Competition and Choice in New York City Social Services

By Savas, E. S. | Public Administration Review, January-February 2002 | Go to article overview

Competition and Choice in New York City Social Services


Savas, E. S., Public Administration Review


Introduction

Local governments provide social welfare benefits in the United States through three main mechanisms: (1) directly, using their own personnel; (2) indirectly, through grants or contracts awarded to private nonprofit or for-profit organizations to supply services to government-designated, eligible individuals; and (3) indirectly, through vouchers that are given to eligible recipients, who can use them to purchase services from approved service suppliers.

These mechanisms differ significantly. Under direct government provision, as well as under grants and contracts, the producer of the service is subsidized, whereas with vouchers the consumers of the service are subsidized. Both contracts and grants on the one hand, and vouchers on the other, can introduce competition and choice. These ingredients--important for good performance--are lacking in direct, monopolistic government services, hence the move toward privatization of public services, where the principal benefits are achieved by competition (Savas 2000, 122-24).

In the 1970s, social services underwent a dramatic change as government awarded contracts and grants to the private, nonprofit sector to supply social services. Between 1971 and 1979, the fraction of state and local social services provided in this manner increased from 25 percent to 55 percent (Kettner and Martin 1994) because local governments could not mobilize internally fast enough to take advantage of the federal funding available for new social programs. By 1992, the fraction of U.S. local governments that relied entirely on their own in-house units for various programs was small, as illustrated in table 1. (Miranda and Andersen 1994, 26-35). None of the responding local governments was operating its own homeless shelters, for example, while 54 percent contracted with private organizations for day care facilities and for homeless shelters.

The nonprofit world faces major environmental changes in the United States: devolution from the federal to state governments, welfare reform, tax reform, reinvented government, cuts in government budgets, managed health care, and the evolution of AIDS into a chronic illness, requiring relatively more outpatient social-support services and relatively less in-patient medical care. Welfare reform alone is having a major impact, with renewed emphasis on job training, job placement, child care, and transportation. Nowhere do these changes have more impact than in New York City, which has some 19,500 nonprofit organizations, including about 5,650 active in social services and health care (Haycock 1992).

Government funding of nonprofits in New York City--by the federal, state, and city governments--has grown to significant proportions and even dominates some fields: Nonprofit agencies in health care receive 74 percent of their funds from government; in housing, 68 percent; and in social services, 66 percent (Haycock 1992). In 1998, New York City entered into 4,361 such contracts for $1.95 billion (table 2); the vast majority of these were with nonprofit agencies, but the number with for-profit firms was rising. The average contract was for $447,000, an amount large enough, generally speaking, to affect the organization winning such an award.

Research Questions

This large-scale use of the private sector offers an opportunity to study the use of contracts for social services. The process of contracting for social services has been examined both conceptually and empirically, and, in particular, the issue of competition has been addressed. Kramer and Grossman (1987) identify major policy issues that arise in contracting for social services: Under what conditions should competition be encouraged? Should low bids always be accepted? Should nonprofit organizations be preferred over for-profits? Should government make special efforts to assist small nonprofit organizations so they can compete?

DeHoog (1984) asks the pertinent empirical question: "To what extent are [social] service environments characterized by competition? …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Competition and Choice in New York City Social Services
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Author Advanced search

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.