To DOGE, or Not to DOGE

The United States Capitol, where the idea of a Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) first took root at the federal level. Now state and local leaders consider if similar government efficiency programs could work for them.

State and local governments across the United States are facing a pivotal question: to DOGE or not to DOGE? The term DOGE stands for Department of Government Efficiency, a concept born at the federal level to streamline operations and cut costs. Now, there is growing interest in DOGE in State and Local Government contexts – essentially adopting DOGE-style efficiency initiatives in state agencies, county offices, and city halls. This blog post will explore what DOGE means, the potential benefits of such government efficiency programs, the drawbacks and trade-offs to watch out for, and how these initiatives might apply to everyday local government functions. By the end, public officials and partners should have a clearer picture of whether embracing a DOGE-style program makes sense for their community.

What Is the DOGE Initiative?

DOGE, or the Department of Government Efficiency, originated as a federal initiative focused on improving performance and eliminating waste in government. Its stated mission is to modernize government operations – for example, “modernizing federal technology and software to maximize governmental efficiency and productivity”​

In practice, this has meant scrutinizing budgets, trimming redundant programs, and leveraging tech innovations to deliver services faster and cheaper. Although the name DOGE was initially introduced at the federal level (with a bit of tongue-in-cheek reference to an internet meme), the core idea is serious: make government leaner, more effective, and more accountable.

Crucially, you don’t need a literal “Department of Government Efficiency” to pursue these goals. Many state and local governments have long run their own efficiency drives or “government efficiency review committees.” In fact, even before the DOGE acronym existed, governors and mayors were looking for ways to save taxpayer dollars and improve services. Now, with the high-profile federal DOGE program in the spotlight, several states have launched their own versions of DOGE-style initiatives to capture the momentum. For example, Iowa’s governor signed an order creating an Iowa Department of Government Efficiency Task Force focusing on maximizing return on taxpayer investment and leveraging emerging technology​

Similarly, Florida’s DOGE Task Force has a mandate to identify waste, even proposing to abolish dozens of unnecessary boards and commissions​. These efforts, often dubbed “government efficiency programs” or “government modernization initiatives,” signal a bipartisan recognition that there are always ways to make the public sector work better.

In summary, DOGE in state government refers to any organized effort by a state or local authority to review operations, cut waste, improve efficiency, and modernize how services are delivered. It’s a reform mindset wrapped in a catchy name. But should your government jump on the DOGE bandwagon? To answer that, let’s weigh the pros and cons.

Potential Benefits of Government Efficiency Programs

Adopting a DOGE-style initiative can offer a range of benefits for cities, counties, and states. These local government cost savings and service improvements are the main reasons leaders are excited about efficiency programs. Some of the key advantages include:

• Cost Savings and Waste Reduction: The most immediate draw is saving money. Efficiency reviews can uncover redundant expenditures, overlapping programs, or outdated contracts that can be renegotiated or cut. By eliminating inefficiencies, governments can redirect funds to higher-priority needs. For instance, DOGE’s focus on rooting out waste has already yielded significant savings at the federal level, which could translate to local government cost savings when applied in a city or county​. Streamlining operations means taxpayer dollars go further in delivering value.
  ‍

• Modernization of Services: Many government processes still rely on legacy systems and paper-based workflows. An efficiency initiative often involves updating technology and processes – essentially city modernization initiatives. This could mean moving permitting or licensing services online, adopting modern software for budgeting, or using data analytics to improve decision-making. Modernizing a “digital city hall” not only saves time and labor, it also improves the citizen experience. As one analysis noted, DOGE’s emphasis on upgrading systems could help local governments improve service delivery from permit processing to emergency response​. Embracing new tools (like cloud platforms or even AI) can make routine services faster, more accessible, and more resilient.

• Improved Accountability and Transparency: Efficiency isn’t just about cutting costs – it’s also about good governance. DOGE-like programs often promote stronger auditing, performance measurement, and transparency. For example, agencies might begin publishing open data on spending, or use dashboards to track key performance indicators. Regular budget efficiency reviews and procurement audits ensure public funds are used responsibly and contracts are awarded fairly. These steps build public trust by showing that the government is accountable and actively managing resources. When Pennsylvania’s governor ordered faster permits for businesses and Colorado’s governor literally sliced through red tape (by cutting up old regulations), they were signaling a commitment to responsive, transparent service​. Such moves can boost confidence that government is working for the people.

• Better Performance & Outcomes: Ultimately, the goal of any government efficiency program is to improve results for the community. By reallocating resources to effective programs and shedding activities that don’t provide value, governments can improve outcomes like public safety, education, infrastructure quality, and more. Efficiency initiatives often encourage evidence-based decision-making – investing in what works and fixing or dropping what doesn’t. They also push agencies to break out of “siloed” thinking. When different departments collaborate and share data (a common DOGE theme), it can lead to innovations in service delivery that were not possible before. In short, a leaner government can also be a more effective government, delivering timely permits, cleaner parks, safer streets, and other tangible benefits to residents.

These benefits show why city and county modernization initiatives inspired by DOGE have strong appeal. A well-run efficiency program can free up budget room, speed up services, and demonstrate stewardship of public funds. However, pursuing government efficiency is not without challenges. Leaders must also consider the potential downsides and how to mitigate them.

Real-World Applications: Where Could DOGE Help?

What do DOGE-style reforms actually look like on the ground? Here are a few accessible examples of areas where an efficiency initiative could make a difference in state or local government:

• Procurement and Contracting: Governments buy everything from office supplies to multimillion-dollar infrastructure. Strengthening procurement practices can yield quick wins for efficiency. This might involve consolidating purchase contracts for better bulk pricing, enforcing competitive bidding to prevent favoritism, or using e-procurement systems to simplify and speed up orders. Another aspect is preventing fraud and abuse – for instance, implementing vendor vetting and invoice monitoring to catch overbilling. A DOGE-style audit of contracts could find overpriced or duplicative vendor agreements to renegotiate or cancel (as the federal DOGE effort did by terminating hundreds of “wasteful” contracts)​. The result is not only cost savings but also greater transparency in procurement so the public knows money is spent fairly​.

• Budgeting and Finance: Budget efficiency reviews are a classic tool of government reform. State and city budgets can be combed for under-utilized funds, outdated programs, or areas where spending doesn’t match priorities. For example, a county might discover it maintains parallel IT teams in multiple departments and save money by centralizing them. Techniques like priority-based budgeting help leaders align expenditures with the community’s top goals​. Some municipalities have even applied private-sector methods like Lean Six Sigma to budgeting, systematically identifying waste in processes. The bottom line: an efficiency initiative in budgeting ensures every dollar has a purpose and that “nice-to-have” expenses don’t crowd out essential services. It can also improve financial transparency by clearly showing taxpayers where money goes and why.

• Permitting and Licensing: Permitting is a frequent pain point for local businesses and residents – think building permits, business licenses, event permits, etc., that often involve long waits and bureaucracy. This is ripe for an efficiency overhaul. Streamlining permitting might include creating an online permit portal, implementing one-stop shops for approvals, or setting time limits so permits are approved faster. Real-world example: Pennsylvania’s governor recently took executive action to speed up state permitting for economic development projects​, recognizing that sluggish approvals hurt the economy. Similarly, many cities are digitizing permitting and using checklists to eliminate redundant steps. The payoff is twofold: applicants get faster responses (helping economic growth and citizen satisfaction), and agencies save staff time by eliminating back-and-forth and paper shuffling. Modern permitting systems can even automate certain checks, striking a balance between thorough review and efficiency.

• Service Delivery and Operations: Government provides countless services – trash pickup, public safety, park maintenance, utilities, record keeping, and more. Efficiency initiatives can look at how these services are delivered and find improvements. For instance, a city might reorganize its trash collection routes using route optimization software to save fuel and time. A state DMV might extend online services to reduce in-person lines for vehicle registration renewals. A county health department could integrate its databases to avoid asking residents to fill out duplicate forms for different programs. Even small changes, like co-locating related services in one building or cross-training staff to handle multiple service requests, can yield better convenience and productivity. DOGE-like modernization also emphasizes resilience and security – e.g., upgrading cybersecurity to protect data as operations become more digital​. The big idea is that every process from issuing a permit to responding to a 911 call should be analyzed for efficiency gains. Many jurisdictions find that engaging frontline employees in this exercise (through suggestion programs or “lean teams”) generates creative solutions to improve service quality without additional cost.

By applying DOGE principles in areas like these, governments can make noticeable improvements that constituents will appreciate. Whether it’s a faster turnaround on a building permit or a more accountable budgeting process, these tangible wins build momentum for the efficiency program. But caution is needed to ensure the pursuit of efficiency doesn’t inadvertently create new problems.

Challenges and Trade-Offs to Consider

Before jumping headlong into a DOGE-style reform, state and local leaders must weigh some trade-offs and challenges. Government is a complex ecosystem, and a strategy that works in one context might stumble in another. Here are some potential drawbacks and considerations to keep in mind:

• Defining “Waste” vs. Essential Services: One of the first challenges is deciding what counts as inefficiency. It turns out that “one person’s concept of waste is another person’s vital service.” As William Glasgall of the Volcker Alliance cautions, what may look like excess fat in a budget to some might be a lifeline to others​. For example, a grant program that seems expendable on paper could be delivering real benefits in a community. Leaders need to approach cuts with care, engaging with stakeholders to understand the impacts. Additionally, unlike the private sector, government often requires some redundancy to meet its public mission​. A city fire department must maintain enough firefighters and equipment for peak emergencies, even if that capacity sits idle most days – this isn’t “waste” but prudent preparedness. Efficiency efforts must balance cost-cutting with the risk of eroding critical capacity or equity. In short, not everything that can be cut should be cut.

• Impact on Workforce and Morale: Talk of efficiency can raise employee concerns about job security. High-profile efficiency drives (like the federal DOGE) often get associated with layoffs or hiring freezes. While state-level initiatives so far have downplayed the job-cutting aspect​, there may still be consolidation of roles or reorganization that affects staff. Government employees are also taxpayers and community members; a demoralized workforce can actually hurt productivity and service quality. To mitigate this, many successful programs focus on attrition and retraining rather than pink slips. Including employees in brainstorming improvements can turn them into partners rather than opponents of the initiative. The message should be about working smarter, not just doing more with less. If done transparently and humanely, a DOGE-style program can empower staff (by removing frustrating red tape in their jobs) rather than simply demand sacrifices.

• Initial Costs and Implementation Burden: Paradoxically, becoming more efficient can require an upfront investment. Upgrading old IT systems, training staff on new processes, or hiring experts to conduct audits all carry costs. For a small town with a tight budget, these changes may strain resources before the savings kick in. There’s also a compliance burden to consider – if new policies or reporting requirements are introduced in the name of efficiency, they might create extra work for staff in the short term​. For instance, documenting every process and outcome to find improvements is valuable, but it takes employee time. Leaders should be realistic about the time and money required to implement reforms. Setting aside a modest budget or seeking grants for efficiency projects can pay off, but not every locality will have that luxury. It may make sense to start with low-cost changes (like process mapping and quick fixes) before investing in big IT overhauls.

• Uneven Capacity Across Communities: Not all governments are equally equipped to launch a major efficiency drive. Larger cities and well-funded counties might have analysts, data systems, and management consultants at their disposal, while small rural towns do not. This raises the risk that DOGE-style mandates could widen gaps in performance. An initiative that works well in a city of 1 million might flop in a community of 10,000 simply due to scale and resource differences​. State leaders considering a broad efficiency push need to provide flexibility and support so that smaller municipalities can adapt. Otherwise, there’s a chance that well-intentioned efficiency standards become unfunded mandates or overwhelm local officials who wear many hats. Tailoring the approach – perhaps offering opt-in toolkits or regional support teams – can help ensure the benefits of efficiency are shared widely, not just in wealthy or large jurisdictions.

• Potential Political and Public Pushback: Finally, leaders should brace for political sensitivities. Efficiency sounds great in theory, but when specific programs or jobs face the chopping block, it can become controversial. Partisan mistrust might also color how a DOGE initiative is perceived – some may worry it’s cover for an ideological agenda (for instance, cutting certain programs under the guise of efficiency). The best antidote is transparency and clear communication about the goals. If the public sees factual reports of wasteful spending being eliminated or faster services being delivered, they are more likely to support the changes. Conversely, any missteps (like critical services disrupted due to cuts) will also be noticed. A pragmatic, nonpartisan tone – focusing on common-sense improvements and service delivery enhancements – can keep the effort on track and earn broad buy-in. Remember that the end goal is not just a smaller budget, but a better-functioning government that citizens trust.

In light of these challenges, a “DOGE or not to DOGE” decision shouldn’t be taken lightly. The most successful government efficiency programs treat it as a continuous improvement journey rather than a one-time slash-and-burn. With thoughtful planning, stakeholder input, and a willingness to adjust course, the downsides can be managed while the upsides are realized.

Conclusion: Finding the Right Balance

Ultimately, whether to adopt a DOGE-style efficiency initiative comes down to balancing ambition with caution. On the one hand, government efficiency programs offer a compelling path to local government cost savings and modernization. They can uncover hidden opportunities to reallocate funds, speed up services like permitting, and introduce innovations that make life easier for both employees and citizens. In an era of tight budgets and rising public expectations, no elected official or city manager wants to leave obvious efficiencies on the table. Embracing a thoughtful city modernization initiative can demonstrate proactive leadership and good stewardship of taxpayer resources.

On the other hand, it’s clear that not every “efficiency” move is risk-free or universally beneficial. Public officials must be careful not to simply copy-paste private sector tactics or another jurisdiction’s playbook without considering local context. The trade-offs – from ensuring vital services are protected, to investing in change management for staff – are very real. The smartest approach is often to start with a diagnostic: Where are our pain points? Where do stakeholders see waste or frustration? This can identify the low-hanging fruit for quick wins, while flagging areas that need deeper study. Efficiency is a means to an end (better government), not an end in itself.

So, to DOGE or not to DOGE? The answer need not be a binary yes/no. Every government can adopt the spirit of DOGE in a form that fits its circumstances. This might mean a full-fledged efficiency commission and public dashboard in one city, and a modest internal task force in another. What’s important is to foster a culture that continually asks, “How can we do this better?” and is willing to act on the answers.

Now a call to action

If you’re a government leader intrigued by what DOGE could mean for your state or community, why not take the next step? We invite elected officials, city/county managers, and public CFOs to claim your government profile on our platform and join a growing community of innovative public sector leaders. Connect with peers and access resources to kickstart your efficiency journey. Likewise, if you represent a consulting or accounting firm that specializes in government improvement, create a profile and take our 9-question DOGE assessment today. This quick assessment will help you showcase your expertise and see how well aligned your services are with the DOGE principles.

It’s time to turn interest into action. Whether you’re eager to trim waste, modernize services, or boost transparency, there’s never been a better moment to explore the DOGE approach. Claim your profile, take the DOGE challenge, and lead the charge toward a more efficient, responsive government – your citizens and stakeholders will thank you for it.