chapter 8

©2011, Cengage Learning, Brooks/ Col©2011, Cengage Learning, Brooks/ Cole Publishinge Publishing

Becoming an Effective Becoming an Effective Policy AdvocatePolicy Advocate

Bruce Jansson, University of Southern CaliforniaBruce Jansson, University of Southern California

PowerPoint created byPowerPoint created by

Gretchen Heidemann, MSW, PhD CandidateGretchen Heidemann, MSW, PhD Candidate

University of Southern CaliforniaUniversity of Southern California

School of Social WorkSchool of Social Work


Chapter 8Chapter 8Developing Proposals in the Second, Developing Proposals in the Second,

Third, and Fourth Steps of Policy Third, and Fourth Steps of Policy AnalysisAnalysis


Returning to the Six-Step Policy Returning to the Six-Step Policy Analysis, Proposal-Writing, and Analysis, Proposal-Writing, and

Presentation FrameworkPresentation Framework

This chapter discusses steps 2, 3, and 4 of This chapter discusses steps 2, 3, and 4 of the six-step policy analysis, proposal-the six-step policy analysis, proposal-writing, and presentation frameworkwriting, and presentation frameworkThese steps are a prelude to developing These steps are a prelude to developing and drafting policy proposals (step 5)and drafting policy proposals (step 5)Policy proposals lie at the heart of the Policy proposals lie at the heart of the policy making process since they express policy making process since they express the wishes of specific policy advocates in the wishes of specific policy advocates in concrete termsconcrete terms


Intersecting Arenas and Intersecting Arenas and StakeholdersStakeholders

Proposals are fashioned through Proposals are fashioned through deliberations and discussions of stakeholdersdeliberations and discussions of stakeholders– Intersecting arenas:

Links between the federal, state, county, and municipal arenas as well as governmental and nongovernmental sectors

– Stakeholders: Key persons, groups, and institutions with an interest in a particular policy issue

Also, the officials and advocates who operate in specific arenas



Efforts to develop policies resemble a Efforts to develop policies resemble a dancedance – The moves of each of these stakeholders are

profoundly influenced by the moves of the others

– Stakeholders have various motivations and perspectives as they consider the merits of specific policies



Policy advocates must consider:Policy advocates must consider:1. A mission for a proposal1. A mission for a proposal2. How a proposal’s services will be structured2. How a proposal’s services will be structured3. The resource path of a proposal3. The resource path of a proposal4. The content of a proposal’s services4. The content of a proposal’s services5. How a proposal’s resources will be rationed5. How a proposal’s resources will be rationed6. How agencies associated with a proposal will be linked6. How agencies associated with a proposal will be linked7. How a proposal’s services will be linked to communities7. How a proposal’s services will be linked to communities8. How the implementation of a proposal will be overseen8. How the implementation of a proposal will be overseen9. How a proposal’s services will be assessed9. How a proposal’s services will be assessed


Establishing a MissionEstablishing a Mission

The policy advocate must: The policy advocate must: 1.1. Create objectives for the proposed programCreate objectives for the proposed program

Policies usually contain explicit or implicit Policies usually contain explicit or implicit objectives that provide programs with an objectives that provide programs with an overarching directionoverarching direction

The preambles of legislation also provide such a The preambles of legislation also provide such a rationalerationale


Designing the Structure of Designing the Structure of ServiceService

The policy advocate must:The policy advocate must:1.1. Decide what agency has ultimate Decide what agency has ultimate

responsibility for the programresponsibility for the programDevelop policies about implementation

2. Decide which kinds of agencies can receive funding

Weigh the advantages and disadvantages of public, not-for-profit and for-profit agencies


Planning the Extent of Devolution Planning the Extent of Devolution and the Resource Pathand the Resource Path

The policy advocate must:The policy advocate must:1. Decide to what extent the program should be placed

on a continuum from sole federal to sole state or local

Rank the program on 8 criteria (see Table 8.1)

2. Choose from a variety of funding optionsEx: payroll taxes, client payments, special taxes, and private philanthropy

3. Determine the level of funds Is usually a 2-step process of authorization and appropriation



4. Devise funding channels to distribute resourcesRoute 1: Federal funds to local agencies

Route 2: Federal to state

Route 3: Federal to state to local

Route 4: Federal directly to local

Route 5: Federal directly to consumers

Route 6: States to local agencies

Route 7: States to local government to agencies

Route 8: Local government to agencies



5. Consider indirect financing – Tax deductions, credits, and exemptions

6. Make difficult funding choices– How much funding to request – To what extent the states should match federal

funds– Whether the states should receive funds with

relatively few restrictions– Whether taxes on marriage licenses should be

used to fund the program


Defining ServicesDefining Services

The policy advocate must:The policy advocate must:1. Articulate an orienting framework on which to

base services

2. Designate the type of staff that will deliver services, and their qualifications

Professions develop out of altruism and self-interest

They gain credibility through licensing and classification

3. Decide whether services will be preventative or curative


Rationing Scarce ResourcesRationing Scarce Resources

The policy advocate must:The policy advocate must:1.1. Specify the formal or direct means of Specify the formal or direct means of

restricting accessrestricting accessEx: Means testing, diagnostic criteriaEx: Means testing, diagnostic criteria

2.2. Specify the indirect methods of restricting Specify the indirect methods of restricting accessaccess

Ex: Ex: Place limits on the intensity or duration of services, first-come first-served, reserve resources for underserved populations, location of facility, use of specific program titles, selective use of outreach, charging fees


Addressing Agency Network Addressing Agency Network IssuesIssues

The policy advocate must:The policy advocate must:1.1. Specify the linkages, partnerships and Specify the linkages, partnerships and

collaborations the program will have with collaborations the program will have with other agenciesother agencies

Consider options such as managed care, fee-for-Consider options such as managed care, fee-for-service, and capitationservice, and capitation

2.2. Consider the creation of regional Consider the creation of regional organizations to fund local agenciesorganizations to fund local agencies


Addressing Community FactorsAddressing Community Factors

The policy advocate must:The policy advocate must:1.1. Specify how the agency will embed itself in Specify how the agency will embed itself in

the community, such as through:the community, such as through:OutreachOutreach

Linkages with other organizationsLinkages with other organizations

Advocacy on relevant issuesAdvocacy on relevant issues

Inviting board members from the communityInviting board members from the community


Guiding and Overseeing Policy Guiding and Overseeing Policy ImplementationImplementation

The policy advocate must:The policy advocate must:1. Specify who will establish the detailed

policies that will guide the implementation of the proposal

I.e. who will develop the administrative regulations

2. Specify who will monitor the proposal’s implementation

How they will be monitored and whether they will be given technical assistance


Assessing Implemented PoliciesAssessing Implemented Policies

The policy advocate must:The policy advocate must:1.1. Determine how programs and services will Determine how programs and services will

be assessedbe assessedWho will perform the assessment

How it will be funded


The Anatomy of Policy The Anatomy of Policy ProposalsProposals

Proposal writing involves choosing from Proposal writing involves choosing from the competing options on various policy the competing options on various policy issuesissues

The policy advocate maps a proposal by The policy advocate maps a proposal by drawing lines between alternative options drawing lines between alternative options on a diagram that displays the issues and on a diagram that displays the issues and the competing optionsthe competing options

(See Figure 8.3)(See Figure 8.3)


Systematically Comparing Systematically Comparing Policy OptionsPolicy Options

Policy advocates proceed deliberately when making systematic comparisons of policy options:– Identify options – Select and weigh criteria– Rank options– Develop a decision-making matrix


Identifying OptionsIdentifying Options

Policy analysts should consider more than Policy analysts should consider more than just a single policy approach just a single policy approach

The identified problem may have a limited The identified problem may have a limited or an infinite number of potential solutionsor an infinite number of potential solutions

All possible solutions should be identified All possible solutions should be identified before selecting and weighing criteriabefore selecting and weighing criteria


Selecting and Weighing CriteriaSelecting and Weighing Criteria

Advocates must identify the criteria to use as a basis of comparison, and weigh their relative importance– Value-based criteria

Such as equality, social justice and beneficence

– Consumer-outcome criteriaThe policy’s effectiveness in ameliorating social problems

– Economic criteriaThe relative cost of competing options


Selecting and Weighing CriteriaSelecting and Weighing Criteria

– Feasibility criteriaThe political and administrative practicality of specific policy options

– Externalities criteriaUsed to assess how a policy option would affect institutions or persons who initially appear to be unrelated to the policy

– Cost-EffectivenessWhich policy will most benefit consumers at the lowest cost


Creating a Decision-Making Creating a Decision-Making MatrixMatrix

Advocates should then construct a decision-Advocates should then construct a decision-making matrix that graphically portrays the making matrix that graphically portrays the options and the criteria (see Table 8.2)options and the criteria (see Table 8.2)The policy options are then rated by the criteria, The policy options are then rated by the criteria, such as on a scale of 1 to 10such as on a scale of 1 to 10– Often, each of the options has at least one weaknessOften, each of the options has at least one weakness

The advocate then calculates scores that The advocate then calculates scores that combine the ranking of the options for each combine the ranking of the options for each criterion and the relative importance of each criterion and the relative importance of each criterion, and then tallies them for a total scorecriterion, and then tallies them for a total score


Creating a Decision-Making Creating a Decision-Making MatrixMatrix

Advocates must considerAdvocates must consider trade-offs trade-offs:: – The comparative advantages of policy options

The advocate seeks to discover which option has the most weight (i.e. the highest net score)This process does not necessarily eliminate conflict; there may be disagreement about: – The criteria selected– The relative importance of the criteria– Specific options’ scores for those criteria– It is also difficult to predict the outcomes, costs, and

consequences of options


Qualitative RankingsQualitative Rankings

Policy options can also be ranked Policy options can also be ranked qualitatively rather than quantitativelyqualitatively rather than quantitatively– Can include a narrative description of

advantages and disadvantages– It is still necessary to develop options and

criteria, and weigh the criteria to judge the relative merits of the options

Ex: high, medium, and low


Using Different Policy Skills in Tandem

Effective policy advocates combine Effective policy advocates combine analytic skills in identifying, comparing, analytic skills in identifying, comparing, and selecting policy options with other and selecting policy options with other policy practice skillspolicy practice skillsThey have to make ethical choices and They have to make ethical choices and compromises to get proposals enactedcompromises to get proposals enactedThey must alsoThey must also be acutely aware of be acutely aware of political realities as they construct political realities as they construct proposalsproposals

chapter 8

Education

cengage learning

brooks cole publishing

policy proposals step

proposals services

stakeholders policy

stakeholders proposals

local route

step policy analysis