The Reagan administration's domestic budget cuts have imposed severe fiscal stress upon local-government and nonprofit agencies. The responses to this stress by organizations in northwest Ohio are analyzed in this study. Compared to local-government agencies, the federal fiscal changes had the greater impact upon nonprofit agencies, which searched more actively for alternative funding sources, varied internal process more dramatically, made programs more readily, and cast about for more effective management techniques.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ALLISON, G. T. Jr. (1983) "Public and private management: are they fundamentally alike in all unimportant particulars?" in R. T Golembiewski and F. Gibson (eds.) Readings in Public Administration: Institutions, Processes, Behavior, Policy (4th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
2.
APPLEBY, P. H. (1945) Big Democracy. New York: Knopf.
3.
ELLING, R. (1985) "The Reagan block grant initiative: fiscal, programmatic and administrative consequences in Michigan." Delivered at the Region VI conference of the American Society for Public Administration, Flint, MI.
4.
McCURDY, H. E. (1978) "Selecting and training public managers: business skills versus public administration."Public Administration Rev.38: 571-578.
5.
McKELVEY, B. and H. ALDRICH (1983) "Populations, natural selection, and applied organizational science."Admin. Sci. Q.18: 101-128.
6.
MEYER, J. A. (1984) "Budget cuts in the Reagan administration: a question of fairness," pp. 33-64 in D. L. Bawden (ed.) The Social Contract Revisited: Aims and Outcomes of President Reagan's Social Welfare Policy. Washington. DC: Urban Institute Press.
7.
MURRAY, M. A. (1975) "Comparing public and private management: an exploratory essay."Public Administration Rev.35: 364-371.
8.
MUSSELWHITE, J. C. , R. B. KATZ, and L. M. SALAMON (1985) Government Spending and the Non-profit Sector in Pittsburgh/Allegheny County. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.
9.
NATHAN, R. P. , F. C. DOOLITTLE, and Associates (1983) The Consequences of Cuts: The Effects of the Reagan Domestic Program on State and Local Governments. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press.
10.
NIELSEN, W. A. (1979) The Endangered Sector. New York: Columbia Univ. Press.
11.
Office of Management and Budget (1985) Budget of the United States Government: Fiscal Year 1986. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
12.
Office of Management and Budget (1986) Budget of the United States Government: Fiscal Year 1987. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
13.
OLSON, M. (1975) The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.
14.
PALMER, J. L. and I. V. SAWHILL (1984) "Overview," pp. 1-30 in J. L. Palmer and I. V. Sawhill (eds.) The Reagan Record: An Assessment of America's Changing Domestic Priorities. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
15.
SALAMON, L. M. (1984) "Nonprofit organizations: the lost opportunity," pp. 261-286 in J. L. Palmer and I. V. Sawhill (eds.) The Reagan Record: An Assessment of America's Changing Domestic Priorities. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
16.
SALAMON, L. M. and A. J. ABRAMSON (1982) The Federal Budget and the Nonprofit Sector. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.
17.
SAVAS. E. S. (1982) Privatizing the Public Sector: How to Shrink Government. Chatham, NJ: Chatham.
18.
SMEEDING, T. M. (1984) "is the safety net still intact?" pp. 69-120 in D. L. Bawden (ed.) The Social Contract Revisited: Aim and Outcomes of President Reagan's Social Welfare Policy. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.
19.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (1982) The President's National Urban Policy Report. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
20.
WILSON, J. Q. (1973) Political Organizations. New York: Basic Books.
