1. Update on FP2020 “Core” Indicators for Indonesia, 2017
JAKARTA, 5 OCTOBER 2017

2. FP2020 Core Indicators Model-based estimates Directly measured
9. Method mix
10. % facilities stocked out
11. % SDP with method choice
12. Annual expenditures
13. Couple-years of protection (CYP)
14. Method information index
15. Information provided
16. Decision making
17. Adolescent birth rate
Directly measured
Additional modern method users
mCPR (all women)
Unmet need for a modern method
% demand satisfied by modern method
Unintended pregnancies
Unintended pregnancies averted
Unsafe abortions averted
Maternal deaths averted

3. FP2020 Core Indicators for 2017 Annual Report
2017 Value
Source
1. Additional modern method users (since 2012)
2,095,000
FPET
2. mCPR (AW)
45.7
3. mCPR (MW)
59.4
4. Unmet need (MW)
14.3
5. % demand satisfied (MW)
80.6
6. Unintended pregnancies
2,605,157
7. Unintended pregnancies averted due to modern contraceptive
9,213,000
8. Unsafe abortions averted
3,203,000
9. Maternal deaths averted
14,400

4. What is FPET (Family Planning Estimation Tool)?
Actually two tools endorsed by FP2020 as the official methodology
The first, an adaptation of the UN Pop Division Family Planning Estimation Model (FPEM), was developed for individual country applications
Hierarchical, Bayesian model that takes into account virtually every survey that has even been done globally, as well as in specific countries
Provides most probable estimates of mCPR and Unmet Need for current and future years, along with uncertainty bounds
Useful in countries that have only periodic surveys, as well as in countries like Indonesia that have multiple surveys whose estimates often don’t agree
Open access on Avenir Health website

5. What survey information do we have to inform FPET estimates?
Type of Survey
Year
SUSENAS
2001
IDHS
2003
2005
2007
2008
2009
2010
2012
2013
2014
2015
PMA2020
2016
RPJMN
What survey information do we have to inform FPET estimates?

6. FPET (continued) Second tool calculates “impact” indicators (#s 6-9)
Uses as much country-specific are available, and then regional and global averages to fill gaps
Algorithms approved by committee of high-level experts at outset of FP2020
Data entered into Excel-based tool – automatic/instant calculations
Open access on Avenir Health website

7. Are we on track to meet our goal?

8. Is it possible to increase CPR and achieve the RPJMN target in 2019?
Yes, but CPR tends to grow slowly once countries reach the % level

9. Additional users from 2012 - 2017 are about 2 million

10. Impacts of contraceptive use
Show impacts that did not happen because women were using modern contraceptives (and therefore did not experience unintended pregnancies, and related consequences).
The 2012 number represents the impact existing modern contraceptive use had in the country (e.g. if no women in the country were using modern contraceptives, there would have been xxx more unintended pregnancies). Increases from the 2012 number show the additional impacts generated by increasing the number of women using modern contraception and changes in method mix (green on the graphs below).

11. Turning our attention here
FP2020: Core Indicators
Turning our attention here
Big picture: our progress and its impact
Progress from a program perspective
Provided by PMA2020 or RPJMN
Provided by PMA2020
9. Method Mix
10. % facilities stocked out
11. % SDP with method choice
12. Annual expenditures
13. CYP
14. Method information index
15. Information provided
16. Decision making
17. Adolescent birth rate
Additional modern method users
mCPR (all women)
Unmet need for a modern method
% demand satisfied by modern method
Unintended pregnancies
Unintended pregnancies averted
Unsafe abortions averted
Maternal deaths averted
NIDI
F2 BKKBN

12. Method mix (all women)

13. Extreme Contraception Methods Mix in Indonesia Provinces
Provinces in which the most popular method comprise 60% or more of the provincial method mix
Source : Center for Reproductive Health and Center for Health Policy and Management
University of Gadja Mada (UGM)

14. Stock-outs by method and facility type
Source: PMA

15. Government expenditures
Why is this important?
Country
2013
2014
2015
Indonesia NA
$189M
$210M
Source: NIDI
17.7%
16%
24.3%
29.6%
Source: DITJALPEM 2015

16. Source of expenditure (NIDI 2015)

17. Method Information Index (MII)
MII is quality of services indicator  20.8 (PMA)
% Informed about other methods
% Informed about side effects
% Told what to do if experienced side effects
All users
Married users
57.1
57.2
48.9
49.1
74.5
74.3

18. Focus on informed choice – likely to lead to reduced discontinuation
Discontinuation rate due to side effect (1st year)
Informed choice over time
Source: UGM, (Reproductive Health 2016)
But we should change the way we analyze informed choice from single information (as above) to whole information (as defined by FP2020 for MII)
Source: UGM, (Reproductive Health 2016)

19. Trend ASFR per 1,000 women aged 15-19 years old in Indonesia

20. Terimakasih