This article examines US fair housing policy from a critical perspective. We describe the impact of the expansion of neoliberal ideology on the fair housing assistance program (FHAP), the fair housing initiatives program (FHIP), and the scope of US Department of Justice activities. Prior findings from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and IRS Form 990 are summarized. We argue that neoliberalism has contributed to the underdevelopment, underfunding, and poor implementation of US fair housing policy. We offer three recommendations for fair housing reform. The first focuses on the need to remove fair housing activities from HUD and place them in an independent fair housing agency. The second focuses on the need for the federal government to mandate fair housing enforcement across all governmental programs and agencies. The third focuses on the need for increased lobbying, litigation, and activism by community-based advocacy organizations for reform.

Purpose – This paper seeks to examine executive directors’ perceptions of the relationship between access to funding and an organization’s programmatic and advocacy activities. Design/methodology/approach – This study is based on data from a national survey of executive directors of non-profit advocacy organizations in the USA. The organizations were selected because they served minority and disadvantaged groups, and were heavily reliant on public funding. Findings – The findings indicate that several factors are associated with how organizations balance their programmatic and advocacy activities. They include dependence on public funding, constituencies served, and perception of funders. Despite evidence for institutional pressures to reduce advocacy activities, the results indicate that such activities are sustainable in organizations with a strong individual donor base. In essence, a stable source of grassroots resources can counter institutional pressures to reduce advocacy. Research limitations/implications – This study focuses on a specific subgroup of advocacy organizations. Although it offers insights into their perceptions, the findings do not necessarily reflect more general perceptions. Social implications – The findings enhance understanding of impediments to non-profit advocacy that stem from trends in public funding and regulations related to non-profit lobbying and advocacy activities. The findings also enhance understanding of the extent to which the influences of the emerging non-profit industrial complex are offset by traditional grassroots support for non-profit advocacy. Originality/value – This paper adds to the body of research on non-profit decision making in relation to the balance between programmatic and advocacy work. It adds to the understanding of how organizations interface with larger institutions in society and the constraints that institutional ties entail.

This article examines charter schools applying a nonprofit conceptual frame of reference. The proliferation of charter schools is framed as a form of nonprofitization of public education. The implications of this trend are discussed. This discussion is contextualized through an examination of charter schools in New York. The case analysis is supported with data from the New York State Department of Education, the US Census Public Education Finance Report, and IRS Form 990 data. The findings suggest that there is mixed evidence for better school outcomes between charter schools and other public schools, while differences that do exist may be driven by socio-economic inequalities and other factors. This raises questions about the future of nonprofit schools and the degree to which they are accountable to traditional constituencies served by the public education system.