Planning and Evaluation for Public Safety Leaders

A Toolkit

Shane Nordyke

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2021
• Print ISBN:
  9781032020839
• eBook ISBN:
  9781000403350
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Management
• Index: Politics & International Relations

Planning and Evaluation for Public Safety Leaders presents field-tested techniques and tips to help public safety leaders effectively manage their organizations and overcome challenges.

Organizations and agencies operating within the public safety sector are unique in many respects. These unique elements provide a different context in which planning, and performance measurement occur. Without recognizing this particular context, most public planning texts ignore crucial pieces of the puzzle when it comes to effectively achieving and measuring public safety outcomes. This book's practical approach equips students with approachable explanations specific to the public safety context, and practical tools for public safety leaders that can apply to their organizations.

Key Features

• Each chapter begins with a real-world case from the public safety sector that highlights the importance or possible application of the information covered.

• Cases are written in close coordination with the public safety practitioners to illustrate how the concepts covered in the chapter work in a real-world public safety context.

• "Put it into Practice" Reflections at the end of each chapter allow new or future public safety leaders to apply the material directly to their current organization.

• Boxes describe how to use and apply specific methods in a concise and easy to find tools addressing planning and evaluation challenges as they arise

• Key terms and application questions written specifically for students, focus in on the most important concepts and terms from the text.

• Overviews of relevant theoretical and scholarly work on the concepts offer connections with course material.

1The Role of Planning and Evaluation in the Public Safety Sector

Introduction

It has likely never been more difficult to direct a public safety agency than it is today. Dwindling state resources, ever-evolving risks, heightened expectations, and increased public scrutiny require public safety programs to be more effective, efficient, and transparent. While doing more with less, public safety agencies also need to adapt to rapid technological innovation, increased pressure from external and internal stakeholders, and an increased expectation for greater coordination with other entities to achieve broad (and often ambiguous) policy goals. While most public safety agencies and leaders are involved in planning and performance evaluation on a daily basis, there are few resources available to guide these processes.

Planning and performance evaluation are important in any public agency. Plans for the future allow an agency to organize materials, draft budgets, coordinate staff, and strategically acquire resources to achieve program goals as effectively and efficiently as possible. All public agencies are also responsible for performance measurement to some degree. Good performance measures allow organizations to make progress toward goals and evaluate the effectiveness of current strategies; they are also often required to secure future funding and resources. There are numerous texts on effective planning and performance measurement in the broader public sector but very few on the public safety sector specifically.

In my experience as an academic who works closely with public safety practitioners, I have found organizations and agencies operating within the public safety sector are unique in many respects, providing a different context in which planning and performance measurement occur. Without recognizing this distinct context, most public planning texts ignore crucial pieces of the puzzle when it comes to effectively achieving public safety outcomes. This text bridges that gap.

Planning and Evaluation

Planning and evaluation seem like pretty common-sense concepts. All organizations engage in both planning and performance evaluation to some extent even if it is just planning what will be accomplished this month and tracking some externally mandated performance measures. Over the last 40 years, however, a variety of evidence-based tools and practices have emerged to facilitate more effective planning and evaluation. Adopting ideas primarily from the business, economics, and political science fields, scholars of public administration and public policy have adapted and strengthened these tools to be specifically relevant for public agencies. In Master of Public Administration or Master of Public Affairs programs across the country, students now take full courses on Public Program Evaluation, Strategic Management in Public and Nonprofit Organizations, Executive Leadership, and Statistical Analysis for Effective Decision Making. While some of the statistical decision-making models take at least a couple of years of coursework to fully comprehend and master, most of these tools and techniques are easy to learn and start applying within public safety organizations without needing extensive coursework. Most of these theories are built upon a foundation or extension of the Rational Decision-Making Model. The Rational Decision-Making Model in public policy posits when faced with decisions, individuals will:

1. Clearly identify the problem
2. Consider all possible solutions to the problem
3. Evaluate the costs, benefits, feasibility, and acceptability of all possible solutions according to established criteria
4. Select the alternative that best meets the needs of the organization
5. Act on that choice
6. Evaluate performance

While a sound strategy on paper, most theorists and practitioners recognize the rational decision-making model is somewhat idealist when considering the day-to-day demands and time constraints organizations face. Public safety leaders cannot spend two to three months, or even two to three weeks, making every decision that needs to be made, nor do public safety organizations have the available resources to identify and research all possible alternative policy options. In 1959, Charles Lindblom, a Political Science Professor at Yale University, recognized these limitations and suggested policy makers in the real world were more likely to take an incremental approach to decision making. Incrementalism suggests that rather than considering all possible alternatives, organizations are more likely to take very small steps away from the status quo, evaluate the effect, and then either retreat or progress further down the chosen path. Lindblom called this practice, “muddling through.” While a more realistic assessment of context, if organizations intentionally rely on a strategy of only making incremental change, they will become less adaptable over time and miss opportunities for large-scale improvements in their practices. Regular planning and evaluation can help agencies realize more of the benefits of the rational decision-making model while still acknowledging organizational context and real-world limitations.

The Public Safety Sector

The public safety sector refers to a broad array of public agencies under the public safety umbrella. These organizations are all designed to prevent hazardous incidents and ensure the safety of the general public. The sector includes everything from local sheriffs, firefighters, and emergency medical technicians, to the directors of homeland security at the state, federal, and tribal levels. It also includes organizations devoted to disaster response as well as those focused on traffic safety. It includes local, state, federal, and tribal agencies. The broad public safety umbrella encompasses all of the following:

• Fire
• Law enforcement
• Corrections
• Wildfire teams
• Parks and wildlife management
• Rescue teams
• Hazardous material teams
• Ambulance and emergency medical services
• Security guards and community crime stoppers
• Emergency communications
• Emergency management
• Homeland security
• Inspections and code enforcement
• Animal control
• Immigration and customs
• Drug enforcement agencies
• Park
• Motor vehicles

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) estimates that more than 2.86 million employees worked in the Public Safety Sector in 2015. NIOSH also classifies these positions as some of the most dangerous in the United States.

The provision of public safety services in the United States is highly fragmented with functions occurring at all levels of government and across multiple independent agencies. As is the case in most policy areas, public safety delivery begins at the local level. The size, structure, and coordination of these local services vary significantly depending on local needs and the size of the community. Large cities often have extensive public safety bureaucracies at the local level. For example, the City of Los Angeles Police Department has over 9,000 sworn officers and 3,000 civilian employees organized across five large divisions. Whereas most small communities may rely on a small county sheriff's office and local volunteer fire department for most of their public safety needs. Of the approximately 1,160,500 firefighters in the United States, roughly 70 percent of them serve in a volunteer capacity, usually while maintaining other full-time jobs. Likewise, many local emergency managers serve in a volunteer capacity. The type of planning and management systems appropriate in the former case are not necessarily appropriate in the latter case. However, all of these local public safety providers are generally the face of public safety operations in their region and the first to respond in times of crisis or public need. They are directly responsible for implementing the bulk of the public safety planning that occurs at the federal and state levels and often the best source of information about what currently is and is not working.

Many of the decisions regarding public safety planning and evaluation happen at the state level, often in specific state level departments or offices of public safety. These organizations are generally responsible for applying for and budgeting federal grant dollars, coordinating action between local providers and various state level offices. However, there is a wide variety of organizational structures across these state agencies. As is shown in Table 1.1, the Nevada Department of Public Safety is organized into nine divisions and three offices covering a variety of public safety responsibilities. The Department of Corrections, the Department of Wildlife, the Department of Motor Vehicles, and the Department of Transportation all operate as their own separate organizational units even though they are also share authority for some public safety responsibilities.

Table 1.1 Nevada Department of Public Safety Organizational Structure

Divisions	Offices
Capitol Police Emergency Management/Homeland Security Highway Patrol Human Resources Investigations Parole and Probation Records, Communications and Compliance Division State Fire Marshall Training	Criminal Justice Assistance Professional Responsibility Traffic Safety

The State of Connecticut does not have a Department or Office of Public Safety but instead has a Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection and includes six divisions: Commission on Fire Prevention and Control, Emergency Management and Homeland Security, Statewide Emergency Telecommunications, Police Officer Standards and Training Council, Scientific Services, and the State Police. Meanwhile, in Arizona, the Department of Public Safety is synonymous with the Arizona State Troopers and not a larger organizational umbrella. There is a separate Arizona Department of Homeland Security and a separate Governor's Office of Highway Safety. Every state also has its own set of relationships with local and tribal partners. The significant variety of structures and frameworks in the sectors means it is more difficult to develop boilerplate solutions and planning templates that will work across the board. Hence, leaders within the public safety sector often have to design and implement planning and evaluation processes on their own.

Historically, the United States has not relied on or felt comfortable with the federal government playing a substantial role in policy planning. The Tenth Amendment of the US Constitution reserves all “powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States.” The development and implementation of public policy emerged and evolved as primarily local and state-level efforts. Over the course of the 20th century, though, the size and responsibility of the federal government expanded significantly into areas that heretofore fell solely under state purview. An increased dependence on a national infrastructure of roads and transportation systems increased federal oversight and funding of roads and highways. The expansion of scientific and technological knowledge and their relationship with national security expanded the federal role in education policy, and the evolving nature of hazards and threats expanded the federal role in coordinating and funding public safety efforts. Now the public safety sector includes employees within the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, the Department of Transportation, and the Department of the Interior all at the federal level. These federal departments oversee volumes of federal policy regulations and the distribution of federal public safety dollars. They also provide coordination and guidance for state level actors as well as public safety planning and evaluation training programs. For example, while every state is responsible for developing its own annual highway safety plan, the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration requires these performance-based plans to include federally identified priorities as ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Endorsements
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Contents
• List of Figures and Tables
• Acknowledgments
• About the Author
• 1 The Role of Planning and Evaluation in the 
Public Safety Sector
• 2 Planning Basics
• 3 Designing Effective Policies
• 4 Program Evaluation
• 5 Collecting and Analyzing Survey Data
• 6 Utilizing Existing Data
• 7 Developing Effective Collaborations
• 8 Communicating to the Public
• Index