chapter Social Welfare Policy Research: A Framework for Policy Analysisvsed by the poly researcher, siuctared framework for policy analysis, as well pas the common components of such Elissen policy frameworks. We also propose our own model for policy analysis. alysts engage in the systematic in- vestigation of a social policy ora set of policies "Thus, policy analysts can be employed in a var cy of settings, including federal, state, and local governments; think tanks (on both the left and thesight); universities; social justice groups, pub: licinterest groups, or community organizations; and Ineger social agencies. The goals of policy analysis can range Fram pure research to provic fg information to legislators (as i done by con gressional researchers) lo advocacy resea oy The previous chapter exarnined Be, ow idealogy, economic theories, and Eiishcon politcal ideas influence the soci wel bh paler fare state. Tt also indicated that con- © Cepts such as social justice and equity play a © central role in the formation of social welfare pol= }, icy. A policy framework—in other words, a sys- tematic means for examining a specific social welfare policy or a series of policies—is one aneans analysis use to evaluate the congruence of a poliey with the mission and goals ofthe social "welfare state. We can also employ policy frame- ‘works to assess whether key social welfare values {, social justice, redistribution, equity) are n= corporated within a given policy. Moreover, pol- Jey frameworks help us determine whether a policy its within the theoretical guidelines of so- Gal welfare activities and whether a policy is consistent with established social welfare foun- that is, with the historical precedents that ide social welfare initiatives. For example, ‘et us consider the proposal that foster care { should be abolished and that all children sus- pected of being abused or neglected should be | placed in orphanages. The use of a policy frame: _ ork would show that this proposal represents ‘lear break with the general dil of child welfare Policy atthe beginning of the wenty-frst century ‘id, moreover; that i€ repudiates general social ‘welfare values that sivess selfdetermination, js tice, equity, and compassion. hy addition, Fematic analysis would reveal that this policy is nol feasible—economically, politically, or socially Apart (rom exarnining a given policy, an an alytic framework is also useful for comparing existing policies. For example, comparing the mental health policies of Missouri with those of Massachusetts and Minnesota would yield valu- able information forall three states, A compara~ tive analysis of the health systems of the United States, Canada, and Swerken would also provide useful information for decision makers. Lastly, analytic frameworks can be used (0 evaluate competing policies. Given alternative policies, an analytic Framework can help the analyst make a recommendation as to which policy would most effectively solve a problem or remedy a need. Policy analysis frameworks can be useful for social work practitioners on several different lev- els. For one, poticy analysis can be done on the agency as well as on statewide or national levels. Social work practitioners can look at agency poli- cies around issues such as flestime, merit pay, agency-based day care services, job shifting, andl 0 forth, Child welfare workers can use policy analysis to evaluate impending state or federal legislation and the concomitant fiscal allocation Social workers in health care can analyze man- aged care policies in terms of cquity effectiveness, and a wide range of other issues. Agency or otber policies dictate what a social worker will do, with swhom, and for how long. Policies define who is (or is not) a client and what services will be pro- vided for clients. Social work practice is clearly influenced—#f not driven—by social policy. Policy analysis is also useful in the environ- mental scatining activities of nonprofit and for profit agencies. Specifically, as the delivery of social services becomes more grounded in the rules of the marketplace, social a forced to replicate successful private sector cor porate behavior: This includes being on top of changing demographic trends (doing market analyses) and monitoring new legislation. In some social welfare sectors, events change so 2930 PART ONE/ American Social Welfare Policy rapidly that agencies must quickly niodify their operations if they are to remain viable. Data- based envitonmental scanning allows agencies to make long- and short-range plans based on changing demographics, new forms of competi- tion, and the effects of present and impending legislation. Environmental scanning also allows agencies to discover new markets and to protect their existing ones. Social welfare policies and prov Bp, grams are complcs phencmenn. For Kriitcom example, itis easy to propose a social Bists policy such as mandatory drug test for all governmental employees. On the surface, the policy may appear simple: Drug users are to be discovered by the tests and then forced toseek treatment. On closer serutiny, however, the hid- den issues appear more problematic Is it con: tutional to require drug tresiment if a positive result is found? Is occasional use of marijuana sufficient grounds for requiring drug treatment? Because alcohol isa lexel substance, drug tests do not detect drinking. Is alcohol less debilitating than marijuana? Can the policy of mandatory drug testing be misused by supervisors to harass ‘employees? Will the policy produce the intended results? Although these questions must be ad- dressed, without a systematic way to analyze the effects of an intended policy, decisions become arbitrary and may produce side effects worse than the original problem. All well-designed policy frameworks are characterized by eight key elements: 1 Policy frameworks attempt to analyze a s0- cial policy or program systentatically. # Policy frameworks reflect an understand- ing that social policy is not created in a ‘vacuum but is context sensitive, and policy options usually contain a set of competing priorities. = Policy frameworks employ rational meth- ods of inquiry and analysis. The evidence used for the analysis of a policy must be derived from scientific inquiry, and all data ‘must be collected from reliable and legiti- mate sources. Data should be interpreted and analyzed as objectively as possible. * Although open to interpretation, the ana- Iytic method is explicit, and all succeeding analysts should be able to approximate the same conclusion, * The objectives of policy analysis reflect a commitment to deriving the largest possi- ble social benefit at the least possible social cost. A good social policy is one that bene- fits at least one person (as that person per- ceives his or her own self-interest) while at the same time hurting no one. In the real ‘world of finite rescurees-—and of prolifer= ating claims upon them—that goal is arely achieved, Nevertheless, analysts should strive to realize that aim, ® Policy frameworks should take into ac- ‘count the unintended consequences of a particular policy or program. * Policy frameworks examine @ particular policy in the context of alternatives; that is, they consider alternative social policies o alternative uses of the resources allocated toa.given policy Policy frameworks exarnine the potential impact of a policy (or a series of policies) ‘on other social policies, other social prob- Jems, and the public. Jn the end, the analysis of a social policy— ‘often through utilization of policy framework— provides decision makers and the general public ‘with information, an understanding of the pos ble ramifications of the policy on the target prob- Jemas well as on other problems and policies, and a series of alternative policies that could be more effective in dealing with the problem, Untoward costs and injuries are more likely to result when a systematic framework for policy analysis is not used History is replete with examples of well- {intentioned policies that proved to be catastrophic. For example, in 1919 the U.S. Congress enacted a aw prohibiting the manufacture, sale, or trans- pport of alcohol in an effort to cut down on crime, familial instability, unemployment, and other so- cial problems. Proponents of Prohibition, includ {ng many social workers, touted theend of alechol ‘as 2 major step forward in the social evolution of( { } CHAPTER 2 / So the United States. However, when Prohibition was {epealed 13 years later in 1932, most of the origi hal supporters did not argue vigorously for its Continuance. Despite the hopes of its backers, Prohibition did not decrease crime oF familial in- stability or encourage social order, instead, Prohi- Dition encouraged the growth of an organized crime industry that fed the ongoing taste of Amer feans for alcohol. Instead of eliminating slechol- related nightlife, Prohibition fostered the growth ff Megal but wel-attended spenkeasies, Even many supporters conceded that alcohol was al- tnost as abundant as before Prohibition. Had a “Systematic analysis of the prohibition poticy been tmdertaken, good policy analysts might have demonstrated the futility of the measure, "A similar argument can be made for the cur~ rent policy of drug interdiction and enforcement. ‘After almost a century of vigorous drug enforee- tment, beroin, cocaine, and other drugs continue to be readily available. The latest round of drug enforcement hes resulted not in less drug use but {na doubling ofthe prison population from 1980 to 1996 (more one million people are now inear- erated), The "war on drugs” has also resulted in the added public expense of new prison con- Struction, the creation of Intemational drug ea tels whose wealth and power rival that of many national governments and multinational corpo: rations, a dramatic inereas¢ in the homicide rate ‘associated with drugs, and the deterioration of jnner eity neighbochoods racked by a gang war fare rooted in the lucrative drug culture, More- ver although drug enforcement policies have not ted to the diminished use of ciugs, they have fos- tered the creation of adrug industry that includes governmental officials, contracters, private cor Fectional corporations, police departments, and Jarge parts of the legal and judicial system. These groups have a vested interest in maintaining asta fus quo drug policy, regardless ofits efficacy. In short, a social problem led to @ social policy; but the policy, in tum, has led to a powerful industry that depends for its very existence on the contin uuation of that ineffective poli ‘as this example suggests, social policy is often driven by politics and rarely, if ever, oys tematically analyzed. Policy analysis often oc- | Welare Policy Research: A Framework fr Policy Analysis 31 ers only after a bill or policy is enacted. As a re- sult, analysts are often asked to perform an au- fopsy to determine why a specific bill or policy failed. “The purpose of a policy framework is to pro vide the analyst with a model—a set of questions— for systematically analyzing a policy? The choice ofa framework, then, must fit therequirements of the project as well asthe sesources of the analyst, Every policy framework can be either fine-tuned cor substantially modified. In fact, the best policy framework may result from a synthesis of exis ‘models. In short, a policy framework is simply a ‘at of questions that analysts systematically ask bout a past, present, or Future policy in order to determine its desirability or viability A Proposed Model for Policy Analysis ‘The policy analyst is expected to evaluate a pol fey and make recommendations, To succeed 1 this charge, the analyst must accept his or her fown values while, at the same time, basing the analysis on objective criteria. The policy frame- ‘work that we propose here is divided into four ‘sections: (1) the bistorical background of the policy, (2) description of the prob- f, fem(a) that necessitated the policy, pee, G) description of the policy, and prrcor the policy analysis ee Figure 2.1), See Historical Background of the Policy Understanding the historical antecedents of @ particular policy is important to the policy ana- Iyst for two reasons. Fits, for the sake of conti- nuity, the analyst needs to identify the problems that led to the original creation of the policy and the historical background of the policy under consideration. Questions might include: What historical problems led to the ereatfon of the pol- icy? How important have these problems been2 PART ONE / American Social Welfare Policy METEIIEAIE 4 Proposed Model fr Plcy Anais Policy Framowork Historical Problem(s) That Background Necessitate lhe Paley the Poloy Policy Analysis + Poly goals + Poiica feast * Eoonomie feesbiy + Administrative feasiliy Polley Doseripion historically? How was the problem previously handled? What is the historical background of the policy? When did the policy originate? How hhas the original policy changed over time? What is the legislative history of the policy (e.g., what similar policies have been discussed and debated in the House and the Senate)? In addition, the policy analyst must examine similar policies that ‘were adopted in the past and how they fated, Second, beyond providing continuity, @ his torical analysis helps to curb the tendency of de cision makers to reinvent the wheel. Policies that were previously unsuccessful may continue to be so; or the analyst may come to realize that cit- cumstances have changed, thus creatinga climate in which a previously failed policy might now be viable. In addition, a historical analysis helps the analyst to understand the forces that were pre- viously mobilized to support or oppose a given policy. In short, 2 historical analysis locates a par- ticular policy within a historical framework, thus helping to explicate the evolutionary nature of a specific social policy or series of policies. Problem(s) That Necessitate the Policy ‘The second step in analyzing a policy addresses the problem(s) that led to the creation of the pol- icy. In order to assess the ability of a policy to successfully remedy a social problem, the ana- lyst must understand the parameters of the prob- Jem. Furthermore, the analyst must be familiar with the nature, scope, and magnitude of the problem and with the populations affected by i. Tn this way, the policy analyst will be able to dis- cern carly the appropriateness of the policy for tackling the problem it is expected to remedy, Specific questions that the policy analyst might ‘ask include: What is the nature of the problem? How widespread is it? How many people are af- fected by it? Who is affected and how? What are the causes of the problem? Policy Description ‘The next step in this policy framework is to de- scribe the policy. This section requires a detailed explanation ofthe policy, including a description ‘of (1) how the policy is expected to work; 2) the resources or opportunities the policy is expected to provide (power, cash, economic opportunity, in-kind services, status redistribution, goods and services, and so forth); (3) who will be covered by the policy and how (e.g., universal versus selec tive entitlement, means testing, end so forth); (4) how the policy will be implemented, includ- ing coordination; (5) the expected short- and long-term goals and outcomes of the policy; (6) the administrative auspices under which the policy will be lodged, including the roles of the private sector and of local, state, and federal gov- emments in its development; (7) the funding mechanism for the policy, including short and Jong-term funding commitments; (8) the agen:cies or organizations with overall responsibility for overseeing, evaluating, and coordinating the policy; (9) the formal or informal eriteria that ‘will be used to determine the effectiveness of the policy; (10) the length of time the policy is ex- pected to be in existence—for example, is it a sunset law” (a law designed to end at a certain date)? and (J) the knowledge base or scientific grounding on which the policy rests. Policy Analysis In this section, the heart of any policy analysis, the analyst goes beyond a simple description of the policy and engages in a systematic analysis, of the policy. Polley Goals. The goals of the policy ‘Sp, are the criteria by which all else is Siasicom measured. Oftentimes the goals of a ae policy are not overtly stated, and the analyst must conjecture on the overall goals of the policy. The following questions can help to explicate the goals ofa particular policy. ® Are the goals ofthe policy legal? 4 Are the goals ofthe policy just and democratic? 4 Do the goals of the policy contribute to ‘greater social equality? * Do the goals of the policy positively affect the redistribution of income, resources, rights, entitlements, rewards, opportuni: ties, and status? Do the goals of the policy contribute to a better quality oflife for the target popula. tion? Will the goals adversely affeet the quality of life ofthe target group? Does the policy contribute to positive social relations between the target population ancl the overall society? Are the goals of the policy consistent with the values of professional social work (self determination, client rights, self-sealization, and so forth)? Othet, perhaps more difficult, questions ‘should also be asked. Analysts must understand | thevalue premises ofthe policy as well as the ide- (CHAPTER 2 / Social Welfare Policy Research: A Framework fr Policy Analysis 33 ological assumptions underlying it. To this end, several questions should be addressed: What are the hidden ideological suppositions contained in the policy? How is the target population viewed in the context of the policy? What social vision, if any, does the policy contain? Does the pol encourage the status quo, or does it represent radical departure? Who are the major beneficia- ries of the policy? In whose best interest is the policy? Ts the policy designed to foster real social change or only to placate a potentially insurgent group? Uncovering the hidden ideological di- mensions ofa policy is frequentiy the most diffi- cat task for the policy analyst. Respite the good intentions of a prospective policy, its goals must be achievable for it to be successfully implemented. U.S. history is littered with worthy goals that were simply not viable at the time they were proposed. For example, dur- ing the middle 1930s (at the height of the Great Depression), a California physician named Fran- cis Townsend proposed that all citizens over the age of 65 be given a flat governmental pension of $200 per manth. Although in more prosperous times this proposel might have been given at least a cursory hearing, in the midst of one of the greatest depressions in history, policymakers summarily dismissed the proposal as not viable. ‘The overall feasibility of a policy is based on three factors: political feasibility, economic fea~ sibility, and administrative feasibility, Political Feasibility. The political feast bility ofa particular policy is always a iy subjective assessment. In order to Savedercom evaluate a policy, the analyst must as- fay ses8 which groups will oppose and which groups will support a particular policy and mist esti mate the constituency and power base of each group. In US. politics, however, the size of che constituency base and its relative power are sometimes unrelated, For example, despite its relatively small numbers, the American Medical Association (AMA) is a powerful lobby. Con: versely, although more than 30 million Ameri- cans are poor, their political clout is negligible, Thus, the analyst must carefully weigh the polit ical strength of each side in the policy struggle.i : yanmar 34 PART ONE / American Socal Wellare Policy ‘The political viability of a policy is always subject to the publics perception ofits feasibility In other words, for a policy to be feasible, it must be perceived as being feasible, For example, al- though some observers maintain that a sizable portion, if not the majority, of the public would like to see some form of national health care, none exists, In part, a national health care program does not exist because of the power of the health care industry; but in part, such a program has not een enacted because the public believes thet it cannot happen. Therefore, the United States lacks a national health care policy not because people reject it, but because they believe that it cannot ‘occur. Thus is born a public myth around what is possible and impossible, Many good policies fall to be enacted because of public mythology about ‘what is feasible. “To assess the political feasibility of a policy, the analyst must examine the public sentiment toward it. Is a lange segment of the public con- cerned about the policy? Do people feel that they will be directly affected by the policy? Does the policy address a problem that is considered to be ‘a major political issue? Does the policy threaten fundamental social values? Is the policy com- patible with the present social and political cli- mate? What isthe possibility that either side will bbe able to marshal public sentiment for or against the policy? The answers to these ques- tions help the policy analyst determine the polit- ical feasibility of the policy. ‘The question of political feasibility also en- compasses a smeller, but no less important, di- ‘mension. In order to do a thorough assessment, the analyst must understand the relationship be- ‘tween the policy and external factors in agencies and institutions. For example, which social wel- fare agencies, institutions, or organizations sup- port or oppose the policy? What is the relative strength of each group? How strong is thelr sup- port of or opposition to the policy? What are the ‘major federal, state, orlocal agencies that would be affected by the policy? How would these agen- cies be affected? The world of social policy is heavily political, with some governmental and private social welfare agencies having political power on @ par with that of elected decision mak- ers, Groups of institutions often coalesce around jssues, problems, or policies that directly affect them, and through their lobbying strength they have the ability to defeat legislation. In cases in ‘which they cannot defeat a policy outright, these administrative institutions can choose to imple. ment a policy in such a way as to ensure its fail- tue. The analyst must therefore take into account whether these administrative units support or ‘oppase a proposed or existing social policy. Feonomic Feasibility. Many, if not most, social poli- cies require some form of directo indirect fund- ing. In assessing the economic feasibility of & policy, the analyst must ask several hard ques- ‘tions: What is the minimum level of funding re- quited for the successful implementation of the policy? Does adequate funding for the policy cur~ rently exist? not, what is the public sentiment to- ‘ward funding the policy? Is the funding called for by the drafters of the policy adequate? What are the future funding needs ofthe policy likely to be? Given the current political and economic climate in the nation, it appears unlikely that new social policy initiatives requiring large ad- ditional revenues will be successful. Perhaps ‘new policy legislation requiring additional rev- ‘enues will be based on the reallocation of exist- ing resources (budget-neutral policies) rather than on new revenue sources, This approach— taking money away from one program to fund another—is referred to in Congress as pay-go funding. The inherent danger in this approach is that thinning out fiscal resources among, many programs may mean that none will be ad- equately funded. The analyst must therefore de- cide whether a new policy initiative should be recommended regardless of the funding prospects, The parameters of this decision are cormplex. If a new policy is recommended de- spite insufficient resources, the chances of its failure are greater. If a policy is not recom- mended, however, the possibility exists that ad- equate fiscal resources may be allocated in the future. Therefore, many policy analysts lean to- ‘ward incremental approaches, tending to rec- ‘ommend policies in the hope that suitable funding will become available in the future.Administrative Feasibility, The analyst must also be concerned with the administrative viability of + the policy. Regardless of the potential value of the policy, responsible administrative and super~ visory agencies must possess the personnel, resources, skills, and expertise needed to imple ‘ment the policy effectively. If the requisite per- sonnel are lacking, agencies must have the fiscal resources to hire qualified employees. In addi- ton, directors and supervisors must be sympa thetic to the goals ofthe policy, have the expertise and skill necessary to implement or oversee the policy, and possess an understanding of the Fun- damental objectives of the policy. The analyst ‘ust focus on two key aspects of administrative feasibility: (1) effectivenessand (2) efficiency and alternative policies, {. Mectiveness. The question of effectiveness has to do with the likelihood that the policy can ac- { complish what its designers intended. The answer to this question encompasses other ‘questions: Is the policy broad enough to ac- complish its stated goals? Will the benefits of the policy reach the target group? Will the im= plementation of the policy likely couse new or other social problems? What ramifications © does the policy have for the nontarget sector (eg., higher taxes, reduced opportunity, dimin- ished freedom, or fewer resources)? An important question facing policy ana~ lysts involves the nature and extent of the unin tended consequences of a policy. Virtually all policies have certain consequences that are une foreseen. An example of this can be seen in the case of methadone, a drug legally administered to addicts as a substitute for heroin. When in- troduced in the 1960s, methadone was thought to be a safe way to wean addicts away from © heroin, By the mid-1970s, however, health ex- ~ perts realized that methadone was almost as addictive as heroin and that some addicts were selling their methadone as a street drug. Despite 2 this outcome, some addicts were able to with- » draw from heroin and, in hindsight, the metha- done program was probably « positive develop- + ment. Because policy analysts cannot see into 2 the future, they make their recommendations on CHAPTER 2 j Sociel Welfare Policy Resear Framework for Policy Analysis 35, the basis of available data, Nevertheless, an at- tempt must be made to try to predict possible ad verse future consequences. ficiency and AternatvePolies ‘The policy analyst ‘must also look closely at efficiency—the cost- effectiveness of the proposed policy compared to that of alternative policies, of no policy, or of the present policy, Social policy always involves a trade-off. Bven in the best of economic times, so- cietal resources are always inadequate compared to the breadth of human need, For example, vir- tually everyone could benefit from some form of social welfare, whether it be counseling services, food stamps, or free health care. But because resources are finite, society must choose the pri- mary beneficiaries ofits social allocations. Pub- licly financed services are often awarcled on the basis of wwo criteria: (1) the severity of the prob- lem, with services going to those who most re- quire the allocation; and (2) means, with services provided to those who can least afford them. As a result of finite resources, the adequate funding of one policy often means denying or curbing al- locations to another. This is the essential trade-off in social welfare policy, When analysts evaluate a policy, they must be cognizant that promoting cone policy means that needs in other areas may {go unmet. Thus, a significant question remains: Is this policy important enough to justify the al- location of scarce resources? Moreover, are there other areas where resources could be better used? ‘The policy analyst is concemed with the cost-effectiveness of a given policy compared to the cost-effectiveness of alternative policies. Given the additional expenditures, wall the new policy provide results that are better than either the present policy orno policy at all? Would it be advantageous to enlarge or modify the present policy rather than creating a new one? Could an alternative policy provide better results at a Jower cost? What alternative policies could be created that would achieve the same results? How would these alternative policies compare with each other and with the proposed policy? ‘These questions must be addressed in any thor- ough policy analysis.36 PART ONE/ American Socal Welfare Policy In summaty, the policy analyst must address several key questions: Is the proposed policy workable and desirable? What, if any, modifica- tions should be made to the policy? Does the policy represent a wise use of resources? Are there alternative policies that would be prefer- able? How feasible is the implementation of the policy? What barriers, fany, are there to the fall implementation of the policy? These questions represent the core of policy analysis. Researching and Analyzing Social Policies ‘There are two major hurdles in policy analysis. ‘The first is finding and focusing on a manage- able social policy to analyze, and the second is finding or generating information relevant to it. One of the most difficult tacks the analyst faces is choosing the actual policy. In order to do ‘careful policy analysis, the analyst must select a policy that is both discrete and specific, For example, it would be difficult, ifnot impossible, todoan exhaustive analysis of child welfare pol- iy in the United States, For one thing, the United States does not have one specific child welfare policy. Policies on child welfare are composed of myriad programs that constitute a patchwork quilt of social policies. Given the lim- itations of time and resources, the question then becomes which policy will be analyzed. Second, the differences among child welfare policies on the national, state, and community levels make such a policy analysis even more daunting. Thus, defining and narrowing a specific and manageable sociel policy constitutes a formida- ble task A second task involves locating relevant in- formation on a specific social policy. There are seven major avenues for finding information. First, policy analysis may choose to generate their own data through primary research, including surveys, opinion polls, experimental research, longitudinal staes, nd so forth, Ab ge though this method can yield a rich Sy body of information, time and cos: Sites ‘constraints may prove an impossible fees obstacle. Moreover, the same rescarch may al- ready exist in other places, in which case the repli- cation of the effort would be unwarranted, Second, governmental or agency records are often fruitful sources of relevant data on a spe- cific policy. These records can include archives, memos, and the minutes of meetings of boards of directors, governmental officials, and staff. ‘This research method can also include an exem- ination of policy manuals, departmentalzrecords, and minutes of public meetings. A surprising amount of this information can be found online {in government or ageney websites. A third avenue for policy research involves the records and published minutes of legislative bodies and committees. On the federal level these sources include the Congressional Record and the minutes of the various House and Senate com- rmittees and subcommittees (many of which can be accessed online). All state legislatures have similar record-keeping procedures, and most of thse legislative records can be found in regional or university libraries or online. A fourth source of information is found in governmental publications, For example, the U.S. Government Printing Office maintains catalogues of all government documents published. Other documents include the Census Buréau’s popula- tion studies (many of which are updated annu- ally); publications of the Departments of Labor, Commerce, Housing, and Health and Human Services; and the Green Book of the House Com- mittee on Ways and Means, a yearly publication Containing the most comprehensive information available on social programs and par- ticipants, Many of these publications .&¥, ‘can be found in regional and university fare libraries and online. fo A fifth source of policy-relevant information is available through think tanks, advocacy orga nizations, and professional associations, All think tanks (many of which also function as ad- vocaey organizations) employ research staff who evaluate and analyze social policies. ExamplesCHAPTER 2 / Social Welfare Policy Research: A Framework for Policy Analysis 37 of these inchide the Brookings Institute, the American Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Hoover Institute, the Urban Institute, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the Reason Foundation, the Hudson Institute, the Progressive Policy Institute, the Economic Policy Institute, and the Independent Sector. Again, at least some of the information can be accessed through the Internet. Most, if not all, of these think tanks are affiliated with particular political ideologies, however; so their evaluation of data and their policy recommen dations must be viewed critically. Many national advocacy organizations re- tain research staff and publish reports that may bbe helpful to the poticy analyst, Some of these or ganizations are the Urian League, the NAACP, the Children’s Defense Fund, the National Farm Organization, and the National Organization for ‘Women. Many professional associations, such 2s the American Medical Association, the American Public Human Services Association, and the ‘American Psychological Association, also pub- lish poliey-relevant information. A listing of these organizations can be found in any major i- brary. Updated lists can also be found through Internet search engines, A.sixth procedure used by policy analysts is to consult professional journals, books, and monographs, Articles or books on specific pol- icy areas can be found in various places, in= cluding the Social Science Index ancl the subject headings in library catalogues, online library systems, and clectronic databases, which are becoming increasingly common in the larger professional associations. Blectronic databases such as Nexus are also <2 becoming common ventures, Lastly, policy-relevant information can be sathered from interviews with principals in the policy process, advocates, recipients of services, and government officials, Personal interviews ‘may help the analyst determine the background of the issue, assess the opposition or support for « particular policy, or gauge the public reaction toa policy, Taken together, these sources can be a gold mine for the policy analyst. hae Conclusion ‘The choice of a policy analysis framework de- pends upon several considerations, including GQ) the kind of problem or policy that is ana- lyzed; (2) the resources available to the analyst, including time, money, staff, facilities, and the availability of data; (3) the needs of the de- cision maker requesting the analysis; and (4) the time frame within which the analysis, mast be completed. Because it is impossible to discover all of the data (data are essentially infinite) and to ask ail of the possible questions, no policy analysis Js ever complete or perfect. Policy analysis is always an approximation ofthe ideal, and there- fore decisions are inevitably made on the basis of incomplete data, How incomplete the data are and how close an approximation to a ratio nal decision is provided to decision makers will depend on the skills of the analyst, the avail- able resources, and the time allotted for the project. Despite its reliance on an analytic frame- work, social policy analysis in the real world is to-a lange degree subjective. Because a policy is analyzed by human beings, it is always done through the lens of the analysts value system, ideological beliefs, and his or her particular ‘understanding of the goals and purposes of so- ial welfare, Subjectivity may be evident in the ‘omission of facts or questions or in the relative ‘weight glven to one variable over another: Other forms of subjectivity include asking the wrong questions of the poliy, evaluating it on the basis of expectations that it cannot meet, or ‘expecting it to tackle a problem it was not de- signed to remedy, Finally, political pressure can be put on the policy analyst to come up with recommendations that are acceptable to a certain interest group. Regardless of the causes of subjectivity, policy analysis is always an ap- proximation ofthe ideal and always involves an. informed hunch as to the effects of a policy or a set of policies.38 PART ONE / American Socal Welfare Policy Discussion Questions 41, What are the main advantages of using a systematic framework for sociel policy analysis? Describe the benefits of using such a framework. What, if any, are the potential drawbacks? 2. Although by definition the unintended con- sequences of a social policy are unpredict- able, what specifically can a policy analyst do to minimize the risks ofa policy's pro- ducing harmful unintended consequences? Describe a recent social policy that has produced unintended consequences that were either positive or harmful. Is it possible for a policy researcher to neutralize his or her personal values when conducting a policy analysis? If so, de- seribe ways in which this can be done. ‘What specific components could be added to the proposed policy framework presented Noles in this chapter? Which of the components provided in this framework are the most important, and why? ‘Are most social policies analyzed thor- oughly and rationally? If not, why not? Describe the factors that stand in the way of systematic and rational analysis of social policy in U.S. society. How much value do decision makers place on social policy research before reaching @ decision? Because any analysis of social policy is by nature incomplete, should decision makers therefore not rely heavily on policy studies? What alternatives, ifany, can be used in lieu of a thorough and systematic policy analysis? tt |. Thanks to Brene Brown, Assistant Professor at the University of Houston Clear Lake and doc- toral student at the University of Houston Graduate School of Social Work, for her ideas on environmental scanning, Ms. Brown has repeatedly pointed out that environmental scanning is a concept that successful agencies must adopt . Many social poliey writers have developed excellent policy frameworks, among them Elizabeth Huttman, Introduction to Social Pol icy (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1981); Neil Gilbert and Harry Specht, Dimensions of Social Welfare Policy, 2nd ed. (Bnglewood CCiffs, NU: Prentice-Hall, 1986); Gail Marker, "Guidelines for Analysis of a Social Welfare Program,” in John E. Tropman et al. (eds,), ‘Strategic Perspectives on Social Policy (New York: Pergamon Press, 1976); David Gil, Unraveling Social Policy (Boston: Shenksman, 1981}; and Charles Prigmore and Charies Atherton, Social Welfare Policy (New York: D.C. Heath, 1979),