 |
Mandates and Management Challenges in the Trenches: An Intergovernmental Perspective of Homeland Security
| |
| | Unformatted Document Text:
9
“[T]he required relationships are not in place and, in many instances, may not be even understood….Homeland security implies a significant reconfiguring of a substantial portion of the public service. Changes are being made—and will continue to be made in the political, financial, legal-regulatory, and operational dimensions of intergovernmental functioning….
The authors base their recommendations on the insights of Posner (2002) and a GAO report (2001) spelling out the inefficiencies of fragmentation and redundancies.
The shortcomings of the system led noted scholar Donald Kettl (2003a:254) to call for a
different paradigm— a situational brand of federalism “…that builds on existing administrative structures and policy capacity but which pulls them together, effectively, when they are needed, as they are needed.” He brands it “contingent coordination” –a type of coordination requiring “nonstructural approaches” and including “interorganizational networks,… improved information technology, and stronger political leadership” (Kettl, 2003a:261). Managers and policy makers, says Kettl, must be adept at “securing collaborative work among disparate levels of government, agencies, and public servants for critical problems, which may occur rarely and may never repeat” (2003a:275).
The importance and difficulty of establishing intergovernmental and inter-organizational
networks has been well-delineated by Provan and Milward (2001), O’Toole (1997), Russo and Labriola (2003), Bardach (1998, 2001), Agranoff (2001), Agranoff and McGuire (2001), Wise (2002), Linden (2004), McEntire (2003), McEntire, Fuller, Johnston, and Weber, 2002, McGuire, 2002, Elliott, 2003, Hickman and Reaves, 2003, Kettl (2003a), Kenyon and Kincaid, (1991), and others. In the area of emergency management, the most extensive vertical and horizontal networks are organized around functions (police, fire, EMS, etc.), rather than management (cf. McEntire and Myers, 2003; Griffiths, 2004). The Federal Government
The Office of Homeland Security was created in 2001, the Department of Homeland Security
in 2002. In Fiscal Year 2003, the Congress approved more than $2 billion in funding for state and local governments for homeland security via formula grants to states which were, in turn, to distribute 80% to local governments (NACO and IAEM, 2003:2).
In the Fiscal Year 2004 budget, Congress appropriated $37.4 billion to the Department of
Homeland Security, $4.037 billion specifically for State and Local Funding via the Office for Domestic Preparedness (ODP). ODP is required to disperse these funds to the states who must, in turn, distribute a large percentage of the grants to their localities (U.S. Department of Homeland Security, October 1, 2003).
7
7
Of the $4 billion, $1.7 billion is a formula -based grant to the states, 80% of which they must share with their localities,
$750 million is for Firefighters Assistance Grants, $725 million is a discretionary grant to states, 80% of which is to go to localities in high-threat, high-density urban areas, $500 million is for law enforcement terrorism prevention grants (80% given to localities), and $40 million for Citizen Corps grants. The Citizen Corps funds are to help state and local governments create and coordinate volunteer activities in communities. (Funding figures are from U.S. Department of Homeland Security, October 1, 2003.)
|
| | Authors: MacManus, Susan. and Caruson, Kiki. |
|
| |
|
|
9
“[T]he required relationships are not in place and, in many instances, may not be even
understood….Homeland security implies a significant reconfiguring of a substantial
portion of the public service. Changes are being made—and will continue to be made in
the political, financial, legal-regulatory, and operational dimensions of
intergovernmental functioning….
The authors base their recommendations on the insights of Posner (2002) and a GAO report (2001)
spelling out the inefficiencies of fragmentation and redundancies.
The shortcomings of the system led noted scholar Donald Kettl (2003a:254) to call for a
different paradigm— a situational brand of federalism “…that builds on existing administrative
structures and policy capacity but which pulls them together, effectively, when they are needed, as they
are needed.” He brands it “contingent coordination” –a type of coordination requiring “nonstructural
approaches” and including “interorganizational networks,… improved information technology, and
stronger political leadership” (Kettl, 2003a:261). Managers and policy makers, says Kettl, must be
adept at “securing collaborative work among disparate levels of government, agencies, and public
servants for critical problems, which may occur rarely and may never repeat” (2003a:275).
The importance and difficulty of establishing intergovernmental and inter-organizational
networks has been well-delineated by Provan and Milward (2001), O’Toole (1997), Russo and
Labriola (2003), Bardach (1998, 2001), Agranoff (2001), Agranoff and McGuire (2001), Wise (2002),
Linden (2004), McEntire (2003), McEntire, Fuller, Johnston, and Weber, 2002, McGuire, 2002, Elliott,
2003, Hickman and Reaves, 2003, Kettl (2003a), Kenyon and Kincaid, (1991), and others. In the area
of emergency management, the most extensive vertical and horizontal networks are organized around
functions (police, fire, EMS, etc.), rather than management (cf. McEntire and Myers, 2003; Griffiths,
2004).
The Federal Government
The Office of Homeland Security was created in 2001, the Department of Homeland Security
in 2002. In Fiscal Year 2003, the Congress approved more than $2 billion in funding for state and
local governments for homeland security via formula grants to states which were, in turn, to distribute
80% to local governments (NACO and IAEM, 2003:2).
In the Fiscal Year 2004 budget, Congress appropriated $37.4 billion to the Department of
Homeland Security, $4.037 billion specifically for State and Local Funding via the Office for
Domestic Preparedness (ODP). ODP is required to disperse these funds to the states who must, in turn,
distribute a large percentage of the grants to their localities (U.S. Department of Homeland Security,
October 1, 2003).
7
7
Of the $4 billion, $1.7 billion is a formula -based grant to the states, 80% of which they must share with their localities,
$750 million is for Firefighters Assistance Grants, $725 million is a discretionary grant to states, 80% of which is to go to
localities in high-threat, high-density urban areas, $500 million is for law enforcement terrorism prevention grants (80%
given to localities), and $40 million for Citizen Corps grants. The Citizen Corps funds are to help state and local
governments create and coordinate volunteer activities in communities. (Funding figures are from U.S. Department of
Homeland Security, October 1, 2003.)
|
|
 Convention | | Submission, Review, and Scheduling! All Academic Convention can help with all of your abstract management needs and many more. Contact us today for a quote! | | Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. | | Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! | | Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! | | Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. | | Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! | | Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! | | Click here for more information. |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
