Assessing the New Federalism is a multiyear Urban Institute project designed to analyze the devolution of responsibility for social programs from the federal government to the states, focusing primarily on health care, income security, employment and training programs, and social services. Alan Weil is the project director. Researchers monitor program changes and fiscal developments. In collaboration with Child Trends, the project studies changes in family well-being. The project aims to provide timely, nonpartisan information to inform public debate and to help state and local decisionmakers carry out their new responsibilities more effectively.
Key components of the project include a household survey, studies of policies in 13 states, and a database with information on all states and the District of Columbia, available at the Urban Institute's Web site. This paper is one in a series of discussion papers analyzing information from these and other sources.
The project has received funding from the Annie E. Casey Foundation, the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, the McKnight Foundation, the Commonwealth Fund, the Stuart Foundation, the Weingart Foundation, the Fund for New Jersey, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, the Joyce Foundation, and the Rockerfeller Foundation.
The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.
New Federalism and Research:
Rearranging Old Methods to Study New Social Policies in the States
Goals and Components of the Assessing the New Federalism Project
The Defining Features of Past Evaluations
Changes in the Evaluation Landscape
with the Advent of the "New Federalism"
State-Specific Results
Multiple Policy Changes
New Research Priorities
New Funding Mix
ANF Features That Reflect the Changing Landscape
Lessons Learned to Date from the ANF Research
Broad-Based Analyses Are Hard
Limits Are Essential
Data Needs Cannot Be Compromised
Clear, Timely Presentation of Results Is More Important Than Ever
The Final Challenge: Linking Policy to Outcomes
The Challenge
Possible Responses
Next Steps
Notes
References
About the Author
New Federalism and Research: Rearranging Old Methods to Study New Social Policies in the States
Social programs in the areas of welfare, employment, health, and social services have been changing rapidly in the 1990s, especially since the passage of national welfare reform legislation (in 1996) and the children's health insurance initiative (in 1997). As responsibility for social programs shifts further toward state and local government, the range of policy directions that states may take-and, thus, the potential for path-breaking research in these areas-is enormous. The most direct transfer of authority stipulated by the "new federalism" movement is from federal to state governments. Hence, it is natural to begin research at the state level.1
Assessing the New Federalism (ANF), an Urban Institute program that examines recent social policy changes, represents one of many state-focused studies emerging from the new policy environment. Thus, it provides a case study of how research might be designed to study comprehensive state reforms in general. The large number of policy questions the program seeks to address—and the vast, diverse "canvas" on which the answers are unfolding—necessitates the use of new, and potentially controversial, combinations of research and analysis tools. This paper outlines the design elements included in the ANF study and considers whether the research techniques used are likely to form a vital part of other full-spectrum analyses of comprehensive state policy reforms in the social welfare area.
The paper begins by describing ANF's research goals and their role in determining the project's design. Differences between this design and more familiar strategies for evaluating large-scale social programs are considered next and are traced to shifting social policy responsibilities between the federal and state/local governments. The remaining sections of the paper attempt to generalize from the ANF experience by considering some of the more global challenges faced and lessons learned in conducting this type of research. Special attention is paid to the largest analytic challenge of all: determining which state reforms benefit low-income citizens—and advance broader social objectives—the most, all other things equal.
See the PDF for complete report.
Notes
1. State decisions also provide the context for local reforms and occur sooner than policy changes in local communities.
Usage, posting and reprint of materials on the UI web site:
Most publications may be downloaded free of charge from the web site in PDF format. This information may be used and copies made for research, academic, policy or other non-commercial purposes. Proper attribution is required. Copyright of the written materials contained within the Urban Institute website is owned or controlled by the Urban Institute. Posting UI research papers on other websites is permitted subject to prior approval from the Urban Institute—contact paffairs@ui.urban.org.
If you are unable to access or print the PDF document please contact us or call the Publications Office at (202) 261-5687.
Disclaimer: The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.
