Customer-driven management models for choiceless clientele? Business process reengineering in a California welfare agency

Business process reengineering and lean are increasingly used to restructure public sector work. This article presents a case study of reengineering in a California welfare agency. It finds extensive work intensification and reduced autonomy for the workforce, and deteriorating service for the clientele. Rather than attribute these outcomes as inherent to the business process reengineering model, this article emphasizes how cost cutting and quantitative efficiency were prioritized over worker empowerment and service quality because the organization is a government agency facing severe budgetary pressures under neoliberalism, and the clientele consists of indigent families and individuals who have no choice of an alternative provider. © 2015, SAGE Publications. All rights reserved

The uncertain relationship between transparency and accountability

The concepts of transparency and accountability are closely linked: transparency is supposed to generate accountability. This article questions this widely held assumption. Transparency mobilises the power of shame, yet the shameless may not be vulnerable to public exposure. Truth often fails to lead to justice. After exploring different definitions and dimensions of the two ideas, the more relevant question turns out tobe: what kinds of transparency lead to what kinds of accountability, and under what conditions? The article concludes by proposing that the concept can be unpacked in terms of two distinct variants. Transparency can be either ‘clear’or‘opaque’, while accountability can be either‘soft’or‘hard’

An Assessment of DNA Testing for African Refugees

In March 2008, the Bureau of Population, Migration and Refugees (PRM) -- the Department of State agency that processes refugees abroad -- halted its family reunification program, known as Priority 3 (P3), because of concerns that there were high levels of fraud in the program. The suspension of the P3 program has had devastating effects on African refugees in the United States seeking to reunite with their relatives. The U.S. accepts disproportionately low numbers of refugees from Africa, and the suspension of the P3 program means that even fewer African refugees have been allowed to enter the U.S. In September of 2010, PRM published proposed rules that would change its procedures for processing P3 applicants, including mandatory DNA testing to prove claimed family relationships. The prospect of mandatory DNA testing is of concern to refugees themselves, refugee resettlement agencies, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), and other human rights advocates. Moreover, the implementation of DNA testing in the refugee context may portend required DNA testing in other areas of immigration admissions. Consequently, understanding the particular role DNA testing may play in refugee admissions -- its costs, its benefits, and the necessary safeguards if put into use -- provides insight into not only refugee admissions, but other issues that come into play in immigration policy, such as how family relationships are proven. This paper traces the underrepresentation of refugees from Africa in the U.S., the allegations of fraudulent African family reunification applications, DNA testing, and how the U.S. government intends to deal with the issue in the future

Division and Dislocation: Regulating Immigration through Local Housing Ordinances

The last two years have seen an intensified public debate over the issue of undocumented immigrants in the United States. However, Congress and the White House have repeatedly failed to enact immigration reform legislation that might effectively address the problem of undocumented immigration. This inaction by the federal government has led to heightened frustration at the local level. One way in which some policymakers and activists have expressed this frustration is through support for ordinances that target undocumented immigrants. As of March 10, 2007, such ordinances had been proposed, debated, or adopted in at least 104 cities and counties in 28 states. These ordinances encompass a number of measures -- most notably prohibitions on renting to or employing undocumented immigrants and the adoption of English as the official language of the local government. Forty-three of the 104 localities have debated or passed rental restrictions alone or as part of broader ordinances. According to the judges who so far have heard cases involving the ordinances, a local ordinance that regulates immigration or otherwise conflicts with federal immigration law is unconstitutional. Regulating immigration has long been within the exclusive purview of the federal government. The ordinances also have been found to deny "due process" rights to renters and landlords. Local ordinances that target undocumented immigrants needlessly foster anti-immigrant and anti-Latino discrimination, divide communities, and undermine the economic prosperity of the locales that adopt them. Most cities and counties already have the ability to deal with problems such as crime and overcrowding through existing laws. Rather than championing anti-immigrant ordinances that claim to deal with these problems without actually doing so, local policymakers would be well advised to focus their energies instead on addressing the concerns of their residents that actually fall within the range of local power