Recipient policies

Several considerations are involved. First is a preference for consumer sovereignty, allowing recipients to choose how to spend. Second, being a consumer or a producer of a particular commodity is a poor indicator of whether assistance is deserved. Eveiyone from the poorest residents (but not the homeless) to the richest Americans are residential electricity consumers. Third, commodity-specific policies tend more to aid producers in the industry than consumers. Politicians often dispute these appraisals and institute subsidies on equity grounds. 

Worldwide, the taxation and payments for resources and emissions are devised in such a manner as to make it more profitable for the manufacturer to resolve the environmental issues in-plant, rather than to shift them off to the consumer area. A combination of sanctions with economic incentives for a cleaner production will make the latter not a recipient from, but rather a donor to the government budget.Yet even domination of a cleaner economy policy will not soon guarantee survival of the population under a deep economic crisis like the current one. The anthropogenic damage already caused to nature may prove too heavy and not lending itself to repair within the life span of one or even more generations. 

The quality of life experienced by people with MCS is shaped, to a great extent, by the level of awareness of environmental health issues where they live and work. Some are recipients of workplace accommodations in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act others are harassed and ostracized at work, or fired from their jobs. Some disabled by chemical exposures in the workplace receive workers compensation the majority of chemical-illness claims are denied. Some cities, schools and other institutions have adopted fragrance-free policies and Integrated Pest Management (IPM) programs to reduce chemical barriers and dangers in public places others still resist despite all the prevalence studies and research indicating that MCS is a serious threat to public health. 

Legislators Risk communication may influence and facilitate the legislative process Recipients of communication with limited knowledge of risk assessment but need to understand the role of science in informing policy... 

Perceptions of their role in meeting societal and public policy needs are also significantly influenced by the firms recognition that widespread public health problems are beyond the firms individual and the industry s collective abilities to impact positively. Product and monetary donations in response to natural and environmental disasters are substantial, but tension often results between the donor company and the recipient organization or country over lack of evidence that funds or product donations were used for the intended purpose. 

Price policies (how much the recipient pays to use the voucher)... 

Inclusion criteria that can be used in determining the recipient policies include age occupation (for example, miners, commercial sex workers, migrant workers) location exposure to specific disease risk factors (for example, smoking, family history, contact with infected carriers) income ethnic group disease or health status (for example, tuberculosis patients, pregnant women) gender sexual orientation and previous health service usage. 

Consider the sensitivity and specificity of your recipient policies. 

By acceptance of this article, the publisher or recipient acknowledges the right of the U.S. Government to retain a nonexclusive, royalty-free license and to any copyright covering the article. The content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Department of Health and Human Services, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. 

In comparison to the unemployment assistance scheme, means-testing was harsher in the social assistance scheme moreover, any job was considered acceptable. For the labour market integration of employable social assistance recipients, a fairly rudimentary labour market policy, the Help to Work scheme, was available. It was operated by the municipalities with a considerable scope of discretion. There was no entitlement to integration measures by the PES. 

Complementary to activating instruments in a more narrow sense, SGB II comprises enabling schemes such as labour market policy programs ( 16 (1) SGB II) and other social services like child care provision or help in case of social problems like drug abuse, debt or housing ( 16(2) SGB II) that have been conceived in order to facilitate labour market integration of employable benefit recipients, but do not reinforce benefit conditionality. 

Provision of services is based on individual need for assistance. UB II recipients are no longer excluded from most of the instruments of active labour market policies provided by SGB III. The implementing institutions (Arbeitsgemeinschaften, ARGEs, or Optionskommunen, municipalities) are in principle entitled, as set forth in 16(1)... 

While the federal burden of funding of ALG II, related employment services and housing costs went up, municipal responsibility for the implementation of labour market policy increased. The municipalities can free-ride in their decisions at the expense of the state budget. As the municipalities maintain the financial responsibility for income support for persons who are not able to work (social assistance), the municipalities have an incentive to shift costs by classifying persons as being able to work who would otherwise obtain municipal social assistance. Indeed, in 2005 more than 90% of the former SA recipients were assessed to be capable of working and therefore transferred to the federal funded ALG II system. 

One-Euro Jobs are by far the most frequently used activation scheme in SGB n active labour market policy (Fig. 3). In autumn 2007, about 15% of all UB II recipients participated in active schemes, approximately half of them in One-Euro Jobs. 

---