Evaluating The Efficiency Of Private Sector Organizations In Helping Welfare Beneficiaries Find Employment

Abstract

This research examines the relative success of private, public, and nonprofit organizations in finding employment for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families beneficiaries in Florida. A variety of data are used to measure success in this endeavor. Type of organization used to assist in finding employment was entered into a regression model that controlled for demographic characteristics of the welfare population. Ordinary least squares regression, analysis of variance, difference of means, and descriptive statistics were employed to test the hypothesis that private service providers were more efficient and effective than were public or nonprofit organizations in finding employment for welfare beneficiaries. The analysis did not support the hypothesis.

Administrative Privatization and Employment Outcomes in the Implementation of Temporary Assistance to Needy Families

“…In the aftermath of PRWORA, Florida pursued extensive second-order devolution, granting 24 RWBs, operating in 67 Florida counties, the autonomy to contract welfare services to private, public, or a mix of agency types and allowed private entities to operate entire local welfare offices. 3 Florida’s demographic diversity and pursuit of decentralized bureaucratic control results in meaningful variation in provider types and street-level operations across counties, making this state a popular choice for welfare reform researchers (Crew & Lamothe, 2003; Soss et al, 2011).…”

“…In turn, states have responded by creating an increased role for private, both for-profit and nonprofit, entities in the delivery of welfare services (Crew & Lamothe, 2003; U.S. GAO, 2002; Sanger, 2003; Winston et al, 2002).…”

“…Fifteen years after the passage of PRWORA, we know that all states except South Dakota have contracted some portion of their TANF dollars to private firms (U.S. GAO, 2002), but quantitative investigation into the ramifications of TANF privatization remains limited (for exceptions, see Crew & Lamothe, 2003; Heinrich & Choi, 2007; Sanger, 2003). This is unfortunate because with the economic recession of 2008 and sluggish recovery, vulnerable families are continuing to seek redistributive cash assistance services from private social service providers, yet little is known regarding how their experiences and outcomes might differ across public and private arrangements.…”

“…One published large-N study undertakes multiple regression analysis of administrative ownership and aggregate TANF employment outcomes within the state of Florida (Crew & Lamothe, 2003). The authors report that Regional Workforce Boards (RWBs) utilizing governmental agencies in TANF implementation performed on par or more proficiently than RWBs with private service providers.…”

Privatization and the Poor: Exploring Patterns in Welfare Contracting

“…Not only did PRWORA institute stringent work requirements and sanctions for non-compliance with program rules, but the administrative structuring of welfare at the street level also changed dramatically. In particular, welfare administration became more decentralized and privatized (Crew & Lamothe, 2003;Gainsborough, 2003;Sanger, 2003;Soss, Fording, & Schram, 2011;Winston et al, 2002). Along with diversity in program rules, PRWORA additionally encouraged administrative diversity allowing states to grant private entities, for the first time, the potential authority to determine TANF program eligibility and effectively manage the operation of entire welfare offices (GAO, 2002;Sanger, 2003;Soss et al, 2011).…”