c. 2003 Religion News Service

WASHINGTON _ Two studies released this week by a religion and social policy research organization found that even though “faith-based” service groups provide longer-term care for the neediest of society than other groups, states have been sluggish in building a framework that supports such organizations.

Both studies were released by the Roundtable on Religion and Social Welfare Policy, a research organization that focuses on the role of faith-based social service programs, at the group’s fall research conference.

Early in his presidency, George W. Bush proposed a wide-ranging “faith-based initiative” aimed at freeing up funds in more federal programs for a wider range of religious groups, but it has failed to garner enough congressional support to be enacted into law. The proposed program has been controversial among some liberal members of Congress and church-state separation groups, who say giving government funds to religiously grounded community groups could open the gate to government-funded proselytizing.

Supporters of the initiative argue that faith-based groups, such as those programs established by Catholic Charities, have been receiving government funding for years.

But since Bush’s “faith-based initiative” was activated by executive orders, Roundtable found that only eight states have passed laws that would help support smaller religious charities previously barred from state and local grants.

The study also reported that even in states that have shown the most dedication to supporting religious charity groups, “with few exceptions, there has been little change in participation.”

“In general, it appears that state officials feel there is no urgent need to make major changes,” said Richard Nathan, director of the Rockefeller Institute of Government at State University of New York.

He said religious organizations are already “active players in the delivery of services in many states.”

The other study released at the conference showed that faith-based organizations often serve the needier populations _ generally, clients who first turned to secular programs and then to “faith-based” groups as a last resort.

The study also found that religious programs serve people for a longer period of time and are more focused on developing patrons’ skills than secular programs.

At the Roundtable research conference, a panel discussed the pitfalls of increasing support for religious service organizations at the state level.

“We’ve got some uneasy American sense that as soon as you talk about faith, you’re being discriminating,” said Ronald J. Sider, president of Evangelicals for Social Action.

But Tom Harvey, former president of Catholic Charities, said religious service groups run the risk of being inherently coercive because many of their patrons are required to participate by personal necessity or state mandate.

“When I walk into my church, my pastor can say, `This is the way I want you to live your life.’ And I have the freedom to walk out,” Harvey said. But at service providers for the jobless, needy or mentally ill, “you might be with someone who is not able to walk out,” he said.

George Washington University Law Professor Robert Tuttle said start-up groups must be mindful to stay within government regulations when establishing service centers.

“My advice for social-services groups is: Don’t be low-hanging fruit,” Tuttle said. He suggested that training sessions for staff members _ both clergy and secular _ and a clear policy that any religious activity is voluntary in government-funded groups can help safeguard new charities against lawsuits.

Although the Roundtable study showed that few states have actively pursued establishing or supporting new religious service groups since the president issued executive orders freeing up funds for those groups, experts said the definition of a “religious” and “secular” organization is hazy at best.

John Bartowski, associate professor of sociology at Mississippi State University, said some groups that were billed as “faith-based” would step away from faith language if participants were not interested in discussing faith, while some “secular” organizations relied heavily on biblical passages and prayer throughout their programs.

Overall, Bartowski said “faith-based” programs tend to focus on “values transformation.” For example, at a group designed to teach better parenting techniques, a religious service would stress that children were a gift from God, in an effort to change people’s actions through changing their core values and beliefs. Secular groups, however, stressed technical competence and practical parenting tips _ how long a child’s “time out” should be, for example _ and hoped a values transformation would follow naturally.

But Nathan stressed that the work done by religious organizations has deep roots in the communities they serve, regardless of what comes out of Washington.

“While the spotlight on the Faith-Based Initiative has been very bright in Washington, it tends to get much dimmer once you get outside the Beltway,” Nathan said.

DEA END GABRIEL