In this article, Casey reviews how Reproductive Health Services (RHSs) are accessed, what are the positive developments and limitations from the services, and what are the main gaps that make refugees less able to obtain efficiently in three different humanitarian settings. The study was conducted in three prone African countries which involved 63 selected health facilities, 34 focus discussion groups, and 273 research samples. The author reveals that most RHSs offer family planning service, emergency antenatal and infant care, abortion care, rape clinic management, and sexual transmitted diseases service which can be utilized by refugees. However,  while most of the health facilities had met the minimum criteria of general infrastructure, some participants reported that a distance between the hospitals and their resettlements, a quality of care, and medicine supplies limited their willingness to get the services. Furthermore, an inadequate supply of family planning services such as contraceptions and untrained staffs give contribution in weakening reproductive health on women and girls. Besides, a sociocultural barrier and misconception toward contraception used which associated with negative behaviors of unmarried relationship make the implementation of RHS can not meet the maximum target of intervention. Finally, study highlights several efforts which can be taken to encourage women’s intention to access RHS such as strengthening community engagement, building capacity development, securing supply chain, making an integrated policy, and rng awareness of reproductive health to adolescent. The main limitation of the research was an insufficiency in data collection phase due to practical barriers in language translation and time. Therefore, it is useful for my essay topic because the analyses of RHS is comprehensive.