Government shekels without government shackles? The administrative challenges of charitable choice

Public Administration Review

Volumn 62, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 4-11

  Kennedy, Sheila Suess ^a   Bielefeld, Wolfgang ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038893353     PISSN: 00333352     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1540-6210.00150     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. American Jewish Committee (AJC). 1990. Report of the Task Force on Sectarian Social Services and Public Funding. 1990. New York: AJC.
2. Brown, Dorothy M., and Elizabeth McKeown. 1997. The Poor Belong to Us: Catholic Charities and American Welfare. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
3. Chaves, Mark. 2001. Interview by author. Chicago, IL, April.
4. Center for Public Justice. 2000. Charitable Choice Compliance: A National Report Card. Annapolis, MD: Center for Public Justice. Available at http://www.cpjustice.org/stories/ storyReader$296. Accessed August 1, 2001.
5. Coughlin, Bernard J. 1969. Church and State in Social Welfare. New York: Columbia University Press.
6. DiIulio, John J., Jr. 2001. Know Us by Our Works. Wall Street Journal, February 14.
7. Hansmann, Henry. 1996. The Ownership of Enterprise. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
8. Jensen, Laura. 2001. Interview by author. Indianapolis, IN, May.
9. Kennedy, Sheila S. Forthcoming. Privatization and Prayer: The Case of Charitable Choice.
10. Krashinsky, Michael. 1998. Does Auspice Matter? The Case of Day Care for Children in Canada. In Private Action and the Public Good, edited by Walter W. Powell and Elizabeth Clemens, 114-23. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
11. Lenkowsky, Leslie. 2001. Funding the Faithful: Why Bush is Right. Commentary 111 (6). Available at http:// www.commentarymagazine.com/0106/lenkowsky.htm. Accessed August 1, 2001.
12. Mauser, Elizabeth. 1998. The Importance of Organizational Form: Parent Perceptions versus Reality in the Day Care Industry. In Private Action and the Public Good, edited by Walter W. Powell and Elizabeth Clemens, 124-36. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
13. Minow, Martha. 1999. Choice or Commonality: Welfare and Schooling after the End of Welfare as We Knew It. Duke Law Journal 49(2): 493.
14. Monsma, Stephen V. 1996. When Sacred and Secular Mix: Religious Nonprofit Organizations and Public Money. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
15. Netting, F. Ellen. 1982. Secular and Religious Funding of Church-Related Agencies. Social Service Review 56(4): 586-604.
16. Raibley, Matt. 2001. Interview by author. Indianapolis, IN, July.
17. Salamon, Lester M. 1995. Partners in Public Service: Government-Nonprofit Relations in the Modern Welfare State. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
18. Schlesinger, Mark. 1998. Mismeasuring the Consequences of Ownership: External Influences and the Comparative Performance of Public, For-Profit, and Private Nonprofit Organizations. In Private Action and the Public Good, edited by Walter W. Powell and Elizabeth Clemens, 85-113. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
19. Stone, Melissa, Mark A. Hager, and Jennifer Griffin. 2001. Organizational Characteristics and Funding Environments: A Study of a Population of United Way-Affiliated Nonprofits. Public Administration Review 61(3): 274-87.
20. U.S. Senate. 2001. Committee on the Judiciary. Faith Based Solutions: What are the Legal Issues? Hearing before the Judiciary Committee. 107th Cong., 1st sess. June 6.
21. Weisbrod, Burton. 1998. Institutional Form and Organizational Behavior. In Private Action and the Public Good, edited by Walter W. Powell and Elizabeth Clemens, 69-84. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
22. Wineburg, Robert J. 1992. Local Human Services Provision by Religious Congregations: A Community Analysis. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 21(2): 107-18.
23. Winston, Diane. 2001. Losing Their Religion? Available at http:/ /www.killingthebuddha.com/damn_nation/losing_their_ religion.htm. Accessed August 1, 2001.