Skip to main content
Guttmacher Institute

Search

  • X
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • Contact

Highlights

  • Roe v. Wade Overturned
  • Reproductive Health Impact Study
  • Adding It Up
  • Abortion Worldwide
  • Guttmacher-Lancet Commission
  • Monthly Abortion Provision Study
  • US policy resources
  • State policy resources
  • State legislation tracker

Reports

  • Global
  • United States

Articles

  • Global research
  • US research
  • Policy analysis
  • Guttmacher Policy Review
  • Opinion

Fact Sheets

  • Global
  • United States
  • US State Laws and Policies

Data, Videos & Visualizations

  • Data center
  • Videos
  • Infographics
  • Public-use data sets

Peer-reviewed Journals

  • International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1975–2020)
  • Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1969–2020)

Global

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • HIV & STIs
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

US

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • HIV & STIs
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

Our Work by Geography

  • Global
  • Africa
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Latin America & the Caribbean
  • Northern America
  • Oceania

Who We Are

  • About
  • Staff
  • Board
  • Job opportunities
  • Newsletter
  • History
  • Contact
  • Conflict of Interest Policy

Media

  • Media office
  • News releases

Support Our Work

  • Make a gift today
  • Monthly Giving Circle
  • Ways to Give
  • Guttmacher Guardians
  • Guttmacher Legacy Circle
  • Financials
  • 2024 Impact Report

Awards & Scholarships

  • Darroch Award
  • Richards Scholarship
  • Bixby Fellowship
Donate
Guttmacher Institute
Donate

Highlights

  • Roe v. Wade Overturned
  • Reproductive Health Impact Study
  • Adding It Up
  • Abortion Worldwide
  • Guttmacher-Lancet Commission
  • Monthly Abortion Provision Study
  • US policy resources
  • State policy resources
  • State legislation tracker

Reports

  • Global
  • United States

Articles

  • Global research
  • US research
  • Policy analysis
  • Guttmacher Policy Review
  • Opinion

Fact Sheets

  • Global
  • United States
  • US State Laws and Policies

Data, Videos & Visualizations

  • Data center
  • Videos
  • Infographics
  • Public-use data sets

Peer-reviewed Journals

  • International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1975–2020)
  • Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1969–2020)

Global

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • HIV & STIs
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

US

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • HIV & STIs
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

Our Work by Geography

  • Global
  • Africa
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Latin America & the Caribbean
  • Northern America
  • Oceania

Who We Are

  • About
  • Staff
  • Board
  • Job opportunities
  • Newsletter
  • History
  • Contact
  • Conflict of Interest Policy

Media

  • Media office
  • News releases

Support Our Work

  • Make a gift today
  • Monthly Giving Circle
  • Ways to Give
  • Guttmacher Guardians
  • Guttmacher Legacy Circle
  • Financials
  • 2024 Impact Report

Awards & Scholarships

  • Darroch Award
  • Richards Scholarship
  • Bixby Fellowship
Donate
  • X
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • Contact

Reproductive Health Impact Study

The Reproductive Health Impact Study (RHIS) is a multiyear comprehensive research initiative that analyzed the effects of federal and state policy changes on US publicly funded family planning care from 2017 to 2024. The Guttmacher Institute worked with research and policy partners in four states—Arizona, Iowa, New Jersey and Wisconsin—to document the impact of these policies on family planning service delivery and the patients who rely on this care.

The RHIS was conceived in the aftermath of the 2016 election, in anticipation of federal and state efforts to change funding streams and service delivery for publicly funded family planning. As the study progressed, the RHIS team adapted ongoing study activities to document several relevant events—notably, the 2019 changes to the federal Title X regulations (the Trump-Pence administration’s “domestic gag rule”), the COVID-19 pandemic and the US Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision in 2022 overturning Roe v. Wade.

How Do Policy Changes Affect US Publicly Funded Family Planning Care?

The RHIS demonstrates that restrictions on sexual and reproductive health care and rights undermine people’s reproductive autonomy through negative outcomes at the patient, provider and system levels. Additional and unexpected disruptions to the landscape during the study period, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and the Dobbs decision, exacerbated the harms of restrictive policies.

The impacts of policies that restrict abortion care and access ripple out to all aspects of sexual and reproductive health care.

Primary Takeaway 

  • All types of sexual and reproductive health care are inextricably linked, and restrictions on sexual and reproductive health care have broader implications.

Additional Key Takeaways 

  • Programs and policies that support person-centered care and focus on sexual and reproductive health equity are key to ensuring reproductive autonomy for all patients.
  • Cost is a significant barrier to patients’ ability to access care and achieve reproductive autonomy.
  • Person-centered contraceptive care is essential because contraceptive preferences vary.
  • Publicly funded family planning programs, including Title X, are critical to making contraceptive services affordable.
  • Policy restrictions on sexual and reproductive health care compound existing inequities, particularly for Black people and other people of color, LGBTQ+ individuals and people with low incomes.

The Guttmacher Institute has published numerous research articles, reports and policy analyses using RHIS data. A complete list of RHIS-related publications is available. Overall RHIS findings and their implications for policy are documented in a summary analysis.

Implications

The RHIS findings indicate that policy restrictions on sexual and reproductive health care impede access to care and compound existing inequities in health care access. Federal, state and local policies should promote meaningful access to sexual and reproductive health care, provision of person-centered care and support reproductive autonomy. Policymakers should take the following steps to build sexual and reproductive health equity:

  • Fully fund and strengthen the Title X national family planning program
  • Ensure that sexual and reproductive health care programs provide person-centered care
  • Remove restrictions that silo abortion care
  • Require all health insurance plans and programs to provide comprehensive coverage for all contraceptive options
  • Ensure that patients have multiple options for accessing reproductive health care

Study Design

RHIS Activities Flow Chart
  • The RHIS used original in-depth quantitative and qualitative research, including longitudinal studies, and a wide range of secondary data sources to create a robust set of scientifically innovative, policy-relevant findings. The project objective was to illuminate the effects of policy change on publicly funded family planning from several different angles:
  • Overall landscape: Identify how delivery networks changed in composition and capacity as funding streams and programmatic guidance shifted
  • Clinics: Quantify changes to the number and types of safety-net health centers available to women and to the number of women who visited these sites for contraceptive services
  • Clinic staff: Describe the perspectives and experiences of clinic staff as they navigated the changing policy landscape while providing high-quality services to patients in their communities
  • Patients: Highlight the perspectives and experiences of family planning patients as they navigated barriers to access within a changing family planning service delivery system
  • Reproductive health indicators: Monitor shifts in key reproductive health indicators at the state level

State Fact Sheets

Choose a state:

Choose Arizona
Choose Iowa
Choose New Jersey
Choose Wisconsin
 

Published Research Studies and Policy Analyses

  • November 2024
    Research Article

    Differential Associations Between Access to Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare and Subsequent Contraceptive and Pregnancy Outcomes by Ethnicity Among Family Planning Patients in Arizona

    Drawing on surveys of patients who initially received sexual and reproductive health care at publicly funded sites in Arizona in 2018, this study highlights how specialized reproductive health care providers—including Planned Parenthood and Title X sites—play a critical role in contraceptive care delivery. The findings demonstrate inequities across ethnicities, as Hispanic or Latina/x respondents did not experience the same improved outcomes as a result of where they got their care as did their non-Hispanic or Latina/x counterparts. 

  • October 2024
    Research Article

    Differential associations between experiences of contraceptive care and subsequent contraceptive access and preferences among family planning patients by racial and ethnic identity: Evidence from Arizona, Iowa, and Wisconsin

    This research paper highlights how associations between receiving high-quality contraceptive care and higher levels of use of preferred contraceptives varied by racial and ethnic groups, highlighting persistent disparities. For respondents identifying as people of color, receiving high-quality contraceptive care did not necessarily lead to the same association with positive outcomes as it did for their non-Hispanic White counterparts.

  • March 2024
    Research Article

    Unfulfilled and method-specific contraceptive preferences among reproductive-aged contraceptive users in Arizona, Iowa, New Jersey, and Wisconsin

    Drawing on secondary baseline data from 4,660 reproductive aged contraceptive users from Surveys of Women (SoW) in Arizona, Iowa, New Jersey and Wisconsin, this study examined associations between individuals' reproductive health-related experiences and their contraceptive preferences. This research adds to a growing body of evidence that health care providers play a critical role in helping patients decrease the gap between contraceptive methods used and those preferred.

  • March 2024 Report

    Any Restrictions on Reproductive Health Care Harm Reproductive Autonomy: Evidence from Four States

    Drawing on seven years of research from our Reproductive Health Impact Study, this report illustrates the cumulative harm that restrictive federal and state policies have on all aspects of sexual and reproductive health care. The case studies in Arizona, Iowa, New Jersey and Wisconsin make clear that restrictions on reproductive health care negatively impact the provision of care, the availability of patient-centered services and reproductive autonomy. 

  • February 2024
    Research Article

    Has the fall of Roe changed contraceptive access and use? New research from four US states offers critical insights

    As the fallout of the Dobbs decision on access to abortion continues, this study makes clear that access to broader contraceptive care is worsening. The data, collected from two surveys conducted pre- and post-Dobbs in Arizona, Iowa, New Jersey and Wisconsin of women ages 18–44, found that sexual activity declined, barriers to accessing contraception increased, reports of receiving high-quality contraceptive care decreased and condom use increased.   

  • November 2023
    Research Article

    Cost-related barriers to sexual and reproductive health care: Results from a longitudinal qualitative study in Arizona

    This study found that burdensome and unexpected costs from changes in family planning policies influenced whether, when and where Arizona residents sought care. The study, which was published in SSM-Qualitative Research in Health, recruited people assigned female at birth aged 15 and older who accessed sexual and reproductive health care in Arizona in 2019.  

Pagination

  • Current page 1
  • Page 2
  • Page 3
  • Page 4
  • Page 5
  • Next page Next
  • Last page Last

Study States and Partners

RHIS researchers and policy experts worked in close collaboration with stakeholders in each study state.

We are grateful for the expertise shared by the following colleagues:

  • Affirm
  • Planned Parenthood of Arizona
  • Planned Parenthood North Central States
  • Family Planning Council of Iowa
  • University of Wisconsin-Madison Collaborative for Reproductive Equity (UW CORE)
  • New Jersey Family Planning League
  • Other key stakeholders in each state

Key Guttmacher Institute Staff

Research:

  • Jennifer Frost
  • Megan Kavanaugh
  • Alicia VandeVusse

Policy:

  • Amy Friedrich-Karnik

Communications:

  • Emma Stoskopf-Ehrlich

Acknowledgments

The Reproductive Health Impact Study was funded in part through a generous grant from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions and policies of the donor.

Media Contacts

[email protected]

Guttmacher Institute

Center facts. Shape policy.
Advance sexual and reproductive rights.

Donate Now
Newsletter Signup  Contact Us 
  • X
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • Contact

Footer

  • Privacy Policy
  • Accessibility Statement
© 2025 Guttmacher Institute. The Guttmacher Institute is registered as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization under the tax identification number 13-2890727. Contributions are tax deductible to the fullest extent allowable.
OSZAR »