The Influence of Religious Affiliation of Vulnerable Families on Their Investments and Consumption Secondary Analysis of a Program Evaluation
Posted on 30 Dec, 2011 
Abstract
The article presents some of the results of a secondary analysis performed on the data collected during an evaluation carried out as part of the Family Strengthening Program run by SOS Children’s Villages in district 1 of Bucharest. The secondary analysis had other objectives than those set out for the evaluation, having a more exploratory character. As a result of the analyzed individual interviews and focus group meetings held with the program beneficiaries, a number of significant differences were found between the behavior of Protestant families and of Orthodox families. In similar circumstances (all the families included in the program were vulnerable, with several children having received the same social services provided by the organization) the Protestant families have a behavior that focuses on savings and investments in improving living conditions, whereas Orthodox families focus mainly on consumption. The Protestants defined the financial support (consisting in social vouchers that can be used exclusively for buying foodstuffs and toiletries) received from the organization as an opportunity to save on other resources and to invest in improving their living conditions. The Orthodox families perceived this support as designed to meet their basic needs, as a form of supplementing the resources allocated mainly to buying food and paying for utilities. Therefore, the former category of vulnerable families showed a genuine independence from the services provided, whereas in the case of the Orthodox families dependence on the provided services increased.
Keywords: secondary analysis; program evaluation; exploratory secondary analysis; investments in improving living conditions; Protestant; Orthodox.
References
Boruch, R., Wortman, P. (1978). An illustrative project on secondary analysis. New directions for program evaluation, 4, 89-106.
Brueggemann, W., (1996) The practice of macro social work, Chicago: Nelson Hall Publishers.
Cace, C. (2002). Evaluarea programelor sociale. Jurnalul practicilor pozitive comunitare, 3-4, 13-32.
Cace, S. (2003). Importanta evaluarii şi monitorizarii programelor sociale la nivel comunitar. Jurnalul practicilor pozitive comunitare, 3-4, 30-34.
Cartwright, D. (1960). Group Dynamics Research and Theory, Thrid Edition.
Cojocaru, D., Cojocaru, S, Sandu, A. (2011). The Role of Religion in the System of Social and Medical Services in Post-communism. Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies, 10(28), 65-83.
Cojocaru, S. (2005). The appreciative perspective in multicultural relations. Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies, 2(2), 36-48.
Cojocaru, S. (2006). Social projectionism: A vision for new ethics in social welfare. Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies, 6(13), 32-38.
Cojocaru, S. (2010). Evaluarea programelor de asistență socială. Iași: Polirom.
Cojocaru, S., (2009). Clarifying the theory-based evaluation. Revista de Cercetare si Interventie Sociala, 26, 76-86.
Cojocaru, S., Cojocaru, D. (2011). Naturalistic evaluation of programs. Parents’ voice in parent education programs. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, No. 34 E/2011, 49-62.
Cojocaru, S., Cojocaru, D., Bunea, O. (2010). Family strengthening program. Evaluation report. Social Research Reports, 14, 3-87.
David, J., Pelavin, S. (1978). Secondary analysis: in compensatory education program. New Directions for Program
Evaluation, 4, 31-44.
Dollar, C., Ambacher, B. (1978). The national archives and secondary analysis. New Directions for Program Evaluation,
4, 1-5.
Fitzgerald, M. (2009). Satan, the great motivator – The curious effect of religion, http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2009/11/15/the_curious_economic_effects_of_religion/.
Frunză, S. (2011a). Media Communication and the Politics of the Symbolic Construction of Reality. Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies, 10(29), 182-202.
Frunză, S. (2011b). The relational individual in a communication built society. Towards a new philosophy of communication. Transylvanian Review, vol. XX, No. 3, 140-152.
Gergen, K.J. (1985). The social constructionism movement in modern psychology. American Psychologist, 40
(3), 266-275.
Lipsey, M.W. (2000). Meta-analysis and the learning curve in evaluation practice. American journal of evaluation, 21(2),
207-212.
Maurer, B. (2007). Confession and bookkeeping: The religious, moral, and rhetorical roots of modern accounting. American
Journal of Sociology, 112(4), 1295-1296.
McCleary, R.M, Barro, R.J. (2006). Religion and Economy. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(2), 49-72.
Powell, M. (1978). Secondary analysis: in the beginning teacher evaluation study. New Directions for Program Evaluation,
4, 63-74.
Rubin, A. (2008). Secondary analysis. In Grinnell, R.Jr., Unrau, Y. (coord), Social work research and evaluation. Foundations of evidence-based practice, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 305-314.
Sandu, A. (2010). Appreciative semiotic and hermeneutic practices in the analysis of ethnic minorities. Revista de Cercetare si Interventie Sociala 29, 109-129.
Taylor, C. (2004). Modern Social Imaginaries, Duke University Press.
Thomas, J.C., Hersen, M. (2002). Handbook of mental health in the workplace, Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage Publications.
Tindall, N.T.J. (2001). Identity, power, and difference: The management of roles and self among public relations practitioners, University ofMaryland,College Park.
Webber, M. (1946). From Max Webber: Essays in Sociology, Translated, edited, with an introduction by G. H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills, Oxford University Press.
Wolins, L. (1978). Secondary analysis: in published research in the behavioral sciences. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 4, 45-55.
Zamagni, S. (2010). Catholic Social Thought, Civil Economy and the Spirit of Capitalism. In The True Wealth of Nations, Ed. by Daniel K. Finn, Oxford University Press.
Loading ...
