On average, the program cost $13,459 per family, 48 percent of which was paid directly to families as cash rewards.
So the best we can do is 48% efficiency?
So the best we can do is 48% efficiency?
Think of it like this: if all of the remaining 52% went to paying a NYC social worker's average salary of $73.9k (source below), then each social worker has to manage 10.5 families to pay their salary. That's managing ten families and making sure their kids are in school, they are going to doctor's visits, etc, each week. That sounds like a manageable workload. BUT WAIT! An employee actually costs 200% of their salary to employ in terms of office rent, benefits, and other incidentals (that 200% figure can go up and down depending on company, location, etc, but is a good enough number for this thought experiment). So in reality, each social worker needs to manage 21 families to have their employment costs paid for. And tracking 21 families weekly sounds like a reasonable full time fob to me. That's getting in touch with just a little over four families each day to make sure they are meeting their conditions for the money. Since social work like this usually requires a lot of driving, it will probably fill up their day.
So really, when accounting for the fact that you have to pay the case managers a fair wage to live in NYC to administer the program, 48% sounds about right. At least that single number doesn't point to there being any obvious graft going on.
Most government agencies generally own the land and buildings in which the agencies are located (excepting agencies which entered into lease-back arrangements...). Whether or not those savings are eaten up by retirement benefits depends on the jurisdiction.
Source: I've worked in Finance Departments and have actually seen the cost side.
And sure, we can delete the cost of office rent for government workers, but you have to add in the nice benefits package and you have to add in all the mileage they get reimbursed for driving their cars, and the fact that a considerable portion of their time is lost in training and meetings that don't directly support accomplishing the CCT's core mission. None of those things were included in my thought experiment, and erode the efficiency a little bit at a time.
Source: Am statistician employed by the government.
With respect to the politics of implementing these programs, it's not simply the incentives created by the 48% that lead to a programs continued adoption, but the incentive created by the 52%.