|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, Vol. 32, No. 1,
70-96 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/0899764002250007
The Intrametropolitan Geography of Poverty and the Nonprofit Sector in Southern California
Pascale Joassart-Marcelli
University of Massachusetts
Jennifer R. Wolch
University of Southern California
This article investigates the geographic distribution of nonprofit social service providers across southern California cities in an attempt to see whether they reach people in poverty. Using 1996 Internal Revenue Service data from the National Center on Charitable Statistics, combined with 1990 census data, the authors find that the number of antipoverty nonprofits and their level of expenditure are higher in poorer cities. Nevertheless, given poverty concentration patterns, these activities are insufficient to guarantee equal services to poor persons in the poorest areas compared with those in wealthier cities. Regression analyses indicate that higher levels of nonprofit antipoverty activity are likely to be found in older and centrally located cities with higher socioeconomic status and significant government contribution to the provision of social services. These findings suggest that nonprofits and governments ought to be seen as complements rather than substitutes in efforts to alleviate intrametropolitan poverty disparities.
Key Words: poverty • geographic distribution • social services • government contribution
References
- Bailey, T.C., & Gatrell, A.C. (1995). Interactive spatial data analysis. Essex, UK: Longman.
- Barber, G.M. (1988). Elementary statistics for geographers. New York: Guilford.
- Bielefeld, W. (2000). Metropolitan nonprofit sectors: Findings from NCCS data. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 29, 297-314.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Bielefeld, W., Murdoch, J.C., & Waddell, P. (1997). The influence of demographics and distance on profit location. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 26, 207-225.[Abstract]
- Boris, E. (1998). Myths about the nonprofit sector. Charting Civil Society Series. Washington, DC: Urban Institute, Center on Nonprofits and Philanthropy. Retrieved from http://www.urban.org/periodcl/cnp/cnp_4.htm#tab1
- Boris, E., & Steuerle, E. (Eds.). (1999). Nonprofits and government: Collaboration and conflict. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.
- California State Controller. (1997). Annual reports of financial transactions concerning cities of California. Sacramento, CA: Author.
- California registry of charitable trusts. (2001). Retrieved from http://www.caag.state.ca.us/charities/
- Clotfelter, C.T. (Ed.). (1992). Who benefits from the nonprofit sector? Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Curtis, J.E., Grab, E., & Baer, D. (1992). Voluntary association membership in 15 countries: A comparative analysis. American Sociological Review, 57, 139-152.[CrossRef]
- Danzinger, S., & Gottschalk, P. (1995). America unequal. New York and Cambridge, MA: Russell Sage and Harvard University Press.
- DeVerteuil, G. (2000). Reconsidering the legacy of urban public facility location theory in human geography. Progress in Human Geography, 24(1), 47-69.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Ellwood, D.A., & Boyd D.J. (2000). Changes in spending on social services since the implementation of welfare reform: A preliminary report. Albany, NY: The Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government.
- Froelich, K.A., & Knoepfle, T.W. (1996). Internal Revenue Service 990 data: Fact or fiction? Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 25(1), 40-52.[Abstract]
- Gronbjerg, K. (1994). Using NTEE to classify non-profit organizations: An assessment of human service and regional applications. Voluntas, 5(3), 301-328.[CrossRef]
- Hagar, M., Galaskiewicz, J., & Bielefeld, W. (1996). Tales from the grave: Organizations accounts of their own demise. American Behavioral Scientist, 39(8), 975-994.[Abstract]
- Hasenfeld, Y. (2000). Social services and welfare-to-work: Prospects for the social work profession. Administration in Social Work, 23(3), 185-201.
- Hodgkinson, V.A., & Weitzman, M.S. (1986). Dimensions of the independent sector (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Independent Sector.
- Hodgkinson, V.A., Weitzman, M.S., Noga, S.M., & Gorski, H.A. (1992). Giving and volunteering in the United States. Washington, DC: Independent Sector.
- Joassart-Marcelli, P., & Musso, J.A. (2001). The regressive impact of federal fiscal policy: Federal spending and southern California cities. Urban Affairs Review, 37(2), 163-183.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Lee, M., Wolch, J.R., & Walsh, J. (1999). Homeless health and service needs: An urban political economy and service distribution. In R. Kearns & W. Gesler (Eds.), Putting health into place: Landscape, identity, and well-being (pp. 120-142). New York: Syracuse University Press.
- Mill, J.S. (1848). Principles of political economy. Fairfield, NJ: Augustus M. Kelley.
- National Center for Charitable Statistics. (2000). 1996 IRS core files. Retrieved from http://nccs.urban.org/product.htm
- Okten, C., & Weisbrod, B.A. (2000). Determinants of donations in private nonprofits markets. Journal of Public Economics, 75, 255-272.[CrossRef]
- Olasky, M. (2000). Compassionate conservatism: What it is, what it does, and how it can transform America. New York: Free Press.
- O’Neill, M. (1989). The third America: The emergence of the nonprofit sector in the United States. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
- Pack, J.R. (1998). Poverty and urban public expenditures. Urban Studies, 35, 1995-2019.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Pastor, M., Jr. (2000). Regional growth and inequality. Los Angeles: University of Southern California, Southern California Studies Center.
- Riddick-Norton, G. (1996). Social service resource directory for Los Angeles County. Orange, CA: Resource Directory.
- Salamon, L. (1992). Social services. In C.T. Clotfelter (Ed.), Who benefits from the nonprofit sector? (pp. 134-173). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Salamon, L., & Anheier, H. (1992). In search of the non-profit sector II: The problem of classification. Voluntas, 3(3), 267-309.
- Salamon, L.M. (1997). Holding the center: America’s nonprofit sector at a crossroads. New York: Nathan Cummings Foundation.
- Salkever, D.S., & Frank, R.G. (1992). Health services. In C.T. Clotfelter (Ed.), Who benefits from the nonprofit sector? (pp. 24-54). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Smith, D.H. (1983). Public benefit and member benefit nonprofit voluntary groups. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 22, 53-68.
- Smith, D.H. (1994). Determinants of voluntary association participation and volunteering: A literature review. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 23, 243-263.
- Smith, S.R., & Lipsky, M. (1993). Nonprofits for hire: The welfare state in the age of contracting. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Smith, S.R., & Stone, D. (1988). The unexpected consequence of privatization. In M.K. Brown (Ed.), Remaking the welfare state: Retrenchment and social policy in America (pp. 232-252). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
- Steinberg, R. (1987). Voluntary donations and public expenditures in a federalist system. American Economic Review, 77, 24-36.
- Sundeen, R.A. (1992). Differences in personal goals and attitudes among volunteers. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 21, 271-291.[Abstract]
- Takahashi, L.M., & Dear, M.J. (1997). The changing dynamics of community attitudes toward human services. Journal of the American Planning Association, 63(1), 79-93.[CrossRef][ISI]
- Twombly, E.C. (2001). Human service nonprofits in metropolitan areas during devolution and welfare reform. Charting Civil Society Series. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
- U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1994-1996). Consolidated federal funds reports. Washington, DC: Author.
- U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1990). U.S. census of population and housing. Summary Tape Files. Washington, DC: Author
- Weisbrod, B.A. (1988). The nonprofit economy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Wolch, J.R. (1990). The shadow state: Government and voluntary sector in transition. New York: The Foundation Center.
- Wolch, J.R., & DeVerteuil, G. (2001). New landscape of urban poverty management. In J. May & N. Thrift (Eds.), TimeSpace (pp. 149-168). London: Routledge.
- Wolch, J.R., & Geiger, R.K. (1983). The distribution of urban voluntary resources: An exploratory analysis. Environment and Planning A, 15, 1067-1082.[CrossRef]
- Wolch, J.R., Moon, K., & Lee, M. (1990). A geography of children’s services in Los Angeles. Los Angeles: Los Angeles Roundtable for Children.
- Wolch, J.R., & Walsh, J. (1998). Postmodern urbanism and delivering integrated services to families with children in Los Angeles. In J. McCrosky & S.D. Einbinder (Eds.), Universities and communities: Remaking professional and interprofessional education for the next century (pp. 88-118). Westport, CT: Praeger.
- Wolpert, J. (1988). Regional generosity and civic commitment. In Looking forward to the Year 2000: Public policy and philanthropy (1988 Spring Research Forum Working Papers, pp. 472-483). Washington, DC: Independent Sector and United Way Institute.
- Wolpert, J. (1993a). Decentralization and equity in public and nonprofit sectors. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 22, 281-296.[Abstract]
- Wolpert, J. (1993b). Patterns of generosity in America: Who’s holding the safety net? New York: The Twentieth Century Fund Press.
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
L. R. Peck
Do Antipoverty Nonprofits Locate Where People Need Them? Evidence From a Spatial Analysis of Phoenix
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,
March 1, 2008;
37(1):
138 - 151.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. W. Allard
The Changing Face of Welfare during the Bush Administration
Publius,
May 29, 2007;
(2007)
pjm013v1.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
