Charitable Choice: Overview of Research Findings on		 
Implementation (18-JAN-02, GAO-02-337). 			 
                                                                 
Charitable choice provisions require states and localities to	 
allow religious organizations to compete for federal funding on  
the same basis as other social service providers, without	 
impairing the religious character of such organizations. Congress
has been considering legislation to expand charitable choice	 
provisions to other government programs. At least 19 states have 
contracted with faith-based organizations (FBOs) to provide some 
welfare services. Moreover, states are using various approaches  
to implement charitable choice legislation. For example, some	 
states have created state faith-based liaisons to promote greater
awareness of charitable choice provisions or removed barriers to 
contracting with FBOs. Several factors have limited the 	 
establishment of collaborations between FBOs and states,	 
including some FBOs' lack of awareness and understanding of	 
charitable choice provisions, their reluctance to partner with	 
government, and the limited financial and administrative capacity
of some FBOs. Once collaborations have occurred, some small FBOs 
have had problems (1) covering ongoing costs while awaiting	 
government reimbursement or (2) managing the performance-based	 
contracts because of limited technological and management	 
systems. GAO found no information with which to assess the	 
effectiveness of FBOs as providers of social services. Although  
some anecdotal evidence suggests that FBOs have been successful, 
the research community has not rigorously examined the		 
effectiveness of FBOs as social service providers.		 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-02-337 					        
    ACCNO:   A02666						        
  TITLE:     Charitable Choice: Overview of Research Findings on      
Implementation							 
     DATE:   01/18/2002 
  SUBJECT:   Charitable organizations				 
	     Federal aid programs				 
	     Federal funds					 
	     Federal grants					 
	     Federal legislation				 
	     Federal/state relations				 
	     Performance measures				 
	     Procurement regulations				 
	     Community Services Block Grant Program		 
	     Temporary Assistance for Needy Families		 
	     Program						 
                                                                 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Testimony.                                               **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-02-337
     
United States General Accounting Office

GAO

Report to Congressional Requesters

January 2002

CHARITABLE CHOICE

Overview of Research Findings on Implementation

GAO-02-337

United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548

January 18, 2002

The Honorable Joseph I. Lieberman
Chairman
Committee on Governmental Affairs
United States Senate

The Honorable Elijah E. Cummings

Ranking Minority Member

Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources Committee
on Government Reform House of Representatives

This report addresses your request for an overview of research findings on
the implementation of charitable choice provisions in current law.
Charitable choice provisions require states and localities to allow
religious organizations to compete for federal funding on the same basis as
other social service providers, without impairing the religious character of
such organizations. These provisions apply to several programs, including
the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, the Community Services
Block Grant program, and substance abuse treatment and prevention programs
under amendments to the Public Health Services Act in 2000.

The Congress has been considering legislation to expand charitable choice
provisions to other specific government programs. To provide you with
information to consider during this debate, you asked that we review the
available literature to determine (1) the extent to which and how states
have responded to charitable choice provisions in current law; (2) the
factors that have limited the collaboration between states and faith-based
organizations (FBOs); (3) the issues that have been encountered once
collaboration has occurred; and (4) how FBOs performed as compared to
secular providers of social services.

To address your request, we reviewed the existing research on charitable
choice provisions and interviewed several experts in the field. We conducted
our work from June through July 2001 in accordance with generally accepted
government auditing standards. We briefed your staff on the results of our
work on July 27 and August 28, 2001. This report formally conveys the
documents used at those briefings.

In summary, while the literature does not provide a national picture of the
extent to which states have responded to charitable choice provisions, it
provides some useful information. At least 19 states have contracted with
FBOs to provide some welfare-related services. Moreover, states are using
a variety of approaches to implement charitable choice legislation. For
example, some states have created state faith-based liaisons to promote
greater awareness of charitable choice provisions or changed state
procurement requirements to remove barriers to contracting with FBOs.
Several factors have limited the establishment of collaborations between
FBOs and states, including some FBOs' lack of awareness and
understanding of charitable choice provisions, their reluctance to partner
with government, and the limited financial and administrative capacity of
some FBOs. Once collaborations have occurred, some small FBOs have
encountered difficulties in covering ongoing costs while awaiting
government reimbursement or difficulties managing the performance-
based contracts, due to limited technological and management systems.
Finally, the literature we reviewed provides no information with which to
assess the effectiveness of FBOs as providers of social services. While
some anecdotal evidence attributes success to FBOs, the effectiveness of
FBOs as social service providers has not been rigorously examined by the
research community.

We are sending copies of this report to relevant congressional committees,
the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives in the White House,
and the Centers for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives in the
Departments of Education, Health and Human Services, Housing and
Urban Development, Justice, and Labor. We will make copies available to
others upon request. If you or your staff have any questions about this
report, please contact me on (202) 512-7215 or Andrew Sherrill on (202)
512-7252.

Sigurd R. Nilsen
Director, Education, Workforce,

and Income Security Issues
*** End of document. ***