Data Center
Build, download and share custom tables, graphs and maps utilizing data on key sexual and reproductive health indicators from the Guttmacher Institute and other trusted sources.
TableSelect 1 or more states and 1 or more topics. Click the TABLE button below.
MapSelect 1 topic with a map icon. Click the MAP button below.
TrendSelect 1–6 states, plus 1 topic with a trend icon. Click on the TREND button below. (Download includes data for all 50 states.)
States (51)
Topics (1)
Contraception
Contraceptive use
Cost savings at all publicly funded centers
Cost savings at Title X-funded centers
Family planning and birth costs
Family planning centers
Outcomes averted
Outcomes averted by publicly funded centers
Outcomes averted by Title X-funded centers
Public expenditures for family planning
Title X-funded centers
Women with potential demand for contraceptive services and supplies
Women in likely need of publicly funded contraceptive services and supplies
Pregnancy
Pregnancies and their outcomes
Pregnancies wanted later or unwanted
Pregnancies wanted then or sooner
Wasn’t-sure pregnancies
Public expenditures for pregnancies
Teen pregnancies
Teen pregnancies ending in abortion
Teen Pregnancies ending in birth
Teen pregnancies ending in fetal loss
Abortion
Abortion clinics
Abortion expenditures
Abortions by state of occurrence
Abortions by state of residence
All abortion providers
Public expenditures for abortion
Teen pregnancies ending in abortion
Adolescents
Teen pregnancies
Teen pregnancies ending in abortion
Teen pregnancies ending in birth
Teen pregnancies ending in fetal loss
Teen pregnancy outcomes
Demographics
Insurance status
Population Estimates
*Selecting fewer topics at a time results in better performance.
| U.S. State | Pregnancies wanted later or unwanted as a % of all pregnancies, 2017 |
|---|---|
| Alabama | 40 |
| Alaska | 30 |
| Arizona | 37 a |
| Arkansas | 39 |
| California | 38 a |
| Colorado | 35 |
| Connecticut | 38 |
| Delaware | 40 |
| District of Columbia | u |
| Florida | 41 a |
| Georgia | 41 |
| Hawaii | 35 |
| Idaho | 30 a |
| Illinois | 40 |
| Indiana | 35 a |
| Iowa | 28 |
| Kansas | 32 |
| Kentucky | 31 |
| Louisiana | 43 |
| Maine | 31 |
| Maryland | 44 |
| Massachusetts | 34 |
| Michigan | 37 |
| Minnesota | 31 |
| Mississippi | 40 a |
| Missouri | 36 |
| Montana | 31 |
| Nebraska | 28 |
| Nevada | 41 a |
| New Hampshire | 31 |
| New Jersey | 44 |
| New Mexico | 34 |
| New York | 44 |
| North Carolina | 41 |
| North Dakota | 31 |
| Ohio | 40 |
| Oklahoma | 36 |
| Oregon | 36 |
| Pennsylvania | 39 |
| Rhode Island | 39 |
| South Carolina | 39 a |
| South Dakota | 29 |
| Tennessee | 43 |
| Texas | 39 |
| Utah | 26 |
| Vermont | 32 |
| Virginia | 35 |
| Washington | 33 |
| West Virginia | 32 |
| Wisconsin | 31 |
| Wyoming | 33 |
| Sources | Sources: 1 |
Notes
- Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) survey data was not available from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for any year in the period 2012–2017; instead, the proportion of births in each pregnancy desire category was predicted through multivariable regression (see Methodology Appendix)
- u = unavailable
- n/a = not applicable
Sources
- Kost K, Maddow-Zimet I and Little AC, Pregnancies and Pregnancy Desires at the State Level: Estimates for 2017 and Trends Since 2012, New York: Guttmacher Institute, 2021, https://www.guttmacher.org/report/pregnancy-desires-and-pregnancies-state-level-estimates-2017.
Estimate the health benefits and cost savings of publicly funded family planning services with our tool for program administrators and providers. Calculate the impact