Networks for Welfare Provision: Getting a Grip on Processes of Social Exclusion by Evaluating Network Effectiveness

Abstract

It has been repeatedly stated that the topic of network effectiveness has often been neglected. This has led to a situation of ‘network euphoria’ amongst practitioners and policymakers with regard to the creation of networks as a means to (re‐)organize welfare provision. Starting from a case study of networks for welfare provision in two Belgian cities, this article focuses on the effectiveness of service delivering networks at the client level, which is understood as the contribution of the network in improving the conditions of life of those being served or targeted by the network. Therefore, we focused on the collective efforts via these networks (e.g. by creating a night shelter or by conducting case consultations) to look after a population of homeless people who face multiple problems and are not able yet to benefit from welfare provision. Our findings revealed that these networks were able to realize a ‘collaborative advantage’ by filling in service gaps and by overcoming fragmentation of care. Nevertheless, these networks equally maintained criteria that restricted the accessibility or usefulness of welfare services provided to homeless people. In the concluding section, we highlight some of the factors that could help us to explain our findings and highlight the tension between the effectiveness of networks at the client level and the effectiveness at the organizational level.

How social networks affect policy implementation: An analysis of street‐level bureaucrats' performance regarding a health policy

“…In an analysis of the articles published in prominent journals between 2003 and 2017, we found 278 articles on SLBs. The abstracts of these articles suggested that only five of them mobilized relational dimensions in the analysis (De Corte, Verschuere, & De Bie, ; Maroulis, ; Nisar & Maroulis, ; Siciliano, ; Siciliano, ). Additionally, these articles only consider social relationships among peers and neglect bureaucrat–citizen relations.…”

Nurse champions as street-level bureaucrats: Factors which facilitate innovation, policy making, and reconstruction

“…In establishing these forums, managers should be attentive to the dynamic nature of networks and their evolving structural and functional characteristics. It is recommended that they adopt clear and enforceable rules and procedures to facilitate such networks and support their members in reaching collectively accepted solutions and ideas for innovation through the lead of nurse champions ( De Corte et al, 2017 ). Yet, as our findings revealed, structural solutions in the form of diverse network are not enough.…”

The Intersection of Nonprofit Roles and Public Policy Implementation

“…However, factors that affect one-to-one partnerships (role simultaneity, perceptions of service delivery, the influence of time), as well as supply and social structures, also affect network composition and may take on greater importance in a network setting. Just as organizational identity can be dynamic, so can networks, which has implications for contract specification and formalization (De Corte, Verschuere, & De Bie, 2017). Similarly, just as nonprofit roles can affect contracts on a dyadic level (e.g., nonprofit-public entity), so too can roles affect membership in and performance of networks.…”