Federal money came to put computers in front of SC children with no internet. A public audit followed $635,600 of it to two USC labs that never opened.
Thank you, sir. This is the kind of transparency (and accountability) needed at ALL levels of our government. I look forward to more and supporting your candidacy.
PS I will share with our own state rep and senator.
This is impressive research! Looking forward to reading more of it. Ideally with less Milton Friedman. 😂 I don’t disagree with your point on that, but I wouldn’t go so far as to say it’s a universal truth that people are sloppy with money from elsewhere. Think it depends on the situation. And always need more accountability baked in.
It’s also worth noting that contracting out state work to nonprofits is the public-private partnership model generally touted by conservatives as being superior to government-run, and I don’t think that’s necessarily always true either.
Anyway, it’s cool that you’re doing all this. I look forward to reading more of your work!
Thanks for the compliment Lauren. You may be correct about about the public-private partnership model having been (or still is?) popular with conservatives - but I think we are starting to see so much abuse and insider dealing with the not-for-profits that this may change rapidly. The downside of these arrangements is that money disappears into a black hole. Like many things, I don't think we will find an absolute rule about these relationships but we do need transparency and we should be able to track outcomes in some form or another.
The specific sourcing model is relevant but not the pertinent point: wherever public monies are being spent on projects (defined start/end, deliverables and outcomes, etc.), regardless whether being done with public sector or private sector resources, there needs to be better governance not only of the spend but also the outcomes and quality. Upstream procurement should ensure the measurements of the project performance and results are included in the contracts, project management should ensure quality execution, and financial oversight should ensure financial oversight and that the monies were properly spent and produced the expected outcomes.
If I might be a little political here, isn’t it ironic that the AG candidate who would have shined a spotlight on this sort of shenanigans and prosecuted it didn’t make the runoff.
Thank you, sir. This is the kind of transparency (and accountability) needed at ALL levels of our government. I look forward to more and supporting your candidacy.
PS I will share with our own state rep and senator.
Thank you Phil!
This is impressive research! Looking forward to reading more of it. Ideally with less Milton Friedman. 😂 I don’t disagree with your point on that, but I wouldn’t go so far as to say it’s a universal truth that people are sloppy with money from elsewhere. Think it depends on the situation. And always need more accountability baked in.
It’s also worth noting that contracting out state work to nonprofits is the public-private partnership model generally touted by conservatives as being superior to government-run, and I don’t think that’s necessarily always true either.
Anyway, it’s cool that you’re doing all this. I look forward to reading more of your work!
Thanks for the compliment Lauren. You may be correct about about the public-private partnership model having been (or still is?) popular with conservatives - but I think we are starting to see so much abuse and insider dealing with the not-for-profits that this may change rapidly. The downside of these arrangements is that money disappears into a black hole. Like many things, I don't think we will find an absolute rule about these relationships but we do need transparency and we should be able to track outcomes in some form or another.
The specific sourcing model is relevant but not the pertinent point: wherever public monies are being spent on projects (defined start/end, deliverables and outcomes, etc.), regardless whether being done with public sector or private sector resources, there needs to be better governance not only of the spend but also the outcomes and quality. Upstream procurement should ensure the measurements of the project performance and results are included in the contracts, project management should ensure quality execution, and financial oversight should ensure financial oversight and that the monies were properly spent and produced the expected outcomes.
I appreciate this perspective and your learned insights. I look forward to the weekly installments all the way up to your election in November!
Thanks Jim. There is plenty of content!
If I might be a little political here, isn’t it ironic that the AG candidate who would have shined a spotlight on this sort of shenanigans and prosecuted it didn’t make the runoff.