Editor’s Note: Former NCUA Chairman Michael E. Fryzel was a member of the Transition Team for the Trump Administration. He was assigned the task of reviewing the National Credit Union Administration and preparing their Agency Action Plan, the tool that would be used to put forward the President’s agenda for the federal government. In a series of three articles, Fryzel discusses the preparation for the transition, the method used to evaluate NCUA and writing the Agency Action Plan. Below is the second of those three articles. Part 1 in the series can be found here.
By Michael Fryzel
Upon being assigned NCUA as the agency I was to review and evaluate to determine and recommend how it could operate more efficiently and effectively while implementing the regulatory improvement goals of the Trump Administration, I prepared a work plan to use in my approach.
It was of great benefit having been on the NCUA board as I was not only familiar with the operations of the agency but also knew the staff responsible for fulfilling its mission. Putting that knowledge to work, I used an approach I believed would be applicable to use in any agency of the government.
The federal government is notorious for its compilation and accumulation of documents. On any issue there could be a few pages of discussion or hundreds of pages that would also include references, attachments and other related sources of information and opinion. Although burdensome, these documents become an excellent source of reference to determine an agency’s course of direction, plan of action and its impact on the industry it regulates.
Prior to my first on-site visit to NCUA after the election, I requested a set of 33 documents covering such subjects as budgets, strategic plans, problems credit unions, proposed regulations and regional summaries. Prior to completing my agency review, I requested an additional 31 documents which included leases, contracts, professional service agreements and additional budget information.
A Wealth of Information
The documents contained a wealth of information that I would use in evaluating the agency and preparing the Agency Action Plan (AAP). The AAP would detail the steps needed to implement the new administration’s promise of a less restrictive and more reasonable government.
I am pleased to say that the cooperation I received from the NCUA staff in providing the documents was not only efficient and swift but highly commendable. The format in which the documents were provided was organized and easily understandable and my follow-up requests were handled expeditiously. They understood what my job was as well as what was needed for a smooth and productive transition. It was professionalism at its best.
On my first day at NCUA’s office in Alexandria, Va., I conducted a series of interviews beginning with the chairman and board member. The goals of the Transition Team were discussed and I inquired about their thoughts on the status of the agency and what they believed needed to be accomplished moving forward. I went on to have discussions with 24 staff members including senior administrative personnel, regional directors, Congressional affairs and legal counsel.
Answers to Hard Questions
The subjects of these discussions ranged from examinations to consumer protection and from pending legal actions to budget reviews. Each individual with whom I met provided answers to the hard questions of what could be done better, how to improve performance, future problems that may develop and ways to conduct the agency’s business in a more productive and efficient manner.
I spent 10 days prior to the Inauguration at NCUA talking with staff and following up on my request for additional documentation. Everything I learned would assist me in preparing the AAP, which will be discussed in part three of the Transfer of Power.
Michael Fryzel is the former chairman of NCUA who is now in private practice in Chicago.