A Framework of High-Stakes Algorithmic Decision-Making for the Public Sector Developed through a Case Study of Child-Welfare
Devansh Saxena, Karla A. Badillo-Urquiola, Pamela J. Wisniewski, Shion Guha
Abstract
Algorithms have permeated throughout civil government and society, where they are being used to make high-stakes decisions about human lives. In this paper, we first develop a cohesive framework of algorithmic decision-making adapted for the public sector (ADMAPS) that reflects the complex socio-technical interactions between human discretion, bureaucratic processes, and algorithmic decision-making by synthesizing disparate bodies of work in the fields of Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), Science and Technology Studies (STS), and Public Administration (PA). We then applied the ADMAPS framework to conduct a qualitative analysis of an in-depth, eight-month ethnographic case study of algorithms in daily use within a child-welfare agency that serves approximately 900 families and 1300 children in the mid-western United States. Overall, we found that there is a need to focus on strength-based algorithmic outcomes centered in social ecological frameworks. In addition, algorithmic systems need to support existing bureaucratic processes and augment human discretion, rather than replace it. Finally, collective buy-in in algorithmic systems requires trust in the target outcomes at both the practitioner and bureaucratic levels. As a result of our study, we propose guidelines for the design of high-stakes algorithmic decision-making tools in the child-welfare system, and more generally, in the public sector. We empirically validate the theoretically derived ADMAPS framework to demonstrate how it can be useful for systematically making pragmatic decisions about the design of algorithms for the public sector.
CCS Concepts: • Human-centered computing → Human-computer interaction (HCI); Empirical studies in HCI ; • Applied computing → Computing in government.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext f44108b7-1644-4565-aab3-eaf22e702f82Cited by top-tier papers31
- Improving Human-AI Partnerships in Child Welfare: Understanding Worker Practices, Challenges, and Desires for Algorithmic Decision SupportAnna Kawakami, Venkatesh Sivaraman, Hao Fei Cheng, Logan Stapleton et al.CHI 2022 · 137 citations
- Understanding Frontline Workers' and Unhoused Individuals' Perspectives on AI Used in Homeless ServicesTzu-Sheng Kuo, Hong Shen, Jisoo Geum, Nev Jones et al.CHI 2023 · 82 citations
- Deliberating with AI: Improving Decision-Making for the Future through Participatory AI Design and Stakeholder DeliberationAngie Zhang, Olympia Walker, Kaci Nguyen, Jiajun Dai et al.CSCW 2023 · 71 citations
- Contestable Camera Cars: A Speculative Design Exploration of Public AI That Is Open and Responsive to DisputeKars Alfrink, Ianus Keller, Neelke Doorn, Gerd KortuemCHI 2023 · 44 citations
- Rethinking "Risk" in Algorithmic Systems Through A Computational Narrative Analysis of Casenotes in Child-WelfareDevansh Saxena, Erina Seh-Young Moon, Aryan Chaurasia, Yixin Guan et al.CHI 2023 · 35 citations
Builds on5
- Questioning the AI: Informing Design Practices for Explainable AI User ExperiencesQ. Vera Liao, Daniel M. Gruen, Sarah MillerCHI 2020 · 758 citations
- A Case for Humans-in-the-Loop: Decisions in the Presence of Erroneous Algorithmic ScoresMaria De-Arteaga, Riccardo Fogliato, Alexandra ChouldechovaCHI 2020 · 176 citations
- A Human-Centered Review of Algorithms used within the U.S. Child Welfare SystemDevansh Saxena, Karla A. Badillo-Urquiola, Pamela J. Wisniewski, Shion GuhaCHI 2020 · 114 citations
- Modeling Assumptions Clash with the Real World: Transparency, Equity, and Community Challenges for Student Assignment AlgorithmsSamantha Robertson, Tonya Nguyen, Niloufar SalehiCHI 2021 · 57 citations
- Bureaucracy as a Lens for Analyzing and Designing Algorithmic SystemsJuho Pääkkönen, Matti Nelimarkka, Jesse Haapoja, Airi LampinenCHI 2020 · 36 citations
Related papers
- Unpacking Invisible Work Practices, Constraints, and Latent Power Relationships in Child Welfare through Casenote AnalysisDevansh Saxena, Erina Seh-Young Moon, Dahlia Shehata, Shion GuhaCHI 2022 · 33 citations
- Studying Up Public Sector AI: How Networks of Power Relations Shape Agency Decisions Around AI Design and UseAnna Kawakami, Amanda Coston, Hoda Heidari, Kenneth Holstein et al.CSCW 2024 · 22 citations
- Are We Asking the Right Questions?: Designing for Community Stakeholders' Interactions with AI in PolicingMd. Romael Haque, Devansh Saxena, Katy Weathington, Joseph Chudzik et al.CHI 2024 · 23 citations
- Heterogeneity in Algorithm-Assisted Decision-Making: A Case Study in Child Abuse Hotline ScreeningLingwei Cheng, Alexandra ChouldechovaCSCW 2022 · 20 citations
- The Situate AI Guidebook: Co-Designing a Toolkit to Support Multi-Stakeholder, Early-stage Deliberations Around Public Sector AI ProposalsAnna Kawakami, Amanda Coston, Haiyi Zhu, Hoda Heidari et al.CHI 2024 · 54 citations
