¶ … child in crisis; what would your immediate response be? For those in the field of social work, the response would be to act without hesitation. The question arises, however, if whether a preventative, community based approach benefits service recipients better than a crisis management approach. The issue of how to best allocate limited resources is but one of the issues facing the field of social work today. Another issue is the exclusion of front line service providers from the decision-making process. Service providers who relate to clients directly have an inside view on what action is needed to bring about positive change; however, life-altering decisions are often made by remote administration unfamiliar with the needs of their clients, resulting in change that often is too little, and occurs too late. Finally, middle level management walks a delicate tightrope in the social work field. Their job of balancing compliance with directives from governmental officials while addressing the needs of their service workers and their service recipients. Improving the service provided to recipients of said services is paramount; addressing the issue must come via a coordinated change in both the power of the individual service worker and the priorities of management and government in regards to social policy. Before a discussion of improving social policy can ensue, a definition is necessary. Social policy is, in a large way, the result of public policy decisions made by government officials, in "their continual but not always successful attempts to insure the safety and well being of citizens" (McKenzie & Wharf, 1998). McKenzie and Wharf differentiate between "grand" issues and "ordinary issues," defining the "grand issues as those that take place on the national and international scale. Major decision at this level have a trickle-down effect upon the ordinary issues faced by service providers and their clients. Budgetary concerns comprise the major portion of the grand issue spectrum. Since the majority...

A study by the Center for People in Need revealed that 74% of respondents to a survey on social service use in Lincoln, Nebraska had trouble buying food; 49: of those respondents reported having to choose between buying food and paying bills (CPN, 2009). On Maslow's hierarchy of needs, the need for food, water and shelter is at the very base of the pyramid. When people are unable to meet these very basic needs, it is difficult, if not impossible for them to make progress on even the second step of Maslow's pyramid, including working on employment, resources for the family, and health. Harder still would be work on respect for self and respect for others, yet work on these very traits is requisite if service recipients are ever to escape from the cycle of depression, abuse, and neglect that so often accompany poverty and drive these recipients to seek services in the first place. A single vote, or a single veto, at the highest level of government impacts the very lives of those dependent upon basic services for food and shelter, as well as services for mental health and eventual self-sufficiency. Actions on the grand level, in an budgetary attempt to reduce the amount spent on social services often have the opposite effect - without recourse to appropriate services and assistants, recipients of social services become stuck in a vicious cycle of dependence upon whatever services they can receive, instead of successfully completing a service plan and exiting the system.
Budget concerns in regards to social work are not only the domain of governmental entities but also the case managers who oversee the administration of social services. Indeed, according to the National Association for Social Workers, the seventh standard for case managers reads, "The social work case manager shall be knowledgeable about resource availability, service costs and budgetary…