Abstract
ABSTRACT Street-level bureaucracy (SLB) theory posits bureaucratic demands and resource scarcity are primary drivers of suboptimal SLB-client interactions. As such, mitigating SLBs’ bureaucratic work is considered key to improving client treatment. Yet, little evidence exists that reconfiguring bureaucratic demands enhances SLB client engagement or decision-making. To this end, this study considers a case management team model where lead caseworkers were primarily responsible for client engagement while case assistants managed bureaucratic demands in a large southwest nonprofit’s anti-poverty program. We draw on interviews (N = 38) at two points in time with team members to examine the relationship between bureaucratic delineation, resource allocations, and decision-making. We find that delineating bureaucratic work along with teams’ access to generous client provisions expands the breadth and quality of resource distribution, but this is mitigated by team relational demands such as frequent case meetings. Our findings suggest enhanced resources are not necessarily a panacea for improving SLB-client engagement.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
