Implementing Government Cooperation with Religious Charities

May-June 1997

By Stanley W. Carlson-Thies

WASHINGTON, D.C.—There is increasing agreement these days that churches and parachurch organizations have an essential role to play in helping the poor. Indeed, the 1996 federal welfare law includes a Charitable Choice provision designed to prod state welfare officials to support faith-based organizations that serve the needy. The provision creates strong legal protections for religious groups that choose to cooperate with public welfare programs. But experts and ministry leaders brought together by the Center for Public Justice strongly urge that this path-breaking federal provision needs to be paired with other measures if cooperation is to be fruitful.

Legal protections are insufficient because government's impact, for good and ill, also depends on how it finances and regulates nonprofit organizations. That was the consensus of thirty public officials, leaders of Christian ministries, consultants, and scholars brought together by the Center in February to examine the details of governmental interaction with religious charities. This was the second of two workshops for the Lilly Endowment-funded project on Government and the Religious Social Sector. The first workshop, held last summer just as Congress was adopting the new federal welfare law, established the constitutional rationale for government cooperation with faith-based organizations.

Public welfare authorities most commonly work with nonprofits by contracting to purchase services. Contracts maximize government's ability to guard how public funds are spent. However, such thorough control gives nonprofits little scope to manifest distinctive styles of service. Consultant William Wubbenhorst, who formerly worked for the state of Massachusetts to improve its contracting practices, was very skeptical of the various reform schemes. If the mission of a faith-based organization does not match welfare officials' preconceptions about how the poor should be served, then accepting contracts is likely to hamper its service, despite legal guarantees.

Community Development Block Grants, analyzed by Karen Kispert, a Pennsylvania low-cost housing expert, seemingly give participating nonprofits more autonomy. But these funds do not come with the Charitable Choice protections, and nonprofits need considerable staff time and expertise to be able to comply with the myriad federal regulations. Vouchers, one of the means by which poor families are enabled to obtain child-care services, allow government to target its spending without micromanaging nonprofit organizations. They are no panacea, however, according to Bill Tobin, based on his examination of many state child care programs. Vouchers need careful implementation to ensure quality services and enough accurate information so that clients can wisely select among providers. Federal law mandates extensive use of vouchers so that churches can provide child-care without sacrificing their religious character, but there is no systematic information on how well the voucher requirement is working, Tobin said.

Faith-based organizations often chafe under government regulation. Yet, as Clarke Cochran (Texas Tech University) emphasized, service organizations should welcome the opportunity to account for their stewardship not only to government but also to churches and to their clients. But wrongly designed licensing standards and credential requirements can divert ministries from their mission of service in the name of the Lord. One remedy may be alternative accreditation systems that accommodate faith-based treatment approaches while holding the ministries to higher standards of excellence. Public officials are devising many different forms of cooperation with churches in the search for effective ways to help families move off welfare. Amy Sherman, who directs her own church's community service programs in Virginia, emphasized that churches must be wary lest connecting with public welfare programs leads them to drop their spiritual focus in favor of supplying only material help. Yet her research shows that collaborating with government can actually enhance a church's ministry Mississippi's Faith and Families program, for instance, allows a church to mentor welfare families without having to supply the family's every material need. It also ensures that welfare families do not just float away if the church asks for tough changes.

Much of the today's discussion about engaging churches and other institutions of civil society in helping the poor has stayed at the level of principles (or slogans!). But fruitful cooperation requires carefully designed policies that respect government's authority while maximizing the ability of faith-based institutions to do good.