Welfare Research, 1999 and Beyond

Many large-scale, ongoing welfare research projects will release interim or final reports in 1999. In addition, the federal government is funding studies about different populations and programs that, in general, have not been the subject of welfare research. This article describes: © Recent findings from some of the large-scale welfare waiver experiments and major national research efforts; © Relatively new federally-funded research projects; and © The evaluations that expect to release final reports in 1999. This research is contributing to an extensive body of knowledge about the effects of the welfare waiver programs initiated in the early 1990’s, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), and related social policies. The Research Forum is currently keeping track of these and other research projects. Of the 43 large-scale research projects in the Research Forum’s on-line database, 27 have impact studies (20 of which are controlled experiments). Also included are implementation studies (some of which relate to the impact research), child outcomes studies embedded in larger impact studies, and policy analyses. Many smaller projects are also underway. Summaries of the 43 large-scale projects and 60 small-scale projects, names of individuals to contact for additional project information, and existing and forthcoming publications are all accessible at the Forum’s web site: www.researchforum.org

Dignity and Discrimination: Employment Civil Rights in the Workplace and in Courts

Employment civil rights and the litigation associated with enforcing them are a complex interplay of public and private employers, regulatory agencies, and federal courts. When an employee loses a job or their position in an employing organization, the financial effects are very real. If the employee makes a claim of discriminatory treatment using the employer’s human resources complaint processes or with the EEOC or state equivalent, they often face workplace retaliation and even termination. Using interviews conducted with parties to employment civil rights lawsuits, this article argues that the regime of employment civil rights in the United States can be conceived as perpetuating dignity takings (and occasionally dignity restorations) because (1) the state sanctions/permits/gives deference to management in ways that allow discrimination and loss of earnings and (2) does it in a way that allows and perpetuates dehumanizing infantilization which demonstrates that plaintiffs face dehumanizing stereotyped treatment in the workplace and in courts

The Partial Deinstitutionalization of Affirmative Action in U.S. Higher Education, 1988 to 2014

Since the 1990s, affirmative action opponents have targeted colleges’ and universities’ race-conscious admissions policies and secured bans on the practice in eight states. Although scholarly and media attention has focused on these dynamics at a handful of elite institutions, little is known about race-conscious admissions across the broader field of higher education. We provide a descriptive, quantitative account of how different types of colleges and universities responded to this political context. Through analysis of almost 1,000 selective colleges and universities, we find a dramatic shift in stated organizational policy starting in the mid-1990s. In 1994, 60 percent of selective institutions publicly declared that they considered race in undergraduate admissions; by 2014, just 35 percent did. This decline varied depending on status (competitiveness) and sector (public or private). Race-conscious admissions remain the stated policy of almost all of the most elite public and private institutions. The retreat from race-conscious admissions occurs largely among schools lower in the status hierarchy: very competitive public institutions and competitive public and private institutions. These patterns are not explained by implementation of state-level bans. We suggest that the anti–affirmative action movement had a diffuse impact whose effects varied across different strata of American higher education

Welfare Research Perspectives: Past, Present, and Future, 1999 Edition

Research findings are providing increasingly valuable information about the effects of welfare changes on families receiving public assistance. This working paper outlines past and current research activities related to the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), and describes the proliferation of research reports scheduled for publication over the next several years. Most importantly, it identifies questions and issues still to be addressed

When Colleges Drop Affirmative Action: Trends in Admissions Policies and Student Enrollment at Selective U.S. Institutions, 1990-2016

Scholarship on elite American colleges has identified the rise and persistence of a “diversity imperative” – an institution’s perceived need to enroll racially heterogeneous student bodies to maintain its status in the field. At the same time, a significant proportion of selective institutions have stopped considering race in admissions. To understand the relationship between affirmative action and enrollment, we analyze enrollment trends by race at 973 competitive institutions in states without affirmative action bans from 1990-2016. We find that considering race is associated with an increase in Black and Latinx enrollments at more competitive institutions. At less competitive schools, considering race is associated with a decrease in Black and Latinx enrollments, and an increase in White and Asian/Pacific Islander enrollments. The results indicate that the relationship between affirmative action in admissions and enrollment demographics varies by institutional competitiveness; considering race does not necessarily translate into higher Black or Latinx enrollments or lower White and API enrollments

Dignity and Discrimination: Employment Civil Rights in the Workplace and in Courts

Employment civil rights and the litigation associated with enforcing them are a complex interplay of public and private employers, regulatory agencies, and federal courts. When an employee loses a job or their position in an employing organization, the financial effects are very real. If the employee makes a claim of discriminatory treatment using the employer’s human resources complaint processes or with the EEOC or state equivalent, they often face workplace retaliation and even termination. Using interviews conducted with parties to employment civil rights lawsuits, this article argues that the regime of employment civil rights in the United States can be conceived as perpetuating dignity takings (and occasionally dignity restorations) because (1) the state sanctions/permits/gives deference to management in ways that allow discrimination and loss of earnings and (2) does it in a way that allows and perpetuates dehumanizing infantilization which demonstrates that plaintiffs face dehumanizing stereotyped treatment in the workplace and in courts

Civil rights as patient experience: How healthcare organizations handle discrimination complaints

The nondiscrimination clause of the Affordable Care Act, known as Section 1557, formally expanded patients’ civil rights in nearly every healthcare setting in the United States in 2010. Regulations required healthcare organizations to name a person to handle grievances and set up an internal grievance process for resolving them. Drawing on interviews with 58 healthcare grievance handlers, this study examines how healthcare organizations respond to patients’ discrimination complaints. We find that organizations incorporated the new right into preexisting complaint and grievance procedures, treating possible patient civil rights violations as patient experience problems. Grievance handlers smooth over problems using customer service strategies. These procedures diminish the efforts of policymakers to expand civil rights protections in healthcare. For civil rights to provoke real organizational change, discrimination complaints would need to be handled by professionals attuned to rights consciousness.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/167779/1/lasr12554_am.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/167779/2/lasr12554.pd