Two somewhat opposing views on that question. First up, AU's Barry Lynn, argues that nothing has changed:
During his presidential campaign, Obama specifically promised that "if you get a federal grant, you can't use that grant money to proselytize to the people you help and you can't discriminate against them — or against the people you hire — on the basis of their religion."
This sounded pretty unequivocal. But more than a year has gone by since Obama set up his Office of Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, and no substantive policy has been changed, least of all discriminatory hiring.
Melissa Rogers – who led the President's Faith-Based Advisory Council in crafting a report of recommendations for the White House – responds, making the case that lots is about to change:
Beyond the council's unanimous endorsement [of reform recommendations], these proposals also received support from an array of national organizations, including Barry Lynn's Americans United for Separation of Church and State. And Lynn served on a task force the Advisory Council established to develop these and others recommendations. His helpful suggestions strengthened our work.
But in recent comments on the council's report, Lynn and Americans United hardly mention these important reforms. Instead, they focus narrowly on a few other items, one of which is a significant issue the council was instructed not to address: the practice of allowing religious groups to make religion-based employment decisions in government-funded jobs. The White House decided to deal with that issue outside the scope of the council process.
…
If the administration implements our recommendations in this area swiftly, and those rules are especially durable given the fact that they are supported by such a broad constituency, won't that be a great victory? I think so.
