The Growing Impact of Charitable Choice

On March 20, the Center for Public Justice released the first of two major reports from its project tracking the implementation of the Charitable Choice provision of the 1996 welfare reform law. Written by Dr. Amy L. Sherman, the report is "A Catalogue of New Collaborations Between Government and Faith-Based Organizations in Nine States." Sherman is a senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute and adviser to a Christian urban ministry in Charlottesville, Virginia. The following excerpts are from the 92-page report, which is available from the Center by calling 1-866-CPJUSTICE (275-8784).]

Based on the numerous testimonies of government and faith-sector representatives interviewed [for this report], it is easy to demonstrate that welfare reform, generally, has stimulated many new collaborations. Understanding the specific role Charitable Choice has played is more difficult to assess. While many of the interviewees were vaguely aware of Charitable Choice as "that part of welfare reform that makes it permissible for government and religious groups to work together," most were ignorant of its specific provisions and guidelines. This was the case even among some government and FBO [faith-based organization] staff members actively partnering together to serve the needy. For these people, Charitable Choice served primarily as a "green light." Government staff felt more comfortable reaching out to FBOs because "Washington had given its blessing" to such collaborations. Meanwhile, religious leaders who mistakenly believed that the principle of separation of church and state made financial collaboration improper discovered within Charitable Choice a formal approval of such collaboration. In short, Charitable Choice's most important effect thus far is that it has made collaboration plausible for those within government and the faith community who had previously assumed such partnering was somehow outside the bounds of constitutionality under their (misguided) interpretation of the First Amendment.

Undeniably, government officials in most of the states studied are genuinely enthusiastic about "the spirit of Charitable Choice"--developing new working relationships with the faith community. We are likely to see a further increase in the number of collaborations in the future.

Nevertheless, official enthusiasm for building new collaborations is rarely being translated into concrete efforts to remodel the way government procures services from outside entities. On the whole, government agencies are continuing to use the "Requests for Proposals" (RFP) procedure for soliciting partners--and they are not modifying RFPs to make them more accessible and "user-friendly" to FBOs with no experience in contracting with government. To the contrary, according to the complaints registered by some of the faith community representatives interviewed (and the frank admissions of several government staff), the process of submitting proposals and reports remains full of "red tape." . . .

In most of the examples listed in this Catalogue, government staff took the first step toward the faith community. Agencies in all of the nine states studied hosted meetings from 1997 to 1999 aimed at educating these private sector organizations about welfare reform and mobilizing them for action on behalf of families making the transition from welfare to work. In many instances, these meetings forged new friendships from which new public-private programs to serve the needy emerged. In a few cases, though, it was the faith community that took the initiative to build a new relationship. In some instances, individual clergy or staff of FBOs approached their local Department of Social Services (or similar entity) without concrete plans, wanting to explore whether government was interested in designing together new community ministries that could be helpful to families affected by welfare reform. In other instances, faith groups simply launched their own new initiatives and then informed their local government welfare agencies of them, requesting referrals of potential program participants. In still other cases, FBOs with a history of cooperating with government became "intermediary organizations" that facilitated the entry of new faith groups in the social service arena.