Good Example Of Case Study On Local Government Management

What fiscal federalism conventions can you identify that underlie the program dilemma in this case?

The fiscal federalism convention of ‘family self-sufficiency’ is the major convention triggering dilemma in this case. This is as compared to the project self-sufficiency that the project was being run on. The FSS runs on a first-come-first-served basis which would severely limit the success rate of the program and would limit the number of families that could be served over time. The FSS focused on getting new low income housing residents employed and off public assistance as compared to PSS aim of ensuring self-sufficiency. The FSS also limited the number of section 8 certificates that HASCO leveraged upon. The prohibition against the use of motivation in the selection of participants also motivates the dilemma.
Compare the funding/programmatic requirements of PSS and FSS, how do the programs signal a change in the federal and local leadership and managerial roles as service providers?
The PSS requires funds for case management and coordination. With an increased workload and number of cases, the PSS requires the hiring of new counselors and the coordination and facilitation of ties between the program and the community. On the other hand, the FSS did not require this high level involvement; rather, it concentrated on basic referral function of the program. The PSS requires both high level management and lower level management for proper functioning but the FSS relies heavily on top management. Also, under the PSS, the project’s administrative function serves as a liaison among partner agencies.

What local interests, if any, might be better met under FSS?

The greater issue of addressing poverty might be met under the FSS than the PSS. This is simply because the FSS requires the participants to seek and maintain suitable employment for entire one year and be independent of any income assistance before completing the program. This in itself would motivate the locals to work harder and seek employment. The only problem is that is the locals lack the knowledge, skills and technical expertise to be employed.

What are Holt’s options in seeking compliance with the federal mandate?

In seeking compliance with the federal mandate, Holt can leverage on the success of the program, the partner agencies and the high involvement of the counselors to ensure as many referrals as possible to ensure continuity, growth and success. He can also ensure the application of additional section 8 certificates to increase the housing inventory of the participants and also enjoy the services of the supporting agencies. Holt should make it watered-down PSS due to the lack of funding and resources.

What is the risk to Holt’s agency if they engage in non-compliance?

Non-compliance with the new federal mandate would mean that Holt’s agency would be put into jeopardy. The agency risks undoing the benefits and successes it has done for the locals for all those years. This would mean not providing a housing solution to the low income earners and also failing to support them with the basic services like counseling and education among them. Many support groups and organizations would pull out of the agreement leaving HASCO to carry out those services which would be overwhelming and costly. It also risks bearing a heavy financial burden.

References

The Evans School of Public Affairs. Integrating housing and social services: local initiative versus federal mandate (a). The Electronic Hallway, University of Washington 1994.