Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

1978

Studies for the Heritage Foundation:

Civil Service Reform and Government Reorganization

ERA Extension: Update on the Arguments

Tuition Tax Credits Proposals

District of Columbia Representation: "As Though It Were a State" The Drug Regulation Reform Act

Airline Deregulation

1977

Studies for the Heritage Foundation:

The ERA: Is Seven Years Enough?

National Flood Insurance: The End of a Partnership?
Sunset Proposals: Can They Reform the Bureaucracy?

PUBLIC TESTIMONY

1981

1979

1978

Before the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the
Judiciary Committee of the U.S. Senate, concerning
Congress' power over the federal judiciary pursuant to
Article III of the Constitution.

Before the state legislatures of Kentucky and Alaska,
concerning the proposed constitutional amendment
providing for representation for the District of
Columbia.

Before the state legislatures of Pennsylvania and Ohio, concerning the proposed constitutional amendment

providing for representation for the District of Columbia.

OCTOBER 9, 1985

REVIEW OF "A PROPOSAL FOR THE NATIONAL PARTNERSHIP TO PREVENT DRUG AND ALCOHOL ABUSE," SUBMITTED TO THE OFFICE OF JUVENILE JUSTICE AND DELINQUENCY PREVENTION PROGRAMS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.

Reviewed by Thomas R. Ascik

Attorney at Law

1611 North Kent Street

Arlington, Virginia 22209 703-525-1505

Overall Evaluation

This proposal may well be an "outstanding opportunity to achieve the goals and objectives of the Juvenile Justice Act." A great deal of work has put in to round up an impressive list of people who have committed themselves to active involvement in the project. This list includes the President and the First Lady themselves. Certainly, the "visibility test" has been passed. This project will get public attention.

In addition, one of the stated purposes of the project, to find out what works and to be a resource for the replication of workable projects at other sites, is wisely conceived and may protect this project from the unsuccessful fate of numerous "top-down" interventions of the past.

The intergovernmental aspect of this project local sources,

[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

is another safeguard against failure. In addition, the private sector really dominates the public sector in this proposal. That is probably the only way something like this can succeed.

probably correctable

There are some deficiencies that do, however, call into question how good this "opportunity" really is. In brief, they are:

1) There is a very noticeable lack of church involvement in the project. I saw mention of only two mentions of participation by churches. Is it presumed that priests, rabbais, and ministers have nothing to say about these problems? In addition, don't churches conduct their own prevention programs these days?

2) There may be less than meets the eye in the media involvement in this project. Are they agreeing to just run public service announcements, or are they agreeing to seriously consider whether their own programs and ads actually contribute to the problem?

3) It is not obvious that there is a "need for national coordination" to attack this problem. This is merely asserted but not proved. It could have been proved by showing how local efforts have failed or by showing that the source of the problem is national (the national drug trade, for example). Is a national figure like the President more effective in exhortig kids to remain free from drugs or is a kid's father, priest, or teacher?

4) The personnel is heavily from the health community and lightly from the school community. This should be adjusted.

5) The conception of the project is entirely from an empirical point of view. The section on theory is almost entirely devoid of theory. It is almost exclusively descriptive. Is there

no theoretical work in theis field?

Or is this proposal deficient in presenting it? Presumably, since this project aims to prevent these behaviors, some theoretical work is necessary.

6) It is clear that the "experts," the empirical scientists and the health workers, are going to dominate the actual substance of what programs are eventually adopted by the project. The private sector is likely to have the job to sell the adopted programs. The proposal as a whole is short on what substantive programs will be adopted. It is difficult to assess the opportunity presented by this proposal when so little of the eventual substance is known.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

is outstanding and suggestions

are mode for ripsing the application.

[ocr errors]

Patrick B. McGuigan is Co-Editor of Criminal Justice Reform: A Blueprint. Mr. McGuigan is Director of the Judicial Reform Project of The Institute for Government and Politics, Free Congress Foundation. In addition to four books, previously published in the general subject area of crime and delinquency, he has a book forthcoming on the topic: Crime and Punishment in Modern America, of which he is co-editor. He holds the B.A. degree in History, and a M.A. in History in Medieval History.

Mr. McGuigan is on the Board of Advisors for RESTTA, and a recognized expert in the area of juvenile justice as related to minority issues.

October 9, 1985

MEMORANDUM

From: Patrick B. McGuigan

To:

Co-Director

Patrick Badaling

Institute for Government and Politics

Frank Porpotage, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

Re:

National Partnership to Prevent Alcohol and Drug Abuse

I have devoted substantial time and energy to a peer review of the proposed grant.

I believe this program offers a unique and outstanding opportunity to achieve the goals and objectives of the Juvenile Justice Act. The incidence of drug-related crime and social problems is well-documented not only in this grant, but also in the research documents I peruse regularly in my work. The program concept is sound and sufficiently specific that I am confident it will promote the primary goal of reducing drug and alcohol abuse among young people.

The mechanism described in this grant for carrying out the program concept is particularly viable. Further, the ideas described here are exciting in that they build on effective community-based models.

To summarize my views after careful analysis of the proposal:

the statement of the problem is pointed and determined, yet not infused with the panic-stricken quality so frequently encountered in the literature focusing on drug abuse prevention and education.

The objectives are

* the definition of objectives is clear and understandable. quite focused and specific, with admirable restraint in the description of what is achievable given the resources and personnel desired by the applicant.

*the project design is perhaps the most outstanding portion of the application. - Here is a "real world" program with imminently achievable objectives and a specific plan to move.

* the management structure is straightforward and dictated by the scope of the concept.

* given the experience and credibility of the consultants and professional staff (insofar as those are defined in this application), the organizational capability to move on this problem is apparent given sufficient resources and time to implement the concept.

* the costs described herein are entirely reasonable, given the reach and scope of the program required to implement the concept.

Of all the specific steps and programs described herein to achieve the program goals, I was most enthusiastic about the Town Meeting plan of action. These problems will only be resolved by free men and women acting in their own communities. The grant applicant appears to understand that solutions can not be "parachuted in" to local communities. Related to this, I have only one specific proposal for improving the application and the program concept: The national, state, anchor city and town/county

« AnteriorContinuar »