Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) organizational structure
Formed in 1970, the EPA has been in the business
of providing "cleaner, healthier environment".
The Agency's mission is to "protect
human health and the environment." With a
staff of 18000 spread across the country and support
by 10 regional offices and labs, the EPA not only
has the responsibility to administer regulations
and provide financial assistance for projects
for the protection of the environment but also
work in collaboration with the government as well.
Some of the services include engaging
in research, setting up research grants and fellowships,
educational projects with the goal to create awareness,
information system, generate finance and provide
it to projects such as Drinking Water State Revolving
Fund, Clean Water State Revolving Fund and the
Brownfield program etc.
To carry out these tasks, the EPA
engage multifaceted skill pool such as technicians,
engineers, doctors, scientists etc. along with
managerial taskforce (EPA 2004).
Internally, the EPA is centralized
and relatively flat in nature with one or two
level of span of control. The ultimate authority
lies in the Administrator and Deputy Administrator
while assistant administrators for various departments,
as well as CFO, GC and IG along with regional
offices all report to the two.
Although, the EPA follows a bureaucratic
structure but unlike typical bureaucrat organizations
it is expensive to run as well as not so highly
centralized. With the span of control divested
to the various divisions, the EPA has a complex
bureaucracy adapted to the needs of people and
communities thereby depend on the network of its
offices as well as connections with the government
for its resources (EPA 2004; Borgatti 2001).
Identification of organizational
structure
The EPA organization resembles
human service organizations whereby the organization
is involved in direct contact with the users/consumers
even though the consumers of EPA are different
from the usual consumers as these comprise of
other agencies working in the same capacity, governmental
organizations as well as research and educational
organizations.
Apart from these, the EPA is also
in direct contact with its employees who are its
consumers too. In David M. Austin's book on human
services management, (2002) he notes that "Human
service organizations are distinguished by the
fundamental fact that people are their “raw
material.” … I want to highlight the
fact that the core activities of the organization
are structured to process, sustain, or change
people who come under its jurisdiction."
(Hasenfeld from Austin 2002, p. 30)
Furthermore he also writes of human
services organization are nonprofit voluntary
or nonprofit governmental organizations. The basis
for their identification is that they provide
services to the community and require extensive
processes for the deliverance of its services.
It is formal structure and its competency depends
on core management processes (Austin 2002, p.
33).
At times these organizations also
require technological skills to resolve problems
and issues that come in the course of provision
of service. The EPA's organizational structure
as well as activities indicates this fact.
Even though Austin did not mention
environmental or such agencies nevertheless observation
of the EPA reveals that it falls under this category.
The human service organizations are formal and
usually engage in critical decisions that require
value judgments which have moral consequences
(Austin, 2002, p. 33).
EPA follows all of these
structures.
However, the EPA deviates from
the human services organization structure in that
it does not involve in providing services to the
direct consumers. Furthermore, the organization
chart shows that there is less centralization
of authority as its span of control is flat. This
creates direct reporting environment which decreases
the efficiency of the decision makers.
Those who are in direct contact
with the locals for example will obviously contact
the head of the department and the like immediately
should there be mishap in the community. But at
the same time it must be noted that the executive/administrator
is not only involved in day to day activities
but also in management.
The convergence of his/her role
decreases efficiency in making decision and thereby
might lag in achieving its objectives. In contrast
the author suggests one or two level of span of
control more so that the organization can segregate
daily activities from managerial tasks. This would
although increase reportage but it would ensure
critical thinking and effective decision making.
References
Austin, D. M. (2002). Human Services Management:
Organizational Leadership in Social Work Practice.
Columbia University Press. Place of Publication:
New York.
Borgatti, S. P. (2001). Organizational Theory.
Home Page. Accessed from: http://www.analytictech.com/mb021/intranet.htm
Environmental Protection Agency (2004). Official
Website Accessed from: http://www.epa.gov/ocfo/about/org2.htm
Organizational Chart
|