Skip to main content
Log in

Delegating governmental responsibility: Issues regarding a Mental Health Demonstration Project

  • Articles And Reports
  • Reports
  • Published:
Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Conclusions

Several conclusions seem to follow from the above literature review and description of the IMH Demonstration Project. First, as authors have found, the boundary between government and nongovernment may be indistinct. Second, factors supporting the creation of enterprises to operate on this indistinct boundary may be similar in mental health to those that obtain in other areas of society, and associated problems in theory and practice may be closely similar. Third, focusing more narrowly on Integrated Mental Health, there seems to be no overriding problems with its exercising, to the degree that it does, powers and responsibilities which perhaps in times past were, and in other settings are, exercised more directly by government. More specifically, the gain in service planning and provision compares favorably with any possible risk which might be thought to be associated with abrogation of particular responsibilities by government.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Appleby, P. (1978). Government is different. In J. Shafritz, & A. Hyde (Eds.),Classics of public administration. Oak Park, IL: Moore Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blum v. Yaretsky, 457 U.S. 991 (1982).

  • Ciconne, J., Tokoli, J., Clements, C., & Gift, T. (in press).Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law.

  • Dorwart, R., Schlesinger, M., & Pulice, R. (1986). The promise and pitfalls of purchase-of-service contracts.Hospital and Community Psychiatry, 37, 875–878.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emmert, M., & Crow, M. (1988). Public, private and hybrid organization: An empirical examination of the role of publicness.Administration & Society, 20, 216–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moe, R. (1987). Exploring the limits of privatization.Public Administration Review, 47, 453–460.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moe, R. (1988). Liabilities of the quasi government.Government Executive, November, 47–50.

  • Moe, R., & Stanton, T. (1989). Government-sponsored enterprises as federal instrumentalities: Reconciling private management with public accountability.Public Administration Review, 49, 321–329.

    Google Scholar 

  • Musolf, L., & Seidman, H. (1980). The blurred boundaries of public administration.Public Administration Review, 40, 124–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seidman, H. (1988). The quasi world of the federal government.The Brookings Review, 6, 23–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, B. (1975). The public use of the private sector. In B. Smith (Ed.),The new political economy: The public use of the private sector (p. 8). New York: Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, H. (1987). Privatization of public services: A growing threat to constitutional rights.Public Administration Review, 47, 461–467.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gift, T.E., Marshall, P.E. Delegating governmental responsibility: Issues regarding a Mental Health Demonstration Project. Adm Policy Ment Health 18, 367–372 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00707002

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00707002

Keywords

Navigation