State Factors and Bureaucratic Decision-Making: Examining the Use of Abawd Discretionary Exemptions in the Administration of SNAP

Introduction

Welfare reform and the devolution of policy authority in social safety net programs have led scholars to draw connections between bureaucratic discretion and unequal access to these programs. While most research in this area has focused on the most decentralized programs, such as TANF, whose largest beneficiaries are families with children, less attention has been given to examining how bureaucratic discretion affects smaller populations like able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWDs) in the administration of SNAP. ABAWDs represent a marginalized group who have a variety of barriers to overcoming poverty, yet they have limited access to means-tested programs outside of SNAP. The street-level bureaucrats (SLBs) in each state have authority over implementing ABAWD discretionary exemptions, which extend the SNAP eligibility of ABAWDs who are losing their benefits due to the program time limits. In the absence of data that captures the organizational context and specific characteristics of SLBs across the states, it is even more critical to explore how state factors are related to inequalities in bureaucratic decision-making. I answer the following research question: How are the states’ political, racial, and economic characteristics related to their respective state agents’ choices on utilizing ABAWD discretionary exemptions?

Methods

In order to capture the context in which SLBs work, this paper examines a culmination of state-level factors that likely affect the professional disposition and discretionary policy decisions of street-level caseworkers in the delivery of SNAP benefits. Using 21 years of data for each of the 50 states (N=1,500), this study conducts a panel analysis to examine how the variation of states’ political, racial, and economic factors are related to how their respective SLBs implemented ABAWD discretionary waivers over time. Specifically, publicly available data is pulled from the American Community Survey, the US Census Bureau Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, and the SNAP Policy Quality Control Dataset to evaluate whether the political ideology of citizens, the proportion of racially minoritized citizens, and the public welfare spending per capita within each state are associated with the proportion of discretionary exemptions ABAWDs receive out of each states’ federally allocated total.

Results and Implications

States varied considerably in how their SLBs implemented the ABAWD discretionary exemptions. Specifically, states with higher proportions of Black constituents, less generous public welfare spending, and higher shares of conservative citizens were also states where caseworkers were less likely to grant ABAWDs discretionary exemptions. The implications from this study highlight how geographic location and opportunities for bureaucratic discretion determine whether ABAWDs can access one of the program flexibilities that ensure continued food assistance. The findings also validate the inaccuracy of bureaucratic neutrality and suggest that political, social, and economic factors within the state can predict whether their respective street-level caseworkers will use their policy authority to exclude participants from the program. The discretionary decision-making of socially situated SLBs warrants concern for the inequities in accessing means-tested programs, particularly for marginalized populations considered less deserving of policy benefits.