1. Gold RB et al., Next Steps for America’s Family Planning Program: Leveraging the Potential of Medicaid and Title X in an Evolving Health Care System, New York: Guttmacher Institute, 2009.
2. Guttmacher Institute, Testimony of Guttmacher Institute, submitted to the Committee on Preventive Services for Women, IOM, 2011, <http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/CPSW-testimony.pdf>, accessed Apr. 9, 2012.
3. Frost JJ, Henshaw SK and Sonfield A, Contraceptive Needs and Services, National and State Data, 2008 Update, New York: Guttmacher Institute, 2010.
4. Special tabulations of the 2010 and 2011 U.S. Census Bureau Current Population Survey.
5. Guttmacher Institute, Medicaid family planning eligibility expansions, State Policies in Brief (as of April 1, 2012), 2012, <http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_SMFPE.pdf>, accessed Apr. 9, 2012.
6. Sonfield A and Gold RB, Public Funding for Family Planning, Sterilization and Abortion Services, FY 1980–2010, New York: Guttmacher Institute, 2012, <http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/Public-Funding-FP-2010.pdf>, accessed Apr. 9, 2012.
7. Finer LB and Kost K, Unintended pregnancy rates at the state level, Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2011, 43(2):78–87.
8. Sonfield A et al., The public costs of births resulting from unintended pregnancies: national and state-level estimates, Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2011, 43(2):94–102.
10. Guttmacher Institute, U.S. Teenage Pregnancies, Births and Abortions: National and State Trends and Trends by Race and Ethnicity, 2010, <http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/USTPtrends.pdf>, accessed Apr. 9, 2012.
12. Martin JA et al., Births: final data for 2009, National Vital Statistics Reports, 2011, Vol. 60, No. 1.
13. Sonfield A, The central role of Medicaid in the nation’s family planning effort, Guttmacher Policy Review, 2012, 15(2), forthcoming.
14. Guttmacher Institute Data Center, Number of unintended pregnancies averted to clients aged <20 by publicly funded family planning centers, 2006, <http://www.guttmacher.org/datacenter/>, accessed Apr. 9, 2012.
15. Guttmacher Institute, Contraceptive Needs and Services, 2006, 2009, <http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/win/allstates2006.pdf>, accessed Apr. 9, 2012.
16. Salgonicoff A and Ranji U, Medicaid’s role for women across the lifespan: current issues and the impact of the Affordable Care Act, Women’s Issue Brief, Menlo Park, CA: Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, 2012.
17. Sonfield A and Gold RB, Medicaid Family Planning Expansions: Lessons Learned and Implications for the Future, New York: Guttmacher Institute, 2011, <www.guttmacher.org/pubs/Medicaid-Expansions.pdf>, accessed Apr. 9, 2012.
18. Sonfield A, Frost JJ and Gold RB, Estimating the Impact of Expanding Medicaid Eligibility for Family Planning Services: 2011 Update, New York: Guttmacher Institute, 2011.
19. Bronstein JM, Alabama’s Plan First Medicaid Demonstration Program Evaluation, Demonstration Year Nine, October 2008–September 2009, Birmingham: School of Public Health, University of Alabama, 2010.
20. Edwards J, Bronstein J and Adams K, Evaluation of Medicaid Family Planning Demonstrations, Alexandria, VA: CNA, 2003.
21. Fay W. Boozman College of Public Health, University of Arkansas for Medical Services (UAMS), Evaluation of the Women’s Health Waiver, Little Rock, AR: UAMS, 2007.
22. Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, Family PACT Program Report Fiscal Year 2009-10, San Francisco: Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, University of California, 2010, <http://www.familypact.org/Files/Provider/Research%20Reports/2011-0725_FamPACT2011AR_508.pdf>, accessed Nov. 1, 2011.
23. Thiel de Bocanegra H et al., The 2007 Family PACT Medical Record Review: Assessing the Quality of Services, Sacramento: Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, University of California, San Francisco, 2009.
24. Foster DG et al., Number of oral contraceptive pill packages dispensed and subsequent unintended pregnancies, Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2011, 117(3):566–572.
25. Biggs MA et al., Cost-Benefit Analysis of the California Family PACT Program for Calendar Year 2007, San Francisco: Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, University of California, 2010, <http://bixbycenter.ucsf.edu/publications/files/FamilyPACTCost-BenefitAnalysis2007_2010Apr.pdf>, accessed Nov. 21, 2010.
26. Boonstra H, Winning campaign: California’s concerted effort to reduce its teen pregnancy rate, Guttmacher Policy Review, 2010 13(2):18–24.
27. Unpublished data from the Illinois Healthy Women Program, 2011.
28. Division of Medical Programs, Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services, Report to the General Assembly, January 2010: Public Act 93-0536, Springfield: Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services, 2010.
29. Momany ET and Carter KD, Iowa Family Planning Demonstration Evaluation Final Report, Iowa City: University of Iowa Public Policy Center, 2011.
30. Michigan Department of Community Health, PLAN FIRST! Michigan’s Family Planning Waiver: July 1, 2009–June 30, 2010 Annual Report, Lansing: Michigan Department of Community Health, 2010.
31. Alicia Smith & Associates, Evaluation of the Women’s Health Services Program, Jefferson City: State of Missouri Department of Social Services, 2011.
32. New Mexico Medical Review Association, Family Planning Waiver Evaluation: July 1, 1998 – June 30, 2006, Albuquerque: New Mexico Human Services Department, 2006.
33. Navigant Consulting, North Carolina Medicaid Be Smart Family Planning Waiver: Waiver Year Five Annual Report, Raleigh: North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, 2011.
34. Oklahoma Health Care Authority, Final Evaluation of Oklahoma’s SoonerPlan, Oklahoma City: Oklahoma Health Care Authority, 2010.
35. Office of Family Health, Oregon Health Authority, Family Planning Expansion Project: Project Evaluation Report for the Life of the Program 1999–2009, Portland: Oregon DHS Public Health, 2009.
36. Lindrooth RC, Measuring the effect of Oregon’s family planning Medicaid waiver, Policy Brief, Charleston: Medical University of South Carolina, 2008.
37. Office of Medical Assistance Programs, Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare, 2010 SelectPlan for Women: Recipient Survey Analysis, Harrisburg: Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare, 2011.
38. Center for Health Services & Policy Research, Interim Evaluation of Project No. 11–00057/4 SC Family Planning Waiver: Expansion of Medicaid Benefits for Women Below 185% FPL (SFYs 1995–2005), Columbia: Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, 2007.
39. Center for Health Services & Policy Research, Supplemental Report: Interim Evaluation of Project No. 11–00057/4 SC Family Planning Waiver: Expansion of Medicaid Benefits for Women Below 185% FPL (SFYs 1995-2005), Columbia: Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, 2007.
40. Texas Health and Human Services Commission, Women’s Health Program Annual Report 2008: January 1, 2008–December 31, 2008, Austin: Texas Health and Human Services Commission, 2009.
41. Texas Health and Human Services Commission, 2010 Annual Savings and Performance Report for the Women’s Health Program, Austin: Texas Health and Human Services Commission, 2011.
42. Cawthorn L et al., Take Charge Final Evaluation: First Five Years: July 2001–June 2006, Seattle: Washington State Department of Social and Health Services, 2006.
43. Office of Policy Initiatives and Budget, Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services, The Wisconsin Family Planning Waiver: Final Evaluation Report for 2003–2007, 2008, <http://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/aboutdhs/opib/policyresearch/FamilyPlanningWaiverFinalEvaluationReport2003-2007.pdf>, accessed Dec. 15, 2010.