Charitable Choice and Faith-Based Welfare: A Call for Social Work

Cnaan, Ram A.; Boddie, Stephanie C.

doi:10.1093/sw/47.3.224

Cited by 91 publications

(68 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, we find some increases over time in survey respondents' positive assessments of economic well-being, declines in coresidence with extended family (a positive trend if coresidence signals economic hardship, but a negative trend if coresidence indicates higher levels of social support), and increased participation in work support programs such as the EITC. Decreases in the use of charity/ emergency assistance are somewhat unexpected, given incentives in PRWORA that encourage state cooperation with community and "faith-based" organizations in the delivery of welfare services-the so-called "charitable choice" provision (Cnaan & Boddie, 2002). Also, other research has documented at least modest growth in the use of emergency or charitable services, such as food pantry use, following the passage of PRWORA (Mosley & Tiehen, 2004;Tiehen, 2002).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Family economic well-being following the 1996 welfare reform: Trend data from five non-experimental panel studies

Slack

Magnuson

Berger

et al. 2007

Children and Youth Services Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This analysis summarizes trends in family economic well-being from five non-experimental, longitudinal welfare-to-work studies launched following the passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA). The studies include a sizable group of parents and other caregivers who received TANF at the point of sampleCorresponding author: Kristen Shook Slack, Assistant Professor, School of Social Work, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1350 University Avenue, Madison, WI 53706, ksslack@wisc.edu, Phone: 608-263-3671. Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. NIH Public Access Author ManuscriptChild Youth Serv Rev. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 December 09. Published in final edited form as:Child Youth Serv Rev. 2007 June ; 29(6): 698-720. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2006. NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript selection or shortly thereafter, and share a wide range of similar measures of economic well-being. This analysis provides descriptive information on how these families are faring over time.Our results confirm what has been found by previous studies. Many families remain dependent on public benefits, and are either poor or near-poor, despite gains in some indicators of economic well-being. We caution that these aggregate statistics may mask important heterogeneity among families.U.S. welfare policy has a long history of expansion and retrenchment. One of the most significant developments since its inception in 1935, with the passage of the Social Security Act and creation of Aid to Dependent Children, manifested in the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA). This federal law eliminated welfare as an entitlement benefit, and solidified a shift in welfare policy back to the states. In the wake of "welfare reform," as PRWORA is often labeled, welfare caseloads dropped precipitously. However, as noted by many policy scholars, caseload reduction should not be heralded as the sole indicator of PRWORA's success (Blank, 2002; Duncan & ChaseLansdale, 2001; Zedlewski, 2002). Rather, it is important to understand whether this caseload decline has been accompanied by economic gains or losses, as well as changes in other indicators of family well-being.This analysis summarizes trends in family economic well-being from several nonexperimental, longitudinal welfare-to-work studies 1 launched following the passage of PRWORA. Our set of indicators is limited primarily to those relating to economic wellbeing and hardship. We have done this deliberately ...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Family economic well-being following the 1996 welfare reform: Trend data from five non-experimental panel studies

Slack

Magnuson

Berger

et al. 2007

Children and Youth Services Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since these are not directly related to the thrust of my argument I will not discuss this literature. See, for example, Cnaan and Boddie (2002), Daly (2006) and Wineburg (2007). For a study of FBCI in general, see Sager (2010).…”

Section: Concluding Thoughtsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Faith-based initiatives and pastoral power

Biebricher

2011

Economy and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper offers a critical analysis of the 'Faith-Based and Community Initiatives' established by the Bush administration in 2001 and expanded under the Obama administration. After situating the programme in the context of the welfare reform of 1996 and the 'new paternalism' (Lawrence Mead) built into it, the paper proceeds to introduce and discuss Michel Foucault's concept of 'pastoral power' as it is developed in his lectures on the history of governmentality. Using this concept as a critical heuristic device the paper analyses and problematizes the relations of care and concomitant processes of subjectification prevalent in faith-based organizations and, particularly, their mentoring programmes. In a final step, the paper argues that these relations of care can be interpreted as a departure from or at least a partial transformation of neoliberalism that produces not only new subjectivities but also novel forms of governing that combine the activating rhetoric of neoliberalism with religious (spiritual transformation) and illiberal (supervisory intervention) elements.

show abstract

“…However questionable the assumption (Chaves, 2000;Farnsley, 2001;Fredericksen and London, 2000;Salamon, 1997;Swanson, 2001), President George W. Bush's executive order establishing the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives raised public expectations around the contributions CBOs could make to welfare reform (Cnaan and Boddie, 2002).…”

Section: Second-order Devolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scaling up CBOs for second‐order devolution in welfare reform

Poole

2003

Nonprofit Mgmnt & Ldrshp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 created a paradigm shift in the financing, organization, and delivery of welfare programs in the United States. The act shifted revenue and authority to states, giving them great discretion to determine the specifics of their programs. First-order devolution, combined with time limits and work requirements, set in motion a chain of events that moved Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) recipients into the labor force and off state welfare rolls. Second-order devolution shifted revenue and authority to community-based organizations (CBOs) to help former recipients remain employed, advance to higher paying jobs, and move their families toward economic selfsufficiency. Early findings from project innovations in Texas and other states raise doubts about the capacity of these organizations to achieve these goals. State funders will need to provide ongoing technical assistance and support to "scale up" the capacity of CBOs to plan, implement, and manage local innovations in welfare reform.

show abstract

Charitable Choice and Faith-Based Welfare: A Call for Social Work

Cited by 91 publications

References 9 publications

Family economic well-being following the 1996 welfare reform: Trend data from five non-experimental panel studies

Family economic well-being following the 1996 welfare reform: Trend data from five non-experimental panel studies

Faith-based initiatives and pastoral power

Scaling up CBOs for second‐order devolution in welfare reform

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About