ial from the Mayor's Management Report presented in: Office of the State Comptroller, Office of the Special Deputy Comptroller for New York City, Fact Sheets for Major Agencies in New York City, Showing Data as of June, FCB1 -80, June 11, 1979. The data were drawn from an updated version of the 1978 Mayor's Management Report issued on August 18, 1978. Data reported for 1978 was unaudited, and therefore reflects the agency's choice on how to present itself. 13. Office of the State Comptroller, Office of the Special Deputy Comptroller for New York City, Summary of Cost Reduction Memoranda Submitted to the City as of December 31, 1978, FCB-21-80, June 11, 1979, p. i. 13a. These categorizations are mine, not the EFCB's. 14. HPD and HA data were not included in EFCB recodifications of the 1978 Mayor's Management Report. Indicators for these agencies were examined by using retrospective information in the 1979 Mayor's Management Report, City of New York, Mayor's Management Report, April 26, 1979. 15. The figure for housing is a combination of memos issued to the Housing and Development Administration, and the separate departments into which it was subsequently separated. 16. services memo totals include memos issued to the Department of Social Services and its predecessor, the Human Resources Administration (which included other functions as well). 17. This table is drawn from James Hartman, Expenditures and Services, in Horton and Brecher (eds.), op. cit., p. 58. Since Hartman presents his data by expenditure function rather than by city agencies, the categories he uses are not identical to those used in earlier tables. 18. This is consistent with Hartman's explanation of the dynamics of high growth and high retrenchment. In his interpretation, high growth in the pre-crisis period was concentrated in those agencies where new federal matching funds could be attracted. High retrenchment was concentrated in those agencies where functions could be moved out ofthe city's jurisdiction (usually to the state) and in those agencies where there were few matching funds and high municipal discretion about service levels. Some agencies are low in retrenchment because of externally mandated spending levels. Hartman, op. cit. These criteria stand independent of the types of management effectiveness (and perceptions of management effectiveness) measures this study has primarily been concerned with. 19. Andrew Glassberg, Response to Budgetary Stringency: New York and London, 1978 World Congress of Sociology convention paper.
Read full abstract