Minnesota Teen Challenge describes itself as a “para-church” ministry that completes the “spiritual restoration” of Minnesotans dealing with drug addiction, yet over the last seven years it’s received more than $10 million in government funds — and twice the Minnesota Legislature has singled the program out for a raise.
The arrangement raises questions about the constitutional separation of church and state, and some experts say the state has overstepped its bounds in contracting with Teen Challenge.
In 2001, the Minnesota Legislature approved a funding increase of 46 percent for Teen Challenge and authorized another in 2005, capping payments at $700 per unit. Experts say those funding increases create the impression that the state favors the treatment center which is closely affiliated with the Assemblies of God, a pentecostal Christian denomination.
“To me, I think, that the legislature is setting special rates for a pervasively sectarian organization is enough to make that funding unconstitutional,” said Alex Luchenitser of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State. “You have clear favoritism and endorsement of a religious program.”
Religious character “inseparable” from treatment
Beyond perceptions of legislative favoritism is the question of how the state got involved with a religious ministry in the first place. The answer goes back a decade and involved two years of legal wrangling between Hennepin County and Teen Challenge.
In early 2000, Teen Challenge, Hennepin County and the Department of Human Services began a discussion about contracting with Teen Challenge to provide chemical dependency treatment services to county clients.
According to some 1,300 pages of documents obtained by the Minnesota Independent, that arrangement hit a few snags along the way as Hennepin County looked for a way to contract with a pervasively Christian program.
“I will tell you that Teen Challenge has been consulting with us for the past couple years and that there seems to be no way for them to separate the treatment from the Christian orientation and beliefs,” Peg Murphy, former program manager of Hennepin County’s Chemical Health Division, wrote in a letter to the Hennepin County Attorney’s office. “Because Hennepin County’s standard contract language precludes funding for ‘religious training or services,’ we do not intend to negotiate a contract with Teen Challenge in the absence of authorization from your office.”
She urged the county attorney to offer an opinion before county officials could negotiate a contract.
In early 2000, Hennepin County Attorney Amy Klobuchar approved the arrangement, presumably under the doctrine of “beneficiary choice,” giving Teen Challenge the go-ahead to submit an application.
The county rejected requests by the Minnesota Independent to obtain a copy of that opinion, citing the documents as “privileged.”
Klobuchar would go on to help secure a federal earmark for the program as U.S. Senator in 2008 along with former Rep. Jim Ramstad. And the organization has secured the support of a number of other elected officials. First Lady Mary Pawlenty was a past member of the board of directors, and Gov. Pawlenty has donated a large sum of campaign funds ($85,892) to the program. Rep. Michele Bachmann donated $9,200 in campaign funds related to the Tom Petters Ponzi scheme scandal, but Teen Challenge later returned the “tainted” funds.
“Beneficiary choice” means a client has a choice between a secular and a religious treatment program, and the client can pay money given by the government to the treatment of their choosing. In other states, the system works with vouchers, which Minnesota doesn’t use. Instead Teen Challenge gets paid a flat rate multiplied by the number of clients in its care who receive state assistance. It’s that rate that the Minnesota legislature voted to increase in 2001 and 2005.
Luchenitser said that the “beneficiary choice” arrangement that Hennepin County set up with Teen Challenge may be legally problematic.
“What’s clear is that this funding has to be completely under the control of the individual,” he said. If the money is not part of a voucher system, he added, then there isn’t a true choice of program, only “approved” programs that the county contracts with, such as Teen Challenge.
And the state sets the rate of reimbursement, not the client, which creates a constitutional problem when the Legislature decides to give a religious program “a raise,” he said.
“Government should not influence how much money goes to a specific provider,” especially when its a religious provider, Luchenitser said. “It puts the force of government authority behind it,” which he characterizes as an endorsement of religion.
While the County Attorney’s office gave the program the green light, problems continued to plague the fledgling arrangement because of MNTC’s religious nature. The county’s contracting department raised a red flag in 2001 about the evangelical treatment center’s hiring practices: Teen Challenge said it would only hire Christians who adhered to a statement of faith and a code of ethics.
“Minnesota Teen Challenge is a residential Christian discipleship program dealing with adolescents and adults with life-controlling issues, and is a para-church ministry operating under the authority of the Assemblies of God denomination,” the group’s statement of faith begins (PDF). “Our purpose is to train individuals (students) in our program to be disciples of Jesus Christ.”
That statement also states that “whether a person is preparing a meal, writing a computer program, or generating a financial statement” for the organization, that person must “be an effective witness for Christ.”
It requires all employees to pray for the program and may be called upon “to minister to program students” with their testimony.
In MNTC’s code of conduct, all employees are required to attend church and to pray. They are prohibited from viewing pornography or being in a romantic relationship with someone of the same sex.
Hennepin County took issue with those employment practices and rejected Teen Challenge’s application because it violated the county’s ban on religious discrimination. The county said that MNTC could resubmit the application with a new affirmative action plan.
Finally a compromise was reached: Teen Challenge limited the practice to executive, leadership, pastoral, and counselor positions.
Teen Challenge’s chemical dependency program manager Cecilia Winsor explained the news in an email to the county’s senior planning analyst, Michael Miller.
“There are certain ‘ministry’ positions which will have religious requirements to them, and those positions will only be filled by people who can perform the job,” she wrote (PDF). “A Muslim would not be considered for a Pastoral Counselor position, but would be considered to work in our Accounting [Department], for example.”
According to state records (PDF), Teen Challenge requires 21 of its 40 employees to be Christians.
Some of those job descriptions highlight the close connections to Pentecostalism. The executive director’s position description says that the director must be “approved by the Assemblies of God and endorsed by the National Division of Home Missions.”
The National Division is now called Assemblies of God U.S. Missions, and its mission is “to equip, empower and encourage the Assemblies of God to evangelize America.”
Teen Challenge International, Inc., of which Minnesota Teen Challenge reports to monthly, is one of the six ministries that make up the Missions.













16 Comments »
Pingback posted January 8, 2010 @ 5:03 pm
[...] Minnesota Independent reported today that the state still has not halted aid: In the past seven years, the evangelical, antigay program [...]
Comment posted January 8, 2010 @ 7:42 pm
Unconstitutional at best.
Comment posted January 8, 2010 @ 7:44 pm
Teen Challenge should be ordered to give back the funding. Gov. Pawlenty do your job.
Pingback posted January 9, 2010 @ 12:01 am
[...] State funding for Minnesota Teen Challenge questioned « Minnesota … [...]
Comment posted January 9, 2010 @ 5:14 pm
Are they being paid public money to help teens recover from chemical dependency? If that’s the deal, where are the data about how well their program works, relative to other treatment options?
And whether a prisoner or a pauper on public support, if there is a coercive element to forcing teens into the progam using state power, everything else aside, it is unconstitutional, and should not stand
Comment posted January 9, 2010 @ 7:50 pm
Although I now live in Mo. I used to live in Mn. Do NOT give Teen Challenge any taxpayers money.
I called them to get help. I told them on the phone the my son was a drug addict and had anger management issues. I was told TC was the place for him. I had spent a whole day calling treament centers and no one but TC had a bed available.
After giving them a non-refundable cashier’s check for $760.00 He was admitted. It wasn’t until after he was admitted that I found out they have no drug program per se. While talking to my son on the phone he said it was all church and he felt like it was a ‘cult’.
Upon entry they take the residents to a dr. for a physical. It was then that we learned my son has hepitits C. Within one week he was kicked out of there program; put on a greyhound bus without even contacting us to let us know what was happening or where and when to pick him up.
I have a blog up on my myspace account that you should go read. http://www.myspace.com/bipsey
Comment posted January 9, 2010 @ 8:34 pm
Thank you, Jane.
Comment posted January 10, 2010 @ 1:09 pm
Very interesting post, Jane.
Comment posted January 10, 2010 @ 2:35 pm
You are absolutely correct about TC’s agenda! I speak from personal experience. TC crosses the boundaries of separation of church and state, and should not receive funding from the state or federal government. They do discriminate against other religions. My child was not allowed to use his Catholic Bible while in their program.
Comment posted January 10, 2010 @ 10:14 pm
Its high time a complete investigation was done of this program. They are well known for inflating their success stories. Having worked in the field for 23 years, I can only recall one person who actually completed their program.
Comment posted January 11, 2010 @ 10:29 am
My grandson was in their program. He had DWI problems. The idea of Teen Challenge was to send him to Bible Study half of the day memorizing. Then he would go back to his room and study some more. He became so indoctrinated into their way of thinking that we were beginning to think the place was a cult of some kind. They were suppose to be helping him to get his high school diploma which they never did. We had him go into the program because we thought this would be better then sitting in the workhouse for a year’s time learning nothing. Finally, when his time was up to leave there, they told him he needed more time there. He said this was just a way for them to get more government tax money as many people had left after being disillusioned by what Teen challenge promised and what they never did. Sunday was spent going to their church whether he wanted to or not. Finally, he packed his clothes and walked out after serving his time there. He hasn’t had a drink in 3 years and has a very good job which he did on his own with no help from Teen Challenge. I feel that this organization should not be given state or federal monies if their main purpose is to teach bible study classes most of the day and require church attendance on Sunday at the choice of Teen Challenge.
Comment posted January 11, 2010 @ 12:58 pm
It looks like the author put some time into research. Since I am a bang for the buck citizen… let’s hear the success rate of this program. I’ve known people over the years who have volunteered there and is sure seemed like they had far more success stories, and therefore a better outome percentage than the abysmally low success rates of ballyhooed programs like Hazeldon for example. (Look for all treatment programs under Obamacare to wither and die a slow death as measured successfull outcomes will be a stron component of dollars given for treatment.) Every 12 step program has a higher power component. I suppose one could call their pet ferret a higher power, but I suspect most people in recovery are turning to GOD. Teen challenge does wonderful things for these kids. Imagine the empowerment of regaining control of your life while still in your teens instead of your 40’s or 50’s in some prison recovery program.
Comment posted January 11, 2010 @ 1:49 pm
“Our purpose is to train individuals (students) in our program to be disciples of Jesus Christ.”
How can an organization with this purpose statement not be endorsing an establishment of religion? By funding this organization, the government is furthering this endorsement and is working in direct opposition to The Constitution.
Comment posted January 11, 2010 @ 2:42 pm
Teen challenge demonstrates what is commonplace in this state and throughout the country. Government is in collusion with religion to establish a christocentric, patriarchal, homo/transphobic, government. This is not limited to teen challenge but also occurs with the salvation army and nearly every church in the state that has any sort of “charitable” program. These programs should only receive state and federal funds if they are secular. Evidently and disappointingly is that even so called progressives are involved in this effort to force christianity on those who need services because of poverty and disability. This is a flagrant violation of the separation of church and state. Religious organizations should be free to provide services paid for by their membership as long as they do not violate discrimination laws that should be applied to them the same way as they are applied to anyone else.
Comment posted January 28, 2010 @ 9:48 pm
What’s the success rate of the program?
Comment posted February 24, 2010 @ 11:58 pm
As educated individuals with a relatively equal interest in seeing both appropriate fiscal responsibility balanced with the assurance that our next generation is not being left victim to the horrors of addiction, it remains imperative that we evaluate both sides of the issue. The reality is that despite this organizations religious affiliations, it provides a substantial number of addicts long term freedom from their dependency issues. In fact, an independent Wilder study evaluated outcome measures of this organization in 2009 and found their success rate to rank among the highest in the chemical dependency field (Over 70% as opposed to the average government success rate of 12-15%). In addition, they provide FREE admission to all adults who are unable to afford treatment-as one would imagine, the majority of the cliental cannot afford the exorbitant rates charged by other well known secular MN treatment programs (exp, Hazeldon). One must also consider the cost of the alternative to treatment: recurrent DWI’s; theft, incarceration, re-entry; drug trafficking and at its worst-promotion of these behaviors to the next generation. The reality is that despite America’s generalized hostilities to any form of religious idealism-at the end of the day, we as a community will be flipping the bill for something-effective drug rehab with Christian ideals, or meth-lab clean-ups and striped t-shirts. America’s leaders appear to have recognized this crucial dilemma, and have acted in what they, and many Minnesotans, consider to be in the best interest of our community. After analyzing many commentaries on this issue, I have found a rather disappointing appropriation of guarded and clearly un-educated opinions on this issue. I would encourage individuals truly interested in this topic to read Mr. Scherber’s rebuttal to a similar commentary made 2 years ago at:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rich-scherber/setting-the-record-straig_b_151091.html
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Leave a comment