Jeremy L. Hall

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.

Assessing the use and weight of information and evidence in U.S. state policy decisions

Abstract This study reports results from a 2008 survey of U.S. State agency administrators across all 50 states and 12 different agency types. Agency managers were asked to disclose the extent to which they relied on information from 19 information sources and to weight the value of information from each source. This paper is particularly interested in ascertaining the proportion of agency policies that are based on formal scientific evidence, and the importance of scientific information as a source of influence on agency decisions relative to other potential sources of information. Information is presented by agency type with significant differences across substantive policy areas noted. Using a weighted index approach, we combine the frequency of consultation of an information source with the weight placed on that evidence by the agency administrator in developing programs and practices. Using these weighted scores, we further examine the relationship of these responses to the weight agencies place on information from various sources.

The Distribution of Federal Economic Development Grant Funds: A Consideration of Need and the Urban/Rural Divide

This article seeks to determine the effect of rurality and need on per capita federal grant receipts in local areas over time, controlling for local and regional government capacities. In other words, are rural places treated differently than urban places in federal grant distributions? Kentucky is used as the case state, with 120 county areas considered over an 11-year period from 1993 to 2003. Factor analysis is used to explore the underlying capacity constructs, and a pooled cross-sectional analysis reveals differential effects of grant receipts per person according to a county’s position on the rural—urban continuum (aka Beale code) and need-based indicators. Whereas rurality significantly increases grant funding per capita, need has the opposite effect.

City Adoption of Federal Performance Measurement Requirements: Perspectives from Community Development Block Grant Program Administrators

Performance measurement and management have become pervasive across levels of government and areas of programmatic emphasis. The Department of Housing and Urban Developments (HUDs) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) entitlement program, facing cuts and reorganization under the second Bush administration, adopted enhanced performance measurement as a tool to increase program-wide accountability. Entitlement cities vary in terms of organizational characteristics, including local goals, that affect their perception of, adoption of, and ultimately the success of HUDs federal performance measurement requirements. Goal incongruence is thought to shape city satisfaction with new federal performance measurement and reporting requirements. This article utilizes data from an original survey of CDBG program administrators and U.S. Census data to determine which factors affect city adoption of HUD performance measurement requirements. Results indicate varied satisfaction and effectiveness among local grant administrators using HUD-imposed measures and can be used to inform other intergovernmental grant programs.

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.

Exploring Management Practice Variation in Tax Increment Financing Districts

Tax increment financing (TIF) has become a mainstay of local economic development efforts. A significant body of research has investigated the effectiveness of TIF efforts as economic development tools. Such research has concentrated on measuring economic impact of TIF projects, with widely varied results. There has been little examination of the internal differences in TIF project planning and management that affect TIF district performance. This qualitative study builds a theory of TIF performance by examining differences in management practices across TIF districts in the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex. Archival analysis is used to determine what efforts cities take to assess risk (preimplementation) and to measure ongoing TIF project performance (postimplementation). Cities are then classified, and descriptive analysis documents the observed differences.

Adding Meaning to Measurement Evaluating Trends and Differences in Innovation Capacity Among the States

How do states compare to one another, and to themselves, in innovation capacity and past innovation performance? Are there groups of states that are more or less similar in innovation capacity composition? Because different score dimensions vary independently, it is possible for states to be high on some dimensions and low on others. In an effort to give greater meaning to innovation index scores, it is necessary to evaluate the relationships among them. This article subjects Halls innovation capacity index scores to cluster analysis to reveal clusters of states that are similar in innovation capacity levels across the three dimensions considered. A cluster typology is created, and state changes in typology are observed and compared over the 20-year period of the data set. Patterns observed across states and over time will help policy makers to identify major changes in their typology that may reflect goal progress or regression.

Cognitive Styles Matching: Expanding the Efficacy of Group Work in MPA Courses

This essay describes a unique approach to assigning Master’s of Public Administration (MPA) students to groups in order to enhance the value of the overall classroom team experience. The relevant mechanism of interest is the Cognitive Styles Matching (CSM) group-selection process, combined with a brief explanatory session. Many instructors utilize groups for various reasons, without considering that the selection process can be altered to maximize relevant learning and interpersonal skills development. In this approach, a Myers-Briggs Type Indicator within a CSM process is used to configure groups for semester-long course projects. The essay takes the additional step of examining the approach’s performance, by using a post-only evaluation design that considers academic performance and a survey of student perceptions regarding the CSM treatment and potential alternatives. The benefits associated with the CSM process — product consistency and learning to work with others in a collaborative public service environment — suggest a meaningful role for broader use of the CSM selection process in the MPA curriculum.