Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory Advance Access originally published online on December 16, 2004
Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 2005 15(3):393-419; doi:10.1093/jopart/mui019
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Exploring and Explaining Contracting Out: Patterns among the American States
University of Georgia
Indiana University
Ohio University
University of North Carolina
Address correspondence to Jeffrey L. Brudney at jbrudney{at}uga.edu.
Although a vast literature explores government contracting out for the delivery of publicly financed services, comparatively little of this analysis, whether descriptive or explanatory, focuses on the American states. Accordingly, the present research has two primary goals. It first examines the extent of contracting out by state agencies and the perceived effects of this activity on the quality and costs of service delivery. The second aim is to develop a model of contracting out by state agencies and to test it empirically using appropriate hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) statistical techniques. The analysis incorporates individual agency variables (level I) and contextual information regarding the states (level II). The findings reveal—not surprisingly—that contracting out for the delivery of services by state governments is very common, employed by more than 70 percent of responding agencies. State agencies, however, do not seem to achieve the main goals that are advocated by proponents of contracting out, at least not routinely. About half of the agencies engaged in contracting out for the delivery of services acknowledge improved service quality, but barely one-third report decreased service costs. Results of the HLM analysis indicate that most of the variables that help to explain contracting out by state agencies are agency-specific, and that the state-level contextual variables, with the exception of fiscal factors, play a much smaller role. Consistent with some literature, this overall finding suggests that privatization has entered a new, less ideological phase, in which it has become an accepted practice across the American states, subject mainly to the circumstances of individual agencies.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  C. A. Kelleher and S. W. Yackee A Political Consequence of Contracting: Organized Interests and State Agency Decision Making J. Public Adm. Res. Theory., July 24, 2008; (2008) mun014v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Askim, A. Johnsen, and K.-A. Christophersen Factors behind Organizational Learning from Benchmarking: Experiences from Norwegian Municipal Benchmarking Networks J. Public Adm. Res. Theory., April 1, 2008; 18(2): 297 - 320. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. D. Coggburn Outsourcing Human Resources: The Case of the Texas Health and Human Services Commission Review of Public Personnel Administration, December 1, 2007; 27(4): 315 - 335. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Fernandez and C. R. Smith Looking for Evidence of Public Employee Opposition to Privatization: An Empirical Study With Implications for Practice Review of Public Personnel Administration, December 1, 2006; 26(4): 356 - 381. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|