Annex 2015



Mobilizing Resources

Family planning programs require funding, and expansions to those programs require additional funding. The logic is as simple as it is inescapable. No matter how well intentioned a country’s commitment or how well designed a partner’s project, they are unworkable without the resources to underwrite their implementation.

The 2012 London Summit generated US$2.6 billion in financial commitments from global donors to support family planning. It also sparked a renewed emphasis on family planning as a global development priority, with growing recognition that voluntary, rights-based family planning is one of the most cost-effective investments a country can make in its future.

These pledges and priorities are translating into action: a new analysis by the Kaiser Family Foundation reveals that bilateral funding for family planning has increased by almost a third since the 2012 London Summit. Donor governments are following through on their FP2020 commitments:

In 2014 donor governments provided US$1.4 billion in bilateral funding for family planning programs, a 9% increase over the prior year and a 32% increase over 2012.10

  • The US was the largest bilateral donor in 2014, providing almost half (44%) of total bilateral funding: US$636.6 million. The UK was the second-largest bilateral donor, accounting for nearly a quarter of all funding (US$327.6 million).11
  • All eight commitment-making donor governments profiled by the Kaiser Family Foundation are on track to meet their FP2020 commitments.12

These increases continue the upward trendline reported last year and confirm that support for family planning is solidifying and strengthening among global donors. Yet at the same time, Track20 estimates that expenditures on family planning in 2013—the first year for which the data can be compiled—totaled $3.1 billion across the 69 FP2020 focus countries.13 To expand family planning programs beyond 2013 service levels, funding will need to be scaled up even more dramatically.

Further analyses on this page include:



2014 marks the third year of Kaiser Family Foundation’s annual analysis of donor government funding for family planning.14 Overall, donor governments15 provided US$1.4 billion for bilateral family planning in 2014, a 9% increase over the prior year. Of the 10 donor governments profiled, 8 made commitments during the 2012 London Summit; all 8 are on track to meet those commitments.

This analysis is based on data from 29 governments who were members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Development Assistance Committee (DAC) in 2014 and had reported Official Development Assistance (ODA) to the DAC.


  • In 2014, donor governments provided US$1.4 billion for bilateral family planning programs (see table).

Bilateral funding:

  • The US$1.4 billion provided by donors in 2014 represents a 9% increase (+US$120.5 million) above 2013 (US$1.3 billion), and 32% above 2012 (US$1.1 billion).
  • Seven donors (Canada, Denmark, France, Netherlands, Sweden, US, and UK) increased bilateral funding in 2014 (after exchange rate fluctuations are taken into account), while two (Australia and Norway) remained essentially flat and one decreased (Germany).
  • Most of the bilateral increase was driven by the US, followed by France, the UK, and Sweden.
  • The US was the largest bilateral donor in 2014, providing US$636.6 million and accounting for almost half (44%) of total bilateral funding. The UK (US$327.6 million, 23%) was the second-largest bilateral donor, accounting for nearly a quarter of all funding, followed by the Netherlands (US$163.6 million, 11%), Sweden (US$70.2 million, 5%), and France (US$69.8 million, 5%).

Progress toward FP2020 commitments:

  • Among the 10 donors profiled in this analysis, 8 made commitments during the 2012 London Summit on Family Planning: Australia, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and the UK. Preliminary estimates indicate that all 8 are on track toward fulfilling their commitments.


  • In addition to donor government bilateral disbursements for family planning—which include non-core contributions to UNFPA for family planning projects as specified by the donor—donors also contributed US$472 million to UNFPA core resources in 2014. Core resources are meant to be used by UNFPA for both programmatic activities (family planning, population and development, HIV-AIDS, gender, and sexual and reproductive health and rights) and operational support. In 2014, UNFPA spent an estimated US$93 million of core contributions on family planning. Combined with the estimated US$241 million spent on family planning from non-core resources, the overall amount spent by UNFPA on family planning was an estimated US$334 million in 2014, or 40.7% of UNFPA total resources.
  • Among the donor governments profiled, Sweden provided the largest core contribution to UNFPA in 2014 (US$70.3 million), followed by Norway (US$69.1 million), the Netherlands (US$48.4 million), and Denmark (US$41.9).16

Photo by: Mark Naftalin/FP2020

10. Kaiser Family Foundation

11. Kaiser Family Foundation

12. Kaiser Family Foundation

13. Source: Track20. See:

14. For purposes of this analysis, family planning bilateral expenditures represent funding specifically designated by donor governments for family planning as defined by the OECD DAC (see methodology), and include: stand-alone family planning projects; family planning–specific contributions to multilateral organizations (e.g., contributions to the Global Programme to Enhance Reproductive Health Commodity Security at UNFPA); and, in some cases, projects that include family planning within broader reproductive health activities.

15. Donor governments include members of the OECD DAC only.

16. In 2014, Finland, which was not directly profiled in this analysis, provided the third largest core contribution (US$60.4 million) to UNFPA, followed by the Netherlands.


The World Bank provides funding for family planning under broader population and reproductive health activities. In 2014, the World Bank provided US$251 million for population and reproductive health, an increase of US$30 million above the 2013 level (US$221 million). With the creation of the Global Financing Facility (GFF), the World Bank is expected to play an increasingly important role in supporting family planning activities.17

17. Kaiser Family Foundation based on personal communication with World Bank


The financial data presented in this analysis represent disbursements defined as the actual release of funds to, or the purchase of goods or services for, a recipient. They were obtained through direct communication with donor governments, analysis of raw primary data, and from the OECD Creditor Reporting System (CRS). UNFPA core contributions were obtained from United Nations Executive Board documents.

In some cases it is difficult to disaggregate bilateral family planning funding from broader reproductive and maternal health totals, and the two are sometimes represented as integrated totals (Canada, France, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the US do not disaggregate family planning funding from broader reproductive and maternal health totals). In addition, family planning–related activities funded in the context of other official development assistance sectors (e.g., education, civil society) has remained largely unidentified. For purposes of this analysis, we worked closely with the largest donors to family planning to identify such family planning–specific funding where possible (see table notes). Going forward, it will be important to efforts to track donor government support for family planning if such funding is more systematically identified within other activity categories by primary financial systems.

For data in the currency of the donor country, please contact the researchers.

Download PDF of the Donor Government Bilateral Disbursements for Family Planning 2012-2014 table here.

Download PDF of the Donor Government Progress Toward London Summit Commitments table here.


Countdown 2015 Europe is a consortium of 15 leading European non-governmental organizations working to ensure sexual and reproductive health and rights in developing countries. Countdown 2015 Europe tracks European donor spending on international family planning and works nationally with their own governments to increase support and accountability for family planning and reproductive health.

During this key year for sexual and reproductive health and rights and family planning (SRHR/FP), European donors have maintained their long-standing commitment to the issues through vocal support during negotiations on the post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals, in European Council processes, during the redrafting of the Global Strategy, and in other international forums. There have been new governments elected in a few European countries, and forthcoming budget changes are likely. However, the policy framework surrounding SRHR/FP remains robust. Financial figures spent on SRHR/FP from European governments overall have been growing over the past year, following the same pattern as previous years.

Denmark’s government changed in June 2015 and budget cuts are possible, but the policy basis for commitment to RH/FP is sound. In fall 2014 Denmark joined with the Dutch government to launch AmplifyChange, a new fund to promote civil society advocacy for sexual and reproductive health and rights, with access to family planning for the most marginalized as one of its five priority themes.


European institutions have undergone various changes in financial disbursements and instruments over the past year, but remain strongly committed to SRHR/FP. As commitment-makers to FP2020, the European Commission pledged €23 million for family planning, which then increased to €36 million. This has been implemented through a call for proposals to civil society organizations (launched in 2013) and funding to the Global Programme on Enhancing Commodity Security through UNFPA.

The policy framework surrounding sexual and reproductive health and rights and family planning (SRHR/FP) remains robust. Financial figures spent on SRHR/FP from European governments overall have been growing over the past year, following the same pattern as previous years.

Finland’s newly elected government is faced with a tight economic climate, with budget cuts expected for 2016. In the past few years funding to RH has been protected, and core and project funding to UNFPA has actually increased.

France’s first Development Law was passed in 2014, with specific mention of reproductive health including family planning. The French Development Agency endorsed a health strategy in June 2015, and a strategy that includes population and SRHR issues is forthcoming from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

In January 2015, the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) announced that it would extend its Initiative on Rights-based Family Planning and Maternal Health until 2019 and increase funding from ¤80 million/year to ¤100 million/year. The initiative was launched in 2011 as part of Germany’s Muskoka commitment, which comes to an end this year, and was counted as Germany’s contribution to FP2020.

The Netherlands has maintained its position as a long-standing supporter of SRHR/FP through policy engagement as well as the launch of AmplifyChange in late 2014 (see above). SRHR/FP was protected in the budget cuts announced in spring 2014.

Norway is also historically a strong supporter of SRHR/FP, with a significant increase in SRHR/FP funding in the past two years, including financial support to UNFPA.

Sweden’s commitment to sexual and reproductive health and rights remains robust and is exemplified through policy and financial support. A new regional strategy for sub-Saharan Africa has been adopted and will be operationalized in fall 2015. The government has initiated a digital and diplomatic campaign called midwifed4all, highlighting the need of midwives to ensure FP and SRHR.

While a large majority of international family planning assistance is provided by 11 FP2020 pledging donors and the United States (which is the largest donor but did not make a London Summit commitment), notable contributions have also been made by non-pledging countries in Europe to address the global unmet need for family planning. In Belgium and Ireland, policy commitments to RH/FP have actually seen a rise in 2014–2015. UNFPA received increased financial support from both Belgium and Finland in 2014 and 2015.


A new way to estimate total spending on family planning from all sources (public, private, and out-of-pocket) across the 69 FP2020 focus countries has been developed by Track20 with the help of a group of experts convened as the International Family Planning Expenditure Tracking Advisory Group. The methodology draws from ongoing work by numerous partners to improve the collection and understanding of data on family planning expenditures, including donor contributions, spending by NGOs and corporations, and out-of-pocket expenditures.

A new way to estimate total spending on family planning from all sources (public, private, and out- of-pocket) across the 69 FP2020 focus countries has been developed by Track20.

It is now estimated that in 2013, a total of US$3.1 billion was spent on family planning across the 69 FP2020 focus countries. This estimate brings together expenditure data from the Kaiser Family Foundation, UNFPA/Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographics Institute Resource Flows Project, World Health Organization System of Health Accounts, Countdown 2015 Europe, USAID/Deliver Project, PMA2020, and Track20.

The total expenditure translates to just under US$12 per modern contraceptive user per year. Almost half of expenditures occur in just five countries—Indonesia, India, Pakistan, Egypt, and Bangladesh—and these five countries account for 70% of modern contraceptive users across the 69 FP2020 focus countries.

For more information on Track20 estimates and analysis, download the full FP2020 Commitment to Action: Measurement Annex 2015

Prashant Panjiar/FP2020


To illustrate the potential impact of a nation’s investment in contraception, Marie Stopes International (MSI) selected five social and economic indicators for which country-level data are widespread and robust: per capita GDP; primary school completion rate for girls; gender equality ranking; foreign aid as percentage of government revenue; and position in the Fragile State Index. Using the hypothetical example of a small sub-Saharan African nation called Contraceptia, with 2.2 million women of reproductive age and a contraceptive prevalence rate (CPR) of 20%, MSI estimated the benefits of increasing CPR by 5 percentage points. The results point to some potentially exciting correlations: providing contraception to an additional 5% of women of reproductive age appears to coincide with substantial improvements for all five social and economic indicators.18


Chapter xx xx
xx xx