The Emerging Federal Quasi Government: Issues of Management and Accountability

Abstract

There has been a growing trend in the federal government toward reliance on organizations that commingle legal attributes of the government and private sectors. These hybrid organizations now constitute a quasi government that occasions both interest and concern by political leaders, practitioners, and scholars alike because these organizations touch the very heart of democratic governance: To whom are these hybrids accountable? How well is the public interest being protected against the interests of private parties?

Quasi-Governmental Organizations at the Local Level: Publicly-Appointed Directors Leading Nonprofit Organizations

“…Definitional difficulties are compounded by transnational differences in legal regimes, social history, and cultural traditions, but even scholars focused on the American experience have failed to reach a consensus. The varying attempts at definition congeal around the idea that the organizations of interest possess a mix of public and private characteristics, but scholars differ as to which characteristics are considered, focusing variously on funding sources, missions, performance characteristics, means of accountability, and/or application of certain laws (such as personnel rules or governmental immunities) (Koppell 2003;Becker 2010;Andre 2010;Moe 2001;Bertelli 2005;O'Connell 2014;Kosar 2008;Musolf and Seidman 1980). One reason why scholars have not agreed on -or even sought -a common definition is because the variables of interest will differ depending on the scholar's particular research aims.…”

Shifting Boundaries between the Public and Private Sectors: Implications from the Economic Crisis

“…The key question becomes, is the government capacity and authority in place to initiate, manage, and evaluate the configuration? Public–private configurations require uniquely equipped public management capacity that includes knowledge of and skill with the appropriate management tools (Mosher 1980; Salamon 2002), an “energetic executive” equipped to carry out ongoing management responsibilities (Light 2008), and the authority (and credibility) to provide direction and shape outcomes (Koppell 2001; Moe 2001; Moe and Stanton 1989).…”

The <i>Kelo</i> Opportunity

“…Public accountability is problematic because of the decrease in transparency due to public-private partnerships. Moe (2001) agrees, noting that hybrid organizations have become so prevalent that they are now thought of as quasi-governmental organizations; the key problem is the question of to whom these organizations are accountable. As Moe notes, accountability is troubling for constitutionalists because of distinctions between the public and private sectors as a matter founded in law.…”