The role of contract managers in the implementation of charitable choice in Maryland
MetadataShow full item record
Type of Workiv, 138 leaves
DepartmentUniversity of Baltimore. Yale Gordon College of Public Affairs
ProgramUniversity of Baltimore. Doctor of Public Administration
RightsThis item may be protected under Title 17 of the U.S. Copyright Law. It is made available by the University of Baltimore for non-commercial research and educational purposes.
Subjectscase study research
United States. Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996
Maryland. Department of Human Resources
Public welfare administration
Using case study methodology, this research study addressed the two questions: what are the roles of public sector contract managers in the implementation of the Charitable Choice provision in Maryland and how was the Charitable Choice provision implemented in Maryland? In the past ten years, a growing number of scholars, think tanks and government officials have conducted research to determine the nature and extent of implementation success and the current impact of the Charitable Choice Policy as a policy and administrative initiative in Maryland. The research has run the gamut from detailed, multi-state studies to surveys of religious organizations on the local level to efforts to catalogue the human services they provide. Many studies have concentrated on individual states. However, noticeably missing are studies focusing on the roles of contract managers in the implementation of the Charitable Choice provision, particularly in the State of Maryland. This research study addressed this void by examining how the provision was implemented and the role of contract managers in its implementation. The study sought to determine if contract managers served as a kind of interpreter, enforcer, or circuit stimulus in the direct implementation of the Charitable Choice provision in Maryland. This research study covered the ten year period, 1996 to 2006, of two different gubernatorial administrations representing the two major political parties. The study did not discover evidence that supports the assertion that contract managers served as a kind of interpreter, enforcer, or circuit stimulus in the direct implementation of the Charitable Choice provision in Maryland. Although, this research study examined the actions of Baltimore City Department of Social Services (BCDSS) contract managers, who managed contracts with three faith-based organizations to provide welfare-to-work services, it has been discovered that these contracts were not the result of an intentional effort to implement Charitable Choice. However, it can be concluded there is evidence that the BCDSS contract managers did act as interpreter, enforcer, and problem solver in implementing its welfare-to-work contracts in general.