There is a time in the life of every organization when it is appropriate and sometimes necessary to stand back and take a second look.
That time has come for NDAA.
There have been many changes in our association and its affiliates, in the criminal justice system, in our profession and indeed around the world since we last took a hard look at our organizational structure and functions. A major development, for example, was creation of the National Advocacy Center on the campus of the University of South Carolina in Columbia. Other significant developments include the phenomenal expansion and success of the American Prosecutors Research Institute (APRI) and the move of the National College of District Attorneys (NCDA) to Columbia to become the advocacy center’s neighbor, as well as the college’s creation of the National Center for Prosecution Ethics.
For these and many other reasons, an NDAA Reorganization Committee has begun to lay the groundwork for one of the most comprehensive self-examination efforts in our history. The committee currently consists of President Paul Walsh, Mat Heck, Bill Ritter, who is also board chair of APRI; John Justice, who is also chair of NCDA’s Board of Regents; and NDAA Board Chair Bob McCulloch.
The Reorganization Committee has had preliminary discussions with the NDAA Board of Directors, the APRI Board of Directors and NCDA’s Board of Regents to determine whether some kind of reorganization, including a formal merger, is needed to bring about more efficient and productive operations in all these organizations.
This will be an open, collaborative and participatory effort and we enter these discussions with no preconceived plans or cast-in-concrete concepts. It will be an open-ended process. It may end with a number of major and far-reaching proposals or a few basic recommendations or even a recommendation to maintain the status quo.
We are aware, however, of a number of situations that need to be addressed. These include duplication of services. For example, all three of our affiliates are heavily involved in the training of prosecutors, so one of the issues is whether there is close enough coordination by NDAA of the training programs of the affiliates, and whether our training mission could be more effectively accomplished if there were a merger of training activities. We also have duplication of purchasing of products and services, ranging from printing and advertising to publishing.
Indeed the very legal basis of NDAA and its affiliates may be outdated. NDAA, which was organized in Chicago, is an Illinois corporation. APRI, which was created after NDAA moved to Alexandria, is a Virginia corporation. And NCDA, which was originally situated in Houston, is a Texas corporation.
Next month the Reorganization Committee is expected to submit its recommendations to me for study and to the three boards involved for discussion and consideration. I want to emphasize that whatever the final decision is, it will not be a unilateral, arbitrary decision imposed from “on high.” It will be the result of a collaborative effort based on a broad consensus, with input from all the boards, as well as from the membership.
I also want to point out that during this process, I will not be a proponent of any proposal and am taking no position even as to whether there should be a reorganization. As your executive director, my goal is only to ensure that the issues are fully explored and that we have input from the NDAA membership.
So, to re-state the obvious: an organization is its membership. The decisions that result from the re-examination process will determine how we serve you and all of America’s prosecutors for years to come. That’s why it is so important, as the process begins, that you, the members, give us your ideas.
I look forward to hearing from you.
