To-Do List
Site structure & technical foundation
The crawlable, findable, organized base everything else sits on.
For AI tools to cite Power to Decide, they first have to crawl and read the site. The good news: PTD.org already allows all the major AI crawlers. The gap is what happens after they arrive: four fixable issues limit how much of the site LLMs can actually read and reuse.
Most are Drupal plugin installs plus one content change: a valid XML sitemap, structured data (schema), publishing the Contraceptive Deserts data as crawlable text beside the map, and making key pages easier to find and link to.
See the Technical screen for the full audit, importance, and recommended fix for each.
Roughly 240 Power to Decide PDFs currently rank in search, and PDFs account for about 77% of the audience-relevant search visibility the site earns. Visibility is good, but a PDF has limitations: it's hard for AI tools to cite cleanly, can get outdated, and gives the reader no next step. Several of the highest-traffic files are years out of date, a credibility risk with the audiences who check sources.
Start with the highest trafficked files and decide the next steps for each: keep as-is, update/refresh, convert to an HTML page, redirect, or retire.
See the PDF Library screen for the ranked list of what's appearing today.
A repeatable issue-page template gives every priority topic a consistent, citable structure: understand the issue → the data → what Power to Decide does → related tools → how to take action.
Review the Issue Page Wireframe (example: Birth Control Access) and decide if this framework can scale across issues.
Realigning the site around Power to Decide's primary audiences means the top-level navigation should lead with the organization's issues and work, with Bedsider and Abortion Finder positioned as the consumer resources people are directed to.
Review the proposed structure in the Navigation Wireframe (Issues, What We Do, About Us, Get Involved, Latest) and decide whether to adopt it, adjust it, or test in smaller rollouts.
Power to Decide already maintains current state-by-state policy fact sheets (recent examples: Wisconsin and Alaska), but they're hard to find on the live site, so policymakers, journalists, and AI tools all miss them. This reframes the earlier state-by-state question: the data upkeep is handled; the gap is exposure and structure.
The work is findability, not new content: surface these in navigation (or an issues hub), add internal links from related pages, and give each a clean, crawlable URL. See the Policymakers screen for audience context.
Content & messaging
What Power to Decide publishes, and for whom.
Audience research surfaced content gaps for two high-value audiences: policymakers and media & journalists. These are the audiences most likely to cite Power to Decide, so filling the gaps directly supports authority and visibility.
Decide which gap topics to add to the content strategy, and what citable data, experts, and framing each should provide. See the Policymakers and Media & Journalists audience screens.
Policy and reproductive-health news can move fast: court decisions, funding changes, legislation, etc. Rapid response pages let Power to Decide publish an authoritative, data-backed take while journalists and policymakers are actively searching, which is when citations happen.
A rapid response template is already built. The remaining work is defining listening criteria for topical news stories and a publishing workflow so a page can go live quickly during a news cycle.
The donor and funder audience responds to specifics. Rework the donate page so the ask is concrete: what a gift actually funds, which programs it supports, and the impact it makes, rather than a generic donation prompt.
Ground the messaging in the donor/funder audience research so the case matches what motivates this audience.
The social listening scan tool surfaces what the audience is actually talking about and asking. Reviewing that data helps identify emerging topics to feed the content strategy and rapid response pipeline before demand peaks.
Review the latest scan output and create a shortlist of topics worth pursuing.
Authority & off-site presence
Citations and presence beyond powertodecide.org.
Many of the highest-value AI answers, especially donor and abortion-access prompts, are won off-site, on the third-party sources LLMs already trust, not on PTD.org. Power to Decide now has three off-site assets in flight that feed exactly those signals.
The three: the new abortion-facts microsite (live Jul 30), the Wikipedia revamp (updated Power to Decide page plus new Bedsider and Abortion Finder entries), and the Impact / “Our Impact” series. Decide how PTD.org links to and reinforces each so they build authority and show up in AI answers, rather than living in isolation.
Platforms that connect reporters with expert sources are a direct path to getting Power to Decide's experts quoted and cited in coverage, which compounds authority and AI-search visibility.
Assess the available options on cost, effort, and fit, and decide whether to invest and which to use.
Examples include Qwoted and Featured.
Audience & Content Strategy
Who Power to Decide is now built to serve, what each audience is actually looking for, and the unique data and expertise only Power to Decide can bring them.
The audience shift
Power to Decide's site was initially built for teens and young adults looking for birth control information, and it still shows up for those searches. The strategy now realigns the site around the organization's institutional audiences, while Bedsider (birth control) and Abortion Finder (abortion access) stay the direct-to-consumer resource brands. Power to Decide is the authoritative center of the universe, and the consumer brands are how people get care, access, and direct information.
Explore the four audiences
Where content strategy comes from
Content strategy lives in the overlap: the topics where Power to Decide's unique data and expertise meet what each audience is actually looking for.
1Donors & Funders
Individual donors (with the aspiration of reaching more Gen X and Millennials), plus foundation and corporate grantmakers.
What they want & search for
- Proof of impact. Concrete "what does my $50/month do?", transparency on where funds go, and quick trust signals.
- Issue-led discovery. They often come through a specific cause they identify with, searching the issue itself ("organizations working on contraceptive access," "who's fighting birth control misinformation," "young people's access to birth control") as much as generic terms like "where to donate to support reproductive rights."
- Vetting. Once a cause pulls them in, they tend to check the org via Charity Navigator or Candid.
How they find the site today
Top non-branded Search Console terms · powertodecide.org · Jan–Jun 2026
| Search term | Impr. | Clicks | Avg pos |
|---|---|---|---|
| shop to support abortion access | 60 | 0 | 32.3 |
Donors currently are not discovering Power to Decide through search. They may arrive through Power to Decide's more consumer-focused web properties, but no search terms are currently drawing them to the site — even for issues-related content, let alone search terms that might lead them down the path of donating.
Pages & PDFs surfacing for this audience
Power to Decide content on donor & funder topics earning search impressions · powertodecide.org · Jan–Jun 2026 · top 7 by impressions
| Content | Type | Impr. | Clicks | Avg pos |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Benefits of Birth Control in America | 22,573 | 102 | 12.4 | |
| Savings Fact Sheet National | 972 | 11 | 8.8 | |
| Donate | Page | 752 | 14 | 6.3 |
| Savings Fact Sheet TX | 360 | 8 | 9.5 | |
| Savings Fact Sheet AL | 281 | 2 | 9.9 | |
| Gift Matching | Page | 22 | 1 | 7.5 |
| Savings FAQ | 16 | 0 | 7.9 |
Unique Perspective
Donors give to protect two things: accurate reproductive-health information and access to care itself. That access has several dimensions they care about:
- Legal access: whether birth control and abortion are allowed at all.
- Financial access: whether people can afford care and coverage.
- Physical access: whether people can actually reach a provider, given distance and transportation.
They act when any of this feels under attack, from misinformation about birth control to increasingly restrictive policy and funding cuts (contraception, medication abortion, Title X, Planned Parenthood defunding). A gift to Power to Decide is one of the few ways to defend information and access at once. It funds:
- Accurate information and the experts behind it, countering misinformation with credible, research-backed answers.
- Tools that connect people to real care: Abortion Finder (a verified directory of abortion providers and funds, with fake clinics screened out) and Bedsider (birth control guidance and a provider directory).
- Policy advocacy to protect and expand access: federal work (Title X, Medicaid family planning and postpartum coverage) and state work (pharmacist prescribing, 12-month supply, no-cost coverage) that widens legal and financial access.
- The Contraceptive Equity Initiative, which expands contraceptive coverage and access, from ACA no-cost coverage to pharmacist prescribing, telehealth, and over-the-counter pills.
- Campus programs that reach students where they are, including Beyond the Sheets at HBCUs.
That combination of fighting misinformation, defending access, and actually helping people is what few other organizations can offer.
Who shows up today
Organizations that dominate Google results for the terms donors search · 2026
| Organization | Type | Shows up for |
|---|---|---|
| Planned Parenthood | National nonprofit brand | Most donation & contraception terms |
| Center for Reproductive Rights | Nonprofit / advocacy | "Ways to give," effectiveness terms |
| Charity Navigator | Charity-rating aggregator | Vetting & "best charity" terms |
| Impactful Ninja, GreatNonprofits | "Best charities" listicles | "Most effective" comparison terms |
| National Abortion Federation | Nonprofit / advocacy | Donation & best-charity terms |
| WRRAP, National Network of Abortion Funds | Direct-aid nonprofits | "Where to donate" terms |
| Marie Claire, Katie Couric Media | Media roundups | "Where to donate" journalism |
Power to Decide appears for only 2 of the 10 sample donor terms we used, and only through its Contraceptive Deserts content. It never shows up on a donation, charity, or tax-deductibility query. Big advocacy brands own the emotional, abortion-framed giving terms, and charity-rating sites own the "best" and "most effective" comparisons. This is the most contested of the four territories. The realistic opening is issue-led discovery, like "how to support birth control access," rather than generic "where to donate."
Content & data opportunities
- Dedicated issue pages for the specific sub-issues Power to Decide can own, each educating with Power to Decide's own data and ending in a "support this work" call to action. This captures donors who are searching the issue rather than searching for a charity. Proven models:
- ACLU — Religion and Reproductive Rights (a narrow sub-issue page)
- PEN America — 5 Ways to Fight Book Bans (action-oriented "how to help" content)
- NRDC — Fossil Fuels (a core issue page)
- Everytown — Issues (an issues hub)
- Birth control access (getting a prescription, getting to a provider)
- Cost of birth control (price, insurance coverage, cost without insurance)
- Birth control misinformation (including the gap between medical facts and public understanding)
- Young people's access to birth control
- Access to abortion care
- Reproductive health for marginalized communities
- Pre-built "rapid response" giving pages for the threats Power to Decide knows are coming (a misinformation spike, a funding or policy attack), so a gift path and clear messaging can go live ASAP instead of scrambling.
- Plain "what your gift protects" content (accurate information, plus real help through Bedsider and Abortion Finder), since the team already messages the properties together and "access to information" is a value donors care about.
2Policymakers
Federal and state legislators, and the staff who do the actual research and write the briefs.
What they want & search for
It's more varied than a single "number." Depending on the moment, a staffer may need:
- Language to draft or refine legislation that's data-backed or science-based, so it's accurate.
- A one-pager on a specific measure (Title X, or how to access contraception on Medicaid/Medicare).
- Supporting facts and data.
- Fact-checking for something they're about to share with constituents.
Whatever the form, it has to be current, credible, nonpartisan, and short enough to drop into a one-pager.
How they find the site today
Top non-branded Search Console terms · powertodecide.org · Jan–Jun 2026
| Search term | Impr. | Clicks | Avg pos |
|---|---|---|---|
| contraceptive deserts | 288 | 96 | 3.2 |
| access to contraception | 544 | 1 | 6.9 |
| birth control access | 304 | 2 | 7.3 |
| access to contraception in the us | 112 | 7 | 4.2 |
| birth control access in the us | 111 | 6 | 2.3 |
There are a few search terms that could loosely relate to research or searches by policymakers that may give us some clues as to what the audience is looking for, but adding more specificity to specific issues or research topics on the site could be helpful.
Pages & PDFs surfacing for this audience
Power to Decide content on policymaker topics earning search impressions · powertodecide.org · Jan–Jun 2026 · top 25 by impressions
Unique Perspective
A nonpartisan, science-based, data-backed partner that helps offices get the policy right by:
- Reviewing and drafting accurate legislative language.
- Supplying vetted information and data across reproductive health, from contraceptive access to abortion access.
The goal is to be the first call when an office is weighing a policy and asks, "would this actually improve access for our constituents?"
An opportunity for differentiated data is state-level access data (e.g., a per-state fact sheet); the open question is whether the Power to Decide team can sustainably produce and maintain that across states.
Who shows up today
Organizations that dominate Google results for the terms policymakers & staff search · 2026
| Organization | Type | Shows up for |
|---|---|---|
| Guttmacher Institute | Research / data authority | 6 of 10 terms — the leader |
| Power to Decide | Nonprofit (you) | 5 of 10 — #1 for the access map & county terms |
| Population Reference Bureau | State-policy scorecard | "State of Access" comparisons |
| KFF | Health-policy think-tank | Title X, Medicaid, clinic closures |
| NCSL | Legislative reference | State policy tracking |
| Government (state Medicaid, OPA, Congress) | Government | Coverage & funding terms |
This territory belongs to research authorities like Guttmacher, not to advocacy organizations. But across the sample terms we used, Power to Decide already holds the most defensible niche and ranks second overall. It is the #1 result for the birth-control-access map and county-level queries, because it is the source of that data. The opportunity is to defend and extend that map authority by adding state-specific and cost-of-inaction framing, rather than trying to beat Guttmacher on raw statistics.
Content & data opportunities
Potential Content Gaps
| Keyword | Volume | PTD ranking |
|---|---|---|
| roe v wade | 246,000 | Yes — #2 (May '26) |
| roe v wade overturned | 40,500 | No |
| abortion laws by state | 18,100 | Yes — #1 (Mar '26) |
| abortion law | 18,100 | Yes — #1 (Apr '26) |
| comstock law | 12,100 | No |
| abortion law in north carolina | 12,100 | No |
| supreme court abortion | 9,900 | No |
| fetal viability | 9,900 | No |
| abortion laws united states | 9,900 | No |
| idaho abortion laws | 8,100 | No |
| planned parenthood v casey | 8,100 | No |
| hyde amendment | 5,400 | No |
| georgia abortion law | 5,400 | No |
| illegal abortion states | 4,400 | No |
| abortion ban | 4,400 | No |
| states where abortion is legal | 3,600 | Yes — #1 (Apr '26) |
| abortion by state | 1,900 | Yes — #1 (Mar '26) |
| abortion bill | 1,900 | Yes — #3 (Apr '26) |
| ban on contraception | 1,600 | No |
| ban contraception | 1,600 | No |
| ban birth control | 1,300 | No |
| abortion access | 880 | Yes — #100 (Jan '26) |
| 14th amendment abortion | 880 | No |
| 14th amendment and abortion | 880 | No |
| laws on contraception | 720 | No |
| abortion access by state | 590 | No |
| federal funding for abortion | 480 | No |
| birth control laws | 320 | No |
| 1973 abortion law | 260 | No |
| access to contraception | 260 | Yes — #9 (Jun '26) |
| 20 week abortion ban | 170 | No |
| affordable care act contraception mandate | 140 | Yes — #41 (May '26) |
| 4th amendment abortion | 140 | No |
| 15 week abortion ban | 140 | No |
| 14th amendment abortion rights | 110 | No |
| aca contraception mandate | 110 | No |
| planned parenthood title x | 110 | No |
| birth control supreme court case | 110 | No |
| anti contraception laws | 70 | No |
| anti contraception law | 70 | No |
| affordable care act contraception | 70 | Yes — #54 (Jun '26) |
| availability of contraception | 70 | Yes — #7 (May '26) |
| 24 weeks abortion law | 50 | No |
| available contraception | 30 | No |
| comprehensive contraception coverage act | 20 | No |
| aca contraception | 20 | Yes — #89 (Feb '26) |
| 3rd trimester abortion laws | 20 | No |
| access to contraception statistics | 20 | No |
| 20 week abortion ban states | 10 | No |
| 20 week abortion ban bill | 10 | No |
| affordable care act free contraception | 10 | No |
| affordable care act contraception list | 10 | No |
| affordable care act contraception coverage | 10 | Yes — #52 (Jun '26) |
| aca and contraception | 10 | Yes — #28 (May '26) |
| 1973 supreme court decision on abortion | 10 | No |
| 1973 abortion case | 10 | No |
| 2016 democratic platform on abortion | 10 | No |
| access to contraception in missouri | 10 | No |
| availability of emergency contraception | 10 | No |
| plan b availability by state | 10 | No |
| access to contraception in latin america | 10 | No |
- Per-state access fact sheets. Power to Decide already shares one-pagers like this.
- Issue one-pagers on the measures they actually ask for (Title X, and how to access contraception on Medicaid/Medicare), kept current with the funding fights.
- A simple way to pull a state's or district's data that staff can cite directly and that AI tools can surface.
Candidate topics to validate against Power to Decide's real request log, organized by how squarely each sits in Power to Decide's lane:
- Contraceptive access & methods (own these): OTC contraception, pharmacist prescribing, LARC (IUDs/implants), emergency contraception, contraceptive deserts, male contraception.
- Funding & coverage (own the local access impact): Title X, Medicaid coverage & reimbursement, Planned Parenthood funding, FQHCs, network adequacy, prior authorization, religious/refusal exemptions.
- Access barriers & populations (selective, where Power to Decide has data): clinic closures, uninsured patients, racial disparities, rural access, youth access, immigrant access, disability & reproductive autonomy, incarcerated pregnant people.
- Abortion topics (contribute a unique angle, not the tracker): emergency / health / rape-incest exceptions, interstate travel, medication abortion, provider liability, abortion data reporting, public funding & insurance coverage.
3Media & Journalists
Reporters on health, policy, and women's/consumer desks, national and (crucially) local, plus freelancers.
What they want & search for
- Fast access to a credible expert and a verifiable stat they can localize to their county or state.
- Interesting angles or data for a story about reproductive health.
How they find the site today
Top non-branded Search Console terms · powertodecide.org · Jan–Jun 2026
| Search term | Impr. | Clicks | Avg pos |
|---|---|---|---|
| teen pregnancy rates 2025 | 267 | 1 | 6.6 |
| teen pregnancy statistics 2025 | 220 | 2 | 7.9 |
| birth control statistics | 167 | 0 | 24.5 |
| how many teen pregnancies in 2025 | 117 | 0 | 9.2 |
| most cited sources for reproductive health statistics | 35 | 0 | 13.3 |
Currently it seems like the most common search terms that might lead media and journalists to the site are focused on statistics and data. That's a positive signal, but currently Power to Decide's website isn't actually generating much traffic, with some impressions but very few clicks on these results.
Pages & PDFs surfacing for this audience
Power to Decide content on media & journalist topics earning search impressions · powertodecide.org · Jan–Jun 2026 · top 25 by impressions
Unique Perspective
A single nonpartisan source across reproductive health that reporters can't easily get elsewhere:
- Original data: the annual youth survey, Contraceptive Deserts, Survey Says polling, and misinformation tracking.
- On-staff expertise for fast, credible quotes, spanning contraception and abortion.
The competitive advantage is breadth: Power to Decide can localize a figure to a reporter's state or county and put a named expert on the phone.
Who shows up today
Organizations that dominate Google results for the terms journalists search · 2026
| Organization | Type | Shows up for |
|---|---|---|
| Power to Decide | Nonprofit (you) | 5 of 10 — #1 on the access map / county cluster |
| KFF | Health-policy think-tank | State tables, women's health, closures |
| Guttmacher Institute | Repro data authority | Abortion & contraception statistics |
| CDC | Government | National & teen-use data |
| Population Reference Bureau | Think-tank | Scorecard & journalist guides |
| NIH / PubMed | Academic studies | Peer-reviewed evidence |
| NBC, CNN, HealthcareDive | News | Timely "clinic closures" coverage |
Across the sample terms we used, Power to Decide already owns the contraceptive-access, desert, and county-map cluster, and search engines attribute the map to it by name, ahead of even KFF and Guttmacher. Abortion, teen-use, and national statistics belong to Guttmacher, KFF, and CDC. Two lanes sit wide open: "reproductive health expert to interview" and "reproductive health data journalist resources" both return thin or off-topic results, so a purpose-built press and expert-source hub could own both.
Content & data opportunities
Potential Content Gaps
| Keyword | Volume | PTD ranking |
|---|---|---|
| abortion statistics | 6,600 | No |
| abortion rates | 1,600 | No |
| u.s. abortion statistics | 1,600 | No |
| abortion rate | 1,300 | No |
| reason for abortion statistics | 880 | No |
| are abortions covered by insurance | 880 | No |
| does medicaid cover abortion | 590 | No |
| birth control insurance | 260 | No |
| iud statistics | 210 | No |
| 1 in 3 women abortion | 110 | No |
| can you buy emergency contraception over the counter | 70 | No |
| condom contraception rate | 50 | Yes — #40 (Jan '26) |
| 1 in 3 women have an abortion | 40 | No |
| percent of unintended pregnancies in us | 40 | No |
| how many unintended pregnancies each year | 40 | No |
| can you get emergency contraception over the counter | 40 | No |
| 3rd trimester abortion legal | 40 | No |
| birth control usage statistics | 30 | Yes — #24 (Feb '26) |
| birth control survey | 30 | No |
| 24 hour waiting period for abortion | 30 | No |
| 3rd trimester abortion statistics | 20 | No |
| abortion as contraception statistics | 20 | No |
| natural family planning statistics | 20 | No |
| 1 in 3 abortion statistic | 10 | No |
| facts about abortion | 10 | No |
| abortion and contraception statistics | 10 | No |
| abortion rates in countries where abortion is illegal | 10 | No |
| how many abortion providers in the us | 10 | No |
| 5 countries that ban abortion | 10 | No |
| 16 year old abortion without parental consent | 10 | No |
| 24 hour waiting period for abortion florida | 10 | No |
| minors access to contraceptive services | 10 | No |
| legal age to get birth control without parental consent | 10 | No |
| abstinence vs. contraception education | 10 | No |
- Source topics from real demand, not assumptions. Build the content pipeline from where interest actually is:
- First-party demand: Power to Decide's own media-request log (12–24 months, tagged by topic and outlet), the base signal of what the press already wants.
- Journalist-request platforms: Qwoted, Featured, and #JournoRequest, for what reporters are actively seeking right now.
- Search-demand tools: Google Trends, Power to Decide's Search Console, and keyword research, for rising queries.
- The social-listening scan tool: Power to Decide's early-warning system for spotting misinformation and emerging narratives before they reach mainstream coverage.
- An expanded media relations center / press kit: quick-access resources on common topics so a reporter can access without waiting on email.
- Annual data releases (the youth survey and the 2026 Contraceptive Deserts refresh).
4Partner & Peer Organizations
Other nonprofits, state/local health departments, community health centers, Title X grantees, coalition partners, and researchers.
What they want & search for
Ready-made things they can use without building from scratch:
- Campaign materials to post on their own channels.
- Accurate resources to point their audiences to.
- Reproductive-health data to support their programs and grant applications.
On sensitive topics, they also want to stay aligned with how the rest of the field is messaging.
How they find the site today
Top non-branded Search Console terms · powertodecide.org · Jan–Jun 2026
| Search term | Impr. | Clicks | Avg pos |
|---|---|---|---|
| national campaign to prevent teen and unplanned pregnancy | 362 | 45 | 10.9 |
| kirby 2007 emerging answers (programs to reduce teen pregnancy) | 141 | 75 | 1.0 |
| national campaign to prevent teen pregnancy | 140 | 29 | 4.7 |
| ohio prep "reducing the risk" curriculum | 105 | 0 | 8.1 |
| ohio prep personal responsibility education program | 85 | 0 | 9.1 |
This audience may be genuinely finding the site. However, some of that search volume is tied to the organization's former name and old data. There are some newer programs showing up in search terms, but they haven't gained traction in terms of yielding clicks yet.
Pages & PDFs surfacing for this audience
Power to Decide content on partner & peer-org topics earning search impressions · powertodecide.org · Jan–Jun 2026 · top 25 by impressions
Unique Perspective
Three concrete things:
- Ready-to-use campaign toolkits, most visibly Thanks Birth Control, which partner orgs already use to post on Thanks Birth Control Day, plus the newer toolkit the team built.
- Provider-backed, accurate resources partners can hand to their own audiences, because Power to Decide has clinicians on staff and runs Bedsider and Abortion Finder.
- Original research and data (the youth survey, Contraceptive Deserts) partners can cite in grant applications and program design.
There's also a program other states could consider: The Right Time, its Missouri contraceptive-access model.
Who shows up today
Organizations that dominate Google results for the terms partner & peer orgs search · 2026
| Organization | Type | Shows up for |
|---|---|---|
| Guttmacher Institute | Data authority | State estimates, method mix, datasets |
| RHNTC | Title X training / toolkit hub | Toolkits, messaging, grantee training |
| CDC (incl. NCHS) | Government data | FastStats, NSFG, program guidance |
| Power to Decide | Nonprofit (you) | #1 for "contraceptive access toolkit" |
| HHS Office of Population Affairs | Government | Title X grantee resources |
| ASTHO | State-health-agency TA | Contraceptive-care toolkits |
| Population Reference Bureau | Policy scorecard | State-by-state access ranking |
Across the sample terms we used, three incumbents each own a lane: Guttmacher for data, RHNTC for Title X toolkits and training, and CDC and OPA for the government layer. KFF and NFPRHA don't appear at all. Power to Decide holds one strong position, ranking #1 for the main term "contraceptive access toolkit," but it's absent from the higher-intent implementation queries. Open lanes with weak incumbents include contraceptive-access programs in conservative states, how to replicate a family planning program, and reproductive-health messaging guides.
Content & data opportunities
- Promote the toolkits year-round, not just on Thanks Birth Control Day: one always-available library of campaign materials partners can grab anytime.
- An easy way to find and request Power to Decide's data (its #1 inbound request today), instead of one-off email back-and-forth.
- Clear, shareable resource pages partners can link their own audiences to, backed by Power to Decide's providers.
- A simple how-to for The Right Time, so a state that wants to copy the model has a clear starting point.
PDF Library
More than 240 Power to Decide PDFs currently show up in Google search results, and that's largely a good sign. It means Power to Decide is visible as a resource across many of the topics its audiences care about. Among the content relevant to the four audiences, we've identified that PDFs account for roughly three-quarters of all the search visibility the site earns.
The real question is what we do with each PDF. First, it's important to identify the PDFs that fit the primary audiences we're looking to attract today. We also need to address the accuracy of each one, since many are several years old, and some resources are more than 10 years old.
PDFs that are appearing today
Top 50 Power to Decide PDFs by search impressions · powertodecide.org · Jan–Jun 2026
You can visit each audience page to see which PDFs and content are showing up for that specific audience.
Possible next steps
We have different options for what we can do with each PDF, depending on how current the content is, whether the topic serves a priority audience, and how much demand it's capturing.
| Route | What it involves | When it's the right call |
|---|---|---|
| 1Keep as-is | Leave the PDF where it is, untouched. | Content is current and accurate, the topic still serves a priority audience, and it genuinely needs to stay a downloadable document. |
| 2Refresh in place | Update the file's data and details; keep the same web address. | The topic is still relevant but the numbers or facts are dated, and it makes sense to stay a PDF. This is the cheapest way to fix an accuracy problem. |
| 3Move on-site + redirect | Rebuild the content as a page on the website, then redirect the PDF to it. | On-strategy topic with real search demand. The page can rank better, be cited by AI tools, stay current, and carry a call to action a PDF can't. |
| 4On-site page + PDF download | Build a web page as the main version and keep the PDF as a download linked from it. | Formal reports people actually print or share (annual report, fact sheets, toolkits). The page does the ranking and converting; the PDF stays the takeaway. |
| 5Consolidate into a hub | Combine many related PDFs into one topic page, redirecting the strongest into it. | Clusters of similar files: state fact sheets, pharmacy-prescribing pages, the Survey Says archive, annual reports. Concentrates authority and makes the data easier to find. |
| 6Retire / redirect away | Remove the PDF, sending its traffic to the nearest relevant page (or retiring it fully). | Outdated, off-strategy, or low-value files, including high-traffic ones on topics Power to Decide no longer prioritizes. Removes clutter and credibility risk. |
| 7Add the action bridge | Wherever the content lands, add the audience's next step: give, replicate a program, request data, or contact an expert. | Applies on top of every route above. Most PDFs are dead ends today; this turns captured attention into an action or a relationship. |
Next step: a working pass through the highest-traffic PDFs, confirming which are still accurate and audience-aligned, then assigning each one a route to turn this into a concrete action list.
Website Navigation Wireframe
A low-fidelity wireframe of the proposed site navigation. Click the nav items inside (Issues, What We Do, About Us, Get Involved, Latest) to explore each menu.
/teen-talk Findings
The site's highest-volume page rivals the homepage for #1 by traffic, but almost none of that traffic is the target audience. A look at who actually lands on /teen-talk, what searches send them, and what it means for the strategy.
/teen-talk pulls ~125K pageviews a year, but roughly 93% of its search traffic is explicit adult-content seekers, mostly outside the US. The target audience is a small minority hiding under a big vanity number.
GA4 + Search Console · powertodecide.org · Jun 2025–May 2026
Finding 1 — Who's actually landing there
Where visitors are · share of users
The US (the target audience) is roughly 1 in 9 visitors.
Profile of the traffic
*Gender/age are only available for the ~16–19% of users Google can identify, and GA4 never reports under-18, so the actual teen audience is hard to measure. US visitors engage 2–3× better: that's the audience worth designing for.
Finding 2 — What searches drive it
Search intent by clicks · 61,476 queries
Google maps the page to adult searches because of its name + topic — 3.4M such impressions in 12 months.
Top queries · verbatim
| Query | Clicks |
|---|---|
| “teen sex” | 8,974 |
| “teen girl sex” | 6,854 |
| “young girl sex” | 4,004 |
| “sex teen” | 3,281 |
| “teen seks” · misspelled variant | long tail |
| “yandex sex” · search-engine + explicit | long tail |
| “bokep” · Indonesian explicit | long tail |
| “ngentot” · Indonesian explicit | long tail |
| explicit variants in Hindi/Urdu, Arabic, Turkish | long tail |
| “stayteen.org” · legacy brand — the one genuinely on-brand query | 135 |
The queries above account for the bulk of clicks. Every high-volume term is explicit.
LLM Tracking
Prompts tracked
Each monitored question, with Power to Decide's brand coverage and how it performs — brand mentions / own-domain citations, and the engines it ranks in. Competitor cells show mentions / citations. Hover any column heading for its definition.
| Prompt | Brand coverage | Total cites | PTD | Engines | CRR | Gutt. | KFF | NAF | NNAF | PP | RHNTC | WRRAP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| What organization tracks where people can't get birth control? | 75% | 34 | 3 / 3 | 1 | – | 0 / 1 | – | – | – | 2 / 0 | – | – |
| Are there resources or toolkits for a birth control access campaign we can use? | 75% | 30 | 3 / 1 | 1 | – | – | – | – | – | – | 2 / 2 | – |
| What organizations offer technical assistance for expanding contraceptive access? | 50% | 34 | 2 / 2 | 1 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Who's a nonpartisan expert I can quote on contraceptive access? | 25% | 36 | 1 / 1 | 2 | – | 2 / 4 | 1 / 3 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Which groups provide accurate information on abortion care options? | 25% | 40 | 1 / – | 3 | 0 / 1 | 1 / 0 | – | 3 / 0 | – | 3 / 7 | – | – |
| Is there recent, unbiased data on birth control access? | 25% | 31 | 1 / 1 | 3 | – | 2 / 1 | 2 / 5 | – | – | – | – | – |
| What's the latest data on birth control access? | 25% | 52 | 1 / 2 | 3 | – | 2 / 8 | 2 / 6 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Give me a nonpartisan, current statistic on contraceptive access I can put in a one-pager. | 25% | 39 | 1 / 1 | 2 | – | 2 / 12 | 1 / 5 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Where can I find birth control access data to justify a program to our board? | 25% | 35 | 1 / 2 | 2 | – | 3 / 12 | 1 / 1 | – | – | – | – | – |
| What's a proven contraceptive access program we could use in our state? | 0% | 41 | – | – | – | 1 / 4 | 0 / 1 | – | – | – | – | – |
| What are the most trusted reproductive health advocacy organizations? | 0% | 36 | – | – | 4 / 1 | 3 / 1 | – | – | 1 / 0 | 4 / 8 | – | – |
| Who is a good source to reference for a policy on reproductive health? | 0% | 27 | – | – | – | 3 / 1 | 2 / 1 | – | – | – | – | – |
| What's the most effective organization to donate to to improve reproductive health access in the US? | 0% | 38 | – | – | 4 / 2 | – | – | – | 3 / 3 | 4 / 4 | – | – |
| What's the most effective organization to donate to to improve abortion access in the US? | 0% | 34 | – | – | 2 / 1 | 1 / 0 | – | 3 / 0 | 4 / 5 | 3 / 6 | – | 1 / 1 |
| Give me statistics about abortion access in the US. | 0% | 35 | – | – | 1 / 0 | 3 / 10 | 2 / 5 | – | – | – | – | – |
Highlighted rows are prompts where Power to Decide is mentioned or cited. The brand appears in 9 of 15 sampled prompts, all on the contraceptive-access side of the topic; it is absent from every abortion-access and "who to donate to" prompt.
Brand landscape
Every tracked brand, ranked by AI mentions in the selected period. Lower average position is better. Hover any column heading for its definition.
| # | Brand | Sentiment | Mentions | Coverage | Share of voice | Avg pos | Visibility |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Guttmacher Institute | +44 | 23 | 38.3% | 25% | 1.72 | Leader |
| 2 | Planned Parenthood | +68 | 16 | 26.7% | 17% | 1.64 | Leader |
| 3 | Power to Decide | +56 | 14 | 23.3% | 15% | 1.29 | Leader |
| 4 | Center for Reproductive Rights | +83 | 11 | 18.3% | 12% | 2.29 | Niche |
| 5 | KFF | +29 | 11 | 18.3% | 12% | 1.58 | Niche |
| 6 | National Network of Abortion Funds | +86 | 8 | 13.3% | 9% | 1.38 | Niche |
| 7 | National Abortion Federation | +75 | 6 | 10.0% | 7% | 2.75 | Niche |
| 8 | RHNTC | +67 | 2 | 3.3% | 2% | 1.50 | Niche |
| 9 | WRRAP | N/A | 1 | 1.7% | 1% | 3.00 | Niche |
| 10 | cdc.gov | N/A | 0 | 0% | 0% | – | – |
Power to Decide sits third by volume but holds the strongest average answer position (1.29) of any tracked brand. When it's cited, it tends to lead the answer.
Where AI pulls its answers from
Most-cited URLs · all prompts
| # | URL | Cites | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | guttmacher.org/united-states/contraception | 10 | 2% |
| 2 | powertodecide.org/what-we-do/contraceptive-deserts | 8 | 1% |
| 3 | acog.org/clinical/clinical-guidance/comm | 8 | 1% |
| 4 | stateofaccess.prb.org/federal-overview | 7 | 1% |
| 5 | kff.org/womens-health-policy/contraception | 7 | 1% |
| 6 | plannedparenthood.org/ | 5 | 1% |
| 7 | kff.org/womens-health-policy/oral-contraception | 5 | 1% |
| 8 | abortionfunds.org/ | 5 | 1% |
| 9 | cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db539 | 5 | 1% |
| 10 | contraceptionaccess.org/resources-1 | 4 | 1% |
Top domains by citations
| # | Domain | Cites | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | guttmacher.org | 54 | 10% |
| 2 | kff.org | 27 | 5% |
| 3 | plannedparenthood.org | 25 | 5% |
| 4 | acog.org | 24 | 4% |
| 5 | cdc.gov | 21 | 4% |
| 6 | contraceptionaccess.org | 18 | 3% |
| 7 | pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov | 15 | 3% |
| 8 | who.int | 14 | 3% |
| 9 | powertodecide.org | 13 | 2% |
| 10 | reproductiveaccess.org | 12 | 2% |
Power to Decide's domain earns a 3% brand coverage of citations. Its strongest asset is the contraceptive-deserts page, the #2 most-cited URL across every tracked prompt.
Power to Decide's footprint
Top prompts by PTD brand mentions
| Prompt | Mentions |
|---|---|
| What organization tracks where people can't get birth control? | 3 |
| Are there resources or toolkits for a birth control access campaign we can use? | 3 |
| What organizations offer technical assistance for expanding contraceptive access? | 2 |
| Who's a nonpartisan expert I can quote on contraceptive access? | 1 |
| Which groups provide accurate information on abortion care options? | 1 |
| Is there recent, unbiased data on birth control access? | 1 |
| What's the latest data on birth control access? | 1 |
| Give me a nonpartisan, current statistic on contraceptive access I can put in a one-pager. | 1 |
| Where can I find birth control access data to justify a program to our board? | 1 |
| What's a proven contraceptive access program we could use in our state? | 0 |
Top prompts by PTD domain citations
| Prompt | Cites |
|---|---|
| What organization tracks where people can't get birth control? | 3 |
| What organizations offer technical assistance for expanding contraceptive access? | 2 |
| What's the latest data on birth control access? | 2 |
| Where can I find birth control access data to justify a program to our board? | 2 |
| Are there resources or toolkits for a birth control access campaign we can use? | 1 |
| Who's a nonpartisan expert I can quote on contraceptive access? | 1 |
| Is there recent, unbiased data on birth control access? | 1 |
| Give me a nonpartisan, current statistic on contraceptive access I can put in a one-pager. | 1 |
| Which groups provide accurate information on abortion care options? | 0 |
| What's a proven contraceptive access program we could use in our state? | 0 |
Power to Decide's most-cited pages
| # | URL | Cites |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | powertodecide.org/what-we-do/contraceptive-deserts | 8 |
| 2 | powertodecide.org/news/interested-expanding-contraceptive-access-your-community | 3 |
| 3 | powertodecide.org/about-us/newsroom/according-power-decide-97-percent-women | 1 |
Source: Otterly.ai brand report & prompt export · All engines · United States · 15 prompts · last 14 days · Jul 20, 2026.
Technical AEO
The technical foundation for AI visibility: before an LLM can cite Power to Decide, it has to crawl, read, and understand the site. PTD passes the basics. Here's what's working, what's holding it back, and how to fix each.
Audit scorecard
| Area | Status | Importance | Effort | Recommended fix |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crawler access | Pass | – | – | Nothing to fix now; re-check robots.txt after any security or CDN change |
| XML sitemap | Fix | High | Low | Install Drupal's XML Sitemap module and submit the sitemap in Google Search Console |
| Structured data (schema) | Fix | Medium | Med | Add schema markup with Drupal's Schema.org Metatag module (Organization, Article, FAQ, Dataset) |
| Deserts data trapped in JavaScript | Fix | Medium | Med | Publish the map's statistics as crawlable text and tables beside the interactive map |
| Findability & internal linking | Fix | Medium | High | Add state fact sheets and datasets to navigation and link to them from related pages |
| llms.txt (optional) | Consider | Low | Low | Add a plaintext /llms.txt file linking to PTD's key citable pages |
The findings in detail
Crawler access
PassEvery major AI assistant reaches PTD.org today, and it passes standard crawl tests. The site's rules allow the crawlers behind ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, and Google's AI. This is the foundation, and it's already in place.
GPTBot, OAI-SearchBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, Google-Extended, CCBot and the rest fall under a permissive User-agent: * that only restricts admin and system paths, so their access is open. Re-check after any CDN or security-plugin change, since firewalls and bot-blockers can silently start blocking AI agents.XML sitemap
FixHigh importanceA sitemap is the index crawlers use to discover every page efficiently. PTD's site doesn't produce a valid one (Search Console rejects the current output), so crawlers are left to find pages on their own, and deep or under-linked content like the state policy fact sheets can be missed entirely.
Sitemap: line pointing to one today. Install the XML Sitemap module, generate a clean sitemap, submit it in Search Console, and reference it from robots.txt. Exclude retired PDFs and redirect pages so crawlers spend their budget on live content.Structured data (schema)
FixMedium importanceSchema is background code that tells an AI what a page is (an organization, a news article, an FAQ, a dataset), so it can pull the facts out cleanly and attribute them to Power to Decide. The site has none today, which means LLMs have to guess at structure and are less likely to extract and cite PTD's data correctly.
Organization site-wide, plus NewsArticle (newsroom), FAQPage (issue pages), and Dataset (Contraceptive Deserts). On Organization, point sameAs at the Wikipedia page and social profiles; it's a direct lever for the off-site work.Contraceptive Deserts data trapped in JavaScript
FixMedium importanceThe Contraceptive Deserts map is Power to Decide's single most-cited URL in AI answers, but the actual statistics live inside JavaScript that many AI crawlers don't run. So the map's success hides a risk: the underlying numbers may not be readable. Fixing it builds on a strength PTD already has.
Dataset schema. Ship it with the map's upcoming relaunch and rename.Findability & internal linking
FixMedium importanceSome of PTD's strongest assets, like the state policy fact sheets and the research / data library, already exist but are buried and lightly linked, so crawlers, LLMs, and people all struggle to find them. AI tools weight content that's well-linked and easy to reach; content that's hard to find reads as low-priority.
llms.txt
ConsiderOptional · forward-lookingAn emerging convention: a simple /llms.txt file that points AI systems straight to your canonical, citable resources, like a sitemap written for LLMs. Adoption is early and support isn't universal, but it's low-effort and signals that Power to Decide is an AI-forward source.
/llms.txt at the domain root listing priority URLs (Deserts data, state fact sheets, key datasets, newsroom) with short descriptions. Low cost, no downside; treat as a nice-to-have after the four core fixes.Media/Policy Topic Universe
The reproductive-health topics Power to Decide can be a cited source for, mapped by category and status, each with the current news hook, the questions reporters are asking, and the assets that make PTD uniquely citable. Click a topic in the map to jump to it.
Birth Control
IUD-insertion pain went viral; CDC (Aug 2024) and ACOG (May 2025) issued new pain-management guidance, but a 2025 study of 286,000+ patients found ~95% still got no recommended pain medication. The 'guidelines vs. reality gap' is the live story reporters keep returning to.
What reporters are asking
- What do the new CDC/ACOG pain guidelines recommend, and what actually works (lidocaine) vs. doesn't (ibuprofen)?
- Why are ~95% of patients still getting no pain med?
- Was women's pain historically dismissed?
- Hormonal vs. copper IUD: side-effect differences?
- How do I advocate for pain management before my appointment?
- Are young people avoiding or removing LARCs over TikTok content, and is it accurate?
- Is there a link between hormonal contraception and mood/depression?
Why PTD is uniquely citable
Provider on staff and provider network (clinical quotes); social-listening scan tool (TikTok misinfo); Bedsider explainer library and Providers interview bank; YouR HeAlth survey (young-adult attitudes and behaviors).
What only PTD can say
PTD can pair a real clinician quote with hard attitudinal data on how young people actually feel about IUD pain and side effects, then use the scan tool to quantify which IUD myths are spreading on TikTok right now. No clinic or journal source can do all three at once.
Adjacent subtopics
Example coverage
- What to know about pain relief for IUD insertion… · CBS News (2024/25)
- ACOG Releases New Recommendations on Pain Management for IUD Insertions · ACOG (May 2025)
- How birth control is discussed on social media · Journalist's Resource
Distribution is normalizing fast. Single-dose EC is now in ~11,000 convenience stores across 48 states and in $10 college vending machines, even as post-Dobbs demand spikes and Project-2025-style threats to free EC coverage persist. A June 2026 poll found 72% of Republican voters want EC access protected.
What reporters are asking
- Where can I actually buy EC now, and is there an age requirement? (No age limit on levonorgestrel EC.)
- Why is Plan B still behind the counter in some pharmacies?
- Plan B (levonorgestrel) vs. ella (ulipristal), and does weight affect efficacy?
- How fast must I take it; how well does it work at 72 vs. 120 hours?
- Real shortages or just local stock-outs and purchase limits?
- How has demand changed since Dobbs and around elections?
- Could federal policy strip no-copay EC coverage?
Why PTD is uniquely citable
Contraceptive Deserts map (access geography); YouR HeAlth survey (awareness, confusion with the abortion pill); provider on staff (efficacy and timing accuracy); scan tool (EC misinformation).
What only PTD can say
PTD can quantify, from its own survey, how many young adults don't know EC is age-unrestricted or confuse it with the abortion pill, then overlay Contraceptive Deserts data to show exactly where convenience-store and vending-machine expansion does and doesn't close the gap.
Adjacent subtopics
Example coverage
- Emergency contraception is now at the 7-Eleven… · NBC News (2024)
- Birth control has become harder to get. New York has some creative solutions · STAT (Sep 2024)
- Plan B… 72% of Republican Voters Say Policymakers Should Protect Access · Business Wire (Jun 2026)
One year in, the 'access revolution' hit a wall: a 2025 study found Opill sales went flat and only ~4% of women who'd heard of it had bought it. The 2026 hook is 'why isn't the first OTC pill catching on?' The answer: cost plus the insurance-coverage gap (no federal mandate to cover OTC contraception; only ~9 states require it).
What reporters are asking
- Why has Opill uptake stayed so low despite removing the prescription barrier?
- Will insurance cover an OTC pill, and why doesn't the ACA mandate apply without a prescription?
- Who's actually buying it? (Disproportionately uninsured, rural, prior non-users.)
- Is $19.99/month a barrier for the people it's meant to reach?
- How does Opill work, who can take it, how effective (91% typical use)?
- Can teens buy it without a prescription? (Yes.)
- Is awareness the problem, or cost?
Why PTD is uniquely citable
YouR HeAlth survey (awareness, intent, who's using OTC); Contraceptive Deserts (rural and underserved reach); Bedsider DTC platform (consumer education); provider on staff (eligibility and effectiveness).
What only PTD can say
PTD can answer the question KFF and sales data can't: why young people aren't buying Opill, separating the awareness gap from the cost gap and mapping uptake against contraceptive deserts to show whether OTC availability is actually reaching underserved populations.
Adjacent subtopics
Example coverage
- What is Opill, the first U.S. over-the-counter birth control pill? · Washington Post (Mar 2024)
- Opill… now for sale online · NPR Shots (Mar 2024)
- 3 Charts: The Cost and Coverage of Opill · KFF
Peer-reviewed data (JAMA, Jan 2025) confirmed a durable post-Dobbs surge in vasectomies and tubal ligations among adults under 30, including single, childless people. The story has shifted from 'is this happening?' to 'what does it mean that a generation treats sterilization as a defensive response to policy risk?'
What reporters are asking
- Are young people really getting sterilized more, or is it a media narrative? Magnitude?
- How much is driven by abortion-access fear vs. childfree-by-choice vs. economics?
- Are doctors refusing young, childless patients, and is that legal or ethical?
- Is the trend bigger in ban states than protective states?
- What should a 22-year-old know first? Is it reversible?
- Are women bearing the surgical burden more than men?
- How do young people feel emotionally: regret, relief, defiance?
Why PTD is uniquely citable
YouR HeAlth survey (motivations and attitudes); provider on staff and network (refusal and access reality); Bedsider Providers interview bank; Bedsider (method comparison including reversible options).
What only PTD can say
What this age group actually believes and fears about permanent vs. reversible methods, and how many considered sterilization as a direct reaction to losing abortion access: the attitudinal 'why' behind the claims data, from PTD's own young-adult survey.
Adjacent subtopics
Example coverage
- Changes in Permanent Contraception Among Young Women and Men After Dobbs · JAMA Health Forum (Jan 2025)
- More young people choosing permanent sterilization after abortion restrictions · NBC News (2024)
- Vasectomies Are Becoming Popular in a Post-Roe World · Scientific American (2024)
Birth Control · Policy
Two flashpoints collide: HHS rewrote Title X guidance to favor 'natural family planning' over hormonal contraception (proposed FY27 cut to ~$257M), and the OBBBA's one-year Medicaid defunding of Planned Parenthood is set to expire July 4, 2026, with Congress fighting over an extension.
What reporters are asking
- If Title X shifts to 'natural family planning,' how much less effective is that than the pill or an IUD?
- How many 16–24-year-olds rely on Title X / Medicaid for birth control, and what happens if it's cut?
- The Medicaid PP defunding 'expires' July 4: what changes if it lapses vs. is extended?
- Which states backfilled funding; which left the biggest gaps?
- Is the ACA no-cost contraception mandate really at risk?
- Real out-of-pocket cost difference for a young person?
- What does this mean for unintended/teen pregnancy down the line?
Why PTD is uniquely citable
YouR HeAlth survey (reliance on public programs; what young people would do if coverage vanished), plus provider on staff and Bedsider as the consumer-translation layer.
What only PTD can say
The young-adult-specific reliance numbers: what share of 16–24 AFAB young adults depend on Title X and Medicaid-funded contraception, and how their behavior shifts as access narrows, paired with the effectiveness gap between fertility-awareness and hormonal or LARC methods. No other source owns the young-adult survey lens.
Adjacent subtopics
Example coverage
- Trump administration shifts focus of Title X program away from birth control · NBC News (Apr 2026)
- An Update on Medicaid, Title X and Planned Parenthood · KFF (2026)
- Millions of women could lose birth control due to Trump cuts · NPR (Aug 2025)
Note: Live policy clock: OBBBA Medicaid–PP defunding expires Jul 4, 2026; FY27 Title X 'natural family planning' guidance. Both spike reporter demand through summer and fall 2026.
Pharmacy closures (CVS ~900, Walgreens ~1,200, Rite Aid ~800) and clinic closures from the funding fights are physically shrinking where people can get birth control, while more than a third of US counties are maternity-care deserts. PTD literally owns the contraceptive-desert dataset, and a 2026 data refresh is a built-in news hook.
What reporters are asking
- How many people live in a contraceptive desert, and where are the worst counties?
- How do pharmacy and clinic closures compound the problem?
- Where do contraceptive deserts and maternity-care deserts overlap?
- How far must someone in a rural desert travel for the full range of methods?
- Did the 2025–26 funding fight measurably widen the deserts?
- Link between living in a desert and unintended pregnancy / worse maternal outcomes?
- Is telehealth / mail-order birth control closing the gap?
Why PTD is uniquely citable
The Contraceptive Deserts interactive map and dataset (PTD's signature, built with George Washington University), with state and county granularity, plus the YouR HeAlth survey for lived experience and the provider network for on-the-ground voices.
What only PTD can say
About 97% of US women needing publicly funded contraception live in a contraceptive desert (~19.5M); ~1.2M live in a county without a single health center offering the full method range. PTD can name the counties, quantify how access narrowed after the 2025–26 closures, and overlay maternity-desert maps, a combination no other org can produce.
Adjacent subtopics
Example coverage
- Contraception Services Dropped After Defunding Provision Hit Clinics · Rewire News Group (Mar 2026)
- Inside America's contraceptive deserts · NBC News (video)
- Pharmacy deserts… worsens contraception access · Contraception journal (2025)
Note: Lead with the Deserts map and 2026 refresh as the single most ownable, pitchable asset across the whole birth-control universe.
Abortion
Mifepristone access is at the Supreme Court: in Louisiana v. FDA the 5th Circuit ordered in-person dispensing reinstated (May 1, 2026), SCOTUS stayed that May 14 leaving telehealth and mail intact, and HHS directed the FDA to 'review' mifepristone safety with a status report due Oct 7, 2026.
What reporters are asking
- If SCOTUS ultimately sides with Louisiana, what changes overnight, and which states first?
- Two-drug vs. misoprostol-only: how safe and effective is misoprostol alone?
- What does the actual safety data show; what is the FDA 'reviewing'?
- How many abortions are medication abortions now; how many via telehealth?
- If in-person dispensing returns, where would people actually go?
- What is self-managed abortion: legal status and risks (medical vs. legal)?
- How do people verify a pill source is legitimate vs. a scam?
Why PTD is uniquely citable
Abortion Finder (verified provider and access directory); provider on staff and network; scan tool (mifepristone-safety and pill misinformation); Bedsider Providers interview bank.
What only PTD can say
Abortion Finder's verified directory is the only real-time, state-by-state picture of where and how people can get pills right now, turning each court ruling from abstract legal news into a concrete 'here's what's available to you today' answer no think-tank fact sheet can match.
Adjacent subtopics
Example coverage
- Court issues temporary order allowing access to abortion pill by mail · SCOTUSblog (May 2026)
- Supreme Court decides to keep abortion pill mifepristone available by telehealth · NPR (May 2026)
- Louisiana v. FDA: Access to Mifepristone Back at the Supreme Court · KFF (May 2026)
The Louisiana v. FDA fight threatens mailed and telehealth pills, and shield-law providers are now personally targeted: Louisiana indicted NY's Dr. Carpenter; TX AG Paxton sued a DE nurse practitioner. Latest #WeCount data shows shield-law care has surged (~14,870/month; 29% via telehealth), driving US abortions to nearly double the pre-Dobbs rate.
What reporters are asking
- What is a shield law, which states have them, what do they protect?
- How does someone in a total-ban state get pills by mail right now, step by step?
- Can TX or LA actually prosecute or extradite a provider in NY or CA?
- How many shield-law telehealth abortions per month, and how fast is it growing?
- Is it legal for the patient (vs. provider) in a ban state?
- What happens if SCOTUS restores in-person dispensing?
- How is the Comstock Act being used as a weapon?
- How do patients tell a legit shield provider from a fraudulent site?
Why PTD is uniquely citable
Abortion Finder (which telehealth and shield providers ship where, verified); provider on staff and network; scan tool ('is mailing pills legal' misinformation); YouR HeAlth survey (awareness and use of telehealth options).
What only PTD can say
Abortion Finder is the single source that knows, in real time, which shield-law telehealth providers actually serve which states, so when a provider is sued or a ruling lands, PTD can tell a reporter exactly how patient access shifts on the ground, not just in theory.
Adjacent subtopics
Example coverage
- Despite state bans, abortions have almost doubled. The reason? Pills via telehealth · NPR (Jun 2026)
- A Texas lawsuit tests the legal protections for doctors who provide abortion pills · The 19th (Feb 2026)
- #WeCount Report (December 2025 data) · Society of Family Planning
Abortion is a marquee Nov 2026 ballot story: Missouri's Amendment 3 would repeal the 2024 abortion-rights amendment (ballot-wording fights all year), and Nevada and Virginia weigh protections. New 2025 data: 13 states enforce total bans, interstate travel fell (142k in 2025 vs. 154k in 2024) as telehealth surged, and the public is deeply confused about what's legal where.
What reporters are asking
- Which states have total bans vs. gestational limits, and what changed this month?
- What would happen to access in [state] if [ballot measure] passes/fails?
- How far do people in ban states travel right now, and where to?
- Why did travel drop in 2025 if bans persist? (telehealth/shield-law story)
- Is the abortion pill still legally available by mail in ban states?
- How do people figure out what's legal in their own state, and how much misinfo is out there?
- What's the gap between a law on the books and what clinics actually provide?
Why PTD is uniquely citable
Abortion Finder (verified, real-time directory of providers and access by state); Contraceptive Deserts map (parallel access-gap framing); provider on staff.
What only PTD can say
Abortion Finder holds a current, verified, clinic-by-clinic picture of where someone can actually get care right now, not just the legal status on paper. PTD can say 'here's what a 19-year-old in [ban state] would actually face this week,' bridging law-as-written and access-as-lived.
Adjacent subtopics
Example coverage
- Full-Year 2025 Estimates… Decreased Travel and Increased Telehealth · Guttmacher (2026)
- How abortion in America has changed since the Dobbs decision · NPR (Jun 2026)
- Abortion on the 2026 Ballot · KFF (2026)
JAMA Health Forum (Mar 2026) shows teens and 18–24-year-olds driving the surge in online and telehealth abortion-pill requests, with the largest increases in states with parental-consent and notification laws (young people routing around them). 38 states still mandate parental involvement; Nevada's Supreme Court halted its notification law May 28, 2026.
What reporters are asking
- How are teens getting abortions in states with parental-consent laws?
- What is judicial bypass, how long does it take, how does delay push care later?
- Which states require parental involvement; which don't?
- Are young people ordering pills online, and what are the legal risks?
- What do 16–24-year-olds actually believe about access, birth control, and the law?
- How much of what Gen Z 'knows' comes from TikTok misinformation?
- What's the emotional/logistical reality for a minor navigating this alone?
Why PTD is uniquely citable
YouR HeAlth survey (the exact population in these stories); scan tool (TikTok myths); Abortion Finder (no-age-restriction provider info); Bedsider (birth control for the same cohort); provider on staff.
What only PTD can say
PTD's survey is one of the only sources that asks 16–24-year-olds directly what they believe, fear, and misunderstand about abortion and birth control, pairable with the scan tool's real-time read on which TikTok myths are spreading. With Abortion Finder's age-agnostic access data: 'here's what young people think is true, the misinformation driving it, and what's actually available.'
Adjacent subtopics
Example coverage
- Teens and young adults are driving the demand for online abortion pills via telehealth · The Conversation (Mar 2026)
- Parental-involvement laws common even in abortion-protecting states · STAT (Jun 2026)
- Minors' Access to Abortion Care · Guttmacher (2026)
Aspirational · topics to own
Physicians report an 'explosion' of birth-control misinformation on TikTok and Instagram aimed at teens and women in their early 20s, pushing them toward less-effective 'natural' methods just as abortion is restricted. The new layer is generative AI: teens asking ChatGPT-style tools for contraception advice (WHO launched its ChatHRP tool Apr 2026).
What reporters are asking
- How much of the birth-control content young people see is false, and can you quantify it in real time?
- Which specific claims are spreading now (infertility, weight gain, depression, 'the pill is poison')?
- Are young women actually quitting hormonal BC over what they see online?
- Who's driving it: wellness influencers, right-wing commentators, bots?
- Is 'natural'/fertility-awareness as effective as influencers claim?
- Is AI (ChatGPT, AI Overviews) repeating the myths?
- What is 'abortion pill reversal' and why do doctors say it's dangerous?
Why PTD is uniquely citable
The social-listening scan tool (real-time TikTok and hashtag misinfo tracking) is the signature asset, backed by the YouR HeAlth survey (belief and info-source data) and provider on staff for fact-checking.
What only PTD can say
'Here's what's trending in birth-control misinformation this week, not last year's study.' PTD is the only source pairing real-time detection (the scan tool) with audience-truth data (who believes it, ages 16–24) and a clinician who can rate each claim true or false on deadline.
Adjacent subtopics
Example coverage
- Social media misinformation is scaring women about birth control · STAT (Nov 2024)
- Misleading Narratives and Social Media Shape Contraception Perceptions · KFF (2025)
- Technical Difficulties: How Social Media Is Impacting… Misinformation About Reproductive Health · Ms. Magazine (Oct 2025)
Note: Confirm the scan tool's exact name and scope with PTD before naming it in external pitch materials. It appears to be an internal, proprietary asset, not publicly documented.
CPCs are a live beat: NPR (Jun 24, 2026) reported CPCs falsely claiming they can 'rule out' ectopic pregnancy; SCOTUS ruled unanimously (Apr 2026, First Choice v. Davenport) making it harder for states to investigate CPCs for deception; a 2026 GAO report puts post-Dobbs taxpayer funding at ~$430M federal / $491M+ across 21 states with little oversight.
What reporters are asking
- How many CPCs are there vs. real abortion clinics? (~2,500 CPCs vs. ~765 clinics, 3-to-1.)
- How are they funded with taxpayer money, and where's the oversight?
- What deceptive tactics get people in the door (naming, location, 'free ultrasounds')?
- What medical misinformation do they spread (abortion-breast-cancer link, 'post-abortion syndrome,' pill reversal)?
- Can someone in a ban state be misdirected and miss their legal window?
- How does the 2026 SCOTUS ruling change states' ability to police deception?
- How do you tell a fake clinic from a real one before you go?
Why PTD is uniquely citable
Abortion Finder (the verified, vetted directory) is the headline asset, the direct antidote to CPC misdirection, supported by the Contraceptive Deserts map (care gaps where CPCs concentrate) and the staff provider (what CPCs medically can't do).
What only PTD can say
'We're the verified directory: here's how to know a clinic is real before you walk in.' Every Abortion Finder provider is vetted, so PTD can make the verified-vs-fake distinction concretely and quantify how misdirection happens. Paired with the scan tool, PTD can also show CPC misinformation spreading online in real time.
Adjacent subtopics
Example coverage
- Why are crisis pregnancy centers saying they can rule out ectopic pregnancy? · NPR (Jun 2026)
- Taxpayer dollars flood pregnancy centers. Oversight hasn't followed. · States Newsroom (Mar 2026)
- How to Spot a Fake Abortion Clinic · Ms. Magazine (Mar 2025)
Foundational / namesake
The pronatalist 'fertility crisis' framing dominates 2026 headlines (CDC: 3.6M births in 2025; fertility rate down 23% since 2007), even as Dobbs is tied to drops in oral- and emergency-contraceptive fills in the most restrictive states, putting 'the power to decide IF/WHEN/WHETHER' back in the news. Reporters need a nonpartisan source to reframe around autonomy.
What reporters are asking
- Is the 'fertility crisis' about people not wanting kids, or barriers to deciding freely?
- What's happening to unintended pregnancy rates post-Dobbs?
- Did contraception access drop after abortion bans, and where?
- How much real autonomy do young people have (partners, parents, providers)?
- What does 'reproductive autonomy' mean in practice, and how do you measure it?
- Are young people changing methods out of fear rather than preference?
- What do young people themselves say they want, and is anyone asking?
Why PTD is uniquely citable
Contraceptive Deserts map (autonomy barrier); the YouR HeAlth Survey (knowledge, attitudes, and experiences on contraception and abortion); the 'Power to Decide' namesake framing itself; Bedsider and Abortion Finder (the deciding tools).
What only PTD can say
From the YouR HeAlth Survey: how much decision-making autonomy young AFAB people actually have, whether their contraceptive preferences are being met, and how they're rethinking IF/WHEN/WHETHER to have children post-Dobbs. PTD's signature data and its founding question.
Adjacent subtopics
Example coverage
- As U.S. birth rate falls, Trump officials downplay contraception in family planning program · CBS News
- State of World Population Report 2025 (1 in 3 adults have had an unintended pregnancy) · UNFPA (2025)
- New Power to Decide Data Underscore that Young People Need High-Quality Birth Control Information · Power to Decide
Note: This is PTD's namesake territory, the strongest 'reframe the national conversation' pitch. Anchor thought-leadership (NYT, WaPo, Axios) op-eds here.
Education
Federal sex-ed and Title X infrastructure is under threat in the 2026 budget cycle (proposed TPP/SRAE elimination; Title X shift toward 'natural family planning'), while states split: Alabama's 2026 bill mandates 'exclusively sexual risk avoidance,' while Colorado bans abstinence-as-sole-method. Studies show 20%+ of sexual-health TikToks contain misinformation, fueling the 'where are kids actually learning this?' story.
What reporters are asking
- Where are young people actually getting repro-health info now: school, TikTok, friends?
- How accurate is the sexual-health content they see on social media?
- Which states require medically accurate, comprehensive sex ed, and which don't?
- What happens to teen pregnancy/STI rates when comprehensive sex ed is cut?
- How do Title X / TPP funding changes hit teens specifically?
- Is abstinence-only making a comeback in 2026?
- What does the literacy gap look like, and what do young people get wrong about their bodies and birth control?
Why PTD is uniquely citable
Social-listening scan tool (TikTok and hashtag misinfo, signature here); Bedsider (vetted alternative source); YouR HeAlth survey (where they learn, what they get wrong); Contraceptive Deserts map (access consequence of funding cuts).
What only PTD can say
From its own young-adult survey and scan tool: exactly where this cohort sources reproductive info, which specific misinformation is trending now, and the measurable gaps in what they know about their own contraceptive options.
Adjacent subtopics
Example coverage
- Over 20% of sexual health-related TikToks contained inaccurate information · EurekAlert! (2025)
- Reproductive health clinics scramble as Title X funding cliff approaches · NPR (Mar 2026)
- TikTok For Sex Advice? Check The Source, Study Suggests · U.S. News (Sep 2025)