Enhancing service delivery through title x funding: findings from California.

CONTEXT The federal Title X grant program provides funding for family planning services for low-income women and men. In California, all clinics receiving Title X funds participate in the state's family planning program, Family PACT, along with other public and private providers. The relative extent to which Title X-funded clinics and other Family PACT providers have incorporated enhancements beyond their core medical services has never been studied. METHODS In 2010, a survey was sent to public- and private-sector Family PACT clinicians to assess whether funding streams were associated with the availability of special services: extended clinic hours, outreach to vulnerable populations, services for clients not proficient in English and use of advanced clinic-based technologies. Bivariate and logistic regression analyses controlling for potentially confounding factors were conducted. RESULTS Greater proportions of Title X-funded clinics than of other public and private providers had Spanish-speaking unlicensed clinical staff (89% vs. 71% and 58%, respectively) and Spanish-language signs (95% vs. 85% and 82%). Title X-funded providers were more likely than other public providers to offer extended clinic hours, provide outreach to at least three vulnerable or hard-to-reach populations, and use three or more advanced technologies (odds ratios, 2.0-2.9). CONCLUSIONS Compared with other Family PACT providers, clinics that receive Title X funding have implemented greater infrastructure enhancements to promote access and improve the quality of service for underserved populations. This may be because Title X-funded providers have more financial opportunities to provide the array of services that best respond to their clients' needs.

[1]  Jstor,et al.  Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health , 2018, Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health.

[2]  Jill Clark,et al.  Access to contraception after health care reform in Massachusetts: a mixed-methods study investigating benefits and barriers. , 2012, Contraception.

[3]  L. Finer,et al.  Unintended pregnancy in the United States: incidence and disparities, 2006. , 2011, Contraception.

[4]  H. Bosworth,et al.  Medication adherence: emerging use of technology , 2011, Current opinion in cardiology.

[5]  Adam Thomas,et al.  Unintended pregnancy and taxpayer spending. , 2011, Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health.

[6]  L. Finer,et al.  Unintended pregnancy rates at the state level. , 2011, Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health.

[7]  Sarah L Cutrona,et al.  Healthcare information technology interventions to improve cardiovascular and diabetes medication adherence. , 2010, The American journal of managed care.

[8]  E. Clayton,et al.  A Review of the HHS Family Planning Program: Mission, Management, and Measurement of Results , 2009 .

[9]  J. Beyene,et al.  Intention to Become Pregnant and Low Birth Weight and Preterm Birth: A Systematic Review , 2009, Maternal and Child Health Journal.

[10]  C. Brindis,et al.  Cost savings from the provision of specific methods of contraception in a publicly funded program. , 2009, American journal of public health.

[11]  E. Schwarz,et al.  Unintended pregnancy and associated maternal preconception, prenatal and postpartum behaviors. , 2009, Contraception.

[12]  M. Hindin,et al.  The effects of unintended pregnancy on infant, child, and parental health: a review of the literature. , 2008, Studies in family planning.

[13]  C. Brindis,et al.  Public savings from the prevention of unintended pregnancy: a cost analysis of family planning services in California. , 2007, Health services research.

[14]  B. Morrow,et al.  Pregnancy Intention and Its Relationship to Birth and Maternal Outcomes , 2007, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[15]  William D Mosher,et al.  Fertility, family planning, and reproductive health of U.S. women: data from the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth. , 2005, Vital and health statistics. Series 23, Data from the National Survey of Family Growth.

[16]  J. Frost,et al.  The availability and use of publicly funded family planning clinics: U.S. trends, 1994-2001. , 2004, Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health.

[17]  C. Brindis,et al.  Expanded state-funded family planning services: estimating pregnancies averted by the Family PACT Program in California, 1997-1998. , 2004, American journal of public health.

[18]  Theodore Speroff,et al.  Costs and net health effects of contraceptive methods. , 2004, Contraception.

[19]  J. Darroch,et al.  Predicting maternal behaviors during pregnancy: does intention status matter? , 1998, Family planning perspectives.

[20]  J. Trussell,et al.  Cost effectiveness of contraceptives in the United States. , 2009, Contraception.

[21]  J. Frost,et al.  U.S. agencies providing publicly funded contraceptive services in 1999. , 2002, Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health.

[22]  J. Morrison,et al.  The mental health of women 6 months after they give birth to an unwanted baby: a longitudinal study. , 1991, Social science & medicine.