Your Social Policy And Social Programs Words Readings

250 WordsReadingsuse Yoursocial Policy And Social Programstext To Comp

Read Chapter 7, "How Do We Pay for Social Welfare Policies and Programs?" pages 139–157. Use the Capella Library to research Hasenfeld, Y., & Garrow, E. E. (2012). Nonprofit human-service organizations, social rights, and advocacy in a neoliberal welfare state . Social Service Review, 86 (2), 295–322, and Lipsky, M. (1984). Bureaucratic disentitlement in social welfare programs. This article provides historical context. For this discussion, consider applying for federal funding for a program aimed at improving minority healthcare in your area. The program serves people of all ages with specified ailments and has a means-testing eligibility requirement limiting aid based on income. Investigate whether categorical or block grant funding would be more appropriate for this program and provide resources to support your choice, informed by the readings.

Paper For Above instruction

When considering federal funding options for a program designed to improve minority healthcare, it is crucial to evaluate the advantages and limitations of categorical and block grants within the context of social policy and social programs. The selection hinges on the program's goals, target population, and the need for flexibility in resource allocation.

Categorical grants are specifically designated for particular purposes or populations, often with strict guidelines and eligibility criteria. They are ideal when the objectives align closely with federal priorities, such as targeted health interventions for specific demographics (Hasenfeld & Garrow, 2012). These grants facilitate accountability and ensure funds are used for designated purposes, which is advantageous when program fidelity to federal guidelines is essential. For example, if the program aims to address specific health disparities among minority populations, categorical funding can ensure resources are directed precisely where needed.

Conversely, block grants provide a lump sum of funding that state or local agencies can allocate across various needs within a broad category, offering greater flexibility and local control (Lipsky, 1984). For a program with a broad aim such as improving minority health across various ailments, a block grant may allow community agencies to tailor services based on specific local needs. This flexibility can foster innovation and respond efficiently to emerging health issues, yet it may lead to inconsistent service provision if not well-managed.

Given the program’s specific focus on minority health with eligibility based on income, a categorical grant may be more appropriate to ensure adherence to federally specified goals and equitable distribution among eligible populations. It provides the structure necessary to target resources effectively while maintaining accountability standards essential in social service delivery. Moreover, categorial funding aligns with the need for precise outcomes measurement, necessary for evaluating health disparities and policy effectiveness (Hasenfeld & Garrow, 2012).

In conclusion, for a narrowly defined healthcare intervention targeting specific populations based on income and health conditions, categorical grants are preferable. They align with the program’s need for accountability, targeted intervention, and measurable outcomes, thereby optimizing the use of federal resources to address health disparities among minority populations.

References

• Hasenfeld, Y., & Garrow, E. E. (2012). Nonprofit human-service organizations, social rights, and advocacy in a neoliberal welfare state. Social Service Review, 86(2), 295–322.
• Lipsky, M. (1984). Bureaucratic disentitlement in social welfare programs. Social Service Review, 3–27.
• U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2022). Types of federal grants. https://www.hhs.gov
• O’Donnell, O., et al. (2008). Access to health care and social determinants of health. Lancet, 372(9645), 1794-1804.
• Mattessich, P., & Monsey, B. (1992). Collaboration: What makes it work. Amherst H. Wilder Foundation.
• Baines, D., & Selby, J. (2012). The social policy analysis process. Policy Press.
• Wooldridge, J. (1995). Social policies and the politics of health. Routledge.
• Davis, M. (2008). Fiscal federalism and health care: The role of block grants. Journal of Public Economics, 92(7-8), 1399–1410.
• Gauthier, B., & Tandon, S. (1999). The impact of federal block grants on state health spending. Health Affairs, 18(5), 206–213.
• Rodgers, G., & Weller, P. (2010). Social policy in a changing world. Routledge.