Edward T. Jennings

Interorganizational Coordination, Administrative Consolidation, and Policy Performance

Although administrative and policy reformers often urge coordination as the key to more effective delivery of public services, there is little beyond anecdotal evidence to suggest that most approaches to coordination can actually improve public services in multiorganizational delivery systems. Indeed, critical accounts of bureaucratic behavior suggest that it is quite difficult to get organizations to cooperate with each other, much less to do so effectively. Extended scholarly analyses have pointed out the great difficulty of obtaining coordination in the absence of the consolidated administration of programs. For this reason, reformers would often prefer to see programmatic and administrative consolidation, hoping that the enhanced bureaucratic control they anticipate will improve program outcomes. This paper examines the effect of coordination patterns and administrative arrangements on the accomplishment of policy goals in the delivery of employment and training services under the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA). JTPA is carried out in an intergovernmental, multiorganizational setting in which state and local JTPA administrative entities must obtain the support of a variety of other administrative agencies if JTPA goals are to be achieved. The act requires that employment and training coordination plans be written at both the state and local levels to link the activities of these disparate organizations. The organizations themselves have primary missions that overlap, but are not identical. Requirements and written plans are no guarantee that coordination will occur; even if it does, there is no guarantee that it will improve performance. Jennings (1994) found that increasing coordination has positive effects on program outcomes, but his analysis relied strictly on a perceptual measure of performance as reported by state agency administrators. The current study combines Jenningss data with objective measures of program performance, such as placement rates and wages. This is a critically important step since subjective and objective measures of performance can be at variance with each other (Brudney and England, 1982; Brown and Coulter, 1983; Parks, 1984). This article seeks answers to several questions. First, what is the relationship between subjective and objective measures of JTPA performance? Second, how are the objective measures of performance routinely reported to the U.S. Department of Labor related to each other? Third, does the analysis of the effects of coordination and administrative consolidation on performance depend on whether objective or subjective measures are used? Fourth, do coordination and consolidation affect different dimensions of performance differently? As the article pursues answers to these important questions, it tests two central hypotheses: [H.sub.1] Increased levels of coordination lead to higher levels of performance. [H.sub.2] Administrative consolidation of the JTPA administrative agency and the state employment service increases JTPA performance outcomes. The article proceeds as follows. First, we discuss the theory of coordination as reflected in the literature of public administration. We discuss coordination as it relates to interprogram and interorganizational coordination. We then take note of the legal requirements and formal provisions for coordination under JTPA. A discussion of administrative organization follows. We then present a multivariate model of employment and training program outcomes and discuss the measures that are employed in the analysis. Sections analyzing the data follow the discussion of coordination. We examine correlations among the variables, looking in particular at the relationship between objective and subjective measures of performance. We examine the relationships among the different objective measures of performance. We then estimate multiple models of JTPA performance, using the objective indicators of performance as the dependent variables. …

Competition, Constituencies, and Welfare Policies in American States

This article examines the logic underlying standard formulations of the interparty competition hypothesis in the comparative state policy literature, suggests a reformulation which provides some new insights into the conditions under which we might expect state policies to change as a result of party characteristics, and undertakes an initial test of the reformulation. I develop two propositions. The first is that party systems which divide the electorate along economic class lines will generate more generous welfare policies than party systems which do not so organize the electorate. The second is that within states with class-based electoral systems, change in welfare policy will be positively related to the degree to which the party or faction with lower- and working-class support gains control of government. I analyze welfare policies of selected American states for the period 1938 to 1970. My analysis suggests that (1) the class basis of electoral politics does influence state welfare policies and (2) parties and factions which differ in their constituency bases produce different types of policies when they are in control of government.

Accountability, Program Quality, Outcome Assessment, and Graduate Education for Public Affairs and Administration.

The answer to this has come increasingly to mean outcome assessment. Outcome assessment has many forms and meanings, but typically it involves specifying the goals and objectives of a program and ways in which the attainment of those goals can be measured. As an extension of program evaluation, it should be familiar to public administrators because of the extent to which program evaluations dominated debate over public programs in the 1960s and 1970s.

Building Bridges in the Intergovernmental Arena: Coordinating Employment and Training Programs in the American States.

and organizations, and the degree ofeffortput into coordination are central to successful coordination. Twenty-four years ago, in Making Federalism Work, James Sundquist (1969) issued a clarion call for Congress and the executive branch to take the federal system seriously. Having analyzed President Johnsons Great Society programs for community action, model cities, and rural development, Sundquist said that policy makers planning changes in intergovernmental programs should consider the impact of the changes on the system as a whole (p. 31). In other words, coordination of intergovernmental programs would require careful attention if programs were to succeed in their objectives.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)

President Barack Obama promised that his administration would make a clean break with the past, setting new standards in transparency and accountability. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), one of his early legislative initiatives, marks a concerted effort to realize the promises he made during the campaign. This article examines the federal governments past, present, and future efforts at accountability and transparency in administering the grants-in-aid system. It presents and critiques the changes brought about by ARRA to identify its contributions to government accountability. While the act clearly makes some advances in accountability, many of the gains are the result of repackaging and emphasizing already existing accountability mechanisms. The article concludes with some expectations about the direction future federal grants-in-aid accountability and transparency efforts are likely to take.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and State Accountability

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) channeled billions of dollars through the states in an effort to stimulate the economy and shore up faltering state services. It presented unprecedented accountability expectations in the form of required state transparency with regard to ARRA expenditures. This study examines the variations in state responses to ARRA accountability expectations and analyzes state characteristics associated with greater accountability efforts. There is considerable variability in state ARRA accountability reporting but no apparent underlying pattern to the variability, which seems to be largely unaffected by political or other characteristics of the states. The study reveals that most states could have done a much better job of informing their citizens about how ARRA funds were spent and what was accomplished with those funds.

Administrators’ Perspectives on Successful Interstate Collaboration: The Drug Effectiveness Review Project

Governance increasingly relies on intergovernmental and intersectoral collaboration in providing public services. This research reports perceptions of state representatives to the multistate collaborative Drug Effectiveness Review Project about the importance of factors influencing successful collaboration. Findings reveal state motivation to collaborate is closely tied to project governance and suggest how future efforts might be structured to achieve success. Among other factors, a disconnect between ends and means allows the process to function objectively; objective production of drug effectiveness information and subjective use of information in state policy decisions are distinct processes, reducing conflict that might otherwise jeopardize project sustainability.

Determinants of environmental public participation in China: an aggregate level study based on political opportunity theory and post-materialist values theory

ABSTRACT The level of public participation in response to environmental issues in China has significantly increased over the past 10 years. This expansion of participation occurred as the government was pursuing legislative and regulatory approaches to address environmental pollution. Factors contributing to the development of environmental public participation are explored based on the political opportunity theory and post-materialist values theory. Two participation styles are used as dependent variables in a panel data framework. The empirical results of an analysis of provincial level data indicate that the degree of openness to participation and economic development level show consistently significant impacts on the levels of different environmental participation styles, thus demonstrating the applicability of the political opportunity theory and Inglehart’s post-materialist values theory in predicting environmental public participation in China. The results also show that other variables, including educational level and environmental pollution level have different or even reverse effects depending on the form of participation examined. In general, the results are consistent with cross-national studies of environmental policy development and political participation.

Federal Policies and State Programs: The Case Of Public Assistance

Politicians, administrators, and academics alike are concerned about the effect of federal policies on state programs. The range of interests is wide: some are concerned primarily about the distribution of financial burdens among levels of government, others about the complexity of intergovernmental programs, others about state capacities, others about the appropriate division of responsibilities, and still others about the consequences of federal policies for overall levels of service delivery. All would like reliable information about what kinds of effects federal policies have on