tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25220098.post8974321986133512420..comments2023-10-02T09:09:12.963-07:00Comments on NonprofitEye: NONPROFIT ROLE PLAYING?P. Ashlundhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08849994782572188510noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25220098.post-46941629416765925252008-02-16T14:29:00.000-08:002008-02-16T14:29:00.000-08:00My first thought when I read the key portion of th...My first thought when I read the key portion of the job description was "OF COURSE it’s in Orange County, the home of the Republican majority in California, what else would you expect??" But then I began to think about the demographic shifts that have resulted in the election of Democratic members of Congress from the original homeland of Mickey Mouse's Magic Castle.<BR/><BR/>On the other hand, the newest understanding of ‘invisible hand’ theory and links between business and government is: we just outsource all functions previously done by government entities to the private sector on the grounds they do things so much more efficiently. The final legacy of the Bush administration is how easily this can be done without raising any questions. <BR/>For example, there is supposed to be an implication embedded in this concept that the private sector also does things more effectively, but we have long since learned that isn’t the necessarily case if we take a closer look. Unfortunately, this version of invisible hand theory bears a close resemblance to the work of the all-powerful Wizard of OZ.<BR/><BR/>As I feel some certainty on the perspective of the elected officials behind the noted cryptic ideals regarding the “…role of government in society and how it interrelates with the business community” in this posting, I suspect this position is at base similar to an old fashioned contract monitor, but with a few wrinkles. <BR/><BR/>1: The assumption is that all possible government functions including those connected to the political process and public safety would be more cost-effectively performed by private sector (for-profit) entities.<BR/>2: All internal analysis of performance should be done with the goal of spinning off these tasks to a private sector company.<BR/>3: All analysis of tasks currently performed by 501(c)3 organizations under contract by the government should be evaluated with an eye to how they might be achieved on a more cost-effective basis by a for-profit entity.<BR/>4: Any and all analysis of the tasks now performed by private sector companies in lieu of (c)3 or direct Government functions MUST be given the benefit of doubt on any and all documentation that may somehow, someway, be tied to proprietary information---and hence not subject to scrutiny.<BR/>5: It will be presumed that a private sector company is presumptively entitled to earn a profit in any endeavor, and any business practices (including those related to HR concerns) that do not specifically break the law are ipso facto considered acceptable.<BR/>6: As Sole Source contracts are far more efficient than those subject to bidding, they require less oversight and hence time should not be wasted on evaluating their performance. This is the case with those granted to (c)3 organizations as well as those given to private sector companies. <BR/>7: As private-sector companies always utilize best practices in their accounting standards they will not require any financial scrutiny. The market place will assure their efficient management of the funds in question.<BR/>8: (c)3 organizations do not employ high-level accounting systems or staff, and must be presumed to be at a high level of risk of fraud and abuse. Therefore they must have their books audited on a monthly basis.Nonprofit Pundithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02091571125550822079noreply@blogger.com