Related Experiment Videos
Choosing among alternative programs for poor children
1University of California, Los Angeles, USA.
Insights
Evaluating public programs for poor children is complex. This study proposes four criteria—efficiency, return on investment, incentives, and equity—to assess program effectiveness and guide policy for child welfare.
Area of Science:
- Public Policy
- Child Welfare Studies
- Economics
Background:
- Policymakers face challenges in designing public programs for low-income children due to benefit noncomparability and limited outcome data.
- Existing federal programs for poor children vary in their structure and impact, necessitating a framework for evaluation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To propose and apply four criteria (efficiency, return on investment, incentives, equity) for evaluating public programs serving poor children.
- To review the available evidence on the effects of eight major federal programs for low-income children using these criteria.
Main Methods:
- Development of a four-criterion framework: efficiency, return on investment, incentives, and equity.
- Systematic review of existing data on the impacts of eight large federal programs for poor children.
Main Results:
- Programs directly targeting children with specific benefits demonstrate positive effects across various outcomes.
- A shift towards in-kind benefits in federal support for poor children was observed prior to recent welfare reforms.
- Significant knowledge gaps remain regarding the long-term effects of many programs.
Conclusions:
- Evidence supports targeted, in-kind benefit programs for children, but more research is needed for comprehensive policy.
- The proposed criteria offer a structured approach to evaluating and comparing public assistance programs for vulnerable populations.
- Future policy recommendations should be evidence-based, acknowledging current data limitations.
Abstract:
Many public programs serve poor children. By setting budgets, benefit levels, and program rules, policymakers decide how many children will receive benefits and which benefits they will receive. Making these choices in a rational way is difficult, given the noncomparability of different types of program benefits and the limited information available about the effects these programs have on poor children. This article suggests four criteria (efficiency, return on investment, incentives, and equity) for evaluating and comparing public programs for poor children, and provides an overview of the patchwork of information that is currently available about the effects of eight large federal programs using these criteria. Some broad themes emerge. First, several programs that target specific benefits directly to children have been shown to have positive effects on a range of outcomes. Second, even before the current round of welfare reform, the mix of federal support available to poor children had changed in a way that put more emphasis on providing benefits in kind. Finally, more must be learned about the effects of programs for poor children before sweeping policy recommendations can be made. This article concludes with policy recommendations that can be supported by the available evidence.