Documenting the Human Impacts of Social Services Policy Changes

In response to tremendous deficits over the past several years, the Minnesota Legislature made hasty decisions to cut, block grant, and devolve many of the state’s human services programs. A careful analysis based on the proven success and cost effectiveness of the programs was not conducted. In addition, no mechanisms were put in place to track the impacts of these decisions on the people intended to benefit from the programs. Policies should be enacted with the people in mind, not solely the budget.

Minnesota’s human service policies should aspire to ensure household successfulness and policy cost-effectiveness. Therefore, the Minnesota Coalition for the Homeless proposes the State adopt legislation that would require a Social Impact Evaluation be conducted outlining how devolution and state funding cuts since 2001 have impacted the use of state and local human service programs as well as local crisis response systems. A report would be due to the Legislature in 2006.

Another objective of the legislation would be to collect data on the effect devolution has had on vulnerable people. Have devolved programs better served them or have they been switched from effective, preventative, and/or less costly forms of assistance to crisis-oriented, band-aid, and/or more costly assistance that will continue to be needed for the same individuals for an indefinite amount of time? Such an examination would allow Legislators to examine how devolution has worked, where it has fallen short, and where it may need improvement.

Modeled after a process called “impact evaluation” used by the World Bank in it’s own poverty analysis, the impact evaluation would act as a tool to evaluate effectiveness of recent policy changes by assessing the impact on low-income people in need of assistance.

Furthermore, the Minnesota Coalition for the Homeless proposes that impact evaluations in the form of Social Impact Statements would be required to evaluate future proposed policy changes before they are enacted so that policy makers and the public are fully informed about the proposed changes. This would be similar to requiring a fiscal note for proposed legislation, but this analysis would examine the impact on the low-income people instead of the budget.

Legislatively required impact statements for program and budget changes to programs serving low-income people will improve policy-making by requiring a thorough analysis of the problem, effectiveness of current policies in addressing the problem, and the potential alternatives.

For more information please contact Rachel Callanan, the Coalition’s policy advocate.