wfn.org | Providers examine White House report on faith-based barriers

[NewsDesk <NewsDesk@UMCOM.ORG>]

Aug. 21, 2001     News media contact: Joretta Purdue 7(202)
546-87227Washington 10-21-71B{357}

WASHINGTON (UMNS) - Differences between social service providers and the
White House on the issue of faith-based initiatives became apparent during a
recent discussion arranged by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.

The Aug. 17 forum focused on a White House report that examined how five
federal agencies have supported faith-based delivery of social services.

Stanley Carlson-Thies, associate director for cabinet affairs at the White
House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, stressed the
preliminary nature of the report that had been released the day before. He
and six panelists spoke at the forum.

The White House report, titled "Unlevel Playing Field," was intended as a
summary or overview of five separate reports by the U.S. Departments of
Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Education,
Justice and Labor, Carlson-Thies said. The individual reports were directed
to the head of each agency, and those officials will in turn draft
recommendations and action plans to give President Bush. 

The departments were asked to look at their existing programs that provide
block grants to states or direct grants to faith-based providers of social
services, to see if religious groups face barriers to participation.

"With minor exceptions, we did not find grant programs that explicitly
exclude, in so many words, community-based and faith-based organizations,"
Carlson-Thies said. "Normally what the programs say is that nonprofit
organizations are eligible to take part," but the small groups end up being
excluded because of the finer details of a program or the way it operates,
he said.

Jim Winkler, staff head of the United Methodist Board of Church and Society,
has said that United Methodist churches and agencies often work with
government bodies. Winkler, who was not at the forum, told a press
conference in June that the denomination is clear on what it considers
appropriate for a partnership with the state for providing social services. 

"We believe that no private agency, because of its religious affiliations,
ought to be exempted from any of the requirements and standards applied to
programs seeking financial support," Winkler said.

"We do not have any difficulty with the government providing access to
religiously motivated organizations to compete for federal dollars," he
said. "We cannot agree, however, in the establishment of 'faith' as a
separate category which sets religious groups apart from the requirements
that others are obligated to meet in order to provide social services."

A variety of issues surfaced during the panel discussion arranged by the Pew
Forum on Religion and Public Life, a nonprofit organization exploring how
religion shapes the ideas and institutions of American society.

Darren Walker, chief operating officer of the Abyssinian Development Corp.,
an outgrowth of the Abyssinian Baptist Church in Harlem, said his
organization has worked with several federal agencies to develop housing.

"We have not encountered restrictive conditions as a result of our religious
orientation and our religious affiliation with a Christian organization," he
said. He viewed some restrictions as appropriate, and said that maintaining
a separate 501C3 status, recognized by the Internal Revenue Service for
privately held, nonprofit organizations, "protects the integrity and
autonomy of the religious institution that is doing the work."

Walker, who is African American, expressed concern that black churches,
particularly small ones, might misunderstand the initiative as an
opportunity to obtain money for their regular operating expenses. He also is
concerned that government agencies defer to religious institutions, as if
those organizations were always better positioned to serve. He added that in
New York, more than 500 buildings have been purchased fraudulently with HUD
grants by organizations claiming to be faith-based.

Bill Faith, staff head of the Coalition on Homelessness and Housing in Ohio,
criticized the report, saying it is just a "rationale to back up
already-established policy." Faith's coalition provides training and
technical resources to 600 organizational members.

He advocated keeping the organizations accountable to maintain public trust.
He characterized the 501C3 organizations' tax-exempt status as "an enormous
benefit." Filing annual reports "is the least we can expect in return."

Future recommendations and action plans could greatly help faith-based and
community service providers, if the plans would coordinate and simplify the
relationships between government and not-for-profits, Faith said. Government
agencies use different definitions in determining when the use of government
funds is appropriate, he said. 

"We want billions of dollars to address homelessness in this country," he
said. He took exception to the assumption that more money is not needed for
the services the faith-based and community organizations provide. "Unless we
are really talking about more money here, all we're really doing is robbing
Peter to pay Paul," he declared.

Faith said the report "slams HUD in a number of ways that I think is out of
bounds." The community-driven Continuum of Care program is one of the best
ideas HUD ever developed, and it is used by a lot of faith-based groups, he
said. "I work with lots of HUD programs. This is not the one to attack."

The Rev. Stephen E. Burger, director of the Kansas City, Mo.,-based
Association of Gospel Rescue Missions, also urged that the report's
recommendations clarify definitions and eliminate conflicts. 

"How does a bureaucrat determine if an organization is too religious or not
religious enough?" he asked. In some areas, religious organizations are
being required to establish "a secular board" but are not sure what this
means, he said. In other areas, comparable groups are not required to
establish a secular board. He also objected to the lack of clarity in
measures of success that are applied to social service programs.

Richard Foltin, legislative director and counsel for the American Jewish
Committee, said the issue is not whether religious organizations have been
barred from the governmental funding process. He cited an American Civil
Liberties Union survey that found three times as many objections made to
non-religious barriers. 

Instead, Foltin decried a lack of data on charitable choice, the 5-year-old
federal program that enables religious organizations to be providers of
social services with governmental funding. Passage of H.R. 7 by the U.S.
House of Representatives reflects a mood to expand the charitable choice
approach without study, he said.

The report under discussion dismisses any faith-based organizations, like
Catholic Charities, that are already engaged with the government, he said.
They are discounted as monopolies, he said, and attention is focused on
getting smaller churches and organizations involved in competing for the
same funds.

Foltin said the report minimizes concerns about exemptions to the
requirement not to force religion on program participants. At the same time,
it fails to explore how to overcome concerns of "over-zealous bureaucrats"
about faith-based providers, he said.

"We are happy with the direction things are going for us [in Pennsylvania],"
said Richard G. Overmoyer Jr., a policy specialist with the Pennsylvania
Department of Public Welfare. He recommended that faith-based organizations
realize what they can handle and what they cannot. "Programs still must
conform to licensing and certification requirements," he asserted.

"We support faith-based funding," said Gary D. Bass, founder and head of OMB
Watch, a nonprofit research and advocacy organization that monitors the
White House Office of Management and Budget. "At the same time, as Sen.
[Joseph] Lieberman said, 'The devil is in the details.'

"Charities have not done very well this year," Bass said. The estate tax
reduction and the minimization of a charitable deduction for non-itemizers
are likely to result in less giving to charities, he said. 

He made several recommendations based on a survey done by his organization,
sampling 49 states: "Accountability needs to be stronger" for all
organizations, without regard to whether or not they are faith-based, Bass
said. Organizations must be registered with the IRS and make regular
financial disclosures. "There is also a need for stronger enforcement." 

Bass recommended more support for community or grass-roots organizations to
compete not with faith-based groups but with for-profit ones. He urged
technical support so that more money would be better invested for children,
who represent the future.

The grant process must be simplified and the reimbursements made more
speedily, Bass said. He asked for coordination of federal-state procedures
in this process. Currently, he said, too many different reports are required
of provider organizations. 
# # #

*************************************
United Methodist News Service
Photos and stories also available at:
http://umns.umc.org