skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 99558 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: Public Ends and Private Means - Accountability Among Private Providers of Public Social Services
Author(s): J M Keating
Date Published: 1984
Page Count: 121
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute for Dispute Resolution
Washington, DC 20036-4502
National Institute of Justice/
Rockville, MD 20849
NCJRS Photocopy Services
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
NCJRS paper reproduction
Box 6000, Dept F
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America

NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Document: PDF
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This study assessed the accountability measures used in 16 private sector programs and facilities furnished to 2 State childrens' services agencies: the Massachusetts Department of Youth Services and the Rhode Island Department for Children and Their Families.
Abstract: Eight programs in each State were evaluated by interviews conducted with 175 persons involved with the programs. Interviewees were administrators, middle managers, line staff, and client representatives; 100 were professionals in child care delivery services. Accountability measures fit into three basic categories: self-established by the provider, those imposed by the supervising agency, and those created statutorily and presided over by an agency other than the funding agency. Providers relied largely on informal mechanisms. Agency supervision was composed of internal systems for program and contract review, and the investigation of abuse allegations. State watchdog agencies rigorously investigated and pursued allegations of abuse and conducted sporadic reviews of provider programs. Private accountability efforts are therefore totally dependent on the program administrator, while State agency efforts seem to escalate simple grievances into allegations of abuse. These latter efforts are conclusions are that accountability systems must be more carefully planned and systematic, providers need to develop complaint procedures incorporating both formal and informal review processes; clients need greater access to mechanisms for monitoring institutional abuse; and State agencies must improve their supervision of providers with regular programmatic reviews, review process coordination, and client surveys. Four footnotes, program descriptions, and the interview protocols are provided. (Author abstract modified)
Index Term(s): Accountability; Family intervention programs; Institutional child abuse; Massachusetts; Privatization; Program monitoring; Rhode Island; Services effectiveness
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.