# How resilient were family planning programs during the COVID-19 pandemic?  Evidence from 70 countries

## TL;DR

This study examines how family planning programs in 70 countries held up during the COVID-19 pandemic and finds that while all were affected, government commitment and service access remained relatively resilient.

## Contribution

The paper provides new evidence on the resilience of family planning programs during the pandemic using a unique global dataset.

## Key findings

- All family planning programs were affected, but government commitment and service access remained resilient in most cases.
- A strong enabling environment for family planning was linked to better resilience during the pandemic.
- Common challenges included disruptions in logistics, staff reallocation, and reduced financing.

## Abstract

Background: At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic fears of severe disruptions to family planning (FP) and access to services abounded. This paper uses a unique data source, a special Supplement added to the 2021 round of the National Composite Index for Family Planning (NCIFP), to assess in depth the resilience of FP programs in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic across 70 countries spanning six regions.

Methods: The 2021 NCIFP included 961 key informants who were asked questions to assess interference in the countries’ ability to achieve objectives, ability to maintain commitment to FP, and availability of information and services. Open ended responses added context.

Results: All programs were affected; the magnitude of effects varies by region and country. While the average resilience score, at 47 out of 100, implies middling levels of resilience, further analysis showed that despite interference in many components of programming, with some exceptions, the COVID-19 pandemic generally did not diminish government commitment to FP and programs remained resilient in providing access to services. Common themes mentioned by 178 respondents (18.5% of respondents) included: fear of infection; disruption of services / difficulty with lockdown and travel restrictions; staff / facilities diverted to COVID-19; access to reproductive health services and contraceptive methods affected; shifts in services / outreach; interference with logistics & supplies, training & supervision, and M&E; lack of attention to FP/sexual reproductive health; financing reduced or diverted; and effects on existing partnerships. A strong enabling environment for FP, which the NCIFP is designed to measure, was positively correlated with continued government commitment and access to contraceptive methods during COVID-19.

Conclusion: These findings are instructive for programming: it will face challenges and ‘interference’ when unanticipated shocks like COVID-19 occur, with strong FP programs best prepared to exhibit resilience.