berman vs department of interior case

berman vs department of interior case.

berman vs department of interior case

berman vs dept of interior. instructions attached. please look at/follow instructions very carefully. please use terry coopers the responsible administrator as framework/source for the  perspective part.

• Your objective is to write a clear case analysis demonstrating the extent of your , your understanding of the issues, your grasp of course concepts, and your use of appropriate literature.
• Appropriate implementation of APA citation is expected.

Perspective : 

Objective: Identify the  obligations of public officials and

other actors (including, for

example, contractors) involved in the case. Consider the existence and role of any competing obligations and  culture. (Terry Cooper’s The Responsible Administrator serves as a framework for this topic.)
• What societal values were violated by the perpetrators?

• What organizational values were violated by the perpetrators?
• What were the ethical obligations of the public officials involved?

• Were competing obligations apparent in this case?

• What about those who were not public officials?
• What ethical obligations, if any, did they have to the public?

• Were there competing obligations apparent in this case?

• What was the ethical culture of the organizations involved?
• Did ethical culture play a role in the case?

• What notions of Cooper are applicable in this case?

• What notions of Cooper are not applicable in this case?
• Using Cooper as a reference identify and elaborate on the reasons for the breakdown presented in this case.

• Cite source pages for Cooper used in your analysis.
Perspective : Accountability

Objective: Consider three fundamental accountability questions and identify the organizations involved in investigating or auditing the case:
• To whom were the public officials accountable? Did those include non-governmental organizations? Was there  or cooperation or both among the organizations enforcing accountability?

• For what were the public officials accountable?

• How were they held accountable?
• As appropriate, also address the accountability  of contractors and other private parties and individuals.

• What about those who were not public officials?

• To whom were they accountable?
• For what?

• How?

• What is the source of their accountabilities?
• Were the accountability expectations of public officials and nonpublic participants reasonable or excessive?

• Were the right people held accountable for the right things?

 

Perspective: Prevention

Objective: Consider what preventive and reform recommendations might be made.

• What is the nature and scope of the , or what external influences or factors permitted the violation(s) to occur?
• What would be the objectives and goals of an acceptable solution in the environment in which the violation occurred?
• Who or what are the influences found in the environment that can help bring about an acceptable solution or remediate other similar violations?
• How would you judge or what criteria would you use to determine if the acceptable solution was implemented?
• What other approaches to prevention could be developed that might be acceptable or workable?
• Identify the framework of the workable costs and benefits elements of the workable approach to prevention.

• What reforms, corrective actions, or other changes were recommended or implemented as a result of the case?

• Were they sufficient to prevent similar problems in the future?

Perspective :  and bureaucratic environment

Objective: Consider the political and bureaucratic environment in which the case took place and evaluate the impact of the environment on the events and actions that took place.
• What was the political context of the case?

• Did the political environment affect the case?
• Did it serve to facilitate or inhibit the discovery,  or audit, and/or disposition of the case?

• What was the bureaucratic context of the case? Did the bureaucratic  affect the case? Did it serve to facilitate or inhibit the discovery, investigation or audit, and/or disposition of the case?

Perspective: Media and other nongovernmental entities

Objective: Examine the role of media in the case.

• What was the involvement of media or other nongovernmental entities in Identifying, pursuing, or promoting transparency regarding the case?

• Did they promote, assist, or interfere with governmental accountability processes?
• What were the motivations of the media and other nongovernmental entities?

• Were reported accusations, claims, or editorial statements reasonable given the information available?

• Did they report the matter fairly?
• What obligations did the media have in reporting on this case?
What is the source of those obligations?
• Were those obligations met?

• What obligations did other nongovernmental entities have in reporting on this case?

• What is the source of those obligations?
• Were those obligations met?

Perspective : Historical Context

Objective: Examine the history of similar cases.

• Did other similar cases precede this case?

• Were there investigations and reforms? Should the case have been prevented?

• Were there lessons learned that were considered in the case under study?

Click here to get this paper done by our professional writers at an affordable price!!

berman vs department of interior case

Posted in Uncategorized