Analyzing and improving social safety net access
Creators: name: Walsh, Stephanie Lynn
Publisher: name: No Publisher Supplied
Year: 2023

description: Due to means-tested requirements, administrative burdens are an unavoidable component of the social safety net as it is currently structured in the United States. Despite this composition, and because it is incumbent upon public agencies to ensure these processes are not overwhelming, it is necessary to understand how the complex administrative processes and required documentation shape program access. This is particularly important for two primary safety net programs which each have a history of serving fewer than all who are eligible, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Those who are already struggling with the trauma of scarcity and poverty may have limited cognitive resources to process the information they need to learn to apply to a program, and to comply with the necessary processes, allowing administrative burden to disadvantage those who need safety net programs the most. My dissertation explores three topics related to administrative burden and its role in varying safety net participation rates. Chapter 2, Disentangling Administrative Burden: Why Some Families Forgo TANF Benefits, uses first-hand accounts of SNAP recipients who are likely TANF eligible to explore how people experience and perceive administration burden and its role in program access. A key finding from this analysis is that despite relatively similar application processes, SNAP and TANF have very different compliance and psychological costs associated with applying to and receiving benefits. These different degrees of costs of administrative burden between programs leads to cost-benefit analyses among those potentially eligible to ultimately participate in SNAP at much higher rates than TANF. For those with some awareness of or experience with TANF, specific program requirements – participation in training classes and paternity disclosure – were of greater concern than the administrative burdens they overcame to receive SNAP. Chapter 3, Developing a County Level Index to Assess TANF Access, explores the creation of a way to measure TANF access at the county level. This is an important topic as there are differences in policy implementation in practice that lead to different office environments, and subsequently to different levels of program access for families in need. This exploratory analysis reviewed many potential variables to measure program access at the county level. Based on theoretical considerations, substantive match, and data analysis, the following four were selected for inclusion: TANF-to-Poverty ratio, work participation rate, percent of SNAP caseload on TANF, and case closure rate. These variables provide key insights into program access and build upon the foundation of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities state level TANF-to-Poverty ratio. Based on this index, counties were categorized into four access factor groups, ranging from low to high access. These measures are important to future analyses that review how this index relates to the ability of counties in each group to reach those in need of TANF. Finally, Chapter 4, Using Technology to Reduce SNAP Learning Costs: Lessons from a Survey Experiment, uses a survey experiment of a representative sample of New Jersey residents to test the effect of different communication methods on SNAP information recall. Participants were randomly assigned into one of four groups: a control group, and three treatment groups receiving the same information regarding SNAP presented in different formats– an informational flyer, an eligibility screener, and a video explanation. This analysis tested the theory that extraneous cognitive load present in standard government communication increases the learning costs associated with learning about the program, and subsequently affects program participation. Findings suggest that each of the three treatments were effective in increasing SNAP information recall, but that the video was most effective for most groups. Most research on administrative burden has focused on burdens at a high level, exploring the various learning costs and their effects on specific experiences. Similarly, most research related to devolution and variation in safety net implementation has been focused at the state level. The papers presented in this dissertation add nuance to those discussions. Ultimately, each of these three analytical chapters explore the role of administrative burden and its effect on program access. Together they form a contribution to the literature showing differences in program access, offering a way to measure and monitor local variation in access, and begins a framework for assessing the efficacy of outreach to reduce such burdens associated with access. The application and continued analysis of these areas will be vital to informing policy implementation that better serves people when they need the social safety net.