GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Lawmakers unveil bill to establish public service academy

• 21956
  

  To the analyst at the SSA in Baltimore:

  Your son's service as a Peace Corps member provides him with non-competitive eligibility for a federal GS position (in his field). He can market himself to federal agencies independently, either via personal contacts or perhaps at a federal job fair. He can be hired almost on-the-spot without applying for a position. I believe that this rare eligibility, which is very rare (and well earned) in federal hiring, lasts for two years after leaving the Peace Corps. When I was with the IRS in Washington, D.C., we hired several prior Peace Corps personnel, all of who proved themselves as very productive and valued members of our office. Many federal hiring managers like to hire Peace Corps personnel, both because of the relative ease in doing so as well as the high caliber of personnel who come from the Peace Corps ranks. Good luck!

  Michael Smith Posted March 26, 2007 12:21 PM
• 21954
  

  I believe the public service academy is a good start. My son has a degree in sociology with a certificate in African American history. He volunteered and served three years in the Peace Corps (Senegal, West Africa) as a volunteer and then as a PC regional PCV. When he returned from the PC he attended the School for International (SIT) Training with a degree in Management/Sustainable development. He interned in Salt Lake City, Utah at Vista-Americorps. He met his wife at SIT.

  He wife is from Vladivostok. He taught English at the BCM Language Center in Seongnam, Korea. He and his wife returned to Vladivostok for the birth of their daughter. He taught English in the University and at the Technical University in Vladivostok. He recently returned to the US and has been unable to find employment either with the Federal Government or Private Industry. He is currently working part-time and is thinking about teaching. I guess the expectation is if you are recommended by Congress and attend this academy then you are the cream of the crop.

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 26, 2007 11:01 AM
• 21942
  

  The comments from the USAF engineer are in full comport with my initial contention that the DoD is permeated with an insular mindset and sense of entitlement. Excellence is not only gained or present or demonstrated in only DoD organizations. Skill sets are portable and translatable. Further, those truly among the "best and the brightest" do not need to have de facto non-competitive or biased career pathways open for them, career 'pathways' including DLAMP that are created/cobbled together by one agency careerist DoD staffers for one agency careerist current or prior DoD staffers (GS, military or contractor) throughout their careers.

  In fact, when the search for excellence is genuine and the competition is truly fair and open for all that apply (and are not skewed merely for current or prior DoD staffers), hiring outcomes are almost always highly diverse. Successful first order applicants and competitors can and do come from outside merely DoD.

  And yes, they can and even do come from outside the public sector. The mere notion of any organization, including DoD, maintaining near 100% levels of inbreeding -- even when purportedly recruiting from outside of DoD -- such outcomes speak for themselves and provide more than ample evidence of the underlying wrongheaded insular entitlement-based culture that is unfortunately present and thriving within the largest of all federal agencies.

  Michael Smith Posted March 23, 2007 5:32 PM
• 21935
  

  Some months back, when this was initially introduced, I thought it was a great idea to fulfill a compelling need - a core of trained and competent Federal leadership for the next generation (I felt covering state and local needs would be too diluting and unrealistic). It seemed this would provide the needed focus and intensity in the educational process. Something was needed to overcome the prevailing culture of advancement based solely on longevity and technical familiarity with no concern for management ability, coupled with politically-based appointments devoid of long-term interest.

  I have since re-thought the concept and concluded it would be an unnecessarily costly, duplicative, and narrowly regimented approach to develop informed leaders. I believe a better approach would be to allow prospective candidates to get an undergraduate education first, at their own expense or with other sources of aid. This is needed as a basic "license" to even approach a management capacity in government, in my opinion. Then, an attractive graduate program, with heavy government sponsorship, could be established in collaboration with existing graduate schools of public administration. Full-ride scholarships could be given to promising candidates, with assurances of meaningful professional certification, facilitating assignments and advancement throughout their government career (of at least five years).

  This would reduce costs by making use of existing institutional infrastructure - strengthening it in the process by balancing programs which tend to be state and local in emphasis. It would produce a diversified intellectual pool for tackling the challenges of government. Call it more of an "ROTC" than an "academy" approach. But, as I said, something is needed.

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 23, 2007 2:18 PM
• 21927
  

  On its face, this initiative sounds worthwhile. But if you give it additional thought, it tends to lose value for a number of reasons. First, it is inherently redundant. There are legions of public and private universities that educate bright minds for potential entry or re-entry into public service. Can/does anyone disagree with this fact? Then there are the existing highly successful federal programs that already bring in fresh talent into public service, including the Presidential Management Fellowship Program, the Federal Intern Program, the Outstanding Scholar Program and others. What not just enhance them at a fraction of the cost? And lastly, and perhaps most important, there are far too many federal organizations, and most notably the Defense Department, that only provide lip service about "searching for excellence" and hiring the "best and the brightest," etc. The problem is that it's all talk. The unvarnished truth of the matter is that even when DoD purportedly recruits outside of DoD via federal-wide or all sources recruitments at the higher grades in the administrative management series (0300 and 0500), its hiring outcomes result in near 100 percent levels of inbreeding whereby only and merely current or prior DoD staffers are ever hired. Unless and until the every insular and pedestrian-level organizational culture that permeates DoD and some other federal organizations is addressed and ameliorated, this proposed institute will serve little effective value in the long term.

  Michael Smith Posted March 23, 2007 11:31 AM
• 21925
  

  This is a brilliant thought! Most of those training in the DLAMPS program in DoD are themselves looking at retirement in the not-to-distant future. Why? Because they spent their careers trying to get to the GS-14/15 positions just to become eligible to apply for DLAMPS. Bring the best and the brightest into public service right from the start!! But don't stop there - make sure that they are set up to succeed, that their paths are well-planned and funded, and that their jobs are rotated amongst all agencies so they gain the breadth of experience needed to lead effectively anywhere.

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 23, 2007 10:50 AM
• 21918
  

  If Congress would give current employees half the chance to express their opinion and knowledge an academy would not be needed. Higher headquarters make all decisions and the working employees have no input and are not given the training classes required. Look at the post job openings a B.A. for a GS-5. No person with a four-year degree will work for the government when they can make double the amount outside the government.

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 23, 2007 8:47 AM