Snapshots of Joy, Waves of Distress: How Workers Manage the Impact of Isomorphic Pressures in the Care of Unaccompanied Minors

Current policy for Unaccompanied Minors (UM) mandates that children under 18, who enter the U.S. without legal immigration status and without a parent, are held in the least restrictive conditions possible. UM are to be placed with family or a sponsor as quickly as possible once the sponsors are cleared against the risk of trafficking. In this policy landscape, the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) is responsible for the custody and care of UM. However, ORR does not provide direct services, it contracts with two national nonprofits to administer UM policy, and these agencies sub-contract with providers around the country. ORR is accountable to Congress for the successful implementation of UM policy, and thus faces a familiar organizational dilemma: how to ensure that UM in government custody are cared for appropriately by the nonprofits doing the care work? Meanwhile, front-line workers in the UM program face a classic street-level dilemma in the era of neo-liberal service delivery: how to resolve the tension created by being held accountable for service outcomes prioritized by ORR, while also trying to respond to the varying needs of UM? This paper seeks to understand how the organizational and front-line worker dilemmas get resolved, and with what implications for UM.

Methods:

This study employs a case study design. Seven visits were completed at program sites in five states, between September 2022 and June 2023. Sites were selected through purposive and convenience sampling. Study participants were recruited via emails and on-site meetings facilitated by research teams, and 65 interviews were completed with staff and administrators. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed, researchers took interview notes and conducted archival review of agency contracts and policy memos. Data codes were co-created by the research team, and iteratively updated after team meetings. Transcripts were coded and analyzed using NVivo software.

Results: 1) ORR deploys coercive isomorphic pressure through contracts, policy memos, administrative oversight, and corrective action. These cumulative techniques are successful in resolving ORR’s organizational dilemma, in that UM programs across sites are designed and implemented with a common set of service technologies and outcomes priorities. However, the success of isomorphic pressures does not insulate ORR from facing consequences when program outcomes are called into question by Congress. 2) Front-line workers often chafe at the coercive pressures they face. In some cases these pressures are in tension with normative isomorphic pressures that workers feel, related to their professional identity as social workers and service professionals. Workers respond to this tension by focusing on small moments of joy in their work, and by closing themselves off to the negative impacts of the UM system on the youth they serve.

Conclusions: This study grapples with the political implications of a system designed to mitigate risks of trafficking, in which government priorities dictate practice structures and processes. Workers are activated as political agents, perpetuating racist immigration policies. In this context, caseworkers contend with their complicity by holding fast to snapshots of joy and holding back waves of moral distress.