Gender Role Ideologies and Marriage Promotion: State Policy Choices and Suggestions for Improvement

The 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunities Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) lists marriage as one of the major strategies for reducing welfare dependency among clients of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Program along with work requirements and time limits. President George W. Bush has allocated over $240 million to the individual states to create programs to promote and sustain marriages, with specific attention given to encouraging marriage among the low‐income, welfare‐reliant population. We suggest that this policy is based upon a specific gender ideology that seems to ignore the reality of the lives of poor women with children and may be, as some critics suggest, an attempt at “legislating patriarchy.” In this work, we trace the social changes that shaped this ideology, present the options the states have taken to encourage marriage, discuss flaws in the philosophy and implementation of these policies, and provide suggestions for improving program design.     

Service Efforts and Accomplishments Standards: Fundamental Questions of an Emerging Concept

In 1994, the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) adopted and published Concepts Statement No. 2, Service Efforts and Accomplishments Reporting} Although service efforts and accomplishments (SEA) is not a common term, this statement establishes the foundation for the subsequent adoption of reporting requirements that may expand the boundaries of reporting to significantly increase the amount of non-financial information that states and municipalities will report, as well as the cost of external reporting Budget analysts are among prospective users of SEA information. A study of comment letters filed in response to the exposure draft, which preceded Concepts Statement No. 2, shows two divergent views of SEA reporting requirements.2 Support for SEA reporting requirements is grounded in a vision of the potential benefits of SEA reporting;3 opposition to SEA standards is grounded in concerns about potential consequences of instituting reporting requirements.4 The strength of opposition to SEA reporting requirements suggests that consideration of the rationale for standards setting is appropriate. In this article, commonly expressed concerns about reporting requirements are incorporated into five questions. Analysis of these questions evidences the weakness of the rationale for SEA standards as distinguished from the rationale for voluntary SEA reporting. Two proposals are advanced to address concerns about SEA reporting requirements. First, adoption of models of information use from the disciplines of public administration and political science is encouraged. Second, modification of the standard setting process to reflect the non-financial domain of SEA is advocated. Thus, it is proposed that standard setters adopt approaches that emphasize cross-disciplinary research, cooperation with other organizations, and active extension of due process to new stakeholders.     

Poor educational standards and Part V of the Education Act 1 993

This article offers a critical examination of Part V of the Education Act 1993, which builds on the quality assurance regime provided for by the Education (Schools) Act 1992. Among its many important provisions are new powers for special measures to be taken in respect of ‘failing’ schools.