The primacy of institutions

Journal of Policy Analysis and Management

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 577-580

  Mead, Lawrence M ^a  

^a NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 2442442126     PISSN: 02768739     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pam.10155     Document Type: Note

References (10)

1. Bardach, E. (1994). Improving the productivity of JOBS programs. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corp.
2. Behn, R.D. (1991). Leadership counts: lessons for public managers from the Massachusetts welfare, training, and employment program. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
3. Besharov, D.J. (2003). The past the future of welfare reform. The Public Interest, 150(Winter), 4-21.
4. Greenberg, D., Ashworth, K., Cebulla, A., & Walker, R. (2003). When welfare-to-work programs seem to work well: explaining why Riverside and Portland shine so brightly. Loughborough, England: Loughborough University, Centre for Research in Social Policy.
5. Heckman, J.J. (1999). Doing it right: job training and education. The Public Interest, 135(Spring), 86-107.
6. Mead, L.M. (1988). The potential for work enforcement: a study of WIN. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 7, 264-288.
7. Mead, L.M. (1997a). Optimizing JOBS: Evaluation versus Administration. Public Administration Review, 57, 113-23.
8. Mead, L.M. (Ed.). (1997b). The new paternalism: supervisory approaches to poverty. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
9. Mead, L. (2003). Performance analysis. In M.C. Lennon & T. Corbett (Eds.). Policy into action: Implementation research and welfare reform. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.
10. Riccio, J., Friedlander, D., & Freedman, S. (1994). GAIN: benefits, costs, and three-year impacts of a welfare-to-work program. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corp.