Value Our Government – VOTE!

On a recent trip to Europe, I was amazed at how many people asked us about our government.  Are we happy with the Administration?  President Obama seems to be doing a great job, wouldn’t we agree?  Despite the economic problems, America was still strong and bouncing back, right?

Overall, from cab drivers to people at the next table in cafes, the feeling was positive, upbeat and respectful for our United States government and the public face it projects to the world.  It was clear that no matter what we think about how things are going at home, people in these countries, upon learning we were Americans, were eager to share their thoughts on what a great country we live in.  Do we value our own democracy in the same way?

Coming home was something of a culture shock!  Turning on the news to cries of ‘throw the bums out’ (pick a party – any party!) made us realize that perhaps we do not show the same level of respect to our own elected officials and public servants.  While we certainly have a right to criticize and expect more, good or bad, these are the people we elected.  Polite debate has given way to muckraking and name-calling, but these folks did not just appear in office.  We put them there.

Worse perhaps is the indifference.  With primaries upon us, how many will take the time to vote?  And how many of those who did not exercise their rights to elect will complain about those who are elected and the decisions that they make?  This is the ultimate sign of respect for our democracy, taking the time to consider the options and cast a ballot for the people and ideas that resonate with each individual. 

As public servants in any realm, in government, nonprofits or education, we need to encourage everyone to learn about the people and the issues and get out and vote!  It is our duty as well as our right.  It is the reason we fight wars and build global relationships.  And it certainly is valued by those in other countries even if we do a poor job of respecting it here at home!

By Yvonne J. Kochanowski, DPA, MBA, yvonne.kochanowski@capella.edu

That Old Political Game

As the nation heads into a volatile midterm election season, the only certainty is a depressing one: we will be inundated with incessant political ads premised on the notion that we are children.  Every candidate for every office will promise to protect our perks while cutting our taxes.

Those of us who work in, or teach about, government know—and voters should know—that there is no such thing as a free lunch. If we want government services, we have to pay for them, and that actually might mean paying taxes.

On the other hand, perhaps the candidates are right. Perhaps we are children.

In my city right now, six libraries are closing.  Our bus system—already one of the country’s most inadequate—is cutting additional routes. My own neighborhood, a central-city historic district, is working with other downtown neighborhoods on a plan to hire private police to supplement our stretched-way-too-thin police force. In many neighborhoods, the streets and sidewalks are disintegrating. And I try not to look at the condition of our parks.

Thirty years ago, when I worked for city government, there was a recognition that city services had to be paid for, and that there were better and worse ways to do that. Sinking funds (savings accounts) were preferable to bonds (borrowing from future taxpayers) for operating costs. Ongoing maintenance of infrastructure was more cost-effective than cycles of neglect and repair.

The Administration I served in wasn’t perfect, but it was the last in my city to operate on a pay-as-you-go basis. It was succeeded by mayors of both parties who got elected by convincing people that they could deliver government on the cheap. “Privatization” initiatives were used to shift costs from the operating to the capital budget; debt was refinanced over longer periods; infrastructure maintenance was skimped or deferred. Even very modest tax increases were resisted until the cuts in service delivery became too politically damaging to ignore.

The money to fix our decaying infrastructure and deliver necessary municipal services has to come from somewhere, and our childish belief that we can expect something for nothing—a belief nurtured by years of dishonest political rhetoric—means politicians will no longer raise taxes directly. Instead, they employ increasingly “creative” mechanisms to raise desperately needed funds—mechanisms that frequently are much more arbitrary and regressive than property or income taxes, and far less transparent.

Shouldn’t we all just grow up?

The Summer Work Experience

As we wrap up our first year as MPA students, my classmates and I are preparing to enter what our program refers to as “the summer work experience” (aka internship). We will each be spending 400 hours over the summer months working at a governmental, nonprofit, or private organization, and leave behind papers and final exams with feelings of joy.

I have heard classmates rejoice over returning to a scheduled workday; as with some careers, being a student is not a job you leave at the office and nights and weekends are often extensions of the school day. Working full-time for pay also brings welcome relief for some of our bank accounts (hello, paycheck!).

Beyond these obvious benefits, I have been doing some reflecting lately on what is gained from doing a summer internship. Thinking back to my own first internship, an unpaid position at an Arts Council the summer after my sophomore year of college, I see that I was not only able to begin building office skills, but also to begin building the connections and experience that would lead me to other unpaid internships and paying positions.

While viewing my summer internship as a tool for networking and resume-building continues to be important, I also now appreciate the opportunities it gives me beyond that. When I first began doing internships, the sole work-related goal was to meet the agendas’ of the staff members, whether that meant designing workshops, assembling packets, or doing lots (and lots) of copying. This is as it should be, and will continue to be true for me this summer to a degree. However, I now feel I’m at the point where I will have some agency in designing work-related tasks around my own skill development goals. I know that it is up to me to be deliberate about articulating and advancing these goals, and making connections between them and what the agency hopes to do. Thus, as is true with many things in life, what I will gain from this experience is largely up to me and my initiative.

Katie O’Connor Sirakos
MPA 2011

Communications & Public Affairs in Government: Who do they serve?

In the course of exploring dissertation topics for my doctoral program, I attempted a literature search on the role of public affairs offices and communications officers in local government. I found that there is nothing out there on the subject that explains the nature or roles of these officials in a typical government setting.

It is possible to find mission and vision statements from academic programs that educate public affairs staff, but when these individuals enter the profession, the absence of scholarly study of their work lives and contributions to civic knowledge implies that they enter a black hole, never to be seen again (or at least not studied).

Part of my interest in this topic is based on my own (admittedly limited) experience working with public affairs staff in a large county in which I was employed some years ago.  Our public affairs staff were knowledgeable and kind people, but they were unabashedly at the service of our elected County Board. This meant that inquiries that came to us from the media or the public had to go through what felt like a cleansing process whereby we as county staff had to have our statements re-written and information considered sensitive to a particular commissioner or other elected official might be  stricken from the response.  This step took extra time that made it look from the outside as if we were stalling and maybe even “packaging” our response (which we were) and sometimes the effect was to water down answers, sanitize them, and often miss an excellent opportunity to educate our public about an important policy or issue.

I also know that dealing with a public affairs department or staff person is increasingly rare as local governments cut non-critical staff, which might also partially explain the lack of research.  There simply may be very little public affairs work to study.

I am interested in hearing from others about their experience with public affairs and communications staff in their agencies.  Do you think they serve the public interest?  The elected leadership?  Someone else?

These are important roles to fill in local government agencies and we are wise to consider how we staff them and just which masters they serve.

Anita Larson, Research Fellow and Public Administration Doctoral Candidate, St. Paul, MN

On Public Service and Trust: Aiming the Cannons

I hear from my DPA and MPA learners the following lament:  There seems to be a real lack of trust from the public for public servants these days.  Whether it is criticizing the DMV office workers who are off on furlough days or complaining about how much government is spending on services they deem to be pitiful, the public (the residents we serve) seem to hold public administrators in low regard.  Is the public aiming its’ cannons of criticism in the right direction?

Note that in the examples above, I specifically called out a couple of areas where the civil service worker does not have control over the outcome that has disturbed the member of the public.  The worker in the DMV office is told when to take furlough days to help reduce a state deficit; the worker in a government building is also probably not the one who passed the jurisdiction’s budget.  Those same workers, though, are the ones that the public complains about!

When I explain that I teach public administration, I am often harangued with comments that I should teach public administrators to operate more like businesses.  If government was run like a business, people will say, it would be much more efficient.  Government and its workers are irresponsible in terms of spending and inefficiencies that are rampant throughout all jurisdictions.

Those of us who work every day in this field understand why this cannot and never will be true.  There are some inefficiencies in our processes and programs, but so many of these have been forced into oblivion in the many recent years of reduced expenditures and scarce resources.  Government is the provider of last resort, and it has many functions that will never be taken over by a private sector provider because they will never be able to be profitable. 

Government is also a messy business.  The process of setting priorities, funding programs with designated revenue streams, using inadequate general funds to support massive service needs, limiting taxation via two-thirds majority voting and the like all contribute to the complexity of making things run smoothly.  When money is tight, it is sometimes amazing that government can run at all!

The public forgets too that government cannot raise the price on a retail item or introduce a new product line with the ease of a private business.  It cannot decide to eliminate a program or service that is mandated by the law, while a business could decide to discontinue a product line.  It cannot declare bankruptcy or shut the doors and stop providing law enforcement, public health, public works, transportation or other vital services when things become too tight.  To maintain a civil society, these services still need to be provided.

While there is much that government can learn from good business processes and businesses can learn from government collaborations, government is truly different.  Perhaps we all need to become instructors educating the public, our government agencies and the elected officials in how government functions.  When someone votes on an initiative that specifies a revenue source dedicated to only one program, it can take money away from other programs.   We are all vulnerable when government is vulnerable.  We need to take the aim of this cannon off this structure of civil society!

 By Yvonne J. Kochanowski, DPA, MBA, yvonne.kochanowski@capella.edu

Volunteers for the Hungry & the Homeless

Not everyone wants to get involved with community organizations and do volunteer work in the name of charity whereas I always look for opportunities to extend a helping hand and make a difference in the lives of those who are rather a less fortunate. Family members and friends say I like to work for free. They think I rather use my skills, time and energy in the right place so it brings me some extra cash. From my end, I never regret investing time to serve the hungry and the helpless, making those extra efforts toward creating mass awareness and advocating for a social change while empowering them to achieve a better living or at least help them dream for a secure future ahead of them. In fact, volunteering gives me an extra vibe of positive energy in the body and soul. There is nothing as pleasant as letting someone know that you will be there for him no matter what.

I used to be a frequent volunteer at a homeless breakfast Center in the downtown area of Little Rock, the capital city of Arkansas. Of course, going to work was a priority, but there was a sense of enthusiasm on those mornings when I was scheduled to arrange, organize and serve breakfast to the hungry and homeless at the Center. Like other volunteers, I was always ready to embrace the unexpected, and welcome the unknown faces at the Center. There were days when the number of visitors would outnumber the stack of bread and cases of eggs, but we always ensured everyone got a warm cup of coffee. We were always motivated and team-spirit kept us going. Those who consider themselves a little fortunate, and professionals from all walks of life gathered every morning to serve a cause that they believe in and work diligently.

Later the group moved to serve breakfast under the Broadway bridge near Riverfront Park since downtown neighborhoods and businesses complained about the congregation of the homeless people coming together in the morning. Right now there is no fixed place to serve breakfast to these people. Under this uncertainty our long-standing volunteers fell apart. The recent addition of a Homeless Day Resource Center, as part of the Ten Year Plan to end chronic homelessness, within the River City Ministries building in North Little Rock gave some solace to both the homeless and those serving them including volunteers and their patrons. This facility is aimed at providing services like food, clothing, and healthcare apart from helping them out with housing and employment. But until there is a separate and suitable permanent home for the Day Resource Center, confusion regarding service delivery to the homeless will exist. Mayor Mark Stodola recently said that the City is still in the look out for an alternative site for this Resource Center but failed in its efforts as many possible sites have been objected to by neighborhood associations.

The sad reality is that with this floating group of population, the volunteers who serve them are also floating. There are days when I am able to join them but there are times that I cannot guess where they actually are. I hope there will be a day when the City of Little Rock will understand and determine the need for starting up a full-fledged Breakfast Center for the hungry and homeless population of the city and end the dilemma of juggling for these homeless people before they begin their journey on the streets of the city which has unfortunately failed to ensure public housing for them, let alone a confirmed bed in the city operated shelters day in and day out. Meanwhile, though some people may support prohibiting organizations feeding the homeless in the parks or under the bridge, the volunteers will continue to chase them from one place to another to serve both food and smile.

Reefa Mahboob, M.P.A.

Taxes and Patriotism

Increasingly, those of us who teach public administration are confronted with questions about the various movements—most prominently, the so-called “Tea Party” movement—that are challenging not just particular policies, but the legitimacy of government itself.  Much of that angry rhetoric is constructed around one dubious claim that we need to help students deconstruct: (1) taxes are unjust, because my money is the result of my own hard work.

 Ian Welsh points out some “inconvenient truths” about that claim. He compares the average American to the average citizen of Bangladesh. The average American makes $43,740 annually; the average Bangladeshi, $470.

Why the difference? American children are less likely to suffer from malnutrition, which adversely affects intellect later in life. American children are far more likely to get good educations. When a Bengali child grows up, there are fewer available jobs. If he starts a business, the market will be much smaller than the equivalent American market. As Welsh says,

“The vast majority of money that an American earns is due to being born American. Certainly, the qualities that make America a good place to live and a good place to make money are things that were created by Americans, but mostly, they were created by Americans long dead or by Americans working together. ..Since the majority of the money any American earns is a function of being American, not of their own individual virtues, government has the moral right to tax.”

Welsh isn’t the first to come to this conclusion. A student recently pointed me to this quotation by Thomas Paine, who expressed similar sentiments in his pamphlet “Agrarian Justice.”

“Separate an individual from society, and give him an island or a continent to possess, and he cannot acquire personal property. He cannot be rich. So inseparably are the means connected with the end, in all cases, that where the former do not exist the latter cannot be obtained. All accumulation, therefore, of personal property, beyond what a man’s own hands produce, is derived to him by living in society; and he owes on every principle of justice, of gratitude, and of civilization, a part of that accumulation back again to society from whence the whole came.”

We need to remind students that patriotism is more than being willing to die for your country. It’s also about being willing to pay your fair share to maintain the social infrastructure that makes life more pleasant—and more profitable—for us all.

By: Sheila Kennedy

Performance Measurement and Accreditation

The purpose of this is to summarize the strengths and weaknesses of using performance measurement in general, and local public health agency accreditation specifically for improving health capacity and services. Will accreditation have any affect on the services provided by local health departments?

Performance in Public Health

 Performance measurement, according to Novick, Morrow, and Mays (2008) is one of the four elements of performance management. The other elements of performance management are performance standards; reporting of progress; and quality improvement process (p. 460). To understand performance measurement in its proper context we should address what performance management is. According to Robbins and Coulter (2005) performance management is seen as a system for instituting performance standards and for evaluating the work produced by individuals or organizations to determine whether they have achieved pre-determined objectives (p. 296). Performance management can be used to realize internal quality improvement objectives and to exhibit accountability to stack holders outside of the organization. Performance measurements are used to manage tricky public health processes. These measurements along with standards and performance improvement are used to change an organizations capacity, priorities, and processes to manage the needs of the communities they serve better. From a public health perspective, performance measurement is the gathering of qualitative data about important activities that includes a description of its effect on the public (Novick et al., 2008, p. 459).

Strengths and Weaknesses of Performance Measurement

The performance measurement concept is composed of several components: input from stack holders; leadership support; a clear mission statement; long and short term goals and objectives; and has straightforward and controllable approaches; and has technical assistance and support for those involve in the process. Besides being able to provide information regarding capacity, results, and effectiveness of current activities there are several potential benefits once implemented as a process: improvement of goals and objectives; identification of operational strengths and weaknesses; opportunities to work in partnership to produce mutual approaches; to develop clarity in accountability; advance quality; improve in tracing progress; improve communication among stake holders and others concerned; and improve distribution and utilize of resources.  A weakness of performance measurement is that it does not address why a certain observations were seen or how.  Other weaknesses of performance measurement are the inconsistencies in terminology, they can take different forms such as a performance standard which identifies what is expected to be done or they can take the form of a performance indicator which identifies the extent and performance standard has been achieved(Novick et al., 2008, pp. 459-462).

Strengths and Weaknesses of Local Public Health Accreditation

As we continue the discussion on improving the capacity and service of healthcare, it seems appropriate to discuss the accreditation of local public health organizations.  According to the Public Health Accreditation Board (PHAB) (2010) it is in the process of developing a national voluntary accreditation program for public health departments.  Their aim is to protect the health of every community by improving the excellence and the performance of public health departments. PHAB (2010) identifies that public health departments are important for encouraging healthy living as well as safeguarding the communities they serve.  The benefit of accreditation is that a set of common standards are used to gauge performance and helps to drive health departments to make improvements to the services that they render and in their performance (PHAB, 2010). Novick et al. (2008) revealed that some future benefits of accreditation may include contacting advantages for Medicaid, having a market advantage over the private sector, have greater accountability, experiencing simpler transfer interstate and intrastate information (Novick et al., 2008). PHAB (2010) explains that there are three key documents that are needed to apply for national accreditation by public health organizations and they include a community health assessment, a community health improvement plan, and a strategic plan for the health department.  A national accreditation program for health departments is to get underway some time in 2011 (PHAB, 2010).  Michigan, North Carolina, Washington, Illinois, and Missouri have taken part in the study of public health agency accreditation known as Multi-State Learning Collaborative on Performance and Capacity Assessment of Public Health Departments funded by Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and managed by the National Network of Public Health Institute and the Public Health Leadership Society (Novick, et al., 2008, p. 484).  There are other models not mentioned here.  A weakness to the accreditation of local public health organizations is that the current assessments must find the middle ground between minimal and optimal standards because state programs are more geared toward optimal standards versus federal programs.  The success of accreditation is dependent on the value assigned to it by external stakeholders and therefore short-term and long-term benefits must be articulated clearly within the process (Novick et al., 2008, p. 488).

Conclusion

            At a time when transparency and accountability are at the forefront of the minds of many Americans, it is important that public health departments improve the capacity and the quality of their services.  A good way is to improve in how they manage the performance of their organizations and utilize measures that are clear, concise, and concrete.  This will come in time as researchers continue to rein in and tweak assessments. Accreditation of local public health organizations is on the horizon and it will benefit all citizens in all communities as they come up to the level that many community hospitals are at in 2011.

Reference

Novick, L., Morrow, C., & Mays, G. (2008). Public Health administration: Principles for population-based management (2^nd ed.). Boston: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.

Public Health Accreditation Board. (2010). Retrieved from http://www.phaboard.org/

Robbins, S., & Coulter, M. (2005). Management (8^th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.