Rube Goldberg Revisited
Read the full text of Who Controls Major Federal Programs for Children & Families?: Rube Goldberg Revisited (PDF)
Please note: This document is supported by two posters that outline the Congressional Committees and Executive Branch Departments that control major Federal programs for children and families. The posters are available in PDF format. Please click below to download the posters:
- Congressional Committees That Control Programs for Children and Families — And How They Relate to Each Other (PDF)
- Executive Branch Departments and Congressional Committees That Control Programs for Children and Families — And How They Relate to Each Other (PDF)
This document is supported by several interior posters. These posters illustrate the complex relationships among Congressional Committees and Executive Branch departments responsible for major Federal programs for children and families in six program areas: Income, Social Services, Education and Training, Health, Housing, and Nutrition. The posters are available as a separate PDF file:
- Interior Posters (PDF)
Executive Summary
Rube Goldberg, born 1883 American cartoonist and sculptor creator of diagrams of extremely intricate contraptions designed to effect relatively simple results.
The complexity of federal programs for children and families makes Rube Goldberg look like an amateur. This publication examines these intricate relationships in excruciating detail and outlines ways in which the Congress and the Executive Branch could make these programs work better. Congress needs better information, strong leadership, and a structure to provide a focus on children and families. And the Executive Branch needs a Cabinet-level Family Council with the administrative muscle to make policies and programs across departments fit together sensibly for communities and families.
This report looks at 1993 funding and programs. One might ask: "Is this analysis relevant in 1995? After all we have heard about 'reinventing government' by the Clinton Administration and Congressional reform with the new Republican Congress, are federal programs still as fragmented as they were in 1993?"
The answer to both questions is an emphatic "yes."
The Executive Branch has actually become more fragmented. Making the Social Security Administration an independent agency increases the number of Executive Branch departments/agencies responsible for major children and family programs from 11 to 12.
In the new (104th) Congress, the Senate has the same number of full committees that deal with major children and family programs. And the number of Senate subcommittees responsible for these issues has decreased by only two (from 13 to 11).
The much-heralded reforms by the new Republican House of Representatives do nothing to reduce the number of full committees that deal with major federal programs affecting children and families. And these reforms decrease the number of subcommittees dealing with these issues by five (reducing the number from 20 to 15).
And, finally, this analysis does not include large new programs created since 1993, such as those in the 1994 Crime Bill.
To explore who controls federal programs for children and families, the IEL Policy Exchange took a close look at how the Congressional committees and Executive Branch departments that create and administer programs for children and families relate-or, too often, do not relate-to one another. This review included the 76 programs with 1993 funding levels of more than $100 million that were listed in the Congressional Research Service Report for Congress on Federal Programs for Children and Their Families.
Many of these 76 programs serve the same families. But responsibility is spread among 19 Congressional committees, 33 Congressional subcommittees, 10 Executive Branch departments and the Office of Personnel Management, and 25 Assistant Secretary-level agencies within departments. In all, 88 separate federal entities have primary responsibility for major federal programs for children and families. In fact, the total number of federal players is even larger, as is explained in the chapter on "A Blueprint of Federal Fragmentation."
This multiplicity of programs, committees and agencies affecting children and families is neither a plot nor an accident. Rather, it is the result of years of political trade-offs, good intentions and honest attempts to solve problems one-by-one. Nonetheless, in today's world, such fragmentation is a recipe for failure. The needs of families, unlike administrative departments or legislative committees, are not neatly compartmentalized into education, health, social services, housing and other segments. And, even if there were no holes in the safety net, the proliferation of separate and often-unconnected programs leads to a mismatching of needs and services that would be comical were it not so tragic.
Mothers must lug shoe boxes full of rent receipts, utility bills, birth certificates and other records to half a dozen different agencies in order to fill out federal and state applications and eligibility forms that would make a CPA wince. And they still may not get the help they need when they need it in way that they can use it.
Such a system is as inefficient as it is frustrating.
The following pages provide an in-depth look at the Congressional committees and Executive Branch departments that have primary responsibility for major federal programs affecting children and families. Too often, the services available reflect the entities that control programs, not the more holistic and integrated needs of children and families.
This publication begins by describing the desperate shape of too many U.S. children and families, and outlines the connections among educational, health, social service, income, housing and other needs. Next, it details the insidious effects of trickle-down fragmentation-that is, how the federal piecemeal approach affects families, communities and states. "A Blueprint of Federal Fragmentation" analyzes the multiple Congressional committees and Executive Branch departments that have primary responsibility for programs affecting children and families. And, finally, there are suggestions for making federal policies more coherent and effective, both in the U.S. Congress and in the Executive Branch.
This report is designed to provide fuel for continuing debate and reform as the Congress, the Administration, and state and local policy makers consider legislative and administrative changes to address the structural complexity and systemic inefficiency of major programs affecting children, families and communities. These issues are as nonpartisan as they are important.
Read the full text of Who Controls Major Federal Programs for Children & Families?: Rube Goldberg Revisited (PDF)