Measuring street-level bureaucrats' use of behavioral discretion over information, transaction costs, and stigma in U.S. welfare policy implementation: A comparative analysis of public management in state and local government.

摘要

This study uses content analysis to investigate caseworkers' use of discretion during application interviews for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Food Stamp (FS), or Medicaid (MA). One hundred twenty two application interviews were observed in 2000 for three local offices in both Michigan (1 metropolitan, 1 suburban, and 1 rural office) and Texas (2 metropolitan and 1 suburban office). Previous literature suggested that caseworkers had discretion in three areas---(1) manipulating information, (2) distributing transaction costs, and (3) stigmatizing clients.;The results of this study show that systematic variations came from only manipulating information including both providing and collecting information. First, I compared workers' use of discretion between Michigan and Texas using a similar number of interviews from urban and metropolitan offices for clients with similar racial composition. Working in a liberal political context with an investment in human resources (recruiting experienced staff and training them), Michigan workers explained available benefits and services more frequently than Texas workers working under a conservative political culture with a computer-based application procedure. Texas workers spent most of their time collecting routine information for the eligibility determination and emphasized clients' responsibilities rather than explaining benefits. Second, in Michigan, the rural office had funding through Project Zero and small caseloads, and data shows that rural workers provided more information about education, supportive services, nonprofit organizations and encouraged clients to seek jobs as well as education compared to other Michigan workers. In both Michigan and Texas, suburban workers provided more information than metropolitan workers. I argue that street-level bureaucrats' use of discretion could be associated with their political contexts, management system like the adoption of computer systems or human resource investment, and bureaucratic resources.;Finally, there are two worrisome results: (1) white clients received more information than black clients and black clients were stigmatized more than white ones; and (2) only a small number of workers explained clients' right to appeal, earning disregards, and the delinkage between TANF and MA which are important to clients. The current study recommends that policymakers develop accountability mechanisms to ensure that street-level workers provide essential information to clients equally.