Research on the implementation of the Government Performance and Results Act generally has not considered how the strategic plan, annual performance plan, and annual performance report are produced and used. Are the documents good decision and management tools, as the act intends, or are agencies internalizing them to meet the unique needs of their organization? Interviews with representatives of 14 cabinet-level federal agencies suggest that implementation of the act is not standardized. Instead, it is influenced by the unique challenges that agencies face. Further, there is a relationship between the implementation challenges and the overall use of the documents.In early public administration literature, the politicsadministration dichotomy is simply explained as politicians making policy decisions and assigning programs and tasks to government agencies (Wilson 1887). Bureaucrats, in turn, create programs that meet legislative intent. Through laws and statutes, politicians are able to control bureaucrats by specifying the details of implementation, thus assuring consistent implementation. This can be seen as employing a one-size-fits-all mentality that is similar to the "one best way" of the classical theorists (Taylor 1911). Thanks to the neoclassicists (Simon 1945) and other recent theorists (Williams 2000), we know that such proverbs of administration are ill-advised. Yet, in the Government Performance and Results Act (Public Law 102-63), we see exactly this type of behavior by politicians. They attempt to reform government by imposing procedural controls, giving no attention to structures, institutions, and actors. These kinds of actions do not foster visionary governance; instead, they invite micro-level bureaucratic control. They are changes directed at program management, not public policy.In the recent round of reform efforts, Congress and the president used a top-down mandate-the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA)-to define and drive the internal processes of federal government agencies. The act requires the development of three documents (strategic plan, annual performance plan, and annual performance report) that together serve as an effective and efficient management tool to inform decision making and budget allocation by external funding sources. It is also meant to open up the planning process to provide points of access for various agency stakeholders. The act requires consultation with internal and external stakeholders during the development of the documents. These documents are linked to the budget requests of each agency in an effort to align performance with resource-allocation decisions. The GPRA specifies a bottom-up implementation process that will yield documents that inform internal management decisions while providing accountability to external stakeholders; thus, it imposes procedural controls rather than addressing structural issues.The paradox of the GPRA is that it uses a top-down, one-size-fits-all policy direction to mandate a bottom-up implementation approach. This to...
Getting the most bang for the taxpayer buck by bolstering federal agency accountability continues to be a political theme in the 21st century. The second round of strategic plan development mandated by Congress in the 1993 Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) was recently completed. This article reports the results of empirical research diagnosing the implementation issues in GPRA requirements. This research reports on the efficacy of this process from the perspectives of agency representatives. Implementation issues are grouped into two broad categories; those associated with the organization’s structure and those concerned with the plan development process. This research suggests that the potential for alignment of key management systems is suspect given that institutionalization has not occurred after nearly five years of reform efforts. Reporting on federal agency efforts provides insight into barriers to and opportunities for improving GPRA implementation processes
This is a French translation of a work originally published in German in the year 1953. An English translation with the title Men As Ordained Deacons appeared in the year 1955. The work is an unexcelled essay on the diaconate, its institution and history in the Church. But its special interest lies in the case it makes for a married diaconate. Married deacons could supply for the scarcity of priests, they could relieve priests of tasks that lie outside their priestly o~ce; their presence would make it possible to exact a higher standard for priests, it would ease the path to reunion with the Eastern Church, it might lower the wall between laity and clergy and lessen anti-clericalism. To establish this case the author conducts us on a very interesting study of the institution of deacons in the early Church and the development of the institution afterwards down the ages. There was a double line of development, that of the deacons who assisted the pope or bishop and that of the deacons who were appointed to help priests in country parishes. The episcopal deacon gained in importance as he was likely to succeed the bishop and was responsible for administration. Out in the country the deacon fulfilled many of the functions that are now discharged by the curate. How celibacy fitted into this pattern of things the author explains. The increase in the number of priests had the result of diminishing the role of the deacon in the parishes, while it left the position of the episcopal deacon or archdeacon untouched.The feudal system, the foundation of the monasteries and convents, and many other factors contributed to the result that the diaconate became merely a stage on the road to the priesthood. The author sees much similarity between conditions now in missionary countries and those which prevailed in the early centuries. He sees the catechists of today fulfilling many of the duties that once fell to the deacon. He thinks that the status of these catechists would be increased if some were ordained deacons, even though married, and preferably married. It is a question of very great relevance for all missionary countries, and among these must be included the countries of South America. It is surely one that will be under consideration at the forthcoming General Council. It is a question that is ably presented in this book. This short review does not pretend to mention all the facets of the problem.
No abstract
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.