Performance-based Contracting in Social Welfare Programs.

Please note: This page may contain data in Norwegian that is not translated to English.

Author
Heinrich, Carolyn J. & Choi, Youseok

Year
2006

Publisher
La Folette School of Public Affairs, Working Paper Series no. 2006-014.

Type of publication:
Rapport

Link to publication:
http://www.lafollette.wisc.edu/publications/workingpapers/heinrich2006-014.pdf

Comment:
The American Review of Public Administration (forthcoming)

Number of pages:
45

Language of publication:
Engelsk

Country of publication:
USA

NSD-reference:
2320

This page was last updated:
2007-07-10 14:57:02.11


Publikasjonens datagrunnlag
  • Sekundærdata
  • Kvalitativ
  • Dokumentstudie
  • Case studie
  • Komparativ over tid
Land som er gjenstand for studien
  • USA
Verkemiddel i den konstituerande styringa
  • 1.3 Privatisering/markedsretting
Studieoppdrag
  • Forskning
Studietype
  • Iverksetting/implementeringsstudie
  • Effektstudie/implikasjoner/resultater
Sektor (cofog)
  • Barn og familie I
  • Arbeidsledighet I
  • Bustadstøtte I

Summary
The Wisconsin Works (W-2) program changed the administrative structure for social welfare
services delivery from county government administration to one that also invites private sector
management of programs. Performance-based contracting was simultaneously introduced as a
mechanism to motivate and monitor the performance of public and private service providers.
We present a theoretical discussion of government contracting and the implications of alternative
contract structures for service provider behavior and performance. Using the W-2 program as a
case study, we analyze contract design and management across four contract periods (1997-
2005) as the state transitioned to a performance-based contract regime for social welfare services
delivery and evaluate service provider performance. We find that the state made rational
changes in the W-2 contract specifications and performance measures from one period to the
next that should have improved contract efficiency and effectiveness, and service providers
responded to these changes in allocating effort toward the achievement of priority performance
goals. At the same time, deficiencies in program administration and contract management
contributed to some contract failures and setbacks.

Note
Wisconsin county government administration - welfaresystem, USA.