Traditional financial services are rapidly being reformed by technology. Small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) account for more than one-half of the world's GDP and employ two-thirds of the global workforce, however a key barrier to growth faced by SMEs around the globe is access to financing. This is not a new issue, as the onerous information, administration, and collateral requirements associated with traditional loans have inhibited SMEs from seeking or securing financing. The 2008 financial crisis only exacerbated the problem, as many local retail banks (often the primary providers of SME financing) closed their doors and the appetite for taking on high-risk SME loans was quelled. Online business lending may be stepping in to fill this gap by resolving many of the barriers associated with traditional SME financing. This paper analyzes data from PayPal Inc., a company best known for its global online payment system, and from Kiva, a crowdsourcing platform. PayPal Working Capital launched in late 2013; it is a product that enables SMEs to apply for and obtain short-term credit. Our objective is to understand how technology is impacting SMEs' ability to access financing. Our findings suggest the following: (i) online business loans have stepped in to fill the SME funding gap left in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis; (ii) young and minority-owned businesses with low and moderate income benefit particularly from online business loans; and (iii) online business loans can boost the growth of SMEs in under-served counties. Based on increased sales of businesses that have received PPWC loans, we estimate that programs like this have the potential to boost economic activity considerably.

Background: Almost half (49%) of all U.S. pregnancies are unintended. Of these, 43% end in abortion. Clearly, safe and affordable contraception and abortion services are vital for women to achieve their reproductive goals. Despite this major public health need, federal policies restrict funding for abortion research. SFP promotes scientifically sound research by funding studies on contraception and abortion, developing clinical guidelines, and advancing family planning knowledge to inform public policy. Objectives: This study aims to evaluate how SFP-funded research and SFP's evidence-based clinical guidelines have impacted family planning policy and practice. Methods: A review of legislative barriers to abortion research and a literature review of clinical guidelines provided important context for analyzing SFP's impact on the field. A semistructured, 30-question survey was sent to 309 SFP fellows to solicit their views about the impact of SFP's programmatic activities. In addition, two fellows who received SFP grants were interviewed about the impact of the grant on their research. Interview transcripts were coded in NVIVO 9.2 and analyzed for themes. Results: 171 fellows participated in the survey. They were comprised of physicians, clinicians, educators and social science researchers. Conclusions: SFP's main impact is contributing to knowledge about abortion and contraception and providing research support for typically under-funded research areas. SFP also attracts new researchers to the field, provides a supportive research community, and legitimizes family planning as a sub-specialization. Several fellows noted the need for more time for the research to have impact.