Patchwork and Partnerships

Quilting is an art that richly permeates world history.

My understanding is that the earliest depiction of quilts was found in the art of the Egyptian Pharaohs. One of the oldest pieces of fabric found dates back to 200A.D.

More recently history tells us that quilts were an important artifact of Europe’s medieval period. During this time, quilted garments such as the gambeson served as padding under armor or as the armor itself, protecting warriors in battle.

Today, many people think of quilting as a uniquely American tradition. In some ways, it is. There are myriad, rich tales of the friendship and comfort, necessity and loss that surrounded the quilting circles of the Pioneer Women. Quilting remains a treasured past time. Women still gather in sisterhood and solidarity to make quilts. Sometimes, quilts are made to keep the family warm and protected. Sometimes they are made for charitable causes. And sometimes, they are made just for enjoyment.

In this difficult economic time, nonprofits find themselves using ‘patchwork’ funding. This system involves piecing together small parcels of money from a variety of sources in order to be able to offer a much needed but underfunded service to the community—much like the pieces of a patchwork quilt are made from leftover scraps of fabric.

Having employed this strategy for a very long time, I can tell you that the process can be grueling, including an exhausting chase for money, complicated recordkeeping and the task of sustaining a great deal of hope and positive thinking under less than positive circumstances. However rewarding the end result may be, it can be pretty stressful. In my struggle to remain hopeful, I looked to the tradition of quilting. I am happy to share my findings with you.

Quilts are protective. Whether you are keeping your loved ones warm or shielding those who are fighting the good fight, a quilt stitched with passion and purpose prevents harm. Strong partnerships can create programs that serve the greater good, offer safety nets to those on the edge and provide critical services to those currently in need.

Patchwork quilts are cost effective. Patchwork quilts use leftover pieces of fabric, put together in unique and creative ways. Sometimes, there are patterns to follow. Sometimes, you have to create your own. If your organization brings some funding scraps an hope, and I bring some frayed resources and hope, we can piece together something inspired, efficient and effective.

And finally, beautiful patchwork quilts are made through partnerships. And so are beautiful programs. Moreover, like quilting circles, the process of partnering offers support to all of us.

Photo credit: flickr.com; http://dyokel.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/33971.jpg

Living in Fear of Tomorrow – Harrisburg PA

By David Chapinski, Phd Student/Adjunct Professor

Rutgers University/Felician College – Rutherford Campus

Yes, our system of laws in this country is not perfect. Revenue is pulled in but assets still disappear. Can this really be good for anybody?

Going into bankruptcy is difficult.  It should be a last resort.  However, even facing the final hour of reckoning, there is still not always a proper place for it.

When it comes to steering rather than rowing Harrisburg out of debt, it appears that  you cannot really teach a dog (the legislators) new tricks.

The city of Harrisburg has been slow to adopt new tricks in years past. Instead, legislators have been drinking from the same well for decades.  Similarly, as of 2012, the media and the people of Harrisburg, have been naïve enough to drink from the same well too.

And it’s time for something different – drastically different.

Is there anything that can be done to bridge the rate of urban decay between self interested creditors and insolvent debtors who continue to be unsuccessful in getting together and making a collective decision when it counts?

I believe there could be if it was any other city through a remedy called collective preservation of ones’ soul.  I do not believe a clear soul lies right now in the hearts of the mutually unavailable cowards left in the City of Harrisburg.

On the surface, it seems as though counting on private enterprise or a subsidized corporation, advocating for a state-run public works program would be a good idea.  Let’s recall the reversal of failures to meet expectations from projected steam sales of around 40,000 to 50,000 per month before the 2007 incinerator failure.

I am sure the idea of building a trash incinerator was much more lucid in 1972; however, a lot has changed in Harrisburg Pennsylvania in 40 years – - clearly.

However, for other, more powerful rural counties that are watching Harrisburg’s demise, there is little desire to contribute their tax dollars to any project that principally benefits urban business ventures and manufacturing.

The numbers do not lie. A problem has been brewing.

 According to James Spiotto statistics involving critical issues and recent developments in muni bankruptcy cases are clearly disturbing.

After seeing these hard to dismiss figures, it is more obvious that overcoming the great power of anti-Harrisburg sentiment is going to require considerable political skill, a skill that has been left to develop all by itself.

You cannot simply wake up one morning and choose replicable solutions to problems such as employment access, which leads to limitations beyond municipal default.

If that is the path selected, what is the next systemic shoe to drop?

Is it the rating agencies’ systemically raising ratings or the demarcated muni-market altogether?

I feel investors, unfortunately, are on their own with Harrisburg’s recovery and survival.  Indeed, project finance is a high risk, high rewards approach to cities.  Let us take a look at the persistence of the forgotten half.  By forgotten half I mean the funding chasm which will be the norm moving forward for projects in Harrisburg unless the forgotten half is recognized.

It’s OK to Feel

In a box buried somewhere in my closet rests a legal pad containing the notes I took during my introductory MPA class – “Public Affairs Concepts and Theory.”  Inscribed in large capital letters on the pad’s front page is a three-word statement – “THINK, NOT FEEL.”

My professor, the late Dr. Jerzy Hauptmann, a towering figure at Park University, delivered that message to my classmates and me on an August evening in 1991.  A survivor of a Nazi POW camp, he believed that each of us should speak and write with the courage of our convictions.

To him, using a phrase such as “I feel that ‘reinventing government ’ oversimplifies the challenges of 1990s public administration” made a less persuasive argument because, from his perspective, feeling was and is amorphous.

Dr. Hauptmann wanted to believe in the rational model, yet he admitted that most of us frequently make less-than-rational decisions. I recall in that introductory class his lecture on Herbert Simon and the concept of satisficing, a bounded rationality perspective.

In the years following my graduation, I aimed to exemplify intellect and analytical thinking.  I am convinced that my MPA student experience facilitated me burying my emotions long after my graduation.

“THINK, NOT FEEL” is a hard lesson to unlearn.

As I embarked and continued upon my journey as an ASPA officer, a different voice – one decidedly non-rational and very emotional – began to call out from a space deep within me.  While I knew I needed to focus on strategic planning, budgets and the like, I felt like speaking about fairness, respect and human decency.

This voice expressed itself at recent ASPA conferences, sometimes without me actually uttering words.

At the 2010, 2011 and 2012 ASPA Annual Conferences, I participated on panels discussing to what extent professional public administration associations “walk their talk” in terms of social equity.

For my 2010 and 2011 PowerPoint presentations, I juxtaposed audio from Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech with slides addressing the somewhat slow evolution of social equity within ASPA.

At the 2012 ASPA Annual Conference in Las Vegas, my PowerPoint presentation featured photos of socioeconomically challenged neighborhoods of conference host cities with John Lennon’s “Imagine” playing in the background.

To view, the PowerPoint, click here.

By touching attendees’ emotions, I delivered more effective and powerful presentations than anything I might have orated myself.

Speaking of touching people, several of my ASPA National Colleagues concluded their terms of service during the past conference, and I wanted to send them off with more than a handshake.  I trolled their Facebook pages for family photos, compiled a list of their accomplishments, inserted an appropriate audio clip (“So Long, Farewell” from The Sound of Music) and secretly unveiled a PowerPoint tribute at the end of the meeting.  Witnessing their reactions was priceless!

Sometimes in professional organizations we often attempt to be so unemotional and formal that we miss opportunities to celebrate the real friendships and real connections which develop between members.

Likewise, when we define public administration as a science, we overlook the power of public service and its ability to express our collective desire to make a meaningful difference in our communities, our nations and our world (hat tip to Bob and Janet Denhardt).

As I stood behind the podium at the opening of the 2012 Annual Conference in Las Vegas, I attempted to look presidential.  Inside, however, I felt a range of emotions, not the least of which was gratitude.  I remain grateful for my friends in the audience that day, grateful for my family’s love throughout my ASPA tenure, grateful for my University’s patience and support; and grateful for my professor and mentor, Dr. Hauptmann, even though I had to unlearn the first lesson he taught me.

When I served as a pallbearer at Dr. Hauptmann’s funeral, I remained so stoic that I neither shed a tear during nor after the service.  Today, my eyes well up when I recall him.

If I was teaching Park University’s introductory MPA course, the one Dr. Hauptmann himself created, I would begin the first class with the following statement – “It’s OK to feel.”

After all, we’re human.

Photo Credits: Park.edu; copp.utsa.edu; 

The Federal Pay Debate

There has been a lot of chatter around the salaries and benefits of public servants. Like every debate, there are two sides. We recently attended a panel discussion, organized by the Coalition for Effective Change (CEC), which brought this issue to the forefront by bringing together three of the biggest players in the debate: Congressional Budget Office, Washington think tank and the Federal Salary Council.

The CBO recently released a report that found that:

On Wages

• Federal civilian workers with no more than a high school education earned about 21 percent more, on average, than similar workers in the private sector
• Workers whose highest level of education was a bachelor’s degree earned roughly the same hourly wages, on average, in both the federal government and the private sector.
• Federal workers with a professional degree or doctorate earned about 23 percent less, on average, than their private-sector counterparts.

On Benefits

• Average benefits for federal workers with no more than a high school diploma were 72 percent higher than for their private-sector counterparts.
• Average benefits for federal workers whose education ended in a bachelor’s degree were 46 percent higher than for similar workers in the private sector.
• Workers with a professional degree or doctorate received roughly the same level of average benefits in both sectors.

On Total Compensation

• Federal civilian employees with no more than a high school education averaged 36 percent higher total compensation than similar private-sector employees.
• Federal workers whose education culminated in a bachelor’s degree averaged 15 percent higher total compensation than their private-sector counterparts.
• Federal employees with a professional degree or doctorate received 18 percent lower total compensation than their private-sector counterparts, on average.

Meanwhile, the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) also conducted a study of federal work pay and concluded that:

Compared to similar private sector workers, we estimate that federal workers receive a salary premium of 14 percent, a benefits premium of 63 percent, and extra job security worth 17 percent of pay. Together, these generate an overall federal compensation premium of approximately 61 percent.

The Federal Salary Council, which is tasked with examining regularly the pay of federal employees and making recommendations, also conducted its own study. The results were:

On average, its [federal] employees are underpaid by 26.3 percent compared with similar non-federal jobs, a “pay gap” that increased by about 2 percentage points over last year while federal salary rates were frozen.

Federal pay has long been a controversial topic with the results depending on the question asked and the methodology used to find the answer. And ASPA has been attentive to this issue as part of its policy engagement. In 2010, ASPA experts submitted the results of a study on federal pay comparability to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). In that report, ASPA recommends:

With an emphasis on the more technical aspects of federal pay setting, these recommendations include amending the current policy of across-the-board pay adjustments to allow for disaggregated pay increases by grade level and expanding the within grade salary range from 30 percent to 40 percent or higher.

This was crystal clear when Andrew Biggs, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and co-author of the study quoted above; Joseph Kile of the CBO and Rex Facer, an ASPA member and member of the Federal Salary Council, came together on the CEC panel.

Rising resentment over this perceived inequality appears to have fostered some anti-public servant sentiments. And in some cases, as became visible by the questions from the audience, some skepticism from retired and current federal employees.

The former believe that federal employee salaries should be leveled with equal jobs in the private sector. While the latter contend that public servants are not usually adequately compensated for the work that is done.

The answer seems to be right down the middle. As the New York Times noted:

Less-educated federal workers make a bit more than their private-sector counterparts and receive more generous benefits. Workers with a complete or incomplete college education or a master’s degree tend to make about the same amount, again with more generous benefits. But highly educated federal workers earn less than their peers in the private sector.

This may not be the answer most of us want to hear but it may be a good starting point. As Facer pointed out, we must ask “what is the appropriate pay that an employee should receive?” and “Do we have the right salary structure for the Federal Government?”

But that may be a whole other conversation!

Jargon in Public Communication

By Elaine Orr

Every field has its specialized vocabulary, and public administration is no exception.  There is value to this shorthand, commonly referred to as jargon.  We can communicate more efficiently and readily identify kindred spirits.

The disadvantages seep in when we use professional jargon for public consumption.  When specialized language is used in articles or speeches written for a broad readership (or listenership), it can lead to confusion or annoyance.

Generally, politicians are quite good at not lapsing into bureaucratese or geek speak (two great examples of jargon).  They know voters might be turned off and opponents would love to quote anything that makes an incumbent seem out of touch with constituents.

For managers and academics, jargon is more likely to creep into conversation.  When public administrators write for professional journals, it’s expected.  Phrases such as entrepreneurial management paradigm seem to roll off the tongue more readily than explaining that there is a belief that private sector techniques would improve public management.

However, using the phrase at a county commissioner meeting could get the speaker a one-way ticket to a single term commissioner’s seat.

Jargon is not limited to public administration or even the public sector.  For example, how much would you pay to never be told to “think outside the box” or “push the envelope”?

On the other hand, the term “helicopter parents” succinctly conveys the parents who hover over a child’s every activity, generally insisting that their cherub can do no wrong.  And it sounds nicer to refer to someone as a “helicopter parent” rather than as an over-involved interferer.

“Sandwich generation” is useful shorthand for mid-lifers dealing with young children and aging parents.

Occasionally language choices appear to be employed because users think it makes them look more knowledgeable.  For example, you can “say” something or “articulate” it, and the message should be the same.

An action can “make a difference” or be “impactful.”  The latter is such a new word that spell check does not recognize it, so there may be hope that it can leave the lexicon (otherwise known as the dictionary).

The neat thing about English is that we are more open than other languages to introduce new words, and quick to move a catchy phrase to general use or…jargon.  Spyware does not refer to espionage clothing, and you have to think for a second or you will mix up a couch potato with its more recent cousin, the mouse potato.  Each of these phrases conveys something specific in clear shorthand form.

The ultimate jargon has become texting abbreviations.  I can remember what email I was reading and who sent it when I finally figured out that btw was not an abbreviation for between.  Having said that, IMHO, we r done here. CU FTF at the ASPA mtg!

Joblessness & Race

“Is there anything that can be done to bridge the jobless rate gap between African Americans and Whites?”

Since the 1940s the lengthy unemployment lines of African Americans have run like train tracks compared to those of their Whites counterparts.

 

 

 

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

• African Americans unemployment remained high during 2011 at 15.8%
• For whites the rate stayed steady at 7.9%.

For many decades economists, statisticians, historians and sociologists have all asked the same question:

Why is there such a huge gap in the jobless rate among Blacks compared to Whites?

The jobless rate among Blacks has been considered a serious problem in the African American community as well as a hindrance to well-educated African Americans who graduate from prestigious universities seeking jobs.

Despite a reduction in the wage gap between Caucasians and Blacks due to a surge in the number of college educated African Americans over the decades, a widening unemployment gap still exists between the two races. Education does help to bridge the gap but the numbers prove that it is not a fix.

And the question about the disparity of jobless rates between Blacks and Caucasians remains unanswered.

One viable theory is the high incarceration rate among African Americans, especially males.

According to the US Census Bureau, African Americans make up only 13% of the US population, but make up approximately 40.2% of the prison population.

The incarceration rate plays a vital role may explain the reason there is such a huge gap between the unemployment rate of African Americans and Whites. With such a high percentage of blacks in prison it automatically shrinks the number of blacks capable of working, which thus increases the rate of joblessness.

Furthermore, even with the number of ex-convicts who enter the workforce each year, studies have shown that white ex-cons are far more likely to be hired than black ones.

The American Economic Review reported on a field experiment done on labor market discrimination that found that job applicants with black-sounding names (Lakisha and Jamal) are 50% less likely to receive callbacks than applicants with white-sounding names (Emily and Greg). While there are many African Americans who have accomplished resumes, they still face interviewers who wrestle with “the race card.”

According to Brian Miller, executive director of United for Fair Economy, “We have a long history of discriminatory policies and practices… that have prevented people of color from building up personal wealth.”

However, it is difficult to judge the degree to which “the race card” infiltrates every aspect of the job search process for African Americans.

So, we come to the million-dollar question:

Is there anything that can be done to bridge the jobless rate gap between African Americans and Whites?

This subtle form of discrimination has been occurring over the decades, and has been very difficult to prove or to deal with, because many interviewers and employers who discriminate against African Americans do not realize that they are actually committing the act because they feel that their decision is solely based on gut feelings.

In addition, watchdog groups reporting on this type of discrimination is unlikely to solve the problem because anti-discrimination laws mainly depend on the person who is being discriminated against to sound the alarm.

It is nearly impossible for job applicants who are African Americans to know if they are being discriminated against (unless they are mind readers). This often leads to an under reporting of potential incidents.

Evidently, to fix any problem one needs to have first hand knowledge. Knowledge the American society has yet to gain.

A suggested fix:

Have our political leaders invest federal funds into programs that are geared towards hiring black workers or offering payroll tax credit.

However, the fear is that the focus of our leaders will turn away from the issue and spark disagreement over how much to invest or how much to cut.

Sadly, this permanent problem and huge disparity in the jobless rate of African Americans will forever remain a gloomy issue with little or no solution.

Grant Writing 102: Questions? What Questions?

Since writing my April blog entry, Tis the Season I’ve been asked to provide grant writing suggestions beyond Grant Writing 101: Answer the Questions. I am happy to present Grant Writing 102.

It is important to remember that every grant opportunity is unique. Often the request for proposal (RFP) or application will give you an outline to follow.  The outline will ask you a group of questions which will comprise your narrative.  Fortunately, although all RFP’s are different, there are a number of questions that are fairly standard. They show up in some form on most applications.

Common Question (CQ) #1:  Statement of the Problem.

The funding entity needs to determine if backing a project in your geographic region will give them an optimal return on investment. You must address the problem that the RFP has defined; if you want to address about another issue, choose another funding source.

However, this is your opportunity to describe the impact the problem is having on your community. Make sure that you use facts and cite sources. Your opinion on the matter is not important.

Make the strongest argument possible. If the teen pregnancy rate in your area is the lowest in the nation, the funder may be disinclined to support your proposed prevention program. However, if the percentage of teen parents who are the subject of founded abuse complaints in your town is substantially higher than the national average, you may have a good case.

CQ #2: Describe your organization.

Usually the application requires a brief summary of your organization. You’ll want to reference the organization’s history, mission, and services. Emphasize activities that demonstrate your ability to carry out the proposed program, as well as programs that would support the new venture in some way.

One variation on this question asks for an account of your organizational capacity. In other words:

• What is it about your organization that makes it supremely qualified to carry out this project?
• What are your strengths?
• What successes have you achieved?
• What is the organization’s experience managing grants of similar magnitude?
• Do you follow general accounting principles?

Yet another variation asks specifically about your financial capabilities.

• What systems are in place to ensure accurate financial management?

CQ #3: Describe your management plan.  

• Who will oversee the project and what are his/her credentials to do so?
• What will be the specific duties of all positions funded by the proposed project?

If the project will be staffed by incumbent personnel, be prepared with a brief statement regarding their qualifications.

And finally, CQ# 4:

How will you continue the project in the event funding does not continue beyond the initial award?

I think this is my favorite question.  Answering it requires a mixture of creativity and bluntness.

• Are you going to seek additional resources?
• Will you continue the program on a smaller scale?
• How committed are you to addressing the problem?

It is a good idea to think about this even if the question isn’t asked directly. The answer will help you to determine if you have enough organizational commitment, resources, and energy to pursue the project.

As simple as these questions may seem at first glance, a successful application is one that puts considerable thought into the answers. As I’ve said before, writing a strong grant application is not a complicated process, but uncomplicated doesn’t mean easy.

You may find it helpful to develop, in advance, standard answers that you can use in multiple applications. You will have to modify your responses to be certain you are answering the specific questions asked, but it will save you time, and ensure that you are presenting a polished narrative.

Happy Grant Writing!