Suchergebnisse

This article describes the 1996 reform of US welfare and reviews its consequences, concluding that the evidence so far is encouraging, but that the full effects of reform are still unknown. It demonstrates how much the essential character of US welfare has altered: the emphasis on changing behaviour rather than making cash payments; the shift in responsibility from federal government to frontline administrators; the move to discretionary rather than rights based decision-making; and the stress on performance rather than on process. Finally, it notes that the language of political debate takes little account of what has already been achieved.

AbstractCan alternative ways of administering and guaranteeing the flow of child support payments enhance the welfare of children of separated or divorced parents?

This article explores growing pessimism among those scholars who wish to see rigorous research used more frequently to formulate public policy. That commonsense aspiration is threatened by the impoverished dialogue between the communities that conduct studies (researchers) and those that apply them to decisions (policymakers). To examine this disconnect, the authors advance community dissonance theory, which proposes that a better understanding in the research community of the inhabitants, institutions, and cultures of the policy community could increase communication and trust. Community dissonance theory extends earlier two‐communities theories by deconstructing the cultural impediments to optimal communication. Building on previous literature and supported with in‐depth interviews of state policymakers, this article examines professional culture and institutional culture (e.g., preferred decision‐making processes, interactional preferences, favored epistemological frameworks, dominant influence loops, salient goals, salient stakeholders). The article presents several frictions that occur when cultures clash, discussing their promise and peril for improving research use in policymaking.

Families have long been recognized for the contributions they make to their members and to society. Yet families are seldom substantively incorporated into the normal course of policy and program development, implementation, and evaluation. We propose the family impact lens as one way to shift the rhetoric from appreciating families to prioritizing them as worthy of study, investment, partnership, and political action. This paper provides the theoretical and empirical rationale for the family impact lens and introduces a toolkit for professionals who conduct or manage programs, teach about families, communicate with policymakers and program administrators, or evaluate programs and policies. Five guiding principles comprise the core of the family impact lens—family responsibility, family stability, family relationships, family diversity, and family engagement. To operationalize these principles, three methodologies are proposed—Family Impact Discussion Starters, the Family Impact Checklist, and Family Impact Analysis. Next steps are proposed for implementation and evaluation.