This report recommends updating the methodology used by the Census Bureau to calculate the Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM) to reflect household basic needs and replace the current Official Poverty Measure as the primary statistical measure of poverty. The report assesses the strengths and weaknesses of the SPM and provides recommendations for updating its methodology and expanding its use in recognition of the needs of most American families such as medical care, childcare, and housing costs.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
This paper describes results from fieldwork conducted at a social services site where the workers evaluate citizens' applications for food and medical assistance submitted via an e-government system. These results suggest value tensions that result - not from different stakeholders with different values - but from differences among how stakeholders enact the same shared value in practice.
CHI '14: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
This paper introduces a method for auditing benefits eligibility screening tools in four steps: 1) generate test households, 2) automatically populate screening questions with household information and retrieve determinations, 3) translate eligibility guidelines into computer code to generate ground truth determinations, and 4) identify conflicting determinations to detect errors.
There are frameworks available that could inform the standardization of communicating rules as code for U.S. public benefits programs. The Airtable communicates the differences between the frameworks and tools. Each entry is tagged with different categories that identify the type of framework or tool it is.
The Digital Service Network (DSN) spoke with API Director Nicolas Diaz Amigo, GPL Fellow Mia Capone, and OMB Director Timothy Rudd to learn more about the City of Syracuse's multi-year procurement transformation initiative.
This book explores the current capabilities, future possibilities, and necessary governance for facial recognition technology. The report discusses legal, societal, and ethical implications of the technology, and recommends ways that federal agencies and others developing and deploying the technology can mitigate potential harms and enact more comprehensive safeguards.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
This report highlights key findings from the Rules as Code Community of Practice, including practitioners' challenges with complex policies, their desire to share knowledge and resources, the need for increased training and support, and a collective interest in developing open standards and a shared code library.
The DBN’s Rules as Code Community of Practice (RaC CoP) creates a shared learning and exchange space for people working on public benefits eligibility and enrollment systems — and specifically people tackling the issue of how policy becomes software code. The RaC CoP brings together cross-sector experts who share approaches, examples, and challenges. Participants are from state, local, tribal, territorial, and federal government agencies, nonprofit organizations, academia, and private sector companies. We host recurring roundtable conversations and an email group for asynchronous updates, insights, and assistance.
This systematic review examines prior studies to offer a definition of digital identity wallets, addressing the growing interest in the concept amid the lack of a generally accepted definition or its features.
Annual Computers, Software, and Applications Conference (COMPSAC)
What exactly are the differences between generative AI, large language models, and foundation models? This post aims to clarify what each of these three terms mean, how they overlap, and how they differ.
Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET)
Safeguarding privacy and addressing algorithmic bias can pose an under-recognized trade-off. This brief documents tradeoffs by examining the U.S. government’s recent efforts to introduce government-wide equity assessments of federal programs. The authors propose a range of policy solutions that would enable agencies to navigate the privacy-bias trade-off.
