Hostname: page-component-857557d7f7-h6shg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-12-01T23:51:00.006Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Welfare for Profit: Moral, Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2009

Neil Gilbert
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Since the 1960s there has been an increasing number of proprietary agencies engaged in the delivery of social services in the United States. This development has generally been greeted with disfavour by welfare state advocates. Various arguments have been put forward against welfare for profit on moral, empirical and theoretical grounds. This paper analyzes these arguments and proposes several basic conditions that would seem to have significant bearing on the choice between profit and nonprofit providers for a given service.

Information

Type
Article
Information
Journal of Social Policy , Volume 13 , Issue 1 , January 1984 , pp. 63 - 74
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Aaron, H. (1978), Politics and the Professors: The Great Society in Perspective, Brookings Institution, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
Barnett, C.F. (1982), ‘Profit and Nonprofit Distinctions in Theory and in Fact: The Lack of Fit Between Theory and Empirical Research in Health Care Organizations’, mimeographed paper.Google Scholar
Bush, M. and Gordon, A. (1978), ‘The Advantages of Client Involvement’, in Cook, T. et al. (eds), Evaluation Studies Review Annual Vol. 3, Sage. Beverly Hills, pp.767–83.Google Scholar
Campbell, D. (1977). ‘Reforms as Experiments’, in Caro, F.G. (ed.), Readings in Evaluation Research, Russell Sage, New York, pp. 172–204.Google Scholar
Gilbert, N. and Eaton, J. (1970), ‘Who Speaks Fof the Poor’, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 36:6, 411–16.Google Scholar
Gordon, P.J. (1975), ‘Managing Diverse Organizational Strategies’, in Cyert, R. (ed.). The Management of Nonprofit Organizations, Lexington Books, Lexington, Mass., pp.102–5.Google Scholar
Hansmann, H.B. (1980). ‘The Role of Nonprofit Enterprise’. Yale Law Journal, 89:5, 880–1.Google Scholar
Kanter, R.M. (1979), ‘The Measurement of Organizational Effectiveness, Productivity, Performance and Success: Issues and Dilemmas in Service and Nonprofit Organizations’, Program on Nonprofit Organization Working Paper 8, Institution for Social and Policy Studies, Yale University.Google Scholar
Kelling, G.L., Pate, J., Dieckman, D. and Brown, C. (1976), ‘The Kansas City Preventive Patrol Experiment: A Summary Report’, in Glass, G.V. (ed.), Evaluation Studies Review Annual, Volume 1, Sage, Beverly Hills.Google Scholar
Krast, K. (1960). ‘The Efficiency of the Charitable Dollar: An Unfulfilled State Responsibility’, Harvard Law Review, 73, 433–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mendelsohn, M.A. (1974), Tender Loving Greed, Knopf, New York.Google Scholar
Moreland Commission (1976). ‘Reimbursing Operating Costs: Dollars Without Sense’, Report of the New York State Moreland Act Commission on Nursing Homes and Residential Facilities.Google Scholar
New York Times (1977), 12 18, 76.Google Scholar
Salamon, L. and Abramson, A. (1982). The Federal Budget and the Nonprofit Sector, Urban Institute Press. Washington D.C.Google Scholar
Scheirer, M.A. (1979), ‘Program Participants' Positive Perceptions: Psychological Conflict of Interests in Social Program Evaluation’, in Sechrest, L. et al. (eds), Evaluation Studies Review Annual Vol. 4, Sage. Beverly Hills, 407–24.Google Scholar
Senate Special Committee on Aging (1974), Nursing Home Care in the United States: Failure in Public Policy. Introductory Report, Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
Smeeding, T. (1982), Alternative Methods for Valuing Selected In-Kind Transfer Benefits and Measuring Their Effects on Poverty, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Technical Paper No. 50, Government Printing Office. Washington D.C.Google Scholar
Specht, H. (1978), ‘The Grass Roots and Government in Social Planning and Community Organization’, Administration in Social Work. 2:3, 319–34.Google Scholar
Stipak, B. (1979), ‘Citizens Satisfaction With Urban Services: Potential Misuse as a Performance Indicator’, Public Administration Review, 39, 46–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Telyveld, J. (1977), ‘Drive-in Day Care’, New York Times Magazine, 01 5, 110.Google Scholar
Utting, B. (1980), ‘Purchase of Personal Social Services by Government Agencies in the USA’, report to the German Marshall Fund.Google Scholar
Wall Street Journal (1979), 01 24, 1.Google Scholar
Wooden, K. (1976), Weeping in the Playtime of Others, McGraw Hill, New York.Google Scholar