACA was passed, many states had enacted contraceptive equity laws that required plans to treat contraceptives in the same way they covered other services. In addition, since the ACA was passed, a number of states have enacted laws that basically codify in state legislation the ACA benefit rules. This issue brief provides an update on the status of the continuing litigation on the federal contraceptive requirement and explains the interplay between the federal and state contraceptive coverage laws and the implications for employers and women.
The Supreme Court is expected to reach a decision by the end of June, 2014 on the cases brought forth by Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties, two for profit corporations challenging the ACA’s contraceptive coverage requirement. The plaintiffs contend that the requirement that they include coverage for certain contraceptive services (emergency contraceptive pills and intrauterine devices) in the insurance plans “substantially burdens” both the corporation’s and the owners’ religious rights. During the arguments, several of the justices discussed the extent to which the corporations did or not did not have a choice in offering coverage to their workers. In this brief, we explore some of the factors influencing coverage decisions and possible consequences for women and employers given possible Supreme Court decision options: either upholding the contraceptive coverage requirement, or in favor of Hobby Lobby.
House Republicans’ American Health Care Act and other actions under discussion by President Donald Trump’s administration and the new Congress could profoundly affect access to health care for many women.
Repeal of the Affordable Care Act could have a profound impact on women, as the law fundamentally changed women’s health coverage, benefits, and access to care.
Three quarters of reproductive age women on Medicaid are enrolled in managed care arrangements. This analysis explores the experiences and perspectives of leaders of Medicaid Managed Care Organizations (MCOs) in structuring their networks and services to provide family planning and reproductive health services to women. It finds that MCOs rely heavily on safety net clinics including Community Health Centers and Family Planning Clinics such as Planned Parenthood to provide in-network family planning services to their members. MCO leaders also identified churning in enrollment, the high costs of stocking IUDs and implants, global hospital payment methodologies for maternity care, and the inclusion of faith-based providers in plan networks as potential barriers to certain family planning services.
This budget analysis reviews U.S. funding for global health programs included in the fiscal year 2015 Budget Request released on March 4, 2014. It examines funding by program area as well as trends over time.
This issue brief, Coverage of Abortion Services and the Affordable Care Act (ACA), summarizes the major coverage provisions of the ACA that are relevant for women of reproductive age, reviews current federal and state policies on Medicaid and insurance coverage of abortion services as they relate to the ACA, and presents national and state estimates on the availability of abortion coverage for women who are newly eligible for Medicaid or private coverage through the Marketplaces as a result of the ACA.
© 2026 KFF