View the full project profile

Project Description

The "New Federalism" is a term used to collectively identify the changes involving the decentralization of social programs.

Assessing the New Federalism is a multi-year Urban Institute research project to analyze the devolution of responsibility for social programs from the federal government to the states, focusing primarily on health care, income security, job training, and social services. Researchers monitor program changes and fiscal developments. In collaboration with Child Trends, the project is studying the well-being of children and families. Findings should assist state and local policy makers in designing new policies and programs by providing information about significant developments.

The project’s National Survey of America’s Families provides national and state data measuring well-being and program participation (see separate entry). Data from the survey is available on-line at not charge.

The Welfare Rules Database tracks changes in state welfare rules for all 50 states since 1996. The searchable database is available on-line at no charge.

The project has a state database which includes information on the fifty states and the District of Columbia in areas including income security, health, child well-being, demographic, fiscal and political conditions, and social services. This data is available on the New Federalism web site at no charge.

Project duration: Dec 1995 - Dec 2001

Sites studied include State database sites:
All 50 states and District of Columbia.

Case study sites:
Alabama (Jefferson County, Dallas County)
Colorado (Denver)
California (San Diego County, Alameda County, Los Angeles County)
Florida (Hillsborough County, Dade County)
Massachusetts (Suffolk County, Middlesex County)
Michigan (Wayne County)
Minnesota (Hennepin County, Blue Earth County)
Mississippi (Hinds County, Warren County)
New Jersey (Hudson County)
New York (New York County, Kings County, Erie County)
Texas (Harris County, El Paso County)
Washington (King County)
Wisconsin (Milwaukee County, Rusk County

Sample Characteristics and Sites Studied

Social programs in 50 states and the District of Columbia.

Case study reviews cover 13 states and 24 local sites. Nonrandom sample to assure diversity in fiscal capacity, child well-being, spending traditions, and geographic representation.

Recent Findings in Brief

02/01/03: Assessing the New Federalism: Policy Analysis Project: Essential but Often Ignored Child Care Providers in the Subsidy System

Interim Descriptive/Analytical Findings

• Child Care providers are key to achieving the larger goals of both the subsidy system and the welfare system.
• How much providers are paid is critical but a broad range of policies and practices interact to affect the provider's bottom line.
• There are a number of subtle policies and practices that are likely to affect how easy or difficult it is for providers to participate in the subsidy system. These range from how easy it is for them to get a payment agreement with the state, how easy it is to deal with paperwork requirements to get paid, etc.
• The fact that subsidy policies and practices can affect the amount that providers receive as well as their financial stability, suggest that they may also affect the quality of care that providers are able to give.
• Providers are likely to be affected by the entire range of subsidy policies and programs-- both those that affect their bottom line and those that affect their experiences with the system.
• Subsidy policies are likely to play out differently for kith and kin care providers.

Contact