Strengthening the Intergovernmental Grant System: Long‐Term Lessons for the Federal–Local Relationship

Abstract

This study investigates the longitudinal political and administrative problems associated with federal–local government relations. The findings demonstrate four primary challenges of the system of federal grants‐in‐aid that hinder the relationship of policy design at the federal level and policy implementation in local communities: the politics of decentralization, subnational capacity, program accountability and program adaptability. A case study of the Community Development Block Grant, as assessed by the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations and the General Accounting Office between 1974 and the present, is included to demonstrate the application of these problems within the system. Although the “evolution of devolution” can greatly benefit the recipients of public services at the local level, it often operates within an unorganized and ineffective system that public managers at all levels of government must continue to develop.

Where Does the Bucket Leak? Sending Money to the Poor via the Community Development Block Grant Program

“…The first is the literature on CDBG and the spatial distribution of funds. Work on CDBG has examined the program's origins and a somewhat coarser geographic targeting (Rich, 1993), the extent of citizen participation (Handley & Howell-Moroney, 2010), equity in allocations (Collins & Gerber, 2008), the impact of CDBG funds on neighborhood outcomes (Galster, Walker, Hayes, Boxall, & Johnson, 2004), and the impact of federal funds on local spending (Brooks & Phillips, 2010;Brooks et al, 2011;Handley, 2008). 2 Our work also relates to the economics literature on "tagging," or the earmarking of funds to need.…”

Determinants and Evaluation of Local Energy‐Efficiency Initiatives from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

“…A main assumption is that the federal government plays the role of establishing a comprehensive framework and local governments then implement their own programs for meeting the performance targets written into federal goal statements (Rabe, ). The preferences held by federal and local governments are assumed to be aligned (Nicholson‐Crotty, ), and federal policies are assumed to be designed to integrate all levels of government, including state and local (Handley, ). Furthermore, it is assumed that this alignment and integration may be accomplished through intergovernmental grants to state and local governments and other activities in a manner that conforms to federal policy goals (Mueller, ).…”

“…Rather, it was up to the particular locale to make its own case for its own capacity. Thus, the statements of uniform federal policy goals were blind to the particular circumstances of local governments, even though some of these local circumstances played a crucial role in determining levels of policy adoption (Handley, ; Wheeler, ).…”

Iniciativas de gestión pública que promueven la productividad desde una perspectiva del género

“…De acuerdo con Handley (2008), en una política en proceso para programas federales es necesario evitar desconectar su andamiento entre niveles locales y federales, ya que afecta la vida de los ciudadanos locales cuando están siendo colocadas en práctica. La responsabilidad que los gobiernos requieren es de sumo esfuerzo de unidad política, ya que es necesario tomar en cuenta el impacto que provoca el cambio de comportamientos en un sistema federal sobre los sistemas de subvención a los programas de servicio público, que también pueden impactar en los gobiernos locales.…”