Teenage Pregnancy Prevention Program Cuts

Trump’s HHS Cut Off Grants For 81 Programs Across The Country Aimed At Preventing Teenage Pregnancy

Trump Cut Off Grants To The Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program, Denying $200 Million To Local Programs Across The Country. According to CBS News, “The Department of Health and Human Services is cutting off grants for teen pregnancy prevention programs across the country, leaving the groups that receive the grants — and Democratic members of Congress — perplexed. The dozens of localities that receive funding for the Teen Pregnancy Prevention program, a program that began under former President Barack Obama in 2010, were taken aback when the date was changed last month on their notice of award documents from an office within HHS, noting their grants would end in June 2018, instead of in 2020. That means they won’t receive roughly $200 million they were expecting to receive over that two-year period.” [CBS News, 8/11/17]

Grant Money Was Awarded To Approved Evidence-Based Teen Pregnancy Prevention Programs And Research Into New Approaches. According to The New York Times, “In 2010, Congress created the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program, with a mandate to fund age-appropriate and evidence-based programs. Communities could apply for funding to put in only approved evidence-based teen pregnancy prevention programs, or evaluate promising and innovative new approaches. The government chose Mathematica to determine independently which programs were evidence-based, and the list is updated with new and evolving data.” [New York Times, 8/22/17]

81 Institutions Were Notified That Their 5-Year Grants Would End 2 Years Earlier Than Planned. According to The Hill, “The Trump administration has abruptly cut short grant programs aimed at ending teen pregnancy, leaving the institutions that receive the funds scrambling for answers. An office within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) notified 81 institutions across the U.S. that the five-year grants they were awarded would end two years sooner than planned.” [The Hill, 8/11/17]

The Program Grants focused On The neediest Populations, Reaching Half A Million Teens In their First Five Years

HHS: “The OAH TPP Program Reaches Adolescents Age 10-19, With A Focus On Populations With The Greatest Need In Order To Reduce Disparities In Teen Pregnancy And Birth Rates.” According to the Department of Health and Human Services, “The Office of Adolescent Health (OAH) Teen Pregnancy Prevention (TPP) Program is a national, evidence-based program that funds diverse organizations working to prevent teen pregnancy across the United States. OAH invests in both the implementation of evidence-based programs and the development and evaluation of new and innovative approaches to prevent teen pregnancy. The OAH TPP Program reaches adolescents age 10-19, with a focus on populations with the greatest need in order to reduce disparities in teen pregnancy and birth rates.” [Department of Health and Human Services, accessed 8/22/17]

In Its First Five Years, The Program Reached About Half A Million Youth And Trained More Than 6,800 Professionals. According to the Department of Health and Human Services, “During the first five years of the OAH TPP Program (Fiscal Years 2010-2014), there were 102 grantees who reached about half a million youth, trained more than 6,800 professionals, and established partnerships with over 3,800 community-based organizations across the U.S. At that time, the OAH TPP Program funded 41 rigorous, independent evaluation studies that significantly contributed to the field’s knowledge of where, when, and with whom programs are most effective.” [Department of Health and Human Services, accessed 8/22/17]

The Big Cities Health Coalition Wrote To Secretary Price About The Disproportionate Effect The Cuts Would Have On Minorities

Big Cities Health Coalition: “Racial/Ethnic And Geographic Disparities In Teen Birth Rates Persist, Many Of Which Occur In Our Jurisdictions.” According to a letter from the Big Cities Health Coalition to Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, “Since its inception, TPPP has been grounded in evidence-based research and provides important funding to diverse organizations working to prevent teen pregnancy in the U.S. It funds both the implementation and evaluation of new and innovative approaches to reduce teen pregnancy. While there has been a significant decline in these rates in the U.S. to about 20.3 births per 1,000 girls aged 15-19 in 2016, this rate is still substantially higher than other industrialized nations. Additionally, racial/ethnic and geographic disparities in teen birth rates persist, many of which occur in our jurisdictions.” [Letter from Big Cities Health Coalition to HHS Secretary Price, 7/25/17]

The Cuts Will Force Research Studies To End 2 Years Early, Making The Results Unusable And Putting Millions Already Spent To Waste

The Program Funds Five Research Studies That Will Be Invalidated By Being Cut Short. According to The Washington Post, “In addition to school and community-based classes like the ones in Baltimore, the program also funds five related research grants at Johns Hopkins University, the University of California at San Francisco and other institutions. The grants’ early termination will make the first few years of data invalid because researchers won’t be able to continue some studies.” [Washington Post, 8/9/17]

Researchers Decried Trump’s Cuts As Wasteful, As Money Had Already Been Spent On Studies That Would Not Reach Completion. According to Wired, “The biggest loser in all of this, researchers say, is the American taxpayer. ‘To put $3 million into a powerful, randomized clinical study with more than 1,000 people and then stop it before we can really deliver?’ says Hettema. ‘It’s so wasteful.’ She points out that these grants in particular had a unique requirement. They specifically set aside time and money for dissemination of results in year five, so that researchers actually put effort into making their findings widely available to educators, physicians, and teens. Now, even if anything valuable can still come out of these 81 projects, it’s unlikely that information will get where it most needs to go.” [Wired, 7/19/17]

Lisa Masinter, Chicago Department Of Public Health Researcher: “Our Study Can’t Be Salvaged”

Lisa Masinter, Chicago Department Of Public Health Researcher: “Our Study Can’t Be Salvaged.” According to Wired, “The unusual move, circumventing the traditional congressional budgetary process, has scientists and public health officials scrambling to figure out how to save work already in progress. But for most, the outlook is bleak. ‘Our study can’t be salvaged,’ says Lisa Masinter, who leads a Chicago Department of Public Health project to test the efficacy of a school-based education and STI screening program. Started as a pilot in 2009, the program had so much demand that CDPH wanted to make sure it actually worked. So they applied for a federal grant and began collecting baseline data last year. They were planning to start testing the intervention on ninth graders next year, and follow them through their entire high school career. Now, they can maybe collect six months of follow-up data. Which, if you know anything about human gestation, isn’t long enough to evaluate the most relevant metric: births. ‘Even if we find other funding, the framework of the evaluation has been totally altered,’ says Masinter.” [Wired, 7/19/17]

Jennifer Hettema, Associate Research Professor At The University Of New Mexico Health Sciences Center: “We Are Just Reeling.” According to Reveal, “Health officials say cutting off money midway through multiyear research projects is highly unusual and wasteful because it means there can be no scientifically valid findings. The researchers will not have the funds to analyze data they have spent the past two years collecting or incorporate their findings into assistance for teens and their families. ‘We are just reeling. We’re not sure how we’ll adapt,’ said Jennifer Hettema, an associate research professor at the University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, which was finding ways to help doctors talk to Native American and Latino teens about avoiding pregnancy.” [Reveal, 7/14/17]

• Hettema: “It’s Kind Of Like Building Half A Skyscrpaer And Then Saying, “Never Mind.’” According to Reveal, “‘It’s kind of like building half a skyscraper and then saying, ‘Never mind,’ ‘ Hettema said. ‘And there are thousands of health care providers in this country who are winging it in terms of how to talk to teens about unintended pregnancies.’” [Reveal, 7/14/17]

Hennepin County, Minnesota, Commissioner Mike Opat: “We’ve Had So Much Momentum, And It Just Makes You Want To Cry To Think That We Have To Hit The Brakes.” According to the StarTribune, “In all, the U.S. Health and Human Services Department notified 81 programs in 31 states and the District of Columbia that $214 million in funding will end June 30, 2018, instead of in 2020. Officials here and across the country are fighting to save the grants, but worry that the Republican-controlled Congress will not restore funding. Hennepin County Commissioner Mike Opat said he’ll urge the county to fill the gap if its appeal fails. ‘We’ve had so much momentum, and it just makes you want to cry to think that we have to hit the brakes’ on teen pregnancy prevention efforts, Opat said.” [StarTribune, 8/26/17]

Big Cities Health Coalition: “Researchers Will Be Unable To Analyze Data They Have Spent Years Collecting, And It Will Be Incredibly Difficult To Draw Any Conclusions About What Pieces Of These Programs Work Best And Which Are Less Effective At Preventing Unwanted Teen Pregnancy.” According to the Big Cities Health Coalition, “Ending what was intended to be five year TPPP grants two years early is highly disruptive to ongoing work in localities across the country. These cuts will negatively affect the lives of young people currently participating in these programs, and will mean fewer project jobs, fewer trained professionals, and reduced community partnerships. Further, researchers will be unable to analyze data they have spent years collecting, and it will be incredibly difficult to draw any conclusions about what pieces of these programs work best and which are less effective at preventing unwanted teen pregnancy. As a steward of the public’s money, we know you want to make sure that scarce federal dollars are spent on meaningful, impactful prevention programs.” [Letter from Big Cities Health Coalition to HHS Secretary Price, 7/25/17]

Valerie Huber, A “National Abstinence Advocate” And HHS Appointee, Was Allegedly Behind The Cuts

The Office Of The Assistant Secretary Of Health Was Suspected To Be Behind The Cuts. According to Reveal, “Several grantees were told by officials at the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Adolescent Health that the decision to eliminate funding came from the office of the assistant secretary for health. Last month, President Donald Trump appointed a new chief of staff there, Valerie Huber, who favors abstinence as the solution to teen pregnancy.” [Reveal, 7/14/17]

• Valerie Huber, A “National Abstinence Education Advocate,” Was Appointed Chief Of Staff To The Assistant Secretary For Health At The Department Of Health And Human Services. According to The Hill, “The Trump administration has named a national abstinence education advocate to a post at the Department of Health and Human Services. Valerie Huber, the president of Ascend, a D.C.-based professional association that advocates for abstinence education, will be the chief of staff to the assistant secretary for health at HHS, according to a staff email obtained by The Hill.” [The Hill, 6/6/17]

Huber Coined A New Term For Abstinence: “SExual Risk Avoidance”

Boston Globe: “‘Sexual Risk Avoidance’ Is A Clunky Rebranding Of ‘Abstinence Until Marriage’ Proposed By Valerie Huber, Who’s Now The Chief Of Staff For The US Department Of Health And Human Services.” According to the Boston Globe, “sex·u·al risk a·void·ance (n.): It sounds like prim bureaucratic phrase for ‘safe sex,’ but it’s not. ‘Sexual risk avoidance’ is a clunky rebranding of ‘abstinence until marriage’ proposed by Valerie Huber, who’s now the chief of staff for the US Department of Health and Human Services. Strange as it may seem, ‘abstinence’ has become a dirty word in the world of sex education and pregnancy prevention. Federal funding for abstinence-only programs was cut under the Obama administration based on research that shows the approach tends to increase rather than reduce teen pregnancy. But proponents of abstinence have responded with a new term — ‘sexual risk avoidance’ — that may act as a cloaking device for increased funding to abstinence-only education under President Trump. The new term is used by Huber and an organization she led until recently: Ascend, which has also undergone a euphemistic rebrand. Their old name, National Abstinence Education Association, contained the now-taboo A-word.” [Boston Globe, 6/23/17]

Huber Criticized The Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program In An Opinion Piece Praising The Benefits Of “Sexual Risk Avoidance”

Huber Criticized The Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program In An Opinion Piece Praising The Benefits Of “Sexual Risk Avoidance,” Or Abstinence. According to an opinion by Valerie Huber in The Hill, “Only ten cents out of every federal sex education dollar is devoted to Sexual Risk Avoidance (SRA) education, but recent data shows that the approach is more relevant today than it was 25 years ago. […] Since 2007, more than ten billion dollars has been spent on Sexual Risk Reduction (SRR) education. This means 90 cents out of every federal sex education dollar is currently devoted to this approach. It is an approach that has been alternatively named teen pregnancy prevention or so-called comprehensive sex education, but which typically normalizes teen sex. In fact, teens report that these programs make them feel pressured to have sex. More pressured to have sex, in fact, than the pressure they feel from their dating partners. Not surprisingly, then, when the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services recently released the findings of the Obama-era Teen Pregnancy Prevention (TPP) program, it revealed that despite spending nearly one billion dollars, more than 80 percent of teens in the program fared either worse or no better than their peers who were not a part of the program. Those who fared worse, were more likely to get pregnant, more likely to have sex, and more likely to have oral sex. Proponents of TPP called the program evidence-based from the start, but the program failed to deliver.” [Valerie Huber, Opinion – The Hill, 3/12/17]

“Sexual Risk Avoidance” Has Made It Into Official HHS Programming

[Department of Health and Human Services, Sexual Risk Avoidance Education Program Fact Sheet, 2/17/17]

Huber Was “The President Of Ascend, A D.C.-Based Professional Association That Advocates For Abstinence Education”

Huber Was “The President Of Ascend, A D.C.-Based Professional Association That Advocates For Abstinence Education.” According to The Hill, “Valerie Huber, the president of Ascend, a D.C.-based professional association that advocates for abstinence education, will be the chief of staff to the assistant secretary for health at HHS, according to a staff email obtained by The Hill.” [The Hill, 6/6/17]

Ascend Was Formerly The National Abstinence Education Association. According to Slate, “For the past decade Huber has served as the president and CEO of Ascend, formerly known as the National Abstinence Education Association.” [Slate, 6/7/17]

Huber Referred To Her Program As “Sexual Risk Avoidance.” According to an op-ed by Valerie Huber for the Daily Signal, “Now that we know that the percent of high school students who have never had sex has increased by more than 10 percent in only 2 years, we at Ascend anticipate a public acknowledgement of the relevancy and efficacy of the Sexual Risk Avoidance message in both press and policy. Sexual Risk Avoidance is a sex education approach based on a recognized and often used public health model known as ‘risk avoidance’ or ‘primary prevention.’ It is the standard approach used to address risk behaviors such as underage drinking and smoking and is entirely appropriate and beneficial in addressing the risk of teen sex.” [Valerie Huber – Daily Signal, 6/26/16]

Huber Argued That President Obama’s Proposal To Defund Abstinence-Only Programs Was “Indefensible.” According to the Christian Post, “Valerie Huber, president and CEO of Ascend, formerly the National Abstinence Education Association said Monday that President Barack Obama’s proposal to defund abstinence-only education programs because they are not ‘evidenced-based’ is ‘indefensible.’ ‘The president’s recommendation to Congress is really indefensible. To say that there is not evidence that the sexual risk avoidance approach has research behind it is just not true,’ said Huber in an interview with The Christian Post Monday.” [Christian Post, 2/22/16]

Huber Managed Ohio’s Abstinence Program, Which Was Described As “Destructive” And Promoting “False And Misleading Information”

Huber “Managed Ohio’s Abstinence Program From 2004 To 2007. According to The Hill, “Huber also managed Ohio’s abstinence program from 2004 to 2007.” [The Hill, 6/6/17]

Slate: Research Found “That The Programs Huber Ran In The State Contained ‘False And Misleading Information’ About Abortion, Contraceptives, And Sexually Transmitted Infections” And Perpetuated “’Destructive, Inaccurate Gender Stereotypes.’” According to Slate, “For the past decade Huber has served as the president and CEO of Ascend, formerly known as the National Abstinence Education Association. Before that, she led Ohio’s abstinence education programs, a job from which she was suspended after being found guilty of ethics violations for trying to give a state contract to a company she had ties to. Research from Case Western Reserve University found that the programs Huber ran in the state contained ‘false and misleading information’ about abortion, contraceptives, and sexually transmitted infections, in addition to perpetuating ‘destructive, inaccurate gender stereotypes’ and presenting ‘religious convictions as scientific fact.’ One curriculum said that teenagers who have sex before marriage should ‘be prepared to die.’” [Slate, 6/7/17]

Huber’s Appointment Was Supported By The Family Research Council, A Group Listed As An Extremist Group By The Southern Poverty Law Center

Huber’s Appointment Was Supported By The Family Research Council. According to the Associated Press, “The conservative Family Research Council has hailed all three appointments as evidence that the Trump administration seeks transform to HHS into a more conservative agency on such issues as abortion and sexuality. ‘Valerie has a long history of promoting healthy lifestyles, especially for women and children,’ said Tony Perkins, the council’s president. ‘I can’t think of anybody better for the job.’” [Associated Press via U.S. News and World Report, 6/7/17]

Family Research Council Was Listed As An Extremist Group By The Southern Poverty Law Center. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, the Family Research Council was listed as an extremist group. [SPLCenter.org, accessed 8/14/17]

• The Family Research Council Was Designated “An Anti-LGBT Hate Group”. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, “Tony Perkins heads the Family Research Council, an anti-LGBT hate group located in Washington, D.C. Perkins has a sordid political history, having once purchased Klansman David Duke’s mailing list for use in a Louisiana political campaign he was managing. In 2001, Perkins gave a speech to a Louisiana chapter of the Council of Conservative Citizens, a white supremacist group. Since joining the FRC, Perkins has taken the group in a harder anti-LGBT direction, using it to publish false propaganda about that community and contending that gay rights advocates intend to round up Christians in ‘boxcars.’” [Southern Poverty Law Center, viewed 11/9/15]

The Family Research Council Worked Against A Woman’s Right To Choose. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, “As an independent nonprofit, the FRC continued its work in ‘pro-family’ areas, working against abortion and stem cell research, fighting pornography and homosexuality, and promoting ‘the Judeo-Christian worldview as the basis for a just, free, and stable society.’ That work would establish FRC as one of the most powerful of the far right’s advocacy groups.” [Southern Poverty Law Center, accessed 11/6/15]

The Family Research Council Promoted “Sexual Risk Avoidance”

The Family Research Council Promoted “Sexual Risk Avoidance.” According to the Family Research Council, “Sexual Risk-Avoidance (SRA) education is an approach to sex education that focuses on risk-avoidance instead of Sexual Risk-Reduction (SRR) or ‘comprehensive sex education’ when it comes to sexual activity. The term ‘Sexual Risk-Avoidance’ is now used more commonly than the older term ‘abstinence.’ It communicates how this approach mirrors other public health models designed to encourage avoidance instead of reduction of risky behavior, such as underage drinking or the use of illegal drugs. SRA education teaches that avoiding sexual activity before marriage is the surest way to avoid its risks. It also encourages youth to pursue good decision-making skills.” [Family Research Council, 4/2014]