Make
Government Compete
Corporations
don't do everything in-house, why should
government? Virginia could improve its process for evaluating outsourcing
opportunities by looking closely at Florida's.
The
“the fastest way to save money and increase
value is to force public institutions to
compete.” That’s
what the authors and government-reform experts
David Osborne and Peter Hutchinson quipped in
their recent book, The
Price of Government.
Indeed, an overarching recommendation of
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Performance Review
of California state government was to introduce
more competition for government services.
Governments at every level, around the
country, have introduced competition to to find
cost savings and greater performance.
Osborne
and Hutchinson further add that competition and
other reform tools are “well beyond the
experimental phase... [They] have proven their
value in many different public contexts… Waste
no time in implementing them.”
Virginia
government has a long history with competition.
There was a time when the Commonwealth was
considered ahead of the curve. Virginia
created the Commonwealth Competition Council (CCC)
and passed the Public-Private Transportation Act (PPTA)
and the Public-Private Education Act (PPEA). Unfortunately, times have changed.
Yes, the infrastructure that was put into
place is still there. Although we are taking steps to bring more
performance and accountability to state
government, we’ve failed to take full advantage
of competition in recent years.
Once
considered a pioneer and leader in the movement, Virginia
has fallen behind in recent years.
However, this past legislative session saw
an enhanced commitment to competition.
Several competition-oriented bills were
passed. Perhaps
the most noteworthy is HB 1043, the Competitive
Government Act, introduced by Del. Christopher B.
Saxman, R-Staunton, and signed by Gov. Mark R.
Warner. The
bill requires every state agency to analyze its
workforce and identify competition opportunities.
The process is similar to the rules and
guidelines of the federal competitive sourcing
plan and procedure.
Virginia
might well look at Florida
and Gov. Jeb Bush’s creative actions that have
vaulted that state into the national spotlight
along with California.
In March, Governor Bush created the Center
for Efficient Government — in many ways, it is
similar to our Commonwealth Competition Council. However, this Florida Center’s assignment
goes much further to include identifying a list of
competition opportunities within state government,
and the creation of new standards and processes
for carrying out those competitions. The new process has attracted
interest in several other states and is
quickly becoming the model to emulate —
governors in South Carolina
and
Kentucky
are both seriously considering adopting a similar
approach.
Florida
has developed a centralized process, modeled after
the
United
Kingdom for evaluating when and where competition is
appropriate, as well as evaluating the
competitions and determining who is the best
source to deliver services. The process consists of a robust set of
standards, templates, guidelines and a transparent
method of managing each competition initiative.
The process being developed in
Florida
reviews a competition initiative at critical stages in its
lifecycle to validate that it can successfully
advance to the next stage. It is also designed to
couple a more transparent process with more
predictable costs and outcomes.
There are five gates, or points at which an Oversight Board
evaluates a project, during its lifecycle: two
during the planning phases of an initiative and
three during implementation.
The process includes the development of a
business case, where the goals or purpose of the
project are articulated.
In addition, options are identified and
options are presented for the state to pursue.
If a strong business case cannot be
created, the project is dead
since this would indicate there is not strong
purpose for the program in the first place. Stages
two through five outline the procurement process,
contract and transition management, as well as
post-implementation strategies including
performance measurement and evaluation.
The purpose of these procedures is to provide a thorough
assessment at key decision points in the process
of outsourcing a government function or service.
Florida’s
Center for Efficient Government created the most
transparent, accountable, and performance based
process out there.
Virginia
should take notice and consider moving in the same
direction.
Serious
reform and serious savings are still possible to
achieve. Our governor and other leaders
continually affirm their commitment to more
competition and accountability for finding budget
savings. Lessons from efforts in Florida,
California
and elsewhere can dramatically enhance this
effort.
Virginia
can once again be the recognized leader in making
government more efficient by taking a look at Florida
and California
and then stepping forward with its own exciting
“competitive government” program. The groundwork has been laid over the past
few years. Now
might well be the time to move forward more
aggressively.
--
August 23, 2004
|