This is an average of the three domain scores below.
The U.S. Government received a 63 (D) with transparency and a 66 (D) without transparency for Family Planning across all actors. This reflects the negative impact of the PLGHA FAQ and Six Month Review documents as well as insufficient funding for key family planning providers, including UNFPA.
The Department of State received a 56 (F) with transparency and 60 (D-) without transparency for Family Planning based on two documents related to the PLGHA expansion of the Global Gag Rule: the Six Month Review and the FAQ. Neither is gender aware nor based in evidence or human rights principles. However, both documents are responsive to need because they address concerns and questions from partners regarding the implementation of PLGHA. In the budget evaluation, the Department of State largely disbursed family planning funds in accordance with unmet contraceptive need. However, access to family planning and contraception was severely impacted by the Department of State once again defunding UNFPA due to an unsubstantiated Kemp-Kasten amendment violation in FY 2019.
USAID received a 66 (D) with transparency and 65 (D) without transparency for Family Planning. USAID was graded based on three family planning-related guidance and procedures that were issued in 2018. These documents varied in their grades, but none of them were gender transformative or explicitly based in human rights norms. As the agency that coordinates family planning funds through bilateral programs and partners with local civil society, USAID has the potential to implement truly evidence-based and human rights-based programming. These documents are evidence that USAID did not fully step into this role in 2018. The USAID budget grade reflects these conclusions, as a significant portion of the funds disbursed for family planning programming in FY 2019 was not responsive to unmet family planning need by country.
HHS does not receive a grade within the family planning domain because they do not work in international family planning.
DoD does not receive a grade within the family planning domain because they do not work in international family planning.
Congress received a 74 (C) with transparency and a 74 (C) without transparency for Family Planning because the enacted FY 2019 Congressional budget appropriated inadequate funds for UNFPA and USAID. Congress did not pass any legislation on family planning in 2018. Information on family planning legislation and funding was available, so the transparency score did not decrease Congress’ grade for this domain.
The White House received a 54 (F) with transparency and 59 (F) without transparency in Family Planning. In the FY 2019 budget request, the White House did not request any funding for the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and zeroed out all family planning funds for USAID. These budgetary determinations significantly hindered the ability of U.S. global health assistance to support comprehensive family planning programs. The White House did not issue any executive orders or presidential memoranda related to family planning nor did it sign any family planning policies into law in 2018. The transparency score for the White House is low for family planning due to the difficulty accessing budgetary and policy information.