Search

Government contracting with not-for-profit agencies, particularly those characterised as 'religious' and 'faith-based', to deliver social welfare has been the subject of substantial research in the United States and the United Kingdom in recent years. In contrast, attention to the role of 'religious' and 'faith-based' agencies in service delivery in Australia has been relatively limited. This paper explores conceptual issues relating to research into the impact on 'church-related' not-for-profit social welfare agencies in Australia of engagement in government contracting. It commences with a critical analysis of typologies in recent US and UK literature that use the terminology 'religious', 'faith-based' and 'secular', and identifies why this terminology is not analytically helpful. An alternative conceptual approach is developed, to guide research into the engagement of these agencies with government focusing on issues of governance, identity and mission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Governments in Australia have increasingly outsourced human-services provision to the non-government sector. As an innovative outsourcing model, the Facilitating Partner model is used by the Commonwealth Government as part of its Communities for Children program. Unique features of the model include the manner in which non-government organisations are chosen as Facilitating Partners and the quasi-governmental role required of them. This paper explores the implementation of the model and the facilitators and barriers to changes in service-delivery and coordination. It is based on findings from 97 in-depth interviews conducted in ten sites as part of the National Evaluation of Communities for Children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research conducted in 1998 in Tasmania indicated that a fourth sector of society - distinct from market, government and community - was emerging (Alessandrini 2001). The comparative analysis between seven Tasmanian and seven Texan non-government human-service organisations showed dramatic differences between the two groups but also common ground. There was evidence of an emerging social group, possibly a new fourth sector of society, calling into question the conceptual adequacy of civil society (Alessandrini 2002). If these organisations cannot be regarded as government, market or community (or civil society), a new category is indicated. Evidence in 1998 indicated that an 'entrepreneurial civic service' sector was in its infancy in Australia. Ten years on, in 2008, what has happened? Has the anticipated change eventuated, and how robust is the concept of a fourth sector? The seven organisations case-studied and qualitatively analysed in 1998 were recontacted and updated data was collected. When analysed, this revised data is very revealing. Dramatic change has indeed occurred, with significant increases in collaborative and cooperative modes of operation that have accrued benefits to the organisations involved. The evidence for a distinct fourth sector is, however, not convincing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]