Submitted by sfreidus on Wed, 01/03/2018 - 12:17
Following the customer service initiatives launched by Gore’s reinventing government team in the 1990s, the federal government has waxed and waned on the importance of customer service in the course of serving the public. Now that citizen satisfaction with government services is under 20 percent, a new law may turbo charge the emphasis if it is passed, since it would tie customer service to employees’ performance ratings.
Background
Submitted by sfreidus on Wed, 01/03/2018 - 11:33
Typically, the cultural, administrative, and legal barriers to working together collaboratively inside the federal government are too high and they discourage efforts to collaborate (more on this in a future post). The Obama Administration has taken some steps, such as the president’s directive last year that encourages administrative flexibility by federal agencies when working with state and local governments.
Submitted by sfreidus on Wed, 01/03/2018 - 11:28
Should government use Legos to inspire its reorganization approach?
Structural reorganization initiatives – like the creation of the Department of Homeland Security -- are slow, take an enormous amount of effort, and require years to become effective. Ultimately, the new structure becomes rigid and needs to be revisited. Many observers advocate creating more adaptable approaches that allow a mix and match of capabilities. What are some potential options for doing this?
Executive Branch Options
Submitted by sfreidus on Wed, 01/03/2018 - 11:21
When Vice President Gore’s reinventing government team was being formed in the early 1990s, he encouraged it to not focus on reorganizing agencies and programs, but rather to fix what’s inside the agencies. He also advocated the creation of “virtual agencies.” At the time, no one really understood what he was talking about, but today – with the technologies now available – it is really possible.
Submitted by sfreidus on Wed, 01/03/2018 - 11:12
What are some of the lessons from past efforts?
Submitted by sfreidus on Wed, 01/03/2018 - 11:05
Beginning in 1932, presidents were periodically granted authority by Congress to submit plans to reorganize agencies. Over time, it became increasingly limited in scope and when this authority expired in 1984, presidents since then have not asked for it to be renewed, until now.
Submitted by sfreidus on Tue, 01/02/2018 - 15:16
ely identified agency “high priority performance goals” after he took office in 2009. It’s a solid start, but finding the information in one list wasn’t easy.
Submitted by evalery on Tue, 01/02/2018 - 14:51
The Senate hearing focused on recent U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports on duplicative and fragmented programs and the Obama Administration’s efforts to undertake reorganization efforts.
Submitted by evalery on Tue, 01/02/2018 - 14:32
These goals stem from a new statutory requirement that the Office of Management and Budget identify and manage a small handful of cross-agency priority goals, covering both mission and mission-support functions.
OMB identified 14 CAP Goals. Seven focus on mission-related functions. Seven focus on mission-support. All reflect existing initiatives but now have a higher profile.
Submitted by evalery on Tue, 01/02/2018 - 14:31
Yesterday, I highlighted seven Cross-Agency Priority (CAP) Goals developed by OMB for the first time in response to the new GPRA Modernization Act of 2010. Here are highlights of seven additional CAP Goals responding to that new law’s requirement to address cross-cutting management challenges facing agencies.
CAP GOALS FOR MISSION-SUPPORT FUNCTIONS:
Pages
