Call for projects

APPLY NOW FOR A FREE PROGRAM EVALUATION PLAN TAILORED TO YOUR NEEDS!

Program evaluation plans can be used to:

*Provide evaluation information in grant proposals

*Evaluate feasibility of engaging in program evaluation activities

*Improve current evaluation practices

*Generate data that can be used to justify your program to stakeholders, funders and clients

By working as a community partner with Master’s of Public Administration students from BYU, you will receive a comprehensive program evaluation plan tailored to your specific needs including:

*Budget and timeline tailored to your resources (even if you don’t think you have any!)

*Program logic model

*Stakeholder analysis

*Program process evaluation model

*Instructions for data collection and analysis including sampling methodology

*Data collection tools including surveys, focus group questions, etc.

*Written and oral presentations of the program evaluation plan

All of this and more is yours FREE for working with master’s level student consultants under the supervision of Dr. Eva Witesman of the BYU Marriott School of Management. Projects will begin in August, 2011 and be completed by December 12, 2011.

To qualify, you must:

*Represent a public or nonprofit organization or a charitable program

*Have a specific project or program requiring evaluation (one-time or ongoing evaluation)

*Identify a contact person from your organization who will be available for consultation by phone, e-mail, video conference, or in person (so that we can best tailor the program evaluation plan to meet your needs)

TO APPLY, PLEASE CLICK THE FOLLOWING LINK BEFORE FRIDAY, AUGUST 19, 2011. You will be directed to a short form that will ask for your name, organization, contact information, and the specific project(s) to be evaluated. Once we have received your information, we will contact you within one week to discuss your project(s).

SPACE IS LIMITED! APPLY NOW!

Proposal form link: https://byu.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_eR2la1IrV1ZOX0o

For more information, please contact Dr. Eva Witesman by e-mail at eva_witesman@byu.edu

***PLEASE CIRCULATE WIDELY***

Winning an interview

by Andrew Nelson



I had two interviews this week for two very good internships. There was obviously some overlap in the questions including the usual "tell us about yourself," and "tell me about a time when you faced significant conflict" questions.

I had one ringer though that really threw me for a loop.

Near the end of the interview, the city manager said, "So tell us what you know about our city."

I had, of course, done considerable background research and was able to briefly list their demographics, some recent politics, a reference to their budget, and how they recently met one of their strategic objectives. At this point, I was feeling pretty good about myself.

The city manager responded, "And how do you fit into the picture - our city - that you just described?"

I had thought of a similar question - "What can you bring to our city?" - but by then I was already taken off guard. What do I know about the city? Sure, I did some reading, but I never stopped to think about how my presence could possibly solve the specific issues I had described just seconds before. I had prepared to solve the problems directly linked to the job description. That isn't a bad start, but in my preparation perhaps I failed to miss a greater goal, and it also shed light on a personality fault of mine: I came from the perspective that people created internships to help students get their feet wet in the real world. I underestimated the city's desire to solve real problems. I knew that is what they wanted, but it hadn't settled in my brain yet.

Of course, I knew exactly what I should say, but I hesitated during my epiphany. I rattled off what was probably a lame answer and we moved on to the question/answer portion of the interview.

Lesson learned:

1) You must do background research on the city to which you are applying.
2) Your research is useless unless you can answer how you fit in to their current situation and can help meet the city's objectives, especially as they relate to the job description.

I'll cross my fingers. I'll have their decisions in the next few days.

Photo source

Giveaway winners

Congratulations to the LGT giveaway winners:

$10 gift certificate to a local business/restaurant: Annie Seeley

ICMA student membership: Benjamin

Winners, please email me at 2andrewnelson@gmail.com so I can give you further instructions.

Andrew

Appreciation

by Bethany Hansen

I think it has been said of local and state governments that you know they are functioning well when you hardly notice they are there.

Especially since having my son, I have developed an all new appreciation for having clean water come out of my faucet and having a nice, clean, well-maintained park next door to my apartment. Such amenities do not come without someone doing the work—I thought it was interesting to see a city worker cleaning up the park early on a Saturday morning. I do think it is terribly easily to take for granted the services we receive from our local and state governments—especially because we hardly notice the services until something interrupts them, or they are subpar.

We owe much of our quality of life to government in general, and to people who work in those governments, in particular. The administrators, clerks, public utility workers, and others create a combined effort that makes life better for all of us.

So I, for one, want to remember and appreciate those efforts.

It's not too late!

You can still enter Local Government Today's giveaway. Prizes include one student membership to the International City/County Manager's Association and a $10 gift certificate to the business or restaurant of your choice.

For more info, click here.

Debt Ceiling

by Bethany Hansen

As Congress and the president stall (again) in their debt ceiling talks, it reminds me once more that local and state governments do not have the luxury of raising their debt ceilings as easily as Congress does. It is rather an odd concept: essentially, being able to raise one’s own credit limit. I know that many, such as Ben Bernanke, argue that defaulting on our debt would be destructive to the economy, but what about the long-term consequences of creating more debt?

President Obama and others argue that by raising the debt ceiling now, he and Congress can deal with the short-term crisis and then they can focus on really tackling the debt and spending. Judging by the nature of democracy, that is a false assumption. No democratically-elected politician will want to cut anything without the immediate pressure of having to do so.

Some states and even cities have major debt problems (e.g., New York, California, New Jersey, to name just a few), and they have been saved the past two-ish years by handouts from the federal government. But now is the time when they are being forced to seriously make changes to their budgets—because they cannot do what Congress is now considering doing.

As public administrators, we can help to avoid dire financial circumstances by planning and spending conservatively, and by helping elected officials do so as well.

Photo Source