| JPAM Preview ▪ May 2014 |
| JPAM Preview is a newsletter that calls attention to forthcoming articles in JPAM. JPAM Preview provides brief summaries of content now available digitally in Early View, Wiley's online publication system. |
| |
| Feature Article Did Age Discrimination Protections Help Older Workers Weather the Great Recession? David Neumark and Patrick Button We examine whether stronger age discrimination laws at the state level moderated the impact of the Great Recession on older workers. We use a difference-in-difference-in-differences strategy to compare older and younger workers, in states with stronger and weaker laws, before, during, and after the Great Recession. We find very little evidence that stronger age discrimination protections helped older workers weather the Great Recession, relative to younger workers. The evidence sometimes points in the opposite direction, with stronger state age discrimination protections associated with more adverse effects of the Great Recession on older workers. We suggest that during an experience such as the Great Recession, severe labor market disruptions make it difficult to discern discrimination, weakening the effects of stronger state age discrimination protections. Alternatively, higher termination costs associated with stronger age discrimination protections may do more to deter hiring when future product and labor demand is highly uncertain. Forthcoming in JPAM 33(3). Link to JPAM Early View. If you want to cite this article before it is in print, please use the DOI number listed with each article. |
| |
| Feature Article The Effects of Contraception on Female Poverty Stephanie P. Browne and Sara LaLumia Poverty rates are particularly high among households headed by single women, and childbirth is often the event preceding these households' poverty spells. This paper examines the relationship between legal access to the birth control pill and female poverty. We rely on exogenous cross-state variation in the year in which oral contraception became legally available to young, single women. Using census data from 1960 to 1990, we find that having legal access to the birth control pill by age 20 significantly reduces the probability that a woman is subsequently in poverty. We estimate that early legal access to oral contraception reduces female poverty by 0.5 percentage points, even when controlling for completed education, employment status, and household composition. Forthcoming in JPAM 33(3). Link to JPAM Early View. If you want to cite this article before it is in print, please use the DOI number listed with each article. |
| |
| Feature Article The Impact of Rehabilitation and Counseling Services on the Labor Market Activity of Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) Beneficiaries Robert R. Weathers, II and Michelle Stegman Bailey We use data from a social experiment to estimate the impact of a rehabilitation and counseling program on the labor market activity of newly entitled Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) beneficiaries. Our results indicate that the program led to a 4.6 percentage point increase in the receipt of employment services within the first year following random assignment and a 5.1 percentage point increase in participation in the Social Security Administration's Ticket to Work program within the first three years following random assignment. The program led to a 5.3 percentage point increase, or almost 50 percent increase, in employment, and an $831 increase in annual earnings in the second calendar year after the calendar year of random assignment. The employment and earnings impacts are smaller and not statistically significant in the third calendar year following random assignment, and we describe SSDI rules that are consistent with this finding. Our findings indicate that disability reform proposals focusing on restoring the work capacity of people with disabilities can increase the disability employment rate. Forthcoming in JPAM 33(3). Link to JPAM Early View. If you want to cite this article before it is in print, please use the DOI number listed with each article. |
| |
| Feature Article Property Rights and Forest Commons Eric A. Coleman and Scott S. Liebertz Although property rights have been linked to a variety of positive social outcomes at the macro-level, less research focuses on how property rights affect the benefits that actors receive at the micro-level. This article examines property rights to a common-pool resource (CPR) that are asymmetrically allocated among users, and presents a theoretical argument that property rights affect the allocation of resource benefits in two important ways. First, users with extensive property rights receive more benefits than users with limited property rights. Second, users with the power to influence how community rules are enforced-for example, landholders and ethnic majorities-more effectively define and defend their property and thus receive disproportionate CPR benefits compared to users with similar levels of property rights, but with less power. Using household-level survey data in Bolivia, Kenya, Mexico, and Uganda, collected after a period of property rights decentralization, the empirical analysis finds support for these propositions. We conclude that power critically moderates the effects of property rights on the commons. Forthcoming in JPAM 33(3). Link to JPAM Early View. If you want to cite this article before it is in print, please use the DOI number listed with each article. |
| |
| Feature Article The Effect of Providing Breakfast in Class on Student Performance Scott A. Imberman and Adriana D. Kugler Many schools have recently experimented with moving breakfast from the cafeteria to the classroom. We examine whether such a program increases achievement, grades, and attendance rates. We exploit quasi-random timing of program implementation that allows for a difference-in-differences identification strategy. We find that providing breakfast in class relative to the cafeteria raises math and reading achievement by 0.09 and 0.06 standard deviations, respectively. These effects are most pronounced for low-performing, free lunch-eligible, Hispanic, and low body mass index students. A lack of differences by exposure time and effects on grades suggest that these impacts are on test-taking performance rather than learning. At the same time, the results highlight the possibility that measured achievement may be biased downwards, and accountability penalties may be inappropriately applied, in schools where many students do not consume breakfast. Forthcoming in JPAM 33(3). Link to JPAM Early View. If you want to cite this article before it is in print, please use the DOI number listed with each article. |
| |
| Feature Article The Use and Efficacy of Capacity-Building Assistance for Low-Performing Districts: The Case of California's District Assistance and Intervention Teams Katharine O. Strunk, Andrew McEachin, and Theresa N. Westover The theory of action upon which high-stakes accountability policies are based calls for systemic reforms in educational systems that will emerge by pairing incentives for improvement with extensive and targeted technical assistance (TA) to build the capacity of low-performing schools and districts. To this end, a little discussed and often overlooked aspect of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) mandated that, in addition to sanctions, states were required to provide TA to build the capacity of struggling schools and Local Education Agencies (LEAs, or districts) to help them improve student achievement. Although every state in the country provides some form of TA to its lowest performing districts, we know little about the content of these programs or about their efficacy in improving student performance. In this paper, we use both quantitative and qualitative analyses to explore the actions taken by TA providers in one state-California-and examine whether the TA and support tied to California's NCLB sanctions succeeds in improving student achievement. Like many other states, California requires that districts labeled as persistently failing under NCLB (in Program Improvement year 3, PI3) work with external experts to help them build the capacity to make reforms that will improve student achievement. California's lowest performing PI3 districts are given substantial amounts of funding and are required to contract with state-approved District Assistance and Intervention Teams (DAITs), whereas the remaining PI3 districts receive less funding and are asked to access less intensive TA from non-DAIT providers. We use a five-year panel difference-in-difference design to estimate the impacts of DAITs on student performance on the math and English language arts (ELA) standardized tests relative to non-DAIT TA during the two years of the program intervention. We find that students in districts with DAITs perform significantly better on math California Standards Tests (CSTs) averaged over both treatment years and in each of the first and second years. We do not find evidence that students in districts with DAITs perform higher on ELA CSTs over the combined two years of treatment, although we find suggestive evidence that ELA performance increases in the second year of treatment relative to students in districts with non-DAIT TA. Ordinary least squares (OLS) regressions that explore the association between specific activities fostered by DAITs and changes in districts' gains in achievement over the two years of treatment show that DAIT districts that report increasing their focus on using data to guide instruction, shifting district culture to generate and maintain high expectations of students and staff, and increasing within-district accountability for student performance, have higher math achievement gains over the course of the DAIT treatment. In addition, DAIT districts that increase their focus on ELA instruction and shift district culture to one of high expectations have higher ELA achievement gains than do DAIT districts that do not have a similar focus. © 2012 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management. Forthcoming in JPAM 33(3). Link to JPAM Early View. If you want to cite this article before it is in print, please use the DOI number listed with each article. |
| |
| Methods for Policy Analysis What Works Best and When: Accounting for Multiple Sources of Pure Selection Bias in Program Evaluations Haeil Jung and Maureen A. Pirog Most evaluations are still quasi-experimental and most recent quasi-experimental methodological research has focused on various types of propensity score matching to minimize conventional selection bias on observables. Although these methods create better-matched treatment and comparison groups on observables, the issue of selection on unobservables still looms large. Thus, in the absence of being able to run randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or natural experiments, it is important to understand how well different regression-based estimators perform in terms of minimizing pure selection bias, that is, selection on unobservables. We examine the relative magnitudes of three sources of pure selection bias: heterogeneous response bias, time-invariant individual heterogeneity (fixed effects [FEs]), and intertemporal dependence (autoregressive process of order one [AR(1)]). Because the relative magnitude of each source of pure selection bias may vary in different policy contexts, it is important to understand how well different regression-based estimators handle each source of selection bias. Expanding simulations that have their origins in the work of Heckman, LaLonde, and Smith (1999), we find that difference-in-differences (DID) using equidistant pre- and postperiods and FEs estimators are less biased and have smaller standard errors in estimating the Treatment on the Treated (TT) than other regression-based estimators. Our data analysis using the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) program replicates our simulation findings in estimating the TT. Forthcoming in JPAM 33(3). Link to JPAM Early View. If you want to cite this article before it is in print, please use the DOI number listed with each article. |
| |
| Methods for Policy Analysis A Conceptual Framework for Studying the Sources of Variation in Program Effects Michael J. Weiss, Howard S. Bloom, and Thomas Brock Evaluations of public programs in many fields reveal that different types of programs-or different versions of the same program-vary in their effectiveness. Moreover, a program that is effective for one group of people might not be effective for other groups, and a program that is effective in one set of circumstances may not be effective in other circumstances. This paper presents a conceptual framework for research on such variation in program effects and the sources of this variation. The framework is intended to help researchers-both those who focus mainly on studying program implementation and those who focus mainly on estimating program effects-see how their respective pieces fit together in a way that helps to identify factors that explain variation in program effects, and thereby support more systematic data collection. The ultimate goal of the framework is to enable researchers to offer better guidance to policymakers and program operators on the conditions and practices that are associated with larger and more positive effects. Forthcoming in JPAM 33(3). Link to JPAM Early View. If you want to cite this article before it is in print, please use the DOI number listed with each article. |
| |
| Point/Counterpoint The Affordable Care Act Permits Greater Financial Rewards for Weight Loss: A Good Idea in Principle, But Many Practical Concerns Remain John Cawley The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA) increased the maximum rewards that group health insurance plans (including employers who self-insure) may offer in their wellness programs, with the goal of incentivizing healthy behaviors such as weight loss among the obese and smoking cessation. In this essay, I describe the history and intention of such programs, and make the following three points: (1) In principle, incentivizing healthy behavior can reduce external costs and help people with time-inconsistent preferences stick to their resolutions; (2) there are problems with the design of this portion of the ACA that will limit its effectiveness in achieving these goals; and (3) financial rewards for healthy behaviors have a mixed record to date, and thus many practical design features need to be resolved to improve the effectiveness of such programs. Forthcoming in JPAM 33(3). Link to JPAM Early View. If you want to cite this article before it is in print, please use the DOI number listed with each article. |
| |
| Point/Counterpoint The Doctor is in Charge: How the ACA Puts The Employee's Physician in Charge of the Wellness Program Morgan Downey THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT GIVES GROUP HEALTH INSURERS INCREASED FLEXIBILITY TO INCENTIVIZE HEALTHIER BEHAVIORS INCLUDING WEIGHT LOSS? WHAT FORM ARE THESE INCENTIVES LIKELY TO TAKE? Before enactment of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the federal Health Insurance Portability Accessibility Act or HIPAA (HIPAA, 1996) prohibited group health plans from discrimination against individual participants on the basis of health status. However, an exception was made for health insurance premium discounts or rebates in return for participation in health promotion and disease prevention programs. Under HIPAA regulations, 20 percent of the total health insurance premium was set as the maximum amount of a discount or rebate. The ACA increased the amount of the incentive/penalty that an employer or plan may impose, which rose from 20 percent of the value of an individual's total health insurance premium to 30 percent (or up to 50 percent for tobacco smoking cessation programs) starting January 1, 2014. The ACA and regulations enacting its provisions divided employer wellness programs into two categories. The first are participatory wellness programs, which are the most common and either have no rewards or provide the same reward to every participant. The second are called health-contingent wellness programs, which require an employee to satisfy a standard related to a health factor to obtain the reward. There are two subtypes: activity-only wellness programs and outcomes-based wellness programs. Under activity-only programs, an individual is required to perform or complete an activity related to a health factor to obtain a reward, for example, walking, dieting, or exercise program. The outcomes-based programs, on the other hand, require an employee to attain or maintain a specific health outcome, such as not smoking, control of cholesterol, blood pressure, or a normal body mass index (BMI is a measure of adiposity according to the formula [weight (kg)/(height (m)2]). In the outcomes-based programs, there is usually a health assessment and then a program targeted to changes in the particular condition. Weight-loss programs are common across these different types of employer wellness programs. Forthcoming in JPAM 33(3). Link to JPAM Early View. If you want to cite this article before it is in print, please use the DOI number listed with each article. |
| |
| Point/Counterpoint Incentives for Wellness: Tackling Issues of Effectiveness, Biology, Scope, and Cost Shifting John Cawley Morgan Downey raises several interesting issues in his essay. We agree on several points, for example, that current regulations are "really quite porous," with the result that enrollees will be able to get the rewards even if they do not alter their health behaviors. There are also several areas of disagreement that merit further discussion, and I focus on those in this essay. To provide context, my position is that financial incentives for healthy behavior can improve social welfare by internalizing the external costs of risky behaviors and help people with time-inconsistent preferences to adhere to a healthier lifestyle. To achieve the goal of increasing social welfare, the penalties for risky health behaviors should be set equal to the external costs. The design of the rewards (in terms of their frequency, salience, and the amount of loss aversion they invoke) may be critical in determining their effectiveness. Forthcoming in JPAM 33(3). Link to JPAM Early View. If you want to cite this article before it is in print, please use the DOI number listed with each article. |
| |
| Point/Counterpoint Response to Dr. Cawley Morgan Downey As before, I am only addressing the outcomes-contingent employer wellness programs (EWPs) focused on weight-loss interventions that provide an incentive or penalty for meeting or failing to meet a specific weight-related metric. The penalty can be as much as 30 percent of the total health insurance premium, approximately $1,765 for average single coverage or $4,905 for family coverage. For both single and family coverage, this wellness penalty is more than the average employee contributes to group health insurance premiums (Kaiser, 2013). Dr. Cawley and I agree that financial rewards have a mixed record. EWPs have not demonstrated sufficient return on investment and, at best, induce only short-term behavior change (Mukhopadhay, 2013). We agree that the body mass index (BMI) is a poor criterion. It can be overinclusive of persons who may not develop expensive comorbidities for years, if ever, or who have high muscle tissue. Up to one-third of persons with obesity measured by BMI are metabolically normal (Blüher, 2012). The BMI can be underinclusive as well. Persons with a normal BMI and a high percentage of body fat have high risk for cardiometabolic dysfunction (Oliveros, 2014). I would respectfully disagree with Dr. Cawley on a few points. I would not recommend that the Affordable Care Act (ACA) should provide more flexibility for health plans in the design of EWPs. The legislative proposal to increase the size of the incentive/penalty permitted (from 20 percent to 30 percent of the health insurance premium) was enacted on the basis of claims of success from the then-CEO of Safeway Inc., which have never been substantiated (Downey, 2013). Studies to-date involved volunteers and those produced little weight loss. We have no experience with employees compelled to participate in such programs. Studies on the durability of weight loss in EWPs are lacking. We have no experience with EWPs that provide alternative routes to the reward and involve the employee's personal physician. Forthcoming in JPAM 33(3). Link to JPAM Early View. If you want to cite this article before it is in print, please use the DOI number listed with each article. |
| |
| International Conference News Collaboration among Government, Market, and Society: Forging Partnerships and Encouraging Competition Yijia Jing and Douglas J. Besharov Collaboration has become a major solution to modern public administration issues that demand sharing of information, increased productivity, more efficient use of resources, and greater legitimacy among multiple actors from various sectors (Donahue & Zeckhauser, 2011). Countries, despite their varying contexts and conditions, have jumped on this bandwagon and embraced the idea of thinner, more adaptive, more entrepreneurial, and more collaborative government. Although this demand creates strong momentum toward innovation and synergy in the public sector, it challenges existing values, processes, and institutions of the government. This, in turn, raises the overarching question of how government can adopt and manage collaborative processes that are sustainable and vital. Within this context, Fudan University's School of International Relations and Public Affairs (SIRPA), the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management (APPAM), and the University of Maryland's School of Public Policy (UMD) cosponsored an international public policy and management conference at Fudan University, China on May 26 and 27, 2013. Additional support was provided by the Evans School of Public Affairs at the University of Washington, the Chinese-American Association for Public Affairs, the Dr. Seaker Chan Center for Comparative Political Development Studies, the Fudan University Center for Collaborative Governance, and the World Bank. Fudan University Professor Yijia Jing and University of Maryland Professor Douglas J. Besharov co-chaired the conference. The conference theme was "Collaboration Among Government, Market, and Society: Forging Partnerships and Encouraging Competition." About 250 papers were submitted from all over the world and 100 were selected for presentation. More than 140 scholars participated from about 20 countries and jurisdictions, including Belgium, Britain, China, Denmark, Estonia, Hong Kong, Hungary, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, the Philippines, Russia, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, and the United States. The conference also attracted the editors of five major journals in the field (JPAM, JPART, IPMJ, PAD, and PMR) and immediate past presidents of major international associations (APPAM, ASPA, and IRSPM). Twenty-five panels, five plenary keynote speeches, and an editor's forum were presented during the conference. Panel topics included environmental governance; collaborative governance in China; collaboration in education; conflict or collaboration; public governance in transition; privatization; collaborative service delivery; reshaping public accountability; innovation through collaboration; policy and crisis response; government–business collaboration; comparative collaboration; marketization, corruption and foreign aid; public–private partnership; collaborative coping of public affairs; municipal service delivery; networked governance; nonprofit participation and collaboration; collaboration in the health sector; nonprofit advocacy in cross-national perspective; social service delivery; performance and effects of collaboration; collaboration as a change instrument; e-governance; and managing collaboration. Additionally, participating scholars gave a series of lectures at SIRPA before and after the conference. Forthcoming in JPAM 33(3). Link to JPAM Early View. If you want to cite this article before it is in print, please use the DOI number listed with each article. |
| |
|
|
| Journal of Policy Analysis and Management is published by Wiley Periodicals on behalf of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management. Editor-in-Chief: Maureen Pirog ▪ Indiana University, School of Public and Environmental Affairs (and) University of Washington, Daniel J. Evans School of Public Affairs Managing Editors: Robert Kaestner ▪ University of Illinois at Chicago Christopher (Kitt) Carpenter ▪ Vanderbilt University | |
| For any comments or inquiries regarding JPAM, please contact us at jpam@indiana.edu. |
| |
| For Table of Contents (TOC) alerts, please follow the instructions below: 1. Create an account / sign in to Wiley Online Library. 2. Click on "Get New Content Alerts" in the JOURNAL TOOLS menu on the JPAM page. 3. An e-TOC shows up in your email inbox for each issue! |
| | | |
| | | | |