Governments around the world are making increasing use of contracting “technologies” to purchase services from voluntary organizations—both in privatizing (contracting out) previously government-provided services and in reining in (contracting in) more autonomous voluntary sector services previously supported by grants-in-aid. If voluntary organizations are as much about participation as provision, what is the impact on civil society of the widespread adoption of this funding technology? Voluntary organizations are frequently idealized as producing civic “golden eggs” of community resource mobilization and more appropriate and accessible services, as well as providing avenues for citizen participation and involvement. But does the tightening control of government funding contracts risk killing the goose that is laying these golden eggs?
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bernstein, S. (1991). Managing contracted services in the nonprofit agency: Administrative, ethical and practical issues. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
2.
Cornforth, C. (1996). Board games: The dilemmas of governance in voluntary and non-profit organisations. Paper presented at the National Council for Voluntary Organisations annual conference, London.
3.
Darvill, G. (1994). The impact of contracts on volunteers. London: Volunteer Centre UK.
4.
Davey, J. , & Dwyer, M. (1984). Meeting needs in the community: A discussion paper on social services (Planning Paper No.19). Wellington: New Zealand Planning Council.
5.
Department of Internal Affairs . (1997). Building strong communities: A “Thinkpiece”. Wellington, New Zealand: Author.
6.
Department of Social Welfare (DSW) . (1996). Strategic directions: Post-election briefing paper 1996. Wellington, New Zealand: Author.
7.
Ernst & Young. (1996). Study of the viability of the not-for-profit sector in New Zealand. Wellington: New Zealand Community Funding Agency.
8.
Fabricant, M. B. , & Burghardt, S. (1992). The welfare state crisis and the transformation of social service work. Armonk, NY: M E Sharpe.
9.
Hall, M. H. (1995). Funding charities: Dependency on government and implications of cutbacks (Research Bulletin No. 2 [1]). Toronto: Canadian Centre for Philanthropy.
10.
Higgens, J. (1997). Transparency and trade-offs in policy discourse: A case study of social service contracting. Social Policy Journal of New Zealand, 9.
11.
Kearns, K. P. (1996). Managing for accountability: Preserving the public trust in public and nonprofit organisations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
12.
Kelsey, J. (1996). The New Zealand experiment: A world model for structural adjustment?Auckland, New Zealand: Auckland University Press.
13.
Kramer, R. M. (1981). Voluntary agencies in the welfare state. Berkeley: University of California Press.
14.
Kramer, R. M. (1994). Voluntary agencies and the contracting culture: Dream or nightmare?Social Service Review, March.
15.
Leigh, J. (1994). Contracting for social services: A process evaluation of the community funding agency's contracting procedures. Unpublished M.Soc.Sc. thesis, University of Waikato, Hamilton.
16.
Lyons, M. (1994). The privatisation of human services in Australia: Has it happened?Australian Journal of Public Administration, 53(2).
17.
Lyons, M. (1996). Nonprofit sector or civil society: Are they competing paradigms? Paper presented to Social cohesion, justice and citizenship—the role of the voluntary sector biennial conference of Australian and New Zealand Third Sector Research, Wellington, New Zealand.
18.
Nowland-Foreman, G. (1995). Neither mendicants nor deal-makers: Contracting, government funding and voluntary organisations. Wellington: New Zealand Council of Christian Social Services.
19.
Nyland, J. (1993). Little fingers of the state: Aggressive instrumentalism in the Australian welfare state. In Power, politics and performance: Community management in the 90s—conference proceedings (Vol 1). Sydney: Centre for Australian Community Organisations and Management (CACOM), University of Technology, Sydney.
20.
Putnam, R. D. (1993). The prosperous community: Social capital and public life. The American Prospect, 13.
21.
Renouf, J. (1995). Changing relationships between the state and the voluntary sector—the changing face of partnership. Paper presented to Partnerships that Work? Asia Pacific Regional Social Services Conference, Christchurch, New Zealand.
22.
Robinson, D. (1996). Funding New Zealand. Wellington: New Zealand Association of Philanthropic Trust.
23.
Salamon, L. M. (1981). Rethinking public management: Third party government and changing forms of government action. Public Policy, 29(3).
24.
Salamon, L. M. (1987). Partners in public service: The scope and theory of government-nonprofit relations. In W. W. Powell (Ed.), The nonprofit sector: A research handbook. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
25.
Salamon, L. M. (1994). The rise of the nonprofit sector: A global associational revolution. Foreign Affairs, July/Aug.
26.
Salamon, L. M. , & Abramson, A. J. (1996). The federal budget and the nonprofit sector. In D. F. Burlingame, W. A. Diaz, W. F. Ilchman & Associates (Eds.), Capacity for change? The nonprofit world in the age of devolution (the new partnership conferences). Indianapolis: Indiana University Centre on Philanthropy.
27.
Schick, A. (1996). The spirit of reform: Managing the New Zealand state sector in a time of change. Report prepared for the State Services Commission and the Treasury, New Zealand.
28.
Shipley, H. J. (1991). Welfare that works: A statement of government policy on social assistance. Wellington: New Zealand Government.
29.
Smillie, I. (1995). NGOs: Learning, evaluation and life in a three-ring circus. Paris: OECD Development Centre.
30.
Smith, V. (1996). Contracting for social and welfare services: The changing relationship between government and the voluntary sector in New Zealand. Third Sector Review, 2.
31.
Sosin, M. R. (1990). Decentralising the social service system: A reassessment. Social Service Review, 64(4).
32.
Stone, M. (1991). Governance and control under purchase-of-service: A framework for research. In 1991 Spring Research Forum Working Papers. Washington DC: Independent Sector.
33.
Woods, M. (1996). Shrinking government—the effects on volunteers, voluntary organisations and their clients. Paper presented at the biennial conference of Australian New Zealand Third Sector Research, Victoria University of Wellington.
