Governance is a term used for describing how public institutions, from private companies to non-profits, conduct their affairs and manage their resources. Transparency and accountability are imperative for ensuring good governance because of the need to disclose vital information to facilitate the transparent decision-making process. In terms of governance issues identified in the case study, it is essential to mention the problem of transparency. Within the WA Schools Public-Private Partnership (PPP) project, there is a lack of transparency between the participants of the project, which ultimately hinders collaboration.
Without fostering transparency, the project will suffer from a lack of understanding of the objectives and goals of the partnership. In a PPP, transparency is reached with the help of open data and proactive disclosure, which implies the consistent and regular reporting of information between the projects stakeholders. The managers of the project should be more proactive in sharing relevant information about the PPP to foster an environment of trust and collaboration.
It is expected that the project will involve important stakeholders from the sphere of politics (for example, the Minister of Education), which is why it is imperative to establish an environment of transparency within the PPP. The interactions between teachers and students are also important to the project, which is why transparency is needed to ensure that there is no missed or undisclosed information that can limit the projects success.
Wastage of money and resources is another important governance issue related to the WA Schools Public-Private Partnership. This problem is associated with the insufficient use and management of financial and other resources available to the stakeholders of the project. In addition, there may be a lack of effective leadership to guide the control of the resources and their improper use within the project. In order to prevent the wastage of money within the PPP, it is recommended to invest in leadership coaching, evaluate the decisions made in the project on the basis of costs and benefits of the project. The involvement of technologies in the project is among the essential solutions to solving the problem of money wastage within PPP governance because it would allow for the match of the projects needs to the processes necessary for meeting those needs.
In their article Visualising and mapping stakeholder influence, Bourne and Walker provide an insight into the tool used for visualising the power of essential stakeholders within a specific organisation. One of the tools used for the purpose of evaluating the power of stakeholders in the stakeholder circle, which represents a circle with multiple concentric lines that indicate the distance of stakeholders from a particular project.
The shading and the size of the sections in the circle play a significant role in indicating the scope and the scale of influence as well as the degree of its impact. The stakeholder circle below represents the discussion on the degree of leverage of key stakeholders involved in the PPP project. In the PPP project, the collaboration between key stakeholders such as school staff and political players defines the success of the project.
Figure 1. Stakeholder circle (Self-generated).
The two key stakeholders of the project include Teachers and the Minister of Education, both of which have various degrees of influence on the projects success. The project is concerned with the provision of fair and inclusive education for those individuals who are below the poverty line. As stakeholders, teachers are interested in the success of the project because they are the ones to provide educational services to the target population of the project.
They have a strong influence on the project as well as close distance because they can contribute to the programs success while also leading to its failure. For example, when teachers do not possess enough information on how to cater to individuals living below the poverty line, they are more likely to be ineffective in the provision of education.
Teachers make up a significant part of the stakeholder circle because they are high in numbers in terms of representation and need to be considered in the process of decision-making. For example, when involving technologies in the provision of education to low-income individuals, it is imperative to train teachers on how these technologies can be used in the classroom and outside the classroom.
Effective leadership efforts are required to manage the performance of teachers within the project because of the need for them to have a clear vision and an understanding of the projects objectives. Having a leader among teachers is a way of managing their performance as well as ensuring that they fulfil the intended role.
Policy shaping represents the critical change necessary for reaching the success of the project. In a private-public partnership concerned with education, the Minister of Education represents one of the most important stakeholders who will influence the decision-making. The Minister is interested in promoting himself or herself as a politician and develop a cohesive government initiative to ensure that low-income individuals receive the desired level of education. The influence of the stakeholder is strong because of the direct impact on the decision-making process as well as the ability to represent the interests of the projects target population in government.
To manage the result of the Ministers influence on the project, transparency and accountability are essential to establish. As discussed earlier, transparency is an aspect of governance that ensures the consistent sharing of relevant information between key stakeholders of a project and implies further accountability on the basis of the information sharing. The Minister should be encouraged to discuss relevant issues with the stakeholders of the project and then transfer the findings to policy and exploring it with his or her colleagues in the political sphere.
Social welfare organisations will hold the stakeholder accountable for the decision-making process to ensure that the needs of the low-income population are met in terms of providing them with a high-quality education. Overall, cohesive governance efforts are needed to address the challenges associated with the involvement of stakeholders in the PPP project.
Bibliography
Bourne, Lynda, and Derek Walker, Visualising and Mapping Stakeholder Influence. Management Decision 43, no. 5/6 (2005): 649-660.
Buchanan, Rohanna, Rhonda Nese, and Miriam Clark. Stakeholders Voices: Defining Needs of Students with Emotional and Behavioral Disorders Transitioning between School Settings. Behavioural Disorders 41, no. 3 (2016): 135-147.
Grover, Simmy and Adrian Furnham. Coaching as a Developmental Intervention in Organisations: A Systematic Review of Its Effectiveness and the Mechanisms Underlying It. PLoS One 11, no. 7 (2016): 1-10.
Jomo, KS, Anis Chowdhury, Krishnan Sharma, and Daniel Platz. Public-Private Partnerships and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: Fit for Purpose? DESA Working Paper no. 148 (2016): 1-30.
Paschke, Anna, Deirdre Dimansesco, Taryn Vian, Jillian Kohler, and Gilles Forte. Increasing Transparency and Accountability in National Pharmaceutical Systems. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 96, no. 11 (2018): 782-791.
In its quest to deliver to the public and reduce cost, Ontario province has had a series of Public-private partnerships programs over the years. These projects have shown tremendous success in areas mandated to attend.
In these arrangements, privately owned companies are contracted to carry out projects for the provincial government. In the whole of Canada, over 100 Public-Private Participation transactions have occurred in the last 20 years.
To establish the extent of experience in public-private participation in Ontario, SuperBuild initiative is critically analyzed. A few years ago Ontario’s provincial government launched SuperBuild initiative in its budget which targeted infrastructural improvements.
The SuperBuild program emphasized private public partnership as the basis of its success. The partnership targeted private sector, broader public and authorities such as municipalities, universities and other government institutions in the province.
The initiative was planned to take a period of five years costing at least $ 20 billion. To finance the project, Ontario’s provincial government invested $ ten billion while private sector and other partners contributed additional $ 10 billion within a period of five years.
Main priorities for the SuperBuild project were to improve hospitals and healthcare centers, schools, water, transportation infrastructure and environmental protection projects.
Ontario SuperBuild Corporation was mandated by provincial government to perform all duties concerning these projects. Some of its duties included capital planning and policy development, evaluating and recommending necessary changes, develop strategies and report publicly on SuperBuild investment Priorities, plans and results.
Membership of the cooperation was drawn from private and public sectors in a bid to make it inclusive (Ontario SuperBuild, 2011). Infrastructure Ontario was established by an act of parliament in 2005 to fast-track the projects.
To ensure success of Public–private partnership, some guidelines were put in place. These guidelines have been in used for the infrastructure projects in Ontario to ensure certain thresholds are met (Murphy, 2008). The same guidelines have been used in other projects.
The Public-Private Partnership (P3s) Approach
Ontario’s infrastructure is worth close to $ 200 billion. About half is owned by public while the remaining half is owned by private organizations. All of them are publicly regulated.
Even though the infrastructure is thought to be sufficient, there has been need to expand, improve and manage them to ensure that they serve their purposes as intended.
Roads, railways, waterways, hospitals and technological infrastructure require maintenance and improvements. The level of investment at the time was not enough to satisfy current and future needs of the province.
With the need to have a long term planning and financial innovation, Public-Private partnership was the most convenient initiative which could be successfully supported by SuperBuild to achieve its goals (Ontario SuperBuild, 2011).
P3 approach includes service or management contracts, design-build construction projects, design-build-operate transfer concessions, design-build-own-finance-transfer concession and/or divestiture.
Benefits of P3s
Benefits of public-private partnerships in Ontario includes risk sharing, improving service levels, reducing cost and improving revenue, gaining access to new sources of capitals, gaining access to better skills, realizing value of under-utilized assets and realizing economic-development opportunities.
To undertake Public-Private Participation in Ontario, three considerations are made. These considerations are vital to the success of Public-Private Participation. The first is political considerations.
This is the climate which the projects are evaluated, financed and their benefits to the public are realized. Another consideration is the climate which ensures that public must maintain ownership and determine priorities of the project.
The final consideration is the climate under which disputes are resolved (Ontario SuperBuild, 2011). Procurement and implementation generate numerous disputes which require arbitration.
Distribution of responsibilities is based on which party is best suited to play which role. These considerations must be in place to avoid political representation in the project.
Use of digitalization has enhanced transparency in government dealings and political landscape in Canadian system. Members of public are encouraged to air their views on prevailing public debates. Internet use has been a key contributor to public participation in issues being debated in Ontario (Dutil et al., 2010).
Establishment of Criteria
The criterion which has been used in Ontario to select a viable project over the years has been a series. It involves:
Financial terms which are acceptable to both the government and private sector that must be used to carry out projects to completion.
Technical solutions to carry out the project must be available through Public-Private Participation.
Operational- if there are hurdles associated with operations which might hinders full implementation of the project in question.
If the project will be accepted by public.
Implementation- that there are no barriers to carrying out the project.
Timing –if there are possible constrains which can pre-empt P3 procurements.
The decision to build Brampton Civic Hospital was made in 1996 by the Health Services Restructuring Commission using the above criterion.
The criterion was not entirely followed but was later reviewed by Infrastructure Ontario (IO) to be used in subsequent projects. There were changes in leadership which affected the initial implementation of the project.
The election of supportive government was the main advantage into the implementation of this project that was proposed several years earlier (Loxley and Loxley, 2010).
Implementation and operations challenges
Most project in P3 fail because of poor procurement which results in flaws in implementation and operational challenges.
Procurement Principles
In Ontario, appropriate strike between value and fairness is a vital requirement in successful design and implementation of procurement process.
Most private organization want to maximize monetary gains while public want fairness and value for money from the process (Dutil et al., 2010).
Principles have been developed to guide the process and ensure that all bidders have equal opportunities and sufficient information is disclosed. It also ensures that evaluation process is established before bidding process begins and pre-established evaluation process is followed.
The main principles are to ensure that public policies are established and communicated before Request for Proposal is issued and identify public policy trade-offs to be made.
Public policies are made in private while perspectives of public sector and potential bidders are addressed. Appropriate responses to significant labour-force issues are developed and a fair Public-private participation procurement process is designed.
‘Value for money’ is established, confidentiality of public and private partnership is maintained and bidders are provided with full and plain disclosure, enhancing staff functions by retaining consultants.
Project Organization
Organized responsibility structure and approval process is used in projects. This is because of the large number of people involved in these processes. Some particular responsibilities and practices procedure are used in Ontario to ensure fairness and quality of product.
The roles of staff include functions in teams like Project Team, Evaluation Team, Due-Diligence Team, Steering Committee, Process Auditor, Executive (cabinet, municipal councils, school and hospital boards, etc.) and Ongoing Management.
Project Plan
Objectives and scopes of projects are explained to relevant parties before a process of selecting partner is started. Projects team engage in debates of various tradeoffs and constrains of the projects to define clearly the objectives, goals and requirements of each project. (Ontario SuperBuild, 2011).
The project team will make consultation with management, outside experts, and other stakeholders to deliberate these issues in details. A Public-private participation project plan undergoes four phases which include scoping the project, selection process, negotiations, implementation and operation.
Project Scope
The project scope is defined at the beginning of the project. The scope is defined in respect to Financial, Technical, Operational, Acceptability, Implementation and Timing (Ontario SuperBuild, 2011).
Selection Process
Selection process is developed and documented after project scope is established. Project team comes up with a plan to start the process.
This will ensure that the best partner is selected and minimum challenges are expected from public and other organizations. Tailored process must be used basing on the nature (scope) of the project. (Ontario, SuperBuild, 2011).
Negotiations
A majority of organizations in Ontario maximize the use of strategy in procurement process and negotiate later during final agreement. They eventually lose because they do not want any reverse of the won bids.
The one who succeed in negotiations is bidder who offers the best financial price for a project (Ontario SuperBuild, 2011). Sometimes negotiations are customized to suit the project in question.
In ensuring successful negotiations, it is necessary to use a project team which is empowered and ready to walk away from a bad offer. The commitments made must be measurable and appropriate proponents perspectives are addressed.
Implementation and Operations
In Private-Public participation, private contractor is not paid until a substantial amount of work has been completed. This accelerates construction and completion of a project (Murphy, 2008).
Delayed deliveries can result in penalties. This has made most of the private contractors to deliver on-time and on-budget. However, Private sector can back-track commitments made during negotiations or sometimes ignore the agreements during implementation process.
Since public sector is poor in contract administration, it is required to sort off implementation issues at different phases of project which includes development/construction, operations, at the end of term.
It is important that successful bidders are monitored, procedure is followed and commitment is delivered. However, development or construction administration in Private-public participation can be ambiguous and difficult.
The cost of construction changed several times during the time of construction of Brampton Civic Hospital. According to Barrows and others (2011), the total change amounted to 13% overrun with respect to government estimates by the end of the project.
After completion, the hospital had a capacity of 479 funded beds in December 2007. When shifting operations from the old hospital to the new facility, two deaths of patients were reported resulting in a public uproar.
There were claims that there was shortage of staff and patients had to wait for long before being attended to. Public-private participation arrangement was blamed for the situation. This was rectified after some time (Barrows et al. 2011),
Conclusion
Different views have been given concerning Public-private participation in Ontario and other places in Canada and around the world. Despite numerous inconsistencies in its delivery of services and goods, it has benefits.
According to Loxley and Loxley (2010), with view of numerous projects undertaken under Public-Private partnership, majority of them have not delivered results as intended.
To make these conclusions, the two examined projects which included schools, hospitals, water treatment plants and service oriented projects. It is thought that P3s projects save a lot of money because of risk being transferred to contractor.
However, Loxley and Loxley found out that most contractors undertaking the projects finally use more money than if they had been undertaken by government.
This was clearly portrayed by Brampton Civic Hospital project with 13% increase in cost (Barrows et al. 2011), Service oriented projects under public-private participation finally provide poor services to clients and public.
They believe that if public servants provided these services or built the facilities in question, the quality would have improved while cost reduces. Accounting by government officials are misleading with the aim of making the projects look palatable which is not the case in the real sense.
This is attributed to hidden interests between government officials and private operators. Costs are inflated with the aim of making more money from public coffers. These results in unrealistic profits recorded by private operators or contractors (Loxley and Loxley, 2010).
Success of private-public participation can be measured and determined if proper mechanisms are put in place. Delivering of good services to the public can only be improved through Public-private partnerships because government does not have the capacity to undertake all projects (Dutil et al. 2010).
Service culture can be built through cooperation between public, private sector and general public. With the use of internet becoming common, basic public participation in political and other decisions are enhanced. Public involvement in political decisions may increase service delivery especially in politically determined services.
In Ontario, public-private participation has recorded success in both service and infrastructural sectors. Several projects undertaken under public-private partnership participations are completed and workings with few discrepancies being recorded.
Water, health, educational and several other sectors have benefitted from Public-private participation in Ontario. Although initial projects carried out under P3 recorded a few technical and operational problems, subsequent projects were better.
Use of Public-private participation in future needs improvements both in organization and accountability to realize optimum benefits.
Recommendations
According to Barrows and others (2011), Brampton Civic Hospital project was a pilot P3 project undertaken when government employees and members of public had little experience with Public-private participation.
Therefore, to counter political rhetoric, there should be a clear communication plan since P3 is a new model in Ontario and other places. Community management (including unique needs) should be improved to counter accusations after full implementation of projects.
Methods for managing risks should be improved and followed effectively. Risk management and estimate should be given to knowledgeable and experienced participants to effectively transfer and assess risks. Generic risks associated with Policy, Design and Construction, and Maintenance and operations must be reviewed and improved.
Since P3 is growing, people need to be educated on its working, purpose and their roles. This will improve procurements and implementation of future projects.
There is need for holistic design in e-government structure and means of airing views by public (Dutil et al. 2007). Innovation in this section must involve both government and other stakeholders in its design.
This must include responsibilities of employees in public sector in enhancing relationship with the government, capacities of private sector in both reforms and ongoing relational capacities and broadening participation from the current number to involve majority members of public.
Works Cited
Barrows, David, Ian Macdonald, Atipol Supapol, Olivia Dalton-Jez, and Simone Harvey-Rioux. “Public Private Partnerships in Canadian Healthcare A Case Study of the Brampton Civic Hospital.” OECD 3. (2011): 55-140.
Dutil, Patrice, Cosmo Howard, John Langford, and Jeffrey Roy. “Rethinking Government-Public Relationships in a Digital World.” Journal of Information Technology & Politics 4.1, (2007): 77- 90.
Dutil, Patrice, Cosmo Howard, John Langford, and Jeffrey Roy. The Service State Rhetoric, Reality and Promise. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press, 2010. Print.
Loxley, John and Salim Loxley. Public Service Private Profits. Winnipeg, Manitoba: Fernwood Publishing, 2010. Print.
Murphy, Timothy J. “The Case for Public-Private Partnerships in Infrastructure.” Canadian Public Administration 51.1 (2008): 99-126.
Ontario, SuperBuild 2011, A Guide to Public-Private Partnerships for Infrastructure Projects. PDF file. Web.
When it comes to the economy, the private sector provides the community with job positions, various services, and economic growth. It plays a significant role in creating infrastructure, businesses, and employment possibilities because the monetary investment from private companies allows it to outgrow the usual barriers of the public sector. While the public sector is essential for any country, the role of the private sector should not be underestimated as it is a crucial part of the economy (Lane, 1982). There is a fair amount of criticism aimed at the private sector, and it has its merit. Private companies exist first and foremost to earn capital, and it creates a plethora of examples when human rights, state regulations, and the local community suffer from it. This is why the state must affirm its role in regulating the business practices that happen within the private sector. Laws and regulations must be established that ensure that the community does not become collateral damage in the private companies’ pursuit of wealth.
Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) is an example of public and private sectors intersecting with one another. Both sides benefit from the partnership, as they can provide one another with a necessary service. Thus PPP has become more common in many countries over the years (Bovaird, 2004). While PPP is viewed as efficient, there is legitimate criticism raised against it. The main concern is that the private sector benefits more than the public sector. Some people also raise concerns that private companies gain considerable influence over non-profit and public organizations that should be guided by the community’s needs instead of profit margin. Although it is true, the issue lies not within PPP as an idea but in the way private and public sectors interact (Forrer et al., 2010). Public and private organizations need to use their partnership to benefit the community and the economy instead of overpowering one another. While concerns regarding PPP’s flaws have validity, these partnerships contribute significantly to a country’s economy and infrastructure and should not be seen purely negatively.
References
Bovaird, T. (2004). Public-private partnerships: from contested concepts to prevalent practice. International review of administrative sciences, 70(2), 199-215.
Forrer, J., Kee, J. E., Newcomer, K. E., & Boyer, E. (2010). Public-private partnerships and the public accountability question. Public administration review, 70(3), 475-484.
Lane, H. E. (1982). The corporate conscience and the role of business in society. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 23(3), 9-18.
The roles and strategies of private sector security in homeland security
The private security-law enforcement partnerships have been in existence for a long, but the perception changed following the 9/11 attacks. After the attacks, such partnerships are viewed as an important aspect in dealing with terrorism-related activities. Currently, private security manages over 85 percent of the country’s critical infrastructure (Hayes & Ebinger, 2011). On the other hand, the local law enforcement mostly handles information on threats to the infrastructures, which are manned by the private sector. Therefore, the partnership between the two entities ensures that the private sector gets the right information in good time to execute its mandate before the threats can materialize and lead to destruction. The partnership between the private security sector and the homeland security will ensure the efficiency of each partner, which will lead to optimal service delivery to the American residents. For instance, the private security sector worked collaboratively with the homeland security agencies during the 9/11 attacks, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, and Hurricane Katrina to contain the situation by offering immediate solutions to the arising matters. This section addresses the roles and strategies of the private security sector in homeland security.
The protection of critical infrastructure is one of the major roles of the private sector security in homeland security. The private security sector works closely with the Office of Infrastructure Protection (OIP), which is a department within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The OIP works on “threat and vulnerability analyses, national and local-level coordination with businesses and government agencies, and risk mitigation” (Busch & Austenm, 2012, p. 11). Apparently, the private security sector deals mainly with these six areas, and thus, it works with the OPI under the Critical Infrastructure Partnership Advisory Council (CIPAC) to exchange information and facilitate the coordination of the protection activities. Therefore, the strategy, in this case, involves the exchange of important information with government agencies to ensure that the private security sector meets its obligations to its clients and the country as a whole.
The private security sector also plays a critical role in ensuring cybersecurity. The National Cyber Security Alliance (NCSA) “works hand in hand with the private security sector to ensure that computer users know how to protect themselves from cybercrimes” (Busch & Austenm, 2012, p. 16). The NCSA collaborates with the different players in the IT sector like Facebook, Microsoft, Google, and Visa among others to ensure seamless sharing of information to avert or contain cybercrime incidences. For instance, in 2011 Google came across what appeared like the phishing of personal information belonging to senior US government officials. Google established that the intrusion originated from China, and thus, it alerted the FBI. The DHS then worked with Google to assess the impact of the intrusion and devise ways to avoid such incidences in the future. Such collaborative efforts underscore the role of the private security sector in ensuring cybersecurity to all technology users in the US.
Besides, the private security sector plays a central role in ensuring the security of US ports. The American ports are some of the busiest in the contemporary world, and they handle millions of passengers annually. Therefore, such a massive movement of people becomes a security target as terrorists can easily take advantage of the same to smuggle in dangerous weapons. The private security sector works closely with the Customs-Trade Partnership against Terrorism (C-TPAT) to ensure security at the ports. The C-TPAT has certified “over 6,000 private security firms, which work hand-in-hand with the Customs and Border Protection in the US to ensure security in the international supply chain” (Busch & Austenm, 2012, p. 18). Additionally, the private security firms collaborate with the government to ensure homeland security at the ports through other different initiatives, as the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) program among others. The security initiatives provide screening services for both cargo and travelers.
Finally, the private security sector is involved in managing emergencies when they occur. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) assumes disaster management responsibilities by collaborating with the private sector for optimal performance. For instance, during the 9/11 attacks, the private security agents were the first respondents, and they played a key role in evacuating the affected buildings and ensuring the safety of the people (Dunn-Cavelty & Suter, 2009). Similarly, during the Deepwater Horizon oil spillage incident in 2010, the private sector was in the frontline to contain the situation. The same happened with the Hurricane Katrina crisis. Currently, FEMA appreciates the role of the private sector in the management of disasters. This appreciation led to the establishment of FEMA’s regional offices across the US where a private sector liaison officer forges strong relationships with the private sector.
The strategies employed by the private security sector in the provision of homeland security involve different aspects. First, the private sector fills gaps in personnel requirements in the provision of security services. Second, this sector utilizes resources effectively to ensure that the set objectives are met by focusing on the specialization of service delivery. Finally, the private sector has established trust and working relationships with government agencies to ensure that homeland security is at its best across the nation.
The US DHS should facilitate enhanced protection for different areas
The US DHS needs to facilitate enhanced protection for office buildings, residential locations, and houses of worship. These locations present soft targets for local terrorists and other criminals seeking to cause damage for whatever reasons. On the national scale, the security system has managed to ward off serious attacks from the outside similar to the 9/11 incident. Therefore, the focus has now shifted to isolated places like office buildings, residential locations, and houses of worship. According to a report released in 2016, the period between January and June 2015 experienced “a 1.7 percent increment in the rate of violent crimes” (The Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2016, par. 1).
Apparently, the houses of worship, residential areas, and office buildings do not have tight security measures like rigorous screenings as the case in government offices and airports. Consequently, cases of lone gunmen attacking churches and schools have been on the rise in the past leaving a trail of devastation and avoidable loss of life. In the light of this understanding, the DHS needs to explore different avenues through which to enhance the protection of different facilities across the United States. For instance, while churchgoers may not be in a position to ward off a gun-wielding lone shooter like trained security forces, the DHS can come up with training programs to prepare people for such occurrences and reduce the casualty levels.
The DHS needs to focus on protecting all areas that host groups of people because they are soft targets for attacks. The sole aim of terrorism and other related crimes is to cause maximum damage and places like houses of prayer, schools, office buildings, and residential areas present good numbers for such attacks. This section looks at the different approaches that the DHS can use to achieve its objectives. Two cases will be explored with the first one involving protecting the places of worship like churches and the second one is a general approach towards securing all areas that are likely to be targeted for crime or terrorism.
The complexity of securing places of worship arises due to the view that such areas are open to everyone. Therefore, it becomes difficult to identify someone visiting such places with sinister motives. However, the DHS can collaborate with leadership in such places to offer training to observant volunteers who can monitor the happenings within and around the places of worship. For instance, churches have numerous ushers who welcome worshipers as they walk in for a worship service. Unfortunately, a study conducted in 2009 showed that such individuals do not get any training on security matters (Harrell, 2010). Therefore, the DHS can collaborate with the church leaderships to offer basic training on security matters to its ushers and other volunteers.
For instance, in 2007 a lone gunman set out on a killing mission at the New Life Church, in Colorado Springs, and opened fire on innocent worshippers (Harrell, 2010). Fortunately, one of the congregants had a permit to carry a concealed weapon, and he managed to shoot the gunman before causing any harm. This scenario presents a classical example of how the DHS can work with the leadership in houses of worship for enhanced security measures. Currently, the DHS has the Soft Target Awareness Course (STAC) program, which seeks to train leaders in places of worship on how to anticipate and deal with risks associated with terrorism and other attacks. In conclusion, the DHS should come up with different need-based training programs targeting places of worship to enhance security measures in the wake of the increasing cases of domestic terrorism and other violent crimes.
On the other side, one of the most suitable approaches that the DHS can use to enhance security across the country is community-oriented policing. This kind of policing is a form of philosophy that seeks to influence how traditional law enforcement is carried out (Chappell & Gibson, 2009). This philosophy seeks to facilitate the creation of reliable and working partnerships with the affected communities, the use of problem-solving approaches, and the transformation of policing organization and culture to be in line with the changing environment. Community partnerships hinge on the view that the citizens should be on the frontline in the fight against crime. In most cases, the community has vital information regarding the occurrences in a given area, and thus, the DHS should focus on this aspect to create clear communication strategies for reporting such issues to thwart crime before it happens. On the problem-solving approach, the DHS should work with the community to ensure that some of the issues that contribute to violence or terrorism are addressed. Finally, organizational transformation involves changing the way law enforcement officers dispense their duties. Individual officers can be given more space and mandate to handle different issues as they arise in the community. Overall, the DHS should become creative and come up with strategies on how to involve the community in the fight against insecurity. The DHS should facilitate enhanced protection for all areas that can be potential targets for crime and terrorism.
References
Busch, E., & Austenm D. (2012). Public-private partnerships in homeland security: opportunities and challenges. Homeland Security Affairs, 8(18), 1-24.
Chappell, A., & Gibson, S. (2009). Community policing and homeland security policing: friend or foe? Criminal Justice Policy Review, 20(3), 326-343.
Dunn-Cavelty, M., & Suter, M. (2009). Public-private partnerships are no silver bullet: an expanded governance model for critical infrastructure protection. International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, 2(4), 179–187.
Harrell, B. (2010). Security challenges for houses of worship. Journal of Physical Security, 4(2), 1-9.
Hayes, J., & Ebinger, C. (2011). The private sector and the role of risk and responsibility in securing the nation’s infrastructure. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 8 (1), 1-27.