Friday, May 04, 2007
GETTING OUR PRIORITIES STRAIGHT--TAKE ONE BILLION AND COUNTING
The following editorial* appeared in today's Post and Courier. We do not know whether to laugh or to cry, particularly in view of the fact that this article ** also appeared in today's Post and Courier.
We remind the Legislature that the South Carolina Department of Social Services is under federal mandate to install a computerized child support enforcement system and that it continues to face fines for not having done so. Therefore, it seems to us that the State of South Carolina would be better off spending limited funds on needs and mandates rather than spending on wants.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Remove pork smell from grants, put accountability in program
The state Senate has taken a step toward acknowledging the accountability flaws in a controversial multimillion dollar state grants program. Unless strict criteria are established for the award of as much as $30 million in the months ahead, the program should be suspended.
The new executive director of the State Budget and Control Board, Henry White, helped draw attention to the flaws in the program recently by declining to sign off on grants under $100,000. The state legislation that established the program requires that grants of that amount or less be handled administratively by the board's staff.
While the previous executive director awarded grants, Mr. White has taken the position that there is insufficient criteria for him to make decisions. Grants above that amount have been approved by the Competitive Grants Program Committee, dominated by legislative appointees. A total of $21 million worth of grants has been awarded since the program was established in 2005.
A committee-approved grant of $500,000 recently raised eyebrows as a result of a State newspaper report that an Upstate legislator who signed off on the grant was a non-voting member of the non-profit health care group that received the money. It was the highest award to date. The requirement on the application that a legislator or the governor sign off on a grant has rightly earned the criticism that the program is a political "slush fund." While Gov. Mark Sanford initially recommended that a grants program be established, he wound up opposing the legislation as it was written and hasn't signed off on any applications.
Unfortunately, a new Senate budget proviso affirms the requirement for political sponsorship, specifying that the application must have the backing of a member of the General Assembly who represents the county or municipality applying for the grant, or the signature of the governor.
The proposed new criteria does cap grants at $100,000 and puts all the decision making squarely with the committee. It also requires non-profits to make application through their local governments, a stipulation aimed at greater accountability. Very importantly, the proviso has a deadline for final financial reporting by the recipients that is lacking in the current legislation. To date, Mr. White tells us that he has seen only a few reports from recipients detailing how their grant money was spent. He recently sent out letters to all the recipients asking for that information.
But the Senate budget proviso also reveals a strange political priority. In addition to rightly giving preference to water and sewer projects, the provision actually directs "a focus on community festivals." Some 60 such festivals, from the "Come-See-Me" festival to the Lamar Egg Scramble, already have been funded by the grants program. Why aren't those one-day affairs being supported on the local level with accommodations tax dollars that were intended for tourism promotion?
Scott English, the governor's deputy chief of staff and appointee on the grants committee, said he believes the criteria should include a requirement for a local match. "That's a good way," he said, "to weigh out whether or not the project is viable." At a recent meeting, the committee put 18 grant awards totaling $1.4 million on hold pending more information. Pending initial consideration are a total of 2,100 requests for $368 million. The applicants are vying for some $22 million on hand and another $9 million in the pending budget.
It's up to the Legislature to set better guidelines for the program and the Grants Committee to come up with some very specific criteria to rate the applications. For certain, the lawmakers should remove the strong smell of pork from what should be a truly competitive grants program by scratching the requirement that an application have a political blessing.
*http://www.charleston.net/assets/webPages/departmental/news/default_pf.aspx?NEWSID=142221
**http://www.charleston.net/assets/webPages/departmental/news/Stories.aspx?section=sports&tableId=142265&pubDate=5/4/2007
Remove pork smell from grants, put accountability in program
The state Senate has taken a step toward acknowledging the accountability flaws in a controversial multimillion dollar state grants program. Unless strict criteria are established for the award of as much as $30 million in the months ahead, the program should be suspended.
The new executive director of the State Budget and Control Board, Henry White, helped draw attention to the flaws in the program recently by declining to sign off on grants under $100,000. The state legislation that established the program requires that grants of that amount or less be handled administratively by the board's staff.
While the previous executive director awarded grants, Mr. White has taken the position that there is insufficient criteria for him to make decisions. Grants above that amount have been approved by the Competitive Grants Program Committee, dominated by legislative appointees. A total of $21 million worth of grants has been awarded since the program was established in 2005.
A committee-approved grant of $500,000 recently raised eyebrows as a result of a State newspaper report that an Upstate legislator who signed off on the grant was a non-voting member of the non-profit health care group that received the money. It was the highest award to date. The requirement on the application that a legislator or the governor sign off on a grant has rightly earned the criticism that the program is a political "slush fund." While Gov. Mark Sanford initially recommended that a grants program be established, he wound up opposing the legislation as it was written and hasn't signed off on any applications.
Unfortunately, a new Senate budget proviso affirms the requirement for political sponsorship, specifying that the application must have the backing of a member of the General Assembly who represents the county or municipality applying for the grant, or the signature of the governor.
The proposed new criteria does cap grants at $100,000 and puts all the decision making squarely with the committee. It also requires non-profits to make application through their local governments, a stipulation aimed at greater accountability. Very importantly, the proviso has a deadline for final financial reporting by the recipients that is lacking in the current legislation. To date, Mr. White tells us that he has seen only a few reports from recipients detailing how their grant money was spent. He recently sent out letters to all the recipients asking for that information.
But the Senate budget proviso also reveals a strange political priority. In addition to rightly giving preference to water and sewer projects, the provision actually directs "a focus on community festivals." Some 60 such festivals, from the "Come-See-Me" festival to the Lamar Egg Scramble, already have been funded by the grants program. Why aren't those one-day affairs being supported on the local level with accommodations tax dollars that were intended for tourism promotion?
Scott English, the governor's deputy chief of staff and appointee on the grants committee, said he believes the criteria should include a requirement for a local match. "That's a good way," he said, "to weigh out whether or not the project is viable." At a recent meeting, the committee put 18 grant awards totaling $1.4 million on hold pending more information. Pending initial consideration are a total of 2,100 requests for $368 million. The applicants are vying for some $22 million on hand and another $9 million in the pending budget.
It's up to the Legislature to set better guidelines for the program and the Grants Committee to come up with some very specific criteria to rate the applications. For certain, the lawmakers should remove the strong smell of pork from what should be a truly competitive grants program by scratching the requirement that an application have a political blessing.
*http://www.charleston.net/assets/webPages/departmental/news/default_pf.aspx?NEWSID=142221
**http://www.charleston.net/assets/webPages/departmental/news/Stories.aspx?section=sports&tableId=142265&pubDate=5/4/2007
