Most State agencies produce publications and conduct limited public relations activities. For the most part, agency publications and public relations activities are appropriate and low key. The magnitude and cost of these efforts statewide, however, are substantial.

Ranging from small pamphlets to full-length books, more than 3,000 publications were produced during FY 1981 at a cost of approximately $6 million. And approximately $11.5 million was spent during FY 1981 on public relations, including expenditures for salaries of public information officers, production of public service announcements, agency displays at the State Fair, and the promotion of State agriculture and tourism.

JLARC's review of publications and public relations was designed to carry out the intent of SJR 166. The study focused on the purpose, type, number, cost, distribution, and oversight of publications and public relations. The following are among the principal findings of the study:

• Most State publications and public relations activities are low key and appropriate. Given the current climate of fiscal austerity, most agency heads seem to deliberately avoid high profile publications and public relations initiatives. Exceptions were found, however, and several agencies regularly produce publications which fall outside the realm of general acceptability.

• Management of publications and public relations is essentially left to the discretion of individual agencies. Although there are State guidelines which apply to each, publications and public relations efforts are basically conceived, initiated, and produced independently. Attention should be directed toward strengthened guidelines and increased compliance.

The following recommendations are suggested to strengthen State publications and public relations efforts.

Publications (pp. 7 to 30)

Annual Reports. Many State agencies produce annual reports. Although agencies have the flexibility to determine the content and format of their annual reports, many feel they are directed by law to actually produce one. However, Section 2.1-2 of the Code, which is frequently cited as authority for reporting, is not a mandate. Other agencies with specific legislative mandates to prepare annual reports do not feel they are necessary.

Recommendation (1). The Secretary of Administration and Finance, with the assistance of the State Information Committee, should (a) evaluate the need for annual reports and (b) identify for the General Assembly and Governor those agencies that should report biennially, annually or not at all.

Recommendation (2). The General Assembly and Governor should consider mandating biennial rather than annual reporting. Agencies to be exempted from biennial reporting should be clearly designated.

Recommendation (3). The State Council of Higher Education should seek amendment or repeal of sections of the Code mandating annual reports from institutions of higher education. The Secretary of Administration and Finance should evaluate existing annual reports and recommend by name those which should be continued or discontinued. The secretary should also recommend standard limitations to the content, format, length, and expense of annual reports.

Employee Newsletters. Employee newsletters can play an important communication role in State government, but only if agencies carefully assess their needs and evaluate their efforts. As currently produced, few employee newsletters reviewed appeared to be appropriate.

Recommendation (4). State agencies, with assistance from the State Information Committee, should evaluate their newsletters. Fillers such as puzzles, riddles, and articles irrelevant to State employment should be discontinued. Substantive information should constitute the bulk of newsletters and be balanced with some morale and recognition articles. If assessments reveal that newsletters are not of value, these newsletters should be eliminated.

Agencies should also consider issuing newsletters on an as-needed basis, or as a supplementary attachment to the bi-monthly Personnel Communique. At all times, newsletters should be produced in compliance with DPS guidelines and at minimal cost.

Distribution of Reports. Substantial over-distribution of annual and other reports occurs because of Section 2.1-467 and Section 2.1-467.6 of the Code. Many legislators and agency heads receive reports which they neither need, read, nor want. In addition, the State does not offer guidance to agencies regarding economical distribution practices, and practices vary between agencies. Several agencies, however, make use of methods which save money on distribution.

Recommendation (5). The General Assembly may wish to amend Section 2.1-467 and repeal Section 2.1-467.6 of the Code to direct DPS to survey legislators and agency heads on a biennial basis. Each would be asked to designate those agencies whose reports he or she wishes to receive. DPS should also make provisions on the list for individuals to specify the types of agency reports they wish to receive, including annual or biennial, recurring, major, or all reports. Agencies should be informed by DPS as to those individuals who wish to receive their reports, and should limit distribution accordingly.

Recommendation (6). The Secretary of Administration and Finance should take steps to ensure that (a) agencies make use of economical methods of distribution; (b) mailing lists are purged on a regular basis; and (c) the Division of Purchases and Supply develops and distributes guidelines to assist agencies in their distribution practices.

Needs Assessments. Few agencies conduct formal needs assessments related to their publications. Those that have can show more effective publications efforts.

Recommendation (7). The Secretary of Administration and Finance should take steps to ensure that agencies conduct needs assessments of their publications. Objectives should include reducing the number and cost of publications.

Reports Proposed for Modification or Elimination. SJR 166 requires that JLARC "recommend specifically where publications should be eliminated."

Recommendation (8). Publications recommended to the Secretary of Administration and Finance for modification or elimination are presented in Appendix C of the report. Most were reviewed during the daily survey at the Virginia State Library or in case study agencies.

State Oversight of Agencies (pp. 31 to 45)

Publications Guidelines. Although there is limited central oversight of agency publications activities, most publications are austere and appropriate. Some agencies, however, exceed standards. This problem could be solved with clarification of and adherence to DPS guidelines.

Recommendation (9). DPS guidelines should be clarified and strengthened. (As called for by SJR 166, suggested guidelines are presented in Appendix B of the report.) The division, with assistance from the Secretary of Administration and Finance, should better define promotional items. Policies on higher education materials should be standardized with the assistance of the Secretary of Education. These policies should reflect conservative State standards and should indicate when State funding is appropriate.

Except for agencies with promotional mandates, letters of justification should be required for all exceptions to the one-color rule. Letters should be signed by the agency head and a copy forwarded to the appropriate cabinet secretary. Agencies should produce publications in compliance with DPS guidelines.

Low Bidders. Although significant improvements have been noted with DPS services, agencies are not altogether satisfied with the use of low bidders. Sixteen of the 30 case study agencies indicated they have experienced difficulties with low bidders over the past two years.

Recommendation (10). To help eliminate problems some agencies have with printers, DPS should intensify its efforts in qualifying bidders for the bid list. Whenever possible, DPS should continue to verify a shop's capabilities with a site visit and staff interviews before placing it on the bid list. Repeat offenders that do not show significant signs of improvement should be removed from the bid list permanently or for an extended period of time. DPS should arrange for a penalty fee for faulty or late work.

Complaint Filing. Although DPS has a clearly articulated complaint filing system, many agencies do not formally register complaints with DPS. DPS cannot help solve problems if the problems are not brought to its attention. In addition, three other areas deserve closer attention by both agencies and DPS – overruns, coordination costs, and print shop efficiency.

Recommendation (11). Agencies should follow through on complaints with printers and formally document all problems with DPS. Complaint procedures should be clearly articulated in the Agency Procurement Manual. In addition, the manual should remind agencies to

(a) specify that printers will be responsible for all coordinative costs such as pick-up and delivery of drafts, graphics, and finished products. Agencies should also consider requiring that printers make a representative available for consultation and follow-up on problems; and

(b) specify the percent of overrun publications that will be accepted. When overruns cannot be used, they should be prohibited.

Recommendation (12). DPS should continue to analyze print shops with labor and material costs that exceed standards and recommend measures that could improve efficiency. DPS should recommend to the Secretary of Administration and Finance the closing of print shops which cannot be economically justified.

Corrections Printing Services. Despite the requirement that State agencies purchase services, including printing, from the Department of Corrections, an inadequate amount of printing is routed to the department. This underutilization has resulted in less training for inmates and reduced productivity and economy on the printing which is done.

Recommendation (13). The Department of Corrections and the Division of Purchases and Supply should intensify efforts to route more State printing to the department. DPS, in its review of printing requests, should assess the feasibility of using Corrections' facilities and route enough printing to the department to keep its facilities working at full capacity. As capacity increases, and productivity and economy improve, the Department of Corrections and Division of Purchases and Supply should fully explore the feasibility of supporting expanded printing facilities at the Penitentiary and other correctional facilities.

Virginia State Library. The Virginia State Library compiles an inventory of State publications and operates the State's library depository system. Gaps have been identified in both.

Recommendation (14). The Virginia State Library should

(a) follow-up in writing with agencies not remitting inventory sheets;
(b) take steps to ensure that agencies understand the depository system; and
(c) clarify what kinds of publications it wants to receive from State agencies and the quantity thereof.

Agencies that do not comply with requirements should be reported to the appropriate Governor's secretary.

VSL should also continue attempts to establish a depository in an existing library in the Danville area.

Public Relations (pp. 47 to 59)

State Fair. Given the expense of participation in the State Fair and agencies' concerns regarding benefits, better preparation and planning are called for.

Recommendation (15). The Secretary of Commerce and Resources should assess the potential benefit to various agencies of exhibiting at the Fair. Participation should be limited to those agencies which truly benefit from this type of exposure. The Secretary should also consider organizing the State's exhibits around a different theme each year. The use of a theme could help unify the presentation of agency messages and leave the public with a more lasting awareness of State services and missions.

Uncontrolled distribution of publications at the State Fair encourages waste.

Recommendation (16). Agencies should save publications by displaying single copies and providing handouts only on request.

Public Service Announcements. The Department of Telecommunications' requirement that agencies indicate a ceiling price on public service announcements could potentially increase the cost of bids.

Recommendation (17). The Department of Telecommunications should evaluate its policy of informing bidders of production price limits and the potential of this policy for raising costs.