‘Doing’ eligibility through income thresholds: Organisational practices in US financial assistance programmes for women with breast cancer

Deborah Lefkowitz

Critical Social Policy2025https://doi.org/10.1177/02610183251324117article
AJG 2
Weight
0.50

What the paper says

Many financial assistance programmes that target low-income individuals use income thresholds to determine eligibility. Eligibility serves as a critical interface between service applicants and providers, yet eligibility remains undertheorised in the policy literature. Drawing on interviews I conducted with both breast cancer survivors and providers of a range of health-related services, I focus on how organisations make income relevant for access to their services. This making-relevant-for-access is what I conceptualise as ‘doing’ eligibility. Eligibility is thus not a pre-existing status; it emerges through organisational practices. And when these practices change, who becomes eligible changes as well. I explore how different organisations ‘do’ eligibility through income thresholds. Focusing on processes for determining eligibility, rather than categories of eligible individuals, provides new insights into how disparities may be produced and reproduced through seemingly objective work practices such as the calculation of income thresholds.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/02610183251324117

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{deborah2025,
  title        = {{‘Doing’ eligibility through income thresholds: Organisational practices in US financial assistance programmes for women with breast cancer}},
  author       = {Deborah Lefkowitz},
  journal      = {Critical Social Policy},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/02610183251324117},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

‘Doing’ eligibility through income thresholds: Organisational practices in US financial assistance programmes for women with breast cancer

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.