Nothdurfter U., Hermans K. Meeting (or not) at the street level? A literature review on street-level research in public management, social policy and social work This literature review analyses the adoption and development of a street-level perspective in public management, social policy and social work. The last years have seen a prominent revival of a perspective based on Michael Lipsky's streetlevel bureaucracy approach in the debates conducted within all three disciplinary fields. Based on 71 key publications in public management, social policy and social work, the review analyses the adoption of the street-level bureaucracy approach during the period 2005-2015, pointing out the main themes of the debate within, as well as overlaps and differences between, the three disciplines. The findings show the potential of better integrating the different perspectives and taking stock of the articulated debate. Lastly, the review discerns a common viewpoint for further street-level research, emphasising its importance for the critical analysis and understanding of street-level work as a vital dimension of responsive and accountable institutions and as a decisive moment to shape positive policy outcomes on the ground. Key Practitioner Message: • The use of discretion by frontline practitioners and their role as policy actors on the ground has become an important focus of research; • This literature review shows that the debate has gone far beyond discussing discretion as an all-or-nothing issue, pointing out both positive and negative aspects of discretion and developing comprehensive frameworks to explain the use of discretion at the street-level; • However, street-level research has traditionally rather neglected the notion of professionalism. The social work literature brings in the perspective of professionalism; more research efforts are needed to better explore and explain how professionalism matters in relation to challenges and dilemmas of different policy and practice fields.Although public management, social policy and social work are closely interrelated, their debates have been characterised by different perspectives as well as different theoretical and methodological approaches. Especially in relation to social policy and social work, it has been pointed out that, despite their mutual dependence, their relations are an underexposed matter and their perspectives and debates barely ever converge However, the prominent revival of Michael Lipsky's (1980/2010) street-level bureaucracy approach during the last 15 years has done much to identify a common feature of the debates in public management, social policy and social work. Lipsky's approach addresses the dilemmas faced by the individuals at the frontline of public services. An important contribution of Lipsky's approach is that he has highlighted how the use of discretion by street-level bureaucrats, the routines they establish, the devices Int J Soc Welfare 2018: 27: 294-304
The use of information and communication technology (ICT) in child welfare services has increased significantly during the last decades, and so have the possibilities to process health data. Parton (2009) states that this evolution has led to a shift in the nature of social work itself: from ‘the social’ to ‘the informational’. It is claimed that social workers primarily are becoming information processors concerned with the gathering, sharing and monitoring of information, instead of being focused on the relational dimensions of their work. However, social workers have considerable discretion concerning the way they use ICT. In this paper, we investigate (i) the street-level strategies social workers develop regarding ICT and (ii) how these relate to a narrative social work approach. To illustrate this, an evaluation of Charlotte was conducted, a client registration system that is used by social workers in child welfare services in Flanders, Belgium. Based on fifteen interviews, we find that social workers develop various strategies regarding Charlotte to preserve a relational and narrative work approach. These strategies not only result in a gap between ICT policy and the execution of that policy in practice, but also decrease the extent to which accountability can be realised via registration data.
This study reviews the literature available on contents, form, and effectiveness of group‐based programs for combined financial education and counseling aimed specifically at populations at risk for financial difficulties. Despite the widespread application of these programs, relatively little is known about their effectiveness. In general, evidence points to positive effects of several programs on knowledge, confidence, and (intended) behavior, but the exact mechanisms through which this is achieved remain unclear. The topics covered differ among studies, but common themes can be identified. It appears of importance to combine education with practical exercises allowing participants to apply the skills they learn. Motivating clients is another important recurring theme. Working in groups provides an added benefit through recognition and peer support. It is important that future research focuses on the mechanisms of change and on long‐term effects, since these remain largely unknown in the current body of literature.
One year after introducing the interRAI PC, no reduction in residents' needs and symptoms were detected in the intervention nursing homes. However, reductions in needs and symptoms were found in the subgroup of intervention nursing homes without prior experience with the interRAI LTCF instrument. This may suggest that the use of an interRAI instrument other than the interRAI PC specifically can improve care. Future research should aim at replicating this research with a long-term design in order to evaluate the effect of integrating the use of the interRAI PC in the day-to-day practices at nursing homes.
This systematic review can help researchers to plan evaluation of interventions in home care. The interRAI HC instrument proves to be a comprehensive tool to measure outcomes and can serve as an evaluation instrument for interventions. It can also be used as an intervention itself, when caregivers use the tool and its outcome measures to implement a care plan.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.