Planning for stability amid political polarization and transitional challenges

Countering resistance and easing into a political passing of the torch

Change is a fact of life in the public sector. Political transitions, whether at the federal, state, or local level, bring new priorities, altered budgets, and shifts in strategy. For public agencies, these changes can pose challenges to continuity, but they also present opportunities to adapt and strengthen long-term commitments to serving communities.

Periods of political change often feel uncertain, but they don’t have to derail progress. By taking a proactive approach that includes planning for different outcomes, preserving institutional knowledge, and structuring projects for resilience, agencies can navigate transitions with confidence. The right preparation can keep missions on track no matter what changes lie ahead.

Planning for budget shifts and leadership priorities

One of the clearest impacts of political change is its effect on budgets. State-level transitions tend to have faster and more direct impacts. A newly elected governor may quickly change spending priorities, veto budgets, or pause major initiatives, even those that were already approved. These shifts in governance dynamics can be disruptive, but they do not need to halt progress.

Agencies that plan ahead by identifying potential vulnerabilities and assessing their programs’ alignment with leadership priorities will be better positioned to adjust strategies and mitigate risks in times of transition. Conducting regular assessments of program performance can be part of a larger risk mitigation plan, along with identifying areas and projects that would be the most vulnerable during leadership changes.

When Pittsburgh faced budget uncertainties in 2020, city leaders proactively mapped every dollar in their $600 million operating budget to specific programs and scored each against climate and equity priorities.¹ By conducting this assessment before changeover pressure mounted, they identified $41 million that could be reallocated if priorities shifted. This forward-looking approach meant that when leadership changes occurred, the city already had a clear understanding of which programs delivered the most value and could demonstrate measurable outcomes, making them more defensible during budget negotiations.

By balancing short-term adaptability with long-term focus, agencies can ensure their work continues to meet the needs of the communities they serve.

Reducing turnover in periods of political transition

Whether elected or appointed, leadership changes can trigger reevaluations of existing programs. New appointees may prioritize different initiatives, putting some projects at risk of delay or cancellation. These changes are inevitable, but agencies can take steps to reduce their impact.

One strategy is to design projects and contracts in a way that is less likely to draw divisive political attention. Programs that are embedded in operational frameworks or linked to long-term agency goals are often better protected from landscape shifts. Agencies can structure projects in smaller, incremental phases that deliver measurable benefits early on. This approach demonstrates progress to stakeholders and makes programs harder to disrupt.

Virginia's SMART SCALE program, launched in 2014, provides a powerful example of how transparent, data-driven processes can survive political transitions.² Rather than relying on political influence or ad hoc project lists, SMART SCALE scores every project based on measurable factors: safety improvements, congestion reduction, accessibility, economic development, land use coordination, and environmental quality.

Since its creation, SMART SCALE has distributed nearly $7 billion in funding through 6 rounds, spanning multiple gubernatorial administrations of different parties.³ The program's success lies in its transparency and accountability. Every project is evaluated using the same quantifiable criteria, and decision makers are held accountable to taxpayers through public scoring and clear benefit-per-dollar calculations. When Virginia's leadership changed hands, the SMART SCALE framework remained intact because it was built on objective measures rather than political preferences.

It's important to focus on outcomes that resonate with all stakeholders, regardless of political priorities. Programs that save money, improve services, and clearly benefit the community are more likely to gain support across administrations.

Federal mitigation programs provide another compelling example. Over the past 25 years, public sector investments in disaster mitigation by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the U.S. Economic Development Administration, and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) have saved $6 for every $1 spent, totaling $160 billion in avoided losses.⁴ Programs with this kind of demonstrable return on investment (where every dollar spent produces 6 dollars in community benefit) have proven remarkably resilient across multiple administrations. When programs can clearly show they save taxpayer money while improving community outcomes, they transcend partisan priorities and maintain support regardless of who is in office.

Highlighting these shared values helps agencies keep moving forward and avoid setbacks. Building strong relationships with career civil servants and reflecting their input in program design can further reinforce stability and continuity while neutralizing the effects of political polarization.

Navigating alignment and misalignment in leadership

When federal and state priorities diverge, agencies may encounter delays or challenges in securing support. Agencies can prepare by understanding the broader policy landscape and identifying areas of overlap between state and federal goals. By emphasizing common values such as economic growth, equitable outcomes, or greater efficiency, agencies can build consensus and keep initiatives moving forward despite differences in leadership priorities.

Election cycles often bring shake ups in governance and increased uncertainty, but waiting for clarity can be risky. Conducting scenario planning workshops, where teams model how different election results could impact funding or priorities, is one effective way to prepare.

Pennsylvania's transit agencies demonstrated effective contingency planning during the 2025 fiscal year.⁵ When a three-month budget impasse threatened transit funding, SEPTA (Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority) and Pittsburgh Regional Transit had already established the legal authority to "flex" capital funds to cover operational expenses, a provision built into state law for budget emergencies.

SEPTA secured approval to access $394 million in capital funds for operations, preserving service and avoiding cuts for 2 years.⁶ Pittsburgh Regional Transit received similar approval for $107 million. The key lesson: these agencies didn't create this flexibility during the crisis. They had already worked with lawmakers to establish statutory provisions allowing fund transfers, creating a pre-approved mechanism ready to deploy when political uncertainty created a funding gap.

Agencies that establish contingency plans for critical programs ensure they have alternate funding sources or streamlined processes in place.

Leadership transitions and preserving knowledge

Leadership changes are a normal part of political transitions. Career civil servants play a vital role in maintaining continuity. Creating detailed program briefs that include data asset inventories, performance metrics, historical context, and alignment with agency goals ensures new leaders have a clear understanding of ongoing initiatives. These briefs should include:

• Quantifiable outcomes: Measurable results that will be achieved
• Return on investment (ROI): Cost per unit of service delivered and cost savings generated
• Alignment with universal goals: How the program supports efficiency and community benefit
• Risk of discontinuation: Community impacts if the program were paused or eliminated

Preparation: the key to resilience

Shifts in political dynamics will happen, but agencies can manage their effects. By planning for different scenarios, protecting important knowledge, and designing programs to be less vulnerable, agencies can adapt more easily to change.

The main goal is to focus on projects that bring real, lasting benefits. When agencies align their work with shared goals like saving money, helping the community, and being efficient, they make sure their programs stay important and useful. Research shows that programs demonstrating clear value through data and metrics are significantly more likely to survive transitions (up to 46% more likely, according to public sector transformation studies), and proven mitigation programs have achieved 6-to-1 returns that sustained them across decades of political change.⁷

Change management: turning challenges into opportunities

Times of transition give public agencies a chance to reflect and improve their strategies. With good planning (mapping budgets to outcomes before transitions occur, documenting program performance in measurable terms, and creating decision-making frameworks that show value regardless of political priorities), risk mitigation, and thoughtful preparation, agencies can turn uncertainty into an opportunity to grow stronger. By staying focused, adaptable, and prepared, they can continue to make a meaningful difference for their communities.

Explore the different ways CAI can help your teams in the public sector manage change while maintaining integrity for community programs by filling out the form below.