Board Involvement in Policy Making and Administration
研究了州级任命董事会在政策制定与行政中的参与程度，发现其参与模式与地方层面不同，主要集中于政策制定而非日常管理。
A central theme in much of the literature on policy formulation centers on the actors involved. Questions such as these are central: Who are they? To what extent are they involved? In what types of policy are they involved? Recently Svara has merged various strains of both the empirical and theoretical literature that deal with these questions to address the extent to which policy and administrative authority is shared between administrators and elected officials.' Svara's research indicates that the extent of involvement by the actors varies considerably but that elected officials are more involved with setting broad mission statements, while administrators are more involved in day-to-day management. Both midlevel policy making (such as the design of programs) and broad administrative or implementation decisions are likely to be shared to some extent by administrators and elected officials. Research using the four-component model of the policy-administrative continuum mission, policy, administration, and management has only dealt with relationships at the local level.2 It is useful to examine the involvement at the state level also. Svara's conceptualization led to the reanalysis of data collected for a review of state boards in Virginia.3 At the state level, appointed boards are an important group of actors. Boards, while not elected, are generally oriented to a policy-making role. Thus the patterns of their involvement with policy making are interesting to analyze to see if their involvement is primarily at the mission or agenda-setting level or if involvement is extensive at the adminstrative and management level.