MAXIMIZING PERSONAL POTENTIAL FOR
NATIONAL PROSPERITY
A blueprint for changing the way this country thinks about and addresses
poverty.
May 2005
[Note: This file/document begins after Page 42 of the original document.]
Table of Contents
APPENDIXES LIST ....................................................................................................................... 9
APPENDIX A: THE 21ST CENTURY MODEL TO ADDRESS POVERTY PROJECT ........... 10
Project Philosophy .................................................................................................................... 10
Approach and Activities ........................................................................................................... 11
Identification of Topical Lenses ............................................................................................... 12
Identification and Selection of an Overarching Change Model ................................................ 12
Development of the Theoretical Construct ............................................................................... 15
Development of Research Strategy and Products ..................................................................... 16
Working Sessions.................................................................................................................. 16
Compilation of Working Session Proceedings ......................................................................... 17
APPENDIX B: POVERTY PROGRAMS SUMMARY AND MATRIX ................................... 18
Overview -- Agency, Program, Program Purpose and Beneficiaries ........................................... 22
Program, Agency, Type of Assistance, and FY05 Funding Level ............................................... 58
Program, Agency, Type of Funding and Applicant Eligibility..................................................... 69
APPENDIX C: ISSUE PAPERS .................................................................................................. 87
Research Brief on Existing Definitions, Measures, and Causes ............................................... 87
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 88
Defining Poverty ........................................................................................................................... 89
The US Poverty Index – An “Operational” Definition of Poverty ........................................... 90
Problems with the Current Measures ........................................................................................ 91
Causes of Poverty ..................................................................................................................... 92
Unraveling the Causes of Poverty............................................................................................. 93
Situational Versus Persistent Poverty ....................................................................................... 93
Some Theories of Poverty ......................................................................................................... 95
Some Broader Views of Poverty............................................................................................... 97
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 98
Community-Based Solutions ...................................................................................................... 100
Background ............................................................................................................................. 101
Various Approaches to Community-Based Solutions ............................................................ 101
Comprehensive Community Building Models ....................................................................... 102
Comprehensive Community Initiatives .................................................................................. 102
Neighborhood Revitalization Initiatives ................................................................................. 103
Community Action Agencies4 ................................................................................................ 103
Workforce Development Alongside Community and Economic Development..................... 104
Community Economic Development Efforts.......................................................................... 104
Integrating Workforce Development ...................................................................................... 105
Key Contextual and Structural Conditions for Successful Community-Based Coalitions that
Address Poverty Key Paradigms for Potential Future Models ............................................... 106
Engaging the Community and Developing Local Leadership ................................................ 106
Community Asset Mapping and Other Indicators .................................................................. 108
Developing a Plan ................................................................................................................... 109
Research on Effective Community-Based Models ................................................................. 110
Implementing Whole Community Strategies.......................................................................... 111
Sustainability. What is Sustainability? ................................................................................. 112
2
How to Achieve Sustainability ............................................................................................... 113
Evaluation and Sustainability ................................................................................................. 114
Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 115
Sources .................................................................................................................................... 115
Family Economic Security .......................................................................................................... 119
Overview ................................................................................................................................. 120
Financial Capital Acquisition and Asset Protection ............................................................... 120
Access to Mainstream Banking & Financial Products ........................................................... 121
Individual Development Account ........................................................................................... 122
Home Ownership .................................................................................................................... 122
Asset Protection ...................................................................................................................... 124
Growing Social Capital by Building Strong Families ............................................................ 125
Creating Financial Incentives for Marriage ............................................................................ 126
Marriage Education and Relationship Support ....................................................................... 127
Father Involvement ................................................................................................................. 128
Parenting Support.................................................................................................................... 129
Marriage Education for Couples Becoming Parents ............................................................... 129
Becoming Parents Program (BPP) .......................................................................................... 130
Becoming a Family Program .................................................................................................. 130
Human Capital Support and Development ............................................................................. 131
Roles of Federal and State Governments in Selected Supports for Low-Income Individuals 132
Tax Credits .............................................................................................................................. 132
Earned Income Tax Credit .................................................................................................. 132
Enable Work Education and Skills Acquisition...................................................................... 133
Sectoral Initiatives .................................................................................................................. 133
Addressing Barriers to Work .................................................................................................. 134
Appendix: Income and Work Support Policies and Strategies ................................................... 139
Government Cash Assistance ................................................................................................. 139
Food and Nutrition .................................................................................................................. 139
Health Insurance ..................................................................................................................... 140
Housing Assistance ................................................................................................................. 142
Energy Assistance ................................................................................................................... 144
Child Care ............................................................................................................................... 145
Transportation ......................................................................................................................... 146
Minimum Wage and Living Wage ......................................................................................... 147
Maximizing Technology ............................................................................................................. 152
1 Background .......................................................................................................................... 153
1.1 The Changing Face of Technology ............................................................................... 153
Table 1.1 – The Three Industrial Revolutions .................................................................... 154
Workshop .................................................................................................................... 154
1.2 Technology in Human Services Delivery Infrastructure .............................................. 154
Figure 1. The Evolution of Human Services Delivery ....................................................... 155
1.3 Technology for Communities and Individuals ................................................................. 156
2 Current State Analysis ......................................................................................................... 159
2.1 Individuals and Technology.......................................................................................... 159
2.1.1 Computer and Internet Usage .................................................................................... 159
3
I. Americans’ Computer And Internet Use By Income ...................................................... 161
II. The Unconnected............................................................................................................ 162
The Offline Population ....................................................................................................... 163
III. How And Where America Goes Online ........................................................................... 163
Connection Types ............................................................................................................... 163
Higher-Speed Internet Connection by Geographic Area .................................................... 163
Location of Use ................................................................................................................... 164
Internet Use by Specific Location....................................................................................... 164
Primary Uses of the Internet ............................................................................................... 164
IV. The Digital Generation: How Young People Have Embraced Computers And The Internet
................................................................................................................................................. 165
Computer and Internet Use ................................................................................................. 165
Computer Use Among 10 to 17 Year Olds By Income and Location ................................ 165
Computer Use at Home by Income ..................................................................................... 165
Computer Use Among 10 to 17 Year Olds By Race/Ethnicity and Location .................... 165
Computer Use Among 10 to 17 Year Olds By Household Type and Location .................. 165
Internet Use Among 10 to 17 Year Olds By Income and Household Type ....................... 165
How Young People Use the Internet .................................................................................. 166
Concerns About Children’s Online Use ............................................................................. 166
V. Computer And Internet Use Among People With Disabilities .......................................... 166
Primary Uses by the U.S. Population...................................................................................... 170
Figure 3-1: Online Activities, 2000 and 2001 as a Percentage of Total U.S. Population,
Persons Age 3 + ...................................................................................................................... 170
Activities Among Those Individuals Online .......................................................................... 171
Figure 3-2: Activities of Individuals Online, 2001 As a Percentage of Internet Users, Persons
Age 3 +.................................................................................................................................... 171
Summary ................................................................................................................................. 171
More low-income Americans are going online .................................................................. 172
Large numbers of low income individuals have limited literacy skills or disabilities........ 172
More Americans from Other Cultures or Countries Are Using the Internet ...................... 172
Technology Access Outside the Home Is on the Rise ........................................................ 172
The Internet is rapidly Becoming Essential for Basic Needs ............................................. 173
2.1.2 Impacts ........................................................................................................................... 173
2.1.3 Leveraging Technology for Individuals......................................................................... 174
2.2 Community and Technology............................................................................................. 178
2.2.1 Leveraging Technology for Communities ..................................................................... 180
Access ................................................................................................................................. 180
Infrastructure ....................................................................................................................... 180
Capacity .............................................................................................................................. 181
Using technology to support community-based industry: ACENet ................................... 181
Training 20th-century citizens for 21st-century jobs: The South Bristol Learning Network
............................................................................................................................................. 182
A trusted service provider incorporates technology into its programs: United Neighborhood
Houses of New York ........................................................................................................... 182
Public institutions increasing access: Union City Schools and Libraries Online! .............. 183
Providing support and information for community technology centers: CTCNet ............. 185
4
Using technology to strengthen neighborhood communications: The AFNNeighborhood
Network and MUSIC/LUV ................................................................................................. 185
Providing underserved youth with enrichment and training for the jobs of the future: Break
Away Technologies, Plugged In, and National Urban League Youth Achievement
Initiatives............................................................................................................................. 187
CIOF Community Technology Centers .............................................................................. 188
COMPUTER LEARNING CENTER/COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM OF
EVANSVILLE AND VANDERBURGH COUNTY, INC. ............................................... 190
2.3 Technology in Human Services Delivery Infrastructure .................................................. 190
2.4 Characteristics of Technology in Human Services Organizations ................................... 191
2.5 Technology Actions – Government .................................................................................. 192
2.5.1 Leveraging the Internet .................................................................................................. 193
1. Disability Access ................................................................................................................ 195
2. Readability .......................................................................................................................... 195
3. Non-English Language Accessibility ................................................................................. 196
4. Interactivity ......................................................................................................................... 197
5. Access Across Agencies ..................................................................................................... 198
6. User Fees and Premium Sections ........................................................................................ 198
2.5.2 Legislative actions in 2003 to address the digital divide ............................................... 199
Create a Statewide Digital Divide Grant Program .................................................................. 199
2.5.3 Nationwide trends in addressing the digital divide ........................................................ 202
2.6 Current Applications of Technology in Human Services ................................................. 204
E-Government ..................................................................................................................... 204
Nebraska’s N-FOCUS System ............................................................................................ 205
Louisiana’s Department of Health and Hospitals ............................................................... 205
San Mateo Case Management and Consumer Follow through System .............................. 205
Community Human Service Agency – Camfield Estates ................................................... 206
3 Advances in Technology...................................................................................................... 206
3.1 Before and After the Internet ............................................................................................ 206
3.2 Industry Advances in leveraging emerging technology.................................................... 209
Banking ................................................................................................................................... 210
Homeland Security.................................................................................................................. 214
Emergency Workers................................................................................................................ 214
3.3 Emerging Trends in Technology ...................................................................................... 215
Emerging Web Services Standards Stack ................................................................... 217
Communication Technologies ................................................................................................ 217
Radio Frequency Identification Devices ................................................................................. 218
Business intelligence products are supporting a more networked view of the business ........ 218
Text mining is emerging as the "hot" area in customer relationship management ................. 219
Micro-content and micro-business will drive the knowledge economy ................................. 219
The support foundation for software infrastructure is changing. Real-time infrastructure will
reshape IT operations and infrastructure................................................................................. 220
Real-Time Infrastructure ......................................................................................................... 220
4 Technology in Human Services ........................................................................................... 221
4.1 Making Technology a Powerful Weapon ......................................................................... 222
4.2 A Technology Primer ........................................................................................................ 223
5
4.3 Technology Framework to consider ................................................................................. 224
5 Sources ............................................................................................................................. 225
APPENDIX D: WORKING SESSION DESCRIPTIONS ......................................................... 226
APPENDIX E: MEETING RECORDS ...................................................................................... 229
REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF THE PRINCIPLES .................................................... 246
IDENTIFICATION OF WHAT NEEDS TO CHANGE TO GET TO VISION OF NEW
DEFINTIONS (GAP ANALYSIS/DEVELOP STRATEGIES) ............................................ 250
Roles ................................................................................................................................... 251
Systems ............................................................................................................................... 251
Funding ............................................................................................................................... 252
Policy .................................................................................................................................. 253
Attitudes .............................................................................................................................. 253
Structures ............................................................................................................................ 254
Behavior .............................................................................................................................. 255
Incentives ............................................................................................................................ 255
APPENDIX A Core Elements: Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles .......................... 258
Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles ......................................................................... 258
APPENDIX B Research Themes: Redefining Poverty ............................................................. 261
Compelling Case for Change .............................................................................................. 261
Questions to Consider ......................................................................................................... 264
APPENDIX C The Evolution Of Thinking About Poverty: Exploring The Interactions......... 265
THE EVOLUTION OF THINKING ABOUT POVERTY: EXPLORING THE
INTERACTIONS ........................................................................................................... 265
THE EVOLUTION OF THINKING ABOUT POVERTY: EXPLORING THE
INTERACTIONS ........................................................................................................... 265
I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 265
II. INCOME AND CONSUMPTION..................................................................................... 268
Table 1: The Incidence of Poverty ...................................................................................... 270
Growth, Inequality, and Poverty ......................................................................................... 273
From Mechanical Relationships to Policy .......................................................................... 275
III. HUMAN DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................................. 277
Measuring Human Development ........................................................................................ 277
Table 3: Proportion of children who were born in the past 5 years who are no longer living,
by wealth ............................................................................................................................. 279
The Seamless Web .............................................................................................................. 280
Human Development and Growth ...................................................................................... 281
IV. VULNERABILITY AND VOICE ................................................................................... 284
Asking the Poor................................................................................................................... 284
Coping with Risk ................................................................................................................ 288
From Isolation to Participation ........................................................................................... 292
V. OUTSTANDING ISSUES ................................................................................................. 294
References ........................................................................................................................... 296
APPENDIX D Characteristics of Successful Change ............................................................... 303
APPENDIX E Current state presentation: Highlights from the research .................................. 304
APPENDIX F Participant List ................................................................................................... 306
APPENDIX G Project Staff List................................................................................................. 309
6
Community-Based Solutions Working Session ...................................................................... 312
PROCEEDINGS ..................................................................................................................... 314
SESSION CONTEXT AND CONTENT ............................................................................... 317
SMALL GROUP WORK: VISIONING THE IDEAL (DETERMINING DESIRED FUTURE
STATE) ................................................................................................................................... 319
Visioning the Ideal: Community Engagement ........................................................................ 320
APPENDIX A Core Elements: Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles ......................... 336
APPENDIX B Research Themes: Community-Based Solutions .............................................. 339
Community Based Solutions Related to Poverty ................................................................ 339
Community Assessment, Planning, and Development Models .......................................... 340
Community Building as a Poverty Reduction Strategy ...................................................... 341
Linking Community, Economic, and Workforce Development Efforts ............................. 342
Creating, Maintaining, and Sustaining Community-Based Solutions ................................ 343
Questions to Consider ......................................................................................................... 344
APPENDIX C Initiative context presentation: Characteristics of Successful Change .............. 347
APPENDIX D Current state presentation: Highlights from the research .................................. 348
Community Based Solutions to Reducing Poverty ............................................................. 348
APPENDIX E Participant List ................................................................................................... 350
APPENDIX F Project Staff List ................................................................................................ 354
Family Economic Security .......................................................................................................... 357
PROCEEDINGS ................................................................................................................. 359
IDENTIFICATION OF WHAT NEEDS TO CHANGE TO GET TO THE IDEAL ........ 376
APPENDIX A Core Elements: Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles ......................... 388
APPENDIX B Research Themes: Family Economic Security ................................................. 391
Family Economic Security ...................................................................................................... 391
Compelling Case for Change .............................................................................................. 391
Current State ....................................................................................................................... 392
Acquisition and Growth of Assets ...................................................................................... 392
Mainstream Goods and Services ......................................................................................... 393
Public Policy ....................................................................................................................... 394
Questions to Consider ......................................................................................................... 394
APPENDIX C Initiative context presentation: Characteristics of Successful Change .............. 396
APPENDIX D Current state presentation: Highlights from the research .................................. 397
Compelling Case for Change ...................................................................................... 397
Support to Low Income Individuals ................................................................................... 397
APPENDIX E Participant List ................................................................................................... 399
Aspen Wye River Conference Center ......................................................................... 399
APPENDIX F Project Staff List ................................................................................................ 403
Maximizing Technology ............................................................................................................. 406
Group 3 ....................................................................................................................... 418
IDENTIFICATION OF WHAT NEEDS TO CHANGE TO GET TO THE IDEAL: GAPS
AND STRATEGIES ........................................................................................................... 423
TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIES ................................................................................................ 430
APPENDIX A Core Elements: Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles .......................... 433
APPENDIX B Research Themes: Leveraging Technology in Human Services ....................... 435
Current State of Technology in Human Services ................................................................... 435
7
Technology Leveraging in Other Industries ........................................................................... 438
Questions to Consider ......................................................................................................... 439
APPENDIX C Initiative context presentation: Characteristics of Successful Change .............. 441
APPENDIX D Current state presentation: Highlights from the research .................................. 442
The Emerging Digital Economy ......................................................................................... 442
Internet Based Eligibility Systems ...................................................................................... 444
Business Redesign .............................................................................................................. 448
APPENDIX E Participant List ................................................................................................... 449
APPENDIX F Project Staff List ................................................................................................ 453
APPENDIX F: CONTRIBUTORS ............................................................................................. 457
8
APPENDIXES LIST
Appendix A: The Project to Create a 21st Century Model to Address Poverty, provides a
description of the project within which much of the blueprint content was developed, including
how and why specific activities were undertaken.
Appendix B: Poverty Programs Summary and Matrix, summarizes the vast landscape of federal
programs, including the program name, intent, funding level, etc.
Appendix C: Issue Papers, which provide environmental scans of issues related to definitions of
poverty, community-based approaches to poverty, family economic security, and technology.
Appendix D: Descriptions of the four working sessions convened in the late summer of 2004.
Appendix E: Meeting records for each of the four working sessions, within which a host of
unvetted, unfiltered, untested strategies are provided that could be used as a shopping list of
potential projects to be further explored.
Appendix F: Principal Contributors List, which provides a list of key people who lead, wrote,
and/or supported the development of the vision and this document.
9
APPENDIX A: THE 21ST CENTURY MODEL TO ADDRESS POVERTY PROJECT
May 2005 Appendix A 1
In November 2003, Clarence Carter (then Director of the Office of Community Services)
initiated a two-year project to develop and frame a theoretical construct upon which new ways of
thinking about and addressing poverty could be built and that could be used to help launch a
long-term social change movement. As the project leader, Mr. Carter initiated the work with a
strongly held, but complex and unrefined vision for a fundamentally different approach to
poverty. The project was designed to harness the components of that vision, enhance it with
research and the participation of others, and give it the form and structure necessary for it to
serve as the basis for change.
Mr. Carter brought in a team of external resources with multiple areas of expertise,
including organization, community, and workforce development, as well as human services,
sociology, communications, and technology. The organization and workforce development
component of the team served as the strategic and project management arm of the operation,
serving as a central hub for strategy and coordination of all of the components of the project. The
sociology, community development, and technology team members served as subject-matterexperts, who offered subject-specific guidance for a number of project activities, including its
overall direction, the development of the working sessions, the implementation of further
research, and as expert reviewers of the research products associated with the project.
Because changing the way the country thinks about and addresses poverty is a long-term
goal, the project got underway with the understanding that realizing that goal would obviously
not occur over the life of a short-term project. With that in mind, the initiative was designed to
establish a foundation upon which future strategies could be built and to give the issues of
poverty structure and form so that the people and organizations that make up society—the people
who can collectively make a difference—could create systemic and comprehensive strategies
toward a future built upon the construct. The extent to which the project accomplished that goal
is at least partially attributed to a shared understanding between the project leader and the project
team that, since they were navigating “uncharted territory,” their work together was a learning
and discovery process. This understanding, combined with the absence of an organizational
hierarchy, contributed to a spirit of adventure, openness, collaboration, deference, and creativity.
The project is described in more detail in the sections that follow.
Project Philosophy
A few key philosophical tenets thread through the work of the project, and were held as
truths in the development of the construct and related project activities. These tenets are:

The best place to address poverty is in the community. The community is the
entity just small enough to know its own circumstances, people, issues, and
resources and to have the ability to impact all of them. It is also the entity that is
10
most directly affected by its own issues of poverty, and therefore has the most
stake in addressing it and in creating its own desired future. On the other hand,
the community also just large enough an entity to have formal and informal
leadership that can gather and deploy resources toward those circumstances and
can influence policy at the local, state, and Federal level.

Supporting communities in addressing their own issues of poverty means
providing enabling conditions, not prescribing them. No Federal or other
outside entity can know what supports, strategies, or solutions any particular
community needs to address its issues of poverty. Therefore, strategies must
support, enable, and empower communities to address issues of poverty locally
in ways that make sense for their unique circumstances. Doing so also creates
appropriate ownership and commitment within communities in its own wellbeing.

No one entity, political party, sector, organization, program, funding stream, or
service delivery strategy can claim blame for the nation’s issues of poverty or
fame for successfully addressing it. Responsibility for the current and future
poverty situation is shared by every sector of society—it is a systemic issue. In
addition, the speed at which societal, economic, cultural, and technological
change occurs renders any solution obsolete in short order, no matter how
appropriate it might have been at the time of implementation. Therefore,
defending turf, past programs, or strategies is not necessary and should be
discouraged in any activity associated with the project.

No matter how big an undertaking the reconstruction of the nation’s approach
to poverty is, or what form or shape it ultimately takes, its impact must reach
the individual. We must strive to develop systems, structures, and strategies in
which resources and capacity do not stop at the door of the system, but rather,
reach the individual and make a difference in their life.
Approach and Activities
The project in general was approached iteratively, with multiple activities in various
stages of development occurring concurrently. This iterative approach meant that for most of the
year-long project, none of its components was fully developed. The positive side of that scenario
is that the concurrent evolution and learning from the development of each activity or component
informed the others, which resulted in a natural alignment in the end. The challenge in that
scenario is that the complete picture was not known until late in the game, when all of the
components naturally came together to form a coherent whole. The resulting ambiguity was
considered a necessary evil by the project staff. As mentioned previously, the spirit of discovery
and learning and the absence of a formal hierarchy was key for the ultimate success in building
the construct in its current form. Given the project’s iterative nature described above, the
activities described below are provided in relative sequential order.
11
Identification of Topical Lenses
Poverty is obviously an enormous and complex topic, with many tendrils ranging from
the conditions, causes, and impacts of poverty to the difficulties we as a society have in openly
discussing it. The challenge in starting a national dialog about changing the way the country
thinks about and addresses poverty is that the discussion can’t start ‘everywhere’ at once—there
is simply too much there. At the same time, starting with a manageable subset of topics related to
poverty will always seem incomplete. Understanding that the former is impossible and the latter
is insufficient, the latter was chosen as a starting point. Five subtopics were chosen and used as
“lenses” through which to view issues of poverty and the country’s approach to addressing it.
These lenses served as areas of inquiry for the research activities (see “Development of Research
Strategy and Products”), as topical themes for the initial working sessions (see “Working
Sessions”), or as a thread running throughout all project activities. The five topical lenses are
described below.
* Redefining Poverty—This lens was and can be used in the future to explore definitions
of poverty for the purposes of expanding our thinking to encompass a broader set of
elements that more accurately describe conditions of impoverishment. Since definitions
lead to strategies, it suggests that if we are interested in changing the way we address
poverty, then we must change the way we define it.
* Community-Based Solutions—This lens was and can be used in the future to explore
ways to support, enable, and empower all communities to address issues of poverty
locally in ways that make sense for their unique circumstances.
* Family Economic Security—This lens was and can be used in the future to explore key
areas that impact families’ economic security, such as basic income (including work
supports), acquisition and growth of assets, mainstream goods and services, and public
policy.
* Maximizing Technology—This lens was and can be used in the future to explore ways
that technology can be used to more significantly impact individual and community
impoverishment.
* Leadership—This lens was and can be used in the future in two ways. One, as a thread
throughout each area of inquiry to understand what leadership and leadership
development work would be necessary to create and sustain the new approach envisioned
through each lens. Second, as the development of a group of advisors/champions who can
provide feedback and guidance on the construct and the strategies as they were
developed, and serve as ‘communication ambassadors’ in their spheres of influence.
Identification and Selection of an Overarching Change Model
12
Any time people are faced with large, complex, systemic endeavors, the natural thing—
and perhaps the only thing—we can do is to simplify it into manageable conceptual chunks.
Once more manageable conceptual chunks exist, manageable operational chunks are easier to
identify, develop, and sequence in a strategic way. The project team spent considerable time and
energy gathering information and trying to make sense of the many components of Mr. Carter’s
“vision.” In so doing, new components were brought to the surface and added to the emerging
construct. At some point during this process, the first key conceptual simplification emerged.
As the project team learned more and more about the components of the initial vision
during the early stages of its work, it became apparent that, although the topic was poverty, the
project was fundamentally about change. Realizing this was key, because it meant that the
initiative could draw upon a rich knowledge base of organizational and systems change in order
to form a high-level framework for a long-term change effort (Fig. 1). The rationale was that if
that knowledge base provided a framework for the fundamental characteristics of successful
change, and the initiative mapped its approach and activities to that framework, then the journey
into the unknown could at least be based on a known set of success factors. This discovery
provided a sense of confidence that, despite the real uncertainty involved in exploring uncharted
territory, the project could remain on track if its activities were mapped to this framework.
Figure 1. Overarching change model used to map current and future strategies for creating the
21st Century Model to Address Poverty.
While the framework of the overarching change model is useful in developing and
organizing strategies to a common, proven framework, it does, however, oversimplify what is a
complex, iterative, and messy process of change. No model, in its two dimensions, can represent
a complex human/systemic endeavor, and acknowledging that creating the 21st Century Model to
Address Poverty will be neither linear (as the arrows suggest), nor clean (as the boxes suggest)
was an important starting assumption.
13
Despite the limitations of the model, it can be used for both short- and long-term planning
at least until another construct emerges as a better alternative. For now, the framework provides
what is needed at this early stage of the work—an organizing principle upon which to plan
current and future work (see overlapping timeframes represented in the graphic). A description
of each of the model components is provided below; application of several of them within the
project and construct can be seen throughout this blueprint:
* Determine the Need for Change (Assess Current State)—Knowing that there is a need
for change is obviously a prerequisite for any change to occur. There must be something
about the current state of things that is no longer sufficient in some way. We need to
know enough about our starting point—current reality—to know that a change is needed
in the first place, and then build a more solid, specific case for change with data that
describes aspects of the current state in more detail.
* Determine Desired Future State (Gap Analysis!)—In order to plan for and implement
change, we have to know what we are working toward. The more descriptive we can be
in communicating the desired future we are seeking with the change, the more urgency
we create and the more clarity we have for understanding what needs to get done in order
to achieve it. Using what we know about the current state and what we envision as a
desired future, we can begin to identify strategies for filling the gap.
* Establish a Sense of Urgency—No change can occur without a sense of urgency.
Without urgency, it is difficult to pull people together to guide the change or to even
convince others to spend the time or energy needed to begin the work of change. Urgency
is needed to counteract the sources of complacency—the force behind keeping things the
same—such as the absence of a visible crisis, structures that focus people on narrow
goals, too many visible resources, too much “happy talk,” and human nature of engaging
in denial, especially when people are already busy and stressed.
* Create the Guiding Coalition—No one individual has the influence, stamina,
knowledge, skills, time, etc. to create the change or to monitor progress toward it. A
group of people with enough position power, expertise, credibility, and leadership must
be mobilized as a team to carry the change through all of the inevitable obstacles and
forces of inertia.
* Develop the Change Strategy—The strategies that will create the actual change are
developed based on the analysis of the gap between the current state of ‘what is’ and
desired future state of ‘what could be.’ Areas for potential strategy development include
the work itself, behaviors, systems, structures, customers, culture, etc. It is important to
develop at least some ‘quick win’ strategies to demonstrate that the endeavor is worth the
effort and to create commitment for continuing.
* Communicate the Change Strategy—While a great vision can serve a useful purpose if
it is only understood by a few key people, its real power is unleashed only when many
stakeholders have a shared understanding of its goals and direction. Communicating the
vision and strategy simply and clearly in multiple venues is key to creating a shared
14
understanding among the very people who will further develop, create, and implement
the change.
* Empower Broad-Based Action—Existing systems or structures that may have made
perfect sense in the pre-change environment often emerge as obstacles during the change
process. Empowering broad-based action means eliminating those obstacles, changing
systems or structures that undermine the change, and encouraging risk taking and
nontraditional ideas, activities, and actions.
* Consolidate Gains/Produce More Change—Once the change process is well underway,
its progress starts to shake things loose enough to create more change. The credibility
gained with each element of progress can be used to begin aligning more systems,
structures, and policies with the vision than first attempted. In addition to the new
projects these consolidations spawn, new people are added to the mix, creating more
intellectual and emotional energy toward the vision.
* Anchor New Approaches in Culture—If all else has occurred with relative success, the
new approaches, behaviors, etc. brought about by the change begin to anchor themselves
into the culture. This only occurs if the new ways of doing things work and provide
results superior to the old ways.
* Evaluate Change—Evaluating the change simply means knowing the extent to which
the change has produced the results sought. It is important to consider this early on so
that baseline data can be gathered to compare with the data to be collected after the
change strategies have been implemented.
Development of the Theoretical Construct
Understanding the project as an effort to develop a construct that could be used to
establish a long-term, sustainable social change movement, and knowing that the many
dimensions of the initial vision made it difficult for others to digest or to repeat for purposes of
action, the project team set about refining and organizing the various components into a single
theoretical construct (see Chapter 3: Theoretical Construct). The process of sorting, organizing,
and refining the individual pieces resulted in a construct with the following components:
* Mission—what Creating the 21st Century Model to Address Poverty is meant to do,
* Vision—to what end,
* Imperatives—why it should be done, and
* Principles—on what foundation it should be built.
These high-level construct components correspond to the overarching change model
elements of Determine the Need for Change (Assess Current State), Determine Desired Future
(Gap Analysis), and Establish a Sense of Urgency.
15
Development of Research Strategy and Products
A key activity of the first year’s work was to ground planned and future work in the
current state of ‘what is.’ Recognizing that a wealth of primary research in the topic of poverty
already exists, the goal of this activity was to tap into it to provide the initiative with a reputable
environmental scan of what is known. The research activities were organized around the areas of
inquiry provided by the topical lenses Mr. Carter had chosen (see “Identification of Topical
Lenses”) and the resulting products were used as:





Short theme papers in each area of inquiry to inform and ground the initial working
sessions (see “Working Sessions”) in “what is,”
Key questions for discussion in the working sessions,
The basis for a presentation of the current state relative to the topical lens of each of
the working sessions,
Comprehensive, stand-alone environmental scan products in each area of inquiry to
ground the overall initiative, and
“Hybrid papers” in each of the areas of inquiry that provide the key themes, along
with the supporting details (Appendix B).
The research activity corresponds to the overarching change model elements of
Determine the Need for Change (Assess Current State) and Establish a Sense of Urgency.
Working Sessions
As the research and theoretical construct were being developed, a strategy was developed
to convene working sessions in which people from a variety of backgrounds and sectors could
bring their expertise to bear toward creating a fundamentally different model for thinking about
and addressing poverty. Four sessions were developed and convened around the topical lenses of
Redefining Poverty, Community-Based Solutions, Family Economic Security, and Maximizing
Technology (see Appendix C for specific session descriptions). These sessions would:



Serve as the first opportunity to begin the change “conversation” with a broader
participant group.
Serve as the first opportunity to test the draft theoretical construct with stakeholders
from various sectors and worldviews and get their feedback.
Be specifically designed as working sessions wherein a small number of people from
various sectors would engage in strategic discussions and, in so doing, advance the
work of the initiative. Success for all of the sessions was defined as walking away
with:
o A set of components that describe the desired future relative to the session
topic.
o An understanding of what needs to change to realize the desired future.
o A start on specific strategies that will get us there.
o Some kindred souls in this effort moving forward who can help make real
change.
16
o Use a common design, aligned with the overarching change model (see next
bullet), to provide consistent and comparable results.
o Solicit ideas for a desired future, identify gaps between the current reality and
that desired future, and to create a brainstormed list of potential strategies that
could be undertaken to begin filling the gap, all of which would be used to
inform this blueprint for change.
The goals of the session described above correspond to the overarching change model
components of Determine the Need for Change (Assess Current State), Determine Desired
Future State (Gap Analysis!), Establish a Sense of Urgency, Create the Guiding Coalition, and
Develop the Change Strategy.
Since these sessions were designed as working sessions, the number of participants was
limited to 18-25 for each session. While the final numbers were to remain limited, the goal was
to invite participants from a wide variety of sectors. Therefore, a wide net was cast to identify
participants that have significant influence, expertise, and knowledge.
Potential session participants were identified using the following methods:




A web site was established to collect recommendations from various groups and venues
visited by Mr. Carter. Ultimately, over 500 names were submitted.
The project team broadly communicated the existence of the web site and encouraged his
network to make recommendations there.
The project staff, with its collectively broad professional networks, was asked to
nominate potential invitees and to encourage their respective networks to nominate
potential participants.
Mr. Carter and the lead subject matter expert from the project staff reviewed the
compiled lists and decided on a pool of approximately 30 people from which to pull the
invitees.
The working sessions were held in late summer 2004 and met all of the project team’s
criteria for success. This blueprint draws on much of the learning from the sessions.
Compilation of Working Session Proceedings
Proceedings from each of the working sessions were compiled and served as the official
records of the convenings (Appendix E). These records were distributed to participants, who
were asked to review the records for accuracy and to provide feedback if what was captured was
not an accurate reflection of what happened during the session. The records serve as reference
and launching pad for potential future collaboration with participants. They also provide raw
material to mine for developing this blueprint and for specific insights, strategies, and
enhancements to the conceptual framework that can be incorporated into future plans.
17
APPENDIX B: POVERTY PROGRAMS SUMMARY AND MATRIX
The Poverty Program Matrix is a map of the complex and fragmented landscape of
federal programs that provide assistance to low-income individuals, families and communities.
An overview matrix of programs begins on page 5 and the funding level matrix, by program,
begins on page 41. Depending on how one defines “anti-poverty” programs, there are as many as
800 federal programs that, in some way, assist poor and near-poor populations. The Poverty
Program Matrix Project initially identified those programs through a keyword search of the
Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA). Cross-references with other sources,
including authorizing legislation, National Association for State Community Services Programs
annual reports, and Benefits.gov, an internet-based database of public benefits programs, yielded
a significantly smaller list of programs.
A final review identified 125 programs with a stated purpose in legislation or other
documents that includes assistance to low-income populations. Programs not in the Matrix
include those that assist populations with characteristics that might result in or from poverty, if
the programs do not specifically target low-income individuals, families or communities for
assistance. In addition, programs that address circumstances that may disproportionately affect
low-income families are not included if those programs do not specifically aim services at poor
and near poor populations.
For example, programs that provide assistance only to rural communities and Native
Americans are excluded from the Matrix, even though many rural and native communities
experience problems associated with poverty. In addition, the following types of services and
programs are not included in the Matrix:
 Child welfare services
 Child support enforcement programs
 Programs for people with disabilities
 Programs serving seniors
 Veterans programs
 Disaster relief programs
 Programs addressing juvenile delinquency and gang prevention
 Youth development programs
The 125 programs in the Matrix are administered by 23 agencies within the following 13
federal departments:
 Appalachian Regional Commission
 Corporation for National and Community Service
 Department of Agriculture
 Department of Education
 Department of Energy
 Department of Health and Human Services
 Department of Homeland Security
 Department of Housing and Urban Development
18






Department of Labor
Department of the Treasury
Department of Transportation
National Credit Union Administration
Small Business Administration
Social Security Administration
Because there are numerous agencies and departments administering anti-poverty programs,
there are numerous administrative and funding rules, reporting requirements, and information
systems. These discrete systems can impede efforts to integrate and coordinate program
eligibility and service delivery and add to the already complex landscape of programs
encountered by poor and near-poor families and communities.
In FY 2005, agencies will spend more than $387,000,000,000 on low-income assistance
programs and services. Fifty-six programs spend their funds through formula grants; 46 through
categorical (project) grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements; and 12 through direct
payments to individuals and private institutions. Other funding mechanisms include loans; loan
guarantees; the sale, exchange or donation of property or goods; tax credits, advisory services
and conferences. Agencies also fund the use of federal personnel to perform certain tasks for the
benefit of communities and individuals. Several of the programs use a combination of funding
mechanisms to provide assistance.
Recipients of the funds include state, local, and territorial governmental agencies;
community-based nonprofit and for-profit organizations; coalitions of public and private
organizations; elementary, secondary and postsecondary educational institutions; and individuals
or households. Each program in the Poverty Program Matrix has its own rules regarding the flow
of funds to recipients, beginning with the federal agency authorized to administer the program. In
some instances, funds flow directly to state agencies; in other instances, they must go through the
governor’s office and then to the state agency. The funds may support state-administered
programs, may be allocated to local governmental agencies, or they may be distributed through
grants, contracts or cooperative agreements to private non-profit or for-profit organizations.
Depending upon the program, the federal agency, state, or locality may determine administrative
rules, reporting requirements, eligibility requirements and systems, etc.
Differences in funding streams and program rules are common even in programs that are
closely linked by target population and services. For instance, Food Stamps, Medicaid and
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) provide assistance to many of the same
beneficiaries. Despite efforts at the federal and state levels to coordinate and simplify eligibility
systems, the funding stream for each program differs. Food Stamp administrative funds are
provided to states to help defray the costs of running the program; Food Stamp benefit funds go
through the state to eligible beneficiaries, as determined by the federal government. Medicaid is
funded jointly by the federal government and the states; federal funds are provided to states
based upon a state plan. States reimburse providers for health services received by beneficiaries
who meet state eligibility guidelines. TANF funds are distributed to the state as block grants and
beneficiaries receive assistance based upon state-determined eligibility requirements which may
or may not be consistent with the state-determined requirements for Medicaid.
19
Beneficiaries of each of the other programs in the Matrix also are identified by eligibility
criteria specific to each program. In some instances, the federal government has coordinated
eligibility criteria across programs to ease access to services. In most cases, however, criteria
differ among the programs. As a result, many of the same families who may confront
dissimilarities in eligibility criteria and determination procedures in the TANF, Medicaid and
Food Stamp programs, may have to navigate inconsistent, and often complicated, criteria to
receive housing, utility, child care and other types of assistance.
For example, according to program data collected for the Poverty Program Matrix, lowincome standards vary among housing assistance programs. Furthermore, complex and confusing
eligibility criteria can be an additional roadblock to the receipt of these important benefits.
Community Development Block Grants are intended to develop viable urban communities and
provide decent housing and a suitable living environment for low and moderate income families.
For non-metropolitan areas, low and moderate income is generally defined as 80 percent of the
median income for nonmetropolitan areas of the state, adjusted for family size. For metropolitan
areas, low-and moderate-income is generally defined as a member of a family having an income
equal to or less than the Section 8 low-income limit established by HUD. Section 8 Housing
Choice Vouchers, which are intended to aid very low income families in obtaining decent, safe,
and sanitary rental housing defines “very low income families” as those with an income that does
not exceed 50 percent of the median income for the area as determined by the Secretary with
adjustments for smaller and larger families. In some instances, lower income families with an
income that does not exceed 80 percent of the median income for the area, adjusted for smaller
and larger families, are eligible.
A slightly different definition of low-income is used in the HOME Investment Partnerships
Program (HOME Program). The HOME Program is intended to expand the supply of affordable
housing, particularly rental housing, for low and very low income families. For rental housing, at
least 90 percent of HOME funds must benefit low and very low income families at 60 percent of
the area median income; the remaining ten percent must benefit families below 80 percent of the
area median.
Assistance to homeowners and homebuyers must be to families below 80 percent of the area
median.
In addition, many families may need assistance with energy costs. The Low Income Home
Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) makes grants to states and other jurisdictions to assist
eligible households to meet the costs of home energy.
Weatherization Assistance for Low-Income Persons helps insulate the dwellings of low
income persons, particularly the elderly, persons with disabilities, families with children, high
residential energy users, and households with a high energy burden, in order to conserve needed
energy and to aid those persons least able to afford higher utility costs. LIHEAP provides
assistance to households with incomes up to the greater of 150 percent of the poverty level or 60
percent of the State median income. States may set the eligibility at a lower level. To be eligible
for weatherization assistance households must have a combined income that is at or below 125
20
percent of the poverty level. To improve program coordination, states have the option to provide
weatherization assistance to all homes that receive energy assistance. However, many of these
same low-income households would not be eligible for housing assistance given the lower
eligibility standards for the HUD programs. Therefore, as a result of the disconnected nature of
these programs, critical housing needs may remain unmet.
The food and nutrition, education, child care, workforce development, energy, health care,
economic development and housing programs documented in the Poverty Program Matrix have a
common objective--to improve the lives of low-income families and communities. The Matrix
illustrates, however, that they lack a common path to achieve that objective. For example, they
have disparate funding mechanisms, applicant eligibility, funds allocation processes, and
beneficiary eligibility criteria. In some instances these differences result in conflicting
requirements for administering agencies, service providers, and beneficiaries. More often, they
result in duplicative services, service gaps, and barriers to service delivery that compromise
efforts to move individuals, families and communities out of poverty.
21
Overview -- Agency, Program, Program Purpose and Beneficiaries
[Note: this same data is also available in Microsoft Excel file – including all three tables
below, merged]
Agriculture
Program Name
Community Food
Projects
Agri
Agency
COOPERATIVE
STATE
RESEARCH,
EDUCATION,
AND
EXTENSION
SERVICE
FOOD AND
NUTRITION
SERVICE
Child and Adult
Care Food
Program
Agri
Dept
FOOD AND
NUTRITION
SERVICE
Commodity
Supplemental
Food Program
Purpose
To support the development of
community food projects designed
to meet the food needs of lowincome people; increase the selfreliance of communities in
providing Low-Income people for
their own needs; and promote
comprehensive responses to local
food, farm, and nutrition issues.
To assist states to initiate and
maintain nonprofit food service
programs for children, elderly or
impaired adults in nonresidential
day care facilities and children in
emergency shelters.
To improve the health and
nutritional status of low-income
pregnant, postpartum and
breastfeeding women, infants, and
children up to age of 6, and elderly
persons through the donation of
supplemental foods.
22
Eligible Beneficiaries
Low-income people
Approved institutions providing
nonresidential day care services and
emergency shelters which provide
shelter and meals to homeless
families are eligible. Eligible public
and nonprofit private organizations
may include day care centers,
outside-school-hours care centers,
settlement houses, family and group
day care homes, Head Start
programs, and institutions providing
day care services to children with
disabilities. Private for-profit centers
may also participate if they receive
compensation under Title XX for at
least 25 percent of the enrolled
children or 25 percent of their
licensed capacity, whichever is less.
To be certified as eligible to receive
supplemental foods, each applicant
must be: (a) categorically eligible as
an infant, child up to age 6, pregnant,
postpartum or breastfeeding woman,
or elderly person 60 years of age or
older, residing in an area where the
program operates; (b) for women,
infants, and children, income eligible
under existing federal, state, or local
food, health, or welfare programs for
low-income persons; for elderly with
income at or below 130 percent of
federal poverty income guidelines;
and (c) at state agency discretion, at
nutritional risk as determined by a
competent health professional at the
local agency.
Agri
Purpose
To improve the diets of school and
preschool children; the elderly;
needy persons in charitable
institutions; other individuals in
need of food assistance; and, to
increase the market for
domestically produced foods
acquired under surplus removal or
price support operations.
Agri
Program Name
Food Donation/
Distribution
Commodity
Assistance
Program)
FOOD AND
NUTRITION
SERVICE
Food Stamp
Program
Agri
Agency
FOOD AND
NUTRITION
SERVICE
FOOD AND
NUTRITION
SERVICE
National School
Lunch Program
To assist States, through cash
grants and food donations, in
making the school lunch program
available to school children and to
encourage the domestic
consumption of nutritious
agricultural commodities.
Agri
Dept
FOOD AND
NUTRITION
SERVICE
Nutrition
Assistance For
Puerto Rico
A cash grant alternative to the
Food Stamp Program to improve
diets of needy persons residing in
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
To improve diets of low-income
households by increasing their
food purchasing ability.
23
Eligible Beneficiaries
Households in areas which
participate in the Emergency Food
Assistance Program (TEFAP) must
meet eligibility requirements
established by the State. All children
in schools, child care institutions, and
summer camps which participate in
the program may benefit from food
donations. Foods donated to
charitable institutions (on the basis of
needy persons served) and to
nutrition programs for the elderly,
may be used for the benefit of all
served.
Households may participate if they
are found by local welfare officials to
be in need of food assistance.
Eligibility is based on family size,
income, and level of resources. Ablebodied adults with certain limited
exceptions must meet a work
requirement.
In schools offering the program,
lunch is served free to children who
are determined by local school
authorities to have household income
levels at or below 130, and at a
reduced price to children from
households with incomes higher than
130 but at or below 185, percent of
the poverty line respectively.
Children from households certified to
receive food stamps, the Food
Distribution Program on Indian
Reservations, in most cases,
Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families (formerly Aid to Families
With Dependent Children) and some
children in Head Start Programs are
automatically eligible for free meals.
Low-income individuals and families
are eligible for benefits as
determined by the Commonwealth.
Agrii
Agri
Purpose
To assist states in providing a
nutritious nonprofit breakfast
service for school children,
through cash grants and food
donations.
FOOD AND
NUTRITION
SERVICE
Special Milk
Program for
Children
Agri
Program Name
School Breakfast
Program
FOOD AND
NUTRITION
SERVICE
Special
Supplemental
Nutrition
Program for
Women, Infants,
and Children
To provide, low-income pregnant,
breastfeeding and postpartum
women, infants, and children to
age five determined to be at
nutritional risk, at no cost,
supplemental nutritious foods,
nutrition education, and referrals to
health care providers.
Agri
Agency
FOOD AND
NUTRITION
SERVICE
FOOD AND
NUTRITION
SERVICE
State
Administrative
Expenses for
Child Nutrition
Agri
Dept
FOOD AND
NUTRITION
SERVICE
State
Administrative
Matching Grants
for Food Stamp
Program
To provide each State agency with
funds for its administrative
expenses in supervising and giving
technical assistance to local
schools, school districts and
institutions in their conduct of
Child Nutrition Programs. State
agencies that administer the dis
[sic]
To provide Federal financial aid to
State agencies for costs incurred to
operate the Food Stamp Program.
To provide subsidies to schools
and institutions to encourage the
consumption of fluid milk by
children.
24
Eligible Beneficiaries
In schools offering the program,
breakfast is served free to children
who are determined by local school
authorities to have household income
levels at or below 130, or at a
reduced price to children from
households with incomes higher than
130 and at or below 185, percent of
the income eligibility guidelines,
respectively. Meals served to nonneedy children also get cash
assistance. Children from households
certified to receive food stamps, the
Food Distribution Program on Indian
Reservations, Temporary Assistance
for Needy Families (formerly known
as Aid to Families with Dependent
Children) and some children in Head
Start Programs are automatically
eligible for free meals.
All children attending schools and
institutions in which the Special Milk
Program is in operation may
participate in the program.
Pregnant, breastfeeding and
postpartum women, infants, and
children up to 5 years of age are
eligible if: 1) they are individually
determined by a competent
professional to be in need of the
special supplemental foods supplied
by the program because of nutritional
risk; and 2) meet an income standard,
or receive or have certain family
members that receive benefits under
the Food Stamp, Medicaid or
Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families Program. They must also
reside in the State in which benefits
are received.
State agencies responsible for the
conduct of Child Nutrition Programs,
and agencies responsible for the
distribution of USDA donated
commodities to schools, including
agencies in the U.S. Territories.
Agreements are between FNS and
states
Agri
Agri
FOOD AND
NUTRITION
SERVICE
Agri
FOOD AND
NUTRITION
SERVICE
Agri
Agency
FOOD AND
NUTRITION
SERVICE
FOOD AND
NUTRITION
SERVICE
Education
Dept
ASSISTANT
SECRETARY
FOR
VOCATIONAL
AND ADULT
EDUCATION
Program Name
Summer Food
Service Program
for Children
Purpose
To assist States, through grants-inaid and other means, to conduct
nonprofit food service programs
for low-income children during the
summer months and at other
approved times, when schools are
out of session or are closed for
vacation.
The Emergency
Food Assistance
Program
(TEFAP)Administrative
Costs
The Emergency
Food Assistance
Program
(TEFAP)- Food
Commodities
WIC Farmers'
Market Nutrition
Program
(FMNP)
To make funds available to States
for processing, storage and
distribution costs incurred by State
and local agencies in providing
food assistance to needy persons.
Community
Technology
Centers
To create or expand community
technology centers that will
provide disadvantaged residents of
economically distressed urban and
rural communities with access to
information technology and the
training to use it.
Eligible Beneficiaries
A service institution that conducts a
regularly scheduled program for
children from areas in which poor
economic conditions exist is eligible
to participate in the program,
including public or private nonprofit
school food authorities; residential
summer camps; colleges or
universities operating the National
Youth Sports Program during the
months of May to September; and
units of local, municipal, county, or
state governments. Service
institutions which develop food
service programs for children during
school vacations under a continuous
school calendar may also participate.
Public or private non-profit
organizations which provide food
assistance to the needy.
To make food commodities
available to States for use in
providing food assistance to needy
persons.
Needy individuals. They may be
unemployed, welfare recipients, or
low-income.
(1) To provide fresh, nutritious
unprepared produce (such as fruits
and vegetables) to low-income, atrisk women, infants, and children
from farmers' markets; and (2) to
expand the awareness and use of
farmers' markets and increase sales
at such markets.
WIC participants (i.e., pregnant,
postpartum or breastfeeding women;
infants over 4 months of age; and
children up to 5 years of age) and (at
the state's discretion) those who are
on a waiting list to receive WIC
benefits are eligible to receive FMNP
coupons. State agencies may also
designate subcategories of WIC
participants, e.g., pregnant and
breastfeeding women only, to be
FMNP recipients.
Residents of all ages within the
communities served by the
technology centers will benefit.
25
Educ
FEDERAL
STUDENT AID
Program Name
Federal Pell
Grant Program
Purpose
To provide eligible undergraduate
postsecondary students who have
demonstrated financial need with
grant assistance to help meet
educational expenses.
Educ
FEDERAL
STUDENT AID
Federal Perkins
Loan Program
Federal Capital
Contributions
To provide low interest loans to
eligible postsecondary students
with demonstrated financial need
to help meet educational expenses.
Educ
Dept
Agency
OFFICE OF
ASSISTANT
SECRETARY
FOR
POSTSECONDA
RY EDUCATION
Leveraging
Educational
Assistance
Partnership
TRIO
Educational
Opportunity
Centers
To provide grants to the States for
use in programs of financial
assistance to eligible
postsecondary students. To provide
information on financial and
academic assistance available for
qualified adults desiring to pursue
a program of postsecondary
education and to assist them in
applying for admission to
institutions of postsecondary
education. This is one of six TRIO
programs that include outreach and
support targeted to serve and assist
low-income, first-generation
college students, and students with
disabilities to progress through the
academic pipeline from middle
school to postbaccalaureate
programs.
26
Eligible Beneficiaries
Undergraduate students that are U.S.
citizens or eligible noncitizens and
meet financial need criteria. Students
must be: regular students in an
eligible program and enrolled in
institutions of higher education,
making satisfactory academic
progress. Incarcerated students,
except those incarcerated in local
penal facilities, are ineligible.
Students must sign a statement of
educational purpose, not owe a
refund on a Title IV grant, and not be
in default on a Title IV loan. Eligible
males that are at least 18 years old
and born after December 31, 1959,
can receive aid only if they have
registered with the Selective Service.
Undergraduate, graduate, or
professional students enrolled or
accepted for enrollment as regular
students in an eligible program, are
maintaining satisfactory academic
progress in accordance with the
standards and practices of the
institution, have financial need, do
not owe a refund on a Title IV grant,
are not in default on a Title IV loan,
file a statement of educational
purpose, file a statement of
registration compliance (Selective
Service) and meet citizen/resident
requirements. Postsecondary
education students substantial
financial need.
Persons residing in the target area
who need one or more of the services
provided by the project in order to
pursue a program of postsecondary
education and who desire to pursue
or who are pursuing a program of
postsecondary education. Two-thirds
of the participants must be lowincome individuals who are also
potential first-generation college
students. Project participants must be
at least nineteen years old.
Educ
Program Name
TRIO McNair
PostBaccalaureate
Achievement
Educ
Agency
OFFICE OF
ASSISTANT
SECRETARY
FOR
POSTSECONDA
RY EDUCATION
OFFICE OF
ASSISTANT
SECRETARY
FOR
POSTSECONDA
RY EDUCATION
TRIO Student
Support Services
Educ
Dept
OFFICE OF
ASSISTANT
SECRETARY
FOR
POSTSECONDA
RY EDUCATION
TRIO Talent
Search
Purpose
To provide grants for institutions
of higher education to prepare lowincome, first generation college
students and students
underrepresented in graduate
education for graduate study. This
is one of six TRIO programs that
include outreach and support
targeted to serve and assist lowincome, first-generation college
students, and students with
disabilities to progress through the
academic pipeline from middle
school to postbaccalaureate
programs.
To provide supportive services to
disadvantaged college students to
enhance their potential for
successfully completing the
postsecondary education program
in which they are enrolled and
increase their transfer rates from 2year to 4-year institutions. To
foster an institutional climate
supportive of the success of
disadvantaged college students.
This is one of six TRIO programs
that include outreach and support
targeted to serve and assist lowincome, first-generation college
students, and students with
disabilities to progress through the
academic pipeline from middle
school to postbaccalaureate
programs.
To identify disadvantaged youths
with potential for postsecondary
education; to encourage them in
continuing in and graduating from
secondary school and in enrolling
in programs of postsecondary
education; to publicize the
availability of student financial aid;
and to increase the number of
secondary and postsecondary
school dropouts who reenter an
educational program. This is one of
six TRIO programs that include
outreach and support targeted to
serve and assist low income, firstgeneration college students, and
students with disabilities to
progress through the academic
pipeline from middle school to
postbaccalaureate programs.
27
Eligible Beneficiaries
Low-income first generation college
students or students from groups
underrepresented in graduate
education that are enrolled in a
degree program at an eligible
institution of higher education.
Low-income, first generation college
students or disabled students who are
enrolled or accepted for enrollment at
the institution which is the recipient
of the grant and who are in need of
academic support in order to
successfully pursue a program of
postsecondary education. At least
two-thirds of the project participants
must be disabled or must be lowincome individuals who are first
generation college students. The
remaining participants must be
disabled, low-income individuals, or
first generation college students.
One-third of the disabled participants
must be low-income.
Individuals residing in the target area
or attending a target school who have
potential for education at the
postsecondary level and who can
benefit from one or more of the
services provided by the project.
Two-thirds must be low-income
individuals who are also potential
first generation college students.
Project participants must be between
11 and 27 years old.
Educ
Educ
Program Name
TRIO Upward
Bound
OFFICE OF
ELEMENTARY
AND
SECONDARY
EDUCATION
Education for
Homeless
Children and
Youth
Educ
Agency
OFFICE OF
ASSISTANT
SECRETARY
FOR
POSTSECONDA
RY EDUCATION
OFFICE OF
ELEMENTARY
AND
SECONDARY
EDUCATION
Even Start
Migrant
Education
Educ
Dept
OFFICE OF
ELEMENTARY
AND
SECONDARY
EDUCATION
Even Start State
Educational
Agencies
Purpose
To generate skills and motivation
necessary for success in education
beyond high school among lowincome and potential firstgeneration college students and
veterans. The goal of the program
is to increase the academic
performance and motivational
levels of eligible enrollees so that
such persons may complete
secondary school and successfully
pursue postsecondary educational
programs. This is one of six TRIO
programs that include outreach and
support targeted to serve and assist
low-income, first-generation
college students, and students with
disabilities to progress through the
academic pipeline from middle
school to postbaccalaureate
program.
To ensure that homeless children
and youth have equal access to the
same free, appropriate public
education as other children; to
provide activities for and services
to ensure that these children enroll
in, attend, and achieve success in
school; to establish or designate an
office in each state educational
agency (SEA) for the coordination
of education for homeless children
and youth; to develop and
implement programs for school
personnel to heighten awareness of
specific problems of homeless
children and youth; and to provide
grants to local educational agencies
(LEAs).
To improve the educational
opportunities of migrant families
through family literacy programs
that integrate early childhood
education, adult literacy or adult
basic education, and parenting
education.
To help break the cycle of poverty
and illiteracy and improve the
educational opportunities of lowincome families, by integrating
early childhood education, adult
literacy or adult basic education,
and parenting education into a
unified family literacy program.
28
Eligible Beneficiaries
Low-income individuals and
potential first generation college
students who have a need for
academic support in order to
successfully pursue a program of
postsecondary education. Two-thirds
of the participants must be low
income individuals who are also
potential first generation college
students. The remaining participants
must be either low-income
individuals or potential first
generation college students. Except
for veterans, who can be served
regardless of age, project participants
must be between 13 and 19 years old
and have completed the eighth grade
but have not entered the twelfth
grade.
Homeless children and youth in
elementary and secondary schools
(and homeless preschool children and
the parents of homeless children).
Parents who are migratory
agricultural workers or fishers and
their children, from birth through age
7. Parents must also be eligible for
participation under the Adult
Education Act or be within the
State's compulsory school attendance
age range.
Parents eligible for participation
under the Adult Education Act and
their children aged birth through
seven. Families with a low income
level and low level of adult literacy
or English language proficiency, or
with other need-related indicators.
Educ
OFFICE OF
ELEMENTARY
AND
SECONDARY
EDUCATION
Program Name
Even StartStatewide Family
Literacy
Program
Educ
OFFICE OF
ELEMENTARY
AND
SECONDARY
EDUCATION
Migrant
Education
Coordination
Program
Educ
OFFICE OF
ELEMENTARY
AND
SECONDARY
EDUCATION
Migrant
Education State
Grant Program
Educ
OFFICE OF
ELEMENTARY
AND
SECONDARY
EDUCATION
Educ
Dept
Agency
OFFICE OF
ELEMENTARY
AND
SECONDARY
EDUCATION
Title I Grants to
Local
Educational
Agencies(Title I
Basic,
Concentration,
and Targeted
Grants)
Twenty-First
Century
Community
Learning
Centers
Purpose
To plan and implement statewide
family literacy initiatives
consistent with the purpose of
Even Start that coordinate and
integrate existing federal, state, and
local literacy resources, including
funds available under the Adult
Education Act, Head Start, Even
Start, and the Family Support Act
of 1988.
To encourage the interstate and
intrastate coordination of migrant
education including consortium
arrangements to reduce the
administrative costs of state
educational agencies (SEAs)
receiving Title I Migrant Education
Program funds.
To assist states to ensure that
migratory children have the
opportunity to meet the same
challenging state content and
performance standards that all
children are expected to meet.
To help local education agencies
(LEAs) and schools improve the
teaching and learning of children
failing, or most at-risk of failing, to
meet challenging state academic
standards.
To create community learning
centers that provide academic
enrichment opportunities for
children, particularly students who
attend high-poverty and lowperforming schools. The program
helps students meet state and local
student standards in core academic
subjects; offers students a broad
array of enrichment activities; and
offers literacy and other
educational services to the families
of participating children.
29
Eligible Beneficiaries
The state education office or agency.
Migratory children of migratory
agricultural workers or migratory
fishers.
Children, ages 0 through 21, of
migratory agricultural workers or of
migratory fishers, including children
(i.e. persons under age 21) who are
workers themselves and the spouses
of such workers, who have moved
across school district lines during the
past 36 months to obtain temporary
or seasonal employment in
agriculture, fishing, or related food
processing activities.
Children who are failing, or most at
risk of failing, to meet challenging
state academic standards.
Residents of all ages within the
communities served by the learning
centers.
Educ
Educ
Program Name
Advanced
Placement
Program
OFFICE OF
INNOVATION
AND
IMPROVEMENT
Parental
Assistance
Information
Centers
Educ
Agency
OFFICE OF
INNOVATION
AND
IMPROVEMENT
OFFICE OF
INNOVATION
AND
IMPROVEMENT
Star Schools
Educ
Dept
OFFICE OF THE
ASSISTANT
SECRETARY
FOR
POSTSECONDA
RY EDUCATION
Child Care
Access Means
Parents in
School
Purpose
To support state and local efforts to
increase access to advance
placement classes and tests for
low-income students and to cover
part or all of the cost of test fees
for low-income students enrolled
in advanced placement courses.
To provide grants to nonprofit
organizations and nonprofit
organizations in consortia with
local education agencies (LEAs) to
assist them in establishing parental
information and resource centers.
These centers strive to: (1) assist
parents in helping their children to
meet state and local standards; (2)
obtain information about the range
of programs, services, and
resources available nationally and
locally for parents and school
personnel who work with parents;
(3) help parents use the technology
applied in their children's
education; (4) plan, implement,
and fund activities for parents that
coordinate the education of their
children with other programs that
serve their children and families;
and (5) coordinate and integrate
early childhood programs with
school-age programs.
To encourage improved instruction
in mathematics, science, and
foreign languages as well as other
subjects, such as literacy skills and
vocational education. To serve
underserved populations, including
the disadvantaged, illiterate,
limited- English proficient, and
individuals with disabilities.
Grants are made to
telecommunication partnerships for
telecommunications facilities and
equipment, educational and
instructional programming, and
technical assistance in the use of
such facilities and instructional
programming.
To support the participation of
low-income parents in
postsecondary education through
the provision of campus-based
child care services.
30
Eligible Beneficiaries
Low-income individuals who (1) are
enrolled in an advanced placement
class; and (2) plan to take an
advanced placement test.
Preschool and school-aged children
and their parents.
Elementary and secondary school
students and teachers.
Low-income students enrolled in
postsecondary programs.
Educ
Agency
EDUCATION
OFFICE OF THE
ASSISTANT
SECRETARY
FOR
POSTSECONDA
RY EDUCATION
Educ
Dept
OFFICE OF THE
ASSISTANT
SECRETARY
FOR
POSTSECONDA
RY EDUCATION
Program Name
Gaining Early
Awareness and
Readiness for
Undergraduate
Programs
Teacher Quality
Enhancement
Grants
Purpose
To encourage eligible entities to
provide or maintain a guarantee to
eligible low-income students who
obtain a secondary diploma (or its
recognized equivalent), of the
financial assistance necessary to
permit the students to attend an
institution of higher education; and
supports eligible entities in
providing additional counseling,
mentoring, academic support,
outreach, and supportive services
to elementary and middle schools,
and secondary school students who
are at risk of dropping out of
school; and information to students
and their parents about the
advantages of obtaining a
postsecondary education and the
college financing options for the
students and their parents.
To improve student achievement;
improve the quality of the current
and future teaching force by
improving the preparation of
prospective teachers and enhancing
professional development
activities; hold institutions of
higher education accountable for
preparing teachers who have the
necessary teaching skills and are
highly competent in the academic
content areas in which the teachers
plan to teach, such as mathematics,
science, English, foreign language,
history, economics, art, civics,
Government, and geography,
including training in the effective
uses of technology in the
classroom; and recruit highly
qualified individuals, including
individuals from other occupations,
into the teaching force.
31
Eligible Beneficiaries
Low-income students and students in
high poverty schools.
Students and communities within the
high need area.
Health and Human Services
Energy
Dept
Agency
OFFICE OF
ENERGY
EFFICIENCY
AND
RENEWABLE
ENERGY
ADMINISTRATI
ON FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
Program Name
Weatherization
Assistance for
Low-Income
Persons
Basic Center
Grants of the
Consolidated
Runaway and
Homeless Youth
Program
Purpose
To insulate the dwellings of lowincome persons, particularly the
elderly, persons with disabilities,
families with children, high
residential energy users, and
households with a high energy
burden, in order to conserve
needed energy and to aid those
persons least able to afford higher
utility costs. To insulate the
dwellings of low-income persons,
particularly the elderly, persons
with disabilities, families with
children, high residential energy
users, and households with a high
energy burden, in order to conserve
needed energy and to aid those
persons least able to afford higher
utility costs.
To establish or strengthen locally
controlled community-based
programs (outside of the law
enforcement, child welfare, mental
health and juvenile justice systems)
that address the immediate needs
of runaway and homeless youth
and their families. The goals and
objectives are to: alleviate
problems of runaway and homeless
youth; reunite youth with their
families and encourage the
resolution of intra-family problems
through counseling and other
services; strengthen family
relationships and encourage stable
living conditions for youth; and
help youth decide upon
constructive courses of action.
32
Eligible Beneficiaries
Low-income households (combined
income falls at or below 125 percent
of the poverty level). A State may
also elect to make all homes eligible
under the HHS Low-income Home
Energy Assistance Program
(LIHEAP) eligible for weatherization
assistance and may use either 150
percent of poverty or 60 percent of
State median income.
Runaway and homeless youth and
their families. Eligible youth are less
than 18 years of age and who are at
risk of separation from their family.
Homeless youth ages 18-21are
eligible for age appropriate services
or referrals.
HHS
Agency
ADMINISTRATI
ON FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
HHS
Dept
ADMINISTRATI
ON FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
Program Name
Child Care and
Development
Block Grant
Community Food
and Nutrition
Purpose
To make grants to states,
territories, tribes, and tribal
organizations for child care
assistance for low- income families
and to: (1) allow each state
maximum flexibility in developing
child care programs and policies
that best suit the needs of children
and parents within the state; (2)
promote parental choice to
empower working parents to make
their own decisions on the child
care that best suits their family's
needs; (3) encourage states to
provide consumer education
information to help parents make
informed choices about child care;
(4) assist states to provide child
care to parents trying to achieve
independence from public
assistance; and (5) assist states in
implementing the health, safety,
licensing, and registration
standards established in state
regulations.
To provide for community-based,
local, statewide and national
programs which: (1) coordinate
existing private and public food
assistance resources to better serve
low income populations, whenever
such coordination is determined to
be inadequate; (2) assist lowincome communities to identify
potential sponsors of child
nutrition programs and initiate new
programs in underserved or
unserved areas; and (3) develop
innovative approaches at the state
and local level to meet the
nutritional needs of low-income
individuals.
33
Eligible Beneficiaries
Children under age 13 (or, at the
option of the grantee, up to age 19, if
physically or mentally incapable of
self-care or under court supervision),
who reside with a family whose
income does not exceed 85 percent of
the State median income for a family
of the same size, and who reside with
a parent (or parents) who is working
or attending job training or
educational program; or are in need
of, or are receiving protective
services.
A project must be targeted to address
the needs of a specific segment of
low-income individuals or families.
HHS
Agency
ADMINISTRATI
ON FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
HHS
Dept
ADMINISTRATI
ON FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
Program Name
Community
Services Block
Grant
Education and
Prevention to
Reduce Sexual
Abuse of
Runaway,
Homeless and
Street Youth
(Street Outreach
Program)
Purpose
To provide assistance to states and
local communities, working
through a network of community
action agencies and other
neighborhood-based organizations,
for the reduction of poverty, the
revitalization of low-income
communities, and the
empowerment of low-income
families and individuals in rural
and urban areas to become fully
self-sufficient and to: (1) provide
services and activities having a
measurable and potential major
impact on causes of poverty in the
community or those areas of the
community where poverty is a
particularly acute problem; (2)
provide activities designed to assist
low income participants, including
the elderly poor, to secure and
retain meaningful employment;
attain an adequate education; make
better use of available income;
obtain and maintain adequate
housing and a suitable living
environment; obtain emergency
assistance through loans or grants
to meet immediate and urgent
individual and family needs,
including health services,
nutritious food, housing, and
employment-related assistance
To support nonprofit agencies in
providing street-based services to
runaway, homeless and street
youth, who have been subjected to,
or are at risk of being subjected to,
sexual abuse, prostitution, or
sexual exploitation.
34
Eligible Beneficiaries
Low-income individuals and
families. When a state determines
that it serves the objectives of the
block grant, it may revise the income
limit, not to exceed 125 percent of
the official poverty line.
Runaway and homeless street youth.
HHS
Program Name
Head Start
HHS
Agency
ADMINISTRATI
ON FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
ADMINISTRATI
ON FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
Job
Opportunities for
Low-Income
Individuals
HHS
Dept
ADMINISTRATI
ON FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
Low Income
Home Energy
Assistance
Purpose
To promote school readiness by
enhancing the social and cognitive
development of low-income
children, including children on
federally recognized reservations
and children of migratory farm
workers, through the provision of
comprehensive health, educational,
nutritional, social and other
services; and to involve parents in
their children's learning and to help
parents make progress toward their
educational, literacy and
employment goals.
To award funds to organizations
that will create new permanent
employment opportunities for
individuals receiving Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF) benefits and other
individuals. Program funds are
awarded in four project designs
priority areas: (1) expansion of
existing businesses through
technical and financial assistance;
(2) self employment/ microenterprise; (3) new business
ventures; (4) non-traditional
employment initiatives that lead to
economic self-sufficiency for
eligible participants.
To make grants available to states
and other jurisdictions to assist
eligible households to meet the
costs of home energy.
Supplemental Leveraging
Incentive Funds may be awarded
to reward states and other
jurisdictions that provide
additional benefits and services to
LIHEAP-eligible households
beyond what could be provided
with federal funds. To provide
training and technical assistance to
states and other jurisdictions
administering the LIHEAP block
grant program.
35
Eligible Beneficiaries
Head Start/Early Head Start
programs are for children from birth
up to the age when the child enters
the school system. Head Start
programs only serve pre-school age
children. (i.e. children three or four
years old); Early Head Start
programs serve children from birth
through age three. No less than 10
percent of the total enrollment
opportunities in each Head Start
program shall be available for
children with disabilities.
Recipients of Temporary Assistance
for Needy Families (TANF) and any
other individual, whose income level
does not exceed 100 percent of the
official poverty guidelines. Emphasis
is placed on serving individuals who
are TANF recipients, homeless,
unemployed, non-custodial parents,
reside in public housing or receive
housing assistance.
Households with incomes up to the
greater of 150 percent of the poverty
level or 60 percent of the state
median income. Grantees may
establish lower income eligibility
levels, but they may not set the limit
below 110 percent of the poverty
level.
HHS
Agency
ADMINISTRATI
ON FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
HHS
Dept
ADMINISTRATI
ON FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
Program Name
New Assets for
Independence
Demonstration
Program (IDA
Demonstration
Program)
Promoting Safe
and Stable
Families
Purpose
To provide for the establishment of
demonstration projects designed to
determine: 1) the social, civic,
psychological, and economic
effects of providing to individuals
and families with limited means an
incentive to accumulate assets by
saving a portion of their earned
income; 2) the extent to which an
asset-based policy that promotes
saving for postsecondary
education, homeownership, and
microenterprise development may
be used to enable individuals and
families with limited means to
increase their economic selfsufficiency; and 3) the extent to
which an asset-based policy
stabilizes and improves families
and the community in which the
families live.
To fund community-based family
support services that promote the
safety and well being of children
and families by enhancing family
functioning and child
development; to fund family
preservation services that serve
families at risk or in crisis,
including: reunification and
adoption services, preplacement/preventive services,
follow-up services after return of a
child from foster care, respite care,
services designed to improve
parenting skills, and infant safe
haven programs; to fund timelimited family reunification
services to facilitate the
reunification of the child safety
and appropriately within a timely
fashion; and to fund adoption
promotion and support services
designed to encourage more
adoptions out of the foster care
system, when adoptions promote
the best interests of children.
36
Eligible Beneficiaries
Individuals that are members of
households eligible for assistance
under TANF or of households whose
adjusted gross income does not
exceed the earned income amount as
described in Section 32 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 or of
households whose annual income
does not exceed 200 percent of the
poverty income guidelines. The net
worth of the household at the end of
the calendar year preceding the
determination of eligibility must not
exceed $10,000 excluding the
primary dwelling unit and one motor
vehicle owned by a member of the
household. Grantees may restrict
eligibility to target people with lower
incomes and net worth.
Families and children who need
services to assist them to stabilize
their lives, strengthen family
functioning, prevent out-of-home
placement of children, enhance child
development and increase
competence in parenting abilities,
facilitate timely reunification of the
child, and promote appropriate
adoptions.
HHS
HHS
Agency
ADMINISTRATI
ON FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
ADMINISTRATI
ON FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
HHS
Dept
ADMINISTRATI
ON FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
Program Name
Refugee and
Entrant
Assistance
Refugee and
Entrant
Assistance
Voluntary
Agency
Programs
(Matching Grant
Program)
Refugee and
Entrant
AssistanceTargeted
Assistance
Purpose
To develop alternative projects
which promote early employment
of refugees, including certain
Amerasian immigrants, Cuban and
Haitian entrants, asylees, and
certified victims of a severe form
of trafficking. The purpose of these
alternative projects is to provide
integrated services and cash
assistance in order to increase
refugees' prospects for early
employment and self-sufficiency,
reduce their level of welfare
dependence, and promote
coordination among voluntary
resettlement agencies and services
providers.
To assist refugees in becoming
self-supporting and independent
members of American society, by
providing grant funds to private
nonprofit organizations support
case management, transitional
assistance, and social services for
new arrivals.
To provide funding for
employment-related and other
social services for refugees,
asylees, Amerasians, victims of a
severe form of trafficking, and
entrants in areas of high refugee
concentration and high welfare
utilization.
37
Eligible Beneficiaries
Refugees, certain Amerasian
immigrants, Cuban/Haitian entrants,
asylees, and victims of a severe of
trafficking Cash assistance is
transitional for up to 8 months;
services may be provided for a longer
period of time.
Refugees will be determined eligible
by the grantee agencies as verified by
Health and Human Services (HHS)
monitoring. Refugees must be
enrolled within 31 days of arrival.
Entrants/asylees must be enrolled
within 31 days of granting of parole
or asylum.
Persons admitted to the U.S. within
the last 5 years as refugees under
Section 207 of the Immigration and
Nationality Act; granted asylum
under Section 208 of the Act; Cuban
and Haitian entrants, as defined in
Section 501 of the Refugee
Education Assistance Act; and
certain Amerasians from Vietnam
and their accompanying family
members, as defined by Section
584(c) of the Foreign Relations,
Export Financing, and Related
Programs Appropriation Act of 1988.
Victims of a severe form of
trafficking who have received a
certified or letter of eligibility from
ORR.
HHS
HHS
Program Name
Social Services
Block Grant
ADMINISTRATI
ON FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
Social Services
Research and
Demonstration
HHS
Agency
ADMINISTRATI
ON FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
ADMINISTRATI
ON FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
State Court
Improvement
Program
HHS
Dept
ADMINISTRATI
ON FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
Temporary
Assistance for
Needy Families
Purpose
To enable each state to furnish
social services best suited to the
needs of the individuals residing in
the state. To prevent, reduce, or
eliminate dependency; achieve or
maintain self-sufficiency; prevent
neglect, abuse, or exploitation of
children and adults; prevent or
reduce inappropriate institutional
care; and secure admission or
referral for institutional care when
other forms of care are not
appropriate.
To promote the ability of families
to be financially self-sufficient,
and to promote the healthy
development and greater social
well-being of children and
families.
To assist state courts in performing
their role in the continuum of care
provided for families and children
at risk. To assist state courts to
identify barriers to timely and
effective decision-making,
highlight practices which are not
fully successful, examine areas
they find to be in need of
correction or added attention, and
implement reforms.
To provide grants to states,
territories, or tribes to assist needy
families with children so that
children can be cared for in their
own homes; to reduce dependency
by promoting job preparation,
work, and marriage; to reduce and
prevent out-of wedlock
pregnancies; and to encourage the
formation and maintenance of twoparent families.
38
Eligible Beneficiaries
Under Title XX, each eligible
jurisdiction determines the services
that will be provided and the
individuals that will be eligible to
receive services.
Low-income individuals, children,
youth, families, individuals with
developmental disabilities, and
Native Americans.
State courts
Needy families with children, as
determined eligible by the state,
territory or tribe in accordance with
the state or tribal plan submitted to
the Department of Health and Human
Services.
HHS
Agency
ADMINISTRATI
ON FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
HHS
Dept
ADMINISTRATI
ON FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
Program Name
Transitional
Living for
Homeless Youth
Urban and Rural
Community
Economic
Development
Purpose
To establish and operate
transitional living projects for
homeless youth, including
pregnant and parenting youth. To
help older homeless youth achieve
self-sufficiency and avoid longterm dependency on social
services. Transitional living
projects provide shelter, skills
training, and support services to
homeless youth, including
pregnant and parenting youth, for a
continuous period not exceeding
18 months.
To support program activities of
national or regional significance to
alleviate the causes of poverty in
distressed communities which
promote: (1) full-time permanent
jobs for poverty level project area
residents; (2) income and/or
ownership opportunities for lowincome community members; (3) a
better standard of living for rural
low-income individuals in terms of
water and waste water treatment;
(4) national or regional programs
designed to provide character
building, sports and physical
fitness activities for low- income
youth; (5) migrant and seasonal
farmworkers; and support the
design, development and
widespread availability of
interactive information technology
among a nationwide network of
eligible entities, as well as
promoting electronic
communication and access to
program information that would
enhance the effective delivery of
services.
39
Eligible Beneficiaries
Homeless youth (ages 16 to
21).Youth who are under the age of
18 years at the completion of 18
months can remain in the program
for either an additional 180 days or
until the youth turns 18, whichever
occurs first.
A project must be targeted to address
the needs of a specific segment of
low-income individuals or families.
HHS
HHS
Program Name
Welfare Reform
Research,
Evaluations and
National Studies
CENTERS FOR
DISEASE
CONTROL AND
PREVENTION
Cooperative
Agreements for
State-Based
Comprehensive
Breast and
Cervical Cancer
Early Detection
Programs
HHS
Agency
ADMINISTRATI
ON FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
CENTERS FOR
MEDICARE AND
MEDICAID
SERVICES
Medical
Assistance
Program
HHS
Dept
CENTERS FOR
MEDICARE AND
MEDICAID
SERVICES
Medicare
Hospital
Insurance
Purpose
To support research on the
benefits, effects, and costs of
different welfare reform
interventions; to fund studies such
as on the effects of different
programs on welfare dependency,
illegitimacy, teen pregnancy,
employment rates, child wellbeing, and related areas; to assist in
the development and evaluation of
innovative approaches for reducing
welfare dependency and increasing
the well-being of minor children in
welfare families; and to study and
analyze outcome measures for
evaluating the success of the states
in moving individuals out of the
welfare system into employment.
To work with official state and
territorial health agencies or their
designees, and tribal health
agencies in developing
comprehensive breast and cervical
cancer early detection programs.
To the extent possible, increase
screening and follow-up among all
groups of women in the state, tribe
or territory, with special to reach
those women who are of low
income, uninsured, underinsured
and minority, and Native
Americans.
To provide financial assistance to
states for payments of medical
assistance on behalf of cash
assistance recipients, children,
pregnant women, and the aged who
meet income and resource
requirements, and other
categorically-eligible groups.
To provide hospital insurance
protection for covered services to
persons age 65 or above, to certain
disabled persons and to individuals
with chronic renal disease.
40
Eligible Beneficiaries
Needy individuals, children, and
families.
Women who are of low income,
uninsured, underinsured and
minority, and Native Americans
Low-income persons who are over
age 65, blind or disabled, members of
families with dependent children,
low- income children and pregnant
women, certain Medicare
beneficiaries and, in many states,
medically-needy individuals.
Persons age 65 or over and qualified
disabled persons.
HHS
Program Name
State Children's
Insurance
Program
Purpose
To provide funds to states to
enable them to initiate and expand
child health assistance to
uninsured, low-income children.
HHS
HEALTH
RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATI
ON
Community
Health Centers
HEALTH
RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATI
ON
Disadvantaged
Health
Professions
Faculty Loan
Repayment and
Fellowship
Program
HHS
HEALTH
RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATI
ON
Health Careers
Opportunity
Program
HEALTH
RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATI
ON
Health Center
Grants for
Homeless
Populations
To increase access to
comprehensive primary and
preventive health care and improve
the health status of underserved
and vulnerable populations in the
area to be served. Individual health
center grant mechanisms include:
(1) Community Health Centers; (2)
Migrant Health Centers; (3) Health
Care for the Homeless; (4) Public
Housing Primary Care Program;
and (5) School Based Health
Centers.
To attract and retain disadvantaged
health professions faculty members
for accredited health professions
schools of medicine, nursing,
osteopathic medicine, dentistry,
pharmacy, podiatric medicine,
optometry, veterinary medicine,
public health, allied health or
graduate programs in behavioral
and mental health practice for at
least two years.
To develop a more competitive
applicant pool to build diversity in
the health professions. To provide
students from disadvantaged
backgrounds an opportunity to
develop the skills needed to
successfully compete, enter, and
graduate from health professions.
To award grants for the purpose of
enabling grantees to provide for
the delivery of primary health
services and substance abuse
services to homeless individuals
including homeless children.
HHS
CENTERS FOR
MEDICARE AND
MEDICAID
SERVICES
HHS
Dept
Agency
41
Eligible Beneficiaries
Low-income children who have been
determined eligible by the state for
child health assistance under their
state plan. Children whose family
income exceeds the Medicaid
applicable income level but does not
exceed 50 percentage points above
the Medicaid applicable income level
and are not found to be eligible for
medical assistance under Title XIX
or covered under a group health plan
or under health insurance coverage.
Population groups in medically
underserved areas.
Individuals who are from
disadvantaged backgrounds.
An individual will be determined to
be disadvantaged if he or she comes
from a background that has inhibited
the individual from obtaining the
knowledge, skills, and abilities
required to enroll in and graduate
from a health professions school or
program.
Homeless individuals including but
not limited to, children, elderly
persons, handicapped persons,
families with children, Native
Americans, and veterans.
Program Name
Health Centers
Grants for
Migrant and
Seasonal
Farmworkers
HHS
HEALTH
RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATI
ON
Health Centers
Grants for
Residents of
Public Housing
HHS
HEALTH
RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATI
ON
Healthy Start
Initiative
HEALTH
RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATI
ON
Maternal and
Child Health
Services Block
Grant to the
States (MCH
Block Grants
HHS
HEALTH
RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATI
ON
HHS
Dept
Agency
Purpose
To support the development and
operation of Health Centers and
Migrant Health Programs that
provide primary health care
services, supplemental health
services, technical assistance and
environmental health services,
which are accessible to migrant
and seasonal agricultural farm
workers and their families as they
move and work.
To improve minority access to
primary care services by enabling
grantees to provide to residents of
Public Housing primary health
services, including health
screening, and health counseling
and education services.
To eliminate disparities in perinatal
and women's health by enhancing a
community's service system and
infrastructure, and a state's
infrastructure, directing resources
and interventions to improve
access to, utilization, and full
participation of comprehensive
perinatal and women's health
services for high-risk women and
infants.
To enable states to maintain and
strengthen their leadership in
planning, promoting, coordinating
and evaluating health care for
pregnant women, mothers, infants,
and children and children with
special health care needs in
providing health services for
mothers and children who do not
have access to adequate health
care.
42
Eligible Beneficiaries
Migrant agricultural workers,
seasonal agricultural workers, and
members of their families, as defined
in Section 330(g) of the Public
Health Service Act.
Residents of public housing. Nonresidents of public housing may
benefit if grantee chooses to provide
comparable services, as permitted in
legislation.
Service area residents, particularly
women and infants in areas with
significant perinatal health
disparities.
Mothers, infants and children, and
children with special health care
needs particularly those of lowincome families.
HHS
HHS
HHS
Dept
Agency
HEALTH
RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATI
ON
Program Name
Public Health
Training Centers
Grant Program
HEALTH
RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATI
ON
Scholarships for
Health
Professions
Students from
Disadvantaged
Backgrounds
HEALTH
RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATI
ON
State Planning
Grant Health
Care Access for
the Uninsured
Purpose
To improve the Nation's public
health system by strengthening the
technical, scientific, managerial
and leadership competencies and
capabilities of the current and
future public health workforce.
Public health training centers are
intended to: (1) serve a specific
geographic area, including
medically underserved
populations, e.g., elderly,
immigrants/refugees,
disadvantaged, (2) assess the
public health personnel needs of
the area to be served by the Center
and assist in the planning and
development of training programs
to meet their needs; (3) establish or
strengthen field placements for
students in public or nonprofit
private public health agencies or
organizations; and (4) involve
faculty members and students in
collaborative projects to enhance
public health services to medically
underserved communities.
Provides scholarships for students
from disadvantaged backgrounds
to attend eligible health professions
and nursing schools.
To support States in the
development of plans to provide
access to health insurance coverage
for all citizens.
43
Eligible Beneficiaries
Accredited schools of public health
or other public or nonprofit private
institutions accredited for the
provision of graduate or specialized
training.
Students who are citizens, nationals,
or lawful permanent residence of the
United States or the District of
Columbia, or U.S. territories; and
enrolled full-time in health
professions or nursing schools.
Preference shall be given to students
from disadvantaged backgrounds for
whom the costs of attending the
school would constitute a severe
financial hardship and disadvantaged
students who have participated in an
academic enrichment program
funded in whole or in part by Health
Careers Opportunity Program
(HCOP) or by Nursing Workforce
Development (NWD programs).
States developing models for
providing access to health insurance
coverage for all citizens of the state.
Agency
Program Name
Technical and
Non-Financial
Assistance to
Health Centers
and National
Health Service
Corps (NHSC)
Delivery Sites
HHS
HEALTH
RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATI
ON
OFFICE OF THE
SECRETARY
Community
Programs to
Improve
Minority Health
Grant Program
HHS
HHS
Dept
OFFICE OF THE
SECRETARY
Cooperative
Agreements to
Improve the
Health Status of
Minority
Populations
Purpose
To provide assistance to health
centers across the state or region in
the following areas: (1)
collaborative activities on state,
regional, or market area levels; (2)
involvement of state agencies in
assuring primary care to medically
underserved populations; (3)
development of shared services
and joint purchasing arrangements;
(4) provision of, or arrangement
for, training, assessment of
community health center needs,
expertise in dealing with homeless,
public housing, farm workers,
children, rural health and other
special populations, and
management and maximization of
nonfederal resources; and (5)
expanding the health center
network and ensuring high quality
care in health centers.
To support minority community
health coalitions to develop,
implement, and conduct
demonstration projects which
coordinate integrated communitybased screening and outreach
services, and include linkages for
access and treatment to minorities
in high-risk, low-income
communities; and to support
minority community health
coalitions involving non-traditional
partners in carrying out projects to
increase the educational
understanding of HIV/AIDS,
increase testing, and improve
access to HIV/AIDS prevention
and treatment serious.
To provide support for activities
which have the potential to
improve the health status and/or
quality of life of racial/ethnic
minorities, with the objective of
reducing the excessive burden and
death borne by minority and
disadvantaged populations in the
United States.
44
Eligible Beneficiaries
Medically underserved populations.
Members of minority groups:
American Indians or Alaska Natives;
Asians; Blacks or African
Americans; Hispanics or Latinos;
Native Hawaiians or other Pacific
Islanders; or subgroups of these
populations.
Members of minority and
disadvantaged groups: Blacks;
Hispanics; American Indians; Alaska
Natives; Asian/American Pacific
Islanders; or subgroups of these.
Agency
HHS
OFFICE OF THE
SECRETARY
HHS
OFFICE OF THE
SECRETARY
OFFICE OF THE
SECRETARY
HHS
HHS
Dept
SUBSTANCE
ABUSE AND
MENTAL
HEALTH
SERVICES
ADMINISTRATI
ON (SAMHSA)
Program Name
Family Planning
Services
Health
Disparities in
Minority
Health(Health
Disparities
Grants)
Project Grants
for Facilities to
Improve the
Health Status of
Minority
Populations
Projects for
Assistance in
Transition from
Homelessness
(PATH)
Purpose
To provide educational,
counseling, comprehensive
medical and social services
necessary to enable individuals to
freely determine the number and
spacing of their children, and by so
doing helping to reduce maternal
and infant mortality, promote the
health of mothers, families and
children.
To support the elimination of
health disparities among racial and
ethnic populations through local
small-scaled projects which
address a demonstrated health
problem or health issue.
To construct, renovate, expand,
repair, or modernize facilities
designed to promote the
improvement of the health status of
minority underserved communities
and populations.
To provide financial assistance to
states to support services for
individuals who are suffering from
serious mental illness or serious
mental illness and substance abuse;
and are homeless or at imminent
risk of becoming homeless.
Programs and activities include:
(1) outreach services; (2) screening
and diagnostic treatment services;
(3) habilitation and rehabilitation
services; (4) community mental
health services; (5) alcohol or drug
treatment services; (6) staff
training; (7) case management
services; (8) supportive and
supervisory services in residential
settings; (9) referrals for primary
health services, job training,
educational services, and relevant
housing services; and (10) a
prescribed set of housing services.
45
Eligible Beneficiaries
Persons who desire family planning
services and who would not
otherwise have access to them.
Priority to be given to persons from
low-income families.
Members of minority groups:
American Indians or Alaska Natives;
Blacks or African Americans;
Hispanics or Latinos; Native
Hawaiian or other Pacific Islanders;
or subgroups of these populations.
Members of minority and
disadvantaged groups: Blacks;
Hispanics; American Indians; Alaska
Natives; Asian/American Pacific
Islanders; or subgroups of these.
Individuals who have a serious
mental illness or serious mental
illness and substance abuse; and are
homeless or are at imminent risk of
becoming homeless.
Agency
HUD
Program Name
Emergency Food
and Shelter
Program
COMMUNITY
PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT
Community
Development
Block Grant
HUD
FEMA
COMMUNITY
PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT
Emergency
Shelter Grants
Program
HUD
Homeland Security
Dept
COMMUNITY
PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT
HOME
Investment
Partnerships
Program
(HOME
Program)
Purpose
To supplement and expand
ongoing efforts to provide shelter,
food, and supportive services for
needy families and individuals. To
strengthen efforts to create more
effective and innovative local
programs. To conduct minimum
rehabilitation of existing mass
shelter or mass feeding facilities,
but only to the extent necessary to
make facilities safe, sanitary and
bring them into compliance with
local building codes.
To develop viable urban
communities, by providing decent
housing and a suitable living
environment, and by expanding
economic opportunities,
principally for persons of low and
moderate income.
To help improve the quality of
emergency shelters and transitional
housing for the homeless, to make
available additional shelters, to
meet the costs of operating
shelters, to provide essential social
services to homeless individuals,
and to help prevent homelessness.
To expand the supply of affordable
housing, particularly rental
housing, for low and very low
income Americans; to strengthen
the abilities of state and local
governments to design and
implement strategies for achieving
adequate supplies of decent,
affordable housing; to provide both
financial and technical assistance
to participating jurisdictions,
including the development of
model programs for developing
affordable low income housing;
and to extend and strengthen
partnerships among all levels of
government and the private sector,
including for-profit and nonprofit
organizations, in the production
and operation of affordable
housing.
46
Eligible Beneficiaries
Local Boards identify private
nonprofit organizations or public
organizations of the local
government to receive grants to act
as service providers for needy
families and individuals.
Low- and moderate-income persons
(generally defined as a member of a
family having an income equal to or
less than the Section 8 low income
limit established by HUD).
Homeless families and individuals,
and low-income persons in
immediate risk of losing their
housing due to eviction, foreclosure,
or utility shutoffs.
For rental housing, at least 90 percent
of HOME funds must benefit low
and very low income families at 60
percent of the area median income;
the remaining ten percent must
benefit families below 80 percent of
the area median. Assistance to
homeowners and homebuyers must
be to families below 80 percent of
the area median.
HUD
COMMUNITY
PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT
Program Name
Self-Help
Homeownership
Opportunity
Program-SHOP
HUD
COMMUNITY
PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT
Supportive
Housing
Program
HUD
COMMUNITY
PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT
Youthbuild
HUD
COMMUNITY
PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT
Community
Development
Block
Grants/State's
Program
HUD
Dept
Agency
FAIR HOUSING
AND EQUAL
OPPORTUNITY
Low-Income
Housing Tax
Credits
Purpose
To facilitate and encourage
innovative homeownership
opportunities through the provision
of self-help housing where the
homebuyer contributes a
significant amount of sweat equity
toward the construction of the
dwellings.
To promote the development of
supportive housing and supportive
services to assist homeless persons
in the transition from homelessness
and to enable them to live as
independently as possible.
To provide funding assistance for a
wide range of multi-disciplinary
activities and services to assist
economically disadvantaged youth.
The opportunities are designed to
help disadvantaged young adults
who have dropped out of high
school to obtain the education and
employment skills necessary to
achieve economic self-efficiency
and develop leadership skills and a
commitment to community
development in low income
communities. To expand the
supply of permanent affordable
housing for homeless persons and
members of low income and very
low income families.
To develop viable urban
communities by providing decent
housing, a suitable living
environment, and expanding
economic opportunities,
principally for persons of low and
moderate income. Each activity
funded must benefit low and
moderate income families; aid in
the prevention or elimination of
slums or blight; or meet other
community development needs
that have a particular urgency
because existing conditions pose a
serious and immediate threat to the
health or welfare of the
community.
To produce rental housing that is
affordable to low- and moderateincome households.
47
Eligible Beneficiaries
Eligible homebuyers are low-income
families who are otherwise unable to
afford to purchase a dwelling, and
who provide significant amounts of
sweat equity or volunteer labor to the
development of the dwellings.
Homeless individuals and families
with children.
Very low-income young adults, ages
16 to 24, who have dropped out of
high school. The program permits
exceptions for young adults who do
not meet the program's income or
education requirements but who have
educational needs despite attainment
of a high school diploma or its
equivalent. Exceptions for
individuals in this category cannot
exceed 25 percent of all participants.
Low and moderate income persons.
For nonmetropolitan areas, low and
moderate income is generally defined
as 80 percent of the median income
for non-metropolitan areas of the
state, adjusted for family size. For
metropolitan areas, low- and
moderate-income is generally
defined as a member of a family
having an income equal to or less
than the Section 8 low-income limit
established by HUD.
Persons and families with low
incomes.
HUD
HUD
Program Name
Housing
Counseling
Assistance
Program
PUBLIC AND
INDIAN
HOUSING
Demolition and
Revitalization of
Severely
Distressed
Public Housing
(HOPE VI)
HUD
Agency
HOUSING
PUBLIC AND
INDIAN
HOUSING
HUD
Dept
PUBLIC AND
INDIAN
HOUSING
Lower Income
Housing
Assistance
Program Section
8 Moderate
Rehabilitation
(Section 8
Housing
Assistance
Payments
Program for
Very Low
Income Families
– Moderate
Rehabilitation)
Public and
Indian Housing
Purpose
To counsel homeowners,
homebuyers, prospective renters
and tenants under HUD,
conventional and other government
programs in improving their
housing conditions and in meeting
the responsibilities of tenancy and
homeownership.
To enable PHAs to improve the
living environment for public
housing residents of severely
distressed public housing projects
through the demolition, substantial
rehabilitation, reconfiguration,
and/or replacement of severely
distressed units; to revitalize the
sites on which severely distressed
public housing projects are located
and contribute to the improvement
of the surrounding neighborhood;
to lessen isolation and reduce the
concentration of low-income
families; to build sustainable
mixed-income communities; and to
provide well-coordinated, resultsbased community and supportive
services that directly complement
housing redevelopment and that
help residents to achieve selfsufficiency, young people to obtain
educational excellence, and the
community to secure a desirable
quality of life.
To aid very low income families in
obtaining decent, safe and sanitary
rental housing. Housing assistance
payments are used to make up the
difference between the approved
rent due to the owner for the
dwelling unit and the occupant
family's required contribution
towards rent.
Eligible Beneficiaries
Individuals, groups of individuals,
and families who are renters, tenants,
homeowners, and home buyers under
HUD, conventional and other
government programs.
To provide and operate costeffective, decent, safe and
affordable dwellings for lower
income families through an
authorized local Public Housing
Agency (PHA).
Lower income families which
include citizens or eligible
immigrants
48
Residents of the severely distressed
public housing and residents of the
revitalized development.
Very low income families (whose
income does not exceed 50 percent of
the median income for the area) and,
on an exception basis, lower income
families (whose income does not
exceed 80 percent of the median
income for the area adjusted for
small and large families). A very low
income or, on an exception basis,
lower income single person who is
elderly, disabled or handicapped,
displaced, or the remaining member
of an eligible tenant family is also
eligible.
HUD
PUBLIC AND
INDIAN
HOUSING
Program Name
Section 8
Housing Choice
Vouchers
Purpose
To aid very low income families in
obtaining decent, safe, and sanitary
rental housing.
Labor
Dept
Agency
EMPLOYMENT
AND TRAINING
ADMINISTRATI
ON (ETA)
Dislocated
Workers
Assistance
To provide workforce investment
activities that increase the
employment, retention and
earnings of participants, and
increase occupational skill
attainment by the participants. To
reemploy dislocated workers,
improve the quality of the
workforce and enhance the
productivity and competitiveness
of the nation's economy. This
program is designed to increase
employment, as measured by entry
into unsubsidized employment,
retention in unsubsidized
employment six months after entry
into employment, and extent of
recovery of prior wage levels.
49
Eligible Beneficiaries
Very low income families (whose
income does not exceed 50 percent of
the median income for the area with
adjustments for smaller and larger
families) and, on an exception basis,
lower income families (whose
income does not exceed 80 percent of
the median income for the area,
adjusted for smaller and larger
families). At least 75 percent of
families admitted to the voucher
program during the PHA fiscal year
must be extremely low income
families (whose income does not
exceed 30 percent of the median
income for the area.
Workers who have lost their jobs,
including those dislocated as a result
of plant closings or mass layoffs, and
are unlikely to return to their
previous industry or occupation;
formerly self-employed individuals;
and displaced homemakers who have
been dependent on income of another
family member, but are no longer
supported by that income.
Labor
Program Name
Employment and
Training
Administration
Pilots,
Demonstrations,
and Research
Projects
Labor
Agency
EMPLOYMENT
AND TRAINING
ADMINISTRATI
ON (ETA)
EMPLOYMENT
AND TRAINING
ADMINISTRATI
ON (ETA)
Employment
Service
Labor
Dept
EMPLOYMENT
AND TRAINING
ADMINISTRATI
ON (ETA)
Migrant and
Seasonal
Farmworkers
(National
Farmworker
Jobs Program)
Purpose
To address national employment
and training problems through
pilot programs that have interstate
validity and will aid policymakers
and stakeholders in addressing
these problems. Such projects shall
include the provision of direct
services to individuals to enhance
employment opportunities and an
evaluation component and may
include the establishment of
advanced manufacturing
technology skill centers developed
through local partnerships; projects
that provide training to upgrade the
skills of employed workers who
reside and are employed in
enterprise communities or
empowerment zones; programs
conducted jointly with the
Department of Defense to develop
training programs using innovative
learning technologies; projects that
promote the use of distance
learning; projects that assist in
providing comprehensive services
to increase the employment rates
of out-of school youth residing in
high poverty areas within
empowerment zones and enterprise
communities; the establishment of
partnerships with national
organizations.
To assist persons to secure
employment and labor market
information by providing a variety
of job search assistance and labor
market information services
without charge to job seekers and
to employers seeking qualified
individuals to fill job openings.
To provide individual
employability development
assistance and related assistance
for those individuals, including
their dependents, who are
primarily employed in agricultural
labor that is characterized by
chronic unemployment and
underemployment.
50
Eligible Beneficiaries
Generally limited to the economic
disadvantaged and to those who are
underemployed, unemployed, need to
upgrade their skills in order to retain
jobs, at-risk youth, and/or to those
who evidence barriers to
employability.
All employers seeking workers,
persons seeking employment, and
associated groups. Priority in service
is given to veterans, with disabled
veterans receiving preferential
treatment over other veterans.
Low income individuals and their
dependents who have, during any
consecutive 12 month period in the
24 months preceding their
application for enrollment, been
primarily employed in agricultural
labor that is characterized by chronic
unemployment or underemployment
due to the seasonal or migratory
nature of the work. Individuals must
also be legally available for work and
males must not have violated the
Selective Service Act registration
requirement.
Labor
EMPLOYMENT
AND TRAINING
ADMINISTRATI
ON (ETA)
Program Name
One-Stop Career
Center Initiative
Purpose
To provide the customer with
access to all Department of Laborfunded programs within one
physical facility or through
electronic access.
Labor
EMPLOYMENT
AND TRAINING
ADMINISTRATI
ON (ETA)
Senior
Community
Service
Employment
Program
Labor
EMPLOYMENT
AND TRAINING
ADMINISTRATI
ON (ETA)
Unemployment
Insurance
To provide, foster, and promote
part-time work opportunities in
community service activities for
unemployed low-income persons
who are 55 years of age and older.
To increase individual economic
self-sufficiency participants may
be placed into unsubsidized
employment.
To administer this program of
unemployment insurance for
eligible workers through federal
and state cooperation; to
administer payment of trade
adjustment assistance; disaster
unemployment assistance;
unemployment compensation for
federal employees and ex-service
members.
Labor
Dept
Agency
EMPLOYMENT
AND TRAINING
ADMINISTRATI
ON (ETA)
Welfare-to-Work
Grants to States
and Localities
To assist states and localities to
help move hard-to-employ welfare
recipients, certain non-custodial
parents, certain former foster care
recipients, and low-income
custodial parents into lasting
unsubsidized jobs and achieve self
sufficiency.
51
Eligible Beneficiaries
All persons seeking employment; all
employers seeking workers; students
and associated groups. Veterans
receive priority service with disabled
veterans receiving preferential
treatment over other veterans. Adults
55 years or older with a family
income at or below 125 percent of
the DHHS poverty level.
Adults 55 years or older with a
family income at or below 125
percent of the DHHS poverty level.
All workers whose wages are subject
to state unemployment insurance
laws, federal civilian employees, exservice members, trade readjustment
allowance for workers who become
unemployed or underemployed
because of the adverse effect of
increased imports or because of shifts
in production outside the U.S., and
workers whose unemployment is
caused by a Presidentially declared
disaster under the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act, are eligible if they
are involuntarily unemployed, able to
work, available for work, meet the
eligibility and qualifying
requirements of the state law, and are
free from disqualifications.
Long-term welfare recipients and
Non-custodial parents. Not more than
30 percent of the funds allotted or
awarded to an operating entity may
be expended upon individuals
enrolled under the "Other Eligibles"
category, which includes: (1) welfare
recipients with characteristics of
long- term welfare dependence or
significant barriers to selfsufficiency; (2) former foster care
recipients aged 19-24 at the time of
application to WtW; and (3)
custodial parents with incomes below
the poverty line.
Labor
Program Name
WIA Adult
Program
Labor
Agency
EMPLOYMENT
AND TRAINING
ADMINISTRATI
ON (ETA)
EMPLOYMENT
AND TRAINING
ADMINISTRATI
ON (ETA)
WIA Youth
Activities
Labor
Dept
EMPLOYMENT
AND TRAINING
ADMINISTRATI
ON (ETA)
Youth
Opportunity
Grants
Purpose
To provide workforce investment
activities that increase the
employment, retention and
earnings of participants, and
increase occupational skill
attainment by the participants. To
improve the quality of the
workforce, reduce welfare
dependency, and enhance the
productivity and competitiveness
of the nation's economy. This
program is designed to increase
employment, as measured by entry
into unsubsidized employment,
retention in unsubsidized
employment six months after entry
into employment, and wage gain.
To design, with states and local
communities, a revitalized,
workforce investment system that
will help low income youth
between the ages of 14 and 21
acquire the educational and
occupational skills, training and
support needed to achieve
academic and employment success
and successfully transition to
careers and productive adulthood.
To increase the long-term
employment, high school
completion rates, and college
enrollment rates of youth who live
in empowerment zones, enterprise
communities, and high poverty
areas.
52
Eligible Beneficiaries
All adults 18 years and older are
eligible for core services. Priority for
intensive and training services must
be given to recipients of public
assistance and other low- income
individuals where funds are limited.
States and local areas are responsible
for establishing procedures for
applying the priority requirements.
An eligible youth is an individual
who: (1) Is 14 to 21 years of age; and
(2) is an individual who received an
income or is a member of a family
that received a total family income
that, in relation to family size, does
not exceed the higher of (a) the
poverty line; or (b) 70 percent of the
lower living standard income; and (3)
meets one or more of the following
criteria: is an individual who is
deficient in basic literacy skills; a
school dropout; homeless; a
runaway; a foster child; pregnant or a
parent; an offender; or requires
additional assistance to complete
their education or secure and hold
employment.
Youth eligible to be served by the
grant must be 14 to 21 years of age;
reside in the target area; be legal U.S.
residents; and males age 18 and
above must be registered as required
under the Selective Service Act.
Youth residing in the target
community are eligible to be served
by these grants regardless of family
income.
Other
APPALACHIAN
REGIONAL
COMMISSION
Program Name
Appalachian
Area
Development
Other
Dept
Agency
APPALACHIAN
REGIONAL
COMMISSION
Appalachian
Regional
Development
Purpose
To help the regional economy
become more competitive by
putting in place the building blocks
for self-sustaining economic
development, while continuing to
provide special assistance to the
region's most distressed counties.
To assist: (1) Appalachian
residents to have the skills and
knowledge necessary to compete in
the world economy in the 21st
century; (2) Appalachian
communities to have the physical
infrastructure necessary for selfsustaining economic development
and improved quality of life; (3)
the people of Appalachia to have
the vision and capacity to mobilize
and work together for sustained
economic progress and
improvement of their communities;
(4) Appalachian residents to have
access to financial and technical
resources to help build dynamic
and self-sustaining local
economies; and (5)Appalachian
residents to have access to
affordable, quality health care.
To create opportunities for selfsustaining economic development
and an improved quality of life for
the people of Appalachia through
joint federal-state-local efforts; to
stimulate investments in public
services and facilities that will
attract private sector investments
and result in accelerated social and
economic development; to help
establish a set of institutions
capable of permanently directing
the long-term development of the
region; and on a joint federal-statelocal basis, to develop
comprehensive plans and programs
to help accomplish the overall
objectives of Appalachian
development.
53
Eligible Beneficiaries
General public.
General public.
Other
Other
Program Name
AmeriCorps
CORPORATION
FOR NATIONAL
AND
COMMUNITY
SERVICE
Foster
Grandparent
Program
Other
Agency
CORPORATION
FOR NATIONAL
AND
COMMUNITY
SERVICE
CORPORATION
FOR NATIONAL
AND
COMMUNITY
SERVICE
Senior
Companion
Program
Other
Dept
CORPORATION
FOR NATIONAL
AND
COMMUNITY
SERVICE
Volunteers in
Service to
America (VISTA)
Purpose
To encourage Americans to serve
either part or full-time to: get
things done by providing services
with direct and demonstrable
results; strengthen communities
and uniting individuals of different
backgrounds in a common effort to
improve their communities;
encourage responsibility through
service and civic education; and
expand opportunities in return for
devoting a year of their lives to
national service.
To engage persons 60 or older,
with limited incomes, in volunteer
service to meet critical community
needs; and to provide a high
quality volunteer experience that
will enrich the lives of the
volunteers. To support Foster
Grandparents in the provision of
supportive, person to person
service to children with
exceptional or special needs.
To engage persons 60 and older,
particularly those with limited
incomes, in volunteer service to
meet critical community needs;
and to provide a high quality
experience that will enrich the
lives of the volunteers. Program
funds support Senior Companions
in the provision of supportive,
individualized services to help
adults with special needs maintain
their dignity and independence.
To supplement efforts of private,
nonprofit organizations and
federal, state, and local
government agencies to eliminate
poverty and poverty-related
problems by enabling persons from
all walks of life and all age groups
to perform meaningful and
constructive service as volunteers.
54
Eligible Beneficiaries
States, District of Columbia, Puerto
Rico, tribes, territories, national
nonprofit organizations, professional
corps, and multi-state organizations.
Foster Grandparents must be: 60
years of age or older, with an income
within limits determined by the CEO
of the Corporation for National and
Community Service (based on the
Department of Health and Human
Services Poverty Guidelines), and
interested in serving infants, children,
and youth with special or exceptional
needs. They must be physically,
mentally, and emotionally capable
and willing to serve selected infants,
children or youth on a person-toperson basis.
Senior Companions must be: 60
years of age or older, with an income
within limits determined by the CEO
of the Corporation for National and
Community Service (based on the
Department of Health and Human
Services Poverty Guidelines);
interested in serving special-needs
adults, especially the frail elderly,
and must be physically, mentally,
emotionally capable, and willing to
serve on a person-to- person basis.
Persons who are assisted by VISTA
project activities must be low-income
and VISTA activities must directly
benefit the poor.
Other
Other
SMALL
BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATI
ON
Microenterprise
Development
Grants (PRIME)
Other
Program Name
Community
Development
Revolving Loan
Program for
Credit Unions
SMALL
BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATI
ON
Microloan
Demonstration
Program
Other
Agency
NATIONAL
CREDIT UNION
ADMINISTRATI
ON
SMALL
BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATI
ON
New Markets
Venture Capital
Other
Dept
SMALL
BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATI
ON
Small Business
Loans
Purpose
To support low-income credit
unions in their efforts to: stimulate
economic development activities
which result in increased income,
ownership, and employment
opportunities for low-income
residents; and provide basic
financial and related services.
To increase the number of
microenterprises and to enhance
the management capability of
microentrepreneurs; to provide
training and technical assistance at
little or no cost to
microentrepreneur and/or
microenterprises to assist in
starting, expanding and/or growing
their business; to provide training
and capacity building services to
enhance existing MDOs and
expand the universe of MDOs that
provide microenterprise
development training programs
and services; and to fund research
and development of best practices
for training and technical
assistance consistent with the
PRIME Act.
To assist women, low-income, and
minority entrepreneurs, business
owners, and other individuals
possessing the capability to operate
successful business concerns and
to assist small business concerns in
those areas suffering from a lack of
credit due to economic downturns.
To promote economic
development and the creation of
wealth and job opportunities in
low-income geographic areas and
among individuals living in such
areas, through developmental
venture capital investments in
smaller enterprises located in such
areas.
To provide guaranteed loans to
small businesses which are unable
to obtain financing in the private
credit marketplace, but can
demonstrate an ability to repay
loans granted.
55
Eligible Beneficiaries
A credit union wishing to participate
must serve a field of membership
which is comprised primarily of lowincome individuals.
Disadvantaged entrepreneurs,
microenterprises, and
microenterprise development
organizations.
Small businesses, minority
entrepreneurs, nonprofit entities,
business owners, women and lowincome, and other individuals
possessing the capability to operate
successful business concerns.
Smaller enterprises located in lowincome geographic areas and small
businesses.
Small businesses, including those
owned by low-income and
handicapped individuals, or located
in high unemployment areas.
Other
SOCIAL
SECURITY
ADMINISTRATI
ON
Program Name
Supplemental
Security Income
Purpose
To ensure a minimum level of
income to persons who have
attained age 65 or are blind or
disabled, and whose income and
resources are below specified
levels.
Transportation
FEDERAL
TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATI
ON
Job Access and
Reverse
Commute Grants
Treasury
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
FINANCIAL
INSTITUTIONS
FUND
Bank Enterprise
Award Program
Treasury
Dept
Agency
INTERNAL
REVENUE
SERVICE
Child and
Dependent Care
Tax Credit
To provide grants to local
governments, nonprofit
organizations, and designated
recipients of federal transit funding
to develop transportation services
to connect welfare recipients and
low-income persons to
employment and support services.
To support capital projects, and to
finance operating costs of
equipment, facilities and associated
support costs related to providing
access to jobs. To assist in funding
the costs associated with adding
reverse commute bus, train,
carpool or service from urban
areas, urban, rural and other
suburban locations to suburban
work places.
To encourage insured depository
institutions to increase their level
of community development
activities in the form of loans,
investments, services and technical
assistance within distressed
communities and to provide
assistance to community
development financial institution's
through grants, stock purchases,
loans, deposits and other forms of
financial and technical assistance.
To enable people to work or to
look for work by helping them pay
for child care services for
dependents under age 13. The
credit is also available if they must
pay for the care of a spouse or a
dependent of any age who is
physically or mentally incapable of
self-care.
56
Eligible Beneficiaries
Individuals who have attained age 65
or are blind or disabled, who
continue to meet the income and
resources tests, citizenship/ qualified
alien status, U.S. residence, and
certain other requirements. Eligibility
may continue for beneficiaries who
engage in substantial gainful activity
despite disabling physical or mental
impairments.
Low income individuals; individuals
traveling to suburban work places.
Profit organizations and other private
institutions and organizations that are
insured depository institutions.
People who in order to work or look
for work have to pay for child care
services for dependents under age 13
or for care of a spouse or a dependent
of any age who is physically or
mentally incapable of self-care.
Treasury
Program Name
Earned Income
Tax Credit
Treasury
Agency
INTERNAL
REVENUE
SERVICE
INTERNAL
REVENUE
SERVICE
Low-Income
Taxpayer Clinics
Treasury
Dept
UNDER
SECRETARY
FOR DOMESTIC
FINANCE,
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
FINANCIAL
INSTITUTIONS
FUND
Community
Development
Financial
Institutions
Program
Purpose
To provide financial support for
people who work but don't earn
high enough income, and could use
the EITC to put food on the table,
move into better housing, invest in
education, transportation, or save
for the future. The credit reduces
the amount of tax an individual
owes, and may be returned in the
form of a refund.
To provide matching grants to
organizations providing: (1)
representation of low-income
taxpayers in controversies with the
Internal Revenue Service (IRS), or
(2) programs to inform individuals
for whom English is a Second
Language about their tax rights and
responsibilities.
To provide financial assistance and
technical assistance grants to
CDFIs that have comprehensive
business plans for creating
demonstrable community
development impact through the
deployment of capital within their
respective target markets for
community development purposes.
[Note: Deleting this row yields problems in MS Word.]
57
Eligible Beneficiaries
Low-income working individuals and
families.
Low-income taxpayers with incomes
which do not exceed 250 percent of
the poverty level or taxpayers for
whom English is a second language.
Private nonprofit
institutions/organizations, other
private institutions/organizations,
profit organizations.
Program, Agency, Type of Assistance, and FY05 Funding Level
Program Name
Advanced
Placement
Program
AmeriCorps
Appalachian Area
Development
Appalachian
Regional
Development
Bank Enterprise
Award Program
Basic Center
Grants of the
Consolidated
Runaway and
Homeless Youth
Program
Child and Adult
Care Food
Program
Child and
Dependent Care
Tax Credit
Child Care Access
Means Parents in
School
Child Care and
Development
Block Grant
Commodity
Supplemental
Food Program
Community
Development
Block Grant
Community
Development
Block
Grants/State's
Program
Community
Development
Type of Assistance
Project Grants
FY ’05 Funding
$30,000,000
CORPORATION FOR
NATIONAL AND
COMMUNITY SERVICE
APPALACHIAN
REGIONAL COMMISSION
Project Grants
$312,100,000
Project Grants
$0
APPALACHIAN
REGIONAL COMMISSION
Project Grants
$66,000,000
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
FINANCIAL
INSTITUTIONS FUND
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Project Grants
$10,000,000
Project Grants
$89,447,000
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
Formula Grants
$2,058,976,000
Tax Credit
$4,190,000,000
Project Grants
(Discretionary)
$16,099,000
Formula Grants
$2,099,729,000
Sale, Exchange, or
Donation of
Property and
Goods; Formula
Grants
Formula Grants
$107,716,000
COMMUNITY PLANNING
AND DEVELOPMENT
(HUD)
Formula Grants
$0
UNDER SECRETARY FOR
DOMESTIC FINANCE,
Project Grants
$55,522,000
Agency
OFFICE OF INNOVATION
AND IMPROVEMENT
(DEPT. OF ED.)
INTERNAL REVENUE
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
TREASURY)
OFFICE OF THE
ASSISTANT SECRETARY
FOR POSTSECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF
ED.)
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
COMMUNITY PLANNING
AND DEVELOPMENT
(HUD)
58
Notes
Not
a
separate
appropriation.
See
Appalachian Regional
Development
for
funding levels.
Appropriations funds
Appalachian Area
Development as well.
FY05 funds for this
program are a part of the
appropriation for the
Consolidated Runaway
and Homeless Youth
Program.
OMB estimated outlays
for FY05
$4,150,035,000
Not a separate
appropriation. See
Community Services
Block Grant
Program Name
Financial
Institutions
Program
Community
Development
Revolving Loan
Program for
Credit Unions
Community Food
and Nutrition
Community Food
Projects
Agency
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
FINANCIAL
INSTITUTIONS FUND
(DEPT. OF TREASURY)
NATIONAL CREDIT
UNION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
COOPERATIVE STATE
RESEARCH,
EDUCATION, AND
EXTENSION SERVICE
(DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE)
Type of Assistance
FY ’05 Funding
Notes
Direct loans
$1,000,000
FY 2005 funds are
available for 2 years.
Direct Payments for
Specified Use.
$7,238,000
Project Grants
$5,000,000
Community
Health Centers
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
Project Grants
$1,748,381,000
Community
Programs to
Improve Minority
Health Grant
Program
OFFICE OF THE
SECRETARY (DHHS)
Project Grants
$51,011,000
Community
Services Block
Grant
Community
Technology
Centers
Cooperative
Agreements for
State-Based
Comprehensive
Breast and
Cervical Cancer
Early Detection
Programs
Cooperative
Agreements to
Improve the
Health Status of
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Formula Grants
$641,935,000
ASSISTANT SECRETARY
FOR VOCATIONAL AND
ADULT EDUCATION
(DEPT. OF ED.)
CENTERS FOR DISEASE
CONTROL AND
PREVENTION (DHHS)
Project Grants
$5,000,000
Project Grants
(Cooperative
Agreements)
$9,000,000
OFFICE OF THE
SECRETARY (DHHS)
Project Grants
(Cooperative
Agreements)
$0
59
Funding level is the
authorized spending
level. Appropriations
bill does not specify a
separate appropriation.
Appropriations includes
funds for Health Center
Grants for Homeless
Populations; Technical
and Non-Financial
Assistance to Health
Centers and National
Health Service Corps
(NHSC); Health Centers
Grants for Residents of
Public Housing; Health
Centers Grants for
Migrant and Seasonal
Farmworkers.
Not a separate
appropriation. Funding
level shown here is the
overall funding level for
minority health
programs.
Not a separate
appropriation. See
Community Programs to
Improve Minority
Program Name
Minority
Populations
Demolition and
Revitalization of
Severely
Distressed Public
Housing (HOPE
VI)
Disadvantaged
Health
Professions
Faculty Loan
Repayment and
Fellowship
Program
Dislocated
Workers
Assistance
Earned Income
Tax Credit
Education and
Prevention to
Reduce Sexual
Abuse of
Runaway,
Homeless and
Street Youth
(Street Outreach
Program)
Education for
Homeless
Children and
Youth
Emergency Food
and Shelter
Program
Emergency
Shelter Grants
Program
Employment and
Training
Administration
Pilots,
Demonstrations,
and Research
Projects
Employment
Service
Type of Assistance
FY ’05 Funding
PUBLIC AND INDIAN
HOUSING (HUD)
Project Grants
$144,000,000
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
Direct Payments for
Specified Use.
$1,313,000
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
INTERNAL REVENUE
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
TREASURY)
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Formula Grants.
Project Grants
$1,479,419,000
Tax Credit
$39,326,000,000
Project Grants
$15,302,000
OFFICE OF
ELEMENTARY AND
SECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF
ED.)
FEMA (DEPT. OF
HOMELAND SECURITY)
Formula Grants
$63,000,000
Formula Grants
$153,000,000
COMMUNITY PLANNING
AND DEVELOPMENT
(HUD)
Formula Grants
$1,250,515,000
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
Project Grants
$85,854,000
Formula Grants.
Provision of
$786,887,000
Agency
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
60
Notes
Health Grant Program
for overall funding level
for minority health
programs.
OMB estimated outlays
for FY05
Program does not
receive separate
appropriation. It is
funded under the
McKinney Vento
Homeless Assistance
Act.
Program Name
Agency
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
Type of Assistance
Specialized
Services. Advisory
Services and
Counseling
Project Grants
(Discretionary)
FY ’05 Funding
Notes
$0
This program is funded
through a set-aside of
the Even Start program,
not a separate
appropriations. See Even
Start State Educational
Agencies
Even Start
Migrant
Education
OFFICE OF
ELEMENTARY AND
SECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF
ED.)
Even Start State
Educational
Agencies
OFFICE OF
ELEMENTARY AND
SECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF
ED.)
OFFICE OF
ELEMENTARY AND
SECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF
ED.)
Formula Grants.
Project Grants
$226,910,000
Project Grants
(Discretionary)
$0
OFFICE OF THE
SECRETARY (DHHS)
Project Grants
$288,283,000
Direct Payments for
Specified Use
Direct Payments for
Specified Use
$12,464,715,000
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
Sale, Exchange, or
Donation of
Property and Goods
$178,797,000
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
CORPORATION FOR
NATIONAL AND
COMMUNITY SERVICE
Direct Payments for
Specified Use
$35,154,554,000
Project Grants
$110,121,000
OFFICE OF THE
ASSISTANT SECRETARY
FOR POSTSECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF
ED.)
Project Grants
(Discretionary)
$308,960,000
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
Project Grants
$6,898,580,000
Project Grants;
Provision of
Specialized Services
Project Grants
$35,935,000
Even StartStatewide Family
Literacy Program
Family Planning
Services
Federal Pell
Grant Program
Federal Perkins
Loan Program
Federal Capital
Contributions
Food Donation
/Distribution
(Commodity
Assistance
Program)
Food Stamp
Program
Foster
Grandparent
Program
Gaining Early
Awareness and
Readiness for
Undergraduate
Programs
Head Start
Health Careers
Opportunity
Program
Health Center
Grants for
Homeless
FEDERAL STUDENT AID
(DEPT. OF ED.)
FEDERAL STUDENT AID
(DEPT. OF ED.)
61
This program is funded
through a set-aside of
the Even Start program,
not a separate
appropriations. See Even
Start State Educational
Agencies
$66,665,000
$0
Approps. Source: OMB
FY 2005 Budget
Authority Table
Not a separate
appropriations. See
Community Health
Type of Assistance
FY ’05 Funding
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
Project Grants
$0
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
Project Grants
$0
OFFICE OF THE
SECRETARY (DHHS)
Project Grants
$0
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
COMMUNITY PLANNING
AND DEVELOPMENT
(HUD)
Project Grants
$103,376,000
Formula Grants
$1,915,000,000
HOUSING (HUD)
Project Grants
$0
Job Access and
Reverse Commute
Grants
Job Opportunities
for Low-Income
Individuals
FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF TRANSPORTATION)
Project Grants
(Cooperative
Agreements)
Project Grants
$125,000,000
Leveraging
Educational
Assistance
Partnership
Low Income
Home Energy
Assistance
Lower Income
Housing
Assistance
Program Section
8 Moderate
Rehabilitation
(Section 8
Housing
Assistance
Payments
FEDERAL STUDENT AID
(DEPT. OF ED.)
Formula Grants
$66,172,000
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Formula Grants
$2,200,000,000
Direct Payments for
Specified Use
$0
Program Name
Populations
Health Centers
Grants for
Migrant and
Seasonal
Farmworkers
Health Centers
Grants for
Residents of
Public Housing
Health Disparities
in Minority Health
(Health
Disparities
Grants)
Healthy Start
Initiative
HOME Investment
Partnerships
Program (HOME
Program)
Housing
Counseling
Assistance
Program
Agency
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
(DHHS)
PUBLIC AND INDIAN
HOUSING (HUD)
62
$0
Notes
Centers funding.
Not a separate
appropriations. See
Community Health
Centers funding.
Not a separate
appropriations. See
Community Health
Centers funding.
Not a separate
appropriation. See
Community Programs to
Improve Minority
Health Grant Program
for overall funding level
for minority health
programs.
Includes $42,000,000
for the Housing
Assistance Counseling
Program
Funds for this program
are allocated from the
appropriation for the
HOME Investment
Partnership Program.
See the Urban and Rural
Community Economic
Development Program
for JOLI funding
Appropriation inc.
emergency allocations
and leveraging funds.
This program is inactive.
No new projects are
being approved.
Program Name
Program for Very
Low Income
FamiliesModerate
Rehabilitation)
Low-Income
Housing Tax
Credit
Low-Income
Taxpayer Clinics
Maternal and
Child Health
Services Block
Grant to the States
(MCH Block
Grants)
Medical
Assistance
Program
Medicare Hospital
Insurance
Microenterprise
Development
Grants (PRIME)
Microloan
Demonstration
Program
Migrant and
Seasonal
Farmworkers
(National
Farmworker Jobs
Program)
Migrant
Education
Coordination
Program
Migrant
Education State
Grant Program
National School
Lunch Program
New Assets for
Independence
Demonstration
Program (IDA
Demonstration
Program)
New Markets
Venture Capital
Type of Assistance
FY ’05 Funding
Notes
FAIR HOUSING AND
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
(HUD)
Tax Credit
$4,210,000,000
OMB estimated outlays
for FY05
INTERNAL REVENUE
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
TREASURY)
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
Project Grants
$8,000,000
Formula Grants
$729,817,000
CENTERS FOR
MEDICARE AND
MEDICAID SERVICES
(DHHS)
CENTERS FOR
MEDICARE AND
MEDICAID SERVICES
(DHHS)
SMALL BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATION
Formula Grants
$119,124,488,000
Direct Payments for
Specified Use
$87,000,000
Project Grants
$5,000,000
SMALL BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATION
Formula Grants.
Direct Loans
$14,000,000
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
Formula Grants.
Project Grants
$76,874,000
Project Grants
$393,577,000
Combined appropriation
with Migrant Education
State Grant Program.
Formula Grants
$0
See Migrant Education
Coordination Program.
Formula Grants
$6,794,930,000
Project Grants
$24,912,000
Project Grants.
Guaranteed/Insured
Loans
$0
Agency
OFFICE OF
ELEMENTARY AND
SECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF
ED.)
OFFICE OF
ELEMENTARY AND
SECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF
ED.)
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
SMALL BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATION
63
No direct approp for
2005. The
Appropriations bill
Program Name
Agency
Type of Assistance
FY ’05 Funding
Nutrition
Assistance For
Puerto Rico
One-Stop Career
Center Initiative
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
Direct Payments for
Specified Use
$1,515,027,000
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
OFFICE OF INNOVATION
AND IMPROVEMENT
(DEPT. OF ED.)
Project Grants
$98,764,000
Project Grants
$42,224,000
OFFICE OF THE
SECRETARY (DHHS)
Project Grants
$0
Parental
Assistance
Information
Centers
Project Grants for
Facilities to
Improve the
Health Status of
Minority
Populations
Projects for
Assistance in
Transition from
Homelessness
(PATH)
Promoting Safe
and Stable
Families
Public and Indian
Housing
Public Health
Training Centers
Grant Program
SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND
MENTAL HEALTH
SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
Formula Grants
$55,251,000
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Formula Grants
$404,383,000
Direct Payments for
Specified Use
Project Grants
$2,458,000,000
Refugee and
Entrant Assistance
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Project Grants
(Cooperative
Agreements)
$488,336,000
Refugee and
Entrant Assistance
Voluntary Agency
Programs
(Matching Grant
Program)
Refugee and
Entrant
AssistanceTargeted
Assistance
Scholarships for
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Project Grants
$0
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Formula Grants
$49,477,000
Project Grants
$47,510,000
PUBLIC AND INDIAN
HOUSING (HUD)
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
HEALTH RESOURCES
64
$10,249,000
Notes
provides $128.1 million
for business loan
programs.
Not a separate
appropriation. See
Community Programs to
Improve Minority
Health Grant Program
for overall funding level
for minority health
programs.
Funded in the Public
Health Workforce
Development Account
of the Appropriations
bill.
Not a separate
appropriation. Funded
through overall
appropriation for
Refugee and Entrant
Assistance (shown here).
Not a separate
appropriation. See
Refugee and Entrant
Assistance.
Program Name
Health
Professions
Students from
Disadvantaged
Backgrounds
School Breakfast
Program
Section 8 Housing
Choice Vouchers
Self-Help
Homeownership
Opportunity
Program-SHOP
Senior Community
Service
Employment
Program
Senior Companion
Program
Small Business
Loans
Social Services
Block Grant
Social Services
Research and
Demonstration
Special Milk
Program for
Children
Special
Supplemental
Nutrition Program
for Women,
Infants, and
Children
Star Schools
State
Administrative
Expenses for
Child Nutrition
State
Administrative
Matching Grants
for Food Stamp
Type of Assistance
FY ’05 Funding
Formula Grants
$1,925,044,000
Direct Payments for
Specified Use
Project Grants
$0
Formula Grants.
Project Grants
$440,200,000
Project Grants
$46,275,000
Guaranteed/Insured
Loans (including
Immediate
Participation Loans)
Formula Grants
$16,000,000
Project Grants.
Project Grants
(Cooperative
Agreements).
Project Grants
(Contracts)
$32,229,000
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
Formula Grants
$17,210,000
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
Formula Grants
$5,277,250,000
Project Grants
$21,000,000
Formula Grant
$144,487,000
Formula Grants
$35,154,554,000
Agency
Notes
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
PUBLIC AND INDIAN
HOUSING (HUD)
COMMUNITY PLANNING
AND DEVELOPMENT
(HUD)
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
CORPORATION FOR
NATIONAL AND
COMMUNITY SERVICE
SMALL BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
OFFICE OF INNOVATION
AND IMPROVEMENT
(DEPT. OF ED.)
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
65
$25,000,000
$1,700,000,000
Funds are combined
with those for the
Welfare Reform
Research, Evaluations
and National Studies.
$6,000,000 is provided
through an Evaluations
Set-Aside.
Program Name
Program
State Children's
Insurance
Program
State Court
Improvement
Program
State Planning
Grant Health
Care Access for
the Uninsured
Summer Food
Service Program
for Children
Supplemental
Security Income
Agency
CENTERS FOR
MEDICARE AND
MEDICAID SERVICES
(DHHS)
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
SOCIAL SECURITY
ADMINISTRATION
Type of Assistance
FY ’05 Funding
Notes
Formula Grants
$5,343,000,000
Formula Grants
$0
Source for funding level:
President's FY 2006
Budget Proposal.
Not a separate
appropriation. Funded
under Promoting Safe
and Stable Families
capped entitlement
program.
Project Grants
$11,000,000
Formula Grants
$282,787,000
Direct Payments
with Unrestricted
Use. Direct
Payments for
Specified Use
Project Grants;
Direct Payments for
Specified Use
$39,640,829,000
Supportive
Housing Program
COMMUNITY PLANNING
AND DEVELOPMENT
(HUD)
Teacher Quality
Enhancement
Grants
OFFICE OF THE
ASSISTANT SECRETARY
FOR POSTSECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF
ED.)
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
Project Grants
(Discretionary)
$2,940,126,000
Project Grants
(Cooperative
Agreements)
$0
Not a separate
appropriation. Included
in Community Health
Centers funding.
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Formula Grants
$17,881,000,000
Funding level shown
here is Budget
Authority, not
appropriations. Funds
include High
Performance Bonuses.
Source for funding level:
HHS FY 2006
President's Budget
Proposal .
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
Formula Grants
$50,000,000
Technical and
Non-Financial
Assistance to
Health Centers
and National
Health Service
Corps (NHSC)
Delivery Sites
Temporary
Assistance for
Needy Families
The Emergency
Food Assistance
Program
66
$1,250,515,000
Program does not
receive a separate
appropriation. It is
funded under the
McKinney Vento
Homeless Assistance
Act.
Program Name
(TEFAP)Administrative
Costs
The Emergency
Food Assistance
Program
(TEFAP)-Food
Commodities
Title I Grants to
Local Educational
Agencies(Title I
Basic,
Concentration,
and Targeted
Grants)
Transitional
Living for
Homeless Youth
TRIO Educational
Opportunity
Centers
TRIO McNair
PostBaccalaureate
Achievement
TRIO Student
Support Services
TRIO Talent
Search
TRIO Upward
Bound
Twenty-First
Century
Community
Learning Centers
Unemployment
Insurance
Urban and Rural
Community
Type of Assistance
FY ’05 Funding
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
Formula Grants
$140,000,000
OFFICE OF
ELEMENTARY AND
SECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF
ED.)
Formula Grants
$12,842,309,000
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Project Grants
$0
OFFICE OF ASSISTANT
SECRETARY FOR
POSTSECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF
ED.)
Project Grants
$843,289,000
OFFICE OF ASSISTANT
SECRETARY FOR
POSTSECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF
ED.)
OFFICE OF ASSISTANT
SECRETARY FOR
POSTSECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF
ED.)
OFFICE OF ASSISTANT
SECRETARY FOR
POSTSECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF
ED.)
OFFICE OF ASSISTANT
SECRETARY FOR
POSTSECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF
ED.)
OFFICE OF
ELEMENTARY AND
SECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF
ED.)
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
Project Grants
$0
Project Grants
$0
Project Grants
$0
Project Grants
$0
Formula Grants
$999,070,000
Formula Grants.
Direct Payments
with Unrestricted
Use
Project Grants
(Cooperative
$2,695,214,000
Agency
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
67
$33,000,000
Notes
Not a separate
appropriation in FY
2005 (was separately
funded in FY 2004). See
Basic Center Grants of
the Consolidated
Runaway and Homeless
Youth Program
Not a separate
appropriation. Funding
level shown here is the
total for all 6 TRIO
programs.
Not a separate
appropriation. See TRIO
Educational Opportunity
Centers
Not a separate
appropriation. See TRIO
Educational Opportunity
Centers
Not a separate
appropriation. See TRIO
Educational Opportunity
Centers
Not a separate
appropriation. See TRIO
Educational Opportunity
Centers
Includes $5,481,000.00
for JOLI
Program Name
Economic
Development
Volunteers in
Service to
America (VISTA)
Weatherization
Assistance for
Low-Income
Persons
Welfare Reform
Research,
Evaluations and
National Studies
Welfare-to-Work
Grants to States
and Localities
WIA Adult
Program
WIA Youth
Activities
WIC Farmers'
Market Nutrition
Program (FMNP)
Youth Opportunity
Grants
Youthbuild
Agency
Type of Assistance
Agreements)
FY ’05 Funding
CORPORATION FOR
NATIONAL AND
COMMUNITY SERVICE
Provision of
Specialized Services
$95,000,000
OFFICE OF ENERGY
EFFICIENCY AND
RENEWABLE ENERGY
(DEPT. OF ENERGY)
Formula Grants
$230,000,000
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Project Grants
$0
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
Formula Grants.
Project Grants
$376,000
Formula Grants
$898,891,000
Formula Grants
$994,242,000
Formula Grants
$19,800,000
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
COMMUNITY PLANNING
AND DEVELOPMENT
(HUD)
Project Grants
$0
Project Grants
$62,000,000
Total:
68
$387,792,063,000
Notes
Funds are combined
with those for the Social
Services Research and
Demonstrations.
$6,000,000 is provided
through an Evaluations
Set-Aside.
Program expired
September 2004.
Program expired in FY
2003
Program, Agency, Type of Funding and Applicant Eligibility
Program Name
Type of Assistance
Eligible to Apply for Funds
OFFICE OF INNOVATION
AND IMPROVEMENT
(DEPT. OF ED.)
Project Grants
CORPORATION FOR
NATIONAL AND
COMMUNITY SERVICE
Project Grants
Appalachian Area
Development
APPALACHIAN
REGIONAL COMMISSION
Project Grants
Appalachian Regional
Development
APPALACHIAN
REGIONAL COMMISSION
Project Grants
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
FINANCIAL
INSTITUTIONS FUND
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Project Grants
Child and Adult Care
Food Program
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
Formula Grants
Child and Dependent
Care Tax Credit
INTERNAL REVENUE
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
TREASURY)
Local Education Agencies, Nonprofit
Organizations, and State Education
Agencies.
States, District of Columbia, Puerto
Rico, Tribes, Territories, national
nonprofit organizations, professional
corps, and multi-State organizations.
States, their subdivisions and
instrumentalities and private nonprofit
agencies.
States, and through the States, public
bodies and private nonprofit
organizations. All proposed projects
must meet the requirements of the
state Appalachian plan and the annual
state strategy statement and
investment program, all of which must
be approved
Profit organizations and other private
institutions/organizations in the form
of insured depository institutions.
States, localities, private entities, and
coordinated networks of such entities
are eligible to apply for a Basic Center
Program grant unless they are part of
the law enforcement structure or the
juvenile justice system. Federally
recognized Indian organizations are
also eligible to apply for grants as
private, non-profit agencies.
The state or U.S. territory agency
applies for, and signs an annual
agreement to receive federal funds for
disbursement. In Virginia, where the
state does not administer the program,
institutions may receive funds directly
from USDA.
Eligible applicants are people who in
order to work or look for work have to
pay for child care services for
dependents under age 13 or for care of
a spouse or a dependent of any age
who is physically or mentally
incapable of self-care. The filing status
of applicants for the credit must be
single, head of household, qualifying
widow(er) with a dependent child, or
married filing jointly.
An institution of higher education is
eligible to apply if the total amount of
Advanced Placement
Program
AmeriCorps
Bank Enterprise
Award Program
Basic Center Grants of
the Consolidated
Runaway and
Homeless Youth
Program
Child Care Access
Means Parents in
Agency
OFFICE OF THE
ASSISTANT SECRETARY
FOR POSTSECONDARY
Project Grants
Tax Credit.
Project Grants
(Discretionary)
69
Program Name
School
Agency
Type of Assistance
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF ED.)
Child Care and
Development Block
Grant
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Formula Grants
Commodity
Supplemental Food
Program
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
Sale, Exchange, or
Donation of Property
and Goods; Formula
Grants
Community
Development Block
Grant
COMMUNITY PLANNING
AND DEVELOPMENT
(HUD)
Formula Grants
Community
Development Block
Grants/State's
Program
COMMUNITY PLANNING
AND DEVELOPMENT
(HUD)
Formula Grants
Community
Development
Financial Institutions
Program
UNDER SECRETARY FOR
DOMESTIC FINANCE,
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
FINANCIAL
INSTITUTIONS FUND
(DEPT. OF TREASURY)
Project Grants
Community
Development
Revolving Loan
Program for Credit
Unions
Community Food and
Nutrition
NATIONAL CREDIT
UNION ADMINISTRATION
Direct Loans
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Direct Payments for
Specified Use.
Formula Grants
70
Eligible to Apply for Funds
all Federal Pell Grant Funds awarded
to students enrolled at the institution
of higher education for the preceding
fiscal year equals or exceeds
$350,000.
All states, the District of Columbia,
territories, federally recognized tribal
governments, and tribal organizations,
including Alaska Native organizations
and Native Hawaiian organizations.
Agreements are made between FNS
and the state agency, or an Indian
tribe, band, or group recognized by the
Department of the Interior for the
administration of the program.
Cities in Metropolitan Areas
designated by OMB as a central city of
the Metropolitan Area; other cities
over 50,000 in Metropolitan Areas;
and qualified urban counties of at least
200,000 (excluding the population in
entitlement cities located within the
boundaries of such counties) are
eligible to receive CDBG entitlement
grants determined by a statutory
formula.
Only state governments may receive
funds from HUD under this program.
Funds are allocated to each state based
on a statutory formula. States must
distribute the funds to units of general
local government in non-entitlement
areas.
Private nonprofit institutions/
organizations, other private
institutions/organizations, profit
organizations. Only certified
Community Development Financial
Institutions or entities seeking to
become a CDFI.
All state and federally chartered credit
unions with a low income designation.
Formula grants are awarded to
Community Services Block Grant
recipients in each of the 50 States, the
District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam
the Virgin Islands, American Samoa,
and the Northern Mariana Islands. The
Secretary of Health and Human
Services is authorized to make direct
Program Name
Community Food
Projects
Community Health
Centers
Community Programs
to Improve Minority
Health Grant Program
Agency
Type of Assistance
Eligible to Apply for Funds
COOPERATIVE STATE
RESEARCH, EDUCATION,
AND EXTENSION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
Project Grants
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
OFFICE OF THE
SECRETARY (DHHS)
Project Grants
grants to state and local public and
private nonprofit agencies with a
demonstrated ability to successfully
develop and implement nutritionrelated program activities.
Private nonprofit entities. Applicants
are encouraged to seek and create
partnership among public, private
nonprofit and private for-profit
organizations or firms.
Public and non-profit private entities.
Project Grants
Community Services
Block Grant
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Formula Grants
Community
Technology Centers
ASSISTANT SECRETARY
FOR VOCATIONAL AND
ADULT EDUCATION
(DEPT. OF ED.)
Project Grants
Cooperative
Agreements for StateBased Comprehensive
Breast and Cervical
Cancer Early
Detection Programs
CENTERS FOR DISEASE
CONTROL AND
PREVENTION (DHHS)
Project Grants
(Cooperative
Agreements)
Cooperative
Agreements to Improve
the Health Status of
Minority Populations
Demolition and
Revitalization of
Severely Distressed
Public Housing
(HOPE VI)
Disadvantaged Health
Professions Faculty
OFFICE OF THE
SECRETARY (DHHS)
Project Grants
(Cooperative
Agreements)
PUBLIC AND INDIAN
HOUSING (HUD)
Project Grants
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
Direct Payments for
Specified Use
71
Private nonprofit community-based
minority serving organizations which
will serve as the grantee organization
for the coalition. Faith based
organizations also may apply.
Each of the 50 States, the District of
Columbia, the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico, Guam, the Virgin Islands,
American Samoa, the Commonwealth
of the Northern Mariana Islands, as
well as the governing body of a
formally recognized Indian tribe or
tribal organization.
State educational agencies, local
educational agencies, institutions of
higher education, other public and
private nonprofit or for-profit agencies
and organizations, or groups of such
agencies, institutions or organizations.
State health departments, as well as
health departments of the District of
Columbia, and U.S. territories. In
addition, federally recognized Indian
tribal governments and tribal
organizations, urban Indian
organizations and inter-tribal consortia
whose primary purpose is to improve
American Indian/Alaska Native health
and which represent the Native
population in their catchment area.
Public and private nonprofit entities
may apply. Faith based organizations
are eligible to apply.
Public Housing Agencies (PHAs)
operating public housing units. Indian
Housing Authorities and PHAs that
only administer the Section 8 Program
are not eligible to apply.
Individuals from disadvantaged
backgrounds who (1) have a degree in
Program Name
Loan Repayment and
Fellowship Program
Agency
Dislocated Workers
Assistance
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
Earned Income Tax
Credit
INTERNAL REVENUE
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
TREASURY)
Education and
Prevention to Reduce
Sexual Abuse of
Runaway, Homeless
and Street Youth
(Street Outreach
Program)
Education for
Homeless Children
and Youth
Type of Assistance
(DHHS)
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Formula Grants.
Project Grants
Tax Credit
Project Grants
OFFICE OF ELEMENTARY
AND SECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF ED.)
Formula Grants
Emergency Food and
Shelter Program
FEMA (DEPT. OF HOMELAND
SECURITY)
Formula Grants
Emergency Shelter
Grants Program
COMMUNITY PLANNING
AND DEVELOPMENT
(HUD)
Formula Grants
72
Eligible to Apply for Funds
medicine, osteopathic medicine,
dentistry, pharmacy, podiatric
medicine, optometry, veterinary
medicine, nursing, graduate public
health, selected allied health or
graduate behavioral and mental health;
(2) are enrolled in an approved
graduate training program in one of
the health professions listed above; (3)
are enrolled as fulltime students in
accredited institutions described above
and in the final course of study or
program leading to a degree from the
institution.
The 50 States, Puerto Rico, the
District of Columbia and the outlying
areas are eligible to receive formulabased funding.
To claim the EITC, individuals must
be a U.S. citizen or resident alien all
year, have earned income and a valid
Social Security Number and may not
have a tax filing status of "married
filing separately." In addition,
investment income is limited $2,650.
Claimants cannot be a qualifying child
of another person.
Any private, nonprofit agency is
eligible to apply. Non-federally
recognized Indian Tribes and urban
Indian organizations are eligible to
apply for grants as private, nonprofit
agencies. Public agencies are not
eligible.
Departments of education in the 50
states, the District of Columbia, Puerto
Rico, the outlying areas, and schools
serving Indian students that are funded
by the Secretary of the Interior. Only
LEAs are eligible for state subgrants.
Since funds are initially distributed to
jurisdictions based on either a National
Board formula or recommendations
from state Set-Aside Committees,
there is no application process for
jurisdictions. All jurisdictions are
considered within the National Board
formula and all jurisdictions in an
individual state may be considered by
the state Set-Aside Committee for
either initial or additional funding.
States, metropolitan cities, urban
counties, and territories. Local
governments receiving formula
Program Name
Agency
Type of Assistance
Employment and
Training
Administration Pilots,
Demonstrations, and
Research Projects
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
Project Grants
Employment Service
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
Formula Grants
Advisory Services
and Counseling.
Even Start Migrant
Education
OFFICE OF ELEMENTARY
AND SECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF ED.)
Project Grants
(Discretionary).
Even Start State
Educational Agencies
OFFICE OF ELEMENTARY
AND SECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF ED.)
Formula Grants.
Project Grants
Even Start-Statewide
Family Literacy
Program
Family Planning
Services
OFFICE OF ELEMENTARY
AND SECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF ED.)
Project Grants
(Discretionary).
Federal Pell Grant
Program
OFFICE OF THE
SECRETARY (DHHS)
FEDERAL STUDENT AID
(DEPT. OF ED.)
Project Grants
Direct Payments for
Specified Use
73
Eligible to Apply for Funds
allocations may distribute all or part of
their grants to nonprofit recipients to
be used for ESG activities. State
grantees must distribute ESG funds to
local governments, or directly to
nonprofit organizations with the
approval of the local government.
Only local governments and nonprofit
organizations may apply for ESG
funds directly from States. The
territories receive their allocations
based on their population size.
State and local governments, federal
agencies, private nonprofit and forprofit organizations, including faithbased and community-based
organizations, and educational
institutions.
Provision of Specialized Services.
States, including District of Columbia,
the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, and
Guam.
Any entity may apply, including state
educational agencies (SEAs) that
administer migrant programs; local
educational agencies (LEAs) that have
a high percentage of migrant students;
and nonprofit community- based
organizations that work with migrant
families.
State educational agencies.
Subgrantees are partnerships of a local
educational agency (LEA) and a
nonprofit community-based
organization, a public agency other
than an LEA, an institution of higher
education or other public or private
nonprofit organizations. Any of the
latter, with demonstrated quality, may
apply in collaboration with a LEA.
The State education office or agency
Any public (including city, county,
local, regional, or state government)
entity or nonprofit private entity
located in a state (including the
District of Columbia and the U.S.
territories). Faith based organizations
also may apply.
Undergraduate students enrolled as
regular students in an eligible program
at an eligible institution of higher
education and making satisfactory
Program Name
Agency
Type of Assistance
Federal Perkins Loan
Program Federal
Capital Contributions
FEDERAL STUDENT AID
(DEPT. OF ED.)
Direct Payments for
Specified Use
Food Donation
/Distribution
(Commodity
Assistance Program)
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
Sale, Exchange, or
Donation of Property
and Goods.
Food Stamp Program
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
Direct Payments for
Specified Use
Foster Grandparent
Program
Gaining Early
Awareness and
Readiness for
Undergraduate
Programs
Head Start
Health Careers
Opportunity Program
CORPORATION FOR
NATIONAL AND
COMMUNITY SERVICE
OFFICE OF THE
ASSISTANT SECRETARY
FOR POSTSECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF ED.)
Project Grants
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Project Grants
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
Project Grants
Project Grants
(Discretionary).
74
Eligible to Apply for Funds
academic progress. The applicants
must be U.S. citizens or eligible
noncitizens and have a high school
diploma, a GED, or demonstrate the
ability to benefit from the program
offered.
Higher education institutions (public,
private nonprofit, postsecondary
vocational, and proprietary) meeting
eligibility requirements.
State, territorial and federal agencies
that are designated as distributing
agencies by the governor, legislature,
or other authority. School and other
child feeding programs are eligible but
must meet requirements. Charitable
institutions are eligible to the extent
they serve needy persons.
The state or U.S. territory agency
responsible for federally aided public
assistance programs.
State and local government agencies
and private nonprofit organizations.
A state, or a partnership consisting of
one or more local education agencies
acting on behalf of one or more
elementary schools or secondary
schools; and the secondary schools
that students from the schools
(elementary/secondary) would
normally attend; one or more degree
granting institutions of higher
education; and at least two community
organizations or entities, such as
businesses, professional associations,
community-based organizations,
philanthropic organizations, state
agencies, parent groups, and/or
nonprofit organizations.
Any local government, federallyrecognized Indian tribe, or public or
private nonprofit or for profit agency
Grantee agencies may subcontract
with other child-serving agencies to
provide services to Head Start
children.
Accredited schools of medicine,
osteopathic medicine, public health,
dentistry, veterinary medicine,
optometry, pharmacy, allied health,
chiropractic, podiatric medicine,
public and nonprofit private schools
that offer graduate programs in
behavioral and mental health,
Program Name
Agency
Type of Assistance
Health Center Grants
for Homeless
Populations
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
Project Grants
Health Centers Grants
for Migrant and
Seasonal Farmworkers
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
Project Grants
Health Centers Grants
for Residents of Public
Housing
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
Project Grants
Health Disparities in
Minority Health
(Health Disparities
Grants)
Healthy Start Initiative
OFFICE OF THE
SECRETARY (DHHS)
Project Grants
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
Project Grants
HOME Investment
Partnerships Program
(HOME Program)
Housing Counseling
Assistance Program
COMMUNITY PLANNING
AND DEVELOPMENT
(HUD)
HOUSING (HUD)
Formula Grants
Project Grants
75
Eligible to Apply for Funds
programs for the training of physician
assistants, and other public or private
nonprofit health or educational
entities.
Nonprofit private organizations and
public entities, including state and
local governmental agencies. Grantees
and other organizations with whom
they may contract for services under
this program must have an agreement
with a State under its Medicaid
program, Title XIX of the Social
Security Act (if they provide services
that are covered under the Title XIX
plan for the State), and be qualified to
receive payments under the agreement.
Any public or nonprofit private entity.
Priority will be given to applications
submitted by community-based
organizations which are representative
of the populations to be served. Profitmaking organizations are not eligible.
Public and nonprofit private entities
which have the capacity to effectively
administer a grant and are located near
a public housing site.
Private nonprofit community-based
minority serving organizations. Faith
based organizations also may apply.
Any public or private entity, including
an Indian tribe or tribal organization,
in urban and rural communities with
significant disparities in perinatal
health, as well as states with the need
to build their infrastructure/ capacity
to address and support those
communities. Faith-based
organizations also may apply.
States, cities, urban counties, and
consortia (of contiguous units of
general local governments with a
binding agreement) are eligible to
receive formula allocations; funds are
also set aside for grants to Insular
Areas. Eligible applicants for technical
assistance grants include for-profit and
non-profit professional and technical
services companies or firms and
HOME participating jurisdictions or
agencies.
Qualified public or private nonprofit
organizations. There are three
categories of eligible applicants: (1)
Program Name
Agency
Type of Assistance
Job Access and
Reverse Commute
Grants
Job Opportunities for
Low-Income
Individuals
FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF TRANSPORTATION)
Leveraging
Educational Assistance
Partnership
FEDERAL STUDENT AID
(DEPT. OF ED.)
Formula Grants
Low Income Home
Energy Assistance
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Formula Grants
Lower Income
Housing Assistance
Program Section 8
Moderate
Rehabilitation (Section
8 Housing Assistance
Payments Program for
Very Low Income
Families-Moderate
Rehabilitation)
Low-Income Housing
Tax Credit
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
PUBLIC AND INDIAN
HOUSING (HUD)
FAIR HOUSING AND
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
(HUD)
Project Grants
(Cooperative
Agreements)
Project Grants
Direct Payments for
Specified Use
Tax Credit
76
Eligible to Apply for Funds
HUD-approved local housing
counseling agency; (2) HUD-approved
national or regional intermediary; and
(3) State housing finance agency.
State and local government agencies,
nonprofit agencies, and transit
providers.
Nonprofit, tax-exempt organizations
(including community development
corporations, faith based, charitable,
and tribal organizations).
The agency responsible for
administering each state's need-based
scholarship/ grant program. U.S.
territories are also eligible to apply.
All states, the District of Columbia,
federally- and state-recognized Indian
tribal governments which request
direct funding, and specified territories
may receive direct grants. Grantees
desiring leveraging incentive funds
and REACH funds must submit
special applications each year. Other
applicant eligibility may apply if
emergency contingency funds are
released. States, Indian tribes or tribal
organizations, territories, public
agencies, and private nonprofit
organizations may apply for training
and technical assistance grants.
An authorized Public Housing Agency
Owners of low income rental housing
based on the development cost of low
income apartments. States allocate
housing tax credits through a
competitive process based on the
state's consolidated plan. Allocation
plans must give priority to projects
that (a) serve the lowest income
families; and (b) are structured to
remain affordable for the longest
period of time. Ten percent of each
state's annual housing tax credit
allocation is set aside for projects
owned by nonprofit organizations/
Program Name
Agency
Type of Assistance
Low-Income Taxpayer
Clinics
INTERNAL REVENUE
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
TREASURY)
Project Grants
Maternal and Child
Health Services Block
Grant to the States
(MCH Block Grants)
Medical Assistance
Program
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
Formula Grants
CENTERS FOR MEDICARE
AND MEDICAID
SERVICES (DHHS)
Formula Grants
CENTERS FOR MEDICARE
AND MEDICAID
SERVICES (DHHS)
Direct Payments for
Specified Use
Medicare Hospital
Insurance
Microenterprise
Development Grants
(PRIME)
SMALL BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATION
Project Grants
Microloan
Demonstration
Program
SMALL BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATION
Formula Grants.
Direct Loans.
Migrant and Seasonal
Farmworkers
(National Farmworker
Jobs Program)
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
Formula Grants.
Project Grants
Migrant Education
Coordination Program
OFFICE OF ELEMENTARY
AND SECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF ED.)
Project Grants
77
Eligible to Apply for Funds
developers of qualified projects.
Private nonprofit
institutions/organizations or
educational institutions with
accredited law, business or accounting
schools.
States and insular areas
State and local welfare agencies must
operate under an HHS-approved
Medicaid State Plan and comply with
all federal regulations governing aid
and medical assistance to the needy.
Persons age 65 or over and certain
disabled persons are eligible for
hospital insurance protection. A
person reaching age 65 in 1968 or
after, who is not eligible for cash
benefits, needs some work credit to
qualify for hospital insurance benefits.
Non-profit microenterprise
development or program or
collaborative with a demonstrated
record of delivering microenterprise
services to disadvantaged
entrepreneurs, an intermediary, a
microenterprise development
organization or program that is
accountable to a local community,
working in conjunction with a state or
local government or Indian tribe, or an
Indian tribe acting on its' own, if the
tribe can certify that no private
organization or program exists within
its' jurisdiction.
Applicants must meet the definition of
an intermediary lender as published in
program materials, 13 CFR, and PL
102-140, and meet published
minimum experience and capability
requirements.
Public agencies and units of
government (state and local); and
private nonprofit
institutions/organizations authorized
by their charters or articles of
incorporation to operate employment
and training programs.
State educational agencies, local
educational agencies, institutions of
higher education and other public or
nonprofit private entities. SEAs
Program Name
Agency
Type of Assistance
OFFICE OF ELEMENTARY
AND SECONDARY
Formula Grants
National School Lunch
Program
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
Formula Grants
New Assets for
Independence
Demonstration
Program (IDA
Demonstration
Program)
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Project Grants
Migrant Education
State Grant Program
New Markets Venture
Capital
Nutrition Assistance
SMALL BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATION
Project Grants.
Guaranteed/Insured
Loans
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
Direct Payments for
78
Eligible to Apply for Funds
participating in MEP consortium may
apply for incentive grant awards.
State educational agencies or consortia
of state educational agencies and other
appropriate entities.
State and U.S. Territory agencies
(except territories subject to the
Compact of Free Association), public
and nonprofit private schools of high
school grade and under; public and
nonprofit private residential child care
institutions, except Job Corps Centers,
residential summer camps that
participate in the Summer Food
Service Program for children and
private foster homes. Schools and
residential child care institutions
desiring to participate must agree to
operate a nonprofit food service that is
available to all children regardless of
race, sex, color, national origin, age, or
disability.
Private nonprofit organizations,
including faith-based organizations,
that are tax exempt under Section
501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue
Code; state or local governments or
agencies or tribal governments
submitting applications jointly with
tax exempt organizations; or a credit
union designated as a low-income
credit union by the National Credit
Union Administration (NCUA); or an
organization designated as a
Community Development Financial
Institution (CDFI) by the Secretary of
the Treasury (or the CDFI Fund). Each
of the latter entities must demonstrate
a collaborative relationship with a
local non-profit or for- profit
community-based organization whose
activities are designed to address
poverty in the community and the
needs of community members for
economic independence and stability.
Applicants for designation as New
Markets Venture Capital (NMVC)
companies (to receive both guaranteed
debentures and project grants) must be
newly formed for-profit companies.
Existing Specialized Small Business
Investment Companies (SSBICs) also
are eligible to apply for Project Grants.
The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
Program Name
Agency
For Puerto Rico
One-Stop Career
Center Initiative
AGRICULTURE)
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
OFFICE OF INNOVATION
AND IMPROVEMENT
(DEPT. OF ED.)
OFFICE OF THE
SECRETARY (DHHS)
Specified Use
Project Grants;
Provision of
Specialized Services
Project Grants
Project Grants
Public and private nonprofit entities.
SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND
MENTAL HEALTH
SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
Formula Grants
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
PUBLIC AND INDIAN
HOUSING (HUD)
Formula Grants
States, District of Columbia, Guam,
American Samoa, the
Commonwealths of Puerto Rico and
the Northern Mariana Islands, and the
Virgin Islands.
States, territories and certain Indian
tribes.
Parental Assistance
Information Centers
Project Grants for
Facilities to Improve
the Health Status of
Minority Populations
Projects for Assistance
in Transition from
Homelessness (PATH)
Promoting Safe and
Stable Families
Public and Indian
Housing
Public Health Training
Centers Grant
Program
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
Type of Assistance
Direct Payments for
Specified Use
Project Grants
Refugee and Entrant
Assistance
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Project Grants
(Cooperative
Agreements)
Refugee and Entrant
Assistance Voluntary
Agency Programs
(Matching Grant
Program)
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Project Grants
Refugee and Entrant
Assistance-Targeted
Assistance
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Formula Grants
Scholarships for
Health Professions
Students from
Disadvantaged
Backgrounds
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
Project Grants
79
Eligible to Apply for Funds
States, including Washington, DC, the
Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico and Guam.
Nonprofit organizations and nonprofit
organizations in consortia with LEAs.
Public Housing Agencies established
in accordance with state law.
Accredited schools of public health or
other public or nonprofit private
institutions accredited for the
provision of graduate or specialized
training in public health.
States, voluntary resettlement
agencies, and other nonprofit refugee
resettlement organizations may apply
to initiate an alternative program.
Private nonprofit organizations which
have a Reception and Placement Grant
with the Department of State or
Department of Justice and are
providing the prescribed services to
eligible recipient refugees.
The state agency designated as
responsible for the Refugee
Resettlement Program is eligible to
receive funding for assistance to
counties and similar areas in states
where, because of factors such as
unusually large refugee or entrant
populations, high refugee or entrant
concentrations in relation to the
overall population, and high use of
public assistance by refugees, there
exists a need for supplementation of
available resources for services to
refugees.
Accredited public or private nonprofit
schools of allopathic medicine,
nursing, osteopathic medicine,
dentistry, pharmacy, podiatric
medicine, optometry, veterinary
Program Name
School Breakfast
Program
Section 8 Housing
Choice Vouchers
Self-Help
Homeownership
Opportunity ProgramSHOP
Senior Community
Service Employment
Program
Senior Companion
Program
Small Business Loans
Agency
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
PUBLIC AND INDIAN
HOUSING (HUD)
COMMUNITY PLANNING
AND DEVELOPMENT
(HUD)
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
CORPORATION FOR
NATIONAL AND
COMMUNITY SERVICE
SMALL BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATION
Type of Assistance
Formula Grants
Direct Payments for
Specified Use
Project Grants
Formula Grants
Project Grants
Project Grants
Guaranteed/Insured
Loans (including
Immediate
Participation Loans)
Formula Grants
Social Services Block
Grant
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Social Services
Research and
Demonstration
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Project Grants.
Project Grants
(Cooperative
Agreements).
Special Milk Program
for Children
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
Formula Grants
80
Eligible to Apply for Funds
medicine, chiropractic, allied health,
or schools offering graduate programs
in public health, behavioral and mental
health or physician assistants.
State and U.S. territory agencies;
(except territories subject to the
requirements to the Compact of Free
Association) public and nonprofit
private schools of high school grade
and under; public and nonprofit
private residential child care
institutions, except Job Corps Centers;
residential summer camps that
participate in the Summer Food
Service Program for Children; and
private foster homes. Schools desiring
to participate must agree to operate a
nonprofit breakfast program that is
available to all children regardless of
race, sex, color, national origin, age, or
disability.
Public housing agencies.
National or regional nonprofit
organizations or consortia that have
experience in providing self-help
housing homeownership opportunities.
States; public and private nonprofit
institutions/organizations, other than
political parties but including faithbased organizations; and U.S.
territories.
State and local government agencies
and private nonprofit organizations.
Small businesses that are
independently owned and operated
and not dominant in its field.
The 50 states, the District of
Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, the
Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of
the Northern Mariana Islands, and
American Samoa.
Project Governmental entities,
colleges, universities, nonprofit and
for-profit organizations. Grants or
cooperative agreements cannot be
made directly to individuals.
Any State or U.S. Territory (except
territories subject to the requirements
of the Compact of Free Association).
Any public and nonprofit private
school or child care institution of high
school grade or under, except Job
Program Name
Special Supplemental
Nutrition Program for
Women, Infants, and
Children
Star Schools
Agency
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
OFFICE OF INNOVATION
AND IMPROVEMENT
(DEPT. OF ED)
Type of Assistance
Formula Grants
Project Grants
81
Eligible to Apply for Funds
Corps Centers, may participate in the
Special Milk Program upon request if
it does not participate in another meal
service program authorized under the
National School Lunch Act or the
Child Nutrition Act of 1966. This
generally includes nonprofit nursery
schools, child-care centers, settlement
houses and summer camps. Schools
with split session kindergarten and
pre-kindergarten programs can receive
subsidies for milk served to children in
the split session kindergartens and prekindergartens who do not have access
to another meal service program
operating in the school. All schools
and child care institutions which
participate must agree to operate the
program on a nonprofit basis for all
children without regard to race, sex,
color, National origin, age or
disability.
Local public or private nonprofit
health or human service agencies that
serve a population of low-income
women, infants, and children at
nutritional risk.
Telecommunications partnerships
organized on a statewide or multi-state
basis that are: (1) A public agency or
corporation established for the purpose
of developing and operating
telecommunications networks to
enhance educational opportunities
provided by educational institutions,
teacher training centers, and other
entities, provided that the agency or
corporation represents the interests of
elementary and secondary schools
eligible to participate under Title 1 of
the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965; or (2) a
partnership that will provide
telecommunications services and
includes three or more of the
following entities, at least one of
which shall be State or local
educational agency: (a) A local
educational agency, that serves a
significant number of schools eligible
for assistance under Part A, of Title 1
or elementary and secondary schools
operated or funded for Indian children
by the Department of the Interior; (b)
Program Name
Agency
Type of Assistance
State Administrative
Expenses for Child
Nutrition
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
Formula Grant
State Administrative
Matching Grants for
Food Stamp Program
State Children's
Insurance Program
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
Formula Grants
CENTERS FOR MEDICARE
AND MEDICAID
SERVICES (DHHS)
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Formula Grants
State Court
Improvement Program
State Planning Grant
Health Care Access for
the Uninsured
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
Summer Food Service
Program for Children
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
Supplemental Security
Income
SOCIAL SECURITY
ADMINISTRATION
Supportive Housing
Program
COMMUNITY PLANNING
AND DEVELOPMENT
(HUD)
Teacher Quality
Enhancement Grants
OFFICE OF THE
ASSISTANT SECRETARY
FOR POSTSECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF ED.)
Formula Grants
Project Grants
Formula Grants
Direct Payments with
Unrestricted Use.
Direct Payments for
Specified Use.
Project Grants. Direct
Payments for
Specified Use
Project Grants
(Discretionary)
82
Eligible to Apply for Funds
A State educational agency; (c) adult
and family education programs; (d) an
institution of higher education or a
state higher education agency; (e) a
teacher training center or academy; (f)
a public or private entity with
experience and expertise in the
planning and operation of a
telecommunications network, or (g) a
public or private elementary or
secondary school.
State agencies responsible for the
conduct of Child Nutrition Programs,
and agencies responsible for the
distribution of USDA donated
commodities to schools or child or
adult care institutions including
agencies in the U.S. territories.
Agreements are between FNS and
state cooperators. (U.S. territories
qualify as states for grant purposes.)
All states and territories.
The highest state courts in each of the
50 states, the District of Columbia and
Puerto Rico.
The governor (through a designated
agency or individual) of each state or
territory that has not previously
received a state planning grant.
The state or U.S. territory agency
applies for and signs an annual
agreement to receive federal funds for
disbursement. Where the state does
not administer the program, an
applicant institution may sign an
agreement and receive funds directly
from USDA.
Disabled persons per the SSI
definition.
States, local governments, other
governmental entities, private
nonprofit organizations, and
community mental health associations
that are public nonprofit organizations.
Eligible states and partnerships consist
of high-need local educational
agencies with accredited institutions of
higher education that meet certain
criteria. High-need local education
agencies serve: 1) a high percentage of
individuals or families with incomes
Program Name
Technical and NonFinancial Assistance
to Health Centers and
National Health
Service Corps (NHSC)
Delivery Sites
Temporary Assistance
for Needy Families
The Emergency Food
Assistance Program
(TEFAP)Administrative Costs
The Emergency Food
Assistance Program
(TEFAP)- Food
Commodities
Title I Grants to Local
Educational
Agencies(Title I Basic,
Concentration, and
Targeted Grants)
Transitional Living for
Homeless Youth
TRIO Educational
Agency
HEALTH RESOURCES
AND SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
(DHHS)
Type of Assistance
Project Grants
(Cooperative
Agreements)
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Formula Grants
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
Formula Grants
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
Formula Grants
OFFICE OF ELEMENTARY
AND SECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF ED.)
Formula Grants
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Project Grants
OFFICE OF ASSISTANT
SECRETARY FOR
Project Grants
83
Eligible to Apply for Funds
below the poverty line, 2) a high
percentage of secondary teachers not
teaching in the content area that they
were trained to teach, or 3) have a high
teacher turnover rate.
Public and private nonprofit entities,
including faith-based organizations
and community-based organizations,
as well as for-profit entities.
In general, all states, territories, the
District of Columbia, and all federallyrecognized tribes in the lower 48
States and 13 specified entities in
Alaska are eligible. State and local
agencies and Tribes that operate
TANF programs must do so under
plans determined to be complete or
approved by the Department of Health
and Human Services (DHHS). For
contingency funds, all states and the
District of Columbia are eligible if
they are determined to be a "needy
State" by satisfying either an
unemployment trigger or a food stamp
trigger.
States which enter into agreements
with private or public non-profit
organizations that provide food
assistance to the needy.
State agencies that are designated as
distributing agencies by the governor,
legislature or other authority may
receive and distribute these donated
food commodities.
State educational agencies (SEAs) and
the Secretary of the Interior. Local
educational agencies (LEAs) and
Indian tribal schools are subgrantees.
States, localities, private entities, and
coordinated networks of such entities
are eligible to apply for a Transitional
Living Program grant unless they are
part of the law enforcement structure
or the juvenile justice system.
Federally recognized Indian
organizations are also eligible to apply
for grants as private, nonprofit
agencies. Faith-based organizations
and small community-based
organizations also may apply.
Institutions of higher education, public
Program Name
Agency
Type of Assistance
Opportunity Centers
POSTSECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF ED.)
TRIO McNair PostBaccalaureate
Achievement
TRIO Student Support
Services
OFFICE OF ASSISTANT
SECRETARY FOR
POSTSECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF ED.)
OFFICE OF ASSISTANT
SECRETARY FOR
POSTSECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF ED.)
OFFICE OF ASSISTANT
SECRETARY FOR
POSTSECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF ED.)
Project Grants
TRIO Upward Bound
OFFICE OF ASSISTANT
SECRETARY FOR
POSTSECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF ED.)
Project Grants
Twenty-First Century
Community Learning
Centers
Unemployment
Insurance
OFFICE OF ELEMENTARY
AND SECONDARY
EDUCATION (DEPT. OF ED.)
Formula Grants
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
Formula Grants.
Direct Payments with
Unrestricted Use
Urban and Rural
Community Economic
Development
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Project Grants
(Cooperative
Agreements)
Volunteers in Service
to America (VISTA)
CORPORATION FOR
NATIONAL AND
COMMUNITY SERVICE
Provision of
Specialized Services
Weatherization
Assistance for LowIncome Persons
OFFICE OF ENERGY
EFFICIENCY AND
RENEWABLE ENERGY
(DEPT. OF ENERGY)
Formula Grants
Welfare Reform
Research, Evaluations
ADMINISTRATION FOR
CHILDREN AND
Project Grants
TRIO Talent Search
Project Grants
Project Grants
84
Eligible to Apply for Funds
and private not-for-profit agencies and
organizations, a combination of the
above and, in exceptional cases,
secondary schools.
Institutions of higher education or
combinations of institutions of higher
education.
Institutions of higher education and
combinations of institutions of higher
education.
Institutions of higher education, public
and private agencies and
organizations, a combination of the
above and, in exceptional cases,
secondary schools.
Institutions of higher education, public
or private not-for-profit agencies, a
combination of the above, and in
exceptional cases, secondary schools.
State Departments of Education.
State unemployment insurance
agencies, including the District of
Columbia, Puerto Rico and the Virgin
Islands.
For economic development projects,
eligibility is restricted to private,
locally initiated, nonprofit community
development corporations governed by
a board consisting of residents of the
community and business and civic
leaders. For all other projects, the
Secretary is authorized to make direct
grants to states, cities, counties, and
private nonprofit organizations.
Sponsors applying for VISTA
Volunteers must be federal, state or
local government agencies or private,
nonprofit organizations. The project
proposing to use the volunteers must
be designed to assist in the solution of
poverty-related problems.
States, including the District of
Columbia, and in certain instances,
Native American tribal organizations.
In the event a state does not apply, a
unit of general purpose local
government, or community action
agencies and/or other nonprofit
agencies within that State becomes
eligible to apply.
Governmental entities, colleges,
universities, nonprofit and for-profit
Program Name
Agency
Type of Assistance
and National Studies
FAMILIES (DHHS)
Welfare-to-Work
Grants to States and
Localities
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
Formula Grants
Project Grants
WIA Adult Program
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
Formula Grants
WIA Youth Activities
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
Formula Grants
FOOD AND NUTRITION
SERVICE (DEPT. OF
AGRICULTURE)
Formula Grants
WIC Farmers' Market
Nutrition Program
(FMNP)
Youth Opportunity
Grants
EMPLOYMENT AND
TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION (DEPT.
OF LABOR)
Project Grants
Youthbuild
COMMUNITY PLANNING
AND DEVELOPMENT
(HUD)
Project Grants
85
Eligible to Apply for Funds
organizations. Grants or cooperative
agreements cannot be made directly to
individuals.
States are the only eligible federal
grantees for formula funds, although
state subgrantees include eligible
applicable local Workforce Investment
Area agencies under the supervision of
the local Workforce Investment Board
in the area.
The 50 states, Puerto Rico, the District
of Columbia and the outlying areas.
The states in turn allocate funds to
local Workforce Investment Boards by
formula.
The governor is the recipient of youth
training activities funds. For a state to
be eligible to receive youth funds, the
governor must submit a single State
plan that outlines a 5-year strategy for
the statewide workforce investment
system to the Secretary.
State agencies must submit, for each
fiscal year, a state plan to FNS. States
that received federal assistance under
the Farmers' Market Coupon
Demonstration Project, from 19891992, are "grandfathered" into the
FMNP. Local FMNP sites are selected
by participating states based on
concentration of eligible WIC
participants and access to farmers'
markets.
Local workforce investment boards or
entities. Eligible local board serve a
community that: (1) has been
designated as an empowerment zone
or enterprise community; (2) is a state
without a zone and has been
designated as a high poverty area by
the governor; or (3) is one of two areas
in a state designated by the governor
to apply for a grant and meets poverty
rate criteria.
A public or private nonprofit agency,
including: a community-based
organization which is accountable to
low income community residents
through representation on the
governing board and which has a
history of serving the local community
where the Youthbuild program is to be
located; an administrative entity
designated under section 103(b)(1)(B)
Program Name
Agency
Type of Assistance
Eligible to Apply for Funds
of the Job Training Partnership Act; a
community action agency; and a
community development corporation.
In addition, state or local housing
agencies or authorities; state or local
units of general local government; or
any other entity eligible to provide
education and employment training
under other federal employment
training programs.
86
APPENDIX C: ISSUE PAPERS
The following issue papers are included in this appendix and begin on the next page.
 Redefining Poverty
 Community-Based Solutions
 Family Economic Security
 Maximizing Technology
Creating a 21st Century Model to Address Poverty
Redefining Poverty
Research Brief on Existing Definitions, Measures, and Causes
November 2004
Redefining Poverty Research Brief, November 2004
87
Introduction
In 2003, 35.9 million Americans – 12.5 % of the population – were poor, as measured by
the US Census Bureau using the US Poverty Index. Substantial governmental and charitable
resources are invested each year to address the problem of poverty, but a significant percentage
of the population still lives in poverty and this shows no sign of ending any time soon.
In the 1960’s this country did engage in a defined campaign to address poverty as part of
President Johnson’s War on Poverty. During the War on Poverty, there were multiple programs
created but little in the way of a coordinated strategy that had poverty reduction as a goal. For the
past 42 years, since the 1962 AFDCU amendments, the numerous efforts at “welfare reform”
have been more about reducing the numbers on welfare rolls rather than reducing poverty.
Today, multiple programs run by governmental, faith-based and community-based organizations
exist that have reducing poverty as part of their mission, but the measures are about program
specific outcomes rather than overall poverty reduction.
At the heart of this persistent poverty is a question of definition. The US Poverty Index is
solely a measure of financial well-being, and does not address issues of human and social capital
that determine why people are in poverty, nor how best they should escape it. We are operating
under an operational definition – an income-based measure that allows us to divide the
population into “poor” and “non-poor”.
Broadening the definition of poverty to include non-financial factors has the potential to
significantly alter our thinking about strategies to reduce poverty. A broader definition expands
the set of policies that are relevant to the reduction of poverty, and as more aspects of poverty are
recognized, so more policies become relevant to fighting poverty. In addition, the various aspects
of poverty interact in important ways: improving health increases income-earning potential,
increasing education leads to better health outcomes, and providing safety nets allows the poor to
take advantage of high-return, high-risk opportunities. When poverty-reducing strategies
recognize the interactions among policies, programs and approaches can be created than
transcend the sum of the individual parts.
88
Defining Poverty
ONE DEFINITION:
pov·er·ty n.
1. The state of being poor; lack of the means of providing material needs or comforts.
2. Deficiency in amount; scantiness: “the poverty of feeling that reduced her soul” (Scott
Turow).
3. Unproductiveness; infertility: the poverty of the soil.
4. Renunciation made by a member of a religious order of the right to own property.
(From Webster’s Dictionary http://dictionary.reference.com/search)
Another:
The quality or state of being poor or indigent; want or scarcity of means of subsistence;
indigence; need. “Swathed in numblest poverty.” --Keble.
Any deficiency of elements or resources that are needed or desired, or that constitute
richness; as, poverty of soil; poverty of the blood; poverty of ideas.
Synonyms: Indigence; penury; beggary; need; lack; want; scantiness; sparingness;
meagerness; jejuneness.
Usage: Poverty, Indigence, Pauperism. Poverty is a relative term; what is poverty to a
monarch, would be competence for a day laborer. Indigence implies extreme distress, and almost
absolute destitution. Pauperism denotes entire dependence upon public charity, and, therefore,
often a hopeless and degraded state.
(Merriam-Webster Unabridged. Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, ©
1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.)
While these definitions include multiple dimensions, the primary definition in each case
focuses on the material. In general usage, to be poor is to lack material possessions and/or the
ability to purchase goods and services.
It is possible to view poverty as a simple cash equation – is there money left over at the
end of the week, the month, the year? But truly defining poverty in economic terms is a more
complex problem that requires evaluating not only money, and the material assets money can
buy, but also physical and human capital and time. In addition, some researchers feel that simply
determining whether an individual or family has sufficient resources for basic subsistence does
not fully address some of the central qualities of being poor. They may define poverty more in
terms of outcomes, as expressed in poor living conditions, ways of life, customs and attitudes.
In the US, we have tended to consider poverty only in light of the cash equation, as
measured through the US Poverty Index and – as described below – tied primarily to past and
89
current income. Federal poverty definitions have two main purposes –to provide a statistical
analysis of the population and to serve as a test for eligibility determination for specific
programs. They do nothing to enlighten the broader question of the conceptual definition, or
what it means to be poor.
The US Poverty Index – An “Operational” Definition of Poverty
Efforts to define and codify the concept of poverty – also referred to as low income or
minimum subsistence – became increasingly important in the latter third of the nineteenth
century. This was a time of transition and turmoil in the United States, as society became
increasingly urbanized and millions of immigrants entered the country. Social workers were at
the lead of efforts to quantify income and expenditure patterns, in the hope that such measures
would lead to solutions to a variety of social problems such as labor unrest, economic insecurity
and urban slums.
The first known incidence in the US of linking the word “poverty” with a specific income
level occurred in 1871, when the Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics of Labor associated a $2
daily wage (equivalent to $526 per year) with “poverty or want.” The Iowa Commissioner of
Labor Statistics arrived at a similar figure in 1891. During this time period, the word “poverty”
was generally used synonymously with “pauperism” – the state of being dependent on relief or
private charity.
Beginning in the early twentieth century, poverty began to be associated with insufficient
income, regardless of the source of that income or the reason for the insufficiency. This new
definition made it possible for the concept of a “poverty line” to make sense as a way to consider
the poor.
From 1900 through 1930, the question of poverty thresholds largely remained in the
hands of social workers and private charities, with only a few efforts made by government
agencies. Efforts were centered on trying to develop some social consensus about the appropriate
level of an acceptable standard of living.
Attempts to determine this level usually involved developing standard budgets, although
these budgets were generally based on studying the living standards and consumption patterns of
relatively small groups of people.
The Great Depression brought new concern and interest in the question of poverty in
America. A 1934 Brookings Institution report set the “subsistence and poverty” line at $1,500 for
families and $750 for unattached individuals. At the beginning of his second term as President in
1937, Franklin Roosevelt inspired a new definition when he spoke of seeing “one-third of a
nation ill-housed, ill-clad, ill-nourished.” The lowest third of the nation included all families and
unrelated individuals with annual income below $780, and that figure became an unofficial and
approximate measure of poverty for that period.
90
Poverty lines in the United States were usually developed using standard budgets. The
field of people working on issues of poverty and poverty lines was wide and included
congressional subcommittee staff, union officials, Councils of Economic Advisers, lobbyists,
academics, federal civil servants and social commentators. This broad field of analysts set dollar
figures based on a similarly broad range of rationales, with varying amounts of supporting
details.
In 1960, Mollie Orshansky (the creator of the official poverty threshold used today)
developed her first measures of income inadequacy. Her efforts did not receive attention until the
Johnson Administration announced its War on Poverty in 1964 and it became essential for both
political and administrative reasons to have some kind of measure of who was poor. The system
developed then is still used to generate poverty thresholds and guidelines today.
The official US poverty measure compares a family’s pre-tax cash income to poverty
thresholds, adopted in 1965 and updated annually. These thresholds were developed by Ms.
Orshansky of the Social Security Administration based on the minimum cost of a nutritionally
balanced meal plan as designed by the Department of Agriculture. A 1955 survey indicated that
food costs were about one-third of the average family’s post-tax cash expenditures, so the
poverty threshold was set at three times this amount, adjusted for family size and adjusted yearly
for cost of living increases.
The poverty thresholds provide only one part of the data needed to determine the level of
poverty in the United States. In order to determine whether a family is poor, its resources are
compared with the poverty threshold, where resources are gross money income as measured by
the Census Bureau. This includes before-tax cash income from all sources (except gains or losses
on the sale of property) such as gross wages and salaries, net income from the operation of a
farm, business, or partnership, pensions, interest, dividends, and government transfer payments
that are distributed in the form of cash, including social security and public assistance benefits.
The measure does not include sources of non-cash income, such as food stamps, housing
subsidies, and government- and employer-provided health insurance. Many of the concerns
about the accuracy of the poverty thresholds stem from this exclusion of non-cash income, and
will be addressed in detail later in this section.
Problems with the Current Measures
In 1967, Ida Merriam, then Assistant Commissioner in the SSA’s Office of Research and
Statistics wrote that “It is easy to observe that poverty in the US today cannot meaningfully be
defined in the same say as in the US of 1900…[O]bviously today’s [poverty] measure, even if
corrected year by year for changes in the price level… should not be acceptable twenty, ten or
perhaps even five years hence.”
Despite these concerns and misgivings, 40 years later the fundamental basis for the
measure remains unchanged. The high level of political sensitivity around the measure resulted
in it becoming an “agency orphan” – the Census Bureau was given and retains responsibility for
91
publishing poverty statistics, but no federal agency was given responsibility for examining the
definition of poverty and doing research related to it.
Since 1965, federal agencies and interagency study commissions have made several
attempts to develop a more comprehensive poverty measure, but very few changes resulted from
those analyses and those changes were very minor.
In 1990, a Congressional Committee requested a study of the official US poverty measure
by the National Academy of Sciences to provide a basis for a possible revision of the measure.
The NAS Panel published its report of the study in 1995, and its concerns about the measure are
summarized below:
 It excludes in-kind benefits, such as food stamps and housing assistance, when counting
family income.
 It ignores the cost of earning income, including childcare costs, when calculating the net
income available to families with working members.
 It disregards regional variation in the cost of living, especially the cost of housing, in
determining a family’s consumption needs.
 It ignores direct tax payments, such as payroll and income taxes, when measuring family
income.
 It ignores differences in health insurance coverage in determining family income, and
medical care needs in determining family consumption needs.
 It has never been updated to account for changing consumption patterns of US
households. For example, expenditures for food accounted for about one-third of family
income in the 1950s, but they now account for as little as one-seventh.
NAS panel members made three central recommendations to address these concerns:
changing the measure of income, changing the calculation of the poverty threshold, and changing
the survey used to determine income levels, and thus the percentage and distribution of the poor.
Each of these recommendations generates complex technical problems and policy issues.
Previous attempts to change the dollar-based poverty definition have not moved beyond
research, academia, and rhetoric for a variety of reasons:
 It could change the perception of the total number of people who are in poverty.
 It could make more people eligible for assistance and therefore put upward pressure on
budgets.
 It could make fewer people eligible for assistance and therefore put downward pressure
on budgets.
 It could screen out some who now receive substantial in-kind support e.g. food stamps
and Earned Income Tax Credits.
 It could re-allocate funds among states and local service providers.
Causes of Poverty
There is no agreement about which of the causes of poverty are the normal consequence
of the operation of an economy or of defects in the economy, a function of the social values as
92
they exist at any point in time, or the result of individual action or inaction. Because we have not
unraveled and identified all the factors that cause poverty, most legislation does not have clear
cut strategies to eliminate or change those causes. Also missing from our understanding is what
strategies to eliminate poverty will be most effective.
Social mobility is still poorly understood and under-invested in terms of research. There
is much more volatility of movement among the general population than is recognized and
factored into public policy, most of which is based on a static snapshot of society rather then a
dynamic moving picture of how American works. Why do some groups and individuals avoid
poverty altogether? Why do some pop into poverty and quickly pop out? Why do some drop in
and stick?
Unraveling the Causes of Poverty
A 2003 Brookings Institution policy brief1 revealed a very straightforward cause of
poverty. Their research indicated that – very simply – most people who are poor in the US are
poor because they either do not work or work too few hours to move themselves and their
children out of poverty. More specifically, the heads of poor families with children worked only
one half as many hours, on average, as the heads of non-poor families with children in 2001,
according to the Census Bureau.
There are many reasons the poor work fewer hours than the non-poor, including difficulty
in finding jobs, the demands of caring for young children, poor health, transportation problems,
substance abuse, and other personal problems.
Although a shortage of job opportunities is often cited as an important reason for the
poor's lack of involvement in the work force, the gap in the work hours of poor and non-poor
families with children is observed in good years as well as bad. The state of the economy and the
availability of jobs surely play some role, but are not the primary reasons for these differences in
work effort. In short, the poor have less income in large measure because they work far fewer
hours than their more affluent counterparts.
On the surface, this is a simple and understandable fact. But clearly there is more to it
than this simple statement would indicate, and there is a body of research that attempts to look
deeper at the underlying reasons. Further this analysis is keyed to the flawed definition of
poverty as a line separating those who are in poverty from those who aren’t.
Situational Versus Persistent Poverty
The first thing to realize is that there is a difference between situational poverty (short
duration) and long term/ “persistent” poverty. Poverty is frequently episodic – a large number of
American adults will experience poverty at some point, and many will slip into poverty a number
of times. But most people are poor for a relatively short time. From 1979-91, one in three
Americans experienced at least one year in poverty. But long-term poverty is rarer, with only
93
4.9% of the population poor in 10 or more years, and just 1.5% in all 13 years. 2 Although this
“underclass” is prominent in our thoughts about the poor, recent estimates suggest that less than
half of the poor population (and just 5 percent of the total U.S. population) is comprised of the
long-term or chronically poor. 3 Of course this does not take into account spatial differences that
create large concentrations of the poor in dense urban areas and sparse rural areas.
Analysis of economic data reveals several important pieces of information. The longer a
person has been poor, the less likely it is that he or she will escape poverty. Among those who do
escape poverty, reentry rates are relatively high, with more than one-half of those escaping
returning within five years. In terms of people most likely to be in poverty, research shows that
Blacks, Hispanics, female-headed families, persons with low levels of education, and children
are most vulnerable to poverty. 4
As might be expected from the Brooking’s Institution data that began this section,
economic changes related to employment were the most important factor in movement into or
out of poverty. 5 About half of all spells of poverty began or ended when the earnings of a family
head or the spouse fell or increased, and the most frequent trigger event for entry into poverty
was the loss of employment of a household member. A major shift in household composition –
especially transitioning from a two-adult to a female-headed household – was another very likely
trigger for entry into poverty. Incidence of this trigger is low (1.7% of the study population) but
among those who did experience it, 12.4% entered poverty. 6
Some estimates are that as many as 50% of US citizens will experience situational
poverty sometime during their lives. Many of those who enter situational poverty access
government services far less or not at all compared to those in generational poverty. The family,
the clan and other social networks are a stronger part of their support mechanisms. Policymakers
have tended to be most concerned with the long-term or chronically poor, who disproportionately
tax the welfare system and other social support services. For these individuals, poverty is chronic
and may be caused by limited job opportunities, education, and job skills, as well as
discrimination. 7
Long-term poverty was not equally shared. African Americans, high school dropouts,
individuals with health problems, and women and children living in single-mother families were
disproportionately likely to be poor. Race differences in the risk of long-term poverty were
especially striking. Fewer than 1 in 50 whites were poor for 10 or more years from 1979 to 1991,
but 1 in 6 African Americans were. 8
Racial differences are even more striking among children in long-term poverty than
annual poverty rates suggest. Nearly 30 percent of African-American children were poor in 10 or
more years, and they constituted almost 90 percent of long-term-poor children. Other children
who had much higher than average durations in poverty included those who lived with a single
parent throughout their childhood, those who lived in the South, and those with a disabled
parent.9
94
Some Theories of Poverty
Many different researchers have presented many different theories on why people are
poor. A few of these are summarized below. This is not an exhaustive list, but does illustrate the
range and complexity of the problem.
Human Capital Theory attempts to explain individuals’ different levels of investment in
education and training in terms of their expected returns from the investment. Investments in
education and training entail costs in direct expenses and foregone earnings during the
investment period. People who expect to work less in the labor market and to have fewer labor
market opportunities, such as women or minorities, are less likely to invest in human capital. As
a result, these women and minorities may have lower earnings and may be more likely to be in
poverty.
Flawed Character Theories assume that people have ample opportunities for improving
their economic status, but lack the initiative and diligence necessary to take advantage of them.
Oscar Lewis’ “culture of poverty” theory (1968) is an example of a flawed character theory. This
theory maintains that a culture of poverty forms among a significant minority of the poor such
that people are not psychologically geared to take advantage of opportunities that m ay come
their way.
Restricted opportunity theories contend that the poor lack sufficient access to
economic opportunities and cannot avoid poverty unless their economic opportunities improve.
The dual labor market theory is an example. In this theory the labor market is split into two
sectors with little mobility between them—the primary sector offering steady employment,
higher wages, and better promotion opportunities, and the secondary sector with low wages, poor
working conditions, and few promotion opportunities.10
In the Memberships Theory of poverty, 11 socioeconomic outcomes depend significantly
upon the composition of the groups of which people are members over the course of their lives.
These groups may be defined along many dimensions, including ethnicity, the neighborhoods in
which people live, schools, and places of work. Group memberships can shape individual
outcomes through different paths, which include:
1. Peer group effects: the choices of some members of a group affect the preferences of
others.
2. Role model effects: the characteristics of older members of a group influence the
preferences of others.
3. Social learning: information about the costs and benefits of many behaviors comes from
observing others. To the extent that one is in a group which produces certain types of
information, such as knowledge of criminal opportunities, or fails to produce other types,
such as knowledge of the labor market, advantages of college, produce social learning.
4. Social complementarities: the choices of some members of a group make the choices of
other members more or less productive. For example, a study group in which hard work
by other members makes the efforts of each member more productive can be said to
exhibit social complementarities.
95
In the public eye, the “breakdown of the family” and unwed childbearing are seen as
prominent causes of poverty. Research to support these views is mixed. With regards to unwed
childbearing, one study compared sets of sisters, one of whom became an unwed mother while
the other did not. The assumption was that sisters share many factors that might constitute risk
factors for later poverty.
The studies produced a striking result. Despite their different childbearing histories, the
sisters were very similar on most adult outcomes, including education and poverty. On the other
hand, studies that compared unwed mothers with women who miscarried and who were
presumably drawn from the same population found that unwed childbearing affects the
likelihood of subsequent marriage, which in turn is strongly related to later economic well-being.
Statistics do show that married women and their children have much lower rates of poverty than
single mothers and their children, encouraging many to suggest promoting marriage as a method
to reduce poverty. Critics of this view believe that there is a very limited pool of financially
stable men for low-income women to marry. Activities promoting marriage may only serve to
further stigmatize single mothers, who often say they would marry if they found a suitable
spouse.12
And lastly, there is the case of intergenerational persistence, where the question must
be asked: Does growing up poor increase the likelihood of being poor as an adult? Most poor
children do not grow up to be poor adults. Only one in four who were consistently poor below
age 17 can still be considered poor at ages 25–27. But poor African-American children were less
likely to escape poverty than poor white children—one in three was still poor at ages 25–27,
compared to one in 12 poor white children. Indeed, African Americans who were not poor as
children were over twice as likely to be poor at ages 25–27 than were poor white children.
Recent research using longitudinal data has revealed that the correlation between the
long-run economic status of fathers and sons is stronger than previously thought, and that the
size of the effect appears to grow as the sons age: fathers’ economic status accounts for about 25
percent of the economic status of sons in their mid-20s, but about 50 percent of the status of sons
in their late 30s. Fathers’ income appears to have an equally strong link to the economic status of
their adult daughters. There is, however, some evidence to suggest that these associations began
to weaken in the 1980s and 1990s, as intergenerational income and occupational mobility
increased.
Poor children are more than three times as likely to have dropped out of high school.
Poor girls are more than twice as likely to have had a teen birth. Poor boys work fewer hours,
have lower annual earnings, and spend more weeks idle in their mid-20s than do non-poor boys.
Poor children have higher poverty rates and lower incomes in their mid-20s than do non-poor
children.
These statistics do not, however, tell us how much child poverty itself actually affects
children’s developmental and economic outcomes. Poor and non-poor families differ in many
ways. Poor families are more likely to be headed by one parent than by two, and poor parents
tend to be younger, less educated, less healthy, less likely to be employed, more likely to earn
96
less, and more likely to receive welfare than non-poor parents. These differences, not income
alone, could be leading to undesirable outcomes for poor children.13
Some Broader Views of Poverty
While the focus of much research on poverty has been limited to income and measures of
income, there are those who support the notion that poverty is broader than income. Nobel Prize
Winning economist and Harvard Professor Amartya Sen is one of them.
Sen says that too great an emphasis has been placed on trying to generate equality of
outcomes – defined as family incomes in the traditional view of poverty. Discussion of equality
of outcomes has tended to be polarized. The welfare/ majoritarian/ utilitarian argument
encourages government to guarantee these outcomes, and the competing libertarian argument
proclaims that the government should only guarantee the processes or ‘rules of the game’ and
should have no role in assuring outcomes.
Sen moves further back from both of these arguments, and says that the best role for
government is helping people get the education and other “inputs” (primary goods) that they
need to function in that society. Sen’s work moves us away from a focus on “needs” and shifts
our attention to a focus on “strengths,” including social capital, human capital and financial
capital. These forms of capital – which in Sen’s approach are the “primary goods” that people
should start with or acquire -- provide insurance against slipping into poverty and provide
effective ways to get out of poverty.
Sen frames his definition of poverty in terms of “capabilities”. Sen calls a capability the
substantive freedoms people enjoy to lead the kind of life they have reason to value, such as
social functioning, better basic education and healthcare, and longevity. When poverty is viewed
in terms of capability deprivation, it becomes obvious that low income is not the only influence
on capability deprivation; and the impact of income on capabilities is variable among different
communities, families, and individuals. While traditional views of poverty have stressed the
importance of greater earnings to lead to better outcomes, in Sen’s view there is also a
connection going from capability improvement to greater earning power. Individuals need to be
well-prepared to take advantage of economic opportunities in order to realize their full potential.
The idea of realizing individual potential is an important theme in the research of Ravi
Kanbur and Lyn Squire as well. In their view, extending the definition of poverty to incorporate
human development captures important dimensions of poverty that are otherwise missed by
conventional income or expenditure measures. They too stress the important linkages between
human development and income earning capacity – income is both a major determinant and an
outcome of human development.
In their research on poverty around the world, and particularly in developing countries,
they found that the plight of the poor was generally lifted by national or regional economic
growth. The poor tend to participate in economic growth through increased or more productive
use of “their most abundant asset,” labor.
97
But some of the frequent companions of poverty – lack of education, poor nutrition and
health –contribute to functional effects on their capacity to work, and thus the interactions
between human development and multi-layered. For example, a well nourished person can work
more, thereby earning more and both consuming more and saving more, ensuring future
nourishment and work capacity. Without these basic building blocks – “capabilities” in Sen’s
work – the poor are unable to take advantage of income earning opportunities that come with
growth. At the same time, society suffers the loss of their potential contributions.
Kanbur and Squire also identified to other characteristics of poverty that they viewed as
especially important, and that tended not to be captured in traditional views of the poor. These
can be summed up as “vulnerability” and “voice.” Their research found that the poor were
particularly vulnerable to risk: the state of being poor was not just a state of having little, but also
of being vulnerable to losing the little one has. The poor suffer from risk because they lack the
means to protect themselves adequately against it. If a contingency occurs, the poor have few
assets to dispose of in addressing the problem, or the depletion of those assets must plunge them
further into long-term poverty. And they often cannot borrow to meet their needs.
In terms of “voice,” in describing their interactions with government employees and
institutions, surveys of the poor revealed another important aspect of life in poverty: lack of
political power. This lack of voice and political rights, was often described as a sense of
powerlessness, and was described by some as the most fundamental characteristic of poverty.
Conclusion
The existing measure of poverty is best described as a snapshot approach that does not
reveal what happens to a family over time. For example, they may be poor during their younger
years, have adequate income in the middle years, and be poor again or perhaps well off in their
senior years. What are the total lifetime earnings of most individuals and families?
The existing simplistic income-based definition of poverty does not consider real factors
that determine how long a person or family stays in poverty, such as human and social capital.
These cushion a family from temporary income poverty and enable the family to escape poverty
more quickly. The existing formula fails to reveal these cushions and pathways out of poverty.
Due to poor linkages between academic research and public policy, research that has
been conducted on the causes of poverty is generally not reflected in program design.
Additionally, most legislation does not call for the strategies it requires or permits to be
evaluated for their effectiveness. Programs operate for decades with no systematic evaluation.
Programs are focused on specific needs emanating from legislative action -- usually
representing a compromise of conflicting viewpoints. These compromises are based on
assumptions about aggregate needs – but these do not relate to the totality of an individual’s
needs. To be effective in allowing all Americans to reach their full potential, we must embrace a
new definition of poverty.
98
1. Welfare and Marriage: The Way to End Poverty and Welfare, Brookings Institution,
Welfare Reform and Beyond. Policy Brief #28, September 2003
2. Mobility, persistence and the intergenerational determinants of children’s success, Mary
Corcoran, Focus, Vol. 21, No. 2, Fall 2000
3. Poverty in America: Beyond Welfare Reform, Daniel T. Lichter and Martha L. Crowley
(Vol. 57, No. 2 of Population Bulletin from the Population Reference Bureau), June 2002
4. Transition Events in the Dynamics of Poverty, Signe-Mary McKernanc and Caroline
Ratcliffe, The Urban Institute, September 2002
5. Mobility, persistence and the intergenerational determinants of children’s success, Mary
Corcoran, Focus, Vol. 21, No. 2, Fall 2000
6. Transition Events in the Dynamics of Poverty, Signe-Mary McKernanc and Caroline
Ratcliffe, The Urban Institute, September 2002
7. Poverty in America: Beyond Welfare Reform, Daniel T. Lichter and Martha L. Crowley
(Vol. 57, No. 2 of Population Bulletin from the Population Reference Bureau), June 2002
8. Mobility, persistence and the intergenerational determinants of children’s success, Mary
Corcoran, Focus, Vol. 21, No. 2, Fall 2000
9. Mobility, persistence and the intergenerational determinants of children’s success, Mary
Corcoran, Focus, Vol. 21, No. 2, Fall 2000
10. Transition Events in the Dynamics of Poverty, Signe-Mary McKernanc and Caroline
Ratcliffe, The Urban Institute, September 2002
11. The memberships theory of poverty: the role of group affiliations in determining social
outcomes, Focus, Vol. 21, No. 2, Fall 2000
12. Poverty in America: Beyond Welfare Reform, Daniel T. Lichter and Martha L. Crowley
(Vol. 57, No. 2 of Population Bulletin from the Population Reference Bureau), June 2002
13. Mobility, persistence and the intergenerational determinants of children’s success, Mary
Corcoran, Focus, Vol. 21, No. 2, Fall 2000
99
Creating a 21st Century Model to Address Poverty
Community-Based Solutions
Research Brief on Existing Approaches and Strategies
November 2004
100
Background
Until recently, community-based programs have typically focused on one or a few
aspects of poverty and have often been implemented and measured in silo format. Although
many relatively successful programs have existed, there has been an increasing awareness that
individual or family economic stability and quality of life is a complex dynamic that calls for
more holistic approaches. Such approaches address a full range of issues including education,
housing, employment and wage rate environment, neighborhood safety, the norms and networks
that enable collective action (social capital)1, community engagement, family support structures,
and the individual’s and society’s commitment to the alleviation of poverty.
Various strategies have existed over the years, but virtually all programs could be
categorized as “place strategies” or “people strategies.” Place strategies have dominated over the
last forty years and these have focused on rebuilding impoverished neighborhoods through
improvement of housing, job creation, and retail development. The concept behind these
approaches is that the social and economic environment that people live in must be improved in
order for individuals to have opportunities to reach their full potential. By contrast, people
strategies have focused on helping those living in poverty to obtain the skills, personal
orientation, and support needed to achieve self-sufficiency. There is a growing consensus that
both strategies must be integrated to be successful. This line of thinking puts more emphasis on
developing the individual and mobilizing his or her personal responsibility towards economic
self-sufficiency.
As a third dimension, there is a growing realization that many aspects of “community”
must be in place in order for productive change to occur. Strategies to alleviate poverty often
have and most likely will continue to be different in urban versus rural communities. Urban
centers are challenged by urban sprawl, affordability of housing, and long commute times, all of
which can hinder a cohesive sense of community. In urban areas, community approaches that
address issues like poverty now tend to emerge from town centers in a suburban area. Rural areas
have dispersed populations, fewer natural resource-based industries, increased global
competition for the low-skill, low-wage rural jobs and are often disconnected from urban
resources. It is more difficult to develop a cohesive community in a rural area; however, business
or social “clusters” can exist that link small groups of individuals to create economies of scale, to
educate or provide technical assistance, or to initiate or change a policy of mutual interest. The
use of technology has significantly facilitated such rural efforts. Groups of individuals and
businesses with mutual interests have been striving to create a “community approach” to the
alleviation or amelioration of various problems.
Various Approaches to Community-Based Solutions
The notion of community building as a possible solution to poverty embodies the idea
that the many facets of community must be included in order to effectively address poverty.
Community building is a comprehensive approach to addressing the interwoven problems of
unemployment, inadequate housing, economic disinvestment, substance abuse and other crime,
101
and educational shortcomings. These community approaches possess several core principles that
serve as guidelines, including:
 Building on the existing assets of a community.
 Emphasizing strategic planning that represents the whole community.
 Addressing the sources of deterioration in a way that acknowledges the inter-relatedness
of complex, social problems.
 Developing partnerships and collaboration among all stakeholders.
 Being flexible to the changing needs of the community.
Comprehensive Community Building Models
Comprehensive Community Building projects work on the assumption that poverty can
only be alleviated with a comprehensive approach that incorporates the many community entities
that impact individual and family socio-economic status. These are usually HUD or Foundationfunded projects. They focus on housing improvement, neighborhood enhancement, home
ownership, capacity building, and coalition or collaboration building. Although infrastructure is
stressed in these initiatives, there is also strong attention to the “spillover” effect of improved
housing and how to maximize these positive externalities. [Ed –there are several examples in the
tables from p. 37-39 but no indicators of efficacy of any of the projects.]
Comprehensive Community Initiatives
Another emerging community-based organizational structure that focuses on poverty is
the Comprehensive Community Initiatives (CCIs) model. There are far fewer CCIs relative to the
Community Action Agencies discussed below; however, they also work on the premise that
collaboration is a key ingredient to the success of community-based coalitions. This model is
more “place based” and goals include: development of community empowerment, leadership and
organizational capacity building, improving the delivery of human services, expanding beyond
housing development, fostering local economies and job creation, and pursing comprehensive
community transformation. Most CCIs are funded by foundations.
Some CCIs have a broad focus that attempts to address many facets of poverty alleviation
and work on building collaborations between agencies in order to facilitate change. Other CCIs
have a more narrow focus, such as juvenile violence, although most CCIs fall somewhere in
between in terms of comprehensiveness. A central theme is that CCIs typically use strategies that
build community and social capital. These are important attributes for any community to have;
however, they are very difficult to measure so assessment of impact can take many years.
Another central theme is the engagement of all residents in a community, which can delay action
but can also result in near universal legitimacy of the changes that are enacted.
A notable example of CCIs is the Neighborhood and Family Initiative launched by the
Ford Foundation in 1990. Four cities were chosen for revitalization and citizen empowerment.
Over four years, $1,125,000 was given to each of the communities. It may take several years to
have conclusive evidence of success; however, many examples of short term gains are evident
102
such as microenterprise type loans to small businesses (which tend to be highly successful),
improved outdoor lighting in high crime areas, and purchases of park land.
Neighborhood Revitalization Initiatives
Neighborhood Revitalization Initiatives2 focus upon crime, safety, and nuisance
abatement. These initiatives look at both the supply and demand factors in criminal activity and
attempt to address both. Demand side strategies try to address human needs by strengthening
family-oriented services. These could include child care, employment, mental health, and
substance abuse services. The idea is that by alleviating some of the extreme stressors that lowincome individuals can have, they are less likely to engage in criminal activity.
The supply side strategies include “opportunity blocking” and the development of social
capital. “Opportunity blocking” involves making changes to places where criminal activity
occurs such that crimes are more difficult to carry out, less rewarding financially, and more risky
in terms of getting caught. The development of social capital involves initiating a neighborhood
association that brings residents together for ideas and action that can revitalize the
neighborhood and reduce crime.
Neighborhood revitalization strategies that have been most effective are those that
promulgate effective crime prevention strategies and those that have a strong partnership
between residents and other community entities. A seemingly effective example of this model is
the HOPE VI3 initiative launched by Congress in 1993. This program involves large-scale
demolition and redevelopment of public housing units – usually more than 300 units – in very
distressed neighborhoods. A recent study of eight HOPE VI neighborhoods did find many
positive outcomes from 1990-2000, including increases in income, employment and education
levels, and decreases in crime. Again, it is difficult to quantify how much of these gains are due
to HOPE VI and how much is due to other factors like the stronger economic climate during the
1990s. From 1993 to 2002, over $5 billion was earmarked for 193 HUD-funded, HOPE VI
revitalization grants.
Community Action Agencies4
Community Action Agencies (CAAs) serve over a quarter of all Americans living in
poverty or close to the poverty line. CAAs were created through the Economic Opportunity Act
of 1964 and most of the approximately 1,100 organizations dedicated to alleviating poverty are
CAAs. A total of $9 billion is administered by the CAA networks, and each dollar is matched by
almost $5 of state, local, and private contributions. These additional dollars demonstrate the
additional commitment that can emerge from engaged communities.
CAAs can significantly differ from community to community. However, the overarching
goals of CAAs include: securing and maintaining employment, providing adequate education,
ensuring adequate housing, providing emergency services, improving nutrition, creating linkages
among anti-poverty programs, and achieving self-sufficiency. It is interesting to note that CAA
103
goals include a mixture of “people” and “place” strategies as well as a mixture of services that
hold both society and the individual accountable for the socio-economic outcomes of a given
community.
Workforce Development Alongside Community and Economic Development
The average income for a low-income family, adjusted for inflation, is less than it was 30
years ago. The major cause for this negative trend is the decline in the rate of pay. One result has
been that the gap between the higher and lower income stratums is at its highest post-WWII
level. Various theories exist as to the reasons why the gap has grown; however, a somewhat
naturally occurring outcome has been the emergence of community economic development
efforts, including workforce development.
In the past, many networks have existed in workforce development and in economic
development, although the two typically have not been integrated in any systematic fashion.
Generally speaking, economic development efforts are primarily locally funded and governed
while workforce development efforts are primarily responsive to federal mandates and dependent
on federal funds.
Economic development efforts have not been formalized due primarily to the lack of
federal funding and leadership in this area. Workforce development organizations tend to have
more formalized partnership arrangements primarily because federal, state, and local government
has emphasized this. However, local entities, both public and private, have independently
connected with workforce development and community building agencies to address key
economic, community, and workforce issues.
Community Economic Development Efforts
Economic Development efforts to alleviate poverty include enterprise zones, microenterprise programs, and community development financial institutions (CDFIs). Enterprise zone
programs share the basic concept that the revival of significant industrial or commercial areas is
a promising approach to revitalizing adjacent residential areas. Limited data about outcomes
suggest that these zone programs have not been effective. Micro-enterprise programs provide
business development services, including modest start-up funds, to individuals who are
interested in starting a small business (or micro-enterprise). These businesses are defined as
having no more than five employees. Micro-enterprise programs typically produce businesses
with high survival rates. CDFIs provide lending services to low-income individuals who usually
have restricted access to capital.
Another community economic development model is the Community Development
Corporation (CDC). A result of the Great Society programs, CDCs aim to bring about social,
economic, and physical revitalization in a given community. CDCs carry the theme of
comprehensive and integrative approaches to poverty alleviation. There were relatively few
104
CDCs in the early 1970s, but they grew significantly in number during the 1980s when many
social programs were cut or abolished.
CDCS have a wide range of activities and goals but most deal with housing issues,
commercial real estate development, community and tenant organizing, the provision of human
services, employment counseling and placement, rehabilitation of industrial property, loans and
other assistance to small businesses, and neighborhood planning.
Integrating Workforce Development
Workforce development strategies that interface job seekers and employers are not
usually geared towards “holistic” community development. Instead, workforce development
tends to focus upon the immediate goal of increasing employment and ensuring optimal matches
between employers and employees.
Nonetheless, economic and community development has embraced the notion of
workforce development as part of a healthy and desirable community. In general, there have
been four strategies or models that have been utilized by various communities around that
notion:
1. Urban education linked to workforce development.
2. Programs and services supporting successful transition to work.
3. Successful urban entrepreneurial strategies and resources.
4. Effective tax incentives and financial tools to promote inner city development.
Economic and community development does not necessarily have at its core the alleviation
of poverty. However, it is implied that poverty can be diminished or eradicated through its goals
of employer and employee opportunity creation.
There is usually more emphasis in economic and community development efforts on the
employer side of the equation as can be seen by the common characteristics found in the various
programmatic tenets:
 Linked to a market need and strategy.
 Entrepreneurial, opportunity-driven approach.
 Visionary and pragmatic leadership.
 Endorsed by high level corporate, philanthropic or governmental leaders.
 Focused mission with clear goals and customers.
 Comprehensive, customer-focused program design.
Some communities have also adapted urban revitalization and/or economic integration efforts
or living wage ordinances as part of their community development. For example, in Baltimore
and Los Angeles, firms under contract with the city had to pay their workers within a specific
wage rate, one higher than the minimum wage. Outcomes have shown no negative cost effects
on the city itself, no evidence of job loss, less bidding based only on low cost (and lower wages
for workers), and some increases in other quality of life indicators for the affected workers. As
another example, in New York City, a partnership between community, economic, and
105
workforce development devised job placement and support services for released inmates. The
efforts called for much collaboration and coordination between community, economic, and
workforce entities.5
Although some concrete examples exist, community economic development efforts,
including those that integrate workforce development, have very little empirical data regarding
their effectiveness. There are several reasons for this, including that it can be a long time before
results are observable and there are many variables in anything that entails “community,” so
pinpointing and attributing success is challenging. Correspondingly, some projects are very small
scale and any research and/or evaluation of these projects is lacking. These are challenges to
most community initiatives as is further discussed in the evaluation section below.
Key Contextual and Structural Conditions for Successful Community-Based Coalitions
that Address Poverty Key Paradigms for Potential Future Models
Having stated that the success of community models is difficult to measure, there do
appear to be some common themes in those community models with positive outcomes. Models
that focus on the individual developing his or her potential appear to hold promise. A good
example of this is the success of the micro-enterprise programs with approximately 90% of
businesses still in operation after 31 months, according to the U.S. Department of Labor.6 This
notion of personal empowerment puts a significant amount of responsibility on the individual to
capitalize on opportunities created by community, state, or federal initiatives. Clearly,
opportunities have to also be available to all who wish to be economically self sufficient, which
calls upon local or federal programs to promote an environment conducive to opportunity. In this
vein, society also has a responsibility to initiate programs that provide individuals the
opportunities to escape from poverty.
Looking more broadly to the community, models that go beyond income statistics and
focus on the various facets of quality of life tend to meet with greater success. The trend in the
last couple of decades has been to incorporate the many variables that comprise socio-economic
status and quality of life, including individual and/or family economic viability, education,
housing, employment and wage rate environment, neighborhood safety, community engagement,
family support structures, and the individual’s and society’s commitment to the alleviation of
poverty. Since few programs incorporate all of these dimensions, it is even more important for
communities to come together to coordinate these efforts and gain synergies from the
implementation and the outcomes. Hence, all significant parts of the community must be
engaged from both the public and private sectors.
Engaging the Community and Developing Local Leadership
Engaging a community to come together as a unit to affect change is a formidable task.
There are often varying opinions, cultures, agendas and available resources within a community,
which can challenge even a universally-accepted goal of poverty alleviation. Yet there is a
106
growing consensus that mobilizing a community can be an effective and sustainable way to
improve the quality of life of its citizens.
Community engagement entails the legitimization of common goals for the betterment of
a neighborhood or other geographic area with set boundaries.
Community engagement attempts to provide a venue for residents, businesses,
educational institutions, and even government to discuss, collaborate, and implement changes
that aim to improve the community as a whole. Implicit in these endeavors is the empowerment
of individuals and groups of individuals (including businesses) to navigate many aspects of their
immediate environment.
This environment includes important short and long term policies affecting education,
housing, crime reduction, employment, social capital, and family support mechanisms.
Successful community-based coalitions, and organizations of any type, are most
successful when there is a clear vision of what the organization aspires to be and what its goals
are. When communities define their own needs and goals, there is a sense of identity and buy-in
for the course of changes that will occur. Engaged and successful communities often capitalize
on some pivotal event, whether it is favorable or unfavorable. These communities often take
account of what comparative advantages or assets they already have, and what challenges they
face. They are inclusive of all socio-economic, racial, and ethnic groups across all generations.
Engaged communities are comprised of many stakeholders that are willing to work across
many sectors. Effective community engagement includes those with authority, those in need of
assistance and a voice, and those with expertise in the process of coalition-building and
community mobilization. Successful community coalitions seek out technical assistance in the
methodologies and examples of “best practices” in community, economic and workforce
development. Engaged communities usually have some funds dedicated to the capacity building
of the coalition and work towards strategies for perpetual sustainability. Strong, visionary
leadership that respects many voices and operates with great integrity is also a key element of
successful community endeavors.
One could argue that leading a community-based coalition is more challenging than
leading a company or single-entity organization. The simple aim of pulling together varying
individuals’ interests and achieving consensus is an art.
Effective leaders and their staff have to possess the ability and patience to maintain a
sense of hope and momentum, while also being charismatic.
Planning and action must also be balanced carefully. Effective leaders usually need to
develop buy-in from at least one significant political player or level of government, and they
usually have to have sufficient tenure to obtain the support they need. Effective leaders know
how to celebrate successes with the community members, and they know how to give voice and
credit to staff or other members of the coalition.
107
From an operational perspective, good leaders must possess an array of competencies
including the following abilities:
1. To communicate effectively – orally, visually, and written.
2. To translate the overall vision into measurable goals and objectives.
3. To gather and analyze data and use the information wisely.
4. To understand and internalize the goals for each person or group in the community.
5. To listen, and convince various members or interest groups that there is a mutually
beneficial outcome to the various actions or policies under consideration.
6. To motivate participants.
7. To provide recognition and rewards.
8. To assess the available resources and use them judiciously.
9. To work towards long term benefits and outcomes.
There are various initiatives world-wide to develop more effective leaders. Good
leadership is very difficult to find, but an essential component to successful community building
or community development.
Community Asset Mapping and Other Indicators
Community asset mapping is a process of gathering, analyzing, and reporting information
about the capacities or strengths of a specific area or community. It can include a mapping of the
skills and commitment of citizens, the dedication of community organizations, the social capital,
and the resources of formal institutions in the community. Community assessment is a somewhat
broader concept that includes an inventory of assets, but also gathers information about the needs
in a community. The ability of a community to define its own assets and needs, and develop
strategies to productively integrate its assets and needs, is a key element to long term community
success.
Various indicators are used to measure the health of a community. They fall into broad
social categories, including:
 Economic well-being
 Wellness and safety
 Nurturing, inclusive environment
 Demographics
 Educational preparedness
 Community participation
 Transportation
The National Association of Planning Councils (NAPC) is one of the national leaders in
measuring the characteristics of communities. More specifically, the NAPC model includes a
Deprivation Index, a Child Well-being Index, and a Health and Social Descriptive. Each
category has various quantitative parameters that define each index or indicator.
The United Way has also created a quality of life barometer that incorporates 35 indicators
including measures of financial security, health, education, safety, charitable giving,
108
volunteerism,
civic
engagement,
and
the
natural
environment
(http://national.unitedway.org/stateofcaring/). Local communities are creating their own United
Way State of Caring indicators using the methodology of the federal index.7
Kids Count is a measure of the health of a community developed by the Annie E. Casey
Foundation. It is a national and state-by-state effort to track the status of children in the United
States. Children’s health is often a good indicator of the overall health of a community, and it is a
group that all agree needs prioritization and an active voice. One of the most useful aspects of
these indices is that they are accompanied by narrative essays (available online) that give
customized information by state, county, city and community. This can be particularly useful for
comparative and prioritization/planning purposes (www.aecf.org/cgibin/cliks.cgi).
The Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC)8 has also identified key characteristics of
“smart neighborhoods.” All of these tools and similar ones can be useful to communities in
assessing their strengths and weaknesses. They can be used as diagnostic tools that lead to vision
and action. In fact, having access to such key information can also serve as a very powerful tool
to educate community members about their own environment and the living conditions of the
citizens. With this compelling information, it is more likely that community coalitions will have
similar priorities about which unique strengths should be built upon and what challenges should
be addressed first.
Developing a Plan
Community planning processes can vary greatly. There are, however, categories or
models of community planning that can be identified. These may be useful to coalitions that are
beginning to form given that some models have met with more success than others.
The managerial model is a more traditional model used by many community coalitions,
most closely resembling the strategic planning models seen in the private sector. These models
are “top down” and follow fairly rigid processes.
Given that successful community-based coalitions need broad stakeholder participation, it
is not surprising that the managerial model is not usually a very efficacious one.
The legislative model is the second most widely used model. This model includes the
development of an agenda, the fostering of community acceptance of the agenda, and the
legitimization of decisions made by the community’s governing team. These models may
succeed if they are very inclusive and if other key “success” factors (e.g., good leadership) are
present.
The limited community participation model involves a subset of citizens that create a
committee, task force, or commission focused upon a very specific agenda and goal. After the
citizens’ committee completes a report and presents it to some governing body, formal planning
and decision-making is then handed over to another governing body. These models may suit the
109
purpose of a short-term goal and may be “successful” in this right. However, for broader
agendas, participation must be more inclusive of the various players in the community.
The community empowerment process model is built around extensive community
participation. This model serves as a tool to empower community members to navigate the
course of their immediate social and economic surroundings. Residents have a high level of
participation in these models over a long period of time. Given the heavy investment of time and
resources by many stakeholders, these models are highly sustainable.
It is important to note that those community planning processes that develop a formal
structure to monitor progress and delegate responsibilities are also more likely to succeed. This
can involve a delicate balance since too much of a hierarchic structure can also be detrimental.
As stated above, it is also important to have a clear vision, plan of action, implementation
strategy, and plan for sustainability.
Research on Effective Community-Based Models
The Urban Institute has researched the key traits to successful community building.9
They have found that systematic approaches to community building have been more successful
than the narrower neighborhood programs of the past. Their seven key themes for successful
community building include:
1. Focusing around very specific improvement initiatives that embody the values of the
community and that build upon existing social and human capital.
2. Being community driven with broad resident involvement from the various sectors.
3. Adopting a comprehensive, strategic, and entrepreneurial approach.
4. Identifying and leveraging assets of the community – being asset based –rather than
focusing upon the problems or negative aspects of the community.
5. Keeping actions specific and sufficiently tailored to the scale of the neighborhood such
that impact will be observable and measurable.
6. Collaboratively linking to the broader society to capitalize on other resources and
enhance outside opportunities for residents.
7. Making a conscious effort to remove institutional barriers and racism.
The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, United States Department
of Health and Human Services (ASPE)10 also conducted research and developed a list of seven
key attributes of successful community-based initiatives:
1. Most of the coalitions took advantage of a catalytic event early in their development.
110
2. The coalitions tended to be flexible and organic in their mission and actions as needs and
opportunities arose.
3. There was visible impact of community efforts that defined some community-based
signature outcome(s).
4. Most initiatives studied had charismatic leaders with either an entrepreneurial bent or an
ability and willingness to hire such individuals.
5. Alliances were formed between autonomous organizations.
6. There was a strong presence of a solid working class population base.
7. Adequate, stable, and flexible financing was secured.
Implementing Whole Community Strategies
One of the relatively new and key themes in any discussion about effective community
building is social capital. Social capital can be difficult to measure; it involves a sense of trust, an
ease of (candid) communication, and a respect for all members’ opinions. These attributes form
the norms and networks that enable collective action. If social capital is high, it is easier to
implement whole community strategies that embrace the free market, government, private
entities, and all citizens or citizen groups.
Starting from the individual or micro-level, whole community initiatives look at the wellbeing of the individual and/or family structure. Broad social challenges are often brought to the
forefront of community, local, state or federal attention because of how they impact individuals
and/or families. These social challenges are usually intertwined with challenges faced within
family structures. Social problems involve a web of reciprocal cause and effect between the
many facets of the community. Often, the persistent negative effects of poverty cause broader
social dilemmas (e.g., crime) that, in turn, perpetuate detrimental norms within homes (e.g., drug
or alcohol abuse). An effective whole community approach acknowledges that individuals and
families should be given resources to affect change within their homes as well as outside their
homes. This can involve anything from making health care accessible, to drug rehabilitation, to
education about healthy parenting skills (to name a few).
At the neighborhood or community level, whole community initiatives try to reach out to
the various constituents of a community to create a level of understanding for each others’ life
circumstances. In doing so, they embrace the many types of community members and attempt to
put a face on poverty to create understanding and support for those in need. Whole community
initiatives do not make value judgments about certain racial/ethnic or economic groups. They
make the problems they face part of the agenda for change.
111
At the planning level, whole communities aim to understand the aforementioned complex
interaction between individuals, families, neighborhoods and the challenges they face. Once the
specific dynamic is well understood, a holistic approach to alleviating the problems is within
reach. These holistic approaches not only involve all the stakeholders and community members,
they also implement actions and policies that include housing, jobs, health care, education, and
crime. This often entails bringing together community organizations that in the past have been
separate. This is a tall order and many community-based coalitions are limited in their reach.
However, if there is true community involvement that is highly inclusive, many of the
critical components of the community can be positively affected over time.
As stated above, implicit in such successes is the assumption that other vital community
building attributes are in place (e.g., strong leadership, access to effective methodologies for
community building, the recognition of successes, working across racial/ethnic groups).
Monitoring and evaluating programs is also an integral part of what whole communities do. They
want to know if they are achieving their goals and they want to be able to prove their efficacy to
their community members and to potential funders.
The Hispanic Community in Montgomery County, Maryland mobilized a “whole
community” approach to try and solve its very high educational dropout rate, over crowded
housing problem, and high percentage (85%) of families without health insurance. The Hispanics
formed a coalition called the Montgomery County Consejo Latino (MCCL) group and it
acknowledged the interrelated nature of poverty, overcrowded housing, low educational
attainment, and poor health. Community centers are now in the planning phase; they will have a
goal to provide many of the needed services (e.g., bilingual health center, educational, and other
social services). Many private corporations have dedicated money or other resources to help
launch these centers and the county has agreed to match funds. This increases the likelihood that
the plans will materialize and that the wide scope of the “whole community” approach will be
feasible.
A comprehensive overview of the characteristics of promising community efforts can be
found in the PEW Foundation publication Smart Communities authored by Suzanne Moore. This
book gives in-depth examples of many of the defining characteristics discussed in this paper.
Specifically, six high-leverage points are identified as critical to community change. These
include:
1. Investing right the first time.
2. Working together.
3. Building on community strengths.
4. Practicing democracy.
5. Preserving the past.
6. Growing leaders.
Sustainability. What is Sustainability?
112
Sustainability involves a longer term outlook on the viability of the community coalition
and the community itself. True sustainability embraces a holistic view of the community,
including all those facets that affect poverty: education, housing, employment and wage rate
environment, neighborhood safety, social capital, and individual/family support structures.
Implicit in this broad view is the engagement of individuals, businesses, and both public and
private entities. Sustainability also looks at economic, environmental, and social indicators in a
highly comprehensive manner. For example, instead of using the traditional indicator of median
income for a given community, a “sustainability indicator” might measure the number of hours
of paid employment at the average wage rate required to support the basic needs of a person or
family.
These deeper reaching indicators can serve not only as markers for the climate of a
community; they can also be used as prioritization tools for those communities that have many
social issues they want to tackle.
How to Achieve Sustainability
At the community resident level, securing the involvement of citizens is key to
sustainability. Leadership and staff of a community coalition may find it easier to engage and
retain citizen involvement if members feel that their efforts are worthwhile. This can involve
both short term gains, such as increased networking and business or employment opportunities,
and long term gains such as an improved overall community environment that is visible and
concrete.
Similarly, citizens should feel that it is easy to participate in the community coalition.
Leadership and staff should provide multiple entry points for participation and should reach out
to members of the community who might otherwise not participate. It may also be helpful to
provide a social environment that is conducive to recreational events that create friendships and a
sense of collegiality. A sustainable community initiative also has the culture that all members
have a sense of responsibility, that the tasks towards action and improvement must be spread as
evenly as possible across the coalition. This way there is not a sense of reliance on specific
members who may or may not be with the community for the long term. Also, board members,
staff, and volunteers should be members of the community itself. They are more likely to have
legitimacy from other members and they are more likely to participate in a manner that
understands the nuances of that particular community.
As mentioned above, there are several crucial elements that are necessary for any
community coalition to have, whether they are relatively new and in their agenda-forming stage
or whether they are established and looking to future sustainability. These include: strong
leadership; partnerships with businesses, nonprofits and government; high and inclusive
community participation; technical assistance; and a holistic approach that embraces all sectors
of the community.
113
Evaluation and Sustainability
Evaluation of community endeavors is notoriously difficult because of the multiple
variables involved in what comprises a community. Attributing a success (or failure) can be very
difficult when there are multiple causes. For example, if one looks to a massive educational
effort in an impoverished neighborhood for improved childhood asthma rates and sees decreased
emergency room or hospitalization rates, it is possible that those rates are a result of the schoolbased education, the physician education, the media campaigns, or the free Saturday clinics.
However, the reduced rates can also be the result of reduced emissions, which were not part of
the intervention, or they could even be a cohort effect (a coincidental group of youngsters who
have a lower incidence of asthma than the previously measured group). Likewise, the impact of
systemic, broad community policies and actions can take a long time to reveal themselves – even
decades. And some goals can involve very subtle concepts like building social capital, which
also makes evaluation difficult.
It is also true that relatively few communities have the technical capacity to effectively
evaluate their efforts on an ongoing basis. This is one primary reason why it is often suggested
that community-based coalitions should partner with higher academic institutions. Universities
and/or colleges often have faculty that specialize in evaluation, and they are often willing to
partner to both assist in affecting positive change in the community and to research (publishable)
topics of interest.
For those coalitions that have established the expertise and that recognize the importance
of evaluation, attention and impact from their efforts can be more assured if they do the
following:11
1. Produce frequent public reports and fact sheets for key stakeholders and decision-makers
(e.g., government),
2. Conduct face-to-face briefings with these audiences to keep major stakeholders and
policy makers abreast of what the community is doing and what findings are emerging.
3. Release findings to liaison or intermediate organizations that can distribute them to the
appropriate stakeholders and others who should be engaged.
4. Make information available electronically.
5. Use the news media and research papers to share findings with broader audiences.
6. Hold meetings with interested stakeholders about controversial findings to avoid
surprises and find ways for the negative findings to inspire productive action.
7. Keep focus on the issues and not on people or personalities – keep things professional.
Even small community initiatives should have a dedicated evaluation member or team that
constantly maintains, summarizes and presents data. Effective evaluation is not post hoc or
conducted on an as needed basis. Findings should always be used as a continuous quality
improvement tool. Findings can also be used to help solidify future funding from foundations,
local, state or federal sources.
114
Conclusion
In sum, community building is a means to achieving healthy communities, including the
alleviation or amelioration of poverty. Given the complex nature of communities, the scope of
community building can be far-reaching and therefore extremely ambitious. However, there is a
growing consensus that successful communities have a positive view of community building,
and they believe in it as a means to improve their immediate environment and the lives of its
citizens.
Community-based coalitions have a strong sense of ownership on the part of its citizens
and citizen groups (including business and government). Indeed, individuals, businesses, and
policy makers now recognize engaged communities as the key to an improved society. This point
of view is usually subscribed to by stakeholders of varying political affiliations and of varying
socio-economic, cultural, and ethnic composition. This alone can serve as the necessary common
ground or foundation for the initiation of coalitions that seek community-based solutions to
poverty.
Sources
“Building Community with Social Capital: Chits and Chums or Chats with Change,” William R. Potapchuck, Jarle
P. Crocker, William H. Schechter Jr., National Civic Review, 1997.
From the Bottom Up: A Report on the NAPC Social Indicators Project, National Association of Planning Councils,
May 2002.
United Way State of Caring Index (http://national.unitedway.org/stateofcaring/)
Sustainable Measures www.sustainablemeasures.com/Indicators/TraditionalVsSustainable.html
“Information, Models, and Trends for Community Developers,” Local Initiatives Support Corporation, April 2002
(www.lisc.org/resources/2002)
Models of Community Planning, Donald P. Lacy, Ohio State University, Michael John Dougherty, West Virginia
University, Pamela D. Gibson, Virginia Tech, National Community Resources and Economic Development
Conference, February 2002.
National Survey of Urban Economic and Community Development Models, Local Initiatives Support Corporation.
Reintegrating Disadvantaged Communities into the Fabric of Urban Life: The Role of Community Development,
Avis C. Vidal, New School for Social Research, Housing Policy Debate, Volume 6, Issue 1, Fannie Mae, 1995.
Microenterprise Works: Success Stories from Across the Nation, Maria Hein, John Else, and Christine Pigsley of the
Institute for Social and Economic Development, Association for Enterprise Opportunity
Participating in a Place-Based Employment Initiative: Lessons from the Jobs-Plus Demonstration in Public
Housing, Linda Yuriko Kato, MDRC, November 2003.
Revisiting the Critical Elements of Comprehensive Community Initiatives, Bruce Gray, Angela Duran, Ann Segal,
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, United States Department of Health and Human
Services, February 1997.
“Evaluating
Comprehensive
Community
www.aecf.org/publications/evaluation/part2c.htm
Change,”
115
Annie
E.
Casey
Foundation,
“Community Residents and
www.children.smartlibrary.org
Foundations
“Back to the Future: Comprehensive
www.children.smartlibrary.org
Team
Up
Approaches
to
to
Change
Alleviating
the
Urban
System,”
Smart
Library,
Poverty,”
Smart
Library,
Review of Neighborhood Revitalization Initiatives, Jennifer Turnham, Jessica Bonjorni, Abt Associates, Inc.,
February 2004
Community Based Solutions Research Brief, November 2004 21 “Model Projects,” Brownsfields for Global
Learners, www.brownfield.org/Global/model.htm
Residential Mobility and Opportunities: Early Impacts of the Moving to Opportunity Demonstration Program in
Chicago, Emily Rosenbaum (Fordham University) and Laura E. Harris (Urban Institute), Housing Policy Debate,
Volume 12, Issue 2, Fannie Mae Foundation, 2001.
“Bethel New Life – Towards a Healthy Sustainable Community,” Smart Communities Network,
www.sustainable.doe.gov/success/bethel_new.shtml
Working Together: Building Capacity for Community Development, Nancy Nye (Community Development
Consultant) and Norman J. Glickman (Rutgers University), Housing Policy Debate, Volume 11, Issue 1, Fannie Mae
Foundation, 2000.
The Myth of Social Capital in Community Development, James DeFilippis, King’s College, London, Housing Policy
Debate, Volumbe 12, Issue 4, Fannie Mae Corporation, 2001.
Community Impact through Neighborhood Partnerships, United Way of America, 1997.
United Ways’ Community Capacity Building Stories, Curt Johnson and Jim Morrison, United Way of America,
1996.
Community Building Comes of Age, G. Thomas Kingsley, Joseph B. McNeely, and James O. Gibson, Urban
Institute, May 1997.
Community Action and Community Action Agencies, National Community Action Foundation, April 9, 2004,
www.ncaf.org/cacaa.html
The Historical Origins and Causes of Urban Decentralization in the United States, Alexander von Hoffman and
John Felkner, Joint Center for Housing Studies, Harvard University, January 2002.
Building Community with Social Capital: Chits and Chums or Chats with Change, William R. Potapchuk, Jarle P.
Crocker, William H. Schechter, Jr., Building Community with Social Capital, National Civic Review, 1997.
“Social Capital” from the Civic Dictionary, Carmen Sirianni and Lewis Friedland, Civc Practices Network,
www.cpn.org/tools/dictionary/capital.html
Race, Politics, and Community Development in U.S. Cities, Herb Fayer, Robert Pearson, and James Jennings, Tufts
University, Annals, AAPSS, Volume 594, July 2004.
Strategic Planning at a Community Level: A Case Study of the Agenda for Children Tomorrow Project, Anderson,
Mary, 1995
The Atlanta Project: A Community-Based Approach to Solving Urban Problems, Giles, Michael W., National Civic
Review, Fall, 1993
116
Community Based Solutions Research Brief, November 2004 22
Building Community, Leiterman, Mindy and Joseph Stillman, Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC), 1993
Rural Challenges: Barriers to Self-Sufficiency, April Kaplan, Welfare Information Network Issue Notes, September
1998
East Side Neighborhood Development Company Case Study, CSI, June, 2004 Livable Places Profile: Community
by Design, Bruce Liedstrand, Kristen Paulsen http://www.scag.ca.gov/livable/download/pdf/cathedral.pdf
On Ethnic Diversity in Rural Minnesota, Jack M. Geller, Ph.D., Center for Rural Policy and Development, August
2001
Community Development Dynamic Neighborhoods: Synchronizing Services and Strategies with immigrant
Communities, Catherine Fernandez, Fellowship Program for Emerging Leaders in Community and Economic
Development, October 2003
Integrating TANF and WIA Into a Single Workforce System: An Analysis of Legal Issues Mark Greenberg, Emil
Parker, Abbey Frank, February 2004
Review of Neighborhood Revitalization Initiatives, Jessica Bonjorni, Jennifer Turnham Neighborhood Reinvestment
Corporation, February 2004
Hispanic Youth Dropping out of US Schools, Measuring the Challenge, Richard Fry, June 2003
Administration for Children and Families U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Collaborating With Your
Community, April 2004
Comprehensive Community Initiatives: Redefining Community Development, Winton Pitcoff, January 1998
A Guide to Strategic Planning for Rural Communities, USDA Rural Development Office of Community
Development, March 1998
Building Bridges to Self-Sufficiency Improving Services for Low-Income Working Families, Jennifer Miller, Frieda
Molina, Lisa Grossman, Susan Golonka, National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, March 2004
Edna McConnell 2003 Annual Report, Edna Clark McConnell Foundation, 2003
The Effects of Living Wage in Baltimore, Christopher Niedt, Economic Policy Institute, 1999
Telecommuting: Possible Futures for Urban and Rural Communities, Ray Quay, McQuay Technologies, 1995
National Governors Association Growth Tool Kit.
www.nga.org/center/divisions/1,1188,C_ISSUE_BRIEF^D_2487,00.html
Living Wage Issue Guide, Jared Bernstein, Economic Policy Institute, 2000
Community Based Solutions Research Brief, November 2004 23
Transforming State Workforce Development Systems: Case Studies of Five Leading States , Evelyn Ganzglass,
Martin Jensen, Neil Ridley, Martin Simon and Chris Thompson, July 2001
The Role of Partnerships in Economic Development and Labor Markets in the United States, Randall W. Eberts and
George Erickcek, Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, January 2002
117
Who Sprawls Most? How Growth Patterns Differ Across the U.S., William Fulton, Rolf Pendall, Mai Nguyen, and
Alicia Harrison, July 2001
1 World Bank
2 “Review of Neighborhood Revitalization Initiatives”
3 “Review of Neighborhood Revitalization Initiatives”
4 “Community Action and Community Action Agencies”
5 NGA Center for Best Practices
6 Need footnote? One is not provided in the research paper (p. 58)
7 United Way State of Caring Index
8 Information, Models and Trends for Community Developers
9 “Community Building Coming of Age”
10 Evaluating Comprehensive Change
11 “Evaluating Comprehensive Change”
118
Creating A 21st Century Model To Address Poverty
Family Economic Security
Research Brief on Existing Policies and Strategies
November 2004
119
Overview
Economic security, as used throughout this brief, goes beyond economic sufficiency. In
an economically secure environment, a family is able to gather enough resources for basic living,
and is able to do so consistently. It is secure in the knowledge that today’s needs will be met so
that it can plan for tomorrow.
The fundamental distinction between economic sufficiency and security is that the latter
allows families to look beyond the immediate needs, protect the assets they have, and keep their
hopes alive for a better future.
The rest of this paper is organized using an asset-building framework. In this framework,
people are consumers, as well producers, owners, and planners. Individuals are members of
families and communities that share culture and history, and make decisions that affect the
quality of life today and tomorrow. Policies and strategies are reviewed by how they help, or aim
to help, individuals and families to acquire, maintain and grow three kinds of assets: financial,
social and importantly, human asset.
Financial Capital Acquisition and Asset Protection
Before low-income families can acquire and grow assets, most of them need to be
introduced to the mainstream banking system and financial products. Furthermore, what little
savings and assets they have need to be protected from unscrupulous lenders. In this section, we
review policies and strategies that aim to improve financial literacy, increase access to banking
and financial products, accumulate assets, and protect savings and assets from predatory lenders.
Financial Literacy Education 1
Personal financial literacy, as defined by the Institute for Socio-Financial Studies is “the
ability to read, analyze, manage, and communicate about the personal financial conditions that
affect material well-being. It includes the ability to discern financial choices, discuss money and
financial issues without (or despite) discomfort, plan for the future, and respond competently to
life events that affect everyday financial decisions, including events in the general economy.”
The most frequently taught financial education topics are:
1. Budget and Money Management
2. Saving and Investing
3. Credit and Debt
4. 401(k) Investing
5. Financing Education
6. Financing Health Care
In 1995, the Jump$tart Coalition for Personal Financial Literacy was started to promote
personal finance in schools and improve the financial knowledge and abilities of children and
young adults.
120
In April 2000, then-Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers formed the National Partners for
Financial Empowerment, a public-private partnership to promote the development of personal
financial skills for all Americans.
Access to Mainstream Banking & Financial Products
According to estimates provided by the FDIC, there are nearly 10 million people in
America who do not maintain traditional bank, credit, savings, or investment accounts.2 In 2001,
9% of the households in the U.S. did not have any transaction accounts. Among households
making $25,000 or less a year, 22% did not have transaction accounts.3
There are many reasons why people do not use mainstream banks. Significantly, there is
a cultural distrust of bank and misconception that maintaining bank accounts requires
unaffordable minimum balances. Consequently, the unbanked consumers utilize “fringe financial
services providers” such as check cashing outlets, wire transfer companies, pawnshops, payday
lenders – companies that specialize in providing short- term, small loans, generally in return for a
post dated check that the payday lender will deposit when the borrower receives his or her pay
check, benefit check or other compensation. Many people use these fringe lenders because they
are unaware of or don’t have access to any alternatives, especially in neighborhoods with few
bank branches and in families that have never had bank accounts.
Banks and policymakers have placed increased attention and focus on developing
products and approaches that will bring the unbanked into the financial services mainstream.

A growing number of banks are offering the U.S. Treasury Department’s low cost
Electronic Transfer Accounts that allows federal payments recipients to use direct
deposit.

Banks are participating with employers to offer payroll cards that provide the benefits of
direct deposit and debit cards but do not require the consumer to maintain and manage a
checking account.

Banks are enhancing bilingual services and marketing, offering low cost or free money
orders and check cashing services, and modifying personal identification requirements to
better serve immigrants.

A growing range of financial institutions have developed business models that market to
consumers with blemished credit histories, limited credit histories, or who possess other
factors that present a greater degree of risk to the lender.

The Treasury Department has established an Office of Financial Education to develop
and implement financial education policy initiatives and coordinate with other
government programs.
121

The Treasury Department administers a “First Accounts” grant program. It is designed to
help unbanked low- and moderate-income individuals establish banking relationships
with insured depository institutions. Financial institutions that receive the grants will
provide unbanked individuals a free checking or savings account upon completion of a
financial education course, and/or provide ongoing counseling and educational support
services once the unbanked individual has established an account.
Individual Development Account
Individual development accounts (IDA) are dedicated savings accounts containing
deposits by low-income account holders and matched by private and/or public sources.
Individuals may participate if they are eligible for TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy
Families), have annual incomes at or below a specified percentage of the federal poverty level or
fraction of area household median income, or are eligible for the federal Earned Income Tax
Credit (EITC, explored in detail in a later section).4
Once enrolled, participants remain eligible for matches if they make regular minimum
deposits into the accounts. The match rate ranges from 1:1 to 3:1. Funds in IDA accounts can be
used to purchase a home, start a small business, or pay for post-secondary education or job
training. Some states also allow it to be used for retirement savings, car purchase or repair, home
repairs or improvements, and some healthcare and other approved expenses.
Many state IDA programs focus on serving a particular segment of the low-income
population. Examples include:
 California’s LIFETIMES Savings and Self-Sufficiency Program is geared to current or
recent TANF recipients who want to accumulate financial assets to build their education
and skills for access to good jobs and job mobility.
 California’s Worker Income Security Program is directed to low-wage, manufacturing
employees and is workplace-based rather than community-based.
 Minnesota’s Northland Foundation Business Supported IDA, another employment-based
program, targets low-income workers more broadly, with greater employer involvement.
 Pennsylvania ‘s Child-Space Workers Cooperative IDA is sector-focused, serving both
center-based and family-based childcare workers.
 Pennsylvania‘s Individual Learning Account operates like an IDA in that the savings by
employees of participating firms are matched 1:1 by employers and separately, the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The accumulated funds can be used to increase
participants’ human capital (e.g., education and training).
Home Ownership
The Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation was established by an act of Congress in
1978 to increase the capacity of local community-based organizations to revitalize their
communities by expanding and improving housing opportunities and promoting home
122
ownership. Many of them hold hands with potential buyers through every step of home buying
and inspection.
There are many dimensions to their work, including:

Build strong partnerships among corporations, foundations, public agencies, other
nonprofits and citizens;

Educate potential buyers about the buying process and increase their financial literacy;

Find creative ways to offer flexible loan and insurance products;

The Anchorage, Alaska Neighborhood Housing Services (ANHS) Home Affordability
Program received a $5 million dollar line of credit from the Alaska Housing Finance
Corporation to create a comprehensive home ownership program. These funds are
available as a line of credit to potential homeowners, and can be renewed based on
performance.

The New Mexico Mortgage Finance Authority (MFA) teamed up with NeighborWorks
organizations in New Mexico in issuing a $5 million mortgage revenue bond. This unique
partnership has produced the lowest interest rate to first-time homebuyers in the MFA’s
history. Loans are available to families with income at or below 80% of the area median.

Syracuse, New York Neighborhood Housing Services obtained an open-ended request for
30-year first mortgages and a line of credit for between 80 and 100 percent of appraised
values. The NHS packages and underwrites the loans and reviews them with the lender
before actual applications are made.

Inspect the properties for code and maintenance and repair needs;

The Kalamazoo (Michigan) Home Ownership Program is a comprehensive, purchaseand-rehabilitation lending program that has helped turn around city neighborhoods and
attracted ongoing support from lenders. Local lenders provide financing at 90% of a
property’s post-rehabilitation value. In lieu of traditional mortgage insurance, the
Kalamazoo Neighborhood Homeownership Services created a $400,000 loss reversal
fund which functions as an insurance policy for lenders.

Los Angeles Neighborhood Housing Services has been designated a Fannie Mae
construction administrator for Los Angeles County. This allows them to serve as a
resource for and lender using the Fannie Mae products that requires rehabilitation.

Neighborhood Housing Services of Toledo (Ohio) is creating EnergyStar®-rated houses
that, with the help of the U.S. Department of Energy, are 30% more energy efficient than
required by law. This program was motivated by an analysis that concluded lowering
utility bills by 25% would enable an additional 2 million Americans to become
homeowners.
123

Provide post-purchase counseling and services focused on early intervention to help
prevent problems that, when left unchecked, can raise the threat of default and
foreclosure. By helping families avoid foreclosure proceedings, huge cost savings for
lenders and borrowers are realized.
Homeownership helps bolster neighborhood confidence and stimulates other investments.
Owner-occupied homes furnish a stable place in which to raise children and a secure base from
which to establish social networks.
Homeowners stay in a community up to four times longer than renters. When neighbors stay
in one place longer, they have more time to establish social networks.
Other programs that seek to help low-income family achieve home ownership include:

Section 8 Homeownership Program are designed by HUD and implemented by local
housing agencies to provide low-income assistance for families to make the transition
from rental housing to home ownership. The program began in October 2000. The
housing agency provides monthly assistance for mortgage payments, thus assisting lowincome families with building equity in their home5.

Housing Cooperatives that target low-income residents provide home equity
opportunities to those that could not otherwise afford them, thereby increasing
neighborhood affordability and stability.6

Mutual Housing Associations (MHA) are nonprofit, membership-controlled
corporations that develop and own affordable housing for members of the corporation.
While occupancy is limited to MHA members, not all members are residents.
Membership usually consists of current and prospective residents, as well as residents of
the larger community. MHA fees are usually significantly less than down payment for
single-family homes.
Asset Protection
Frequently minorities, the elderly and low-income homeowners are targets and victims of
“predatory lending”: lending without regard to the borrower’s ability to repay; refinancing a loan
repeatedly over a short period of time without any economic benefit to the borrower7; engaging
in fraud and deceptive practices such as misleading borrowers about real terms of the loan or
falsifying documents; trapping borrowers in high-cost loans with long-term prepayment
penalties; and charging exorbitant fees and interest rates.
To help consumers protect their hard earned savings and assets, Congress has enacted
several laws to combat abusive lending practices, including:

Federal Trade Commission Act (FTC Act) - Congress enacted the FTC Act in 1914 to
give FTC the authority to prohibit and prosecute unfair or deceptive practices related to
124
commerce. The FTC has used the Act to punish predatory lending cases where consumers
were misled about their loan terms. Federal banking regulators have also taken action
against banks using the FTC Act.8

Truth in Lending Act (TILA) - Congress enacted TILA in 1968 to provide consumers
with accurate data about the true cost of their borrowing.9 TILA requires lenders to
disclose information about the terms of a loan, including the annual percentage rate,
amount financed, etc. TILA also enables borrowers to cancel certain loans within 3 days
of closing.10 TILA gave state and federal regulators the authority to punish dishonest
lenders.

Real Estate Settlements and Procedures Act (RESPA) - Passed in 1974, RESPA requires
a good faith disclosure of estimated settlement costs within three days of consumers’
application for a mortgage loan. It also requires a uniform settlement statement (HUD-1)
that provides a detailed list of the charges that constitute the final cost of the loan.

Home Ownership and Equal Opportunity Act (HOEPA) - Enacted in 1994 as an
amendment to the TILA, the HOEPA sets a series of restrictions on “high cost” loans.11
Specifically, HOEPA restricts lending without regard to the borrower’s ability to repay;
excessively refinancing a borrower’s loan without economic benefit to the borrower; and
certain prepayment and balloon payment penalties. HOEPA’s provides for damages to
the borrower beyond the actual damages a borrower may sustain as a result of a creditor’s
violation of the statute.
State lawmakers and state bank regulators have also played an extremely active role in
preventing predatory lending from occurring in state-chartered banks and state- licensed finance
companies and related lenders. As of May 15, 2004, 27 states and the District of Columbia have
passed laws that address abusive lending practices.
Most state statutes contain limitations or prohibitions of prepayment penalties, balloon
payments, negative amortization, loan flipping, and mandatory arbitration clauses.12 In addition,
some states require lenders to provide credit counseling to consumers. Some states incorporated
provisions that allow prosecution of purchasers of loans with predatory lending terms under the
predatory lending statute.
Growing Social Capital by Building Strong Families
Growing up with two parents offers many benefits for children. Children in families
headed by married or cohabiting couples have much lower poverty rates than children living with
single parents. Married families are less likely to be poor than cohabiting couples even after
controlling for factors such as race, education, age of parents, and number and age of children.
Poor married families are less likely to miss meals or fail to pay housing-related costs than other
poor families, including poor cohabiting couples. While there is evidence that marriage increases
income and reduces family hardship, what role can government play to encourage formations of
beneficial relationships and strengthen families that already exist?
125
The strongest evidence that social programs can have a positive impact on marriage rates
of disadvantaged individuals comes not from a program that overtly sought to influence marriage
decisions, but rather from what is perhaps the most progressive welfare reform demonstration
program conducted in the United States in the last decade, the Minnesota Family Investment
Program (MFIP).13 MFIP provided generous financial incentives and grant increases for both
single and two-parent families, regardless of their marital status, and also eliminated restrictive
rules that limited participation by two-parent families.
MFIP reduced poverty rates and increased marriage rates for both single parent and twoparent families. Married two-parent families were more likely to remain married — 67%of MFIP
two-parent families were married and living together after three years compared to 48% of the
two-parent families in AFDC control group.14 Single MFIP parents were somewhat more likely
to marry — 10.6% were married and living with a spouse after three years compared to 7% of in
the control group. While there is no consensus on why MFIP increased marriage rates,
researchers who conducted the study suggest that reductions in financial strain for two-parent
families in MFIP reduced sources of marital stress and instability.15
The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) has an ongoing initiative addressing
strong marriages under its Healthy Marriage Initiative. This is broad-base education and
assistance program, which cuts across several components of ACF. The initiative gave out grants
to help local areas develop marriage support programs and offers technical assistance to many
areas interested in starting or strengthening their own efforts. At the website for the HMI, HHS
Secretary Tommy Thompson is quoted as saying that “Research shows that both adults and
children are better off in two-parent families. It is no criticism of single parents to acknowledge
that better outcomes for children of married-couple families. Rather the research findings support
the underlying principles that impel us to redirect our policies so as to encourage healthy
marriages, especially where children are involved.” The Office of Community Services has
within its Assets for Families Initiative a strong component on providing education on the
benefits of marriage as part of its asset building programs.
Creating Financial Incentives for Marriage
The Federal Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) reduces taxes and provides wage
supplements for low-income, working families. A single unemployed mother cannot qualify for
the credit; nor could a working male with no children. But through marriage, the couple could
qualify for the EITC. Federal legislation in 2001 improved benefits for married couples.
Specifically, the income level at which the credit phase-down begins will be increased, resulting
in greater credits for married couples than unmarried couples with the same income.
Additionally, an increase in the top income level at which a married couple can receive benefits
will make more such couples eligible for the credit.16
Most states have changed their TANF eligibility requirement to treat one- and two-parent
families equally; that is, families are eligible based solely on financial eligibility. Under TANF,
states were given the flexibility to set their own eligibility rules. Fifteen states have created state-
126
funded TANF programs where a two-parent family no longer has to meet the 90 percent work
participation rate in order to qualify for benefits.17
To encourage couples to marry, some states have created policies that disregard the
income of a new spouse when calculating TANF eligibility. Alabama, Mississippi, North
Dakota, and Oklahoma disregard all income from a new spouse (biological parent or stepparent)
for three to six months. Tennessee disregards the income of a stepparent if it is less than 185
percent of the needs standard for the household, while New Jersey does so if household income
does not exceed 150 percent of the poverty line. Minnesota includes stepparents as eligible
members in a TANF assistance unit.18
In West Virginia, the state adds a $100 incentive payment to the monthly cash benefit to
married-couple families. Two-parent families on cash assistance receive a $100 bonus (or rebate)
every month they remain married. On average, about 1,500 families receive the bonus per
month.19 A similar program in California from the Torres Martinez Desert Indian Consortium
offers a lump sum of $2,000 to Native Americans living in Los Angeles and Riverside Counties
who participate in a marriage promotion program.20 An additional $1,500 is also offered to these
couples if they have a traditional Native American wedding.
At least seven states have taken steps to alleviate the disincentive of marriage that results
from child support payments. The criterion for forgiving arrears varies by state. Tennessee
forgives child support arrears owed by the father if he marries the mother of his children and
continues to live in the household.
Vermont forgives child support arrears if the biological parents are reunited (they do not
need to marry).21
Marriage Education and Relationship Support
Many states have created programs and set aside funding for premarital education on
relationship and communication. TANF funds are sometimes used to offer scholarship to lowincome couples so that they too can take advantage of these classes. 22





Arizona created a Marriage and Communication Commission to provide premarital
classes and publish educational booklets;
Oklahoma set up resource centers and selected the Prevention and Relationship
Enhancement Program (PREP) to offer marriage education workshops;
Utah’s Governor's Commission on Marriage was funded for four projects related to
encouraging the formation and maintenance of two-parent families.
Alabama’s Family Coaches Program targets TANF recipients and other low-income
families.
Michigan’s Family Independence Agency is working in specific counties to provide
marital counseling, communications skills, and anger management to those eligible under
TANF guidelines.
127
A variety of private marriage education and premarital programs exist to teach couples about
how to work together and survive the ups and downs of a lifetime commitment. These programs
are typically offered in a classroom-like setting or in a workshop format. Popular programs
include:

African American Family Life Education: developed by the Indiana University’s School
of Social Work, containing two empirically based practice models in marriage
enrichment and parenting education for African American family leaders.23

The Art and Science of Love: A Weekend Workshop for Couples: devoted to researchbased relationship skills that can improve friendship in relationships and resolve conflict
in a healthy productive way. 24

Couple Communication: a step-by-step process to work on interpersonal skills for
effective talking, listening, conflict resolution, and anger management. 25

IMAGO Relationship International: a nonprofit organization whose mission is to create a
new model for marriage. 26

PAIRS: programs for married couples, disadvantaged youth, unmarried families, single
parents, domestic violence, prison parolees, and related groups who can benefit from
relationship skills training. 27

Retrouvaille: a live-in weekend and post weekend program for married couples. The
emphasis is on communication techniques between a husband and wife. 28
Father Involvement
Some states are seeking to reunify families through statewide fatherhood programs.
These programs focus on relationship and parenting skills in order to increase fathers’
attachment to their families. Some state’s father involvement programs, however, have a specific
marriage component. For example, the premise of the Florida Commission on Fatherhood policy
is that strong marriages promote fatherhood so programs should promote marriage preservation.
Mississippi’s Responsible Fatherhood Initiative is funded with TANF dollars and addresses all
goals of TANF in the training programs, including marriage. The Pennsylvania Fatherhood
Initiative approaches the subject of marriage in its programs as the best (though not the only)
environment in which to raise children. Staff teaches the value of marriage in the fatherhood
centers and school-based programs.
Two states also train program providers on how to address marriage. The Texas
Fatherhood Initiative will be training community-based organizations on how to promote
marriage within the context of a fatherhood program. Similarly, Virginia’s fatherhood campaign
includes workshops for providers on ways to promote sound marriages. 29
Research suggests that joint legal custody can help reduce conflict after a divorce,
increase the non-custodial parent’s involvement with the children, and increase child support
128
payments relative to non-custodial parents who do not have joint custody. Most states have a
joint legal custody presumption law on the books.
There are some programs that target incarcerated parent and the challenge of creating
parental involvement after release. These programs target both men and women leaving prison
for parenting and family reunification services. Four states have statewide programs for
incarcerated parents. Idaho, for instance, uses TANF funds for family stabilization services for
families with a previously incarcerated individual. Pennsylvania’s fatherhood program targets
incarcerated and paroled fathers to help them make the transition to their families. Marriage is
approached as the best environment in which to raise children. In the District of Columbia, the
Prison Fellowship Ministries offer seminars to prisoners and their spouses to learn how to work
through marital problems. 30
Parenting Support
In Michigan, TANF funds have been used to pilot the Encouraging Family Formation
program. The goals of the program is to create stable family units, improve parenting and
communication skills and help parents to return to work after the birth of their baby. 31 The
program started in five counties in fiscal year 2002 and continued in four counties in fiscal year
2003. The pilot also includes the development of a family formation and fathering curriculum.
Classes at each site vary in content, but each consists of a minimum of 24 hours of classes. A
segment of the Health Marriage Initiative by the Administration for Children & Families
includes programs on parenting. Below are extracts from the Department’s website
(http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/healthymarriage/index.html):
Marriage Education for Couples Becoming Parents
The transition to parenthood, especially with a first child, creates a fundamental life
change for the couple involved. The transition requires couples to adapt their relationship and
individual roles, improve their communication skills, and contend with their existing life
responsibilities while assuming responsibility for a child. Expectant couples are naturally
concerned about the well being of their child, and thus may be especially open to learning new
information, adopting new, positive behaviors, and improving their marital relations. Although
programs generally focus on married couples, the transition to parenthood is also a moment
when both unmarried and married couples can strengthen their relationship and benefit from
education about healthy marriage.
Research indicates that after the birth of a first child, couples disagree more often than
before, experience greater conflict, and report lower satisfaction with their own relationship.
How couples approach marital conflict is critical to the overall health of their marriage and their
children’s well being. Very high levels of parental conflict are associated with greater emotional
and behavioral problems in children. While it is common for expectant couples to attend
childbirth education classes together, such classes typically focus on preparation for labor, birth,
and child development rather than on the many life changes that will follow. Marriage education
129
for couples becoming parents focuses on expectant couples' attention to relationship issues
before they experience marital distress brought on by the transforming event of becoming
parents. The following are examples of marriage education programs for couples becoming
parents.
Becoming Parents Program (BPP)
This approach targets married or committed couples that are becoming parents for the
first time through birth, adoption, or foster parenting and consists of a series of classes designed
to help them learn skills and knowledge to strengthen their relationships. BPP is based on
principles taught in the Prevention and Relationship Enhancement Program (PREP), a
comprehensive program for couples contemplating marriage. BPP supplements the PREP
curriculum with topics relevant to the unique period surrounding the birth or adoption of a
couple’s first child. BPP focuses on relationship skills learning, as adapted from PREP; issues
associated with managing fatigue, stress, anger, and division of household labor; and lessons in
infant care. The program involves 27 hours of classroom time, mostly during the weeks
preceding birth, with one 3-hour “booster” session held when the infant is 6 to 8 weeks old and
another when the child is 6 months old. Program instructors often are nurses, but
paraprofessionals can be trained in the program method.
For additional information, see the website at http://www.becomingparents.com. Also, a
book by the BPP designers, Becoming Parents: How to Strengthen Your Marriage as Your
Family Grows by Pamela L. Jordan, Scott M. Stanley, Howard J. Markman, is available from
Jossey-Bass publishers at http://www.josseybass.com.
Becoming a Family Program
This program was part of an on-going research effort seeking to understand how the
transition to parenthood changes the marital relationship. The program provided a supportive
context in which spouses could learn from other couples experiencing the same life transition. It
was designed to be a safe place for a small group of couples to share their concerns about family
issues and learn from one another during the transitional period with the help of a mental health
professional. Group sessions focused on four major areas: couples’ relationships, parent-child
relationships, relationships with extended families, and the development of supportive networks.
Agendas set by group leaders in collaboration with participants often focused on actual, ongoing
problems.
Couples were encouraged to share their experiences and feelings and to learn from each
other. The evaluation found a decline in marital satisfaction in the control (but not program)
group 18 months post-partum, though marital satisfaction in the two groups converged by 3
years post-partum. Although the program is no longer operating, it can serve as a model for
interventions that aim to provide new parents support groups.
130
For additional information, see Cowan, Carolyn, and Philip A. Cowan. “Interventions to
Ease the Transition to Parenthood: Why They Are Needed and What They Can Do.” Family
Relations, vol. 44, October 1995, pp. 1-11. Also, a book authored by the Becoming a Family
Program designers, When Partners Become Parents: The Big Life Change for Couples by
Carolyn Pape Cowan and Philip A. Cowan, is available from Lawrence Erlbaum Associates at
http://www.erlbaum.com/index.htm.
Human Capital Support and Development
In most people’s minds, capital can mean “money or property owned by a person or
business and human resources of economic value.” But capital is more than properties and bank
accounts. Capital refers to “assets available for use in the production of further assets”.32 What is
human capital? Gary Becker, winner of the 1992 Nobel Prize in economics, writes in his essay
on human capital:
“To most people capital means a bank account, a hundred shares of IBM stock, assembly
lines, or steel plants in the Chicago area. These are all forms of capital in the sense that they are
assets that yield income and other useful outputs over long periods of time. But these tangible
forms of capital are not the only ones. Schooling, a computer training course, expenditures of
medical care, and lectures on the virtues of punctuality and honesty also are capital. That is
because they raise earnings, improve health, or add to a person's good habits over much of his
lifetime. Therefore, economists regard expenditures on education, training, medical care, and so
on as investments in human capital. They are called human capital because people cannot be
separated from their knowledge, skills, health, or values in the way they can be separated from
their financial and physical assets.” 33
In this section, we review policies and strategies that are intended to help individuals to
reach their potential. These include programs that help individuals and families with their basic
needs for adequate food and nutrition, safe housing, quality health care, and access to work
opportunities. In addition, we will review programs that develop human capital at a higher level,
through education, employment training and services, and policies that create opportunities and
rewards work.
Federal and state roles in providing such supports have changed over time in three
significant ways:
 Supports are increasingly seen as temporary measures, with expectations placed upon
individuals to become self-sufficient as quickly as possible;
 Programs increasingly have developmental components to help people develop skills to
move towards independence; and
 States are taking a larger role in decision-making and funding of programs.
The General Accounting Office outlined the roles of federal and state governments in
selected types of support in the table below: 34
131
Roles of Federal and State Governments in Selected Supports for Low-Income Individuals
Support
Funding*
Design**
Entitlement
TANF Cash Assistance
Federal/state
Some federal/more state
No
Food Stamp Program
Mostly federal
Mostly federal
Yes
Medicaid
Federal/state
Federal/state
Yes
SCHIP
Federal/state
Federal/state
No
Health-related services (substance
Federal/state
Some federal/more state
No
abuse and mental health)
Domestic Violence Programs
Federal/state
Mostly state
No
Section 8 Rental Housing
All federal
Mostly federal
No
Utility Assistance
Federal/state
Federal/state
No
Subsidized Child Care
Federal/state
Some federal/more state
No
Transportation Support Services
Federal/state
Mostly state
No
Job Retention and Advancement
Federal/state
Mostly state
No
Services
Federal EITC
All federal
All federal
Yes
State tax credits
All state
All state
Yes
* Defined as the level of government that supplies the primary source of funding for the support
** Defined as the level of government that is primarily responsible for availability, eligibility,
and benefit amount determination
Source: General Accounting Office
Programs that are designed to meet basic needs of health, food and shelter are detailed in
the Appendix. The remainder of this section will focus on policies and strategies that increase
jobs opportunities, reward work and improve access to jobs by the poor.
Tax Credits
Earned Income Tax Credit
The Federal Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) was initiated in 1975 to make the tax
system more equitable for workers struggling to support their households as they make the
transition from welfare to work. It was expanded in recent years to more effectively supplement
the wages for low- and moderate-income working families. Nearly 20 million families and
individuals filing federal income tax returns – roughly one tax return out of six – claim the
federal EITC.
Approximately 85% of eligible households participated in the program in 1990, and it is
estimated that the percentage is even higher today after further program expansion and
promotion35.
The EITC is widely credited for supporting work and reducing poverty36:
132



The proportion of single mothers who were in the labor force rose sharply between 1984
and 1996. EITC expansions instituted during that period were found to be responsible for
more than half of the wage increase.
In 1999, about 4.7 million people, including 2.6 million children, were kept out of
poverty as a result of the federal EITC.
The program’s ability to lift working families out of poverty is especially great in the
south, where a higher proportion of working families tend to have lower wages and
consequently are more likely to qualify for EITC.
As of 2004, eighteen states offer state EITC based on the federal model.37. Most states base
their EITC on a percentage of the federal tax credit and use the same cut-off points for eligibility.
Sixteen of the eighteen states (excluding Colorado and Minnesota) use federal eligibility rules
and express the state credit as specified percentage (anywhere from 5 percent to 50 percent) of
the federal credit.
Child Tax Credit 38
With the enactment of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001,
the federal Child Tax Credit (CTC) joined the EITC as a major source of income support for
many low-income working families with children. The Act changed the CTC in two significant
ways: (1) it doubled the amount of the CTC from $500 to $1,000 per child; and (2) it made the
credit partially refundable for families with incomes over $10,000. Making the CTC partially
refundable was an especially valuable provision for low-income working families, many of
whom would not have otherwise qualified for the credit. As it stands, however, the law does not
do anything for the extremely poor households, with less than $10,000 in annual income.
Enable Work Education and Skills Acquisition
Survey of low-wage workers in September 2003 found that every two out of five lowwage workers were, or had been in the past three years, taking part in job training or education
programs to upgrade their work skills.39 Nearly half (49%) of those who have participated in a
training or education program of some sort reported a concrete, work-related positive outcome,
such as a new job or a raise.
In another report40, states are said to have adopted policies that support education,
training, and advancement. Examples include:
 Permit postsecondary education to count toward the TANF work requirement either when
combined with work or as a stand-alone activity.
 Use TANF/MOE funds to provide college campus-based supports for welfare recipients
and former recipients.
Sectoral Initiatives
133
Sectoral Employment Initiatives came to broad awareness fairly recently. They usually
involve targeting an industry sector (and a cluster of high-demand occupations) and providing
training to low-skilled workers for jobs in the sector. Sectoral initiatives have been carried out in
many different areas, industries and occupations, ranging from paralegals in Washington, D.C.
area to computer technicians in Newark, NJ, to certified nursing assistants all over the country.
A 2001 study examined the results of a longitudinal survey of participants in six sectoral
projects with respect to training, employment, retention and advancement. The sectors addressed
by the projects included construction, textile, manufacturing and health care. Participants in the
initiatives made significant strides in the labor market, reporting higher annual earnings and
earnings per hour; higher employment rates; increased hours of work; and improved job
satisfaction and job quality in a span of only one year after completing the training program.41
Addressing Barriers to Work
A recent publication from the National Governor’s Association and MDRC, supported by
the Dept. of Health and Human Services, the Dept. of Labor, and the Dept. of Agriculture,
focuses on the needs of low wage earners. The report was published in March 2004 and is
entitled “Building Bridges to Self-Sufficiency – Improving Services for Low-Income Working
Families.” The report points to some promising practices, particularly at the state level, to
address the barriers faced by low wager earners. Such efforts include: aligning eligibility
policies; simplifying and aligning application procedures; expanding access points to services,
using technology to help combine service access and delivery; and aggressive marketing to
inform eligible individuals about the services available to them.
Most low wage earners face more challenges to employment retention than the norm.
They have transportation issues, childcare issues, work schedule issues, and more children with
special needs. The report cites the following service areas as effective ways to improve
employment retention: (1) providing enhanced post-employment case management; (2) working
with employers to improve job retention efforts; and (3) offering additional employment
retention services to fill gaps. Call centers can be used to combine service access with agency
collaboration. Case managers can be trained in helping with post-employment services. And
agencies can combine resources to improve access.
Some agencies have created their own temporary employment centers to provide a
longer-term connection with low wage earners and to help smooth out trial periods with
employers. Others, such as the Minnesota model discussed later in this paper, are providing
portable employment assistance programs through training and counseling to help new labor
market entrants better adapt to the demand of employers.
Finally, agencies are filling the gap on post-employment services by providing additional
transportation and childcare assistance, financial literacy training, and asset development.
Once attached to the labor market, low wage earners need opportunities to advance.
Career ladder programs with defined pathways to more skilled and high-paying occupations are
134
not yet well developed but showing promising signs. More attention is dedicated to connecting
job advancement with education opportunities at the right time and clearly linking education to
the job requirements. MDRC, one of the authors of the report, has a demonstration program to
open National Work Advancement and Support Centers which will try to use One-Stop career
centers as the focal point in helping to reduce turnover among low wage workers and inform
workers and employers of the available supports.
Others have viewed this type of support mechanism as more a function that transcends
physical places. Work is ongoing on how to position such a function within communities to help
strengthen the community itself, adapt to the specific needs of the community, and approach
each individual from that person’s needs rather than from the program perspective.
The report provides many examples of various State driven policies that address at least
one of the barriers described earlier. Some additional examples, gleaned from other sources,
describe how states are implementing collaborative approaches:

Massachusetts alerts clients of continued food stamp eligibility when their TANF ends. It
recently created a brochure that describes some of the services and benefits that may be
available to families whose TANF benefits ended.

The brochure reminds clients of the availability of food stamps and lists a 1-800 number
where families can obtain more information. Workers hand the brochure to clients during
the cash assistance exit interview that is held in the month before TANF ends. The state
also mails it to clients who have been off cash assistance for two months. In addition,
caseworkers in Massachusetts refer certain households that they are concerned about to
the Department of Health for follow-up. The Department of Health conducts follow-up
calls and visits to these clients reminding them of the available assistance programs,
including food stamps.

The Georgia Common Access Application (GCAA) Project grew in response to needs
expressed by The Atlanta Project communities. With the support of the Atlanta Federal
Executive Board, an inter-agency work group revised the 64 pages of individual program
applications into the GCAA, a "seamless" 8-page, multi-program application. FNS, the
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the Georgia Department of
Human Resources, HHS Administration for Children and Families and Health Care
Financing Administration, and the Social Security Administration tested the form in
Atlanta. Programs included on the application form were food stamps, SSI, AFDC,
Medicaid, housing assistance and WIC.

In South Dakota, every August the DSS sends food stamp households with school aged
children a shortened application form for free school lunches. The shortened form allows
the household to apply for free school lunches merely by signing the form and sending it
to the school district. The school district knows the household is eligible for free school
lunches because only households with an active food stamp case get the shortened form.
The state also sends a form to newly approved cases if they apply between September
and May.
135

To simplify program access Minnesota is using modern technology for applicants and
recipients who live in remote parts of Beltrami County. The county is installing modem
technology in nearby universities in order to be able to do client interviews using video
telephones.

“No Wrong Door” implemented in Delaware, allows for people who apply for one from
of assistance at State Service Centers to be screened for and referred to other programs. If
a food need exists, the person or family would get a referral to the appropriate food stamp
office.

Wisconsin outstations eligibility workers in clinics, health centers and community-based
organizations so that interested individuals can apply for all assistance programs,
including food stamps.

According to research in New York City conducted by Wider Opportunities for Women
and Women’s Center for Education and Career Advancement, income supplements of
child care subsidies, food stamps, and Medicaid could provide the economic stability of
an $18.43 hourly wage to a single parent with two children who earns $8.04 per hour42
The research indicates that we can increase low-wage workers’ utilization of direct and
indirect public benefits43 by:

Increasing program awareness – Employers are unaware of tax credits or any of the other
benefits available for low-income workers. Moreover, what employers do “know” about
these benefits is often incorrect.

Increasing access to existing programs – States’ procedures often make it difficult for
employed people to access benefits, and varying processes from state to state make it
difficult for companies to provide good information to their employees

Improving marketing of programs– Strategies for informing the public about these
benefits rarely target employers, in content or language, or as an audience.
To examine the potential for addressing retention barriers, a Post-employment Services
Demonstration project was initiated by the Administration for Children and Families of the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services to determine whether supports could be effective in
helping participants retain employment. Four states were awarded grants in 1993 to provide
additional case management services to newly employed welfare recipients. The study found that
“overall, the programs had little effect on increasing earnings, reducing welfare, or promoting the
move toward self-sufficiency.”44
Instead of the focus on post job placement, how is retention affected by services that are
delivered before employment, or by quality of employment obtained?
Researchers at MDRC have found that retention is likely to be higher when the work:
 is steady, rather than intermittent;
136



provides benefits;
has more consistent schedules for hours and days of work;
offers higher wages.45
In addition, clients who are better prepared – who have good basic skills upon entering the
workforce – are also more likely to remain in employment. “Rigorous research on two
demonstrations of post employment case management services found no effect on how long
individuals kept jobs or their overall earnings. Reemployment services combined with more
intensive post employment case management practices may improve outcomes [emphasis
added].”
Research has also uncovered that:
 parents who have formal child care arrangements are more likely to retain employment
than those who use family arrangements --- but many are unaware of the availability of
child care subsidies;
 parents who have health insurance are more likely to retain employment -- but many
families who are eligible for Medicaid are not enrolled. 46
Single mothers of young children are twice as likely to still be employed after two years
if they used center-based care; former welfare recipients with young children who used
formal daycare are nearly three times as likely to still be employed after two years as those
who do not. Furthermore, single mothers of young children are 40% more likely to still be
employed after two years if they receive help paying for child care; and former welfare
recipients with young children are 60% more likely to still be employed after two years if
they receive help paying for child care. Single women who receive employer-provided health
insurance are twice as likely to still be employed after three years as those who do not;
former welfare recipients who receive employer-provided health insurance are 2.6 times as
likely to still be employed after three years as those who do not; and women who started their
job earning in the top quintile of women earners are twice as likely to still be employed after
two years as women who started in the bottom quintile.47
Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. suggested that incentives, when combined with
supports, could increase retention and advancement.48 Monetary and non-monetary incentives
are common in the private sector world.
Incentives have also been effective when used by the government:
The Minnesota Family Investment Program (MFIP) increased that state’s basic
welfare grant by 20 percent and reduced benefits by only 62 cents for every dollar earned
for those participants who were working. An evaluation of this program found that longterm welfare recipients in the program experienced a 40 percent increase in their
employment rate and a 27 percent increase in earnings over the control group. Almost
twice the number of participants had incomes over the poverty line than in the control
group (Rust 1999).49
137
The researchers suggested that the incentives were effective in improving performance
and changing behaviors and habits. Behaviors that could be rewarded might include developing
backup childcare and transportation plans; learning how to handle conflicts with coworkers and
supervisors; and learning how to budget. “Critical to the success of this approach is identifying
the behaviors that are likely to improve a program participant’s ability to remain employed for
the long-term.”
Low-income workers may have barriers to participating in training. They may have low
basic skills that are a barrier to benefiting from technical training. They may be unable to balance
transportation and childcare issues for training that takes place outside of normal work hours.
Because turnover is highest for the lowest level positions, employers may be reluctant to invest
in entry-level workers.
Maryland’s Skills-Based Training for Employment Promotion (STEP) program seeks to
increase the skills of low-income working parents so they can advance into jobs that can sustain
a family and to ease the state’s critical worker shortages in areas such as technology and health
care.
STEP is a four-year competitive grant program established during the 2001 legislative
session and financed by state general funds. The STEP program creates a partnership with the
private sector. STEP grantees.[and] local workforce offices work with Maryland businesses to
help workers upgrade their skills. The program requires financial and institutional support from
employers. Employers pay 50 percent of the training costs, which can include costs such as
wages during training.
Employers must also agree to allow participants to train and draw their salaries and to
work with training providers to help set curricula. In addition, STEP grantees have worked
directly with individuals to determine career goals, obtain training, and provide wraparound
support services.50
The Building Essential Skills through Training (BEST) Initiative in Massachusetts is a
two-year project designed to integrate adult basic education and job training for frontline
workers while reducing persistent job vacancies. BEST is a partnership of the Governor’s Office,
Commonwealth Corporation, Department of Labor and Workforce Development, Department of
Education, Division of Employment and Training, and Department of Transitional Assistance.
State funds and WIA Title I and Title II funds support the initiative. A small contribution of
TANF funds was made for evaluation activities. BEST funds six regional industry teams (RITs)
that were selected through a competitive process in February 2002. RITs bring together
employers, education and training providers, local workforce investment boards, and workers
from firms or organized labor to develop and implement industry-driven education and training
programs that promote career advancement and address skill needs. Each local partnership is
required to contribute a local cash or in-kind match to ensure joint ownership and
sustainability.51
138
The Minnesota Job Skills Partnership funds training for new and incumbent workers
through grant and loan programs. The programs are currently financed through an appropriation
of state general funds. All four grant programs require that projects have at least one education
institution and one business working together and that businesses match funds with cash or inkind contributions. Two of the grant programs focus on low-wage workers, the Minnesota
Pathways Program and the Health Care and Human Services Worker Training and Retention
Program. The Pathways Program supports projects that provide training, employment, and career
paths for individuals at or below 200 percent of federal poverty guidelines or who are making the
transition from welfare to work. The Health Care and Human Services Program aims to address
worker shortages and increase opportunities for direct care employees to qualify for advanced
employment. Trainees must be recipients of TANF or eligible for TANF. The Job Skills
Partnership strongly encourages grantees to work with TANF agencies and community-based
organizations to help serve trainees. 52
Appendix: Income and Work Support Policies and Strategies
Government Cash Assistance
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) cash assistance provides monthly
cash benefits to very low-income families based on eligibility standards set by the states. TANF
is not an entitlement program. Eligible families are not guaranteed benefits. Unlike previous
welfare programs,
 A primary goal is to transition recipients to employment, so that cash benefits are no
longer necessary;
 Recipients must fulfill ongoing work requirements; and
 There is a time limit on benefits.
Requirements vary by state.
Food and Nutrition
The Food Stamp program is the primary food assistance resource available to low-income
families. Families with a gross income at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty are eligible.
The resources are distributed through monthly vouchers to participants that can be used to
purchase food. Food stamps are an entitlement, so all eligible families may receive benefits.
However, many who are eligible do not participate. Reductions in TANF cash assistance have
resulted in reduced food stamp participation, because non-TANF families are less likely to
participate in the program. Rates among eligible working families are particularly low.53
Additional nutritional programs include54:

The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children - better
known as the WIC Program - serves to safeguard the health of low-income women,
139
infants, & children up to age 5 who are at nutritional risk by providing nutritious foods to
supplement diets, information on healthy eating, and referrals to health care55

National School Lunch Program - public or nonprofit private schools of high school
grade or under and public or nonprofit private residential childcare institutions may
participate in the school lunch program. School districts and independent schools that
choose to take part in the lunch program get cash subsidies and donated commodities
from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) for each meal they serve. In return,
they must serve lunches that meet federal requirements, and they must offer free or
reduced price lunches to eligible children. School food authorities can also be reimbursed
for snacks served to children through age 18 in after-school educational or enrichment
programs.

Special Milk Program - the Special Milk Program (SMP) provides milk to children in
schools and childcare institutions who do not participate in other federal meal service
programs. The program reimburses schools for the milk they serve.

The School Breakfast Program (SBP) provides cash assistance to States to operate
nonprofit breakfast programs in schools and residential childcare institutions. It is
administered at the federal level by FNS. State education agencies administer the SBP at
the State level, and local school food authorities operate it in schools.

Summer Food Service – this program ensures that children who are eligible for free and
reduced meals during the school year continue to receive good nutrition during the
summer. State education agencies administer the program in most States. Locally, the
program is run by approved sponsors, including school districts, local government
agencies, camps, or private nonprofit organizations. Sponsors provide free meals to a
group of children at a central site, such as a school or a community center. They receive
payments from USDA, through their State agencies, for the meals they serve and for their
documented operating costs.

Child and Adult Care - FNS administers the program through grants to States. FNS
provides cash assistance to designated state agencies for meals served to eligible children
and adults in day care centers based upon the participant’s eligibility under the Income
Eligibility Guidelines for free, reduced price, or paid meals. In centers, participants from
households with incomes at or below 130 percent of poverty are eligible for free meals.
Participants in centers with household incomes between 130 percent and 185 percent of
poverty are eligible for meals at a reduced price. Institutions must determine each
enrolled participant’s eligibility for free and reduced price meals served in centers.
Health Insurance
It has been repeatedly documented that the poor have significantly more health issues
than the average citizen. Very low-income individuals are56:
 More than twice as likely to have mental disorders than high income individuals;
140



More likely to engage in unhealthy behaviors (smoking, drugs, alcohol, poor diet,
unprotected sex);
More subject to injury caused by violent crime; and
More likely to suffer the affects of pollution from the neighborhoods in which they live.
They are also less likely to seek medical attention, particularly preventative medical
attention.
Medicaid is the largest health and medical care resource for low-income individuals. It is a
federal program under Title XIX of the Social Security Act, jointly funded by federal and state
governments. The program has greatly expanded since its inception in 1965 due to expanded
coverage beyond its original intent to provide medical coverage just to cash assistance recipients.
Although the federal government sets broad guidelines, individual states are authorized to
determine:
 Eligibility standards
 Type, amount, duration, and scope of services
 Rate of payment for services
 Program administrative rules.
Programs therefore vary from state to state as well as within states over time. Not all people
in poverty are eligible, although to receive federal matching funds, states are required to provide
coverage for certain “categorical needy” groups, including Supplemental Security Income
recipients, and children under age six whose family income is at or below 133 percent of the
federal poverty level.
Federal policy requires states to offer basic services to individuals who fall within the
categorically needy populations. These services include:
 Inpatient hospital services.
 Outpatient hospital services.
 Prenatal care.
 Vaccines for children.
 Physician services.
 Nursing facility services for persons aged 21 or older.
 Family planning services and supplies.
 Rural health clinic services.
 Home health care for persons eligible for skilled-nursing services.
 Laboratory and x-ray services.
 Pediatric and family nurse practitioner services.
 Nurse-midwife services.
 Federally qualified health-center (FQHC) services, and ambulatory services of an FQHC
that would be available in other settings.
 Early and periodic screening, diagnostic, and treatment (EPSDT) services for children
under age 21.
141
The State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) gives grants to states to provide
health insurance coverage to uninsured children up to 200% of the federal poverty level (FPL).
The legislation sets eligibility criteria. States can decide to cover all of those children or to target
coverage to a narrower group of children. The eligibility criteria are to cover uninsured children
who are:
 not eligible for Medicaid
 under age 19; and
 at or below 200% of the federal poverty level (FPL).
Since enactment of the SHCIP block grant program to states in 1997, the number and rate of
uninsured children has substantially declined for near-poor children, those from families with
incomes 100-200% of the federal poverty level. However, it is estimated that 2.7 million nearpoor children remain uninsured, despite the fact that the vast majority would be eligible for
Medicaid or SCHIP.57
While the near poor have experienced considerable benefit, there has been little impact on
the poor themselves. “The most recent data suggest that 27.3% of all poor children and 24.9% of
all poor citizen children are uninsured, despite the fact that all citizen children in this income
range were eligible for Medicaid or SCHIP in 2000.”58 Reasons parents gave for not enrolling
their children included lack of knowledge of the program, administrative hassles involved with
enrollment, and not wanting their children covered by public programs or thinking it wasn’t
needed. Information about requirements in each state can be obtained through the Insure Kids
Now! website at http://www.insurekidsnow.gov/states.htm .
Clearinghouse services: The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Bureau of
Primary Health Care, maintains several databases, including geographic listings of health centers
that provide free or low-cost care and a pharmacy database for reduced cost medications
(http://bphc.hrsa.gov/bphc/database.htm).
There are also a number of smaller targeted programs that include block grants for maternal
and child health services; community health centers; migrant health centers; and the Indian
Health Service.
Housing Assistance
Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers allow very low-income families to choose and lease
or purchase safe, decent, and affordable privately owned rental housing. The trend has been to
move toward a voucher process and away from public housing projects. The majority of people
receiving Section 8 assistance now receive vouchers rather than live in housing projects. There
are several types of vouchers, including:

Conversion - If a family lives in a public housing unit that is scheduled to be
demolished, disposed of or converted, they will be contacted by the public housing
142
agency (PHA) when they are eligible for a conversion voucher. The PHA compares the
family’s annual income (gross income) with the HUD-established very low-income limit
or low-income limit for the area. The family cannot earn more than this limit. It is the
responsibility of a family to find a unit that meets their needs. If the family finds a unit
that meets the housing quality standards, the rent is reasonable, and the unit meets other
program requirements, the PHA executes a housing assistance payment (HAP) contract
with the property owner. This contract authorizes the PHA to make subsidy payments on
behalf of the family.

Family unification - Family unification vouchers are made available to families for
whom the lack of adequate housing is a primary factor in the separation, or threat of
imminent separation, of children from their families or in the prevention of reunifying the
children with their families. Family unification vouchers enable these families to lease or
purchase housing that is affordable in the private housing market.

Homeownership - Homeownership vouchers assist first-time homeowners with their
monthly homeownership expenses. The home must pass an initial housing quality
standards inspection conducted by the PHA and an independent home inspection before
the PHA may approve. PHAs may choose to administer a homeownership program, but
are not required to do so.

Project based - Project-based vouchers are a component of a (PHAs) housing choice
voucher program. A PHA can attach up to 20 percent of its voucher assistance to specific
housing units if the owner agrees to either rehabilitate or construct the units, or the owner
agrees to set-aside a portion of the units in an existing development. There are no
appropriations for this program and HUD does not allocate funding for project-based
voucher assistance. Instead, funding for project-based vouchers comes from funds
already obligated by HUD to a PHA under its annual contributions contract (ACC).

Tenant based - Tenant-based vouchers increase affordable housing choices for very lowincome families. Families with a tenant-based voucher choose and lease affordable
privately owned rental housing. Very low-income families (i.e., families with incomes
below 50% of area median income) and a few specific categories of families with
incomes up to 80% of the area median income are eligible. These include families that
are already assisted under the 1937 U.S. Housing Act, such as families physically
displaced by public housing demolition, and owners opting out of project-based section 8
housing assistance payments (HAP) contracts.

Vouchers for people with disabilities – elderly and non-elderly families that have a
person with disabilities are eligible. As part of a demonstration program between HUD
and HHS, 400 vouchers were awarded in Fiscal Year 2001 to 11 lead PHAs to partner
with Medicaid agencies in providing housing assistance to non-elderly disabled persons
transitioning from nursing homes into the community.

Welfare-to-work vouchers - To address the lack of stable, affordable housing available
to families moving off of welfare, HUD awarded approximately 50,000 additional
143
housing choice vouchers to housing authorities throughout the country through its
Welfare to Work (WtW) Voucher Program. According to the National Low-Income
Housing Coalition, the housing voucher program is generally successful, but could be
improved. They note that:
o Different administrators in the same housing market require different forms and
procedures, making it difficult for owners and tenants to maximize their use of
Section 8 and inhibiting the portability of vouchers;
o Owners are sometimes deterred from participating because of late rental payments
from administrators or difficulties with tenants;
o Administrators contend that their parent housing authorities skim off a portion of
the administrative fees they receive from HUD, impairing their ability to run their
programs efficiently.
The Coalition has made recommendations for improvement, including setting payment
standards at levels that allow voucher holders to maximize opportunities to use the voucher, and
conducting thorough rent reasonableness determinations to avoid excess subsidy payments.59
“Housing vouchers look particularly promising as a tool for promoting employment.
Studies have identified a distinct advantage to vouchers compared to public housing projects…
Data from the National Survey of American Families show that among poor families who left
welfare between 1997 and 1999, those with housing assistance had significantly higher barriers
to employment— low education levels, poor mental and physical health, and lack of recent work
experience—than those without it. Despite these barriers, however, they achieved employment
rates and incomes equal to or above families without subsidized housing. A study in
Massachusetts also found better employment outcomes among families with housing assistance
despite greater employment barriers, including a longer history of welfare use.”60 However, there
are waiting lists for these vouchers, and only a small percentage of eligible individuals receive
them.
Energy Assistance
Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) is a federal program under the
authority of the Office of Community Services that helps low income households pay for heating
and/or cooling their homes. The program targets two groups of low-income households that have
the highest home energy needs:


Vulnerable households, which include frail older individuals, individuals with
disabilities, and very young children.
High energy burden households, i.e., those with the lowest incomes and highest home
energy costs.
LIHEAP applications, eligibility, assistance, and benefit levels vary among LIHEAP
programs and individuals must contact their individual state agencies to find out about
requirements. LIHEAP grantees can spend a portion of their funds on weatherization or low-cost
energy related repairs for homes, but they are not required to do so. If they wish, they can use
144
some of their funds to do such things as fix leaky doors or windows, install insulation, or
repair/replace defective or inefficient furnaces or air conditioners. Sometimes, grantees will not
weatherize rental homes or apartments unless the landlord agrees to pay for a portion of the cost
or agrees to other conditions.
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) also administers a program called the Low Income
Weatherization Assistance Program (LIWAP) to weatherize homes or apartments of low
income people. This program is usually run at the local level by Community Action Agencies.61
The federal government operates a National Energy Assistance Referral (NEAR) project.
NEAR is a free service for persons who want information on where to apply for energy
assistance. Individuals may call toll-free at 1-866-674-6327 for energy assistance referral, or email for help at energyassistance@ncat.org.
Child Care
The Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) was created in 1996 to consolidate
several fragmented programs. The fund subsidizes childcare for low-income families to enable
them to work or participate in education or training. Assistance is provided in the form of:
 A contracted child care slot; or
 A voucher that may be used to access care by any provider that meets state requirements.
The subsidy is usually paid directly to the provider and covers the difference between the
family’s co-payment and the actual cost of care. The cost of care is capped by maximum state
payment rates. The co-payment is based on factors that include income, family size, and the
number of children in care. CCDF subsidies are not a federal entitlement. Not everyone who is
eligible receives subsidies. Only Rhode Island guarantees benefits to all eligible families who
apply. Nearly half of the states keep waiting lists for subsidies, and more than 500,000 children
were on these lists in 2003.62 CCDF provides states with an annual base amount as well as
matching funds, as long as states meet maintenance of effort and matching requirements. States
may transfer money into CCDF programs from TANF and other sources.63
Because of the variety of state rules and programs, there are websites available to help
people get to the information they need about local eligibility. These include the National Child
Care Information Center at http://nccic.org/statedata/statepro/index.html and Child Care Aware
at http://www.childcareaware.org/en/.
The United States Department of Agriculture's Rural Development programs offer loans
to develop community facilities, which may include childcare centers. Public entities (such as
counties and cities) and non-profit organizations (under certain conditions) may be eligible for
the loans. For details, consult USDA's web site at: http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rhs/index.html.
The Senate voted on March 30, 2004 for an amendment to the TANF reauthorization bill that
would increase funding for child care assistance by $6 billion. The Senate has not yet passed
TANF reauthorization. The House, in 2003, passed a TANF reauthorization bill requiring $1
billion in additional childcare funding. Individuals programs such as WIA are allowed to provide
145
vouchers to participants for childcare while they are in training, although they are not required to
do so.
Transportation
Reliable Transportation is essential to enable people to get to work every day, and thus
retain their jobs, but most job development has been in suburban areas while the poor tend to live
in urban or rural areas. In 1998, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) found that:
 Only about 6 percent of welfare recipients owned automobiles;
 Two-thirds of all new jobs were in the suburbs, but three-fourths of welfare recipients
lived in rural areas or central cities;
 In metropolitan areas with excellent public transit systems, less than half of the jobs were
accessible by public transit.64
Further, many low-income workers must work 2nd or 3rd shifts when public transportation,
if it is available at all, may not be in operation.
Meeting transportation needs has been traditionally handled on an individual basis, with
participants in programs such as WIA, Welfare-to-Work, and other job training programs
receiving vouchers, bus passes, and taxi reimbursements from program funds. Whether to use
such funds for transportation supports is at the discretion of the individual program grantees. The
U.S. Department of Labor, Federal Transit Administration, and HHS developed guidance that
clarified that TANF and welfare-to-work funds could be used for:
 Contracting for shuttles, buses and car pools
 Purchasing vans, shuttles and minibuses
 Purchasing rider slots, passes or vouchers
 Facilitating the donation and repairs of older vehicles
 Providing loans to eligible individuals for lease or purchase of vehicles
 Making one time or short-term payments for repairs and insurance65
The Federal Transit Administration found that "most state welfare plans submitted to the
federal government barely mentioned transportation.”66
The Department of Health and Human Services has provided guidance on how to use TANF
s a match for car purchases with IDAs. Arkansas, Connecticut, Oklahoma, Illinois, Tennessee,
Pennsylvania, and Maine have policies supporting matched saving accounts for car purchase, and
some of these states use TANF to match savings.67
On April 2, 2004, the House passed the federal transportation bill ensuring programming for
low-income workers, the disabled, and seniors with enhanced funding opportunities for rural
communities. The bill retains funding for the Job Access Reverse Commute (JARC) program.
JARC, which originated in 1998, provides grants to transportation projects that connect lowincome workers to employment and related services. Several grants provided new transportation
services to low income workers. According to a survey completed by the University of Illinois at
Chicago, sixty-six percent of workers who used these new services said that they had total
146
reliance on the new service and could not get to work without it, twenty-seven percent of
respondents said that they did not work prior to new services being provided as a result of the
program and thirty percent earned more income due to the service.68
Minimum Wage and Living Wage
The first federal minimum wage law was introduced as a part of the Fair Labor Standards
Act (FLSA) of 1938. Today the law applies to about two-thirds of wage and salary workers. It is
not indexed to inflation or any other indices of cost of living. Increases in federal minimum wage
are by votes in Congress.
Many states have their own minimum wage laws. Between 1979 and 1989, the number of
states with minimum wages higher than the federal level went from one to 15.69 Twelve states
(Alaska, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Oregon,
Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington), and the District of Columbia have established a minimum
wage that is higher than the federal minimum wage of $5.15 an hour, with a high rate of
$7.16/hour in Washington, and $7.15/hour in Alaska.
Attempting to raise wages of some low-income workers closer to a level sufficient to
support their families and set an example through jobs created by public funding, over 50
localities have enacted “living wage” ordinances. In the cities and counties where ordinances
have been initiated, they generally apply to employers who have a contract with local
government or businesses that receive economic development subsidies from the locality. The
wage rates specified by the living wage ordinances range from just under $7 an hour in
Milwaukee, Wisconsin to a high of $12 an hour in Santa Cruz, California. More than half of the
ordinances also require or encourage employer-provided health insurance.
----------1 Personal Finance and the Rush to Competence: Financial Literacy Education in the U.S., Lois A Vitt, Carol
Anderson, Jamie Kent, Deanna Lyter, Jurg Siegenthaler, Jeremy Ward, Institute for Socio-Financial Studies,
2000.(www.ISFS.org)
2 FDIC, during a symposium entitled “Tapping the Unbanked Market” in Washington DC on November 5, 2003.
3 2001 Survey of Consumer Finance, Federal Reserve Board.
4 Income Households, section IV, Larry W. Beeferman and Sandra H. Venner, Asset Development Institute, Center
on Hunger and Poverty, Heller Graduate School, Brandeis University, April 2001.
5 Sharing the Wealth: Resident Ownership Mechanisms, Heather McCulloch, Policy Link, 2001.
6 Ibid.
7 This practice, known as “flipping” generates considerable fees for lenders each time the loan is refinanced.
8 Federal bank regulators refer to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; the Federal Reserve System; the
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency; the National Credit Union Administration; and the Office of Thrift
Supervision. Both the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Reserve Board have recently
asserted their authority to utilize the FTC Act.
147
9 See 15 U.S.C. §§ 1601-1667f (2000 & Supp 2003).
10 See 15 U.S.C. § 1635.
11 See Pub. L. 103-325 §§ 151-158, 108 Stat. 2190-2198.
12 Loans with balloon payments offer consumers lower monthly payments but one large payment (the balloon) is
due when the loan matures. Some bad actors have extended such loans to consumers without informing them about
the balloon feature. Loans with negative amortization allow borrowers to make regularly scheduled payments that
do not cover the interest due on the loan. Mandatory arbitration clauses limit a borrower’s ability to seek redress
against the lender in court. Loans with such features, when fully disclosed, can provide benefits, particularly to
financially sophisticated borrowers. However, these features have also been used to harm certain consumers such as
the elderly.
13 Minnesota Family Investment Program, at http://www.dhs.state.mn.us/ECS/Program/mfip.htm
14 Reforming Welfare and Rewarding Work, A program Evaluation, Manpower Distribution Research Group, 2000
15 Ibid.
16 Low-Income Families and the Marriage Tax, Laura Wheaton, the Urban Institute, September 1, 1998, at
http://www.urban.org/urlprint.cfm?ID=6394.
17 Helping Unwed Parents Build Strong and Healthy Marriages: A Conceptual Framework for Interventions, Final
Report, Department of Health and Human Services, 2003
18 Beyond Marriage Licenses: Efforts in States to Strengthen Marriage and Two-Parent Families, A State-by-State
Snapshot, Theodora Ooms, Stacey Bouchet, and Mary Parke, CLASP (Center for Law and Social Policy), April
2004. Also at http://www.clasp.org/DMS/Documents/1082987634.24/beyond_marr.pdf%20.
19 “Welfare Promotes Marriage”, Cheryl Wtzstein, The Washington Times, September 16, 2002. On-line at
http://www.shatterdmen.com/Welfare%20promotes%20Marriage.htm.
20 Beyond Marriage Licenses: Efforts in States to Strengthen Marriage and Two-Parent Families, A State-by-State
Snapshot, Theodora Ooms, Stacey Bouchet, and Mary Parke, CLASP (Center for Law and Social Policy), April
2004. Also at http://www.clasp.org/DMS/Documents/1082987634.24/beyond_marr.pdf%20.
21 Helping Unwed Parents Build Strong and Healthy Marriages: A Conceptual Framework for Interventions, Final
Report Department of Health and Human Services, 2003
22 Beyond Marriage Licenses: Efforts in States to Strengthen Marriage and Two-Parent Families, A State-by-State
Snapshot, Theodora Ooms, Stacey Bouchet, and Mary Parke, CLASP (Center for Law and Social Policy), April
2004. Also at http://www.clasp.org/DMS/Documents/1082987634.24/beyond_marr.pdf%20.
23 www.socialwork.iu.edu
24 www.gottman.com/marriage
25 www.couplecommunication.com
26 www.imagotherapy.com
27www.pairs.com
28 www.retrouvaille.org
148
29 Beyond Marriage Licenses: Efforts in States to Strengthen Marriage and Two-Parent Families, A State-by-State
Snapshot, Theodora Ooms, Stacey Bouchet, and Mary Parke, CLASP (Center for Law and Social Policy), April
2004. Also at http://www.clasp.org/DMS/Documents/1082987634.24/beyond_marr.pdf%20.
30 Incarceration and Bonds Among Parents, Bendheim-Thoman Center for Research on Child Wellbeing, Princeton
University, 2002
31 Beyond Marriage Licenses: Efforts in States to Strengthen Marriage and Two-Parent Families, A State-by-State
Snapshot, Theodora Ooms, Stacey Bouchet, and Mary Parke, CLASP (Center for Law and Social Policy), April
2004. Also at http://www.clasp.org/DMS/Documents/1082987634.24/beyond_marr.pdf%20.
32 http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/capital.
33 Human Capital, Gary Becker, in The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics, The Library of Economics and
Liberty, at http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/HumanCapital.html.
34 Supports for Low-Income Families; States Serve a Broad Range of Families through a Complex and Changing
System, United States General Accounting Office, January, 2004.
35 Income Households, Larry W. Beeferman and Sandra H. Venner, Asset Development Institute, Center on Hunger
and Poverty, Heller Graduate School, Brandeis University, April 2001.
36 Ibid.
37 These states are Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New
Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia.
38
Making
Wages
Work:
The
Child
www.financeprojectinfo.org/mww/childtaxcredit.asp
Tax
Credit,
The
Finance
Project,
39 Getting ahead: A survey of low-wage workers on opportunities for advancement, conducted by Lake Snell Perry
& Associates for Jobs for the Future, September 2003
40 Building bridges to self-sufficiency: Improving services for low-income working families, Jennifer Miller, Frieda
Molina, Lisa Grossman & Susan Golonka, March 2004, for National Governors Association Center for Best
Practices (NGA Center) and MDRC.
41 Closing the Gap: How Sectoral Workforce Development Programs Benefit the Working Poor, The Aspen
Institute, 2001.
42 Quoted in Getting ahead: A survey of low-wage workers on opportunities for advancement, conducted by Lake
Snell Perry & Associates for Jobs for the Future, September 2003. Also, The Self Sufficiency Standard for the City of
New York, Wider Opportunities for Women and Women’s Center for Education and Career Advancement. Pearce,
Diane, September 2000.
43 Getting ahead: A survey of low-wage workers on opportunities for advancement, conducted by Lake Snell Perry
& Associates for Jobs for the Future, September 2003.
44 The Struggle to Sustain Employment: The Effectiveness of the Postemployment Services, Rangarajan, A. and
Novak,
T.,
Mathematica
Policy
Research
Inc.,
April
1999,
at
http://www.mathematicampr.com/publications/PDFs/strug-rpt.pdf.
45 Steady Work and Better Jobs: How to Help Low-Income Parents Sustain Employment and Advance in the
Workforce, Strawn and Martinson, Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation, June 2000.
149
46 Ibid.
47 Staying Employed After Welfare: and Work Supports Job Quality Vital To Employment Tenure And Wage
Growth, Heather Boushey, Economic Policy Institute Briefing Paper.
48 Using Incentives to Promote Job Retention and Advancement: Guidance from the Performance Improvement
Industry Final Report, Heather Hill and LaDonna Pavetti; Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. May 9, 2000.
49 Ibid.
50 Incumbent Worker Training for Low-Wage Workers, Nanette Relave, Welfare Information Network Issue Notes,
Vol. 7 No. 13; October, 2003.
51 Ibid.
52 Ibid.
53 National Center for Children in Poverty, at http://nccp.org/policy_index_20.html
54 United States Department of Agriculture, at http://www.fns.usda.gov/fns/
55 USDA Food and Nutrition Service, at http://www.fns.usda.gov/wic/aboutwic/default.htm
56 Health Policies for the Non-Elderly Poor, Mullahy and Wolfe, in Understanding Poverty, Danziger and
Haveman, Russell Sage Foundation, 2001.
57 Five Things Everyone Should Know about SCHIP, The New Federalism: Issues and Options for State, The Urban
Institute, October 2002.
58 Ibid.
59 Scarcity and Success: Perspectives on Assisted Housing; National Low-Income Housing Coalition,
http://www.nlihc.org/
60 National Center for Children in Poverty, at http://www.nccp.org/pub_sum03c.html
61 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Questions and
Answers Support, at http://faq.acf.hhs.gov
62 National Center for Children in Poverty; http://www.nccp.org/pub_swf04.html.
63 National Center for Children in Poverty, http://www.nccp.org/policy_long_description_13.html.
64 Welfare and Transportation: Will there be
http://thewitness.org/archive/julyaug2002/welfaretrans.html
justice
for
the
poor?
Beverly
G.
Ward;
65 Transportation: The Essential Need to Address the "To" in Welfare–to-Work; Kaplan; Welfare Information
Network; Issue Notes; Vol. 2 No. 10, June, 1998.
66 Welfare and Transportation: Will there be justice
http://thewitness.org/archive/julyaug2002/welfaretrans.html
for
67 National Economic Development and Law Center; http://www.nedlc.org
150
the
poor?
Beverly
G.
Ward,
at
68 A User Survey of Transportation Services Funded by the Job-Access-Reverse-Commute Program; Sööt, S.,
Sriraj, P.S. and Thakuriah, P., prepared for the Federal Transit Administration, Urban Transportation Center,
University of Illinois at Chicago, 2002, at http://www.utc.uic.edu/~fta/Reports/survey02.pdf.
69 States Move on Minimum Wage: Federal Inaction Forces States to Raise Wage Floor to Protect Low-Wage
Workers, Jeff Chapman, Economic Policy Institute, June 11, 2003.
151
Creating A 21st Century Model To Address Poverty
Maximizing Technology
Research Brief
August 31, 2004
152
1 Background
1.1 The Changing Face of Technology
Developments in IT over the next five years will significantly change how individuals,
governments and societies deal with information. There will be new and better ways of
presenting, analyzing and using information. There will be improved mobile devices for end
users, much-improved middleware, better-conceptualized standards, wider connectivity, new
collaboration tools, and new and better models for doing business. Many upcoming technological
innovations will change how people, teams, enterprises, governments and even whole societies
interact with and share data. Imagine a world where objects can sense, reason, communicate and
act. The explosion of smaller, cheaper sensors, continuously connected through wireless
communications, will create a sensory web where we will see the physical world online – this
will change everything. The main drivers are standards for improved interoperability, improved
understanding of information supply chains, wider connectivity and some key technologies like
micropayments, digital rights management, extensible markup language and ontologies. Many of
the implications are beyond providing better IT infrastructure. They are more about doing
business completely differently.
If we consider the state of the world technologically as it was in 1994 - just 10 years ago,
we would be without email, without a cell phone, without instant messaging. We would not be
browsing the Internet nor would we be transacting business via e-commerce. We would not have
Personal Digital Assistant’s (PDAs) or web kiosks. We would be technologically immature. In
year 2014, we will look back to 2004 and we will appear to have been technologically immature.
Instead of carrying a computer around, computing environments will be available everywhere for
personalized access to anytime/anywhere information via modified TV, electronic kiosks, or
airplane display monitors. Voice activated applications will have substantially reduced the need
for keyboard typing. Physical hardware computing machines and “boxes” as we know them will
have been replaced by virtual networks. All relevant information will be connected and
accessible to anyone granted permission to access it - at any time. Electronic devices will
integrate and communicate wherever we are, giving us any information that we need. The
network will be the heart of it all — personal and pervasive. Emerging technology and trends
will transform the ability of businesses and people to control their work and personal
environments. The Human Services infrastructure must successfully face the business and human
challenges that will arise in the always-on, always-connected world of 2014.
Experts maintain that a new US and world economy has emerged – a new stage of global
capitalism. This new stage is referred to by some as post industrialism or informationalism.
Informationalism represents a third industrial revolution (table 1.1). The first followed the
invention of the steam engine in the eighteenth century and was characterized by the replacement
of hand tools by machines. The second followed the harnessing of electricity in the nineteenth
century and was characterized by the development of large scale factory productions. The third
revolution came to fruition in the 1970s with the diffusion of the transistor, the personal
computer and telecommunications. In other words, what we have is not an Internet economy but
an information economy in which computers and the Internet play an essential and enabling role.
Experts have identified four features that distinguish informationalism from the prior industrial
153
stage: the driving role of science and technology for economic growth; a shift from material
production to information processing; the emergence and expansion of new forms of networked
industrial organization and the rise of socioeconomic globalization.1
Table 1.1 – The Three Industrial Revolutions
Beginning
First
Industrial Revolution
Late 18th century
Second
Industrial Revolution
Late 19th century
Third
Industrial Revolution
Mid to late 20th
Key
Technologies
Printing press, steam
engine, machinery
Electricity, internal
combustion, telegraph,
telephone
Archetypical
Workplace
Organization
Workshop
Factory
Transistor, personal
computers,
telecommunications,
Internet
Office
Master-apprentice-serf
Large vertical
hierarchies
Horizontal Networks
The changes to date in the world’s economy (as noted above) as well as emerging
technologies that are changing business practices as we know them, create the need for all
industries to reevaluate their use of technology to achieve goals and objectives.
1.2 Technology in Human Services Delivery Infrastructure
Human services programs have evolved dramatically during the past several generations,
often experiencing tectonic shifts as political perceptions evolve regarding their need and value.2
Prior to the Great Depression, most human services needs were addressed by the families or
religious institutions of those in need. However, because the Great Depression generally
overwhelmed the ability of families and charities to care for all of those in need, government
programs were created. In the mid-1960s, the number and complexity of government programs
grew dramatically as part of the "war on poverty." As political leadership challenged the
effectiveness of these programs in the 1980s, their growth was slowed and more flexibility was
shifted back to lower units of government. Since the mid-1990s, even more flexibility has been
granted to noncentral governments and private agencies to offer new or more-flexible services
(see Figure 1). (Gartner Group)
154
Figure 1. The Evolution of Human Services Delivery
Source: Gartner Research (August 2003)
The upper portion of Figure 1 graphically depicts the relative role of government in the
delivery of human services during these eras. The lower portion of Figure 1 depicts how the role
of technology has evolved. Early on, IT was nonexistent. With the development of mainframes
and large-scale payroll systems, technology began to play a more prominent role in human
services during the 1960s as agencies moved management of cash assistance programs onto
computers. However, until the late 1990s, little of this technology development was specifically
designed for or targeted at human services agencies. Other than financial management,
technology played little or no role in far more-qualitative activities, such as case management,
until very recently.3
When human services were primarily the responsibility of the family and charities, the
beneficiaries of those services were given only those things that were perceived to be necessary
in the short term (such as money, clothing, food, spiritual guidance and job tools). Through the
1970s, as the government's role grew, services became more homogeneous (for better or worse).
With welfare reforms beginning in the early 1980s and continuing into the mid-1990s, more
programs have become available to meet the unique and highly varying needs of each case. Yet,
because of the complexity of administering all of these programs, few government jurisdictions
or policies have adapted to better apply these programs to the needs of their constituents.
Human services agencies work to support complex financial and social needs of
qualifying individuals and families. By their very nature, these needs may vary from one
individual or case to another. Human services programs provide income to people or families in
need, provide assistance to enable self-sufficiency from these programs, or which help support or
protect children, the disabled, and the elderly in situations where they are dependent on others.
Because societal needs are so diverse, a wide variety of programs has been, and continues to be,
created to address varying conditions. Each of these programs may have different eligibility
criteria and administrative distinctions. Resources to support eligible clients exist in federal,
155
state and local governments, community action agencies, faith institutions and other not-for
profit entities.
As important as efficient client management is to reducing poverty, the Human Services
community does not have a single system capable of fully integrating program and resource
information holistically to empower those most in need. Most of the problems that the lowincome people face in seeking remedies can be ascribed to the nature of human services
programs and the lack of timely, accurate information needed to make sound and rapid decisions.
This lack of timely accurate information (which should be available on demand) forces the
system into a generally reactive mode. Neither case managers nor clients are able to see
opportunities or obstacles in advance.
While there are a few exceptions, for the most part, the Human Services infrastructure is
limited by stove-piped systems that are independently operated and managed throughout the
various layers of the infrastructure. Data currently resides in redundant, stovepipe applications
that reflect decades-old business processes. System functionality limitations, lack of integration,
and operating difficulties result in extensive manual efforts and inefficient business processes.
These conditions require field staff to focus an inordinate amount of time and effort collecting
data and shuffling paperwork. This does not allow sufficient time for analysis and service
intervention.
The most significant administrative challenge human services agencies will continue to
face will be marrying the specific needs of each client with the most appropriate solution or
program. This is, first and foremost, a problem of case management for employees of human
services agencies and the technology infrastructure intended to support them.
In the future, human services must “invert the paradigm”. The Human Services
infrastructure must consider that the system should operate from the perspective of meeting the
individual need of the client rather than supporting organizations and programs. The process
must begin with the individual by providing tools and resources to allow the person in need to
design a navigation strategy. Governmental resources could then be used to support service
delivery issues which are more complex and not easily solved by technology. Technology is in
place to support the inversion of the paradigm. Technology allows for self-service strategies to
empower individuals and communities to address their own unique needs.
1.3 Technology for Communities and Individuals
There have been mixed reviews in terms of how technology has been leveraged to date
by communities and individuals to deal with issues of poverty. As of August 2001 an estimated
513 million people around the world had Internet access. This represents 8.4% of the world’s
population4. Even though Internet access has been increasing rapidly in some countries, access
remains highly stratified by region. The number of people with Internet access ranges from
57.2% in North America to .5% in Africa. The reasons for the disparity in Internet access rates
are multiple and involve issues of economics, infrastructure, politics, education and culture.
156
Although access is an issue, a computer and the Internet are not much use without content
and applications that serve people’s needs. According to Warschauer in Technology and Social
Inclusion, the United States which leads the world in Web site production suffers from
significant content gaps that affect underserved communities. In other words, the applications or
service interventions that technology affords are not available to meet the needs of individuals
and communities to the degree needed. Additionally, an in-depth study of Internet content and
diversity was carried out by the Children’s Partnership5.
They identified four main content-related barriers that affected large numbers of
Americans. The greatest barrier was the lack of locally relevant technology applications and
information to address the needs of at-risk populations. According to the study, low income users
seek practical, relevant information that affects their daily lives.
Information of this nature is not consistently available at the local level to empower
communities and individuals.6 Locally relevant applications and information must be available
as follows:
 Education – Adult high school degree programs, adult literacy programs, financial aid,
homework assistance, tele-mentoring
 Family – Low-cost child care, low cost enrichment activities for children, public
assistance programs for families
 Finances – Public benefits news, consumer information, credit information
 Government advocacy – Immigration assistance, legal services, tax filing support
 Health – Easy to understand health encyclopedias, local clinics, low cost insurance
resources
 Housing – low cost housing, low cost utilities, neighborhood crime rates
 Personal enrichment – foreign language newspapers and search engines, communities of
interest for youth and adults
 Vocational – Low cost career counseling programs, job training programs, job readiness
programs, job listings
The author of Spanning the Digital Divide summarized some key questions/issues that must
be addressed if technology is to be leveraged to successfully impact individuals and communities
in the 21st century. The questions/issues are as follows7:
Physical Access
Capacity
Affordability
Is there physical access to technology? People will only use technology if it
is available within a reasonable distance from their home or work. A
computer that lacks adequate power supply, connection (internet
capabilities), and software will not be effective in helping people see the
relevance of technology to their lives.
Do people understand how to use technology and its potential use? People
must be able to effectively use the technology. Further, it is essential that
people understand the broader potential for technology applications, so users
can be empowered to creatively apply the technology to other parts of their
life.
Is technology affordable enough for people to use? The cost of hardware,
phone lines, electricity, internet connection, software, and maintenance must
157
not be so expensive it excludes many people and organizations from using
technology.
Do people have confidence in and understand the implications of the
Trust
technology they use, for instance in terms of privacy, security, or cyber
crime?
Is there locally relevant content in the local languages? Content is only
Relevant
relevant when its substance is interesting to users given their culture
Content
background, and accessible given their reading, writing, and language skills.
Does the technology further burden people's lives or does it integrate into
Integration
daily routines?
Are people limited in their use of technology based on gender, race, or other
Socio-cultural
socio-cultural factors? People are often excluded from using technology
Factors
based on ethnic, gender, or other socio-culturally-based inequalities. These
factors must be considered and addressed.
What is the appropriate technology that meets the needs and desires of
Appropriate
people? A wide variety of technologies are available. Policy makers and
Technology
users must be able to critically assess which kind of technology is
appropriate for the intended use.
Local Economic Is there a local economy that can sustain its use? The local economic
situation will determine the level and frequency of technology use.
Environment
Technology that can be used to foster economic growth will foster use in the
community.
Legal
and Do laws and policies foster technology use? What changes are needed to
create an environment that does?
Regulatory
Framework
Is national economic policy conducive to widespread technology use, for
Macroexample in terms of transparency, deregulation, investment, and labor issues?
economic
environment
Is there political will in the government to do what is needed to enable the
Political Will
integration of technology throughout society?
Having more-robust technology accessible at the individual and community levels
coupled with the potential to optimize the organizational silos that make programs and service
delivery so ineffective and inefficient to administer, is the impetus for a new 21st century
approach. This research explores the current state of technology in human services as well as
technological advances that may empower transformation of the Human services industry.
This research is not intended to be an exhaustive analysis of “what works” in applying
information and communications technology to poverty reduction. Despite a proliferation or
reports and initiatives, and pilot projects (some of which we highlight in the research), we still
have little knowledge about the effectiveness of these projects in lowering the incidences of
poverty. There are abundant success stories, but few have been subjected to detailed evaluation
to measure their effectiveness toward poverty reduction outcomes. The goal of this report, then,
is not to outline specifically what works and why but to provide a framework for thinking about
how technology could influence poverty. As such, technology is viewed as a means to an end – a
tool that may help to enable a desired end.
158
This report is organized as follows:
* Current State Analysis
o Individuals
o Communities
o Human Services Infrastructure
* Advances in Technology
2 Current State Analysis
2.1 Individuals and Technology
2.1.1 Computer and Internet Usage
When access to jobs and services is delivered electronically, those who have good
network connections will have an advantage, whereas those with poor service or no service will
be disadvantaged and marginalized.8
Americans are increasingly going online and using the Internet for social, economic, civic
and educational purposes. The power and benefits of information technology are
increasingly evident.
"Many sociologists argue that the ability to use computers and the Internet is fast
becoming a prerequisite for a broad array of jobs. Half of the new jobs that employ workers
without college degrees require daily use of computers, often including use of the Internet, and
the income gap between those who use computers on the job and those who don't continues to
widen." ---Wall Street Journal, (Yochi J. Dreazen, February 4, 2002)
However, while overall Internet access and use increased, millions of Americans who
could benefit from the educational and job opportunities offered by the Internet are the least
likely to be online.
 46% of individuals do not use the Internet (122 million Americans).
 50% of households do not use the Internet.
159
Almost half of Americans do not have access to the Internet.
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA). A Nation Online: How Americans Are Expanding Their Use of the
Internet, February 2002. 8
With many people losing their jobs or unable to find work in these difficult economic times,
it is particularly important to have access to the employment, education and resources
found online. In fact:
 When low-income users do connect, they are more likely to use the Internet to complete
school assignments and search for jobs than higher income Internet users.

People in households with low family incomes — 75% of people who live in households
where annual income is less than $15,000, and 67% of those in households with incomes
between $15,000 and $35,000. 9
Higher-income Americans are more than three times as likely to be online as those with
lower incomes. Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, National Telecommunications and
Information Administration (NTIA). A Nation Online: How Americans Are Expanding Their
Use of the Internet, February 2002.




Adults with low levels of overall education — 87% of adults (age 25+) with less than a
high school education, and 60% of adults with only a high school degree.
Hispanics — 68% of all Hispanics, and 86% of Hispanic households where Spanish is the
only language spoken.
Blacks — 60% of Blacks.
Rural households – 47% of rural households.
160
High percentages of Americans with very low incomes, Hispanics, Blacks, and rural
households still lack access to the Internet.
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA). A Nation Online: How Americans Are Expanding Their Use of the
Internet, February 2002.
In the report “A Nation Online: How Americans Are Expanding Their Use of the Internet”
dated February 200210, we find that disparities still lie in access to computers and the
Internet:


Approximately 46% of the population (roughly 122 million Americans) were not
accessing the Internet, as of September 2001.
34% of the population did not use computers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 Mark Warschauer, Technology and Social Inclusion. 2003
2 John Kost, New Solutions for Government Human Services. 2003
3 John Kost, New Solutions for Government Human Services. 2003
4 Mark Warschauer, Technology and Social Inclusion. 2003
5 Children’s Partnership
6 Mark Warschauer, Technology and Social Inclusion. 2003
7 Teresa Peters - Bridges.org, Spanning the Digital Divide.
8 Donald A. Schön, Bish Sanyal, and William J. Mitchell, High Technology and Low Income
Communities
9 U.S. Department of Commerce, National Telecommunications and Information Administration
(NTIA). A Nation Online: How Americans Are Expanding Their Use of the Internet, February
2002
10 Note: The report utilizes data from the Department of Commerce’s U.S. Census Bureau,
taken from the Census Bureau’s September 2001 Current Population Survey (CPS) of
approximately 57,000 sample households.
I. Americans’ Computer And Internet Use By Income
There are more than 50 percentage points between Americans who have access to
computers and the Internet and those who do not:
Annual Income
Less than $15,000
$15,000 - $24,999
Greater than $75,000
Computer
37%
46%
88%
Internet
25%
33%
79%
Family income remains an indicator of whether a person uses a computer or the Internet.
Individuals who live in high-income households are more likely to be computer and Internet
users than those who live in low-income households. This relationship has held true in each
successive survey of computer and Internet use.6
161
Nonetheless, both computer and Internet use have increased steadily across all income
categories over time (Figure 2-2). While notable differences remain in Internet use across income
categories, Internet use has grown considerably among people who live in lower income
households. Among people living in the lowest income households (less than $15,000 annually),
Internet use had increased from 9.2 percent in October 1997 to 25.0 percent in September 2001.
Figure 2-2: Computer and Internet Use From Any Location by Family Income, By
Employment
 59% of people not employed were not computer users.
 63% of people not employed were not Internet users.
By Education
Individuals who have a bachelor’s degree are five times more likely to use computers
and the Internet as those who have not received a high school diploma.
Less than High School Diploma
High School Diploma
Bachelor's Degree
Computer
17%
47%
85%
Internet
13%
40%
81%
By Race
 Whites, Asians and Pacific Islanders are one and a half times as likely to use computers
and six times more likely to use the Internet as Blacks and Hispanics.
Blacks
Hispanics
Whites
Asian/Pacific Islander
Computer
56%
49%
70%
71%
II. The Unconnected
 46% of individuals do not use the Internet.
 50% of households do not use the Internet.
162
Internet
40%
32%
60%
60%
The Offline Population

People in households with low family incomes — 75% of people who live in households
where income is less than $15,000 annually, and 67% of those in households with
incomes between $15,000 and $35,000.

Adults with low levels of overall education — 87% of adults (age 25+) with less than a
high school education, and 60% of adults with only a high school degree.

Hispanics — 68% of all Hispanics, and 86% of Hispanic households where Spanish is the
only language spoken.

Blacks — 60% of Blacks.

Rural households – 47% of rural households.
What is the main reason Americans are not connected to the Internet?
It is too expensive (stated by 35% of households with annual incomes of less than
$15,000).
III. How And Where America Goes Online
Connection Types

80% of individuals connect to the Internet via a dial-up connection.
Dial-Up
Cable Modem
DSL

80%
13%
7%
High-speed subscribers were present in 97% of the most densely populated zip codes at
the end of December 2000 as compared to 45% of zip codes with the lowest population
densities.
Higher-Speed Internet Connection by Geographic Area

Central and urban cities are nearly twice as likely to have higher-speed Internet
connections as rural areas.
U.S.
2000
19%
163
2001
11%
Central Cities
Urban (Not central cities)
Rural
22%
21%
12%
12%
12%
7%
Location of Use

At the end of 1998, only 7% of the population used the Internet both at home and from
another location. In just under three years, that figure has risen to 25% (an increase of
over 300%).
Internet Use by Specific Location

Internet access at public libraries is more often used by those with lower incomes than
those with higher incomes.
Specifically:



10% of individuals with household incomes of less than $25,000 rely on public libraries
to use the Internet compared with .02% of individuals in households earning over
$75,000.
14% of Internet users do not access the Internet at home, school, or work; alternate access
locations: public libraries-- 5%, community center-- .06%, someone else’s home-- 6%.
43% access the Internet from home.
Primary Uses of the Internet
E-Mail
Product/Service Information Search
News, Weather, Information
Playing Games
Product/Service Purchases

84%
67%
62%
42%
39%
When low-income users do connect, they are more likely to use the Internet to complete
school assignments and search for jobs than higher income Internet users.
o Complete school assignments: 37% of individuals with annual incomes less than
$15,000 compared to 25% with incomes over $75,000.
o Search for jobs: 23% of individuals with annual incomes less than $15,000 and
21% of individuals with incomes between $15,000 - $24,999 compared to 15%
with incomes over $75,000.
164
IV. The Digital Generation: How Young People Have Embraced Computers And The
Internet
Computer and Internet Use



90% of school-aged children (5-17) use computers.
59% of school-aged children (5-17) use the Internet.
Family households with children under age 18 are much more likely to have computers
than families without children (70% compared to 59%). They also are more likely to have
Internet subscriptions (62% vs. 53%).
Computer Use Among 10 to 17 Year Olds By Income and Location

Almost 60 percentage points divide youth who use computers in households in the
lowest income category compared to the highest income category.
Computer Use at Home by Income
Annual Income
Less than $15,000
More than $75,000

%
33%
92%
Four times as many children (ages 10-17) go online only at school if they live in a
household in the lowest income category (21%) compared to those in the highest income
level (5%).
Computer Use Among 10 to 17 Year Olds By Race/Ethnicity and Location
 A far higher percentage of Hispanic (39%) and Black (45%) children rely solely on
schools to use computers than do Asian and Pacific Islanders (11%) and White children
(15%).
Computer Use Among 10 to 17 Year Olds By Household Type and Location

More than twice as many children from single-parent families use computers only at
schools as do children in two-parent families: 41% of children in female-headed
households, 32% in male headed households, and 17% in households with two parents.
Internet Use Among 10 to 17 Year Olds By Income and Household Type
Internet Use at Home by Income
165


Annual Income
%
Less than $15,000
21%
More than $75,000
83%
60 percentage points divide youth who use the Internet in households in the lowest
income category compared to the highest income category.
Children in single-parent families are less likely to use the Internet at home (37% in
female headed households and 45% in male-headed households) than are children in twoparent families (64%).
How Young People Use the Internet
#1 Use: Schoolwork:
Over 1/2 of children over age 10
3/4 of young adults (18-24)
Nearly 1/5 of elementary students
#2 Use: E-mail: close second
Concerns About Children’s Online Use
 68% of parents with children said that, compared with television material, they were
more concerned about their children’s exposure to material on the Internet (though this
would not prompt them to discontinue using the Internet).
V. Computer And Internet Use Among People With Disabilities

People with disabilities tend to use computers and the Internet at rates below the national
average.
Internet Use at Home Among 25-60 year old Disabled Americans:
Deaf or Severe Hearing Impairment
Blind or Severe Vision Impairment
Multiple Disabilities
None of these Disabilities
68%
62%
56%
75%
166
Table 2-1: Computer Use From Any Location by Individuals Age 3 and Older, October
1997 and September 2001
Oct. 1997
Percent of Growth
People
in Use
Who Are
Rate
Computer (annual
Users
rate)
Computer
Total
Computer
Total
Oct. Sept.
Oct.
Users
(thousands)
Users
(thousands) 1997 2001 1997 to
(thousands)
(thousands)
Sept.
2001
136,900
255,689
174,051
265,180
53.5 65.6 5.3
Total
Population
Gender
Male
66,978
Female
69,921
Race/ Origin
White
105,957
Black
13,854
Asian
5,306
Amer. & Pac.
Isl.
Hispanic
10,729
Employment Status
Employed, a 80,687
Not
18,074
Employed a, b
Family Income
Less
than 13,182
$15,000
$15,000 - 12,115
$24,999
$25,000 - 16,360
$34,999
$35,000 - 23,440
$49,999
$50,000 - 30,043
$74,999
$75,000 & 29,542
above
Educational Attainment
Less Than 2,331
High School c
High School 19,256
Diploma/GED
Sept. 2001
124,590
131,099
84,539
89,512
129,152
136,028
53.8
53.3
65.5
65.8
5.2
5.5
184,295
31,786
9,225
130,848
18,544
7,600
186,793
33,305
10,674
57.5
43.6
57.5
70.0
55.7
71.2
5.2
6.5
5.6
28,233
15,690
32,146
38.0
48.8
6.6
130,857
72,911
98,819
31,487
135,089
77,268
61.7
24.8
73.2
40.8
4.5
13.5
44,284
11,681
31,354
29.8
37.3
5.9
32,423
12,464
26,649
37.4
46.8
5.9
33,178
16,495
28,571
49.3
57.7
4.1
38,776
25,233
36,044
60.4
70.0
3.8
41,910
35,465
44,692
71.7
79.4
2.6
36,572
49,672
56,446
80.8
88.0
2.2
29,114
4,672
27,484
7.9
17.0
21.5
57,487
27,118
57,386
33.5
47.3
9.2
167
Oct. 1997
Sept. 2001
Percent of Growth
People
in Use
Who Are
Rate
Computer (annual
Users
rate)
Computer
Total
Computer
Total
Oct. Sept.
Oct.
Users
(thousands)
Users
(thousands) 1997 2001 1997 to
(thousands)
(thousands)
Sept.
2001
c
Some College 24,595
42,544
31,551
c
Bachelors
20,640
27,795
25,965
Degree c
Beyond
10,970
13,863
14,151
Bachelors
Degree c
Age Group
Age 3-8
14,412
24,445
16,877
Age 9-17
30,188
35,469
34,356
Age 18–24
14,528
24,973
19,361
Age 25–49
58,745
101,853
71,491
Male
27,577
50,177
33,647
Female
31,168
51,676
37,844
Age 50 +
19,026
68,949
31,965
Male
9,654
31,252
15,547
Female
9,372
37,697
16,418
Household Type In Which the Individual Lives d
Married
68,855
103,791
81,897
Couple
w/Children
<18
Years
Old
168
45,420
57.8
69.5
4.8
30,588
74.3
84.9
3.5
16,283
79.1
86.9
2.4
23,763
37,118
27,137
101,890
50,020
51,871
75,272
34,438
40,834
59.0
85.1
58.2
57.7
55.0
60.3
27.6
30.9
24.9
71.0
92.6
71.3
70.2
67.3
73.0
42.5
45.1
40.2
4.9
2.2
5.3
5.1
5.3
5.0
11.6
10.2
13.1
104,337
66.3
78.5
4.4
Table 2-1: Computer Use From Any Location by Individuals Age 3 and Older, October
1997 and September 2001
Table 2-1
Oct. 1997
(thousands)
Internet
Total
Users
56,774 255,689
Total
Population
Gender
Male
30,311 124,590
Female
26,464 131,099
Race/ Origin
White
46,678 184,295
Black
4,197
31,786
Asian Amer
2,432
9,225
& Pacific. Isl
Hispanic
3,101
28,233
Employment Status
Employed b
37,254 130,857
Not
9,012
72,911
Employed b,
d
Family Income
Less
than
4,069
44,284
$15,000
$15,000
3,760
32,423
$24,999
$25,000
5,666
33,178
$34,999
$35,000
8,824
38,776
$49,999
$50,000
13,552
41,910
$74,999
$75,000 &
16,276
36,572
above
Educational Attainment
Less Than
516
29,114
High School a
High School
5,589
57,487
Diploma/GED
a
Some
10,548
42,544
College a
Bachelors
11,503
27,795
Degree a
Beyond
7,195
13,863
Bachelors
Degree a
Age Group (and Labor Force)
Age 3–8
1,748
24,445
Age 9–17
11,791
35,469
Age 18–24
7,884
24,973
Age 25–49
27,639 101,853
Dec. 1998
(thousands)
Internet
Total
Users
84,587 258,453
Aug. 2000
(thousands)
Internet
Total
Users
116,480 262,620
Sept. 2001
(thousands)
Internet
Total
Users
142,823 265,180
Oct.
1997
22.2
Internet Use
(percent)
Dec. Aug. Sept.
1998 2000 2001
32.7 44.4 53.9
43,033
41,555
125,932
132,521
56,962
59,518
127,844
134,776
69,580
73,243
129,152
136,028
24.3
20.2
34.2
31.4
44.6
44.2
53.9
53.8
69,470
6,111
3,467
184,980
32,123
9,688
93,714
9,624
5,095
186,439
32,850
10,324
111,942
13,237
6,452
186,793
33,305
10,674
25.3
13.2
26.4
37.6
19.0
35.8
50.3
29.3
49.4
59.9
39.8
60.4
4,897
29,452
7,325
30,918
10,141
32,146
11.0
16.6
23.7
31.6
56,539
14,261
133,119
73,891
76,971
21,321
136,044
73,891
88,396
28,531
135,089
77,268
28.5
12.4
42.5
19.5
56.6
28.9
65.4
36.9
5,170
37,864
6,057
32,096
7,848
31,354
9.2
13.7
18.9
25.0
5,623
30,581
7,063
27,727
8,893
26,650
11.6
18.4
25.5
33.4
8,050
31,836
11,054
31,001
12,591
28,571
17.1
25.3
35.7
44.1
13,528
39,026
16,690
35,867
20,587
36,044
22.8
34.7
46.5
57.1
19,902
43,776
25,059
43,451
30,071
44,692
32.3
45.5
57.7
67.3
24,861
42,221
36,564
52,189
44,547
56,446
44.5
58.9
70.1
78.9
1,228
29,039
2,482
28,254
3,506
27,484
1.8
4.2
8.8
12.8
10,961
57,103
17,425
56,889
22,847
57,386
9.7
19.2
30.6
39.8
16,603
43,038
24,201
44,628
28,321
45,420
24.8
38.6
54.2
62.4
16,937
28,990
21,978
30,329
24,726
30,588
41.4
58.4
72.5
80.8
9,635
14,518
12,104
15,426
13,633
16,283
51.9
66.4
78.5
83.7
2,680
15,396
11,356
41,694
24,282
35,821
25,662
101,836
3,671
19,579
15,039
56,433
23,962
36,673
26,458
101,946
6,637
25,480
17,673
65,138
23,763
37,118
27,137
101,890
7.2
33.2
31.6
27.1
11.0
43.0
44.3
40.9
15.3
53.4
56.8
55.4
27.9
68.6
65.0
63.9
169
Table 2-1
Oct. 1997
Dec. 1998
Aug. 2000
(thousands)
(thousands)
(thousands)
Internet
Total
Internet
Total
Internet
Total
Users
Users
Users
Male
14,679
50,177
20,889
50,054
27,078
50,034
Female
12,960
51,676
20,806
51,781
29,356
51,913
Age 50 +
7,712
68,949
13,669
70,852
21,758
73,580
Male
4,560
31,252
7,356
32,248
10,989
33,561
Female
3,152
37,697
6,313
38,604
10,769
40,019
Geographic Location of Household In Which the Individual Lives
Rural
n/a
n/a
19,274
65,828
28,889
67,980
Urban
n/a
n/a
65,313 192,625
87,591 194,640
Urban
Not
n/a
n/a
41,881 116,091
56,773 118,641
Central City
Urban Central
n/a
n/a
23,432
76,534
30,818
75,999
City
Sept. 2001
(thousands)
Internet
Total
Users
30,891
50,020
34,247
51,871
27,895
75,272
13,757
34,438
14,138
40,834
Oct.
1997
29.3
25.1
11.2
14.6
8.4
Internet Use
(percent)
Dec. Aug. Sept.
1998 2000 2001
41.7 54.1 61.8
40.2 56.5 66.0
19.3 29.6 37.1
22.8 32.7 39.9
16.4 26.9 34.6
35,751
107,072
69,342
67,642
197,537
120,724
n/a
n/a
n/a
29.3
33.9
36.1
42.5
45.0
47.9
52.9
54.2
57.4
37,730
76,813
n/a
30.6
40.6
49.1
Table 2-2: Internet Use From Any Location by Individuals Age 3 and Older, October 1997,
December 1998, August 2000, and September 2001
Primary Uses by the U.S. Population
The chief uses of the Internet remained the same in September 2001 as in August 2000,
but occurred at much higher levels (Figure 3-1). The predominant use continued to be email or
instant messaging. In September 2001, nearly half of the population used e-mail (45.2 percent,
up from 35.4 percent in 2000). Searching for information also ranked high: approximately onethird of Americans used the Internet to search for product and service information (36.2 percent,
up from 26.1 percent in 2000), and to search for news, weather, and sports information (33.3
percent, up from 19.2 percent in 2000).
In addition, many more Internet users reported making online purchases or conducting
online banking. The August 2000 survey combined these two categories and found that 13.3
percent of online users were engaged in both activities. The September 2001 survey, however,
asked about these activities separately and found that 21.0 percent made online purchases and 8.1
percent conducted banking online.
Figure 3-1: Online Activities, 2000 and 2001 as a Percentage of Total U.S. Population,
Persons Age 3 +
170
Source: NTIA and ESA, U.S. Department of Commerce, using U.S. Census Bureau Current
Population Survey Supplements
Activities Among Those Individuals Online
Looking more specifically at Internet users, e-mail easily outdistances all other online
activity (Figure 3-2). Online users are also connecting to the Internet in large numbers to search
for information, whether it is product/services, health, or government services.
The Internet is also a source for news and sports for many online users. To the extent that
product/service purchases, online trading, and online banking represent consumers engaged in ecommerce, that activity is fairly strong and growing.
Figure 3-2: Activities of Individuals Online, 2001 As a Percentage of Internet Users,
Persons Age 3 +
*These online activities surveyed individuals age 15 and over only.
**This activity was asked of all respondents. If the response was restricted to individuals enrolled
in school, the percentage of Internet users completing school assignments would increase to 77.5 percent.
Source: NTIA and ESA, U.S. Department of Commerce, using U.S. Census
Bureau Current Population Survey Supplements
Whether an Internet user engages in a certain activity varies by some, but not all,
demographic factors. For example, geography has little impact on the selection of activity. The
proportions of Internet users engaged in specific online activities varies little across regions, and
was similar regardless of whether the Internet user lived in a rural, urban, or central city area.
Household type also showed little, if any, differences. Gender, age, race, and income, however,
do have some relationship with Internet users’ selection of online activities, as discussed below.
Summary
171
More low-income Americans are going online
Notwithstanding the fact that a significant gap still remains between the “haves” and
“have-nots,” it is true that every day greater numbers of low-income Americans are getting
access to computers and beginning to use the Internet. In other words, more “potential” users of
online content for underserved communities are online today, making the demand for content
that meets the unique needs of low-income individuals greater than ever before.


In the four years between 1997 and 2001 (the latest available data), the number of
Americans with family incomes of less than $25,000 who used the Internet more than
doubled (an increase from 7.8 million to 16.7 million).
Among people in very low-income families (less than $15,000 annually), there was a
90% increase in those online (increase from 4.1 million to 7.8 million)
Large numbers of low income individuals have limited literacy skills or disabilities
An estimated 44 million American adults do not have the reading and writing skills
necessary for functioning in everyday life.5 They are served inadequately by today’s Internet
content, most of which is developed for intermediate or advanced readers.
Appropriate online content for limited literacy Americans has the potential to raise
literacy levels as well as employment levels.
New data, which for the first time includes information about people with disabilities,
shows that approximately 8.5% of the population has at least one significant disability.6
For older Americans (aged 65 and older) the figure is nearly 30%.7 This data also shows,
for the first time, that people who have one or more disability are much less likely to be Internet
users than those without any disability.8 Yet, having access to, and the ability to use, online
information (presented in ways that are accessible to the disabled) could open up valuable new
ways for people with physical or mental difficulties to learn, work, or communicate with others.
More Americans from Other Cultures or Countries Are Using the Internet
For many of the 26 million Americans who are foreign-born, the lack of culturally
diverse Internet content limited what they could find that was relevant and valuable to their lives,
such as advice for dealing with a health problem tailored to their unique cultural beliefs or
practices. According to more recent figures, that number has grown. There are now 28.4 million
Americans living in the United States who are foreign-born.9 This larger group experiences firsthand the shortage of content organized around their unique cultural interests and practices.
Technology Access Outside the Home Is on the Rise
172


Internet access from a location outside of the home more than doubled between 1998 and
2001, up from 17% to 4.8%.
At the end of 1998, only 6.5% of the population used the Internet both at home and from
another location. Three years later, the figure had nearly quadrupled to 24.5%.
The Internet is rapidly Becoming Essential for Basic Needs

At present, over half (57%) of people over the age of 25 who are employed use a
computer at work.15 In fact, blue-collar occupations are moving online faster than any
other occupational group, with factory operators and laborers, for example, showing a
52% increase in one year alone in the number using the Internet.16

According to a recent national survey, when looking for work-related information, 48%
of respondents chose the Internet. Sixty percent chose the Internet for personal and
special interest information needs, compared to 18% who chose magazines

Health information is a top use of the Internet today; low-income individuals place a
high value on it as well. In national survey conducted in March 2002, the Pew Internet
Project found that 73 million Americans (62% of Internet users) have gone online in
search of health information. On a typical day, six million Americans turn to the Internet
for health information. Most report that the information is helpful as they make decisions
about themselves or a loved one.

Three quarters of all individuals enrolled in school use the Internet to complete school
assignments.19 Twenty-one percent of adults nationwide say their children’s grades have
improved since beginning to use the Internet.

In 2001, 55% of Americans visited a government Web site, with 21% actually conducting
business online with a government entity.21 Ensuring Internet access for underserved
communities is important since, increasingly, families are expected to receive
government benefits for which they qualify via the Internet – whether it is Medicaid or
Medicare information, Food Stamps, or Social Security.
2.1.2 Impacts
There is no easy way to measure the impact of the current inequitable distribution of
information technologies, but it clearly is becoming an increasingly important contributor to
inequality in America according to the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA).11 OTA
described the effect as “the concentration of poverty and the deconcentration of opportunity.”
Email, video conferencing, fax machines, and computer networks are making it easier for jobs to
migrate from city centers to suburbs and beyond, the OTA explained in a 1995 report. These
technologies are enabling industries that once had to be close to customers and related businesses
to operate at greater distances. Similarly, they are allowing distributors and financial institutions
like banks and insurance companies to consolidate operations and locate “back room” facilities
farther from their customers, eliminating many downtown jobs. At the same time, new
173
technologies have led to sweeping changes in manufacturing processes, making old factories in
urban centers obsolete. The OTA estimated that the 28 largest counties in the Northeast and
Midwest lost one million jobs in the 1980s. The city of Chicago alone has more than 2,000
unused manufacturing sites, according to Krieg. As employers take advantage of technological
advances to relocate to suburbs, the labor market in many cities has become fractured.
Many highly skilled managerial and professional jobs remain downtown because they
require a great deal of face-to-face contact and networking. But increasingly, the only work for
unskilled people consists of low-paying, service sector jobs. Such jobs offer little hope of
advancement, and intermediate jobs that would help less skilled workers climb career ladders are
hard to find.
“We are witnessing the wholesale disappearance of work accessible to the urban poor,”
concludes Milton J. Little, Jr., executive vice president and chief operating officer of the
National Urban League. His view was confirmed in 1996 by Harvard sociologist William Julius
Wilson in When Work Disappears: The World of the New Urban Poor.
But the cities' loss has not been the rural areas' gain. “Without intervention,
unemployment, poverty, and out-migration will likely increase, exacerbating the structural
problems typical of rural areas,” the OTA warned in an earlier report, Rural 11 Office of
Technology Assessment, OTA America at the Crossroads: Networking for the Future. “Unlike
routine manufacturing industries that migrated to rural areas in search of lower production costs,
today's high-technology industries are attracted by a highly skilled workforce and
communications networks to other economic markets and information centers. These are
precisely what rural areas lack.”
“Poor, rural communities are already isolated,” observes Amy Borgstrom, executive
director of ACENet, an organization dedicated to using networking technologies to open new
markets for citizens in Appalachian Ohio. “There is low access to infrastructures.” Borgstrom
argues that information technologies could enable isolated communities—rural and inner-city—
to compete economically with other regions. “But without infrastructure, training, and access,
information technology and these opportunities will pass these communities by,” she says.
2.1.3 Leveraging Technology for Individuals
There are some key questions/issues that must be addressed to ensure that technology is
leveraged in a manner to support persons susceptible to poverty.12 Access to technology must
mean more than just computers and connections according to Bridges. “Providing access to
technology is critical, but it must be about more than just physical access.
Computers and connections are insufficient if the technology is not used effectively
because it is not affordable; people do not understand how to put it to use, or they are
discouraged from using it; or the local economy cannot sustain its use. The following issues are
the determining factors in whether or not people have "real access" to technology; i.e. access that
174
goes beyond just physical access and makes it possible for people to use technology effectively
to improve their lives.

Physical access. What can we do to make technology available and physically accessible
to our citizens in their communities and workplaces?

Appropriate technology. What can we do to ensure that the available technology is
appropriate to how our citizens need and want to put technology to use, and that it fits
within the reality of their daily lives?

Affordability. What can we do to make technology access and use affordable for our
citizens?

Capacity. What can we do to help our citizens understand how they can use technology in
their lives, and what can we do to ensure they receive the training they need?

Relevant content. What can we do to ensure that content is developed that is locally
relevant to our citizens, especially in terms of language?

Integration. What can we do to ensure that technology is not just a further burden to the
lives of our citizens, and how can we help them integrate technology into their daily
routines? 12 * Bridges.org, www.bridges.org/digitaldivide/realaccess.html.

Sociocultural factors. What can we do to ensure that our citizens are not discouraged
from using technology or limited in their use because of their gender, race, or other
sociocultural factors?

Trust. What can we do to help our citizens trust technology and how can we help them
understand what happens “behind the screen” so that they will feel confident and be
informed about things like electronic privacy, data security, and cyber -crime?

Legal and regulatory framework. What can we do to determine how our laws and
regulations affect technology use and what changes can we make to create an
environment that fosters its use?

Local economic environment. What can we do to foster local economic development that
can and will sustain technology use?

Macro-economic environment. What can we do to determine whether our national
economic policies are conducive to widespread technology use, for example, in terms of
transparency, deregulation, investment, and labor issues, and what changes can we make
to create a more conducive environment?

Political will. What can we do to gain public support for our e-strategies—and to fortify
our government’s political will so that we can make tough decisions and drive the change
needed for our country to achieve its goals?
175
Bridges.org, www.bridges.org/digitaldivide/realaccess.html.
Numerous on-the-ground initiatives are working to provide technology access and
help put technology to use in underserved populations. There are an enormous number of
efforts, ranging from telecentres to training to innovative business applications, Many initiatives
address specific aspects of the range of issues, but too often they neglect related factors that limit
their success. For example, too many telecentres providing computers and connections in rural
locations do not become self-sustaining because local people do not use their services – often
they have failed to address the role of the centre in the local economy or the need for locally
relevant content. There is a need for a holistic approach to cover the range of issues to create
effective and sustainable uses for technology that are integrated into communities.
Providing access to technology is critical, but it must be about more than just
physical access. Computers and connections are insufficient if the technology is not used
effectively because it is not affordable; people do not understand how to put it to use, or they are
discouraged from using it; or the local economy cannot sustain its use. Real access requires
training, relevant content in local language, a supportive political environment, and a sustainable
local economy.
Overall, a pooling of resources and experiences is needed. Dealing with the
technology gap is beyond the scope of any single initiative. While it is important for
organizations doing community technology projects to meet the needs of their clients as
comprehensively as possible, the issues at stake require full collaboration.
Private sector programs are vital.
Many local initiatives have been executed to support or bring technology to low
income individuals. Some examples of these programs are as follows:
DATA BUSTERS
NORTHEAST FLORIDA COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY, INC.; JACKSONVILLE,
FLORIDA
The Northeast Florida Community Action Agency operates a six-week competencybased summer program called “data busters.” that introduces youth to hardware and software.
The program receives federal funding through the Community Services Block Grant. Youth ages
15 to 16 participate in the program. Students use desktop computers and educational content
software. Youth are introduced to a competency-based approach to pre-employment and work
maturity skills. To demonstrate mastery of the work maturity skills, the youth work on
schoolwork detail for which they are paid the minimum wage.
YOUTH TECHNOLOGY
MADISON COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT; EDWARDSVILLE, ILLINOIS
176
Madison County Community Development works in partnership with the Black Butterfly
Youth Foundation to operate a computer technology center. The center primarily focuses on
youth between the ages of 9 and 19; however, the center is open to adults as well. Funding for
the center comes from CSBG, United Way, U.S. Department of Education, and the Catholic
Diocese.
FRESH START PROGRAM
WESTERN DAIRYLAND COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY; INDEPENDENCE,
WISCONSIN
Western Dairyland’s Fresh Start Program provides technology education to at-risk youth.
The Fresh Start Program, with projects in both Eau Claire County and Jackson County, has
received funding primarily from the Wisconsin Division of Housing and Intergovernmental
Relations Bureau of Housing, as well as the Eau Claire County Housing Authority, the
Department of Corrections (for those participants on probation or parole), the Wisconsin
Conservation Corporation (WCC), the Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services
(DHFS) Title IV(e) (for those participants from group homes or foster care), and the Wisconsin
Housing and Economic Development Administration.
The Fresh Start Program has combined classroom instruction and house construction to
provide education, employment skills training, and career direction to high-risk youth between
the ages of 17 to 24. On a daily basis, participants are given instruction to develop skills in the
areas of academics, employment, independent living, health and nutrition, and interpersonal
relations. During the Program, youth participants acquire typing skills and competence in word
processing software and Internet research.
Additionally, Fresh Start youth have the opportunity to receive training in web page
design and development and Internet applications at Western Dairyland’s Women’s Business
Center.
At the Fresh Start Program work site, participants gain skills in home-building
technology, while acquiring the motivation and attitudes necessary to succeed in the workplace
and participating in a worthwhile community project. The youth learn home building skills,
including how to draw and read blueprints and how to convert and scale measurements. The
participants have the opportunity to use 3-D Home Architect computer software to design their
own “dream” home and build scale models based on those designs. The program coordinator
teaches the youth the uses of Auto CAD 2000 LT, which gives the youth the opportunity to see a
detailed picture of what the house will look like when finished. Using the blueprints and designs,
the youth learn how to estimate materials and costs and how to prepare for and conduct the bid
and permit processes. Upon the completion of the excavation and concrete work, the youth
perform all construction activities, from the basic framing of the house to the very detailed work
of installing cabinetry and trim. During this process, the youth learn how to use manual tools,
such as tape measures, speed squares, architect rulers, and carpenters squares, as well as various
power tools. Through technology education, the youth learn how to apply systematic knowledge
to the homebuilding craft, which provides these at-risk youth with an improved education and
177
refined work skills that lead to enhanced self-confidence and, for the first time in many of their
lives, the feeling of accomplishment and success.
Homes built by the Fresh Start Program are sold to low-income families.
The BeeHive (beehive.org)
The Beehive provides information and resources to individuals on areas such as: money,
health, jobs, school and family. This past tax season, the Beehive launched a pilot project to help
families use an online tool to file for the Federal Earned Income Credit (EIC), a program that
helps low-income individuals and families get tax reductions and wage supplements of up to
$4,204 a year. This program helps bring more children out of poverty than any other government
program. The Beehive is a part of one-economy – a non-profit organization.
2.2 Community and Technology
The ability of communities to access, adapt, and create new knowledge using information
and communication technologies is critical to the reduction of poverty. A number of studies have
been commissioned to look at how technology has been leveraged at the community level to
address issues of poverty. Some studies focus on technology in the community in general. Other
studies focus specifically on how technology has been leveraged in low income communities to
bring about positive results. In their book High Technology and Low-Income Communities Prospects for the Positive Use of Advanced Information Technology, the authors outline five
initiatives for using computers and electronic communications to benefit low-income urban
communities:
 to provide access to the new technologies in ways that enable low-income people to
become active producers rather than passive users;
 to use the new technologies to improve the dialogue between public agencies and lowincome neighborhoods;
”With the cooperation of Parent-Teacher associations, schools should be
converted in the evening into community centers, open to the society at large, making
them less vulnerable to gangs and more in touch with the community’s real problems.”
 to help low-income youth to exploit the entrepreneurial potential of information
technologies;
“Entrepreneurial immigrants are quickly becoming the driving economic force in
many poor communities in New York and Los Angeles. Online selling, advertising and
contacting over the Net could ease the difficulty of locating these start-up businesses in
the invisible, dangerous areas of the city.”

to develop approaches to education that take advantage of the educational capabilities of
the computer;
“It is well know that a significant proportion of poor males, particularly among
ethnic minorities, spend considerable amounts of time in jails. Prison becomes an
178
extension to the community. To cut another vicious circle between poverty , racism,
discrimination, and jails, information technology could be used to educate and train the
prison population to provide opportunities for teleworking and to interact with
prospective employers while in prison so that the link with education and jobs is not lost.

to promote the community computer: applications of computers and communications
technology that foster community development.
An article from the Wall Street journal described the issue this way13.
“Silicon Valley,” it said, “is in the midst of an epic boom, opulent even for this
glittering edge of America.” But such riches haven't reached many low-income
communities— even ones like East Palo Alto, which is right in the middle of Silicon
Valley's technological abundance. “Anywhere else in Silicon Valley, your parents use
computers, there is a shop down the street to sell you a computer, another to fix your
computer, another to give you computer classes, (and) there are Kinko’s everywhere,”
notes Bart Decrem, director of a California youth technology initiative called Plugged In.
“In East Palo Alto, there's none of that.”
The contrast between affluent and low-income communities may be particularly sharp in
places like Silicon Valley, but it exists almost everywhere. The simple fact is that poor
communities are entering the Information Age far behind their wealthier neighbors. “While
[middle-class communities] are rapidly approaching the 'next cycle,' the technology of the
previous cycle has already bypassed the inner city,” says Richard Krieg, executive director of
the Institute for Metropolitan Affairs, a public interest organization in Chicago committed to
seeking practical answers to problems involving education, health care, and crime. Krieg notes
that while families in affluent areas are rapidly acquiring home computers, people in many lowincome neighborhoods have little exposure even to earlier generation tools such as laser
scanners at supermarkets and bank automatic tellers. “Despite limited empirical study of
technology diffusion…, it is clear that computerization, telecommunications, and mass media
applications are dramatically underrepresented in distressed urban areas.”
As Krieg suggests, the technology gap is not simply a reflection of the choices made by
individual households. The deeper problem is that many poor neighborhoods lack the
infrastructure available in affluent areas. Groups such as the United Church of Christ that have
studied patterns of telecommunications investment have found that, all too often, telephone and
cable companies have moved quickly to wire wealthier suburbs with advanced systems, while
poor, inner-city neighborhoods aren't upgraded. While public attention is often focused on
whether individuals can get a service, the equally important problem is that lack of adequate
telecommunications facilities makes an area less attractive for businesses. This can feed a spiral
where the lack of investment at the community level leads to fewer economic opportunities for
people who live there. As a result, the poverty in the neighborhood makes it a less inviting target
for investment, further aggravating the problem.
The same neighborhoods that lack infrastructure are comprised of households that are
far less likely to have the tools of the Information Age.
179
13 In an October 8, 1996, article describing one of California's technology corridors, the Wall
Street Journal
Among the services that are currently being provided through Technology in communities are
o Information
o Education and Training
o Mentoring and Consultation
o Self-diagnosis/self-monitoring
o Transaction processing
2.2.1 Leveraging Technology for Communities
Three key issues that communities are facing in leveraging technology: access,
infrastructure and capacity.
Access
There are differing levels of access in communities to various forms of technology. There
are differences in access in sustained and affordable form to landline phones, radio and TV,
Internet, mobile phones, satellites services, etc. Although full access to information and
communication technology requires more than the presence of devices and conduits, there
remains pressing issues about physical access to computers and the Internet.
Access to technology, Upton, Owens and Hickok agreed, is no longer a privilege; rather,
it is a requisite. After eight years of investments by school boards, the federal government, state
governors and the private sector, more than 95 percent of schools are connected to the Internet;
the average school has one computer for every five students. It’s About Outcomes. The ratio of
computers to children only tells us so much. The real challenge for public and private sector
players alike is to move beyond the issue of access and ensure that technologies are used in
meaningful ways to truly improve and encourage learning. Larry Irving told TTR participants,
“but it’s not just about access, it’s got to be about outcomes. If all [a teenager] does with that
technology are the things he or she can do with a newspaper or a television, if he or she is not
getting new skills [or] …contributing to the community, then what’s the point of this
technology?”
Andrew Clement and Leslie Shade present a seven layer conceptual model of access for
communities. They discuss three main questions 1) access for what purposes, 2) access for whom
and 3) access for what.
Infrastructure
180
There are differing levels of infrastructure relevant in communities. There are different
levels of development of the underlying infrastructure that enables access to, and networking of
technologies. Communities must (1) extend the telecommunications infrastructure throughout the
community and (2) make telecommunications more affordable. High-speed Internet access
through cable modem and DSL lines is generally most available in urban and suburban areas,
with limited availability in rural communities
Capacity
There are different levels of capacity to develop and use meaningful applications enabled
by technology. In some instances the capacity of existing technologies to address poverty is not
sufficient (i.e. applications not culturally relevant, don’t consider language barriers, are not
comprehensive)
Below are some technology initiatives currently underway in America to address
issues facing communities.
Using technology to support community-based industry: ACENet
Citizens in Appalachia are using interactive technologies to tie their communities into the
new world economy. The Appalachian Community Economic Network, or ACENet, was started
in 1985 to help small businesses in the impoverished rural area find new markets.
With ACENet's help, more than 20 entrepreneurs have found customers through the
Public WebMarket, a project orchestrated by the Center for Civic Networking. To help small
businesses get started, ACENet has developed a computer loan program.
Beneficiaries include the Runges, owners of a mom-and-pop machine shop operation
with three employees, who were able to increase their profitability with a computer leased from
ACENet and purchase their own, more sophisticated computer system.
Similarly, three women living in rural West Virginia used a computer leased from
ACENet to coordinate shipping and distribution for a network of 40 home-based knitters.
The network, in partnership with a larger company, uses the Internet to receive orders for
custom knitwear from all over the world. Another entrepreneur, a mother with four children,
receives email orders from around the world for herbs she grows.
Beginning in the fall of 1997, ACENet set out to train 18 students in the use of
technology, entrepreneurship, basic workplace skills, and how to be a consultant. At the end of
the year, the students will either own or work at a technology consulting and training facility, or
they may decide to move on to higher education in order to further their technology skills.
181
Training 20th-century citizens for 21st-century jobs: The South Bristol Learning Network
People are not "disadvantaged," argues John O'Hara. They are "dislocated from the
creation of wealth." What's more, he adds, "if they do not become involved in the creation of
digital wealth, they will become even more dislocated."
O'Hara, who believes that "digital wealth" will be the most valued commodity in the
global economy, secured a $1 million challenge grant from the British government in 1993 to
establish the South Bristol Learning Network (SBLN) as a private nonprofit organization
dedicated to creating an advanced information infrastructure. Dislocation was readily apparent in
South Bristol, which had lost more than 40,000 jobs in the 1980s.
SBLN began by training 50 long-term unemployed South Bristol residents in information
technologies, including email, database creation, web page development, CD-ROMs, business
marketing, and the Internet. Once trained, the staff went into the community and evaluated 300
local education groups, community centers, and businesses to assess their information needs and
better understand how to create a local information society. From these assessments, SBLN
developed a plan to raise the community's awareness of information technologies, provide
training, and build partnerships. In the process, they created a market for the trainers' new skills.
SBLN staff went on to run skill workshops, provide technical services for local businesses, and
give presentations about the Internet and information technologies. Of the 50 staffers originally
hired, only seven have returned to the unemployment rolls.
O'Hara now heads the CyberSkills Workshops, dedicated to replicating the design and
success of SBLN elsewhere in England, Europe, and the United States. More than 10,000 people
representing 1,200 organizations have participated in the workshops. The South Bristol Learning
Network model is being applied in Burlington, Vermont, at the Old North End
Community/Technology Center, a project of Chittenden Community Television (CCTV) headed
by CCTV's executive director Lauren-Glenn Davitian. CCTV and the city of Burlington started
ONE C/TC to serve as a community media center and a local center for technology training. Like
the South Bristol Learning Network, ONE C/TC recruits disenfranchised community members to
serve as trainers and staff. More recently, it began focusing more on providing job training and
information on how to develop small businesses.
A trusted service provider incorporates technology into its programs: United
Neighborhood Houses of New York
Settlement houses provide Head Start programs, health education, job training, teen
counseling, music, drama, language classes, and much more to at least half a million of New
York City's residents. So it was a safe bet that if the settlement houses made the Internet
available, people would show up and they have.
The United Neighborhood Houses of New York (UNH), an umbrella organization formed
to help the settlement movement participate in social reform efforts, launched its Information
Technology Initiative in 1991 with two overarching goals: to consolidate recordkeeping among
182
settlement house programs so that caseworkers could spend more time meeting with their clients
and coordinating services with other nearby organizations, and to provide safe, supportive,
friendly telecommunications-based resources for community use. According to technology
training coordinator Michael Roberts, UNH has helped nine settlement houses establish
computer networks and get Internet access. Each of these houses has created "neighborhoodbased family rooms" as spaces for community members to use computers.
The settlement houses introduce community members to technology by incorporating
computers into other programs. After-school tutors for children now use educational software,
for example, and job training workshops use computer databases. More than 29 settlement house
programs have integrated computers into their services.
Maxine Rockoff, who launched the program, recalls one group of 10 parents of children
who were enrolled in Head Start programs at UNH. Six did not speak English, and none had ever
used a computer before. Ten minutes after starting their first computer class, they were working
in pairs and surfing the World Wide Web. One pair found an Ecuadorian website in Spanish that
posted local newspapers and scores from regional soccer games. Another woman was so inspired
by the session she signed up for a course in English as a second language.
Community demand for computer time has been heavy. Melissa Nieves, the librarian at a
settlement house known as the University Settlement, says there is a long waiting list to use the
10 multimedia stations in the computer lab.
UNH currently is concentrating on training staff in business, email, and Internet
applications so that the settlement houses can be sure that their clients are getting the most out of
the resources provided to them. UNH family rooms are understaffed, but that is a problem that
increased funding can easily solve. The big question, according to Roberts, is not simply "how
do you weave technology into existing programs, but once you have, how do you assess if it's
working?"
Rockoff, meanwhile, now advises the city of New York on how it can streamline its
administrative requirements of service providers. In a recent interview, Rockoff reported that
"the Settlement created great places for the community to learn about technology, but we didn't
succeed as much as we wanted in reducing the paperwork load on the settlement houses."
Public institutions increasing access: Union City Schools and Libraries Online!
Many schools and libraries are using their technology facilities and their expertise in
teaching to help communities gain skill with information technologies. Examples of this include
the Union City School District in New Jersey and the libraries participating in the Libraries
Online! initiative, which became the basis of the Gates Library Foundation.
Union City's school reform effort, supported by Bell Atlantic's donations of technology
and technical support, has been one of the most successful and widely reported public-private
educational technology partnerships. In 1989, Union City schools were about to be taken over by
183
the state because of students' poor academic performance. Then the school district adopted
several reforms, including revision of its curriculum. The district formed a partnership with Bell
Atlantic so that the Christopher Columbus Intermediate School, formed in 1993 to reduce
overcrowding in other schools, would receive multimedia-on-demand interactive applications.
All Christopher Columbus students and teachers were provided with computers to use at home.
According to a 1994 report prepared by the Education Development Center, a nonprofit
research organization, student scores on achievement tests increased dramatically throughout the
district after the school reform plans were implemented, with scores at Christopher Columbus
topping the district average.
Parents as well as students have benefited. Union City has been running a Parent
University in which students and their parents sign up for classes on such topics as family math
and family science. Parents can take English as a second language and computer classes. Adriana
Burke, the Parent University coordinator, reports that these programs have been an
overwhelming success. "The parents see how we are doing a good job with their children," she
says. "They see how much the children use computers, and they want to get involved." She says
the program has inspired many parents to go back to school to improve their workplace skills.
Libraries Online!, a joint project of Microsoft Corporation, the American Library
Association, and the Center for Technology in the Public Library, was created to increase
Internet access to underserved communities through local libraries. Initially, nine library systems
in the United States received staff training, computer hardware, and cash grants worth $3
million. Participants included Charlotte-Mecklenberg County, North Carolina; Baltimore
County, Maryland; the Mississippi Library Commission; the State Library of South Dakota;
Brooklyn, New York; Tucson-Pima County, Arizona; Los Angeles, California; and Seattle and
Pend Oreille County, Washington. Each of these library systems offered training and support to
small businesses, families, and students who were not likely to have access.
According to an outside evaluation, the time and money invested in the program had been
put to good use. Of all respondents, 98 percent stated that they would return to the library to use
the computers again, 83 percent said that they "had accomplished the task they had set out to do,"
and 62 percent said that they would "take advantage of learning more about computers now that
they have access in the library." Fully 87 percent of users surveyed stated that they did not have
Internet access at home.
The success of the Libraries Online! program prompted Microsoft chair Bill Gates and
his wife, Melinda French Gates, to create The Gates Library Foundation in June 1997. The new
foundation will spend $200 million over five years to help public libraries, primarily those in
low-income areas, gain Internet access. Microsoft will supply an additional $200 million of
software for the foundation to give away. The foundation also will provide training and support
for library staff. It hopes to work with half of the 17,000 libraries in the United States and
Canada. Gates stated that his vision is that "people will take for granted that you can walk into
your local library, get the latest book, and sit down at a computer." The first round of grants,
announced in early 1998, will benefit more than 1,000 libraries, including 95 percent of the
public libraries in Alabama, the foundation's first state partner.
184
Providing support and information for community technology centers: CTCNet
Community Technology Centers' Network (CTCNet) grew out of the Playing to Win
storefront access centers founded by Toni Stone, a high school math teacher. CTCNet is
composed of more than 250 computer access centers throughout the United States and Europe.
All are committed to work toward a society where each member is "equitably empowered by
technology skills and usage." CTCNet sponsors an annual conference, and six times a year it
publishes a news update describing activities at member organizations, analyses of relevant
policy developments, and discussions of funding, software, and partnership possibilities.
Members also receive a start-up manual to help them work through the challenges of starting and
maintaining a technology center. Regional CTCNet coordinators provide technical assistance to
local centers. CTCNet has been working closely with the Department of Housing and Urban
Development on the Neighborhood Networks initiative, and many neighborhood networks will
become members of CTCNet.
Also in the works are sites sponsored by the National Urban League and Bell Atlantic.
Many of the initiatives discussed in this report are CTCNet members.
Using technology to strengthen neighborhood communications: The AFNNeighborhood
Network and MUSIC/LUV
The AFN-Neighborhood Network is a joint project of the Austin Free-Net (AFN), the
Austin Learning Academy (ALA), and the 21st Century Project at the University of Texas'
Lyndon B. Johnson (LBJ) Graduate Program in Public Policy. Together, the partners are
studying the theoretical and the practical side of increasing access in Austin.
A grant from the National Science Foundation supports eight graduate students and two
faculty members who are studying how best to implement a community access project.
Their findings have led to the Austin Access Model, a plan in which researchers and
community members will develop community computer networks in six areas of Austin. Each
network will offer training, neighborhood public access sites, and links to the AFN.
The 21st Century Project and the ALA received a $248,000 TIIAP matching grant to
create the first community network in a roughly five-block section of East Austin known as the
11th and 12th Street Corridor. Most of East Austin's 70,000 resident are poor, and many are nonEnglish-speaking.
Families participating in ALA classes on technology, English as a second language, or
parenting are working with students in the LBJ program to design the AFNNeighborhood
Network. The development of the network will take place in conjunction with the
implementation of a $9 million redevelopment grant for the areas from HUD.
185
The content will be developed specifically for and by the region by local nonprofits,
organizations, and businesses.
Linking Up Villages (LUV) is a Boston-based project designed to reinvigorate
communities through local electronic bulletin boards and software called Multi-User Sessions in
Community (MUSIC). "The LUV motto is, rather than focusing on National Information
Infrastructure, to us, NII is really about Neighborhood Information Infrastructure," says Alan
Shaw, president of MUSIC, Inc., the for-profit counterpart to LUV.
Shaw designed the MUSIC software a few years ago at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology's Media Lab. It enables participants to create an online version of their communities,
complete with "buildings" and, within the buildings, "rooms." Subject to rules adopted by
individual communities, individuals can "stroll" through this graphical "virtual neighborhood,"
obtain information on community services and activities, make their own contributions to the
database, participate in live "chat" groups, or engage in sustained discussions through various
community forums. All that's needed is a computer and a modem.
In Dorchester, a working-class Boston neighborhood, neighbors who got together online
formed a food co-op, a neighborhood watch, and a community newsletter. In Newark, New
Jersey, where a TIIAP grant helped LUV install a more extensive system, neighbors have put
together a database on adult education programs, an employment hotline, a "political action"
room, and discussion groups on everything from AIDS to recipes. Some local doctors have come
online to answer health questions.
Although LUV primarily operates in Newark, its sphere of influence has been expanding.
LUV's programs in Boston include a TIIAP grant to collaborate with the Boston Public Schools
for a project, called Networking for Student Success, which will connect six Boston high schools
and five community-based organizations and business partners, as well as the establishment of a
web-based community safety network, called Citizens For Safety. In San Francisco, LUV is
working with AT&T and the Greenlining Institute on The Signature Learning Project, which will
connect parents whose children are in elementary school with the school's teachers and
administrators. The families involved in The Signature Learning Project will receive MUSIC
software in addition to the home computers needed to run it. In its Cincinnati project, LUV is
teaming up with the Urban League of Greater Cincinnati and MYCOM in order to establish
community network access centers, called Cybervillages, in the Cincinnati area.
LUV gives away its software to needy communities, and provides technical and start-up
consultations for about $2,500. The big cost for a community wanting to develop a system is the
computers. An $8,000 grant from the Wood Foundation helped put computers into a dozen
neighborhoods in Boston. TIIAP provided $106,000 to help the Newark community purchase 35
computers and pay other start-up costs. LUV encourages communities to put computers in
libraries and other public access locations and to ask businesses to donate their used computers.
In the last two years, LUV has made great strides to ensure that all communities could reap the
benefits of their MUSIC software.
186
Originally designed to run on Macintosh systems, MUSIC is now available in PC format,
can be accessed through LUV Internet connections, and will soon be accessible through an NT
server.
Providing underserved youth with enrichment and training for the jobs of the future:
Break Away Technologies, Plugged In, and National Urban League Youth Achievement
Initiatives
Youth initiatives address a special need in low-income communities. Children and young
adults in neighborhoods struggling with persistent poverty have few opportunities for enrichment
and positive growth within their immediate neighborhoods, and their opportunities to explore the
world outside those boundaries are limited because they lack transportation, money, and
trustworthy guides. Just as adults in these communities are isolated from jobs, kids are isolated
from opportunities to grow and develop. Interactive technologies and the resources available on
the World Wide Web can offer them new learning experiences. Kids who have been shut out can
use online services to visit sites that show museums, cities, and wildlife preserves they otherwise
would not get to see, and they can communicate with people who live far beyond neighborhood
boundaries.
After-school access programs provide enrichment opportunities and training for the jobs
and schools of the future. And, just as importantly, they help teenagers constructively fill the
otherwise unstructured period between 3 p.m. and 6 p.m. (Research done at the request of the
California State Legislature, for example, has revealed that the majority of teen pregnancies are
conceived in this time period.)
In most communities, crime committed by youth is growing faster than most other types
of crime, according to Steve Snow, director of Charlotte's Web, the community access network
in Charlotte, North Carolina. "Young people see less and less reason to play by the rules," he
argues. "If young people are not engaged in society (and electronic technology is part of a matrix
of key interventions needed), then we won't be able to build the walls in the nation's suburbs high
enough."
Break Away Technologies proves the value of youth initiatives. Break Away has about
100 computers primarily Pentiums, many of which were donated by Microsoft. The center is
open from 9 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through Friday. Each day, about 400 elementary school
students from the West Los Angeles Christian Academy come to the center for workshops. Each
afternoon, about 50 teens wander in to take classes and surf the Internet. On Fridays and
Saturdays, classes and services are available for adult learners.
Break Away also works with groups in the community. A teen development group, Rites
of Passage, comes in for classes, as do various kids living in group homes. Break Away leads
young people through a series of technology courses, each emphasizing character development
and personal responsibility, as well as technology. As students advance through computer
classes, they take on more responsibility, working first as study partners and then as mentors.
187
CIOF Community Technology Centers
Computers in Our Future is a four year $7.5 million demonstration project designed to
increase access to technology and training opportunities for young people in low-income
communities across California. Operating in and across eleven sites spread throughout the state,
the project has also provided linkages to job training and employment, served as a community
resource for technology, and established a statewide community voice to advocate for public
polices that strengthen and support local communities. Initial funding for the project was
provided through a grant from The California Wellness Foundation.
Management and technical assistance for the CIOF project has been provided by
Community Partners, CompuMentor and The Children’s Partnership The 11 Computers In Our
Future sites have established community technology access and training centers in low-income
neighborhoods across California. Their locations range from Siskiyou County in the north to San
Ysidro at the southern border. With grants of $525,000 over four years from The California
Wellness Foundation, sites are developing and supporting community technology centers that
increase access to computer technology, teach marketable skills and enhance job placement
opportunities.
Each site will also serve as a community technology resource and promote a public
discussion about technology issues. For more information, visit www.ciof.org.
Computers in Our Future program sites include:
Career Resources Development Center
Career Resources Development Center is a private, nonprofit organization with a
33-year history of providing educational programs to immigrants, refugees and other
disadvantaged populations in San Francisco. Located in San Francisco's Tenderloin
district, CRDC partners with homeless and runaway youth services agencies. CRDC
primarily serves Chinese, African American, Latino, and Southeast Asian youth and
young adults.
Center for Virtual Research, University of California, Riverside
The University of California, Riverside, Community Digital Initiative (CDI) has
established a computer and educational center in the Caesar Chavez Community Center
in Riverside. The Center for Virtual Research and the Center for Social and Behavioral
Science Research in the College of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences at U.C.
Riverside are directing the initiative in partnership with community based organizations
in Riverside.
Central Union High School District
The Central Union High School District is located in El Centro, a city of 39,000
in the Imperial Valley in the southeast corner of California near the U.S.- Mexico border.
The Central Union High School District has established a community technology center
at Desert Oasis High School, a school that provides an alternative education program for
high school students and serves as the site for the District's adult education program.
188
C.T. Learning, Inc.
C.T. Learning, Inc. is a Fresno-based nonprofit organization working to empower
residents of low-income communities through literacy and citizenship programs. It is the
lead agency in a collaborative of faith-based institutions including Catholic, Episcopal
and Baptist churches and the Fresno Interfaith Sponsoring Committee. It primarily serves
African American, Latino, and Southeast Asian youth and young adults.
Karuk Tribe of California
The Karuk Tribe is a federally recognized Indian Tribe located in the remote
Siskiyou County, near the Oregon border. The economy of the area has been adversely
impacted by the decline of the timber industry, and 85 percent of its 4,000 residents are
considered low-income by Federal standards. Through the Karuk Community
Development Corporation, the Karuk Tribe and a broad spectrum of community
organizations and representatives are working together to develop and implement
economic revitalization strategies.
Plumas County Health Services
The Computers In Our Future program, administered by Plumas County Health
Services, established four community technology centers in this rural northeastern county
that is bordered on the east by the Sierra Nevadas. Collaborative partners include Plumas
Children's Network, Almanor Basin Community Center, Portola Healthy Start,
Roundhouse Council, and the Alliance for Workforce Development, Inc. From January
1998 through November 1999, Plumas CIOF had 1,627 free access participants and
reached 22% of the 14-23 year old age group in the four local communities.
Santa Barbara City College
The Continuing Education Division of Santa Barbara City College is Santa
Barbara's primary public sector provider of computer and technology-related instruction
and delivers both English language and bilingual instruction in computer applications and
vocational education. The Division has used its knowledge of starting up computer
centers to convert two additional City College labs into open access centers based on the
CIOF model.
San Diego Housing Commission/Casa Familiar
The San Diego Housing Commission is the public housing authority for the city
of San Diego. The Commission has teamed with Casa Familiar, a local community-based
organization, to increase access to computers, training and jobs for youth in San Ysidro, a
low-income community of 34,000 with no high school or major employers. The computer
center is located with an existing teen center and a fitness facility.
Women's Economic Agenda Project
The Women's Economic Agenda Project (WEAP) in Oakland is a not-for-profit
organization founded in 1982 working to help women develop leadership skills and
become economically self-sufficient. WEAP is using the Computers In Our Future
189
funding to help lift women out of poverty by helping them develop computer and
technology-related skills.
COMPUTER LEARNING CENTER/COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM OF
EVANSVILLE AND VANDERBURGH COUNTY, INC.
The Community Action Program of Evansville and Vanderburgh provides computer
training at its learning center, which is funded by Health and Human Services/Head Start. Clients
of any age can work on computers for assistance with math, reading, or GED study. Computers
are also used for keyboarding classes and for use of the Internet.
The Texas Computer Education Association
The Texas Computer Education Association is the largest state organization
devoted to the use of technology in education. Founded in 1980, the organization has
been very active throughout Texas supporting instructional technology. Our primary
focus is on integrating technology into the K-12 environment and providing our members
with state-of-the-art information through conferences, workshops, newsletters, the
Internet, and collaborations with higher education and business. TCEA is affiliated with
the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) which provides a two-way
channel of information throughout the world.
TCEA is divided into twenty areas across Texas so that the needs of our members
can be more easily met. These twenty areas are defined by the Regional Education
Service Centers. We encourage our members to stay in touch with the area directors so
that everyone will be an active member. There are numerous area conferences and
activities in which educators and students can participate, as well as our large annual state
conference. The conferences and contests will link you with other professionals in your
geographic area as well as across the state.
2.3 Technology in Human Services Delivery Infrastructure
Organizational silos and independently conceived and operated programs have led to a
complex technological environment in Human Services. Many technology solutions are largescale, complex, based on outdated technology, and designed to support single programs and as a
result reinforce the “stove-piping” of program administration. The technology needs of Human
Services agencies have been met via extensive customizations, commercial technology or “inhouse” projects within the context of organizational and program silos. In many instances, the
technology is antiquated and requires a huge expense for maintenance, while offering little
flexibility. Further, systems have not been historically built to serve or empower communities or
individuals.
Rather systems have been built to meet program objectives. Funding and administration
for most human services programs are tightly confined to specific types of needs. A large
number of programs, each with unique eligibility and business rules, provide a wide variety of
190
solutions for many societal ills. However, for citizens to take advantage of these programs, they
must figure out which agency to contact (a challenging task, given the excessive number of
programs) or rely on a single point of contact within government for help to sort through these
services. Unfortunately, human services agencies have struggled to create one-stop shops that
empower case managers with the ability to simultaneously assess eligibility for multiple
programs and provide coordinated service interventions.
While public policy makers are beginning to recognize that government programs can be
more effective if they are individualized to the unique needs of each family situation, the one
size fits all approach is ingrained into the infrastructure due to the monolithic programs and
information systems. For several years, the U.S. government provided funding for state and local
government for new systems, only if they transferred operational systems from other
jurisdictions. However, because the business rules vary so much from state to state, even these
so-called "transfer systems" required massive investment and time for customization, with little
reduction in risk. Further, government procurement processes demanding "turn-key" projects
compounded the risk and have discouraged many jurisdictions from attempting new systems to
take advantage of the flexibility granted by the 1996 welfare reforms.
The primary entities currently addressing issues of poverty and their associated
technology use include the federal government, state government, local governments, private and
not-for profit agencies, and faith based organizations.
2.4 Characteristics of Technology in Human Services Organizations
Characteristics of the current Human Services environment technologically are as follows
Legacy Systems
Human Services agencies (HSA’s) have a variety of legacy automation systems. These
systems are generally mainframe systems that have been in existence for more than a few years.
HSAs invested valuable resources to develop mainframe systems that were once on the leading
edge of technology. However, technology continued to move forward at an incredible rate of
speed, and mainframe systems developed only a short time before became the "legacy"
mainframe system of today. Problems associated with legacy systems are:
 Lack of adequate documentation.
 Programming styles and standards.
 Enhancements to customize a system to meet the needs of one organization reduced the
potential for sharing technology among the HSAs.
Silos of Data
Organizational structures and independently conceived and operated programs have led
to silos of data throughout government and non-government entities. Barriers such as large data
volumes, quality and consistency of data, and complex, stovepipe legacy systems plague
Government enterprises as they attempt to implement strategic initiatives that support data
191
sharing. In an increasingly information-centric, collaboration-dependent world, agency
performance depends on the ability to integrate, move and use data confidently and securely.
Costly Systems /complex Interfaces
Complex interfaces among multiple generations of hardware and operating systems are
commonplace. The interfaces and limited in their reach and serve the silo rather than the client.
Additionally, many of the system currently in operation are costly.
California’s current eligibility costs average $337 per eligible person across all three
programs. Pennsylvania’s eligibility costs for the three programs average $68 per eligible person.
Pennsylvania has adopted an Internet-based eligibility system. Michigan’s eligibility costs
average $79 per eligible person. Florida’s eligibility costs average $144 per eligible person.
Florida is going through an eligibility vendor procurement process from which Florida estimates
that it will reduce eligibility costs by 15–25 percent. New York state eligibility costs average
$171 per eligible person across the three programs. Texas is in the process of developing of an
integrated eligibility system using Internet-based applications with significant savings to its
current system.
Fragmented Data Management
Historically, it was not considered necessary for disparate systems in a heterogeneous
environment to inter-communicate, or if it was, expediency came first. Now there is an ever
increasing requirement to ensure that data sources can talk to one another so that a complete
“picture” is available.
Duplicate Processes - Service Provision
Processes are duplicated across different systems and have the potential to generate large
volumes of inconsistent data.
Access Issues
Access to existing information technology systems is governed by the ‘silo” that owns
the system. For the most part, information is limited to the organization or individual managing
the silo. Access to the Internet varies by community and individual.
Lack of Standards
There are few common standards within the human services infrastructure. There are no
common data structures, no geographic wide data, and access issues throughout.
Infrastructure Issues
Infrastructure is not in place to allow all components of the Human services enterprise to
participate in the process. Many organizations have a huge investment in proprietary server
designs which require a lot of care and feeding at a great cost.
2.5 Technology Actions – Government
192
2.5.1 Leveraging the Internet
Internet Technology has been used by Government to provide or publish information that
may benefit individuals, communities and society
Governments generate huge volumes of information, much of it potentially useful to
individuals and businesses. The Internet and other advanced communications technologies are
being used to bring this information quickly and more directly to citizens. “Publish”
implementations of e-government enable citizens and businesses to readily access government
information without having to travel to government offices, stand in long lines or wait for
government service workers. Publish sites seek to disseminate information about government
and information compiled by government to as wide an audience as possible.
Internet Technology has been used by Government to broaden interactivity
Internet sites that Publish information, however rich in content, are just a first step.
Egovernment has the potential to involve citizens in the governance process by engaging them in
interaction with policymakers throughout the policy cycle and at all levels of government.
Strengthening civic engagement contributes to building public trust in government. Interactive egovernment involves two-way communications, starting with basic functions like email contact
information for government officials or feedback forms that allow users to submit comments on
legislative or policy proposals.
Internet Technology has been used by Government to transact government services
available online
Governments can go further, by creating websites that allow users to conduct transactions
online. Just as the private sector using the Internet to offer e-commerce services, governments
can do the same with their services. Potential cost savings, accountability through information
logs and productivity improvements will be important drivers. A transact website offers a direct
link to government services, available at any time. In the past, government services such as
renewal of drivers licenses required long waits.
Innovations such as citizen service kiosks and home-based internet access bring egovernment directly to citizens.
Achieving E-Government for All provides the latest results on how governments are
responding to the serious challenge of making their online services accessible and relevant to all
people, regardless of their abilities, skills or economic situation. The study concluded that
information on most government websites is skewed to the needs and abilities of highly educated
English speakers. For low-literate populations, the Web remains an untapped resource. People
with disabilities, such as those with visual impairments, continue to struggle with government
websites that don’t address their needs. And the emerging practice of fee-based online services
193
penalizes the poor, who would reasonably expect essential information and services to be
available at no cost.
Tens of millions of Americans cannot avail themselves of essential services, since
government information and services are not offered appropriately to accommodate their needs:
 112 million Americans were not online in early 2002, according to the U.S. Department
of Commerce’s A Nation Online report;
 90 million adult Americans are defined as low literate, based on the findings from the
National Assessment of Adult Literacy (1992);
 53 million Americans have some level of disability, says the U.S. Census Bureau (1997);
many of whom (e.g., people with visual impairments) have trouble interfacing with most
websites;
 25 million adult residents speak a non-English language in the home, data also from the
U.S. Census.
“As government officials transfer day-to-day responsibility of their websites to technicians
and webmasters, there is often benign neglect of underserved citizens whose needs may be
outside the realm of the experience of well-educated, high-tech professionals. This reality
reflects less on the webmaster and more on higher-level decision-makers who fail to give priority
to social inclusion as a primary duty of government of, by and for the people.”
City, state and national governments in the United States have made considerable progress at
getting services online. According to recently released Brown University studies, 68 percent of
federal sites, 44 percent of state ones and 48 percent of city government websites offer online
services. These numbers are up over recent years and demonstrate the success officials have
achieved in bringing the advantages of technology to businesses and slices of the general public.
Despite the extensive progress made in upgrading government offerings, several pressing
policy issues remain for government officials. For example, not all Americans are sharing in the
fruits of technology: there remain well-documented differences in access and digital literacy,
with poorer people and communities of color being less likely to have Internet access or to make
use of electronic information and services. Reports such as the Benton Foundation’s Bringing a
Nation Online and the Pew Internet and American Life project’s The Ever-Shifting Internet
Population demonstrate that there is still much work to be done when it comes to bridging the
digital divide.
In addition, there are challenges concerning the accessibility of digital government for people
with disabilities. Individuals who have a visual disability, a hearing impairment or who face
other physical challenges do not have the same access to online content as the non-disabled.
Many government agencies are not designing their pages in accessible ways or are not taking
advantage of technologies that facilitate usage. With the U.S. Department of Education’s
National Adult Literacy Survey revealing that half of Americans are reading at the eighth-grade
level or lower, many websites are also inaccessible because they are written at too high a level
for many visitors to comprehend.
Complex words and sentences limit the utility of digital government and deny the advantages
of e-government to large populations of American society.
194
Data presented in the Brown University e-government studies of city, state and national
government highlight six policy issues facing the public sector. In particular, (1) disability
access, (2) readability, (3) non-English language accessibility, (4) interactivity, (5) equity of
access across agencies and (6) user fees and premium sites.
1. Disability Access
In this year’s study, 47 percent of federal sites satisfied the W3C standard of
accessibility, 33 percent of state sites did and 20 percent of city government sites met the test.
With the stricter Section 508 guidelines, 22 percent of federal sites were in compliance,
compared to 24 percent of state sites and 13 percent of city websites.
The wide variance in compliance across levels of governments suggests the need for
education and stronger enforcement action in e-government. City governments run considerably
behind state and federal sites in making their sites compliant with disability standards. The
federal government needs to provide resources for this policy area so that all levels of
government can provide disability access.
There has been a federal push in recent decades to improve accessibility for traditional
"bricks and mortar" government, but not the same kind of effort for digital government. This
interferes with the ability of the disabled to take full advantage of the e-government progress that
has been made in recent years.
Beyond the governmental area, nonprofit groups can play a constructive role by
publicizing “best practices” in terms of website accessibility, such as the CPB/WGBH National
Center for Accessible Media. Agencies that do an exemplary job should be officially recognized
for their accomplishments. They deserve financial incentives that encourage them to keep
working hard in this area and give lower-performing sites incentives to do better at providing
disability access. Indeed, in these trying fiscal times for government at all levels, the need for
direct, categorical support for making e-government accessible to all is highly apparent and
underscored by the findings of this study.
2. Readability
Literacy is defined by the U.S. Department of Education as “using printed and written
information to function in society, to achieve one's goals, and to develop one's knowledge and
potential.” As noted earlier, about half of the American population reads at the eighth-grade level
or lower. A number of writers have evaluated text from health warning labels to government
documents to see if they are written at a level that can be understood by citizens. The fear, of
course, is that too many government documents and information sources are written at too high
a level for citizens to comprehend.
195
Since government websites are text based, clearly readability is a basic consideration if
users are to comprehend what’s online. To see how government websites fare, we used the
Flesch-Kincaid test of the grade-level readability of the front page of each government website
that we studied. The Flesch-Kincaid test is a standard reading tool evaluator and is the one used
by the U.S. Department of Defense. It is computed by dividing the average sentence length
(number of words divided by number of sentences) by the average number of syllables per word
(number of syllables divided by the number of words).
The average grade readability level of American government websites is at the eleventh
grade, which is well above the comprehension of many Americans. Sixty-three percent of
federal sites read at the twelfth-grade level, while 68 percent of state sites are at that level, and 70
percent of city sites are legible at the twelfth-grade level. Only 12 percent of state and federal
sites and eight percent of municipal sites fell at the eighth-grade level or below, which is the
reading level of a major segment of the American public.
Inattention to readability limits the usefulness of government websites for visitors who
cannot comprehend online information. In particular, reports, databases and online services need
a level of readability that matches the skills of the target audience. Officials must recognize the
importance of communicating with a broad range of visitors with different levels of educational
attainment and literacy.
Those who are responsible for authoring and editing government documents must
integrate content readability into their editorial processes. It will require a program of training,
skill building and incentives to equip and encourage agency staff to write and edit in a simple
and readable style. Agencies must realize that achieving readability will not come without
financial cost.
In our research, we found little correlation between agency type and readability level.
Agencies that served individuals who were generally less educated paradoxically often had
higher grade-level readability than those whose content might attract more highly educated users.
So clearly much more attention needs to be paid to readability as an important accessibility
barrier for government websites. Much like disability access, readability should be considered an
integral aspect of website accessibility and not an add-on.
3. Non-English Language Accessibility
Some people who visit government websites do not speak or read English or speak/read it
poorly -- over 25 million people in the U.S., for example, prefer to speak a language other than
English at home. The Brown report indicated that governments in the United States are making
slow progress in providing foreign language accessibility. In 2003, 40 percent of federal sites, 12
percent of state sites and 16 percent of city sites offered some type of foreign-language
translation. These numbers are up from previous years for state and federal sites.
In 2000, only four percent of these sites featured foreign-language translation. This rose
to six percent in 2001, seven percent in 2002 and 13 percent in 2003.
196
4. Interactivity
One of the most promising aspects of e-government is its ability to bring citizens closer
to their governments. In our examination of government websites, we looked for several key
features that would facilitate this connection between government and citizen: email contact
information, comment or feedback sections, automatic email updates and the ability to
personalize websites to the visitor’s particular area of interest.
We found mixed results, depending on the particular kind of outreach. Most sites provide
email contact information (93 percent of federal sites, 90 percent of state sites and 71 percent of
city sites). These numbers are up over preceding years. In terms of areas to post comments or
provide feedback through surveys or chat rooms (other than through email), 52 percent of federal
sites, 23 percent of state sites and 35 percent of city sites provide some means for visitors to offer
reactions, suggestions or criticisms.
Automatic updates and website personalization still are relatively infrequent. Only 32
percent of federal sites, 11 percent of state sites and eight percent of city sites have a means to
send automatic updates on specific issues. This information can be in the form of a monthly enewsletter highlighting new information or email alerts notifying citizens when something
relevant to their area of interest has become available. Some states allow visitors to designate
themselves as students, tourists or businesses and customize the website to their particular
interest. This gives visitors more power over website content and allows them to use the
technology in a nonlinear manner. They can search and manipulate information in a manner that
serves their particular needs. However, very few sites – five percent of federal sites, two percent
of state sites, and four percent of city sites -- offer any type of personalization feature, whereby
website visitors can register preferences that allow them to customize the site to their particular
interests. This may not be a deficiency on the part of government websites, as the technology
behind personalization of websites is highly controversial. Often, personalization is
accomplished through “cookies,” which are used to identify users and store information about
them. Many privacy advocates, though, view cookies as an unwarranted intrusion into civil
liberties.
Feedback mechanisms are important for websites because most agencies do not have
budget resources to conduct surveys or focus groups. Some government officials have told us
their only feedback mechanism is their telephone complaint line. When complaints rise, they
know they have a problem, and they seek to address it.
Unfortunately, this puts government in a reactive mode. Officials cannot respond to
problems until specific issues have been highlighted. Rather than merely reacting to complaints,
it would be more useful to be proactive and develop feedback devices such as online surveys and
satisfaction forms that provide regular, ongoing, and systematic feedback on website materials.
Volunteer citizen advisory boards could be formed to solicit participation and feedback from
concerned stakeholders. Such efforts serve to put government officials in a stronger position to
direct future e-government efforts.
197
5. Access Across Agencies
Accessibility varies considerably by agency type. At the state and federal levels, there are
interesting differences across agencies in terms of disability, data, online services and
readability. Economic development sites were the least likely to be accessible to people with
disabilities. Health and housing agencies were the most likely to offer non-English language
translation. Health departments were the most likely to have databases, while budget departments
were the least likely.
Economic development sites were the most likely to offer online services, while budget
departments were the least likely. Readability also varied by the type of agency. For example,
corrections departments had the highest percentage (83 percent) of websites written at the
twelfth-grade level. Other agencies that have a high percentage of sites written at the twelfthgrade level are budget (81 percent), economic development (79 percent), elementary education
(74 percent), housing (69 percent), health (69 percent), human services (67 percent) and taxation
(46
percent).
For
more
details,
see
the
full
e-government
report
at
www.insidepolitics.org/egovt03us.pdf
(Adobe
Acrobat
version)
or
www.insidepolitics.org/egovt03us.html (accessible HTML version).
The mismatch between agency type and accessibility and readability suggests the need
for government officials to recognize their mission and tailor their e-government activities to the
nature of their clientele. Readability levels should match the bulk of the visitors who make use of
the agency’s website. Disability access should be part and parcel of universal design, and should
be unvarying by agency type. Government offices should seek to be comprehensive in posting
information, reports and data online; however, this should not preclude other means of accessing
information, such as printed materials and automated telephone systems.
6. User Fees and Premium Sections
The final aspect of equity and accessibility concerns financial barriers to e-government
use. With governments at all levels facing fiscal difficulties, we have been charting the extent to
which public-sector websites have started to move toward user fees or premium sections
requiring payment for entry. A user fee is an extra fee tacked on to the ordering of an electronic
report or service, while a premium section fee is a payment or subscription required for entry
into particular areas of a website, such as business services, access to databases or viewing up-tothe-minute information.
In general, we have not found that American governments at any level are relying very
much on user fees or premium section charges. None of the federal sites, three percent of state
sites and seven percent of city sites employed user fees. Less than one percent of the national,
state or city sites had premium sections requiring payment for entry or access to a portion of the
website. This is encouraging because user fees and premium sections create the possibility of a
two-tier society based on those who can afford information and those who cannot. E-government
198
should not contain barriers to usage based on the ability to pay. Bricks-and-mortar agencies have
developed a variety of ways to serve different members of the population. Libraries provide
books to diffuse knowledge through public access.
Public areas in agencies allow access by those who do not have computers. It should be
noted that online financial transactions, whether government-related or not, may pose challenges
to low-income people who do not possess a credit card or those who more generally may not feel
comfortable providing financial information online. It is known that comfort levels with
electronic transactions is a function of the length of time a user has been online, such that new
Internet users are less likely to reveal personal information than those for whom the Internet is
now second nature. Alternative methods of payment and face-to-face transactions are still
paramount for a large segment of the population.
User fees and premium sites compromise the principles of equal access to government by
making it more difficult for the poor and needy to use public resources. Government agencies
should continue their general avoidance of these fees. In an era of fiscal tightness, it is tempting
to expand user fees and premium sites as a way to finance e-government.
This temptation should be resisted because it undermines equity of access and the ability
of governments to attract new users to their websites. Anything that constrains public access
compromises the ultimate goals of e-government.
The Internet is a tool with the potential to help all Americans become more efficient,
effective, and productive members of society. Officials should redouble their efforts to make
sure e-government is open to all and that vulnerable populations are not further marginalized
from the benefits of technology.
2.5.2 Legislative actions in 2003 to address the digital divide
Despite record state budget shortfalls throughout the country, there was still notable
progress in increasing technology access and training opportunities. Probably the most
ambitious policy development occurred in California, where community technology advocates
pushed through a bill that created a Digital Divide Grant Program with a sustainable source of
funding. In addition, other states made strides to address technology access by creating
committees or task forces to study the issue, make recommendations, and report back to the
legislature.
In Cleveland, public agencies and community groups connected to existing but unused
high-speed bandwidth to serve their broadband needs. Following is a snapshot of policies—both
legislation or regulatory actions—that took place in 200314.
Create a Statewide Digital Divide Grant Program
199
In California, community technology advocates and wireless companies succeeded in
their two-year effort to create a Digital Divide Grant Program. This program was created through
legislation,
AB
855
(http://info.
sen.ca.gov/pub/bill/asm/ab_08510900/ab_855_bill_20031011_chaptered.html), which centralized the process through which
wireless companies lease state-owned property where they can place cellular towers to increase
wireless coverage. In exchange for using state property, wireless companies pay the state a fee. A
portion of this fee, 15%, goes into a fund that supports community technology programs engaged
in Digital Divide projects, such as creating online content, providing access to computers and the
Internet, and offering technology training to youth. The revenue generated for this fund has been
projected to range between $3 million and $6 million per year.
Establish a commission or task force to study the advanced telecommunications needs of
the state and make recommendations to address these needs
The
Louisiana
Legislature
passed
SCR
91
(http://www.legis.state.la.us/leg_docs/03RS/CVT7/OUT/0000KS91.PDF), which created a joint
committee of the House Committee on Agriculture, Forestry, Aquaculture, and Rural
Development and the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Forestry, Aquaculture, and Rural
Development. This joint committee will identify the availability of Internet access in Louisiana’s
rural communities and to study issues and make recommendations related to solving problems
encountered with providing reliable Internet access to Louisiana’s rural communities.
Similarly,
in
North
Carolina,
H.B.
1194
(http://www.ncga.
state.nc.us/html2003/bills/AllVersions/House/H 1194vf.html) was signed into law. This bill
creates the e-NC Authority for purposes of managing, overseeing, promoting, and monitoring
efforts to provide rural counties and distressed urban areas with high-speed broadband Internet
access. The Authority also serves as the central Internet access policy planning body for rural
and urban distressed areas of the State. The Authority is also charged with communicating and
coordinating with state, regional, and local agencies and private entities in order to continue the
development of a coordinated Internet access policy for the citizens of North Carolina.
Oklahoma passed a similar law, SB 556 (http://www2.lsb.state.ok.us/200304SB/sb556_enr.rtf). This bill commissions the Task Force on Oklahoma’s Communications
Infrastructure and charges it with conducting a study of the communications infrastructure in
Oklahoma. The study is supposed to include, but not be limited to, the following: 1) An
overview of the existing communications infrastructure, including both public and private
components, with particular emphasis on Internet access; 2) Assessment of the strengths and
weaknesses of the existing infrastructure, including issues such as interoperability, efficiency and
impact on economic development; and 3) Development of recommendations for creating a
communications infrastructure which will provide a seamless delivery system for voice, data and
video capacity and for Internet access throughout all areas of the state.
Provide advanced telecommunications discounts for Community Based Organizations
(CBOs)
200
The
California
Public
Utilities
Commission
approved
T-16742
(http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUBLISHED/FINAL_RESOLUTION/26074.htm), a resolution that
affirmed
SB
1863’s
(http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/01-02/bill/sen/sb_18511900/sb_1863_bill_20020828_chaptered.html)
intent
of
increasing
advanced
telecommunications discounts for CBOs to 50%. In addition, it streamlined the process through
which CBOs apply for discounts, included DSL as a discounted service, and removed the limit
on the number of services that qualify for the discount. As a result, this resolution expanded the
scope of SB 1863 so that more CBOs can take advantage of this program to save overhead costs.
In addition,
the
California
Legislature
passed into law SB 720
(http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/sen/sb_0701-0750/sb_720_bill_20030925_chaptered.html),
which allows CBOs to apply for a one-time discount of 90% for installation costs and connection
to advanced communications infrastructure (so-called Internet 2). The intent of this bill is to
allow CBOs access to highspeed and reliable Internet access, and, as a result, access to the rich
after-school curriculum that requires a high-speed connection and is used by schools.
Include community technology needs as part of statewide or regional development plans
To create economic opportunities in Illinois (http://www.commerce.state.il.us/), the
governor facilitated the creation of regional development plans. By dividing the state into ten
distinctive regions that share similar economic traits, the state hopes to track more effectively
economic conditions and trends, rapidly respond to opportunities and challenges, and customize
regional development initiatives with greater precision. These plans recognized and included the
development of a broadband infrastructure and investment in workforce training programs in 21st
Century Skills.
Provide wireless Internet access
In
Central
Los
Angeles,
the
Bresee
Foundation
(http://www.bresee.org/pages/techoverview.html) began offering free wireless Internet access in
its recently-opened park. Situated in a region of Los Angeles with very few green spaces, the
park offers residents not only a place to congregate, but also a place to access the Internet. The
Bresee Foundation received funding from both the city of Los Angeles and the state of California
to develop this park, but absorbed the cost of Internet access by purchasing several Apple
Airports to extend Internet access to outside the building.
Similarly, The Wireless Community Project of the Center for Neighborhood Technology
(http://www.cnt.org/) aims to demonstrate how wireless Internet access can work in two
underserved areas of Chicago. Recently funded by the federal Technology Opportunities
Program (http://www.ntia.doc.gov/top/), this project will provide wireless Internet in Chicago’s
ring-city, Elgin, and in downstate West Frankfurt.
Develop resource and referral networks
201
Illinois
passed
the
211
Human
Services
Collaboration
Act
(http://www.legis.state.il.us/legislation/publicacts/fulltext.asp?name=093-0613), which will
coordinate efforts of eight state agency boards to create 211 Plans in ten Illinois telephone area
code areas. 211 is a statewide non-emergency phone number that provides information about
government and nonprofit services and referrals to human services agencies. This network will
allow community technology programs to promote their services, such as afterschool programs
or workforce training.
Utilize dark fiber
Nonprofit organizations and public entities (universities, city, schools, public TV
network, etc.) in Cleveland created a consortium, called “One Cleveland”
(http://onecleveland.org), to acquire and utilize several rings of dark fiber—fiber that has been
laid in the ground but not used—through which they will offer affordable gigabit network access
throughout the county. Members of this consortium will use the network to deliver advanced
information technology capabilities to achieve community priorities for learning, job training,
research, economic development, and community access to culture, healthcare and egovernment.
Offer tax credits
In Michigan, Grand Rapids Community Media Center (http://digitizethis.grcmc.org), a
community media center that offers access to TV, computers, and the Internet, received a boost
in their fundraising efforts by utilizing a favorable determination on a state tax credit question.
The state attorney general’s office determined that financial contributions to community
television could be considered a tax credit. In other words, by treating a financial contribution as
a tax credit, the donor could reduce his or her tax liability, or taxable income, thus allowing the
donation to be subtracted from the donor’s pre-tax income. This tax credit was used by GRCMC
as an incentive for donors to contribute to the organization during their year-end fundraising
drive.
The research that resulted in “How Cities and States Are Bridging the Technology Gap”
was conducted by The Children’s Partnership between May and November 2001. It included a
review of available analyses on the subject, extensive Web research, and dozens of interviews
with informants in the public and private [sic].
2.5.3 Nationwide trends in addressing the digital divide
This analysis looks at the level of activity and the nationwide trends in city and state
attempts to address the Digital Divide. The Digital Divide has narrowed in some cities and states,
but remains a critical problem for many low-income communities across the country
(http://search.ntia.doc.gov/pdf/fttn00.pdf). It also provides a sampling of the varied approaches,
202
involving the public and private sectors, to achieve widespread technology access and
competence.
1. A New Emphasis on Protecting Our Rights in Cyberspace. While many states are
focused on harnessing the benefits of technology (through e-government, e-trade and
commerce, and tax policies that are supportive), there is even greater activity around
protecting consumers and businesses from the misuses of technology.
2. From E-government to Privacy and Public Safety. In 2000, the vast majority of bills
signed into law by states grappled with e-government; in 2001, attention to Internet
privacy issues dominated the action. Notably more legislative attention was focused on
privacy (including financial, Internet, medical, identity theft, consumer credit, and
unsolicited commercial e-mail) than on the second-most active subject-- public safety
(including computer crimes, harming minors, and content accessible in schools and
libraries).
3. Energetic Responses at the Local Level. Cities and counties are proving to be an active
and fertile testing ground for leadership on Digital Divide issues. With so many residents
in central cities now on the wrong side of the Digital Divide, the problem is very
immediate. National leadership groups representing cities, counties, and mayors have
made this area a priority, devoted time at national conferences to it, and established
policy
to
support
city-led
efforts
(http://usmayors.org/uscm/resolutions/69th_conference/). Efforts by local communities
often have the benefit of being carried out on a manageable scale, while testing ideas that
can be applied on a statewide basis.
4. Promising but Isolated Responses. While there is a growing awareness of the Digital
Divide among city and state decision-makers, there are only isolated efforts to solve the
problem. Many are analyzed in “Examples of Cities and States.” They run a wide gamut
from authorizing studies or task forces to establishing grant programs or a state authority
to build the infrastructure for high-speed Internet access. Ironically, there seemed to be an
underlying assumption that all residents would have access to the benefits e-government
sought to offer. Yet, 75% of Americans with annual incomes less than $15,000 lack
access to the Internet, as do 67% of individuals with annual incomes between $15,000 $24,999 (http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/dn/anationonline2.pdf).
5. Community-based Solutions Neglected. Where the Digital Divide is being addressed by
cities and states, much of the focus is on bridging the gap in schools, with decisionmakers viewing the subject as a school technology issue rather than an equity issue.
Attention to access through other community institutions is very rare, although a few
beacon cities and states are starting to point the way. Interestingly, where schools have
made particular progress in technology, leaders are beginning to understand that
technology use by youth has to extend beyond the schools and into the communities
(http://www.edweek.org/sreports/).
203
6. Wide-Ranging Goals Prompt Action. Where city and state leaders are promoting
Digital Divide initiatives, they are prompted by a variety of goals. These include
workforce development, e-government or e-commerce, building city or state
infrastructures, reducing crime or gang activity, welfare to work, increasing school
achievement, youth development, and civic participation.
7. Digital Divide Leaders in Search of Allies. Although a core cadre is starting to build of
city and state leaders working across states to help one another or seek technical
assistance jointly, this network is still fledgling. Leaders report feeling isolated, a
situation that is particularly worrisome to them because most lack expertise in this
uncharted and highly technical area. Now seems to be the time when a learning
community can be forged among public and private sector leaders working on a similar
mission.
8. Ingenuity in Redeploying Resources. The fiscal constraints, which few states
experienced in 2000, forced many states in 2001 to find new ways to respond to the
Digital Divide. Those cities and states that exercised leadership usually did so by
redeploying existing personnel or facilities, redirecting existing funding sources toward
this new challenge, and creating partnerships with business, philanthropy, and the
nonprofit sector.
Below are some other examples of current technology used in Human Services. These
examples are intended to represent the range of technological solutions currently deployed in
Human services.
2.6 Current Applications of Technology in Human Services
Although the majority of technological solutions in place in local agencies are legacybased silos, there are examples of innovations taking place currently to leverage emerging
technologies. This listing is not an exhaustive listing.
E-Government
Many local, state and federal governments are currently experimenting with “egovernment,” meaning the ability to access government services and get government information
electronically. E-government can become more productive and cost-effective by increasing the
opportunities for citizens to access information, fill out forms, pay bills, and sign-up for services
from any computer, at any hour of the day. E-government is also seen as a new way to engage
citizens in civic participation and encourage a more “user-friendly” image of the democratic (and
bureaucratic) process. Along with ensuring that no one is left out, the goal for effective egovernment is to design web sites that encourage using online services, market those sites to be
sure that people are aware of what is available, and to respond quickly to improve and expand on
e-government services.
204
Nebraska’s N-FOCUS System
N-FOCUS is a fully computerized eligibility determination and case management system
that joins together twenty-seven programs. This system has integrated child welfare, case
management functions and built in a client/server environment. “The system makes use of rulesbased artificial intelligence to determine eligibility for multiple programs, including: Income
Support Programs (TANF, Food Stamps, Medicaid); Employment First and Food Stamp
Employment and Training, Child Care, Emergency Assistance, Adult Protective Services intake,
Developmental Disabilities case management, Children and Family Services (Child Welfare
programs), Social Services for the Aged and Disabled and for Children and Families, Refugee
Resettlement, Medicaid Waiver Programs”3
The structure provides intensive case management, includes resources and services, and
utilizes the system to make payments to clients and their providers. N-FOCUS automatically
interfaces with other state and national systems, such as the: “State Bureau of Motor Vehicles,
Unemployment Compensation, the Internal Revenue Service, and the Social Security
Administration.”3
Louisiana’s Department of Health and Hospitals
Recently Louisiana's Department of Health and Hospitals faced two major challenges.
The first was to design and develop a Medicaid eligibility system that would meet the
requirements of the eligibility determination process, not just for today but the future. The
second was to achieve this in a short period of time, in this case 19 months—an extremely
aggressive timeframe for such a project.
Either of these challenges alone would have been daunting. Addressing both was a
substantial undertaking. Yet, the Medicaid Eligibility Data System (MEDS) was implemented in
July, and is now being used statewide in all eligibility offices.
Prior to implementing the new MEDS system, changes to a welfare program that affected
Medicaid would result in computer programmers having to modify the system.
Modifications to the system required testing, frequently a complicated and costly task.
Louisiana wanted a system that could be more easily and effectively modified, to respond to
change, without lags in service delivery to the public. The key to Louisiana's concern was
designing a flexible computer system.
San Mateo Case Management and Consumer Follow through System
San Mateo County, California has industrialized and put into practice a common case
management and consumer follow through system (SMART) accessible to all staff. The system
is connected to a data warehouse that offers information for executive decision-making.3
205
Community Human Service Agency – Camfield Estates
Community agencies often report that access to technology is key to helping adults with
children to end dependency and operate successfully in the regular labor market of the
community. Antipoverty efforts have proven futile for some, and many want them replaced with
faith-based initiatives. Regardless, the underlining issue of access remains unchanged. (Nathan,
2003)
One community success story of access explains the turn around of Camfield Estates, a
rebuilt 102-unit public housing development. Since 2001 Camfield has been the site of a project
aiming to span the "digital divide" between the impoverished and those with access to the web
technology. It is the Creating Community Connections Project; it gives residents free computer
systems to connect on the Web using high-speed cable. Every home in this project has access to
the service.
(Retrieved from: http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/internet/02/24/housing.hotspot.ap/)
The funding was provided by a $200,000 grant from the Kellogg Foundation and
sustained by corporations like Hewlett-Packard and Microsoft as well as public and nonprofit
entities.6 Residents who have decided to go wireless have also benefited from that option. The
residents can buy wireless cards for 60 dollars and the elderly resident receives the cards free of
charge. O’Bryant, the gentleman who helped to establish this program, hopes the project will be
replicated throughout other disenfranchised communities.
A resident poll established that next to all members used the computers to read news,
learn about healthiness and housing, and to shop online. Many residents are now training to
become professional IT personnel.
While the federal government says the divide is narrowing, consumer and public interest
advocates say it remains a problem.
3 Advances in Technology
3.1 Before and After the Internet
“The Internet changes everything” was Larry Ellison’s most common answer to questions
about the future of Oracle Corporation. He was right and we are just beginning to see how
profound the changes really are.
Prior to the explosive growth of the Intranet many view the advent of the personal
computer as revolutionary and in some respects it was. Personal computers introduced some
Americans to a new way of communicating - email, a new form of entertainment – computer
206
games, education without walls – computer based training, but most use of the computer was still
restricted to businesses for spreadsheets, presentations, and word processing.
The sales of personal computers for home use have been driven by the growth and
availability of the intranet. Many home computers are purchase solely to give user access to the
Internet. The growth rate of home Internet access is paralleling that of the telephone access in the
home which today is about XX% [sic].
To help understand why the impact of the internet is so significant we need to look at
how computer communication took place before the internet and how they are taking place
today.
Starting with the first mainframe computers, communication between the user and the
computer was point-to-point. All information between the user, usually sitting at a terminal, and
the computer, off in some secure air-conditioned room somewhere, was from one point to
another. Any information sent by the user in the form of a command or data entered on the
keyboard, was sent over a wire directly connected to the computer.
Over time that wire running between rooms and building was replaced with telephone
lines, usually leaded from the telephone company. By the late 1970’s and throughout the 1980’s
modems were commonly used to turn any ordinary telephone line into the physical point-to-point
connection needed between the user and computer.
Even with the introduction of personal computers, which replaced the “dumb” terminal,
communications between the user and “mainframe” computer was point-to-point. Users who
needed access to another computer to perform a task needed to know how to make the physical
connection.
The Internet introduced to users a kind of “generic” connection. It was still a physical
connection, via a modem and telephone line, but it was to no specific computer and for no single
purpose. With the one session connected to the Internet users could make travel reservations, pay
a bill, get the latest headlines and use email. For the first time in the modern history of
information technology users could perform multiple tasks without know much about the
computer they were connection to or where that computer was located. Scott McNeally’s
prediction that “the computer was the network” had ultimately come true. User connected to the
Internet – the network – could not distinguish it from the many thousands of computers – web
servers – providing content and services via web pages.
To understand how profound this change was we can look at the comparison of human
interactions with computers BI (Before the Internet) and AI (After the Internet).
Know WHAT needed to be done before you start doing it is no longer essential.
BI: Since computers are programmed to performed specific tasks, it was essential that
users know exactly what need to be done before making the physical connection to the
computer. If a users needed to calculate mortgage payment over a 30 years period they
207
would have to know that up front so they could be sure to connect to the right computer
to make the calculations.
AI: A user may have connected to the Internet to search a local real estate brokers listings
of homes available for sale. When they find one they like the broker offers the option via
a simple click to calculate mortgage payments based on the selling price of the home and
down payment. Given the hypertext capabilities of the web users can like from one item
to the next with only a vague idea of what they are searching for. The more information
the gather in their search the narrower the search becomes until the actually find what
they need.
Computers don’t necessarily need to know WHO the user is.
BI: From the very beginning most computers required users to have some sort of a login
ID and password. It not only was necessary to keep out malicious users but it was used as
a way to keep the cost of computing under control. Computers, especially mainframes,
were very expensive to run costing hundreds or even thousands of dollars to run every
minute. Computer owners could not afford to open up the use of their assets to everyone.
Before the Internet the major part of cost of the information and service you received was
to due to computing costs.
AI: With new low cost mass produced computer technology, cost is not an issue. Today
there are over 50,000,000 servers (equivalent of the old mainframe computers in this
context) on the Internet. When you connect to a web site via the Internet, you typically do
not need to logon. Although there are many pay-for-services web sites the large majority
are still free (in part due to advertising, government and/or private funding). When you
pay for services today via the Internet the cost of computing is almost insignificant.
Amazon.com is a great example with comparable pricing for books as any bookstore.
Knowing WHERE to go for information is not required.
BI: Similar to knowing what to look for, before you look, knowing where to look was
essential before the Internet. If you needed to search the computer for a specific research
topic you would have to make the trek to the library and using one of the terminals
connected to the library’s card catalog system, you would make your search.
AI: Search engine like GOOGLE, has eliminated [the need to] know where to look for
something. Using the GOOGLE search engine any Internet user can find virtually any
piece of information on any of the 50,000,000 computers on the web.
Know HOW to use a computer is (almost) a non-issue.
BI: Computer has always stymied all but the most technical users. Every computer was
different with difficult and often cryptic methods of communication. Graphical interface
like those on the Macintosh and Windows based computer helped for operations
208
performed on that specific computer. When users had to connect to other computers, even
if using a Mac, they had to use the language of the computer they were connecting to.
AI: The web browser, such as Internet Explorer or Netscape, gives users a uniform
interface for all computers on the Internet. Users have little difficulty accessing an
application from the IRS or buying a book from Amazon.com. The look and feel of the
browser is virtually identical on any device connecting to any computer. Even browsers
on cell phone and Palm devices have the same feel.
WHEN you can use a computer is no longer a factor.
BI: Users were often restricted when they could use a computer. System had significant
“down time” and little redundancy because of their high cost. Information was often out
of date because of two factors: one, few information gatekeepers – the individuals that
controlled the information stored on computers; and two, information was processed in
batched with new updated information only available the next day, week or even month.
AI: Batch processing of information is declining, replaced with “real time” processing.
This is possible due to new software technologies and the cost of computing power
becoming almost insignificant. Also given the large number of servers on the web, the
number of information gatekeepers is to the point where every user of the web has an
opportunity to become a gatekeeper.
Perhaps the most revolutionary concept is knowing WHY users need a computer is not necessary
for users to use a computer..
BI: From the beginning of the computer age, system designers and programmers needed
to know why users needed computers. They had to design the computers and software to
perform specific tasks – calculate mortgage payments, forecast economic growth, etc. If a
programmer could not anticipate why a users need to do something on a computer, it
generally could not be done.
AI: Although we are just at the beginning of the age where computer can do things that
were not previously anticipated (e.g. Bayesian thinking from Technology Review’s 10
top emerging technologies), remarkable things are taking place already. It can be a simple
as one computer on the Internet needed information from another and getting without any
human intervention that is done today with a technology called web services. Consider
the more complex where a computer s asked to make a prediction without specifically
being programmed to make that prediction. Emerging technologies combine with the
ubiquitous of the Internet makes the unthinkable possible.
3.2 Industry Advances in leveraging emerging technology
209
As a part of the research, we considered how other industries are leveraging emerging
technologies to streamline and improve business processes. Three fundamental transformations
are present within companies and organizations taking advantage of emerging technologies.
Networks and interconnectivity – Devices, systems, machines, and processes are all getting
connected – with or without wires. Technology’s task is to get these items to talk to each other
seamlessly. Processes that were carried out by humans can now be accomplished by devices
talking to each other.
Sensors – Cheap miniature sensors are showing up everywhere. These devices can see, listen,
count and pass messages wirelessly to each other and networks. How many people are in the
airport terminal, where you drove the rental car, or when you need to reorder more supplies are
now known to whomever or whatever needs to know.
Technology is birthing new industries – Industries encounter technology in a way that changes
them. The movie industry encountered digitization and created a new special effects sub
industry. Genetics encounter with digitization created genomics – a future of gene diagnostics
and gene therapy.
The research surfaced many innovative and cutting edge approaches being adopted by
industry and government. We have provided a few examples of the thinking taking place in
industries other than Human Services.
Banking
ATM’s
According to Technology Review magazine, the functions of ATM machines are
advancing. ATM’s can now perform functions such as selling movie tickets, cashing checks,
adding minutes to your cell-phone account, and discharging cash. ATM’s are no longer dumb
terminals but multi-use task enhancers. Since the 1980s, most ATMs have been built around
simple, slow computers with low-bandwidth telephone connections back to the bank. But a new
generation of ATMs have fast, updated processors, a Microsoft Windows operating system, and
quicker network connections based on the same protocols used on the Internet. That means
ATMs can handle complicated software for cashing checks, making money transfers, or
displaying graphics as varied as any found on the Web. “One of the main advantages of the new
ATMs is that their interfaces can be customized for each user, says Steve Grzymkowski, a
product marketing manager with Diebold. Once a customer has identified himself or herself to a
machine using an ATM card, "the screen would appear like a personalized website with options
showing your preferred transactions, or even have a ticker for your stocks or advertisements of
your favorite accessories," Grzymkowski says. And because they run Windows, it's easy for
software developers to write new programs for them. For example, NCR, a bank machine
manufacturer headquartered in Dayton, OH, offers software that lets ATM users buy movie
tickets or prepaid long-distance telephone minutes and even order flowers.”
-----
210
Technology advances mean better data, faster: innovative grid-based computing allows
marketers to achieve more sophisticated data analysis and modeling at previously unachievable
speed--and at a lower cost according to Charles D. Morgan, company leader of Acxiom, in Little
Rock, Ark. Speaking at a recent symposium in Florida, Morgan said the new technology is
allowing companies to obtain the intelligence needed to enhance customer relationships. "Today,
I can tell you that the impractical is now practical, and what was unimaginable can be imagined,"
he says.17
Payment Processing in Banks
The routing of payment data through multiple systems slows down processing, increases
costs, and hampers customer-facing functions within a bank. Establishing a single storage point
for all data related to a payment eliminates the fragmenting that can make information
inconsistent at different points during the day.
Historically, banks have built stand-alone systems to deliver each product or service. In
the early days of data processing, this was because of reliability issues; by not having to rely on
any other system to complete the processing, the system could be counted on to deliver
consistent service. As a result, today's environment is a conglomeration of disparate hardware,
software, and architecture that is only partially integrated. The check processing systems are one
of the key silos of information not providing intraday data to other systems. A number of
industry initiatives have been launched over the years to address the problem of checks, but none
has gained critical mass. Paper checks continued to be flown around the country for clearing and
settlement.
But following the terrorist attacks of 9/11, airports were closed and checks could not
move from place to place for collection. It was at this moment when the government, along with
banks, started to recognize that the country needed a more seamless and 17 Bank Marketing,
May 2004 v36 i4 p5(1) reliable way to collect check payments. The Check 21 Act, enacted by
Congress and the Federal Reserve, begins the process of moving to a paperless environment.
This new law, which goes into effect Oct. 28, authorizes the use of a substitute check (Image
Replacement Document) for settlement. The decline in overall check volume, caused by industry
consolidation and greater use of electronic products, has brought a rise in processing costs. As
banks look for ways to reduce operating costs, reducing the handling points for each check, now
at an average of 12, is a worthwhile goal. Check 21 offers the industry the opportunity to step
back and reconsider the entire payment process. Rather than just replicating the paper process
using images and electronic data, financial institutions can re-architect their systems to meet the
needs of a multi-channel-oriented customer base.
Check information can be captured one time and made available to all the product and
service systems that need access to it. Day two adjustments can be made directly to the same
data. The result is streamlined processing, the elimination of redundant data, and improved
customer satisfaction both through customer service officers and through the self-service
experience. Payment data is available more rapidly for use by other product systems.
211
Siloed payment structures require increased costs and provide little corresponding value
to the customer and no revenue to the institution. For the years 2005-2007, banks will spend
$13.5 billion to $16 billion reengineering their payment systems. Leading-edge banks will
reorient their spending around enterprise systems.
The process will occur in two stages. First, banks will invest in products to meet the
Check 21 requirements. This will offer an opportunity to move to a single storage point for
payment information. Second, banks will invest in the strategic linkages that will lead to a
common infrastructure for all payment-related applications. The attractiveness of this investment
lies in its potential to directly reduce costs, generate revenue, and increase customer satisfaction.
This evolution has already begun. The check image market is maturing; most of the top 20 banks
have already built or are building enterprise image archives. By creating a single point of storage
for the payment, the number of back office touch points should be lessened. Interaction with the
payment will occur on a single copy stored in one place. Furthermore, a centralized repository of
electronic payment information creates other operational efficiencies.
Game Industry (PR Newswire, May 27, 2004 pNA)
Unrelenting progress in processing power, network bandwidth and storage capacity will
enable the electronic game industry to become greater than five times more pervasive by 2010,
with the installed base of electronic game devices (excluding PCs) growing from 415 million to
2.6 billion. "Moore's Law and Electronic Games," a new global report by Deloitte & Touche's
Technology, Media and Telecommunications (TMT) Group and Deloitte Research, focuses on
the industries -- outside of the electronic game and related industries -- that will be impacted by
technological advances based on Moore's Law, as well as the positive and negative disruptions
that the advancements will create. Moore's Law states that the transistor density of a silicon chip
will double every two years.
"As technology continues to improve, new opportunities will arise for industries outside
of the traditional electronic game arena, such as movie studios, record companies, advertisers,
mobile phone producers, communications operators, toy manufacturers and electronics
manufacturers," said Scott Singer, Managing Director of Deloitte's Media and Entertainment
Corporate Finance Group. "As a matter of fact, the number and range of platforms on which
paid-for electronic games can exist will expand significantly and will include mobile phones,
MP3 players, PDAs, set-top boxes, children's toys and even exercise machines. The installed
base of devices will escalate from 415 million in 2004 to 2.6 billion in 2010."
Moore's Law implies that there will be an eight-fold increase in processing power and
memory capacity between now and 2010, greatly impacting the disruptiveness of the electronic
game industry. It is expected that 450 million homes worldwide will have broadband connections
by 2010, with one billion individuals having access to multimedia mobile phones that could
support game downloads and some form of mobile game playing. Storage capacity will likely
increase to 1,000 gigabytes of disk storage in a typical home PC by 2010, enabling games to be
longer and more complex with enhanced visual detail, sound effects and music. These
212
technological advances will create new revenue opportunities for sectors related to electronic
games and will expand audience reach beyond the traditional electronic game markets.
 Advertising. Game publishers looking to recoup their spiraling development costs are
more and more receptive to product advertising in games. In-game advertising is
expected to become increasingly popular, particularly as technology improvements and
shifting demographics make in-game product ads more appealing.

Wireless communications. Mobile operators will be the predominant channel for selling
and distributing phone-based games, with only a small number sold in retail stores. More
advanced networks prevalent by 2010 will provide higher transfer rates, enabling
downloaded games to be more complex and sophisticated.

Entertainment. Electronic games represent an important new merchandising category,
with cross-licensing between movies and electronic games providing a major source of
revenue for movie studios. Music companies will recognize revenue opportunities, as
music in electronic games becomes a more essential part of the game experience. Video
games have inspired entire lines of toys and action figures, allowing toy manufacturers to
capitalize on cross-licensing opportunities.
Health Care (Business Insurance, May 17, 2004 p14)
The bar will continue to be raised on the technology that health plans provide members
and care providers, to the benefit of all participants in the health care system. Health plans and
the vendors they work with are taking steps toward allowing members to use online tools to
exchange medical information with care providers and to receive disease management coaching.
Eventually, health plans will enable members to help manage their own chronic conditions by
transmitting vital data such as blood-sugar levels or blood pressure online to their care providers.
"Electronic technology allows health plans to continue to do more for the consumer in a
productive way,'' said Karen Ignagni, president and chief executive officer of America's Health
Insurance Plans. Such efforts are important, Ms. Ignagni said, as employers and individuals look
carefully at the costs and cost drivers of health care. "All of these tools enable our consumers to
exercise their alternatives in a consumer-driven market,'' "Consumers are looking for assistance
and information (that helps them) to be matched with the best professional in the right setting.''
As consumer-driven health plans grow, the demand for information and the technology to access
it likely will increase. Other health plans also are using technology to deliver information to
participants and providers wherever and whenever they need it.
The company's IT system serves plan members, physicians, brokers and agents, and
hospitals. "There are four different constituents who need us, and they come to us from four
different ways,'' Mr. Ponder said. "We have spent a lot of time internally to build our own
information technology infrastructure to be accommodating.” The program, which is linked with
the company's drug formulary and includes the "Physicians' Desk Reference,'' alerts the provider
to possible side effects and adverse interactions. The system also helps ensure that the
pharmacist receives a clean, readable, correct prescription, Mr. Ponder said. The other program
provides doctors with a computer, printer and the software to tap into health plan information to
213
verify member eligibility, check claim status, review medical policies and submit paperless
claims. The main purposes of this technology are to better connect patients and physicians,
reduce doctors' administrative burden and enhance patient safety. Also important is meeting the
varied needs of customers in its regional plans. "Medical insurance is a local product,'' said Mr.
Ponder. "We have been able to put in place the (technology) that allows us to be local in terms
of'' regional plans' product offerings, he added. The objective of all of this technology is "to take
the power of information and make it accessible to members, with the goal of making folks
healthier and giving people control of their health destiny.'' Information should not only help
people understand their health conditions but also guide them in using available resources.
"We want them to be able to be engaged and have access to the information to help them
be better consumers and use their dollars wisely,'' Ms. Bierbower said. Technology is the
"conduit'' for conveying information, Dr. Ho said, but health plans must work with consumers to
make online information relevant and user-friendly. The programs are "an online laboratory of
human interactive behavior,'' he said.
Among the online features the company provides members is the Health Dashboard,
which provides an individual member's health statistics, health assessment results and personal
information from another tool, Health Managers. That application provides information and
recommended actions for chronic conditions.
The Web functions are a response to plan members' requests, Ms. Derman said.
Homeland Security
A visitor to the United States in the coming years might have to undergo a retinal scan at
a consulate in his or her home country just to apply for a visa. Once here, the visitor would
present a smart card, encoded with the digital eye print, to an immigration official and undergo a
second scan to ensure a match. The data would be instantly cross-referenced against a database
containing digital descriptors of known terrorists or other criminals. Upon departure, a final scan
would tell officials if the person had overstayed the visa.
That's just one scenario that could play out under a megaproject the Department of
Homeland Security to oversee the creation of a comprehensive border-control system, known as
US-Visit (United States Visitor and Immigration Status Indicator Technology).
Homeland Security is creating a "virtual border" that includes scenarios like the retinal
scans, radio- frequency identification, voice- and facial-recognition, retinal- or iris-scanning, and
digital-fingerprinting systems.
Emergency Workers
Wireless networking technologies being tested and deployed in U.S. communities will
solve at least part of the problem that emergency workers face. The new networks are providing
214
police and firefighters a way to pass vital data such as video, maps, and photos among
themselves quickly and easily. Voice communications may take longer to modernize and
integrate, but observers point to progress in an area called "software radio" that will let
emergency workers from different agencies talk with each other more easily. Wireless laptops
that display information such as drivers' records have been a common feature in police cars for at
least a decade. But they have typically been connected via cellular networks that deliver data at
dial-up-connection speeds or even slower, meaning that they are generally limited to receiving
text. But now, faster data networks for police cars, fire trucks, and ambulances are giving
officials access to more kinds of data and allowing them to share it with each other. Starting in
May, for instance, fire, police, and ambulance workers in Garland, TX, will be able to use their
existing laptops to send and receive mug shots, fingerprints, live video, medical data, and even
floor plans at DSL-like speeds--while racing along at highway speeds.
A technology called mesh networking is used in which laptops instantly become nodes in
a network simply by being on and within range of each other. Each laptop routes data to others
nearby, so that data crosses the network by hopping along the most efficient path from one
laptop to the next. By avoiding the tower-based, hub-and-spoke configuration typical in cellular
networks, mesh networks can work around dead spots created by interference from buildings.
They are also self-healing, meaning they simply reconfigure themselves if any node is lost.
Consequently, no single node is indispensable, as a central tower is in a cell network. Mesh
networks can also route data around bottlenecks to ensure fast transmission, and their range of
coverage can easily be extended by attaching additional routers to traffic lights and lamp posts.
"To the guy on the street, [high-speed data in vehicles] is going to make a huge
difference," says Joe Hanna, a consultant in Dallas, TX, and a past president of the Association
of Public Safety Communications Officials.
3.3 Emerging Trends in Technology
Below is a description of some of the key areas that entities and organizations are
considering and planning for with regard to emerging technology.
 Software infrastructure,
 servers,
 mobile and wireless,
 information management
 and business applications.
There are quite significant changes ahead for software infrastructure. There are variations
in creating composite applications, such as service-oriented business applications (SOBA), but
there is also a new trend in relaxing even further the connectivity between software modules via
complex event processing (CEP). Another trend that seems prevalent in the software, as well as
the hardware community, is the virtualization of resources and its impact on increased utilization
and real-time processing. Many of the innovations in this segment, will not so much address cost
reduction, as enable new capabilities that are more dynamic and have better agility and
flexibility.
215
This is in contrast to the server landscape where many of the upcoming innovations will spur
cost savings. For example, to a certain extent, grid computing will start competing with
supercomputers as a new, inexpensive platform for solving computationally intensive tasks. And
the increasing server virtualization will provide much better utilization rates, again resulting in
cost efficiencies.
In the mobile and wireless domains we will see much more attention given to user interfaces
that are driven by the need for more product differentiation and diverse technological
advancements. One of the big "killer applications" of wireless technologies will be the
establishment of "plug and play" mesh networks, which provide optimized cost, benefit and
reliability ratios. Another big factor will be how mobile infrastructure will start to merge with
fixed computing infrastructure, mostly to use the micro-payment facilities of the mobile
providers.
Information management will benefit from renewed focus as enterprises find themselves
needing to deal with high volumes and new types of data, with "lightly" structured, documentoriented data playing a role in key business processes. Text mining will emerge as the "hot" area
in customer relationship management, causing enterprises to redesign customer-facing business
processes to take advantage of improved customer insight. Other innovations, like the Semantic
Web, will have a hugely beneficial impact on businesses and society. Like data mining, it will
actually remain niche from a software market and practitioners' perspective.
A number of these technological developments will make themselves felt in business
applications. In particular, a service-oriented "ecosystem" will enable a new wave of business
processes and application innovation. These will hit first among applications managing timecritical products or processes. The potential of services-oriented development of applications
(SODA) in driving high reuse, rapid development and high mutability of business applications
will support the evolution of a global trading grid — a single overlay of interconnected extranets
and e-marketplaces that enables partners to electronically interact, collaborate and transact
business. Radio frequency identification (RFID) will drive the innovation of in-store retail
systems, warehouse management, transportation systems and after sales tracking of product use.
Eventually, it will support full supply chain management and execution.
Other components or factors that may be considered subsets of the five key areas are
described below.

Web Services
o Communication Technologies
o Radio Frequency Identification Devices
o Business Intelligence Products
o Text Mining
o Micro-content and Micro-business
o Real-time infrastructures
o Event Management Technology
o Workflow
216
o Open Architecture
Web Services - Web services gives ability to connect disparate systems in a secure and
reliable way. Web portals are being used to unify the user experience across disparate
applications and processes in a seamless manner. Pragmatic and increasingly sophisticated Web
services will cause dramatic changes in the Web services market during 2006 according to
Gartner. Standards and service-oriented applications will be the catalysts for this growth.
By 2006, Web services will take hold as a competitive differentiator in business
relationships and product innovation. Enterprises that want to remain competitive will need to
use Web services to provide commonly requested data to their partners. It is imperative that
enterprises develop a strategy for how to use Web services to develop products, including hard
goods, digital goods and services.
In the healthcare industry, for example, Web services will become a critical tool for
consolidating data from multiple sources. Technicians will be able to compile test results, or
monitor results or patient care recommendations via separate but interoperable repository calls.
Medical device manufacturers will employ Web services to improve patient monitoring, increase
product reliability and establish a strong value proposition for healthcare providers.
Figure 1
Emerging Web Services Standards Stack
Source: Gartner Research (October 2003)
Attempts are being made to build a stack of Web services standards to satisfy every
foreseeable enterprise requirement.
Communication Technologies
217
Devices will integrate and communicate anywhere. The power comes when they can selfassemble into sensor networks. Breakthroughs arise via two new communication technologies:
Ultra-wideband: The biggest cost today in smart sensors is the communication module, whose
parts can't get smaller. Moore's Law (the number of transistors per square inch on integrated
circuits will double every 18 months) doesn't work for radio parts such as inductors. Ultrawideband will eliminate the need for those parts, unleashing Moore's Law. With ultra-wideband,
radios will become tiny, fast, low-power and inexpensive. They'll be so affordable that you can
put ultrawideband radios on every chip. Each chip will be able to communicate wirelessly with
other chips, enabling sensor networks that are location-aware, self-configuring and selfmanaging.
WiMAX (Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access): This new wireless technology
(802.16a) is the next step beyond Wi-Fi (Wireless Fidelity; 802.11). WiMAX promises 70megabit wireless connectivity over a range of 30 miles. It will link the Internet and connected
objects such as sensor networks.
Information Technology will become increasingly ubiquitous with intelligence embedded
in almost all objects. The gap between the physical and virtual world will shrink as the physical
work is increasingly reflected online (Accenture). The growing standardization and
commoditization in the technology industry will result in Web services becoming the dominant
architecture for the delivery of interoperable business solutions
Radio Frequency Identification Devices
Large enterprises are refocusing on data management as a strategic discipline to cope
with new types of data, explosive growth in data volumes, and the demand for higher levels of
application integration and business intelligence. Upcoming technologies include radio
frequency identification (RFID), easier data capture from mobile devices and automatic tagging
technologies like information extraction and text categorization.
Enterprises are looking to new data management approaches involving Web services,
extensions to relational database management systems (DBMSs) using extensible markup
language (XML), and the mapping together of XML dialects.
Enterprises that approach data management as a strategic function will reap the benefits
of greater process transparency, interoperability and automation. This will provide tremendous
benefit to areas such as supply chain management, enterprise application integration, customer
management and the electronic workplace.
Business intelligence products are supporting a more networked view of the business
Collaborative business intelligence (BI) is emerging. The idea is not new. Adding
annotations to reports and sharing analyses with others has been possible since the 1980s. Now,
218
many vendors are adding workflow capabilities to their BI applications. BI allows users to work
on the same models simultaneously or have real-time communication between various BI
applications. This lead to BI networks emerging for several reasons.
 Strategic sourcing requires non-hierarchical participation by many individuals, inside and
outside the company
 Knowledge workers who are used to consulting their peers will gain influence in decision
making
 Cycle times need to be reduced to achieve the goal of becoming a real-time enterprise
The concept of a hierarchy, which is the current BI focus, will be replaced by impact analysis
to show cause-and-effect relationships between various BI users. Synchronization will not take
place within extended and error-prone hierarchical organizations, but through peer consultation
and alignment before sign-off.
Text mining is emerging as the "hot" area in customer relationship management
Text mining is the process of extracting information from textual data and using it for
better business decisions. Text mining has existed for a long time, but mainly as a technology
that was not well coupled with clearly recognized "pain points" in the organization. Customer
service has been handled mainly in call centers, with an emphasis on transaction processing and
short interaction times. As a result, most firms have been missing valuable input from customers
on how to improve their business processes. This has led to low levels of customer satisfaction,
little long-term loyalty and an expensive, albeit necessary, way of resolving customer
complaints.
As text mining begins to be married with blended service-delivery models using the
telephone and Web services, companies will begin to discover that the technology will allow
them to identify not only what the customer said, but also what was meant.
Companies will be able to spot and resolve problems earlier, and improve their ability to
prevent problems recurring. In addition, customer satisfaction will be inferred more accurately
than with today's flawed survey methodology. The result will be increased emphasis on greater
customer interaction, encouragement of customer feedback and a reduction in simple
transactional interactions.
Micro-content and micro-business will drive the knowledge economy
Business transactions costing less than $10 are becoming possible electronically thanks to
evolving efficiencies and improved ease of use in micropayment technologies, digital rights
management, increasing connectivity and various standards. These business transactions center
around content (MP3 files, ring tones and consumer feedback), location-based services ("find me
a taxi") and various other future services (translation, transcoding of data and proofreading). So
far, few of these have gained widespread adoption, but significant new examples have emerged,
219
such as Apple's iTunes, Google's AdWords cost-per-click Web service, Zingo's taxi-hailing
service in London, PayPal, and BT Group's click&buy.
The support foundation for software infrastructure is changing. Real-time infrastructure
will reshape IT operations and infrastructure.
An IT infrastructure is a collection of client devices, servers, storage, networks, databases
and middleware that supports the delivery of business applications and IT-enabled business
processes. A real-time infrastructure (RTI) is an IT infrastructure shared across customers,
business units or applications where business policies and service-level agreements drive
dynamic and automatic optimization of the IT infrastructure, thus reducing costs while
increasing agility and quality of service. RTI represents a 10-year vision and evolution for the
distributed computing architecture and management environments, which will reduce capital and
labor costs while increasing IT agility, responsiveness and quality of service.
Security considerations must be addressed by taking advantage of technologies such as
Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) and Kerberos, because Web services may expose up to 70 percent of
organizational firewalls to malicious-code attacks before WS-Security specifications reach
deployment status beginning in 2005. End users should transform select applications to firstgeneration SOBA-based formats through integration with emerging Web services specifications,
such as SOAP and Web Services Description Language (WSDL), and begin investigating moreadvanced Web services standards, such as BPEL and Web Services Composite Application
Framework (WS-CAF), for future composite formation. Push key application software providers
— especially those that provide niche or industry-specific applications — to state if they plan to
offer SOBAs and what migration path they propose. Providers that can't or won't give this
information by the end of 2004 should be downgraded on your list of preferred vendors.
Real-Time Infrastructure
Nowhere is information technology more critical and important than in providing realtime information access. Developing a real-time infrastructure requires multiple underlying
technologies, including all of the aforementioned technology enablers (e.g., workflow
automation, integrated database, open architecture, B2B integration, and Internet technologies).
For example, in the absence of real-time data, it is difficult to provide automated system
alert/monitoring capabilities when real-time business events exceed some maximum threshold.
Event management technology will reshape the way businesses run by making applications
expose the business events that they touch.
Enterprises will achieve new levels of flexibility and a deeper understanding of their
business processes by applying the techniques of complex-event processing (CEP) to their daily
work. Application systems and office productivity tools will emit a steady stream of event
messages that report on hundreds of activities of business significance.
220
CEP agents will analyze, correlate and summarize these low-level events into higherlevel events suitable for notifying people in human terms or for triggering automated processes.
Businesses will operate more efficiently, with early warning of potential opportunities and
problems, and with better understanding of the root causes that change conditions.
We consider message-oriented middleware (MOM) to be an enabler of the simplest of
four levels of event management. Simple events are widely used (although still underutilized).
MOM has only the most basic "rules" — it will do publish and subscribe (pub-sub) on message
headers, but that's all. The turning point is not simple events, however. The next big wave of
event exploitation will be CEP. CEP is rare in business applications today, but it won't be in five
years. The computer science for CEP is not entirely new — some aspects have been used in IT
operations management software for a decade, and most operating systems are bastions of CEP.
Although some CEP technology is still in the research labs, little CEP has been embedded in
tools that are aimed at business applications. That's the big paradigm shift — applying CEP to a
domain where it was hardly ever used before, which requires new development and middleware
tools. For most people, "events" still mean IT operations management software and application
management issues. The lack of standards is a serious limitation. The Web services movement
has started to work on this, starting with guaranteed delivery and soon to address pub-sub.
Official standards for CEP, however, will take several more years. However, CEP is emerging,
with or without standards.
Workflow
Workflow is a term used to describe the tasks, procedural steps, organizations or people
involved, required input and output information, and tools needed for each step in a business
process. A workflow approach to analyzing and managing a business process can be combined
with an object-oriented programming approach, which tends to focus on documents and data. In
general, workflow management focuses on processes rather than documents. A number of
companies make workflow automation products that allow a company to create a workflow
model and components such as online forms and then use this product as a way to manage and
enforce the consistent handling of work. A workflow engine is the component in a workflow
automation program that knows all the procedures, steps in a procedure, and rules for each step.
The workflow engine determines whether the process is ready to move to the next step.
Proponents of the workflow approach believe that task analysis and workflow modeling is likely
to improve business operations.
4 Technology in Human Services
Before we consider how technology might be leveraged to improve human services, it is
important to recognize that technology alone is not capable of brining about organizational or
systemic change. A common mistake in making organizational improvement is to assume that
the biggest challenges are technical. Invariably, technology challenges pale in comparison with
organizational and process difficulties.
221
Many technical challenges are themselves manifestations of organizational and process
problems. For example, the need to build and support multiple databases is often required
because organizations refuse to share data with each other, rather than because of technical
impediments. Further, even after multiple data centers are created in multiple agencies, building
appropriate linkages for applications and data is hampered, not by technical issues, but by a lack
of willingness to share information. This hurdle is raised even higher by funding processes that,
in effect, require that assets acquired with funds from specific sources be used only for particular
programs.
Breaking down bureaucratic silos is difficult, often requiring stakeholders and their
program managers to surrender some authority and autonomy. Getting information systems to
work together across these silos is not just a technology challenge, it is a threat to organizational
independence (see Figure 1).
Figure 1 Hierarchy of Challenges in Government IT
Source: Gartner Research
It is important that human services decision makers assess and understand technology
issues in the context of this hierarchy of challenges. Often, it is counterproductive to attempt to
solve a technology problem that masks other, more-systemic issues.
4.1 Making Technology a Powerful Weapon
Understanding that technology can be an asset or a nemesis, how do we make it a
powerful weapon in our arsenal to deal with the issues of poverty? We must avoid the trap of
thinking narrowly that technology is just a collection of devices and tools. We must look to the
business world for best practices in applying technology. Charles Field and Donna Stoddard have
identified three basic principles for executing technology effectively.
Develop a long-term technology plan – Most people see technology as a way to deliver quick
and easy solution. Not so, technology requires a long-term disciplined plan and a strategic view
that is linked to business objectives.
Create a unifying technology platform – A look at most technology initiative in an
organization resembles independent countries, each with unique technologies, applications and
222
data. These silos of information prevent sharing of information, consolidate view of data and
cause costs to soar.
Cultivate a high functioning technology culture – Most organizations have treaded technology
groups as an isolated entity that causes technologists to loose sight of the business strategy.
Organization should cultivate a high-performing technology culture that is tightly integrated
within the entire organization.
4.2 A Technology Primer
The traditional model of information technology in human services work can be
characterized by:
 Monolithic systems that perform s single purpose, e.g. a system design to track grant
applications
 System built on platforms that are difficult to update
 Systems that do not have any capability to communicate with other system
 Systems designed with specific outputs in mind, i.e. the system cannot handle a new
situation or change in business process
 Multiple system with overlapping functionality
 Systems that are undocumented and are impractical to modify.
On the other hand systems should be designed to meet the following general requirements:
 web-based
 use database architecture
 scalable
 provide alerts
 robust reporting tool
 robust analytical tools
 support interfaces with third-party systems
 download to various formats
 secure and private
Web-based
A web-based solution must use a web browser as the primary means of interacting with
the system. This means that remote users may access the system over the public Internet or
secure Intranet by simply using a browser, either Microsoft Internet Explorer or Netscape
Navigator. The delivery of information to the desktop is not necessarily restricted to using pure
HTML.
Use database architecture
A database should be the primary means to store data information. The database will be
used to store discrete data entities such as numeric and alphanumeric values, Word document,
images, scanned documents or any other “binary” objects.
Scalable
223
The software applications, middleware, and database will be scalable to meet expanding
and evolving needs. It is expected that all data will be maintained on – line indefinitely, which
will require a database that can grow without performance issues. Also it is expected that
requirements will change over time and in order to handle additional users and additional
processing demands the application software will need to be scaleable as well. .
Provide alerts
The system should be able to alert users of events such as “A report requires your
approval” via notifications when the user signs on the system and via email. Users should also be
able to respond to an email “alert” with an approval or rejection.
Robust reporting tool
A robust set of reporting tools for both technology professionals and end users must be
available. Technology users should have available reporting tools for developing complex
reports. End users should have easy to use tools for developing quick, ad hoc type reports for
commonly requested data items.
Robust analytical tools
Robust analytical tools for multi-dimensional analysis should be available to
sophisticated end users. These tools should perform as an Excel pivot table with the capability
for processing large volumes of data in more dimensions than Excel can readily manipulate.
Support interfaces with third-party systems
Interfaces, both incoming and outgoing, must be available for linking to other vendor databases
or proprietary systems. Application interfaces must offer data validation and error logging. Batch
and real time interfaces should be supported including links to external databases
Download to various formats
Download to common file formats should include at a minimum: Excel, ASCII, HTML
and XML.
Secure and Private
The system must support current standards for privacy and security. They include data
encryption in transit, selective encryption, and a robust user security management.
4.3 Technology Framework to consider




What technologies must be embraced to address poverty in the 21st century?
What are the key technological drivers that may impact human services in the 21st
century?
What are the key benefits that may accrue as a result of modernizing and optimizing
technological advances?
What are some key obstacles that must be overcome to fully realize the advances that
technology affords?
224
5 Sources
High Technology and Low-Income Communities Donald A. Schom, ish Sanyal and William
Mitchell
Benton Foundation. Losing Ground Bit by Bit: Low-Income Communities in the Information Age.
1998
The Children’s Partnership. Online Content for Low-Income and Underserved Americans: The
Digital Divide’s New Frontier, A Strategic Audit of Activities and Opportunities. March 2000
<www.childrenspartnership.org/pub/low_income/index.html>.
City of Seattle Department of Information Technology. Neighborhood Groups and Technology
Survey. April 2001 <www.cityofseattle.net/tech/indicators/neighborhoods>.
City of Seattle Department of Information Technology. Non-Profits and Technology Usage
Survey. April 2001 <www.cityofseattle.net/tech/npo/nporesults.htm>.
Using Technology to Advance Microenterprise Development – the Aspen Institute Technology
and Social Inclusion, Rethinking the Digital Divide, Mark Warschauer Community Informatics:
Enabling Communities with Information and Communication Technologies
225
APPENDIX D: WORKING SESSION DESCRIPTIONS
Overarching Goal: The goal of all of the 2004 working sessions was to allow people from a
variety of backgrounds and sectors to bring their expertise to bear toward creating a
fundamentally different model for thinking about and addressing poverty. All sessions explored
topic-specific content using a common design structure to ensure that results can be rolled up
consistently to inform a cohesive change strategy.
Session 1: Redefining Poverty (August 18-19, 2004)
Session Objectives: This working session had five objectives:
1) Share a compelling case for change and articulate a vision and set of principles
upon which to build strategies to fundamentally change the way we think about
and address poverty as a nation.
2) Catalog the current definitions and measures of poverty and assess their utility in
moving toward the stated vision.
3) Identify some key elements of a desired future state (i.e. what it would look like
in the ideal) from the perspectives of the individual, the community, and society.
These elements go beyond the snapshot of the conditions of poverty (based on the
income/consumption definition) to the individual, social, and economic capacities
and dynamics that are more fully representative of the causes of poverty and the
solutions to it.
4) Identify some of the areas in which work must be undertaken (i.e. change levers)
in order to close the gap between existing and the ideal states.
5) Brainstorm preliminary strategies for filling the gaps.
Session 2: Community-Based Solutions (August 25-26, 2004)
Session Objectives: This working session had five objectives:
1) Share a compelling case for change and articulate a vision and set of principles upon
which to build strategies to fundamentally change the way we think about and address
poverty as a nation.
2) Review key themes of current community-based efforts to build capacity of low-income
individuals, families, and communities to compare/contrast with the stated vision.
3) Identify some key elements of a desired future state that describe what it would look like
in the ideal for communities to 1) develop local leadership; 2) create community
226
engagement; and 3) successfully implement ‘whole-community’ strategies for addressing
poverty.
4) Identify some of the areas in which work must be undertaken (i.e. change levers) in order
to close the gap between existing and the ideal states.
5) Brainstorm preliminary strategies for filling the gaps.
Session 3: Family Economic Security (September 7-8), 2004)
Session Objectives: This working session had five objectives:
1) Share a compelling case for change and articulate a vision and set of principles upon
which to build strategies to fundamentally change the way we think about and address
poverty as a nation.
2) Review the current state relative to four key areas that impact family economic
security—basic income (including work supports), acquisition of growth and assets,
mainstream goods and services, and public policy and compare/contrast with the stated
vision.
3) Identify some key elements of a desired future state for each of the four areas (i.e. what it
would look like in the ideal) from the perspectives of the individual and the community.
4) Identify some of the areas in which work must be undertaken (i.e. change levers) in order
to close the gap between existing and the ideal states.
5) Brainstorm preliminary strategies for filling the gaps.
Session 4: Maximizing Technology (September 14-15), 2004)
Session Objectives: This working session had five objectives:
1) Share a compelling case for change and articulate a vision and set of principles upon
which to build strategies to fundamentally change the way we think about and address
poverty as a nation.
2) Review key areas of the current technological state and its impact on individual and
community impoverishment in areas such as access to technology, use of technology in
providing services to individuals, use of technology for integrating information for
community-based strategies, the use of technology for connecting individuals to
resources, etc. and compare/contrast with the stated vision.
227
3) Identify some key elements of a desired future state relative to technology (i.e. what it
would look like in the ideal) from the perspectives of the individual, the community, and
service delivery (e.g. access to and availability of technology for individuals in
connecting to resources, improving education, and strategic use of information
technology for communities).
4) Identify some of the areas in which work must be undertaken (i.e. change levers) in order
to close the gap between existing and the ideal states.
5) Brainstorm preliminary strategies for filling the gaps.
228
APPENDIX E: MEETING RECORDS
The following meeting records from the 2004 working sessions are included in this
appendix and begin on the next page.
* Redefining Poverty
* Community-Based Solutions
* Family Economic Security
* Maximizing Technology
Office of Community Services
Creating the 21st Century Model to Address Poverty
Redefining Poverty Working Session
August 18-19, 2004
Aspen Wye River Conference Center
Queenstown, MD
MEETING RECORD
Distributed to participants: October 19, 2004
Revised, based on participant feedback: January 4, 2005
This document contains the proceedings of the working session and has been compiled
from the small and large group discussions, the associated flipchart records, and from the
presentations given by project staff. Reaching consensus during the session itself was not
attempted. Therefore, this document merely reflects the viewpoints as they were expressed in
the session and does not imply agreement among participants and/or project staff.
Redefining Poverty Working Session: Meeting Record 1
PRE-MEETING MATERIALS
Participants received the following materials prior to the working session:
 Preliminary Agenda
 Core Elements: Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles (Appendix A)
 Research Themes: Redefining Poverty (Appendix B)
 Article: Kanbur, Ravi and Squire, Lyn (1999). The Evolution of Thinking About Poverty:
Exploring the Interactions. (Appendix C)
ON-SITE PACKET MATERIALS
Participants were provided a meeting packet containing the following materials:
 Final Agenda
 Core Elements: Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles
229






Initiative Context presentation: Characteristics of Successful Change (Appendix D)
Current state presentation: Highlights from the research (Appendix E)
Research Themes: Redefining Poverty
Article: Kanbur, Ravi and Squire, Lyn (1999). The Evolution of Thinking About Poverty:
Exploring the Interactions.
Participant List (Appendix F)
Project Staff List (Appendix G)
MEETING AGENDA
Overarching Goal: The goal of all of the working sessions is to allow people from a variety of
backgrounds and sectors to bring their expertise to bear toward creating a fundamentally
different model for thinking about and addressing poverty.
Session Objectives: This working session has five objectives:
1) Share a compelling case for change and articulate a vision and set of principles upon
which to build strategies to fundamentally change the way we think about and address
poverty as a nation.
2) Catalog the current definitions and measures of poverty and assess their utility in moving
toward the stated vision.
3) Identify some key elements of a desired future state (i.e. what it would look like in the
ideal) from the perspectives of the individual, the community, and society. These
elements go beyond the snapshot of the conditions of poverty (based on the
income/consumption definition) to the individual, social, and economic capacities and
dynamics that are more fully representative of the causes of poverty and the solutions to
it.
4) Identify some of the areas in which work must be undertaken (i.e. change levers) in order
to close the gap between existing and the ideal states.
5) Brainstorm preliminary strategies for filling the gaps.
Wednesday, August 18, 2004:
3:00 – 4:00 Welcome and Overview by Clarence Carter: The overall case for change and why
we are here; the vision of the 21st Century Model to Address Poverty and the underlying
principles for the development of the model.
4:00 – 4:45 Session Content and Context: Overview of the overall initiative, an exploration of
the current state and key themes regarding definitions and measures of poverty, and large group
discussion of how we arrived at the current state from the participants’ perspectives.
4:45 – 5:00 Facilitative Strategy (Facilitator)
230
5:00 – 6:00 Break
6:00 – 7:30 Dinner
7:30 – 9:00 Small Group Work (3 groups—person, community, societal): Each small group
engages in visioning to describe what definitions and measures of poverty would ‘look like’ in
the ideal. The goal of the small group work is to bring focus to a desired future—built upon the
principles—from each of the three perspectives.

Individual includes: human capital -- the education, attitudes and experience that enable a
person to avoid poverty or get out of it.

Community includes: social capital -- the family and community networks and support
systems, and family or clan assets.

Societal includes: the broadest frameworks -- the social values, norms and laws that
create ‘the rules of the game’ (e.g. non-discrimination, terms and conditions of work), the
economic opportunity structure and the dynamics of social mobility (what enables or
promotes movement).
9:00 – 9:45 Small Groups Report: Groups present their work to the large group. Large group
will not discuss presentation content at this time, but will be asked to post questions and
comments on wall for discussion the next day.
9:45 – 10:00 Evening Close Out: Facilitator leads interactive session about the work that’s been
done so far, and what remains for tomorrow.
Thursday, August 19, 2004
8:30 – 10:15 Large Group Discussion: Processing Small Group Work from Wednesday
Using the notes taken by the participants the night before, the group will focus on and
discuss each of the focus areas presented. The focus will be on the identification of the key
elements of the desired future, not on problems with the current state.
10:15 – 10:30 Break
10:30 – 11:45 Identification of Gap Areas and Change Levers: Identification of levers for
change (and related considerations and challenges) that would require work in order to get
‘there’ from ‘here.’
11:45 – 12:45 Lunch
12:45 – 2:15 Identification of Preliminary Change Strategies: Moving from visioning and
change levers to ideas for closing the gap.
231
2:15 – 3:00 Session Close Out and Next Steps: Discussion of how the work that’s been done
here will be synthesized to create the pieces of a draft systemic change strategy and about how to
begin the work of change.
PROCEEDINGS
August 18, 2004: Afternoon
INTRODUCTIONS (facilitated by Barbara Hulburt)
WELCOME AND OVERVIEW BY CLARENCE CARTER
Clarence Carter provided the overall case for change and why we are here; the vision of
the 21 Century Model to Address Poverty and previewed the underlying principles for the
development of the model. Notes from his overview are provided below and contain an
amalgamation of his opening remarks from all four of the working sessions.
st
As America continually strives to form that ‘more perfect union’ envisioned by our
founding fathers, one of the key factors we have always struggled with as a society is how to
care for those in greatest need. For purposes of our work here, we focus on the segment of our
society that exists within the condition we define as poverty.
Every generation or so, our society recalibrates its thinking and approaches for
addressing poverty and it is clearly time for another recalibration. It is time for us to change the
way we think about and address poverty because:

We know that as the number of people living in poverty increases, it becomes more and
more difficult for any society to sustain itself. None of us wants that for our great nation.
As long as many of our citizenry remain under-optimized, our society can never reach its
full potential.

The most recent major recalibration was initiated 40 years ago via the 1964 “War on
Poverty.” President Lyndon Johnson believed that turning the power of the federal
government loose on the issue that we as a society could eliminate poverty.

While there is much progress to celebrate, we clearly have fallen woefully short of the
lofty objective of ameliorating poverty. As a result of the “War on Poverty,” scores of
programs were created, the U.S. Poverty Index was established, unprecedented public
spending was dedicated to the objective, and a massive ‘helping’ industry was created.
Though there have been impressive gains in many important indicators of societal wellbeing, we have not shifted in our approaches as quickly as the conditions have.

The U.S. Poverty Index, developed in the 1960’s and based on an income/food
consumption model, is no longer representative of the conditions of poverty (e.g. cost of
living, basic income needs, economic trends, technological advancements, family
232
structure and roles, workforce trends, etc.). As the economic, social, technological—
societal conditions change the nature of poverty, we must also change the way our
society thinks about it and addresses it in order to remain economically, socially, and
morally sustainable as a society.

We are still using the income/consumption model and the basic formula as designed in
the 1960’s under vastly different circumstances. Proposed reforms to the Poverty Index
over the last three decades to add other cost elements such as housing and health care and
to add other income sources such as the cash value of benefits have not been successful,
resulting in the continued use of a formula that has outlived its efficacy as a accurate
definition of the conditions of poverty.

We currently spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on assisting those in greatest
need in America without an acceptable return on investment. Unfortunately, since there is
no shared vision guiding and leveraging our investments toward a common objective.
Our spending is ad hoc, in categorical programs—with their own rules, regulations, and
objectives—which often work at cross purposes with other programs and initiatives.
Private initiatives often suffer from not having enough resources to be truly effective. In
the aggregate, our fragmented and categorical approach results in the old adage; ‘If you
don’t know where you are going, any road will get you there.’

The issue of poverty is best addressed at the community level. The current construct in
which the ways to address poverty is prescribed at the Federal level fails to fully engage
and empower communities to develop their own vision for the future and the strategies
they need to get there. The uniqueness of America’s communities demands a service
strategy unique to each community’s objectives, resources, and obstacles.

The current construct forces the needs of individuals and families to fit into categorical
programs that cannot possibly anticipate or address the whole and interdependent nature
of what they need to make their lives work for them. Often the goals and objectives of the
various ‘helping programs’ work at cross purposes, making a comprehensive set of
services and support that would be effective problematic at best. This approach is another
example of not leveraging the resources that are currently being expended on the issue
and does not give us a return on our investment.

The existing construct does not maximize the use of technology that would provide for
infinitely more efficient and effective delivery of service and/or to reduce the need for the
services in the first place. The current categorical construct requires separate
technological infrastructures for each of the programs, which means that precious
resources are required to fund the separate infrastructures and resources that could go
directly to the individual or family needing assistance. It means that helpers in the
different program structures have difficulty sharing vital information that would help
serve individuals and families more effectively. Furthermore, technology could be
leveraged to allow many decisions to be placed directly in the hands of the individual or
family, thus obviating the need for intermediaries.
233

The current helping system is financed principally by government and philanthropy,
despite the widely-used economic construct of market solutions in most other
advancement endeavors. Recognizing that every sector has a role in addressing poverty
and that market solutions are encouraged in most facets of American problem-solving,
we must acknowledge that market-based strategies are significantly underutilized in
America’s helping system.
All of the above leave America with less than the most effective helping system. As the
economic, social, technological—societal conditions change the nature of poverty, we must also
change the way our society thinks about it and addresses it in order to remain economically,
socially, and morally sustainable as a society.
We need to create an urgency in society to do the work of this recalibration, such that our
society views eliminating poverty as:
 an exercise in developing self-sustaining conditions at the individual, family, community,
and societal levels,
 a win-win exchange between society and individuals, individuals and institutions, and
 a way to create the harmonious conditions that allow for continued innovation, economic
growth, strong relationships, non-violence, health, etc.
As the Director of the Office of Community Services, I draw on the history and intent of my
organization to help communities address issues of poverty—first as the Office of Economic
Opportunity, and in its subsequent evolutions as the Community Services Administration, and
now as the Office of Community Services—to leverage the power of its mandate toward new
constructs for thinking about and addressing poverty.
We have convened this group of the best and brightest thinkers to help begin a social
movement toward developing this new construct. Understanding that it will be a long-term,
complex endeavor, we recognize that we will not, over the course of the next 24 hours of our
initial working session, solve the problem. Rather, we are simply seeking to start the dialog by
putting forward some guiding principles upon which to build a new construct and by creating the
“space” in which to begin building it. Welcome, thank you for coming, and let’s get to it.
SESSION CONTEXT AND CONTENT (Nancy Polend, Ed Strong, Jim Masters)
Project staff presented context and content material to ground the work of the session: 1)
Overview of the overall initiative using the characteristics of successful change as a conceptual
framework and a description of the project’s activities as an operational framework; and 2) an
exploration of the current state and key themes from the research regarding definitions and
measures of poverty. See Appendixes D and E for staff presentations.
The Characteristics of Successful Change presentation suggested that, since the initiative
is at its core the creation of systemic change, it is useful to map its evolving strategies and
activities to a framework that represents components of successful change. The change model
234
this initiative is using for this purpose is based on the work of John Kotter and John Corlett. The
presentation made connections between the change model and the working session activities in
which participants would be engaging. The presentation also made distinctions between what
could reasonably be accomplished during the working session and what was long-term, evolving
work to be done over the next decade and beyond. Acknowledgment of the uncertain, uncharted
territory of this work was made explicit.
The second component of the Characteristics… presentation included the operational
flow of the project’s short-term activities, showing what had been done to date, where the
working session fit in, and what would come next.
The subject-matter-expert presentation, The Impact of Changes in Measuring Poverty,
provided an environmental scan of definitions and measures of poverty that have been
established and the impact different definitions have had and could have on society. The
literature review that was conducted as part of the initiative, as well as the collective view of the
participants (as observed during the discussions) suggests strongly that the existing U.S. Poverty
Index—based on a 40-year old consumption/income model—is not representative of the real
conditions of poverty and is therefore incomplete.
The Impact… presentation also provided a historical perspective, beginning with the
1960’s and the establishment of the current U.S. Poverty Index. In the 1960’s, antipoverty
workers liked the “poverty line” for several reasons. (1) It was easy to understand and apply. (2)
It could be used to ‘prove’ to skeptics -- who claimed there was no poverty in their community -that poverty existed in their area. (3) It was an easy target to reach. For example, if you helped
Dad get a GED and get a job in the factory at the minimum wage then that family moved above
the poverty line.
In the 1970’s, there were many initiatives to better integrate services in the hopes that by
better linking services (inputs) it would help create better family outcomes. In the 1980’s, the
emphasis shifted to the providing public charity functions that provided a “safety net” of basics
(food and income). These, too, were based on consumption and family “needs.”
There were numerous efforts to change the poverty index in the 1980’s and 1990’s – to
add other cost elements such as housing and health care and to add other income sources such as
the cash value of benefits. None of these efforts at large-scale reform were successful, and so
even today we are still using the income/consumption model and the basic formula as designed
in the 1960’s.
Turning to large-scale frameworks, one of the largest was developed by Nobel Prize
Winning economist and Harvard Professor Amartya Sen. In it, he creates a framework of society
that flows from inputs, to rules and processes, to outcomes. He says that “…every normative
theory of social arrangement that has at all stood the test of time seems to demand equality of
something – something that is regarded as particularly important in that theory.” (Inequality
Reexamined. P. 12, Harvard University Press, 1995). One challenge in his model is that you can
only establish equality across one slice of the system, because everything on either side of that
plane will of necessity be in disequilibrium.
235
Sen says that too great an emphasis has been placed on trying to generate equality of
outcomes -- which in our example is family incomes. Further, the traditional counter argument to
the
idea
that
the
government
should
guarantee
these
outcomes
(the
welfare/majoritarian/utilitarian arguments) has been the libertarian argument, that the
government should only guarantee the processes or ‘rules of the game’ and should have no role
in assuring outcomes.
Sen moves further back from both of these arguments, and says that the best role for
government is helping people get the education and other “inputs” (primary goods) that they
need to function in that society. Sen’s work is useful to us because it provides a framework that
is generally accepted in the fields of economics, philosophy and international development.
Sen’s framework enables us to organize and synthesize all the bits-and-pieces of the other
definitions in use. It is consistent with the principles proposed in the 21st Century initiative and
can be operationalized and used to assess existing policy and program priorities.
Sen’s work moves us away from a focus on “needs” and shifts our attention to a focus on
“strengths,” including social capital, human capital and financial capital. These forms of capital –
which in Sen’s approach are the “primary goods” that people should start with or acquire -provide insurance against slipping into poverty and provide effective ways to get out of poverty.
They are therefore worthy of further development as potential elements of the 21st Century
Model.
As we survey the definitions in use in international organizations and other countries, we
see that they have added in many dimensions that are not considered in the current U.S.
definition. These offer insight and examples of alternative ways to define poverty. One approach
that was tried was an “inductive” approach to synthesize these existing definitions. An effort to
compare the dozens of definitions and their thousands of variables through a ‘factor analysis’ got
lost in the virtual blizzard of factors. Instead, it is recommended that we turn to guiding
principles, such as the ones proposed in the 21st Century Model, to help us develop a new
definition that is more “deductive” in character.
We will start with the broadest possible vision, and develop definitions that are derived
from the desired future.
FACILITATIVE STRATEGY
The facilitator set up the evening’s small group visioning activities by restating the idea
that “definitions lead to strategies” and “if you don’t know where you’re going, any road will
take you there.” She also announced the rosters of each of the groups and addressed various
housekeeping and logistical items.
Participants took an evening break to check in to their rooms and convened in the dining
room at 6:15 for dinner. After dinner, each of the three small groups convened in their break-out
236
rooms to begin their task of envisioning the elements of an ideal definition of poverty (i.e. more
encompassing and representative definition of the conditions of poverty).
SMALL GROUP WORK: VISIONING THE IDEAL (DETERMINING DESIRED
FUTURE STATE)
Based on the belief that the existing operational definition of poverty is outdated and
incomplete, the large group was broken down into three small groups representing specific
perspectives of poverty—Individual, Community, and Society. The groups were tasked with
identifying elements of a new “ideal” definition relative to the perspective their group was
assigned. The goal of the small group work was to bring focus to a desired future—built upon the
principles— from each of the three perspectives.
Ideal Elements of a Definition: Individual Perspective
This small group was given the following definition to help focus their discussion:
Individual includes human capital -- the education, attitudes and experience that enable a person
to avoid poverty or get out of it.
As the group attempted to settle in to their task of identifying ideal elements for a new definition
of poverty, they decided to start with “what poverty is NOT.” The participants acknowledged
that this was an exercise in defining “non-poverty.” The group’s ideas represent a first glimpse of
possible components of a future definition, upon which future indicators and measures could be
based. They also explored the work of Peter Townsend and others as starting points for their
discussion.
Elements of a Definition (non-poverty):
 Independent (see also “Appropriate interdependence”)
 Respect for self, life, others
 Respected
 Autonomy
 Privacy
 Self-Respect,
 Availability of credit,
 Availability of insurance
 “Appropriate interdependence” on institutions, people, services, and their surroundings
o There is a pervading societal myth of “independence” which falsely suggests that
anyone can be totally independent when in fact, everyone has some level of
interdependence on institutions, other people, services, and their surroundings.
o The myth is supported by language in the constitution



o The myth provides a disincentive to ask for help
Self-definition of role in society
Ability/ latitude to make mistakes
Hope
237










Extent to which individual have control over circumstances (e.g. work, housing)
Extent to which individual has control over “response” to circumstances (voice in society
in self definition, influence, power)
Interdependent relationships (access to spiritual nurturance and support)
Education
o Access
o Content: Critical thinking skills, learning how to learn, building and sustaining
relationships in personal and professional life
Work (access)
Money, meaning, friendship
Physical environment
o Individual’s surroundings are a component of their world view. For example, if
what I see as impoverished/not impoverished, that will be my world view
o These surroundings play a role in “dreaming”, creativity, and making plans for the
future
o Hope, spiritual connections = resilient
o The leisure to care about the future
o Mental space
Ability to protect self/family (capacity and conditions are diminished if you are poor; e.g.
predatory lending, police brutality)
o Abilities to be proactive about protecting one’s family and self
o Abilities to make sound choices/ decisions to protect ones family and self
Responsibility for ones future, circumstances, change
Stamina/health
The group decided to explore some existing conceptual definitions offered by key published
experts to ‘mine’ for additional useful elements.
An Implicit Description of an Individual in Society (adapted from Peter Townsend, The
International Analysis of Poverty (1993), p. 36. Provided by Gordon Fisher)
 An individual needs to be able to participate in society.
 This participation requires having access to the following things:
o Relationships
o Diet
o Amenities
o Services (e.g. education, health care, etc.)
 If access to these items are available to individuals, then they should be equipped to
play/participate in their customary roles within that society
* A Definition of Individual Poverty (also adapted from Townsend)
o People are poor when they don’t have sufficient access to food, shelter, services
and amenities that allow them to participate in relationships, protect themselves
and loved ones and engage in the customary behaviors expected of them as part of
a community (from the source cited above; provided by Gordon Fisher).
238
The group developed a narrative statement of a definition of individual poverty based on
the results of their brainstorming and discussions:
“People are poor when they don’t have hope, access/ability to participate, and adequate
income to opportunity to meet physical needs, to achieve innate potential of all kinds, and to
achieve a meaningful life, and when they lack the resources, abilities and moral clarity to lead
others out of poverty.”
Ideal Elements of a Definition: Community Perspective
This small group was given the following definition to help focus their discussion:
Community includes: social capital -- the family and community networks and support systems,
and family or clan assets.
Before the group was able to envision what the ideal community would look like in a
future where poverty was optimally defined, a number of members were compelled to identify
and discuss a range of definitions for “community.” They felt this was important to do to set the
stage for a visioning conversation.
Possible Definition of Community (“How do you define community?” “One size does not fit
all.”)
 Neighborhood
 Town
 Region
 Tax Jurisdiction
 Virtual Technology
 Identity (Race, Ethnicity)
The group then began to describe different elements of a strong or healthy community. They
saw these elements comprising a set of indicators or measures for poverty (or for non-poverty)
from the community perspective.
Ideal Elements
 Strong interconnections between neighborhoods and residents
 Organized
 Access to family households and clan assets (“extended family and friends”)
 Access to surrogate relational systems where family/clan has broken down
 Regional equity/stewardship
 Cultural/community awareness of societal norms/values
 Bringing corporate and institutional players to the table
 Holding corporations and institutions accountable/ responsible
 Community/regional capacity is built to the greatest extent possible; sustainability
 Leveraging best practices to show holistic possibilities
239


Greatest degree of business and economic diversification consistent with comparative
advantage
o Looking inside community for opportunities to develop business and economic
diversity.
Ethnic diversity leads to richer communities
o Priority-setting and commitment of resources to meet priorities, picking those that
work and laying down those that don’t
o Involvement of residents of community/region in planning and priority setting
The group moved to creating a list of the economic indicators or measures of a
healthy or strong community:
Economics of Healthy Community
 Characteristics:
o Local Ownership
o Self Reliance
o High Labor Standards
o Environmental Quality








Assets for Business
Finance Mechanisms
Institutions/Mechanisms for Wealth and Asset Creation
o Community Individual Development Accounts
Community strategies include a focus on:
o Land
o Labor
o Capital
Entrepreneurial Support
Population retention (especially in crisis)
Safety
o Crime
o Domestic Violence
o Incarceration
Natural Capital
o Air, Water, Land
o Recreation Opportunities
Indicators of (Non) Poverty
 People have voice
 People and places are better integrated
 Access to:
o Opportunities
o Healthcare
o Education
o Jobs
o Housing
240











o Social Capital Better Opportunities Social and Economic Equity
Shared standards on equity
Reduced disparities
Commonality
Connectivity
o Social
o Jobs
Local ownership
Self Reliance
High Labor Standards
Networks (of support systems)
o Family
o Church
o Business
Participation, Empowerment, Optimism (Non alienated)
o Economic
o Political
 Voting
 Town Meetings
 Volunteerism
Integration of Sub communities into Larger Communities
Land use policy supports integration (e.g., Mixed income housing and Inclusive Zoning)
Helping System
 Formal/Informal
o Presence?
o Asset Based?
o Reciprocity?
o Community linked and participation?
 Informal
o Generationally rooted (e.g. Korean Banks)
Multiplier
 Finance/Cash
o Liquidity
o Wealth
o Barter
The large group made the following additions to group’s flipchart record:

Which comes first?
o Nurture trusting relationships which lead to opportunity
--Or-o Opportunities which when made available lead to relationships of trust
241

Opportunity structures within communities are often affected or controlled by resources
and circumstances that are not local.
Ideal Elements of a Definition: Societal Perspective
This small group was given the following definition to help focus their discussion:
Societal includes: the broadest frameworks -- the social values, norms and laws that create ‘the
rules of the game’ (e.g. non-discrimination, terms and conditions of work), the economic
opportunity structure and the dynamics of social mobility (what enables or promotes movement).
The discussion was an open one in which the participants freely exchanged ideas moving
from area to area as their thoughts developed. It was a self-guided process with the facilitator
acting as note taker more than process guide. Therefore there is an appropriate randomness to the
flow of the conversation but very powerful nuggets of inspiration that emerged from the
collective wisdom.
Society Vision
In viewing society in a future where poverty was optimally defined the group described
what they would see to include:
 Institutions working together at the regional level to impact economic issues so that
everyone had:
o A voice - all could exert influence and power
o Adequate income for all
o Freedom from vulnerability to market fluctuations because the community had
carved out its niche and held a solid market share, minimizing the risks of
suffering adversely from globalization and other factors that negatively have
impacted community strength and residents’ income
o Regional market stability with a diversity of market opportunities to weather
outside changes and the ability to make market adjustments as circumstances
warranted
o Society would invest in Self-Sufficiency – but define it as broader than income
o Cultural diversity and recognition of the value of all sectors
o
 Access to Technology for all
 A society that leaves no one behind
 All levels of society have assets to tide them over in times of instability (accumulated
assets)
 All members of society have the capability to take advantage of opportunity – including
opportunities to access quality education and quality health care.
 All parents know their children have safe and nurturing surroundings
 Cultural and societal standards and practices that allow access to services for all
including undocumented immigrants
242














Cultures are honored, maintained and revitalized. Individuals and groups are free to
pursue their own unique heritages recognizing that all are not the same e.g. Native
American cultures differ from immigrant cultures.
Hope is part of everybody’s future.
Freedom from abuse by legalized economic exploitation (e.g. check cashing, loans)
Financial service are available to all
o Equal access to financial services
o Financial literacy for all
Solid planning is in evidence. Planning can only come when hope is invigorated
Intergenerational communities are nurturing
Viable, legal opportunities are available for all
Role models and support systems exist for all
There is access to support systems to overcome social injustice
Inclusiveness pervades all society does
Society has solid social values and solid social systems; both are needed
Every individual is given the opportunity to maximize his or her potential to:
Learn
Work
Have housing
Have a safe environment
We all accept responsibility for ourselves and others.
The group collectively came to a general statement summarizing much of the discussion
above as follows:
Definition of the Ideal Society of the Future (this is framed in terms of what would put a
society at risk of not thriving):

A society is at risk when it does not respect every individual and does not provide the
mechanisms for each person and group to recognize and achieve their potential.
The group arrived at this short definition after considering such factors as:
 Incentives and disincentives must exist in all kinds of social contracts.
 Outcomes measures must lead to accountability.
 There must be economic and social justice
 Reciprocal responsibility must drive action at all levels of society
 There must be support for businesses that adopt the “triple bottom line” – profit,
environment, society
 Society must provide opportunity for the extended practice of democracy
 Society must provide clear and honest information and education to potential voters
 Society must provide guidance, authority and engagement at all levels of government.
The large group made the following additions to the group’s flipchart record:
 Consider relationships across Race/Class lines
 Add accountability of the corporate structure
 Reference to the overpowering and self serving nature of the corporate element is missing
243
o There is in that sector a great capacity for harm but if re-oriented the possibility
for value to community and society is great
Other additional thoughts included:








This discussion makes me think that we should slightly redefine the task. That is 1) how
do we define who is poor? and 2) how can we address the elements that make people
poor at the individual, community, and larger societal level?
Consider the philosophy of free enterprise. What about philosophy of cooperatives?
Values personalized can be made real.
Expectations fulfilled
The problematic issues that the undocumented immigrant worker faces
Race
Classism
Sexism
SMALL GROUP PRESENTATIONS TO LARGE GROUP
Each small group presented their work to the large group. All of the groups used the
flipcharts they produced (as transcribed in the previous section of this document) as talking
points and generally presented the highlights of their small group discussions. By design, the
content of the presentations were not discussed in the large group during this evening session.
Participants were instead instructed to write notes, comments, and questions on pieces of paper
and attach them to the “facilitation wall” to inform the full group discussion to occur in the
morning (see … large group additions to flipcharts at bottom of each small group section—
above—for written comments).
Individual Perspective: Talking Points







“Appropriate interdependence” on institutions, people, services, and their surroundings.
Hope
Extent to which individual have control over circumstances (e.g. work, housing)
Extent to which individual has control over “response” to circumstances (voice in society
in self definition, influence, power)
Interdependent relationships (access to spiritual nurturance and support)
Meaningful work
Education
o Access
o Content: Critical thinking skills, learning how to learn, building and sustaining
relationships in personal and professional life
Community Perspective: Talking Points

Strong interconnections between neighborhoods and residents
244







Access to family/clan assets
Moving toward “regions” as “community” and the notion of regional equity
Cultural or community awareness of social norms
Degree of community asset diversification consistent with comparative advantage (e.g.
diversify assets, not all eggs in one basket from a business perspective, such that a
community depends too heavily on one factory or industry as an economic driver.
Extent to which community sets priorities and commitment of resources to meet priorities
o Choosing strategically among the many programs, projects, etc. to only engage in
those things that get most “bang for the buck.”
Ability to do assessments of community assets
o Ability to engage residents and all stakeholders; turn them loose on the
community’s poverty issues
o Bring institutions and corporations to the table
Capacity in sustaining anti-poverty efforts
Societal Perspective: Talking Points





Injustice is a major cause of poverty
Society is in decline when it does not take care of and respect all people in it.
o Respect and a sense of responsibility for all its members
o The extent to which there are societal incentives for helping all citizens reach
their potential.
 Outcome measures for accountability for obligations to the well-being of
all its members
Extent to which it develops business enterprises that are mindful of the “triple bottom
line” (profit, environment, society)
Extent to which clear and honest information and education is provided to potential
voters
Ability to differentiate and devolve authority at the state level
EVENING CLOSE OUT: CLARENCE CARTER
Clarence closed out the evening by summarizing what the group had done collectively
and his feelings about what the group had accomplished and how the group had carried it out.
Key concepts from his close out discussion include the following points:
 Discussions highlighted the complexity and bigness of what is being done
 This is a process of writing an important chapter in history
 There has been real tension on how we deal with this in history
 Need to “check weapons at the door” (referring to a desire to have a “turf-less”
discussion)
 The project team has been both planning and protecting our work until it has legs enough
to stand on its own and to take “hits” that may occur in a broader audience o Intentional
about not creating a circumstance by which we project ourselves too far out in public
until we’ve had a chance to frame the discussion
245



Not interested in casting aspersions; the natural reaction to blaming is protecting
Extremely exhilarated
This is the beginning of a conversation and appreciation for the willingness and spirit in
which we were able to have it.
August 19, 2004: Morning
The morning began with an opportunity for participants to reflect on the work of the day
before and to share anything that came to mind. Some of the thoughts expressed were:
 The need to build accountability into the system for alignment with values (as expressed
in the initiative’s principles)
o Take responsibility for circumstances
o Need to build in reciprocal responsibility, especially with corporations
o Example of jails/prisons was given
 The need to build urgency for change. For example, address the question of why should
those “not affected” care about addressing poverty?
o Clarence agreed that we need to make the societal case for change and that we
need to be able to articulate it in a way that makes sense from a “what’s-in-it-for
me” perspective.
 The need to articulate the idea of “common wealth”
 The notion that expectations (of individuals) tend to get fulfilled and, as a result, the need
to approach changing perceptions to an asset- or strengths-based frame.
 The moral and economic imperative: We have not made this case; that this is everybody’s
work
The facilitator focused the group on the task for the day:
 Large group review and discussion of the guiding principles
 Large group discussion of small group work to arrive at a sense of:
o Completion of the visioning task and a starting point for developing ideas for
what needs to change.
o What the elements of non-poverty look like
o What the unanswered questions are

Identify and discuss what has to change in order to begin move toward the ideal. It was
acknowledged that we would probably not get to the specific strategy development level
in the time that we had left.
REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF THE PRINCIPLES
The group was asked to walk around the room to read and internalize the fourteen
principles in preparation for the large group discussion. Participants were asked to think about
whether and how the principles should be enhanced, whether they were clear (and what
clarifications were needed), and about their reactions to them. The large group discussion
regarding this exercise is summarized below.
246
Comments on Existing Principles
 Shared vision: New ways of thinking about and addressing poverty are aligned with the
assumptions built into the founding documents of the nation
o Discussion and Feedback: Language in the founding documents also stated that
not everyone had the same level of entitlement. For example, African Americans
were described as 3/5ths of a person. Suggest reference to founding documents
should be deleted. More appropriate language would reflect participation, agency,
ownership, and building power.
 Everybody has a role: Every sector of society (government, private industry, non-profit,
communities) has a role in creating a nation of reciprocal responsibility and opportunity.
These roles may or may not be consistent with current roles.
o Discussion and Feedback: Reword to include notion of “poor, rich people;” and
“rich, poor people” and the need to move people who believe they have no role in
addressing poverty out of their mental “comfort zones.”

Fundamental right to individual potential: Every individual has the right to achieve their
potential, regardless of circumstance, strengths, or weaknesses.
o Discussion and Feedback: Reword to strengths-based language that reflects the
individual’s aspirations from their own perspective. Delete from “regardless” to
end of sentence

Government as convener: The government role is one of convener and catalyst for
enabling innovation.
o Discussion and Feedback: Add “a” before “convener” to ensure that it does not
appear as if we are saying that the government only acts as a convener. It acts in
other capacities as well and other sectors/entities also act as conveners.

Consistency with America’s tenet of free enterprise: As in most facets of the American
experience, the helping system should leverage the philosophy of free enterprise. Doing
so encourages and supports free market solutions to geometrically expand the helping
resources available to serve Americans in need.
o Discussion and Feedback: Too passive; the “helping system” should be about
more than leveraging more resources to the poor, which sounds like charity. It
should be imparting skills, knowledge, dignity, motivation – and
entrepreneurship. Move toward language that speaks more of “market solutions”
toward that end.
One suggestion is “Consistency with America’s Market Economy” – “As in most facets
of American problem-solving, the helping system should be grounded in market solutions.
Tapping private resources can expand geometrically resources available to serve Americans in
need, especially through self-financing antipoverty enterprises, and imparting entrepreneurial
skills to those in needs can empower them to become the stewards of their own future.”
Comments on Potentially “Missing” Principles
247
There was some discussion suggesting the addition of a principle that specifically
addresses the notion of participation and engagement, drawing on the concept of “maximum
feasible participation” and what participation can lead to (e.g. power, influence).
LARGE GROUP DISCUSSION OF SMALL GROUP VISIONING WORK
Large group discussion of the small group visioning presentations included the following
components:

There are themes in the elements identified that run across all perspectives—individual,
community, and society—suggesting that definitions of “non-poverty” can help to create
a shared vision for change (see “Themes” section below).

Identifying elements and developing new definitions of poverty/non-poverty is important
for change because definitions lead to strategies. That is, how we define things determine
how we address them.

Any definition should be focused on equity vs. “equality.”

Society has used “capitalism” as a substitute for “democracy” when, in fact, capitalism
[does not equal] democracy. Aligning the way we think about and address poverty with
the concept of democracy vs. aligning it with the concept of capitalism would
significantly change the approach.

The U.S. has an operational definition of poverty (U.S. Poverty Index), but not a
conceptual definition (i.e. what we mean by “poverty”)
o We have been operating from the operational definition without having a
conceptual definition.
o This affirms Clarence’s view that “if you don’t know where you’re going, any
road will take you there.” Federal, philanthropic, non-profit, community, etc.
spending and programs have no shared conceptual definition to guide them and
are therefore fragmented and collectively ineffective.


In exploring the societal perspective, an offering of the following statement to describe
societal poverty:
o “We believe that a society is at risk when it fails to inspire its members to respect
others and fails to align its resources in ways that seek to lift up those who are
most disadvantaged.”
o
Significant discussion about the dilemma that results from the notion of “poor, rich
people” and “rich, poor people.”
o Poverty is broader than income leads to…
o broadening the definition and its elements, which leads to…
o the notion of “poor, rich people” and “rich, poor people, which leads to…
248
o dilution of the issue of “real” poverty, which leads to…
o questions of whether that line of thinking is self-defeating if we are trying to help
the folks who most need it.
o Though it could also help people get out of their conceptual “comfort zones”
regarding “who” is poor.
On the other hand…
o We really DO want everyone to reach his/her potential and “poor, rich people”
need to be able to reach theirs, especially when it comes to realizing their
potential to help others reach theirs.
o We really DO mean that a thriving society needs everyone (including poor, rich
people) to be contributing fully, which suggests that if a person is financially nonpoor, but socially poor, they should be helped as well in order to build their
capacity…
o What DO we mean?
o At the end of this discussion, the idea that a transformative definition would
include BOTH components; it would identify sectors of society/individuals who
are not poor (in the traditional sense) AND sectors of society/individuals who are
poor (in the traditional sense).
 These separate and complimentary definitions would have utility in
different contexts and could therefore be used strategically, selectively,
and intentionally toward improving conditions and capacity throughout
society.
 There could be multiple definitions developed for a variety of purposes.
THEMES: COMMON ELEMENTS OF A NEW DEFINITION ACROSS ALL
PERSPECTIVES



Hope
o Internal spirit
o Sense of future/possibilities
Access (to opportunity structures)
o Food
o Healthcare
o Transportation
o Education
 Content: Critical Thinking/Problem-Solving skills
 Content: Relationship building skills
o Meaningful work
o Housing
o Art/culture
Participation
o Voice/Influence
249



o Control – “appropriate autonomy/interdependence”
o Freedom from (negative) stereotype
Safety
Relationships/Connectivity
Responsibility
o Self
o Family
o Community
o To hold system accountable
The large group made the following additions to overall session’s flipchart record:


Preamble to definition of Poverty – when poverty exists, everyone in society is affected,
therefore it is a shared responsibility of every person, community, entity and corporation
to ensure that poverty, where it exists is alleviated, and that it is not promoted through
community, societal and corporate actions, policies, and in its …
Outcome Replacement for Customary Behavior – to engage in endeavors that benefit
their lives and those of their community.
August 19, 2004: Afternoon
IDENTIFICATION OF WHAT NEEDS TO CHANGE TO GET TO VISION OF NEW
DEFINTIONS (GAP ANALYSIS/DEVELOP STRATEGIES)
Categories of potential “change levers” (i.e. places for change) were put up on the
facilitation wall. Participants were asked to identify what has to change in order to begin move
toward the ideal within each of the change levers. Participants wrote down their ideas and affixed
them to the wall beneath the appropriate category. After everyone had finished, the facilitator
read each idea aloud. NOTE: These are unfiltered ideas that were not processed, agreed upon,
or representative of consensus, nor were they tested against the principles of the 21st Century
Model initiative.
Service Delivery
 Services need to be supported and delivered at the community and neighborhood level
 Service delivery should be informed by those who are receiving the services.
 Adequately funded demonstration projects that examine evidence for effectiveness in the
implementation of new strategies.
 Frontline workers need to be re-oriented to their role in reducing poverty. It’s not about
screening people out, but rather connecting them to resources that will help them to help
themselves negotiate systems and obtain needed education, income, and resources.
 Services are delivered based on ease of access of the individual, not the agency, single
application forms are used and shared.
 Use nonprofit structures that include people served in government contracts
 Nonprofit anti-poverty organizations need to change to be “fast, fluid, and flexible.” How
to lead at the speed of change.
250







All service delivery groups/initiatives etc. gain knowledge of how violence impacts
people’s lives and implement strategies that move our society towards being free of
violence.
Clarify mission/purpose of service to reflect the common elements.
Using the modalities of family and clan as effective places of engagement (relationship
building) – providing opportunities, voice, resources, etc. through these linkages.
Society creates energy policy at the local level, which informs a federal energy policy
that is based in renewable energy sources greatly reducing /eliminating (eventually) the
need for energy assistance programs. First start with green building for low income
housing.
Health care, child care, and elder care are viewed as rights not privileges and are
therefore extended to each person through universal systems.
Training and encouragement for low income people to learn about and run for public
office.
More integrated service approaches within community action to use all of their resources
(as well as other community resources) to address the full range of “barriers to escaping
poverty” for all of their clients.
Roles





Participation/ Voice Control: Those in the local community permitted to have an “active”
role in community decisions – Elected Officials
Also, discussions, education, etc. of “haves” on issue of their roles/responsibilities.
Provide venues/opportunities for holistic models of helping/empowerment to mentor
others
Government at all levels has an obligation to develop ways to include all residents.
Schools teach children about parenting and give children skills to create and maintain
violence free relationships
Systems





Also – jails are removed from profit making institutions. Jails are charged with the
outcome to release people who have the skills to reintegrate in society in positive ways
and to reduce recidivism rates and to treat mental illness and addictions
Businesses pay a living wage
Public elections are publicly funded (only) - no private contributions. Officials are
accountable to the populace.
Prison system’s “purpose” re-defined to prepare more of those incarcerated to function
when they “get out” rather than just “put away” (e.g. programs to maintain contact with
family, or education)
Create support and transition systems for people coming out of prisons and foster care *
Require jails and foster care systems to ensure that all of their “graduates” have high
school level skills
251






Look at how “programs” get people out of poverty, thereby reducing silo effect. Organize
services for “ACCESS” to opportunity, housing, meaningful work, etc.
Recognize, revamp, reeducate the training environments that reinforce old patterns,
stereotypes, etc. of the service provider world.
Re-Create Nationwide program and strategy development and evaluation systems to
identify good ideas to take to scale. Only CFED does this well!
Prisons and jails become places where inmates are educated, trained for jobs, learn
relationship-building skills and maintain connections to “family” and “clan”
Institutions are funded based on outcomes- contracts imbed both incentives and
disincentives for achievement of those outcomes. This is true for Economic Development
initiatives (IRB’s, tax breaks, in-plant training) such as HMO’s, jails, schools, etc.
USA policy and outreach distinguishes capitalism and democracy and how each system
can affect poverty and equity.
Funding
 For all block grant programs for states; hold states accountable for agreed upon outcomes
or reduce funding
 Every benefit from government should be linked with “giving back” by the beneficiaries
to government’s corpus.
 Reinvest money from public pension funds and trusts (e.g. Social Security) in antipoverty
enterprises.
 Eliminate all corporate welfare to make new resources available.
 Focus government grants on promoting entrepreneurship and empowerment (and end
restrictions on various streams)
 Shift foundation money to program related investments in anti-poverty enterprises
 Create more venture, hedge, and mutual funds to focus equity investments in anti poverty
enterprises.
 Separate fundraising for “charitable purposes” from “developmental purpose.” Support
both using Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO’s).
 Request for proposals (from both state and federal fundraising sources) requiring
partnerships across sectors (e.g. county welfare, community action, workforce
development, private non-profit, community or church groups, etc.)
 Prioritize the support services system to deliver service (NGO’s) and hold them
accountable by outcome and payment
 Increase eligibility standards upwards to 110% of median income (even if graduated)
 Cluster funding by the government into one funding source
 Government (federal & state) assists agencies and organizations in breaking down the
‘silos’ of service delivery in such a way that the current resources spent on so-called
antipoverty programs can be reallocated in ways that reduce poverty.
 Funding needs to be more flexible, as to allow for adaptation to local community
needs/conditions
 Outcomes will be used in measuring all government contracts
 Multi-sector funding that links economic capacity building activities support for capacity
building
252
Policy












Recognize the existence of many “undocumented” poor in the U.S. that have no country
of origin to effectively return to- are clearly underserved.
Make it easier for workers to form or join labor unions
Focus on programs that “make work pay” – these increase incentives to work and reduce
dependency:
o 1) continued support for EITC
o 2)childcare accessibility
o 3)periodically increase minimum wage
Need explicit agreement that achieving the outcome listed (e.g. access, participation, etc)
are policy priorities.
Find explicit/formalized ways of getting input/comments strategies from poor people as
an input to making or changing policies.
Eliminate anti-community and anti-small buy bias in law concerning tax insurance,
securities trade, banking, and subsidies.
Gather better data for community economies (e.g. “leakages” of dollars, demand,
residents, etc.)
Create a new type of “Community Corporation” that facilitates anti-poverty enterprises.
Economic strategies should be measured against a set of “Social Justice” principles.
Need national commitment to poverty reduction/elimination to be used as a lens for
evaluating certain federal expenditures.
Stop incarcerating people for status crimes or other personal behavior…create alternative
community based social frameworks (these can be mandatory)
Need change that would not see policy as something that is done to you (poor folks etc)
but rather people as informed and engaged policy players themselves. Assumptions:
o Folks want to improve their lives (quality) chances and outcomes
o There is wisdom, experience and things that work in poor communities
o The self-interest of the poor and the non-poor are not necessarily mutually
exclusive
o Leadership with the right combination of capabilities can make a difference
o Language and forming of the right metaphors—means everything.
o Link schools and service agencies in tracking student’s attendance. Universal
healthcare access. Support inclusive planning process as a pre-requisition for
funding. Simplify residency requirements to access safety nets. Prisons provide
rehabilitation alternative to incarceration are funded.
Attitudes


People are the best and most essential asset in which this country can invest. Also, belief
that every person is important.
Active participants in a democracy can hold systems accountable and create change.
Helping systems (IAPS) have an appropriate role in facilitating the participation of the
poor in the electoral and governing process.
253
















Stress existing assets and build on them. We all have a responsibility for recovering and
addressing the structure and institutional forms. White privilege and racism are
acknowledged and addressed.
We need to get beyond “Blaming the Victims” and “Fostering Low Expectations” that
flow from stereotypes, prejudice, and ignorance.
Reduction in stigma and stereotyping might be achieved by getting everyone (at various
levels and in various circumstances) to understand their role and responsibility and stake
in the overall exercise of creating a more just and less at risk society.
Education about attitude, aspiration and the value of dreaming plus visualizing should be
taught in pre-school and reinforced in later year of childhood.
Need to promote ideal of mutual responsibility among individual, business and
institutions
Alert (disturb/agitate) people- larger society to the invisibility of the poor, overcome
callous attitudes toward current conditions.
More widely realized perception (across social classes and cultural groups) that society is
at risk when we are not actively engaged and aligning resources to help those who are
most disadvantaged.
Help the poor help the poor
Opportunities of “dialogues between the haves and have-nots” -- maybe through faithbased initiatives (to alleviate stereotyping, may embrace hope)
Communities decide that it is essential to create an environment where individual success
is optimized. Each sector knows that they can be a part of the solution to end poverty and
how they can make a difference. The community has incentives to encourage this
participation.
Eliminate concept of “the poor”, and instead focus on programs to empower people
Assume that every person receiving public assistance would become an entrepreneur
Rethink prisons as institutions to reintegrate people into society.
Get the “right people” into places they can make the most difference – Leadership
development.
Recognition of our “interdependence” as individual, community, society.
Find or create social values that are cultural universe’s to provide a foundation for
capacity-building-for-all
Structures

Structures and systems have to be reengineered to include the things that the poor and
non-poor could potentially do from themselves
o Assumptions :
 There are things that work
 There are assets in every community that should/could be creatively
leveraged
 Things that work, best practices – must have a policy context and outcome
lest they die on the vine.
254





Institutional structures need to be elliptical, not hierarchical. Encourages teaching
initiatives (e.g. Learning Organizations)
Federal, state, local government need to look at the above models
Recognize, celebrate, leverage the role of the faith community to secure the moral and
economic premise upon which this initiative is grounded.
Improve healthcare delivery system:
o Reduce administrative bureaucracies
o Expand coverage
o Contain costs
How to achieve the above needs a lot more than this piece of paper
Behavior





Communities adopt strategies and provide resources to deal with sexism, racism,
classism, etc. Where is it identified?
Individuals come to understand their own part in oppression and seek resources to deal
with it.
Re-channel all charity into acts of empowering others.
Buy, invest, hire local, to restore community economies
Individuals who are poor meet elected officials – vote – and work in their communities to
effect policies.
Incentives







Tax incentives for livable wages – Support (public and private) for regional coordination
– reimburse the opportunity cost.
Seeking market incentives for “paying for” all human capacity building initiatives. Are
they there?
Shift Resources from subsidizing consumption (food stamps) to developing capabilities –
Voc Ed, E & T, and to managing risks and economic uncertainty. “Economic Security
insurance”
Grants to community groups willing to develop plans for addressing the needs of low
income people in their community
Grants to community groups to examine (conduct an assessment) of the needs and assets
of people in their region.
Focus on corporations, insurance companies, and industry, etc. to create TAX and other
financial incentives to encourage community investments and individual job creation
Bonuses or tax breaks could be granted for those who help get and keep individuals out
of poverty through significant wage and opportunity increases.
255
SESSION CLOSE OUT AND NEXT STEPS: CLARENCE CARTER
Clarence thanked the group for their engagement during the session and provided
information about next steps. Next steps included:
 The project team will be compiling the proceedings of the session and distributing it to
participants for clarifications and enhancements.
o Participants will be given a set amount of time to submit enhancements
 Once all of the working sessions are completed and all meeting records were revised
based on the participants’ review, the development of a “blueprint for change” will begin.
 There may be some follow up needed with some of the participants as the blueprint
development progresses.
 Hope to set up a web-enabled space for participants to remain connected to the initiative
and to each other.
 Blueprint draft to be completed in early January
 “Mega-Session” in which participants from all working sessions will be convened in the
same space to see and discuss the draft blueprint.
Clarence also took the opportunity to bring into the discussion the issue of politics and
partisanship in this work.

While the presidential election is an important factor, its impact on this work is
minimized because this initiative is NOT about another government program or solution.
For example, waiting until after the election would suggest that it is politically motivated
or is seen as another government program, when in fact, this work transcends
partisanship and government.

The “distraction” of the presidential election provides the opportunity to engage folks and
develop preliminary strategies that will gain momentum and be defined and sustainable
enough to carry through into any future administration.

No partisan discussion/debate has ever helped “Ms. Mamie” (a symbolic image Clarence
uses to personalize the issue of poverty) and so this discussion that we have had proves
that we don’t have to make it political in order to have the discussion.
o A rich discussion of ideologies and philosophies ensued with participants and
Clarence self-disclosing affiliation with party or ideology that resulted in a
collective understanding that, by the very nature of the principles upon which the
discussion was based (see Core Elements), it didn’t matter which “side” you come
from.
o Particular focus on the Reciprocal Responsibility principle as an
integrating/collaborative force that brings both ideologies (e.g. “do it your self”
vs. “let us do it for you”) together toward and understanding that the answer is not
in either exclusive ideology, but rather in the integration of both.
o Participants from both “sides” expressed that they felt that they had connected to
the vision and spirit of this initiative and collegially agreed that they could
256
continue the conversation, even knowing that they would not agree with each
other on everything.
Clarence thanked the project staff for making the working session a reality and Barbara
Hulburt for her expert facilitation. He spoke of his desire for this initiative and this group of
participants to “write an important chapter of history” and his belief that we had gotten a great
start with the thoughtful contributions and engagement of the group. He thanked everyone once
again and wished them safe travels.
APPENDIXES
A. Core Elements: Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles
B. Research Themes: Redefining Poverty
C. Article: Kanbur, Ravi and Squire, Lyn (1999). The Evolution of Thinking About Poverty:
Exploring the Interactions.
D. Initiative context presentation: Characteristics of Successful Change
E. Current state presentation: Highlights from the research
F. Participant List
G. Project Staff List
257
APPENDIX A Core Elements: Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles
CORE ELEMENTS
Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles
August 2004
Mission
This initiative seeks to change the way this country thinks about and addresses poverty.
Imperatives (Why)
Among other reasons, we engage in this work because:




Despite significant investment in addressing poverty, persistent poverty exists.
We have a moral imperative to take care of one another, as our “brother’s keeper” and as
provided in the founding documents of our nation. No one should have to live an
impoverished life.
We have an economic imperative to ensure that the capacity of individuals, communities,
and the nation for innovation is encouraged and sustainable.
Poverty is costly to taxpayers, wherever they live, via the costs associated with social
services, remedial education, law enforcement, welfare programs, etc.
Vision (Desired Future)









Fewer people will live impoverished lives because:
Poverty is viewed by the mainstream as broader than income.
Society proactively plans for decreasing the number of people living impoverished lives.
Individuals proactively plan for a future for themselves that is not impoverished.
The education sector proactively plans and implements strategies to reduce the number of
people living impoverished lives.
The banking industry proactively plans and implements strategies to reduce the number
of people living impoverished lives.
The health industry. . .
The justice system. . .
The philanthropic sector. . .
The Federal government focuses its programs and policies on the above.
258
Principles
The desired future will be built upon the following principles:

Person-centered service delivery structure: Effectively and efficiently serving individuals
in need means that the service delivery structure must focus on the needs of the
individual or family, not on the needs of the helping system.

Consistency with America’s tenet of free enterprise: As in most facets of the American
experience, the helping system should leverage the philosophy of free enterprise. Doing
so encourages and supports free market solutions to geometrically expand the helping
resources available to serve Americans in need.

Reciprocal Responsibility: Full and equal responsibility for maximizing potential lies
with the individual to society and with society to the individual.

“Poverty” is broader than income: Income is only a part of an individual’s ability to make
life work and to be a productive member of society. Human potential depends on
different types of capital –social, economic, and spiritual.

“Poverty” as we know it is only a starting point: Traditional definitions and mental
models about poverty (e.g. models based exclusively on income determinants, which
suggest poverty as a population) are starting points only.

Shared vision: New ways of thinking about and addressing poverty are aligned with the
assumptions built into the founding documents of the nation.

Hopeful: Our new construct is built on a foundation of a profound belief in the natural
gifts, skills and abilities of every person to achieve when set free.

Fundamental right to individual potential: Every individual has the right to achieve their
potential, regardless of circumstance, strengths, or weaknesses.

Systemic interdependence: All parts of the system (read: nation) must fulfill their
obligations toward maximizing potential in order for all to be successful. No one policy,
program, community, strategy can maximize the nation’s collective human potential
alone.

Leveraging resources: The ability of an individual or system to align and strategically use
the resources they have toward the outcome of success, as they have defined it.

Budget neutral: Spending more Federal and philanthropic money is not the issue. We
should strive first to make wiser application of existing resources.
259

Everybody has a role: Every sector of society (government, private industry, non-profit,
communities) has a role in creating a nation of reciprocal responsibility and opportunity.
These roles may or may not be consistent with current roles.

Government as convener: The government role is one of convener and catalyst for
enabling innovation.

Change is necessary: We cannot create a nation of reciprocal responsibility and
opportunity using these principles without fundamental change occurring in every sector
of society.
260
APPENDIX B Research Themes: Redefining Poverty
August 12, 2004 1
Redefining Poverty
Key Themes
Compelling Case for Change
-
There is no federal policy, per se, on reducing poverty in the United States.
-
The last and perhaps only time the U.S. had a vision of reducing poverty and an explicit
commitment to it was during the Great Society Years.
-
During the War on Poverty, there were multiple programs created but little in the way of
a coordinated strategy that had poverty reduction as a goal.
-
For the past 42 years, since the 1962 AFDC-U amendments, the numerous efforts at
‘welfare reform’ have been more about reducing the numbers on welfare rolls rather than
reducing poverty.
-
Multiple programs exist that have reducing poverty as part of their mission but the
measures are about program specific outcomes rather than overall poverty reduction.
-
There is no agreement about which of the causes of poverty are the normal consequence
of the operation of an economy or of defects in the economy, a function of the social
values as they exist at any point in time, or the result of individual action or inaction.
Because we have not unraveled and identified all the factors that cause poverty, most
legislation does not have clear cut strategies to eliminate or change those causes.
-
Most legislation does not require that the strategies it requires or permits be evaluated for
their effectiveness. Programs operate for decades with no systematic evaluation.
-
No effort is made to use the analysis or experience from other countries that have done a
significantly better job of reducing poverty for specific groups, e.g. children.
-
The linkage between the academy and public policy is weak. Research findings are not
reflected in program design.
-
Social mobility is still poorly understood and under-invested in terms of research. There
is much more volatility of movement among the general population than is recognized
and factored into public policy, most of which is based on a static snapshot of society
rather then a dynamic motion picture of how American works. Why do some groups and
261
individuals avoid poverty altogether? Why do some pop into poverty and quickly pop
out? Who do some drop in and stick?
-
The snapshot approach does not reveal what happens to a family over time, e.g. they may
be poor during their younger years, have adequate income in the middle years, and be
poor again or perhaps well off in their senior years. What are the total lifetime earnings
of most individuals and families?
-
Programs are focused on specific needs emanating from legislative action --usually
representing a compromise of conflicting viewpoints. These compromises are based on
assumptions about aggregate needs – but these do not relate to the totality of an
individual’s needs.
-
Program eligibility is typically tied to some form of income test – generally, although not
exclusively, related to the poverty guidelines.
-
Program income tests fail to account for most of the reasons why people are in poverty
and fail to identify the pathways out of poverty.
Current Definition of Poverty
-
Federal poverty definitions have 2 main purposes –to provide a statistical analysis of the
population and to serve as a test for eligibility determination for specific programs.
-
All federal definitions are tied primarily to past and current income.
-
The current poverty thresholds are rooted in a 1965 study using minimum food
consumption budgets – which at that time were assumed to be one third of a family’s
income needs. While levels have increased to reflect cost of living increases, the basic
assumptions have not changed since 1965.
-
Poverty computations essentially only count cash income and a few asses, and vary by
family size.
-
The poverty thresholds are typically absolutes when considering program eligibility –
either you are eligible or you are not – there is no middle ground.
-
There is no national rule that requires the poverty thresholds be used across the board for
program eligibility purposes. Eligibility criteria are typically defined in each piece of
authorizing legislation.
-
The current definition of poverty excludes other relevant social factors that help people
stay out of poverty, that help people get out of poverty, or that keep people in poverty (It
is a consumption-based versus a strength based or a social based approach).
262
-
-
The dollar based element of the poverty definition is obsolete because:
o Food consumption today is 14% of a U.S. family budget vs. 33% in 1965
o No regional variations exist for the poverty index (as they do for other measures
of low-income used in some programs e.g. Lower Living Income Standard
Levels)
o In-kind, benefits or other off-sets are not included in income.
o Life in the United States has changed dramatically since 1965 – many other
factors such as childcare, healthcare, housing and transportation are a much larger
part of minimal living standards than they were then.
Social assets and human capital need to be considered as part of the definition of poverty
because they are crucial factors in avoiding or escaping poverty.
-
There is a difference between situational poverty (short duration) and generational (long
term often lifetime duration) poverty. Some estimates are that as many as 50% of U.S.
citizens will experience situational poverty sometime during their lives. Support systems
and networks exist for most of those in situational poverty such that they access
government services far less or not at all. The family, the clan and other social networks
are a stronger part of their support mechanisms.
-
Attempts to change the dollar-based poverty definition have not moved beyond research,
academia, and rhetoric. There are many reasons for this inertia. There are always winners
and losers in an definitional change:
-
o It can change the perception of the total number of people who are in poverty.
o It can make more people eligible for assistance and therefore put upward pressure
on budgets.
o It could make fewer people eligible for assistance and therefore put downward
pressure on budgets.
o It could screen out some who now receive substantial in-kind support e.g. food
stamps and Earned Income Tax Credits.
o It could re-allocate funds among states and local service providers.
Poverty rates across different countries are difficult to compare primarily because costs of
existence vary so much e.g. at least 2 billion of the 4.8 billion people living in developing
countries exist on the equivalent of $2 or less (in U.S. dollars) a day.
-
Recent international definitions of poverty (the UN Human Poverty Index) factor in
illiteracy, malnutrition among children, early death, poor health care and poor access to
safe water as poverty indicators. They use a much wider array of elements in their
definitions, but not all of them are applicable to developed societies (like the U.S.).
-
Providing the poor with basic social services and enhancing infrastructure would in many
cases over the long term alleviate poverty to a greater extent than simply raising income
levels through government transfers. This applies to the U.S. as well as developing
countries.
263
Questions to Consider
How can changes in the definition of poverty help reveal the causes of poverty and help
identify strategies that, if implemented, would improve the lives of those living in poverty and
ultimately lead to fewer people living impoverished lives?
Can we clarify and sharpen the distinctions between: (a) public-charity and private
charity functions that create a minimal quality of life, (b) human development strategies that
enable a person to maximize their potential, and(c) other anti-poverty strategies that correct
structural problems in the economy or society?
How might such changes impact society’s views about and action toward those in
poverty?
How can such changes impact the views and actions of people who are living in poverty?
How can new definitions help shape a shared vision of addressing poverty in new ways?
How can new definitions help foster greater interdependence among sectors of society -and among different human development systems?
How can other sectors, such as education, foundations, health, and technology benefit
from revised definitions?
How can new definitions maintain a budget-neutral position, or at least be sufficiently
budget-neutral that the dollar cost does not become a pivotal factor in their adoption?
How can new definitions stimulate innovation at all levels?
How can new definitions expand to the role of communities in developing and
implementing policies and methods to enhance opportunity and reduce poverty?
How can new definitions create more opportunity for those in poverty to maximize their
potential to achieve their own success?
How can new definitions take advantage of the human potential of people living
impoverished lives?
How can we create agreement that the definitions should be changed?
What approaches to changing the definitions might work?
264
APPENDIX C The Evolution Of Thinking About Poverty: Exploring The Interactions
Article: Kanbur, Ravi and Squire, Lyn (1999). The Evolution of Thinking About Poverty:
Exploring the Interactions
Ravi Kanbur and Lyn Squire
September, 1999
Ravi Kanbur is T.H. Lee Professor of World Affairs at Cornell University and Director of
the World Development Report at The World Bank; Lyn Squire is Director of the Global
Development Network, at The World Bank in Washington, DC.
Noémi Giszpenc provided excellent research assistance. The authors would like to thank
the participants at the Symposium on “Future of Development Economics in Perspective” held in
Dubrovnik, 13-14 May, 1999 for their many helpful comments and suggestions.
THE EVOLUTION OF THINKING ABOUT POVERTY: EXPLORING THE INTERACTIONS
Abstract
This paper considers the evolution of thinking about poverty since Rowntree's classic
study of poverty in England at the turn of the last century. It highlights the progressive
broadening of the definition and measurement of poverty, from command over market-purchased
goods (income) to other dimensions of living standards such as longevity, literacy and
healthiness, and , most recently, to concerns with risk and vulnerability, and powerlessness and
lack of voice. The paper argues that while there is a correlation between these different
dimensions, this broadening changes significantly our thinking about strategies to reduce
poverty. A broader definition expands the set of policies that are relevant to the reduction of
poverty. But the broadening also emphasizes that poverty reducing strategies must recognize the
interactions among the policies--the impact of appropriately designed combinations will be
greater than the sum of the individual parts.
THE EVOLUTION OF THINKING ABOUT POVERTY: EXPLORING THE INTERACTIONS
Ravi Kanbur and Lyn Squire
September, 1999
I. INTRODUCTION
Eradicating, or at least reducing, poverty lies at the heart of development economics.
While development seeks to benefit all members of society, the poor command our special
attention. Any reasonable definition of poverty implies that significant numbers of people are
living in intolerable circumstances where starvation is a constant threat, sickness is a familiar
companion, and oppression is a fact of life. In Alfred Marshall’s words, “The study of the causes
265
of poverty is the study of the causes of degradation of a large part of mankind.” [Marshall, A.
“Principles of Economics”, p3, eighth edition, 1925.] Improving the lives of the poor must be at
the top of our agenda.
What does development economics have to say about reducing poverty? And how has thinking
evolved over the last quarter of a century? This paper explores these issues through the evidence
and analysis available in the literature in general and through the World Bank’s World
Development Reports on poverty. [World Development Reports, 1980 and 1990. A new report
on poverty will be issued in 2000.] These reports, drawing on evidence from around the world,
summarize contemporary thinking on the subject and are therefore useful instruments for
assessing progress in our understanding of the problem and our ability to solve it.
The breadth of the topic requires some selectivity. We focus on two questions. How
should poverty be defined and measured? And, what policies and strategies reduce poverty so
defined? The questions are of course related – the definition of poverty drives the choice of
policies. To organize the discussion, we take advantage of the fact that the definition of poverty
has broadened over the last quarter of a century, and, as it has broadened, so the relevant set of
policies has expanded. Beginning with a focus on command over market-purchased goods
(income), the definition of poverty has expanded to embrace other dimensions of living standards
such as longevity, literacy, and healthiness. And, as we learn more about and from the poor, the
concept has developed further to reflect a concern with vulnerability and risk, and with
powerlessness and lack of voice. Our review of the evolution of thinking about poverty leads us
to two broad conclusions.
First, broadening the definition of poverty does not change significantly who is counted
as poor – at least not as far as aggregate measures are concerned. While this is a simplification,
and we can find evidence to the contrary in the literature, it reflects the fact that the many aspects
of poverty – income, health, political rights, and so on – are often closely correlated. While
aggregate measures may be largely unaffected, the broader definitions allow a better
characterization of poverty and the terrible hardships burdening the poor, and therefore increase
our understanding of poverty and the poor. This deeper understanding will often be critical to the
design and implementation of specific programs and projects to help people escape poverty.
Second and related, broadening the definition of poverty changes significantly our
thinking about strategies to reduce poverty. In part this is obvious. A broader definition naturally
expands the set of policies that are relevant to the reduction of poverty. As more aspects of
poverty are recognized, so more policies become relevant to fighting poverty – moving beyond
income to include health, for example, introduces a new set of policy instruments. But, there is
another, more subtle and important consequence. The various aspects of poverty interact in
important ways, such that policies do more than simply add up – for example, improving health
increases income-earning potential, increasing education leads to better health outcomes,
providing safety nets allows the poor to take advantage of high-return, high-risk opportunities,
and so on. Poverty-reducing strategies must recognize the interactions among policies – the
impact of appropriately designed combinations will be greater than the sum of the individual
parts. The interaction between the various dimensions of poverty is a theme that runs throughout
this review.
266
These two issues – definition and strategy – are explored in more depth in the following
sections as we trace the historical evolution of poverty through its various manifestations.
Section two looks at the definition of poverty as it emerged from the pioneering efforts of
Rowntree at the turn of the century. His focus on income (or expenditure) led naturally to a
strategy based on growth in national income. But growth in national income will only help the
poor if they share in that growth. The key interaction then was the link between growth in
national income and changes in inequality, and a fear that progress on one front (growth) would
lead to setbacks on the other (inequality) with uncertain implications for the poor.
Section three explores the incorporation in the 1980s of other dimensions of poverty –
longevity, literacy, healthiness. This brought new policies into play but also revealed two new
interactions. One was within the new set of policies – healthier children perform better at school;
better educated mothers have healthier families and so on. And the other was between progress
in human development and increases in national income. From one perspective better health and
education can be viewed as an investment in human capital that, like investment in physical
capital, should yield a return in the form of increased income. From another perspective better
health and education can be seen as improvements in the quality of life in their own right.
Indeed, in this view growth in national income only has value to the extent that is leads to
longer lives, better health, and greater literacy. Either way, there is an interaction between the
two sets of outcomes.
In section four we incorporate the findings from the analysis of panel data and from a
range of participatory techniques that have recently come to the fore and which seek to elicit
views about poverty from the poor themselves. This has led to today’s concern with risk and
vulnerability, powerlessness, and lack of voice. Here too important interactions emerge.
Reducing exposure to risk offers an immediate benefit to the otherwise vulnerable but it
also provides a platform to escape long-run poverty – lower exposure to risk frees the poor to
engage in riskier, but more profitable, production and investment strategies including investing
in their children’s education. Similarly, giving the poor voice reduces their sense of isolation, an
immediate benefit. But once they have a greater say in the selection and design of programs to
assist them, then they are also more committed to implementation. In direct opposition to the
isolation the poor often endure, successful implementation of income-earning projects, health
programs, and safety nets calls for inclusion and active participation in a wide range of
circumstances.
We conclude in section five by restating the central proposition of this review. As the
definition of poverty has expanded and new dimensions have been introduced, the degree of
interaction among the elements has also increased because each element contributes to wellbeing in the broad but also contributes to the achievement of other elements. With this
perspective as background, section five offers some views on the most important outstanding
issues in need of further research.
267
II. INCOME AND CONSUMPTION
Conventional Measures
According to normal usage poverty is “The state of one who lacks a usual or socially acceptable
amount of money or material possessions.” [Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (1995)].
This definition contains two important ideas. First, the definition of poverty will be different at
different times and in different societies – what is “socially acceptable” in, say, India may differ
from that in the U.S.A. And second, the focus is on the ability to purchase goods and services
(money) or on their ownership (material possessions). As we shall see, many attempts to measure
poverty incorporate these two ideas.
Benjamin Seebohm Rowntree, an early measurer of poverty, arrived at a “socially
acceptable” amount of money by estimating the budget required “to obtain the minimum
necessaries for the maintenance of merely physical efficiency” [Rowntree, 1910, p.86.]
appropriate to the specific circumstances of the City of York at the turn of the century. Based on
the nutritional content of various foods and their local prices, Rowntree concluded that fifteen
shillings would provide the minimum budget for food for a family of six for one week. Adding
an allowance for shelter, clothing, fuel, and other sundries, he arrived at a poverty line of twentysix shillings for a family of six that implied a poverty rate of almost 10 percent in York. While
this same approach has been used in other countries and other times, the resulting poverty line is
sensitive to local circumstances.
Thus, the Indian and U.S. poverty lines are based more or less on this approach, yet when
both are expressed in 1985 PPP dollars, the latter is ten to twenty times as large as the former,
depending on the size of the household. This difference reflects the tendency for poverty lines to
change over time within countries as average incomes rise and views about the “minimum
necessaries” evolve. A study of poverty lines – budgets for “minimum subsistence” – used in the
U.S.A. in the period 1905 to 1960 found that they rose 0.75 percent in real terms for each 1.0
percent increase in the real disposable income per capita of the general population. [Cited in
Fisher, 1996.] Thus, compared with the absolute poverty threshold established by Mollie
Orshansky for 1963, minimum subsistence budgets before World War I were, in constant dollars,
between 43 and 54 percent as large; by 1923, a “minimum subsistence level” was 53 to 68
percent as large. An “emergency” budget during the Depression year of 1935 was 65 percent,
and a low-income line for 1957 was 88 percent of Orshansky’s threshold.
That popular conceptions of the amount needed to “get along” rise with increases in
overall incomes is neatly captured in a quotation from 1938: “A standard budget worked out in
the [1890’s], for example, would have no place for electric appliances, automobiles, spinach,
radios, and many other things which found a place on the 1938 comfort model. The budget of
1950 will undoubtedly make the present one look as antiquated as the hobble skirt.” [Cited in
Fisher, 1996.] As technology progresses and the general standard of living rises, three effects
have an impact on poverty: new consumption items, initially viewed as luxuries, come to be seen
as conveniences and then as necessities; changes in the way society is organized may make it
more expensive for the poor to accomplish a given goal – say, when widespread automobile
268
ownership leads to a deterioration in public transportation; and finally, general upgrading of
social standards can make things more expensive for the poor, as when housing code
requirements that all houses have indoor plumbing add to the cost of housing.
Once a poverty line has been established, it could be applied to data on incomes or on
expenditure. Most analysts favor expenditure. In many cases, expenditure is far easier to
measure. It also has a conceptual advantage. If incomes vary over time in fairly predictable ways
(as they are likely to do in a rural economy, say), households can to some extent smooth their
living standards from income variability. Anand and Harris (1994) address the choice of a
welfare indicator using data from Sri Lanka. They conjecture, and find, that income is a noisy
indicator of “permanent” income, while household total expenditure per capita is less noisy and
thus preferred. [They go on to argue that household food expenditure is an even better indicator
of permanent income.]
Within this broad approach, many attempts have been made to improve estimates of
poverty lines and overcome a host of conceptual and empirical difficulties. [For useful surveys,
see Callan and Nolan, 1991, and Lipton and Ravallion, 1995.] The value of this effort depends
on the use to be made of poverty lines and hence the required level of precision. We discuss and
judge some of these efforts from the perspective of two possible uses of poverty lines – as a
means of measuring poverty worldwide and monitoring changes over time, and as a means of
designing specific actions oriented towards the poor.
A commonly used poverty line for monitoring progress in reducing poverty worldwide is the
dollar-a-day measure introduced in the 1990 World Development Report. Based on the poverty
lines actually used in several low-income countries [in 1985 PPP prices, the 1990 WDR used a
range of income, from $275 to $370 per person a year, to permit cross-country comparison. The
range spanned the poverty lines estimated for a number of countries – Bangladesh, the Arab
Republic of Egypt, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Morocco, and Tanzania], this poverty line is
expressed in 1985 PPP dollars and refers to household expenditure per person. This measure has
several well-known deficiencies – it does not allow for cost-of-living differentials within
countries (Ravallion and van de Walle, 1991), it does not distinguish between transient and
chronic poverty (World Bank, 1990), it only values goods and services delivered through the
market (van de Walle and Nead, 1994), it does not consider intra-household allocation of
expenditure (Haddad and Kanbur, 1990), it deals in only a rudimentary fashion with differences
in household size and composition (Lanjouw and Ravallion, 1995), and so on. Techniques exist
to handle most of these concerns but only at a cost and only with appropriate data. The relevant
question therefore is: when is it reasonable to ignore these complications and when are they
critical?
The broad elements of the answer are clear. As far as overall monitoring is concerned, the
important issue is the extent to which the quantitative significance of these deficiencies changes
through time or differs across countries. While it is important to keep these factors in mind, their
significance must be judged against our ability to measure poverty with any precision even in the
best of circumstances. Measurement errors arising from different survey techniques, samples,
timing, and so on make it doubtful that efforts to deal with some of the deficiencies noted above
will greatly improve our ability to monitor progress in reducing poverty in the broad. Or, to put
269
the same point differently, current methods, crude as they are, may well be adequate. Gauging
the robustness of results through careful use of sensitivity analysis can provide some reassurance.
This is all the more important in that the deprivation of someone living just above the poverty
line is almost as severe as that of a person just below it. For this reason, it makes sense to use
more than one poverty line. [Dominance conditions are a more formal solution to the problem
of uncertainty about the poverty line (Atkinson, 1987).]
It is reassuring that the use of more than one line generally gives the same overall picture
regarding the worldwide distribution of poverty and how it is changing over time. Table 1
illustrates this point for two poverty lines – one identifying the poor and the other the extreme
poor as defined in the 1990 World Development Report. Whichever poverty line one uses, the
incidence of poverty is highest in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa and lowest in the Middle
East and North Africa and East Asia. Similarly, whichever poverty line one uses, between 1985
and 1990 the incidence of poverty fell in South Asia, but increased in Latin America and subSaharan Africa. The survey data underlying these numbers cover 80 percent of the population in
developing countries. Extrapolating to the total population, the higher of the two poverty lines,
the widely used dollar-a-day poverty line for one individual at 1985 U.S. prices, indicates that
about 1.3 billion people, or one in three, were living in poverty in the developing world in 1990.
Table 1: The Incidence of Poverty
Poverty Line
(1985 PPP$/person/month)
Year
Region (% of population)
South Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
East Asia
Total
Source: Chen, Datt, and Ravallion, 1994.
$21.00
$30.42
1985
1990
1985
1990
36.76
31.65
13.23
4.89
1.33
18.25
33.31
33.44
17.21
4.86
0.54
17.79
60.84
51.40
23.07
15.72
4.49
33.88
58.60
52.89
27.77
14.71
2.52
33.52
The importance of precise measures of poverty increases when we turn to the design of
specific, poverty-reducing actions because equal treatment of equals is one of the fundamental
principles of public policy. Take the issue of rural-urban differentials in the cost of living.
People migrating from rural to urban areas in a developing country may find themselves
facing an entirely new set of prices, especially for housing and food staples. For example,
according to Ravallion and van de Walle (1991), average dwelling rents in 1981 were six times
higher in urban Java than in rural Java. Incorporating such huge differences into location-specific
poverty lines can of course change the focus of poverty-oriented actions from rural to urban
areas. But, the quality of the dwelling stock is often better on average in urban areas, and, once
allowance is made for this, Ravallion and van de Walle conclude that the appropriate differential
is much smaller – about 10 percent between urban and rural Java. [Ravallion and van de Walle
(1991).] Thus, adjusting for cost-of-living differences may be important to ensure equal
270
treatment of urban and rural dwellers, but the adjustment will usually be much less than that
suggested by a simple comparison of prices.
Similarly, failure to allow for differential access to goods and services that are not
purchased in the market can lead to misleading assessments of poverty. Thus, two equally poor
households according to the dollar-a-day definition could have quite different levels of wellbeing if they have different degrees of access to free or heavily subsidized goods and services, or
if they have different degrees of access to public goods. For example, the subsidy received by the
poorest decile of the urban population through their use of hospitals and primary health centers
in Indonesia in 1987 was twice that received by the poorest decile of the rural population (van de
Walle, 1994). Similarly, if poor people are depleting common resources, the conventional
estimates will overlook increases in pauperization. For example, Jodha (1995) points to the loss
of common property resources in dry regions of India. Between 1950 and the early 1980s
common areas declined by 31 to 55 percent in the study villages. One can see a manifestation of
narrowed options for succeeding generations in the premature harvesting of trees to make up for
the reduced availability of plant material, a process which is not reflected in the national
accounts.
Assume that we have handled cost-of-living differentials and similar problems such as
differences in household size and composition,12 and that we have identified two equally poor
households during the survey period. But if one household is experiencing a temporary fall into
poverty while the other is chronically poor, the appropriate policy responses towards the two
households should probably be quite different. Specifically, alleviation of chronic poverty
demands increases in the poor’s physical and human capital, or in the returns to their labor, while
insurance and income-stabilization schemes are more appropriate for transient poverty. That
said, instruments and objectives cannot be so easily segregated. The existence of an effective
safety net or access to credit to smooth income fluctuations also has potentially important
implications for the ability of the chronically poor to escape poverty, as we shall see.
Available panel data suggest that movement into and out of poverty is large. For
example, data from the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics
(ICRISAT) survey of six Indian villages from 1975 to 1983 showed that 50 percent of the
population were poor in a typical year but only 19 percent were poor in every year (World Bank,
1990). Thus, a substantial core of chronically poor co-exists with considerable movement into
and out of poverty. Jalan and Ravallion (1998) present a number of findings about rural China
using panel data for six years, 1985 to 1990. They find that transient poverty, defined as the
poverty that can be attributed to intertemporal variability in consumption, accounts for 37
percent of total poverty for those households that were below the poverty line on average.
However, the extent of transient poverty drops to a negligible amount for households
whose mean consumption is more than 50 percent above the poverty line. The authors also found
that about half of mean poverty is attributable to variability in consumption in the poorer
provinces, while in a relatively well-off province with higher average consumption it was much
higher, at 84 percent of mean poverty.
271
The distinction between transient and chronic poverty has emerged as an important issue
in the context of the East Asian crisis. The traditional concentration of poverty in Indonesia, the
hardest-hit country, is in rural areas. Rural poverty has been declining in Indonesia, but in 1997 it
was still at 12.4 percent, compared with 9.2 percent in the urban sector – with the result that 70
percent of Indonesia’s poor were in rural areas in 1997 (Poppele et al. 1999). But the immediate
impact of the crisis has fallen on the financial sector and the corporate sector and can, therefore,
be expected to generate additional poverty in urban areas. Evidence in support of this view is
now beginning to appear. A survey of 2,000 households suggests that incomes in urban areas
have fallen by one third, whereas in rural areas the decline has been less than 15 percent
(Poppele et al.1999). Allocating income support schemes – such as public works programs –
according to the pre-crisis distribution of poverty would have missed many of the newly poor in
urban areas.
Imagine that we have constructed poverty lines that truly treat equal households equally.
Does this necessarily imply the equal treatment of equal individuals? The answer depends on
how households allocate income or food to individual household members. To test the
quantitative importance of moving from household-based measures to individual-based ones, 12
The choice of an “equivalence scale” that sets a proportion for children’s needs versus those of
adults can change commonly held views about poverty. For example, if economies of size are
sufficiently strong then the negative relationship between size of household and expenditure per
person can be reversed (Lanjouw and Ravallion, 1995).8
Haddad and Kanbur (1990) use data on calorie intake by individuals based on 24-hour
recall by the mother in a sample of rural households in southern Philippines. They find that
ignoring within-household inequality understates total inequality – for example, the Gini index
increases by about 35 percent when the base moves from households to individuals. On the other
hand, rankings across groups producing different crops or having different tenurial status were
not affected by the change in base.
The way in which households allocate income among members can have a significant
impact on policy formation and implementation. In the unitary model [Singh, Squire, Strauss
(1986)], which assumes a single utility function that governs the household as a whole,
policymakers can only shift household allocation by shifting relative prices. Other models move
away from the notion of income-pooling and a common utility function and assume instead that
household members engage in a bargaining process or else behave independently (Manser and
Brown 1980, McElroy and Horney 1981, Alderman et al 1995, Haddad et al., 1997). In these
models, the impact that public transfers have on welfare may be affected by the identity of the
recipient. In support of this, Thomas (1990) shows that the impact of non-labor income accruing
to women in Brazilian households on per capita calorie and protein intake, fertility, child
survival, and weight-for-height for children less than eight years old is different from what
would have occurred had the income accrued to men. For example, unearned income accruing to
the mother raises the probability of child survival by 20 times that of a similar increase in the
unearned income of the father.
Similarly, if information is not pooled, then it matters to whom policy initiatives are directed.
Faulty policy assumptions may result in the non-adoption of, say, new technology, or the
272
adoption of projects that make a group worse off. For example, in the Dominican Republic, a
reforestation initiative assumed that men and women used wood for the same purposes, and
consequently only consulted men. Only mid-way through the project were women consulted, and
it turned out that their needs for fuelwood were not met by the project — and it was too late for
those needs to be addressed. [Fortmann and Rocheleau (1989) in Haddad, Hoddinott and
Alderman (1997).]
The many difficulties of measuring poverty along conventional lines notwithstanding, the
endeavor has seen considerable progress in the last 25 years thanks to the expanding availability
of household surveys. Between the World Bank’s first progress report on poverty in 1993 and its
second one in 1996, the number of low-income and middle-income countries with household
data on income or expenditure more than doubled from 31 to 71 (World Bank, 1996). This
availability of household surveys of some form or other has improved our knowledge of poverty
substantially and clarified the links between growth in national income and changes in
inequality, the issue to which we now turn.
Growth, Inequality, and Poverty
Those who viewed poverty as a lack of income or commodities naturally turned their
attention to the expansion of per capita income -- economic growth -- as a potential strategy to
reduce poverty. The only question was whether income expansion accrued as much to the poor
14 9
as to the rest of society, or whether it left them behind. In 1955, Simon Kuznets called attention
to the consideration of economic growth and income inequality, describing it as “central to much
of economic analysis and thinking.” [Kuznets (1955).] He examined the question with about 5
percent empirical information and 95 percent speculation, by his own account, suggesting
explanations for – and theoretical arguments against – his scant data. [Most of his figures are
from the United States, United Kingdom, and Germany, with some references to India, Prussia,
Ceylon, and Puerto Rico (op. cit.).] What is now known as the Kuznets curve or Inverted U
Hypothesis comes from a hypothetical numerical exercise. The idea is that primarily agricultural
economies start out with an initially equitable distribution with a low average, but that as they
develop, portions of the population migrate to other sectors with greater inequality but higher
averages. Initially, this causes inequality to worsen. But, as countries continue to progress, more
of the rural sector moves out of agriculture and inequality eventually decreases.
This picture was largely based on Lewis’s dual economy theory (1954). In his numerical
example, Kuznets observed that the share of the lowest portion of the population fell in all cases
(but no such pattern was found in his data).
Kuznets based his speculation on longitudinal data from the development of industrialized
countries, but many subsequent estimations used cross-country data to explore the hypothesis.
[Ahluwalia et al. (1979), Paukert (1973), Chenery and Syrquin (1975) and Ahluwalia (1976).]
These studies found a pattern of significant increases in inequality as income levels rose, with
ambiguous effects for poverty reduction, ranging from absolute impoverishment to slower than
average gains. Later studies criticized the cross-country exercises for ignoring country-specific
273
effects and measurement differences, and also looked at newly available country time-series
data. [Anand and Kanbur (1993), Bruno et al. (1998), Deininger and Squire (1998).] The
Kuznets U faded from view, leaving the conclusion that inequality and income are not
systematically related according to some immutable law of development. [In his review of
income distribution and development, Kanbur (1998) describes this conclusion as the “emerging
consensus.”]
Thus, one study of 49 countries finds that there is no statistical relationship between
inequality and income in forty cases (more than 80 percent of the sample). Four out of the
remaining nine exhibited a U-shaped relationship rather than the inverted U hypothesized by
Kuznets. So the Kuznets curve appeared in only 5 out of 49 countries. [Deininger and Squire,
1998., p.279.] Nor does there seem to be a simple relationship between inequality and growth.
Chen and Ravallion (1997) found that inequality was not correlated with growth in mean
consumption in 43 spells, a spell being a period for which two household surveys are available
for a country.
In place of the Kuznets curve, the recent literature points to a different empirical
regularity. As more time series data become available, it appears that aggregate inequality as
measured by, say, the Gini index does not typically change dramatically from year to year. In
fact, one study of panel data for 49 countries found that 91.8 percent of the variance in inequality
was due to cross-country variance while only 0.85 percent was attributed to variance over time.
[Li, Squire, and Zou, 1998, p.4.]
The same study also showed that few countries exhibited statistically significant trends
over time. Thirty-two out of 49 countries revealed no trend, while 10 showed an increasing trend
in inequality and 7 a decreasing one (Li, Squire, Zou, 1998). This is not to say that inequality
does not change. Obviously it does and in some cases – China, Eastern Europe, UK – quite
rapidly. Nevertheless, for many countries over long periods of time inequality is surprisingly
persistent.
And where inequality has changed rapidly, it has increased. We do not have solid
evidence of rapid reductions in inequality. For the seven countries where inequality decreased in
the Li, Squire, and Zou sample the average rate of decrease was 0.3 Gini points a year. This
implies that it would take about 60 years for a country with Latin American levels of inequality
to move to the average of all developing countries.
That said, even small changes in aggregate inequality can have a significant impact on
poverty. It is difficult to establish a simple formula relating changes in aggregate measures of
inequality such as the Gini index to changes in poverty. Thus, the Gini index can increase or
decrease and leave poverty unchanged if the distribution above the poverty line changes. And,
poverty can increase or decrease without any change in the Gini index if there are appropriate
offsetting changes in distribution among the non-poor. To explore the impact of inequality on the
poor, we need to specify the change in distribution more precisely.
One specification that has received some attention22 assumes that the Lorenz curve shifts
by a constant proportion of the difference between the actual share of total income accruing to
274
each income group and equal shares. This leads to analytically tractable elasticities of the
Poverty Gap with respect to the Gini index.23 Using the poverty line of one dollar a day, the
elasticity can be as high as 8.2 (Brazil), 12.6 (Chile), and even 21.1 (Thailand). For countries
with lower incomes and hence more poverty, however, the elasticities are much lower – 0.82
(India), 0.76 (Uganda), and 0.40 (Zambia). Nevertheless, the experience of two countries reveals
the significance of sustained falls in inequality over time. From the early 60s to the early 90s,
Thailand saw its Gini index rise by 0.31 Gini points a year; Norway saw its fall by a similar
amount – 0.34 Gini points a year. In Thailand, the incomes of the poorest quintile grew at half
the rate of mean per capita income; in Norway they grew almost 80 percent faster than the
mean.24
Moreover, while there is no evidence of any systematic link between inequality and the
level of income, nor between inequality and the rate of growth (see evidence cited above), there
may be a reverse relationship from initial inequality in income or assets to growth. Clarke (1996)
conducts one of the most careful econometric studies in the literature and finds a strong negative
and statistically significant effect of initial inequality in income on future growth. He concludes
that a reduction in inequality from one standard deviation above the mean to one standard
deviation below would increase the long-run growth rate by 1.3 percentage points a year. In
contrast, subsequent research using higher-quality data have found a positive impact of initial
inequality on growth (Li and Zou, 1998 and Forbes, 1998).
22 See Kakwani, 1980 and Lipton and Ravallion, 1995.
23 The poverty gap is defined as the amount of transfer (perfectly targeted) required to bring
every one up to the poverty line expressed as a proportion of the poverty line times the total
population.
24 Authors’ calculation using the Deininger-Squire data base.
11
While the evidence on initial income inequality may therefore be mixed, several authors
have found a strong relationship between growth and the initial distribution of various types of
assets. For example, Birdsall and Londono (1997) find that the initial distribution of human
capital affects future growth, while Deininger and Squire (1998) find that the initial unequal
distribution of land reduces future growth. One thing to be careful of in these aggregate growth
regressions is the possibility of an aggregation bias. Ravallion (1998) found such a bias to be
quite large, and a consistent micro model of consumption growth at the farm-household level
indicated a far more harmful effect of asset inequality on consumption growth. These
conclusions point to the possibility of identifying redistributive policies that increase growth and
could therefore yield a double benefit for the poor.
From Mechanical Relationships to Policy
Searching for a mechanical link between inequality and income is not likely to be fruitful.
There exist too many different experiences. Nor does such an approach lead to policy insights
(Kanbur, 1998). Both growth and inequality are outcomes of economic policies as well as
institutional capacity, and are subject to external trends and shocks. Moreover, there is now a
substantial empirical literature on the range of factors that influence growth (Barro and Sala-
275
IMartin, 1995, Easterly, et al., 1993) and a smaller one on the factors influencing inequality
(Bourguignon and Morrison, 1990, Li, Squire, Zou, 1998). It is odd, however, that analysts have
typically looked for mechanical links when investigating growth and inequality jointly, largely
ignoring the role of policy. And when they have investigated the role of policy, they have usually
looked at growth and inequality separately. Yet the key piece of information from the policymakers’ standpoint is how policies influence both growth and inequality.
Policies to help the poor should examine how to increase growth and improve equality at
the same time, or at least how to mitigate inequality-generating growth with pro-poor measures.
Lundberg and Squire (1999) demonstrate the importance of examining the impact of policy on
both growth and inequality. They estimate separate “standard” growth and inequality equations
based on the existing literature. These regressions reveal one common variable – education—
that is significant in both equations. Education involves a trade-off -- it reduces growth but
improves inequality. This is immediate confirmation that the separate treatment of growth and
inequality could be quite misleading from a policy perspective.
The estimation of separate standard models indicates that three variables – openness, civil
liberties, and land distribution – are exclusively significant either to growth or to equality. This
suggests that the policy maker has ample room to choose a package of policies that benefits both
growth and equality. But the three variables are mutually exclusive by assumption. Lundberg and
Squire rerun the standard regressions but now they include all variables in both equations.
In the joint model, land distribution and civil liberties are confirmed as mutually
exclusive variables but openness now signifies a trade-off – it increases growth but worsens
equality.
Lundberg and Squire conclude that, at least for these simple models, the independent
analysis of growth and inequality produces potentially misleading, or at least incomplete, results
for the policy maker. Their results also suggest, however, that, even when growth and inequality
are analyzed jointly, there are still likely to be mutually exclusive variables implying a degree of
flexibility for the policy maker.
12
Lundberg and Squire also examine the joint determination of growth and inequality in
more realistic specifications. Openness, financial depth, and land redistribution emerge as
policies that consistently spur growth across different specifications. They also find that with the
significant exception of openness to trade these policies benefit equality, although these results
do not hold for all specifications and their quantitative impact is small. Indeed, a general result
emerging from this analysis is that growth is much more sensitive than equality to policy
interventions. For example, the elasticity of growth with respect to the index of openness is –
0.33; with respect to inequality, it is 0.01. In no case does a variable have a relatively larger
influence on inequality than growth. This is consistent with historical experience: growth rates
are much more volatile than inequality.25
These results illustrate the importance of treating growth and inequality together. A
strong growth performance with even a relatively modest reduction in inequality will have a
tremendous impact on the incomes of the poor. Historical evidence supports this view. Data from
276
the early 1960s to the early 1990s show that both Indonesia and Taiwan experienced rapid
growth and at least no deterioration in inequality – for both countries inequality fell but the trend
was not statistically significant. During this period, the poorest quintile in Indonesia saw their
incomes increase at a rate of 4.8 percent a year; in Taiwan the poorest quintile did even better –
an annual rate of growth of 5.8 percent.26
Understanding the policies and development strategies of these countries should provide
valuable guidance for other countries. The 1990 World Development Report pointed to: a stable
macroeconomic environment (to encourage private investment), relatively undistorted sectoral
terms of trade (to avoid bias against agriculture), relatively undistorted factor markets (to avoid
capital intensive production), and public provision of infrastructure especially to rural areas (to
avoid urban bias). Another feature underlying the success of these countries was their emphasis
on human development. They invested heavily in the education and health of their populations as
a contributing factor to growth but also as a benefit in its own right. We look at this additional
dimension of poverty in more detail in the following section.
III. HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
Measuring Human Development
A recent survey of poverty concludes that: “The generally preferred indicator of
household living standards is a suitably comprehensive measure of current consumption, given
by a price-weighted aggregate over all marketed commodities consumed by the household from
all sources (purchases, gifts, and own production).”27 This carefully worded statement
summarizes well the conventional view on measuring poverty. In principle, this definition
captures the value of publicly provided goods and services that are often supplied free of charge
or else are highly subsidized as long as there is a relevant market price. In practice, however, 25
See Easterly et al. (1993) on growth and Li, Squire and Zou (1998) on inequality.
26 Authors’ calculations using the Deininger-Squire data set.
27 Lipton and Ravallion, 1995, p.2573-4.
13
this may not always be done. There are many such goods and services, but two which are
almost always supplied in this manner are basic education and health services. Moreover, the
definition fails to capture public goods – spraying swamps to eliminate malaria for example –
many of which influence health outcomes. Because the level and quality of basic education and
health services, including public goods, varies significantly across countries, most analysts
recommend the inclusion of social indicators in arriving at an overall assessment of living
standards. For example, the 1990 World Development Report “supplements a consumptionbased poverty measure with others, such as nutrition, life expectancy, under 5 mortality, and
school enrollment rates.”28
The key word in the preceding quote is ‘supplements’— the social indicators are
providing information not captured in conventional measures of poverty. Command over market-
277
purchased commodities is important but so is access to public goods. An alternative approach
treats income (or expenditure) as an input to other, more fundamental goals. For example, the
focus of the 1980 World Development Report “is on absolute poverty – a condition of life so
characterized by malnutrition, illiteracy, and disease as to be beneath any reasonable definition
of human decency.”29 This represents a marked difference from conventional definitions in that
it does not mention income or expenditure but focuses on wellbeing as revealed by nutritional
status, educational attainment, and health status. To be sure, income may be important to the
realization of these outcomes, but there is no universal or guaranteed transformation of income
into these outcomes and, according to this view, it is the outcomes that count.
This view has received intellectual support from Sen’s definition of poverty in terms of
“capabilities”.30 Sen calls a capability the substantive freedoms people enjoy to lead the kind of
life they have reason to value, such as social functioning, better basic education and healthcare,
and longevity.31 The arguments in favor of the capability approach are that: poverty can be
characterized by capability deprivation, since these are intrinsically important while low income
is only instrumentally significant; low income is not the only influence on capability deprivation;
and the impact of income on capabilities is variable among different communities, families, and
individuals. It is interesting to note that there is a connection going from capability improvement
to greater earning power and not only the other way around. This points to the importance of a
citizenry well-prepared to take advantage of economic opportunities.
The United Nations Development Program has played the leading role in defining
poverty in terms of human development and has introduced several measures including the
Human Development Index and, of particular relevance to the present discussion, the Human
Poverty Index (HPI). This index concentrates on three aspects of human deprivation – longevity,
literacy, and living standard. Longevity is measured by the percentage of people who die before
age 40, literacy by the percentage of adults who are literate, and living standard by a combination
of the percentage of the population with access to health services, the percentage of the
population with access to safe water, and the percentage of malnourished children under five.
28 World Bank (1990), p. 26.
29 World Bank (1980), p. 32.
30 Sen (1981) and (1984).
31 Sen (1999).
14
While information on each aspect is valuable, aggregation into a single index raises a
host of serious issues. Apart from the loss of policy-relevant information, aggregation requires
the arbitrary selection of weights, a feature subject to considerable criticism in the literature.32
Unlike the conventional poverty measures discussed above, the HPI at best ranks
countries across the world. Because they are national means – like GDP per capita – they tell us
nothing about the poor. While governments are presumably interested in the life expectancy of
all their citizens, just as they are presumably interested in the incomes of all members of the
population, a special focus on poverty requires that we look at those who can expect to live the
fewest number of years. National averages do not allow ranking of households within countries.
278
And, as such, they cannot be used to distinguish the poor from the non-poor. This, of course,
reflects the absence of household surveys that allow the computation of relevant distributions.
For some measures of human development, however, household-level data are beginning
to become available. Wherever such information is available, households that are poor according
to an expenditure-based measure invariably score badly on other indicators of well-being. Tables
2 and 3 illustrate this point.
Table 2 shows that the poorest households by income level in five Latin American
countries attain fewer years of education than richer households. In the poorest households the
number of years of education for 25-year-olds ranges from about one half to one fifth of that
attained by their counterparts in the wealthiest households. In each country, the number of years
of education increases steadily as one moves up the income scale.
Table 2: Average years of education for 25 year olds by income level. Data from
recent household surveys for five Latin American countries
Decile
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
6.24
6.88
7.09
7.40
7.69
8.16
8.47
9.80 10.88 12.83
Chile
1.98
2.49
2.97
3.41
3.66
4.40
4.49
5.98
7.43
10.53
Brazil
2.14
2.95
3.78
4.15
4.78
5.66
6.06
7.24
8.89
12.13
Mexico
3.87
4.17
4.95
5.69
6.60
7.05
7.66
8.28
9.04
10.80
Peru
4.94
5.27
5.72
6.23
6.68
7.20
7.78
8.58
10.81
Venezuela 4.66
Source: Facing up to inequality in Latin America, Inter-American Development Bank, 1998.
Table 3 reveals an almost identical (but opposite) picture for sickness and wealth in
developing countries. The very poor are generally much sicker than the rest of the population.
For the sample of Asian and African countries shown in Table 3 the proportion of children born
in the past 5 years but no longer living is between 3 and 6 times larger for the poorest decile than
for the richest decile. In two of the countries – Tanzania and Uganda – almost half the children
born in the poorest decile in the past five years have died. As with education but in reverse, the
table reveals a steady decline in this measure of child mortality as wealth increases.
32 See, for example, McGillivray and White (1993), and Ravallion (1997) on the subject of the
similar Human Development Index.
15
Table 3: Proportion of children who were born in the past 5 years who are no longer living,
by wealth
Decile
Bangladesh
Indonesia
Madagascar
Pakistan
Tanzania
1
0.19
0.25
0.25
0.18
0.49
2
0.13
0.14
0.14
0.10
0.18
3
0.10
0.08
0.13
0.10
0.13
4
0.09
0.06
0.10
0.09
0.14
5
0.08
0.06
0.1
0.09
0.11
279
6
0.10
0.05
0.10
0.07
0.10
7
0.07
0.05
0.10
0.08
0.08
8
0.09
0.05
0.09
0.07
0.07
9
0.09
0.04
0.08
0.07
0.07
10
0.06
0.04
0.08
0.06
0.09
0.48
0.19
0.16
0.14
0.13
0.09
0.12
0.09
0.09
0.07
Uganda
Source: Bonilla-Chacin and Hammer, 1999, from Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS)
conducted by the MACRO corporation for USAID.
It should not be concluded from this evidence that the identification of the poor according
to different dimensions of poverty will lead to exactly the same results. A study using data
collected in 1985 in Côte d’Ivoire showed relatively modest correlations between different
measures of poverty. Of the 30 percent of the population identified as poor by a measure based
on consumption per capita adjusted for family composition, less than half were so identified
where the criterion was the average education level of adults (Glewwe and van der Gaag, 1990).
A similar conclusion emerges from a study of six developing countries – “Individuals
with lower incomes on average also have lower welfare in other dimensions… However, it is
also noticeable that the correlations are rather modest – income usually explains very little of the
variation in non-money metric welfare indicators” (Appleton and Song, 1999, p.25). This study,
however, makes no allowance for family composition in arriving at its measure of per capita
consumption.
Thus, while there is clearly an overlap -- those who lack income are also those who are
less well educated and suffer more sickness -- the correspondence is less than complete and can,
in some cases, be quite small.
We saw earlier that the poor, on balance, gain from broad-based growth (they certainly
have little to gain from contraction or stagnation). From this perspective then a poverty-reducing
strategy that does not give a central role to equity-improving growth is unlikely to be successful.
How should the strategy change if the definition of poverty is expanded to incorporate human
development as measured by, say, life expectancy or literacy? This extension captures important
dimensions of poverty that are otherwise missed by conventional income or expenditure
measures especially as used in applied work. It serves to remind us that there are additional
policy instruments that need to be kept in mind. Moreover, there are important interactions at
play – both among various elements of human development and between those elements and
growth.
The Seamless Web
A society faced with the task of providing social services to the poor may well wonder
where to begin. The lives of the poor are ringed with a tangle of vicious circles, with the virtuous
circles seemingly hovering just out of reach. These interactions have been recognized for some
time. WDR1980, for example, stresses that the “different elements of human development are
key determinants of each other” (p.68) and speaks of the “seamless web of interrelations” (p.69).
16
Efforts to improve on past performance in delivering social services are better informed
than ever about these interactions. For example, many studies have shown that mothers’
education has a strong positive effect on their children’s health. We now know that this occurs
because education enables the mother to obtain and process information. Thus, a study using data
280
from northeastern Brazil for 1986 shows that parents who regularly made use of the mass media
had healthier children as measured by height for age. Once variables for use of the media are
included, mother’s years of schooling no longer have an independent effect. One interpretation
of this result is that education is necessary for mothers to process information, but that access to
relevant material through the mass media is necessary for education to have an effect on child
health (Thomas, Strauss, and Henriques, 1991). A study using data for Morocco from 1990-91
provides support for this interpretation. It found that a mother’s basic health knowledge had a
direct effect on child health, and that education and access to media were shown to be the
vehicles for acquiring that knowledge (Glewwe, 1997).
And there are many studies showing that better health improves school attendance and
performance. Often, however, these studies use cross-sectional data and rely on recall. To
overcome this problem, a recent study uses longitudinal data to investigate the impact of child
health and nutrition on school enrollments in rural Pakistan. Unlike most other work, these data
allow the authors to relax the assumption that child health and nutrition is predetermined rather
than determined by household choices. Their preferred point estimates indicate that child
health/nutrition is three times more important for enrollment than conventional approaches
would suggest (Alderman et al., 1997). They also find that the effects are larger for girls than for
boys. While this study demonstrates that better child health and nutrition induces greater
schooling, its methodological point increases our confidence in the results of previous work
indicating a positive effect on performance as well.
Human Development and Growth
In addition to the interrelations among various aspects of human development, there are
important linkages between human development and income earning capacity – income is a
major determinant and outcome of human development. The specific way in which the poor
participate in growth tends to be through increased or more productive use of “their most
abundant asset,” labor. But part of the intrinsic characteristics of poverty – lack of education,
poor nutrition and health – also contribute to functional effects on their capacity to work. Some
of the links that either enhance or impair the poor’s capabilities may give an idea of the
multifarious interactions between human development and growth. For example, a wellnourished person can work more, thereby earning more and both consuming more and saving
more, ensuring future nourishment and work capacity. Similarly, a person with primary
education can take a higher-paying job, ensuring the ability of her children to attend school. We
briefly illustrate from the extensive empirical literature on these links.
Drawing on data from a survey of 1,725 households in Conakry, Guinea in 1990, Glick
and Sahn (1997) examine the impact of education on labor earnings by sector of employment.
Two results are noteworthy. First, education raises the earnings of men and women in the three
sectors examined – self employment, private wage employment, and public wage employment.
Thus, even in a very low-income urban area such as Conakry the benefits of schooling are
clearly visible. And second, the authors note that the informal sector (which overlaps with the
small enterprises of the self-employed) is expected to be an important source of job growth in
Africa. Even here, earnings are shown to increase with level of education. For example,
281
completing primary schooling raises the hourly enterprise profits for self-employed women by
30 percent.
Measures of nutritional status and health status have also been shown to have positive
impacts on wages and productivity. Moreover, these impacts are greater for the poor than the
non-poor. Strauss and Thomas (1997) show that controlling for a range of factors taller men in
the U.S.A. earn more – a one percent increase in height is associated with a 1 percent increase in
wages. The same relationship for Brazilian males is much more powerful – the same 1 percent
increase in height implies a 7 percent increase in wages. In their survey of the literature, Strauss
and Thomas (1998) conclude that improvements in health do result in increases in productivity
and wages and, more importantly for present purposes, the “effects are likely to be greatest for
the most vulnerable – the poorest and those with little education.”
Without these basic building blocks, the poor are unable to take advantage of incomeearning opportunities that come with growth. [For example, Ravallion and Datt (1999) show
that non-farm economic growth in India’s states was less effective in reducing poverty in states
with poor basic education.]
At the same time, society suffers the loss of their potential contributions. Therefore, the
provision of basic social services, besides being important in its own right, constitutes an
important element in the growth of a society. As one would expect, national comparisons do
indeed indicate a broad correlation between income levels and life expectancy, literacy, infant
mortality and so on. But growth in income by itself does not necessarily translate into
improvements in health status or educational attainment; nor does improved health or better
education necessarily lead to increases in income.
For example, there are some striking outliers from the general correlation between
income and other measures of well-being. The 1994 Human Development Report showed Sri
Lanka, Nicaragua, Pakistan, and Guinea all with per capita incomes in the $400-$500 range, but
life expectancies of, respectively, 71, 65, 58 and 44 years, and infant mortality rates of,
respectively, 24, 53, 99 and 135 per 1000 live births. Outliers often provide valuable insights but
there are at least two interpretations in this case.
First, the resources generated by growth may not be used in a way that promotes
improvements in other indicators. Growth provides an opportunity but that opportunity has to be
seized. Anand and Ravallion (1993) provide support for this view. For a sample of 22 countries,
they show that the observed relationship between improvements in life expectancy and increases
in mean income disappears once measures for income-poverty and public spending per capita on
health are introduced. This suggests that growth in mean income translates into improvements in
life expectancy only if growth reduces poverty (increases in the income of the poor are critical to
significant improvements in life expectancy) and if adequate provision is made for public
healthcare. It is the way in which the fruits of economic growth are used that is critical. Sri
Lanka has used its income effectively in this view, whereas Guinea has not.
But there is a second interpretation as well. The structure of incentives and the
complementary investments to ensure that society, and especially the poor, reap maximum
282
benefit, including increased incomes, from investment in education and health may not be in
place (Squire, 1993). There is evidence in support of this view especially for education. Thus,
cross-country regressions suggest that the impact of growth in educational capital on growth in
GDP per worker are “consistently small and negative” (Pritchett, 1996). Pritchett squares the
circle between the apparently positive effect of education at the individual level and its
apparently insignificant effect at the aggregate level by distinguishing between rent seeking and
productive activities (Murphy, Shleifer, and Vishny, 1991). If the returns to being educated are to
be found at least in part in rent seeking then the individuals receiving education will enjoy
increases in income but national income will not necessarily rise. According to this view,
countries like Sri Lanka have enjoyed the immediate benefits of better health and more education
but have not realized the increases in income that could accompany them.
The argument that growth does not necessarily translate into social progress and the
argument that improvements in health and education do not necessarily lead to higher incomes
can, of course, be turned around. Where countries have used the benefits of growth to finance
basic healthcare and access to education for all, and where countries have put in place incentive
structures and complementary investments to ensure that better health and education lead to
higher incomes, the poor have benefited doubly – they are healthier and better educated, and they
have increased their consumption. The 1990 World Development Report made progress on these
two fronts the foundation of its two-part strategy, arguing that they were mutually reinforcing
and that one without the other was not sufficient.
Most of the East Asian countries, prior to the recent crisis, illustrate what can be
achieved. Poverty fell dramatically in East Asia from 1975, when roughly six out of ten East
Asians lived in absolute poverty, to 1995, when only about two did. At the same time, and in part
propelling these achievements, governments invested in human capital through public
expenditures on education and health. Over the same 20-year period, life expectancy increased
by more than 9 years, the average years of education rose by 60 percent, and infant mortality fell
from 73 per thousand births to 35. [Population-weighted averages for Indonesia, Korea,
Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, and Taiwan.]
While these achievements may be eroded to some extent during the current crisis, their
lasting impact will still represent a degree of progress not seen elsewhere.
Several recent empirical studies at the household level using panel data provide further
support for a strong interaction between human development and growth in incomes. For
example, a panel of 891 households in Peru was studied during the period 1994 to 1997. The
study found that the higher the education of the household head in 1994, the larger the growth in
per capita expenditures in the subsequent period (Chong and Hentschel, 1999). Similarly, panel
data for 2,678 Vietnamese households covering the period 1993 to 1998 came to the same
conclusion – while on average those households whose head had no education saw expenditure
per capita decline, on average all households whose head had primary education or more saw per
capita expenditure increase, with the increase for those with upper secondary education being
three times that for those with primary education (Zaman 1999).
283
Incorporating other dimensions of poverty – longevity and literacy – into our definition
expands considerably the range of policy instruments available to alleviate poverty. Even if their
incomes do not increase, policies that improve the health of individuals and increase their
capacity to absorb and exchange information improve the quality of their lives. But, and this is
the lasting lesson of pre-crisis East Asia, where policies and programs to improve health and
expand education are combined with government action designed to promote investment and
broad-based growth, the benefits to the poor are that much greater. Additional country-level
research to illuminate the appropriate balance between policies for countries at different levels of
development would yield valuable lessons. Transferring such lessons to the countries of subSaharan Africa and South Asia, home to 70 percent of the world’s poor, still remains an
important challenge in the fight to reduce poverty. Yet even as this challenge goes unanswered,
new challenges are coming to the fore. The risks to the poor and non-poor alike of large
fluctuations in capital flows are now abundantly visible in East Asia. And, as we shall explore in
the next section, risk manifests itself in a multitude of forms as far as the poor are concerned.
IV. VULNERABILITY AND VOICE
Asking the Poor
Conventional measures of poverty draw heavily on the statistical information contained
in household surveys combined with a more or less arbitrary cut-off separating the poor from the
non-poor. An alternative empirical approach to measuring poverty involves asking people what,
to them, constitutes poverty. Initial investigations along these lines were designed to elicit
information about an expenditure-based or income-based poverty line. For example, respondents
might be asked: what income would they consider to be the minimum needed to make ends
meet? [See for example Goedhart, et al. (1977) and Hagenaars (1986).] More recent work –
participatory poverty assessments – are much more open-ended, interactive and qualitative and
allow people to describe what constitutes poverty in whatever dimension they choose.
Participatory surveys are designed to learn how individuals from various social groups
assess their own poverty and existing poverty reduction strategies; how various survival
strategies operate; which government poverty reduction strategies people prefer; and which they
are prepared to support. The findings are meant to refocus, elaborate, or validate conclusions
drawn from conventional poverty assessments. [Salmen (1995).] At the same time,
participatory poverty assessments pay special attention to process with the aim of engaging a
range of stakeholders, generating involvement, maximizing local ownership and building
commitment to change. Each one is different, reflecting the country context, the time available
and the information needs of policymakers. [Narayan and Nyamwaya (1996).] Thus, the
specific questions each one addresses will vary widely.
The World Bank began systematically requiring a poverty assessment of each country as
a result of the findings of the 1990 WDR. [World Bank (1991).] Poverty assessments use a
variety of sources to diagnose structural causes of poverty. Taking their cue from researchers
such as N.S. Jodha, Robert Chambers, and Lawrence Salmen who had been asking the poor for
their own assessments of their economic status, the poverty assessments began in 1993 to include
284
participatory surveys of their own. The participatory poverty assessments draw their
methodology from other analytical instruments used in the World Bank: beneficiary assessments,
designed to obtain client feedback, and participatory rural appraisals, which involve the
stakeholders in forming a rapid understanding of a particular location. As of July 1998, 43
policy-oriented participatory surveys had been undertaken at the World Bank, with at least ten
more now underway. Of the 43 completed participatory assessments, 28 were in Africa, 6 in
Latin America, 5 in Eastern Europe, and 4 in Asia.
Although expressed in many different ways, two aspects of poverty that emerge from
participatory assessments and which are not captured in conventional surveys seem especially
important. One is a concern with risk and volatility of incomes, and is often expressed as a
feeling of vulnerability. In talking about their situation, the poor detailed the ways in which
fluctuations, seasons, and crises affected their well-being. From these descriptions, we come to
understand the particular importance of poverty not just as a state of having little, but also of
being vulnerable to losing the little one has. The poor also described their interactions with
government employees and institutions, revealing another important aspect of life in poverty:
lack of political power. This lack of voice and political rights, often described as a sense of
powerlessness, is the second dimension of poverty revealed by participatory assessments and is
described by some as the most fundamental characteristic of poverty.
Vulnerability “has two sides: the external side of exposure to shocks, stress and risk; and the
internal side of defenselessness, meaning a lack of means to cope without damaging loss”.
[Chambers (1995).]
Outside sources of risk range from irregular rainfall and epidemics to crime and violence,
as well as the structural vulnerability of homes and civil conflict. During the civil war in
Tajikistan, economic activity in the affected areas ground to a halt, and in its aftermath, women
without grown males to protect them still felt particularly vulnerable. Thus, the poor perceived
peace and security as the highest priority, even over better food and shelter. With peace, people
in Tajikistan felt that the economic and political situation would improve and so would physical
security (World Bank, 1998a). Faced with a great deal of risk, the poor try to minimize their
vulnerability to disaster by diversifying their income. For example, in Kenya, the poor engage in
activities such as small-scale subsistence farming, peddling and hawking, manual labor, illicit
brewing, welding and cobbling, and operating small-scale businesses. But as we shall see, these
kinds of coping mechanisms are inadequate.
The poor suffer from risk because they lack the means to protect themselves adequately
against it – this is what makes them vulnerable. If a contingency occurs, the poor have few assets
to dispose of in addressing the problem, or the depletion of those assets must plunge them further
into long-term poverty. And they often cannot borrow to meet their needs. In Kenya, only 4
percent of the poor had access to credit through banks and another 3 percent through
cooperatives, mainly because property requirements exclude them. Thus the poor in Djibouti,
Zambia, and Tajikistan associate poverty with insecurity, uncertainty, and vulnerability. [World
Bank (1994, 1997 and 1998a).]
285
The Zambia participatory poverty assessment points out that definitions of poverty and
vulnerability at the local level often pick out characteristics that refer to people who are at or
beyond the margins of the local community, since an entire village community may well be
below a standard national “poverty line” measure, but most will still conceive of themselves as
coping. Frequently the idea of a secure livelihood is perceived as more important than
maximizing income, and thus the local understandings of people about their livelihoods have
more to do with vulnerability than poverty (World Bank 1994, p. 34). For example, the report
presented evidence that growing a wide spread of crops in terms of both food supply and cash
income reduces the vulnerability of populations to both environmental and market-based shocks
and reduces the seasonal dimension of vulnerability as well. Still, common characteristics
associated with the rural poor are a combination of age, childlessness and social isolation for
widows and divorcées, illustrating how vulnerability means lacking the means to cope.
In Cameroon, the poor in all regions distinguish themselves from the non-poor on five
main criteria: the presence of hunger in their households; fewer meals a day and nutritionally
inadequate diets; higher percentage of their meager and irregular income being spent on food;
non-existent or low sources of cash income; and a feeling of powerlessness and an inability to
make themselves heard (World Bank, 1995). This last factor can be seen in concrete terms by the
inability of most poor in Cameroon to obtain an identity card, which makes them legally
nonexistent, unable to vote, barred from work, travel, and economic activities such as having a
bank account or obtaining a loan. One retired man in Yaoundé, the capital, said: “The more time
passes, the more poor we become; on top of that, we have no security anymore, everywhere we
are insulted, pushed aside; and we here are poor, even the government ignores us (Mfoulou et al.,
1994 p. 139).” A widow announced, “Everywhere, health, food, and school is for the bigwigs
who took all the money… (p. 140).” Thus, while income or income-related dimensions of
poverty feature prominently, the participatory approach unearths the poor’s concern with
isolation and powerlessness.
Economically marginalized groups tend to be socially marginalized as well, so that they
are disadvantaged with respect to both resources and power. [Salmen (1995). He goes on to say
that in-depth listening to the poor would reveal whether getting out of poverty is more a problem
of lack or absence of representation or lack of material resources, an issue of key importance in
poverty reduction.]
In Kenya, Cameroon, Gabon, and Zambia, the poor reported that they felt powerless and
unable to make their voices heard. In Gabon and Zambia, the government carried out projects
without consulting the communities that were meant to benefit from them, and in Kenya the poor
complained that district officials tended not to go to villages or only passed through quickly
without talking to the poor about their problems. Interviews with those officials revealed that
they were unaware of basic characteristics of the lives of the poor; for example, they didn’t know
that health clinics regularly charged fees to the poor (Narayan and Nyamwaya 1996).
Where there is interaction between those in power and the poor, it can be very lopsided.
A 1995 participatory poverty assessment in Mexico found that custom dictated a patron-client
relationship between politicians and the people, called clientilismo, in which political leaders
provide services or favors in exchange for votes. This trading is the only way that the poor
286
acquire land, housing, and urban infrastructure such as water and electricity. The system of
strong vertical channels has led many to perceive a lack of opportunities to act individually or as
a collective group in their own interests and undermined their willingness to take any initiatives.
The evidence cited above gives a flavor of the complexity and diversity in people’s views
about poverty. Their views on the causes of poverty and its cures can influence public efforts in
ways that may be overlooked by conventional surveys. Their insights indicate actions with high
benefits for poor people for relatively low financial costs. For example, access to healthcare
emerges as a high priority for the poor in rural and urban communities in Zambia. Yet, the poor
consistently complained that staff in hospitals and clinics were rude and arrogant to them (World
Bank, 1994). In response to the findings of the participatory poverty assessment, the World
Bank’s Social Fund supported some of the priorities identified by communities, and a health
project now includes cost recovery conditions as identified in the assessment: drought-stricken
areas are exempt from paying health fees, and the Ministry of Health has increased resources
allocated to rural areas in an effort to empower and decrease the frustration of health workers
(Robb 1999). The same participatory survey revealed a problem with respect to school fees,
uniforms, books and materials for rural households. These expenditures typically occurred in the
pre-harvest season when incomes are low and available cash is needed for emergency stocks of
food to cover the period up to the harvest. This pointed to the need for stretching school expenses
over the year or shifting them to another point in the year, policies which the Ministry of
Education is now considering (Robb 1999).
Thus, participatory surveys can enrich our understanding of the poor and lead to public
action that is perceived by the poor to be of benefit to them. That said, these extensions –
especially vulnerability and powerlessness – probably do not change our view of who is poor
significantly. This is difficult to establish in any precise way. As is the case with indicators of
human development, we do not have household-level measures of vulnerability or powerlessness
and so cannot distinguish the poor (in these dimensions) from the non-poor. Moreover, measures
of exposure to risk could be very high for individuals with very large incomes. This is clearly not
what people have in mind when they refer to vulnerability.
Empirical evidence on the overlap between these measures of poverty and a consumption
based one are scare. The one frequently cited study – Jodha (1988) – has been questioned by
Moore, Choudhary, and Singh (1998). Jodha claimed that the majority of households who had
experienced a decline in income by at least five percent between 1963-66 and 1982-84 in two
villages in Rajasthan reported that they were better off according to several other criteria such as
lesser resort to “emergency” income-earning strategies. Moore et al., point out that the provision
of many public services had improved over this period. Piped drinking water had been provided
for example. They also question the evidence on the decline in private income. Moore et al.,
comment “There is no convincing evidence that the poor place a very high value on
independence, respect, or personal autonomy if that is to be traded off against food when they are
hungry” (Moore et al, 1998, p. 17).
Since vulnerability and powerlessness emerge clearly from participatory surveys, one
way of testing whether conventional measures of poverty coincide with measures based on
vulnerability or powerlessness is to ask whether conventional surveys and participatory surveys
287
identify the same people as poor. In Kenya, for example, we can compare the findings of the
1995 participatory survey using “wealth ranking” with those of a 1992 National Welfare
Monitoring Survey based on an established poverty line.42 Where cluster sampling was carried
out carefully (and drought did not seriously affect the district in the intervening years), the
estimates of poverty from the participatory survey end up being virtually identical to estimates
from the national survey. In the district of Bomet, the two estimates were 64 percent
(participatory) and 65 percent (national); in Busia, the respective numbers were both 68 percent,
and in Nyamira, they were both 54 percent.
As more points of comparison become available, the conclusion suggested by the Kenyan
example will be confirmed or else modified. One interesting comparison comes from fieldwork
in Lugazi, Uganda. The authors administered a questionnaire to 384 households, and conducted a
series of participatory community meetings throughout Lugazi with attendance ranging from 50
to 225 people. The purpose of both exercises was to ascertain willingness to pay for improved
water and sanitation service levels. The results are broadly similar. For example, the household
survey indicated that one third of households would connect to a piped water supply at the
specified price, while the community meetings suggested that one quarter might do so.
The authors argue that these differences are not significant from a policy perspective.
They also note, however, that the two approaches resulted in samples with significantly different
socioeconomic characteristics – despite “best practice” techniques in both cases different
samples of individuals were consulted (Davis and Whittington, 1998). Their results both point
the way and suggest the need for additional research to identify the relative strengths and
weaknesses of different approaches and how best to make use of conventional surveys and
participatory approaches.
Coping with Risk
We have spoken of health and education for the poor as important components of a
poverty-reducing strategy in their own right and as essential building blocks to help the poor
increase their incomes. Underlying this we can identify other factors that provide the platform
for reducing poverty. In particular, actions that reduce risk or provide insurance against risk
expand the range of opportunities available to the poor and position them to take better
advantage of strategies to reduce poverty whether it be with respect to health, education, or
income-earning possibilities. How does recognizing the importance of risk influence povertyreducing strategies?
Increasingly, we are realizing that even such victories as the poor can achieve in
improving their lot, no matter how virtuously linked to increasingly better outcomes, ultimately
suffer from excessive fragility. Risks associated with being poor may wipe out hard-won gains
overnight. Indeed, as we have seen, one of the most common features alluded to in contemporary
descriptions of poverty is risk. In many cases, risk prevents the poor from undertaking possibly
high-return activities. The problem of risk has at least two dimensions, then: keeping the poor in
low-risk, low-return activities, and endangering what they already have. The usual remedies for
288
risk – borrowing and insurance – are rarely available to the poor and their absence lies at the
heart of many of the disadvantages the poor must face.
42 Narayan and Nyamwaya (1996).
24
A well-known study of money lenders in Chambar, Pakistan in the early 1980s illustrates
the problem in the credit market. Money lenders invest considerable time and effort in
ascertaining the creditworthiness of would-be borrowers. Lacking collateral, the poor require
more scrutiny than others. Even if an applicant successfully overcomes this hurdle (the rejection
rate was around 50 percent), the money lender usually begins with a small loan to test the waters.
The combination of high administrative cost and small loan leads inevitably to high interest
rates. The average rate charged by money lenders in Chambar was 79 percent a year (Aleem,
1993). At these rates, the poor are effectively excluded. Similarly, insurers lack a reliable means
of assessing effort on the part of those seeking insurance especially in agricultural contexts and
thus cannot identify the real cause of, say, a crop failure (Hazell et al., 1986).
The lack of credit and insurance bear heavily on the poor. For example, a study of rural
households in south-western China for the period 1985-90 found that the loss of one year’s
income due to crop failure led on average to a 10 percent decline in consumption in the
following year for the richest third of households. This is significant but manageable. In contrast,
for the poorest tenth of households the average decline was a devastating 40 percent in the year
following a crop failure (Jalan and Ravallion, 1999). Similarly, in the South Indian villages
intensively surveyed over 10 years by ICRISAT the average coefficient of variation of household
income was 40 percent; for farm profits it was over 125 percent (reported in Morduch, 1995).
Poor households react to income volatility in two ways. They may adopt production plans
or employment strategies to reduce their exposure to the risk of adverse income shocks even if
this entails lower average income. And, in addition to such efforts to smooth income, they may
also try to smooth consumption by creating buffer stocks, withdrawing children from school, and
developing informal insurance and credit arrangements. These efforts are both costly and
inadequate. The cost arises because the poor face a bitter trade-off: they can accept risk that
could lead to disastrous fluctuations in consumption, or minimize risk in ways that perpetuate
poverty. And their efforts are inadequate because risks remain especially at the village, region, or
national level against which the poor themselves are unable to insure. We illustrate these points
briefly.
With respect to costs, Morduch uses the ICRISAT data to show that households which
are more vulnerable to income shocks devote a smaller share of their land (9 percent) to risky,
high-yielding varieties compared with about 36 percent for households with better access to
coping mechanisms (Morduch, 1990). And Jacoby and Skoufias (1997) show that when hit by a
drop in income, poor households withdraw their children from school. They find that a 10
percent decline in agricultural income across agricultural seasons leads to a fall in school
attendance of about five days in a sample of six Indian villages. Thus, whether they reduce
income or reduce schooling, these and other coping mechanisms, although providing some
protection in the short run, limit their long-run prospects of escaping poverty.
289
And with respect to inadequacy, informal mechanisms of insurance are unlikely to be
able to cope with systemic risk. In four Muslim villages near Zaria in northern Nigeria, a 198889 survey revealed the importance of informal credit transactions – over one half of the
households had both borrowed and lent during the survey period, and only one tenth of
households had neither borrowed not lent. Loans between villages, however, are much less
prevalent than loans within villages. And yet more than half the variation (58 percent) in 25
agricultural output in the region was caused by aggregate shocks that affected entire villages. No
matter how good the within-village insurance mechanisms, villagers were unable to protect
themselves from one of the biggest sources of risk (Udry 1990 and 1994).
To counteract the effects of crises on the poor, governments must provide safety nets to
cushion the blows and keep the way open for the future. Their ability to do so is benefiting from
two recent innovations. The information problems that so plague credit and insurance markets
are being overcome through group screening and monitoring and through self-revelation of
information.
The costs of collecting information (see the Chambar example above) and enforcing
repayment can be significantly reduced through group lending. Since groups of poor people may
know quite a bit about each other and have many opportunities to interact and enforce their
social expectations of each other’s behavior, such groups may apply for joint loans and monitor
each other to ensure repayment. Thus the information burden to the lender is significantly
reduced and the poor pay less for the uncertainty lenders have about them. This idea, pioneered
by Grameen Bank in Bangladesh, has now spread in various forms to many countries. About ten
million households worldwide are served by microfinance programs. Repayment rates are high –
Grameen, for example, boasts a repayment rate above 95 percent. Interest rates are lower than
those in the informal market, and more than 30 programs operate without any subsidy at all
(Morduch, 1998a).
As one might expect, not all programs are equally successful in all dimensions. Thus, the
programs that have been most successful in reaching the poor remain far from financial
sustainability. Grameen Bank, for example, has reached over two million borrowers, 94 percent
of whom are women, by charging relatively low rates of interest – 20 percent a year. To operate
without any subsidies, however, Grameen would have to increase interest rates to 33 percent a
year (Morduch, 1998a). Group-lending schemes have succeeded where others had failed, in
providing credit to the poor, but, as Morduch (1998c) notes a large number still face the problem
of high operating costs. He goes on to propose two options. Focus on simple programs to reach
the poor such as the simplified administrative procedures and ‘minimalist credit’ approach
practiced by Bangladesh’s Association for Social Advancement. [The term ‘minimalist’ credit,
where only loans are provided, contrasts with the ‘integrated credit’ approach practiced by
BRAC in Bangladesh where some loans are supplemented with a package of extension services,
training and marketing support.]
Alternatively, or jointly, governments and donors could undertake to subsidize the
administrative costs of programs with significant poverty-focused outreach. The relevant issue
here is whether subsidies used for this purpose are a better way of helping the poor than
290
subsidies used for other purposes and that calls for careful evaluation of the impact of alternative
actions.
As far as group-lending is concerned, the evidence is mixed. Some find evidence of
substantial benefit. Pitt and Khandker (1998a) for example estimate that household consumption
increases by 18 taka for every 100 taka lent to a women and by 11 taka for every 100 taka lent to
a man. They also find evidence that access to credit improves the borrowing household’s ability
to smooth consumption across seasons (Pitt and Khandker, 1998b). However there is also
evidence that significant rises in consumption arise primarily for moderately poor households
who borrow beyond a threshold loan size (Zaman 1998). [Zaman (1998) estimates this threshold
as 10000 taka in cumulative loans.]
Using the same data as Khandker and Pitt and correcting for a possible error in their
selectivity correction, Morduch (1998b) finds no increase in consumption but does find evidence
of consumption smoothing.
Even if the benefits of group-lending are limited to consumption smoothing, this may
lead to long-run gains that are not being captured in the surveys currently available. As we have
noted above, the ability to smooth consumption is important not only for its immediate benefit
but because it may help households pursue longer run strategies to escape poverty that might
otherwise be considered too risky. The issue of inter-linkages is also evident in another way.
There is evidence that participation in micro-credit programs leads to an improvement in
nutritional indicators and on children’s schooling (Khandker 1998) and that access to credit has
an ‘empowering’ effect on female borrowers giving them greater control of various aspects of
their lives (Hashemi et al. 1996). [Hashemi and Schuler (1996) develop an empowerment index
made up of indicators such as female mobility, ownership and control over resources, decisionmaking over household purchases etc. They show that borrowing from Grameen and BRAC has
a significant impact on empowerment controlling for a range of other factors.]
Savings offer another means of smoothing consumption. While many of the microfinance
schemes have not focused on savings mobilization, some successful schemes are emerging. Bank
Rakyat Indonesia (BRI) introduced a saving program called SIMPEDES in 1986 that offers
modest interest rates but allows withdrawals at any time. It also runs a lottery, with the chances
of winning linked to the size of deposits. By 1988, over 4 million poor households were
participating. This increased to 16 million by the end of 1996 (Morduch, 1998a). As a result, BRI
has access to a relatively cheap source of funds amounting to $3 billion in 1996, and households
can accumulate assets as well as smooth consumption.
A second important innovation is self-revelation of information. This has been used
effectively in public works schemes. For example, in Chile, a large public works program in the
wake of a major crisis in the 1980s succeeded in part because it set wages low enough to ensure
that the most needy were the main participants. [World Bank (1998b).] A World Bank project
in Argentina in 1997 offered low-wage work on community projects in poor areas, and more
than half the participants were from the poorest 10 percent of the population. [World Bank
(1999), p. 126.] These and many other examples now provide a convincing argument that the
291
basic approach has merit. Issues now revolve around how to keep administrative costs down and
how to draw the balance between asset creation and insurance. Programs that offer guaranteed
employment provide the greatest insurance but may not create the most productive assets.
Public insurance schemes may displace private efforts. That is why it is important to
understand people’s preferences for allocating time. For example, Datt and Ravallion (1994)
investigate the opportunity costs to participants in rural public works projects in two Indian
villages. In one, the public works participants mostly shift their time out of being unemployed, so
that their opportunity costs are low and their net benefits from the program are high. In the other
village, public-works employment mostly replaces wage labor and own-farm work, leading to a
substantially higher opportunity cost and lower net benefits. Similarly, Cox and Jimenez (1998)
consider whether the motive for private transfers in Peru is altruism or exchange; this is
important because such motivation can influence the effects of public income transfers. Indeed,
they find that social security benefits “crowd out” private transfers: receiving social security
reduces the probability of receiving a private transfer by about six percent. The response is
stronger in the Philippines, where Cox and Jimenez (1995) found that private transfers would be
37 percent higher in the absence of retirement income. While these factors should be borne in
mind when designing public action, there are two reasons to persevere with public schemes.
First, as we see from these examples, the offset is not one-for-one. And second, insurance
against village-wide or region-wide risks is unlikely to be accomplished through informal
mechanisms.
The East Asian crisis has served to underscore the importance of safety nets in a most
dramatic and unfortunate way. Countries like Indonesia had neither the financial resources nor
the administrative mechanisms to deal with the fall-out of the crisis. Actions being taken now
will strengthen safety nets and social security throughout the region. But there is a lesson for
macroeconomic policy here as well. The degree of risk in macroeconomic policy has to be
managed in light of the ability to protect citizens in the advent of a crisis and the extent to which
international action limits the likelihood of a crisis (Stiglitz, 1998a and 1998b). Absent an
adequate domestic safety net and international restraints on investors, the risks in liberalizing
financial markets and capital accounts are great.
Many of the participatory poverty surveys reviewed earlier pointed to a concern with risk.
Other evidence points to the costs of various actions that the poor take to offset risk or deal with
its consequences. At the same time, there is a growing but as yet incomplete body of evidence
regarding public action to alleviate this dimension of poverty. While not all the evidence points
in the same direction and further evaluations are clearly needed, experience suggests that a
combination of public works programs, group-lending schemes subsidized where necessary, and
simple deposit schemes offer the poor at least some support in dealing with risk.
From Isolation to Participation
Recent theoretical contributions show how the median voter in a high-inequality,
democratic society can achieve a more redistributive policy stance through the vote albeit at the
292
cost of slower growth (Persson and Tabellini, 1994). What is wrong with this picture as a
characterization of actual events in developing countries over the last 25 years? Apart from the
inconclusive empirical evidence, the theory assumes that most countries were democracies so
that the vote determined policy, and that, once determined, policy could be effectively
implemented. Neither of these statements captures the reality of developing countries over the
last quarter of the century.
For a start, even as late as 1990, fewer than half the countries in the world were
democracies. Moreover, inequality in many high-inequality countries is largely a consequence of
the disproportionate share of income received by the richest decile. In the high-inequality
countries of Latin America, the richest decile captures 40 percent of national income. Whether
through the political process or outside it, this concentration of economic power must give a
small percentage of the population a tremendous capacity to influence the formulation of policy
and if not its formulation then its implementation. For example, Anand and Kanbur (1991) note
that as the targeting of the Sri Lankan rice ration was improved, so it was allowed to be eroded
by inflation with little or no protest. Those with the power to protest were not benefiting from the
ration, so the erosion in its value actually freed up resources for other uses which might be to
their benefit.
The spread of democracy – the number of countries with electoral democracies increased
from 76 in 1990 to 117 in 1995 – and the increasing commitment to respect civil and political
rights – 140 countries have so far ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political – are
opening the way to a larger say for the poor in policy-making.
“Ownership” has been shown to be a key factor in the success or failure of structural
adjustment loans. A study of 81 adjustment operations supported by the World Bank between
1980 and 1992 developed a measure of borrower ownership. The measure included the locus of
the initiative for the program, the level of intellectual commitment of key policy-makers, the
expression of political will by top leadership, and, of most interest for present purposes, efforts to
build consensus. The last element assessed the extent to which the government had undertaken a
broad public campaign to elicit support for the program. In the 16 cases when local ownership
was considered to be very high, 15 of the operations were judged to be successful. And in the 17
cases when local ownership was very low, only 3 operations were judged to be successful
(Jayarajah and Branson, 1995). While these and similar results point to the importance of
ownership, they do not tell us the extent to which the poor were consulted.
The impact of the poor’s voice is more apparent at the project level. Top-down solutions
have often failed. Over the last decade, development practitioners have become increasingly
aware that the poor have better knowledge of their situation and their needs, and can therefore
contribute to the design of policies and projects intended to better their lot. And once they have a
say in design, they are also more committed to implementation. In direct opposition to the
isolation the poor often endure, successful implementation calls for inclusion and active
participation in a wide range of circumstances.
Development practitioners have come to a consensus that participation by the intended
beneficiaries improves project performance. Many examples now exist of the value of
293
participation. In Indonesia, the Government and an aid organization, CARE, shifted their focus
to community demand as the key selection criterion for water supply and sanitation projects,
with control shifted to communities. Over the period 1979-1990 the combined cash contributions
of CARE and the Indonesian government dropped from approximately 80 percent of project
costs to about 30 percent. Communities had provided all cash contributions for physical
construction for more than three-fourths of the projects, and most had successfully operated and
maintained their systems. Many communities had also helped neighboring groups to develop
their own systems (Narayan 1994).
In addition to case studies, econometric evidence leads to the same conclusion. In a
careful study of 121 rural water supply projects in 49 countries, Isham, Narayan, and Pritchett
(1994) found that 7 out of every 10 projects succeeded when the intended beneficiaries took an
active part in project design, but that only 1 in 10 succeeded when they did not. Government
support for a participatory approach greatly increased the likelihood of participation. Case
studies of some of these projects confirmed the importance of participation. Phase I of the Aguthi
Rural Water Supply Project in Kenya did not involve community members. The project ran into
construction delays, cost over-runs, and disagreement over payment methods. To get the project
back on track, local leaders and project staff organized stakeholder conferences. With
community involvement, Phase II of the project was completed on time and within budget
(Narayan, 1994).
The interactions between voice and other development outcomes and between risk and
other development outcomes are perhaps less well understood and researched than the links
between growth and inequality and between growth and human development that were discussed
earlier. Nevertheless, the evidence available to date suggests that these are areas that warrant
further attention.48 They have the potential to increase greatly the effectiveness of project and
program implementation by giving the poor more say in matters, and, by reducing exposure to
risk, they have the potential to provide the poor with the security to explore high-return activities
that may have been outside their reach in the past but may also be their best hope for escaping
poverty. Information failures lie at the heart of both.
V. OUTSTANDING ISSUES
How would Benjamin Seebohm Rowntree assess the evolution of thought over the last
quarter of a century from the perspective of his investigation into poverty in the City of York at
the turn of the century? We think he would have three reactions. First, surprise that the basic
approach to measuring poverty used by him almost 100 years ago is still very much a feature of
how we measure poverty today. Second, agreement that life expectancy, literacy, and morbidity
are key aspects of well-being and that the poor in the City of York suffered in all these
dimensions. Indeed, he devotes a chapter to the relation of poverty to health. Rowntree states that
“the death-rate is the best instrument for measuring the variations in the physical well-being of
the people,” and finds that “the mortality amongst the very poor is more than twice as high as
amongst the best paid section of the working classes.” Greater infant and child mortality as well
as more general illness and physical under-development all afflicted the poor of York in
Rowntree’s time.
294
His third reaction, toward the notion of giving the poor voice and providing them with
safety nets, is nuanced. Though his object was “to state facts rather than to suggest remedies” he
remarks that “the suffering may be all but voiceless,” and also that even if all persons in poverty
over 65 received old age pensions, it would only reduce poverty by about one percent”. He
criticizes the inadequacy of the work-houses and relief administration, and notes that the very
poor often cannot afford to insure against illness -- but he makes only passing, vague mention of
the prospect of the poor organizing politically or the State changing its power relations to the
individual. In all, Rowntree exhibits a surprising modernity, stressing the importance of
education (especially for women, acclaiming the benefits of capacity-building public service, and
describing the interconnecting, cyclical nature of poverty, where outcomes become also causes.
Looking back from our vantage point of today, how should we assess the evolution of
thinking? While the different methods of defining and measuring poverty will inevitably identify
different groups as poor, the evidence suggests that the differences may not be that great.
48 See, for example, Rodrik (1999) and Kaufmann, Kraay and Zoido-Lobaton (1999).
Their real contribution is not to measurement, but to strategy; the way in which poverty is
defined drives the strategy for dealing with it. One obvious aspect of this arises immediately
from the broadening of the definition – more policy instruments become relevant to the task of
reducing poverty. A less obvious aspect arises from the interactions among different aspects of
poverty which, in turn, calls for a careful integration of policies.
When the focus was confined to income, the key interaction was between growth in the
mean and changes in equality. As the definition expanded to include health status, literacy, and
so on, the key interaction became that between efforts to increase income and efforts to improve
these other dimensions of well-being. And when the definition was further extended to embrace
risk, vulnerability, and voice, then safety nets, access to credit, and participation emerged as
critical to the poor’s ability to take advantage of risky, poverty-reducing opportunities and to
shape economic policy and programs to their benefit.
And looking forward, what are the key outstanding areas in need of additional research?
We close with two suggestions. First, additional research is still required to increase our
understanding of the interactions identified in this review. We began by claiming that the
appropriate package of policies would have a greater impact than the sum of their parts because
of these interactions. While we have presented evidence of this, more information about the best
combinations of policy for countries with different problems and different capacities would be of
great value. In our view, this calls for careful, in depth country case studies to explore how
different policy packages have or have not benefited the poor.49 And second, we have seen how
information failures and knowledge gaps may have undermined the access of the poor to credit
and insurance and limited their role in the design and implementation of policies and projects.
Again, we gave examples of where these problems seemed to have been overcome
through development of new institutional arrangements but we lack a full assessment of these
295
innovations. We suggest that the other priority, therefore, is the careful evaluation of these
institutional innovations to find out what works and why.50
49 Taiwan provides good examples from the early work of Fei, Ranis, and Kuo (1979) to the
more recent work of Chu (1995). Preliminary papers emerging from a research project on
income distribution managed by Francois Bourguignon and Nora Lustig also illustrate the type
of detailed analysis that can be undertaken at the country level. See Ferreira and Paes de Barros
(1999) for Brazil; and Bouillon, Legovini, and Lustig (1999) for Mexico.
50 Good examples to date include work on microfinance (Morduch, 1998b, for example) and on
public employment schemes (Datt and Ravallion, 1994). Preliminary papers emerging from a
research project on income distribution managed by Francois Bourguignon and Nora Lustig also
illustrate the type of detailed analysis that can be undertaken. See Ferreira and Pues de Barros
(1999) for Brazil; and Bouillon, Legovini, and Lustig (1998) for Mexico.
References
Ahluwalia, M.S. 1976. “Inequality, Poverty, and Development.” Journal of Development Economics, 3, September,
307-342.
Ahluwalia, M.S., N.G. Carter and H.B. Chenery. 1979. “Growth and Poverty in Developing Countries.” Journal of
Development Economics, 6, 299-341.
Alderman, H., et al. 1995. “Unitary Versus Collective Models of the Household: Is it Time to Shift the Burden of
Proof?” World Bank Research Observer 10: 1-19.
Alderman, H., J. Behrman, V. Lavy, and R. Menon. 1997. “Child Nutrition, Child Health, and School Enrollment: a
Longitudinal Analysis.” Policy Research Working Paper No. 1700. Washington, D.C.: Policy Research Department,
The World Bank.
Aleem, I. 1993. “Imperfect Information, Screening, and the Costs of Informal Lending: A Study of a Rural Credit
Market in Pakistan.” In Hoff, K., A. Braverman, and J. Stiglitz, eds. The Economics of Rural Organization: Theory,
Practice, and Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press for the World Bank, 131-53.
Anand, S. and C. Harris. 1994. “Choosing a Welfare Indicator.”: American Economic Review; 84:226-31 May.
Anand, S. and S.M.R. Kanbur, 1991. “Public Policy and Basic Needs Provision in Sri Lanka” In Dreze, J., and A.
Sen, eds. The Political Economy of Hunger, Vol III: Endemic Hunger. Oxford, Clarendon Press.
Anand, S. and S.M.R. Kanbur. 1993. “Inequality and Development: A Critique.”Journal of Development
Economics, 41(1), June: 19-43.
Anand, S. and M. Ravallion. 1993. “Human Development in Poor Countries: On the Role of Private Incomes and
Public Services.” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 7(1), Winter: 133-150.
Appleton, Simon and Lina Song. 1999. “Income and Human Development at the Household Level: Evidence from
Six Countries.” mimeo: Center for the Study of African Economies, Oxford.
Atkinson, A.B. 1987. “On the Measurement of Poverty.” Econometrica, 55: 749-64.
Barro, R. and X. Sala-i-Martin, 1995. Economic Growth. New York: McGraw-Hill.
296
Birdsall, N. and J.L. Londoño. 1997. “Asset Inequality Matters: An Assessment of the World Bank’s Approach to
Poverty Reduction.” The American Economic Review, 87:2:32-37.
Bonilla-Chacin, M. and J. Hammer. 1999. “Life and Death among the Poorest.” Paper presented at the Economist’s
Forum, World Bank, April.
Bouilon, C., A. Legovini and N. Lustig. 1998. “Rising Inequality in Mexico: Returns to Household Characteristics
and the ‘Chiapas Effect’.” mimeo: The World Bank.
Bourguignon, F. and C. Morrison. 1990. “Income Distribution, Development, and Foreign Trade: A Cross-Sectional
Analysis.” European Economic Review, 34:6:1113-32.
Bruno, M., M. Ravallion and L. Squire. 1998. “Equity and Growth in Developing Countries: Old and New
Perspectives on the Policy Issue.” In V. Tanzi and K.-Y. Chu (eds.), Income Distribution and High-Quality Growth.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Callan, T. and B. Nolan. 1991. “Concepts of Poverty and the Poverty Line.” Journal Of Economic Surveys; 5, No.
3:[243]-61.
Chambers, R. 1995. Poverty and Livelihoods: Whose Reality Counts? DP 347, Institute of Development Studies.
Chen, S. and M. Ravallion. 1997. “What Can New Survey Data Tell Us about Recent Changes in Distribution and
Poverty?” The World Bank Economic Review, 11(2): 357-382.
Chen, S., G. Datt, and M. Ravallion. 1994. “Is Poverty Increasing in the Developing World?” Review of Income and
Wealth, 40(4), December: 359-376.
Chenery and Syrquin. 1975. Patterns of development, 1950-1970. London : Oxford University Press for the World
Bank.
Chong, A. and J. Hentschel. 1999. “Bundling of Basic Services, Welfare, and Structural Reform in Perú.”
Unpublished paper. DECRG and PREM, the World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Chu, Y. 1995. “Taiwan’s Inequality in the Postwar Era.” Unpublished paper. Sun Yat Sen Institute, Taiwan.
Clarke, G. 1996. “More Evidence on Income Distribution and Growth.” Journal of Development Economics,
47:2:403-27.
Cox, D. and E. Jimenez. 1992. “Social Security and Private Transfers in Peru.” World Bank Economic Review,
January: 155-169.
__________. 1995. “Private Transfers and the Effectiveness of Public Income Redistribution in the Philippines.” In
Public Spending and the Poor: Theory and Evidence, D. van de Walle and K. Nead, eds. Johns Hopkins University
Press: Baltimore.
Cox, D., Z. Eser, and E. Jimenez. 1998. “Motives for Private Transfers over the Life Cycle: An Analytical
Framework and Evidence for Peru.” Journal of Development Economics, 55: 57-80.
Datt, G. and M. Ravallion. 1994. “Transfer Benefits from Public-Works Employment: Evidence for Rural India.”
The Economic Journal, 104 (November): 1346-1369.
Davis, J. and D. Whittington. 1998. “`Participatory’ Research for Development Projects: A Comparison of the
Community Meeting and Household Survey Techniques.” Economic Development and Cultural Change, 47: 73-94.
297
Deininger, K. and L. Squire. 1998. “New Ways of Looking at Old Issues: Inequality and Growth.” Journal of
Development Economics, vol. 57: 259-287.
Easterly, W., M. Kremer, L. Pritchett, and L.H. Summers. 1993. “Good Policy or Good Luck? Country Growth
Performance and Temporary Shocks.” Journal of Monetary Economics, 32:459-483.
Fei, J.C. H., G. Ranis, and S.W.Y. Kuo. 1979. “Growth with Equity: the Taiwan Case.” New York. Oxford
University Press.
Ferreira, F. H. G. and R. Paes de Barros. 1999. “The Slippery Slope: Explaining the increase in Extreme Poverty in
Urban Brazil, 1976-96.” mimeo : The World Bank.
Fisher, G. 1996. “Relative or Absolute—New Light on the Behavior of Poverty Lines Over Time.” Newsletter of the
Government Statistics Section and the Social Statistics Section of the American Statistical Association, Summer
1996: 10-12.
Forbes, K. 1998. “A Reassessment of the Relationship Between Inequality and Growth.” Unpublished paper,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, September.
Fortmann, L. and D. Rocheleau. 1989. “Why Agroforestry Needs Women: Four Myths and a Case Study.” In
Women’s Role in Forest Resource Management: A Reader. Bangkok, Thailand: Food and Agriculture Organization
of the United Nations, Regional Wood Energy Development Program in Asia
Glewwe, P. 1997. “How Does Schooling of Mothers Improve Child Health? : Evidence from Morocco.” LSMS
Working Paper No. 128. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.
Glewwe, P. and J. van der Gaag. 1990. “Identifying the Poor in Developing Countries: Do Different Definitions
Matter?” World Development, 18: pp.803-14.
Glick, P. and D. Sahn. 1997. “Gender and Education Impacts on Employment and Earnings in West Africa:
Evidence from Guinea.” Economic Development and Cultural Change, 45, July: 793-823.
Goedhart, T., V. Halberstadt, A. Kapteyn and B. van Praag. 1977. “The Poverty Line: Concept and Measurement.”
Journal of Human Resources, 12: 503-520.
Haddad, L. and R. Kanbur. 1990. “How Serious is the Neglect of Intrahousehold Inequality?” Policy, Planning, and
Research Working Paper No. 296. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.
Haddad, L., J. Hoddinott and H. Alderman, eds. 1997. Intrahousehold Resource Allocation in Developing
Countries: Models, Methods, and Policy. Baltimore: Published for the International Food Policy Research Institute
by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Hagenaars, A. 1986. The Perception of Poverty. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Hashemi, S., S. Schuler and I. Riley. 1996. “Rural Credit Programs and Women’s Empowerment in Bangladesh.”
World Development, 24(4): 635-653.
Hazell, P., C. Pomareda, and A. Valdés, eds. 1986. Crop Insurance for Agricultural Development: Issues and
Experience. Baltimore : Published for the International Food Policy Research Institute by the Johns Hopkins
University Press.
Inter-American Development Bank. 1998. Facing up to Inequality in Latin America. Washington, D.C.: InterAmerican Development Bank.
Isham, J., D. Narayan, and L. Pritchett. 1994. “Does Participation Improve Project Performance? Establishing
Causality with Subjective Data.” Policy Research Working Paper 1357. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.
298
Jacoby, H. and E. Skoufias. 1997. “Risk, Financial Markets, and Human Capital in a Developing Country.” Review
of Economic Studies, 64(3): 311-335.
Jalan, J. and M. Ravallion. 1998. “Transient Poverty in Postreform Rural China.” Journal of Comparative
Economics 26: 338-357.
__________. 1999. “Are the Poor Less Well Insured? Evidence on Vulnerability to Income Risk in Rural China.”
Journal of Development Economics 58: 61-81.
Jayarajah, C. and W. Branson. 1995. “Evaluating the Impacts of Policy Adjustment.” Paper No. 1, International
Monetary Fund Seminar Series, January.
Jodha, N.S. 1995. “Common Property Resources and the Dynamics of Rural Poverty in India’s Dry Regions.”
Unasylva 180, Vol. 46: 23-29.
Kakwani, N. 1980. Income Inequality and Poverty: Methods of Estimation and Policy Applications. New York:
Oxford University Press, published for the World Bank.
Kanbur, R. 1998. “Income Distribution and Development.” Working Paper No. 98-13, Department of Agricultural,
Resource, and Managerial Economics, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.
Kaufmann, Daniel, A. Kraay, and P. Zoido-Lobaton. 1999. “Governance Matters.” mimeo: The World Bank.
Khandker, S. 1998. Fighting Poverty with Microcredit: Experience in Bangladesh. New York: Oxford University
Press for the World Bank.
Kuznets, S. 1955. “Economic Growth and Income Inequality.” The American Economic Review, 45(1): 1-28.
Lanjouw, P. and M. Ravallion. 1995. “Poverty and Household Size.” The Economic Journal, 105, November: 14151434.
Lewis, W.A. 1954. “Economic Development with Unlimited Supplies of Labor.” Manchester School of Economic
Studies 22, May, 139-191.
Li, H., L. Squire and H. Zou. 1998. “Explaining International and Intertemporal Variations in Income Inequality.”
The Economic Journal, 108 (January): 1-18.
Li, H. and H. Zou. 1998. “Income Inequality is not Harmful for Growth: Theory and Evidence.” Review of
Development Economics, 2(3): 318-334.
Lipton, M. and M. Ravallion. 1995. Poverty and Policy. Washington, D.C.: Policy Research Dept., World Bank.
Lundberg, M. and L. Squire. 1999. “Growth and Inequality: Extracting the Lessons for Policymakers.” Unpublished
paper, the World Bank.
Manser, M. and M. Brown. 1980. “Marriage and Household Decisionmaking: a Bargaining Analysis.” International
Economic Review, 21: 31-44.
Marshall, A. 1925. Principles of Economics. Eighth edition. London: Macmillan.
Martella, A. 1996. “Djibouti Participatory Poverty Assessment.” Background document for the Djibouti Poverty
Assessment, Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
McGillivray, M. and H. White. 1993. “Measuring Development? The UNDP’s Human Development Index.”
Journal of International Development, 5: 183-192.
299
McElroy, M. and M. Horney. 1981. “Nash Bargained Household Decisions: Towards a Generalization of the Theory
of Demand.” International Economic Review, 22: 333-350.
Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. 1995. 10th ed. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.
Mfoulou, J., V. Nga Ndongo, J. Aboa Ngono, A.S. Zoa, and C. Bala. 1994. “Evaluation Participative de la Pauvreté
au Cameroun.” Report of study conducted in Yaoundé for the World Bank, July 1994.
Moore, M., Madhulika Choudhary, and Neelam Singh. 1998. “How can we know what they want? Understanding
Local Perceptions of Poverty and Ill-being in Asia.” IDS Working Paper 80.
Morduch, J. 1990. “Risk, Production, and Saving: Theory and Evidence from Indian Households.” Working paper,
Department of Economics, Harvard University.
__________. 1995. “Income Smoothing and Consumption Smoothing” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(3),
Summer: 103-114.
__________. 1998a. “The Microfinance Promise.” Unpublished paper, Hoover Institution, Stanford University,
August 22.
__________. 1998b. “Does Microfinance Really Help the Poor? New Evidence from Flagship Programs in
Bangladesh.” Unpublished paper, Hoover Institution, Stanford University, June 27.
__________. 1998c. “The Grameen Bank: A Financial Reckoning.” Unpublished paper, Hoover Institution,
Stanford University, August 25.
Mpol, F., M. Mendouka, A. Bikoï, L. A. Ndongo. 1994. “Evaluation Participative de la Pauvreté au Cameroun.”
Report of study conducted in the East Province for the World Bank, June 1994.
Murphy, K., A. Shleifer, and R. Vishny. 1991. “The Allocation of Talent: Implications for Growth.” Quarterly
Journal of Economics, 106(2): 503-530.
Narayan, D. 1994. “The Contribution of People’s Participation: Evidence from 121 Rural Water Supply Projects.”
Environmentally Sustainable Development Occasional Paper Series No. 1. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.
Narayan, D. and D. Nyamwaya. 1996. “Learning from the Poor: A Participatory Poverty Assessment in Kenya.”
Paper No. 034, Environment Department Papers. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.
Paukert, F. 1973. “Income Distribution at Different Levels of Development: A Survey of Evidence.” International
Labour Review, CVIII, Nos. 2-3: 97-125.
Persson, T. and G. Tabellini. 1994. “Is inequality harmful for growth?” American Economic Review, 84:3:600-621.
Pitt, M. and S. Khandker. 1998a. The Impact of Group-Based Credit Programs on Poor Households in Bangladesh:
Does the Gender of Participants Matter?” Journal of Political Economy, 106: 958-996.
___________. 1998b. “Credit Programs for the Poor and Seasonality in Rural Bangladesh,” Brown University and
World Bank, draft, January 9.
Poppele, J., S. Sumarto and L. Pritchett. 1999. “Social Impacts of the Indonesian Crisis: New Data and Policy
Implications.” http://www.smeru.or.id/report/frreport2.htm
Pritchett, L. 1996. “Where Has All the Education Gone?” Policy Research Working Paper No. 1581. Washington,
D.C.: Policy Research Department, The World Bank.
300
Ravallion, M. and G. Datt. 1999. “When is Growth Pro-Poor? Evidence from the Diverse Experiences of India’s
States.” mimeo: The World Bank.
Ravallion, M. 1998. “Does Aggregation Hide the Harmful Effects of Inequality on Growth?” Economics Letters 61:
73-77.
__________. 1997. “Good and Bad Growth: The Human Development Reports.” World Development, 25(5), May:
631-638.
Ravallion, M. and D. van de Walle. 1991. “Urban-Rural Cost of Living Differentials in a Developing Economy.”
Journal of Urban Economics 29: 113-127.
Robb, C. 1999. Can the Poor Influence Policy? Participatory Poverty Assessments in the Developing World.
Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.
Rodrik, Dani. 1999. The New Global Economy and Developing Countries: Making Openness Work. Policy Essay
No. 24. Washington, DC: Overseas Development Council.
Rowntree, B. S. 1910. Poverty: a Study of Town Life. London: Macmillan.
Salmen, L. 1995. “Participatory Poverty Assessment: Incorporating Poor People’s Perspectives into Poverty
Assessment Work.” Paper Number 11, Social Development Papers. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.
Sen, A. 1999. Development as Freedom. New York, NY: Knopf, forthcoming.
__________. 1984. Resources, Values, and Development. Oxford: B. Blackwell.
__________. 1981. Poverty and Famines : An Essay on Entitlement and Deprivation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Singh, I., L. Squire and J. Strauss, eds. 1986. Agricultural Household Models: Extensions, Applications and Policy.
Baltimore: published for the World Bank by the Johns Hopkins University Press.
Squire, L. 1993. “Fighting Poverty.” AEA Papers and Proceedings, 83(2): 377-382.
Stiglitz, J. 1998a. “Responding to Economic Crises: Policy Alternatives for Equitable Recovery and Development.”
Remarks at the North-South Institute Seminar, “Recovery from Crisis,” Ottawa, Canada, September 29.
__________. 1998b. “Must Financial Crises Be This Frequent and This Painful?” McKay Lecture, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, September 23.
Strauss, J. and D. Thomas. 1997. “Health and Wages: Evidence on Men and Women in Urban Brazil.” Journal of
Econometrics, 77(1): 159-185.
__________. 1998. “Health, Nutrition, and Economic Development.” Journal of Economic Literature, 36: 766-817.
Thomas, D. 1990. “Intra-household Resource Allocation: An Inferential Approach.” Journal of Human Resources,
25(4), Fall: 635-664.
Thomas, D., J. Strauss, and M. Henriques. 1991. “How Does Mother’s Education Affect Child Height?” The
Journal of Human Resources, 26(2), Spring: 183-211.
Udry, C. 1990. “Rural Credit in Northern Nigeria: Credit as Insurance in a Rural Economy.” World Bank Economic
Review, 4: 251-269.
__________. 1994. “Risk and Insurance in a Rural Credit Market: An Empirical Investigation in Northern Nigeria.”
Review of Economic Studies, 61: 495-526.
301
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 1994. Human Development Report. New York City: Oxford
University Press.
van de Walle, D. and K. Nead, eds. 1994. Public Spending and the Poor: Theory and Evidence. Baltimore, MD:
Johns Hopkins University Press.
van de Walle, D. 1994. “The Distribution of Subsidies through Public Health Services in Indonesia, 1978-87.” The
World Bank Economic Review, 8(2), May: 279-309.
World Bank. 1980. World Development Report 1980. New York: Oxford University Press.
__________. 1990. World Development Report 1990. New York: Oxford University Press.
__________. 1991. Assistance Strategies to Reduce Poverty. Policy Paper. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.
__________. 1994. “Zambia Poverty Assessment.” Volume V: Participatory Poverty Assessment, World Bank,
November 30, 1994.
__________. 1995. Cameroon: Diversity, Growth, and Poverty Reduction. Economic Report, AFR region, World
Bank.
__________. 1996. Poverty Reduction and the World Bank: Progress and Challenges in the 1990s. Washington,
D.C.: The World Bank.
__________. 1997. Djibouti -- Crossroads of the Horn of Africa: Poverty Assessment. Sector Report, AFR region,
World Bank.
__________. 1998a. “Note on Poverty in The Republic of Tajikistan,” prepared for the Consultative Group Meeting,
May 20, 1998.
__________. 1998b. East Asia: The Road to Recovery. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.
__________. 1999. World Development Report 1998/99: Knowledge for Development. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Zaman, H. 1998. “Who Benefits and to What Extent? An Evaluation of BRAC’s Micro-credit Program.” D. Phil
thesis, University of Sussex.
__________. 1999. “Changing Poverty in Vietnam, 1993-1998.” Unpublished paper, the World Bank.
302
APPENDIX D Characteristics of Successful Change
303
APPENDIX E Current state presentation: Highlights from the research
The Impact of Changes in Measuring Poverty

Changing definitions can help to identify strategies to reduce the number of people living
impoverished lives.
o Programs are focused on specific needs emanating from legislative direction and
assumptions about aggregate needs, but do not relate to the totality of an
individual’s needs.
o Program eligibility is typically based primarily on income – neglecting causal
factors.

Changing definitions can impact society’s views and actions toward those in poverty.
o Current definitions have two main uses – measuring the number of people in
poverty and determining program eligibility
o Virtually all major efforts to change the definition have failed
o Shifting the paradigm can give society new views on what constitutes poverty and
what causes it
o Expanding our understanding of social and economic mobility provides additional
insights
The Impact of New Definitions

New definitions can help shape a shared vision of addressing poverty in new ways.
o Exploring new definitions invigorates the debate on how to prevent or reduce
poverty
o Looking at poverty in new ways gives society opportunities to impact it

New definitions can help foster greater system interdependence
o Looking at poverty from the individual, family and community perspectives calls
for responses that are person-focused rather than program driven
o Building on an individual’s strengths calls for systems to work together
304

New definitions enable innovation at all levels
o The current Federal definition excludes: other costs of living, sources of income,
human, social, and spiritual capital – limiting expectations and interventions
o Explore alternatives to the consumption & income model; e.g., cultural universals,
quality of life standards, survey based definitions, definitions in use elsewhere

New definitions can create more opportunity for people to maximize their potential
achieve success.
o Social assets, financial assets and human capital help people avoid poverty or
escape it quickly
o Providing education, other services and infrastructure may alleviate poverty more
effectively than increasing income.
305
APPENDIX F Participant List
REDEFINING POVERTY WORKING SESSION
PARTICIPANT LIST
Aspen Wye River Conference Center
Queenstown, Maryland
August 18-19, 2004
Joe Brooks
Director
Capacity Building and Civic Engagement
PolicyLink
101 Broadway
Oakland, CA 94607
Phone: 510-663-4317 Fax: 510-587-1117
E-mail: jb@policylink.org
Anita Carwile
Relationship Manager
Volunteer and Community Partnerships
Internal Revenue Service
401 West Peachtree Street, STOP WI-53
Atlanta, GA 30308
Phone: 404-338-8825 Fax: 404-338-8664
E-mail: anita.carwile@irs.gov
Kit Danley
Founder and President
Neighborhood Ministries
1918 West Van Buren Street
Phoenix, AZ 85009
Phone: 602-252-5225 Fax: 602-252-3171
E-mail: kit.danley@nmaz.net
Gordon Fisher
Program Analyst
Office of the Assistant Secretary
for Planning and Evaluation
306
Department of Health and Human Services
200 Independence Avenue, Room 404 E
Washington, DC 20201
Phone: 202-690-6143
E-mail: gordon.fisher@hhs.gov
Cornelia Flora
Director and University Distinguished Professor
Sociology Department
Iowa State University
107 Curtiss Hall
Ames, IA 50011-1050
Phone: 515-294-1329 Fax: 515-294-3180
E-mail: cflora@iastate.edu
Nancy Fritz
Executive Director
Coastal Community Action Program
P.O. Box 808; 4 Union Street
Rockland, ME 04841
Phone: 207-596-0361 Fax: 201-594-2695
E-mail: nfritz@ccap-me.org
John Iceland, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Sociology Department
University of Maryland
2112 Art/Sociology Building
College Park, MD 20742
Phone: 301-405-6430 Fax: 301-314-6892
E-mail: jiceland@umd.edu
Sally Moore
Executive Director
Sandoval County Economic Opportunity Corp.
P.O. Box 757
Bernalillo, NM 87004
Phone: 505-867-3374 Fax: 505-872-0392
E-mail: smoore@sceocnm.org
James Norman
President and CEO
Action for a Better Community, Inc.
550 East Main Street
Rochester, NY 14604
Phone: 585-295-1825 Fax: 585-325-2266
307
E-mail: jnorman@abcinfo.org
Greg Owen, Ph.D.
Consulting Scientist
Wilder Research Center
1295 Bandana Boulevard, Suite 210
St. Paul, MN 55108
Phone: 651-647-4612 Fax: 651-647-4623
E-mail: greg@wilder.org
Michael H. Shuman
Vice President for Enterprise Development
Training and Development Corporation
3713 Warren Street NW
Washington, DC 20016
Phone: 202-364-4051 Fax: 202-318-0756
E-mail: shuman@igc.org
Mike Thorsteinson
Executive Director
Three Rivers Community Action
1414 North Start Drive
Zumbrota, MN 55992
Phone: 507-732-8501 Fax: 507-732-8547
E-mail: mike.thorsteinson@threeriverscap.org
Timothy Warfield
Executive Director
National Association for
State Community Services Programs
444 North Capitol Street NW, Suite 395
Washington, DC 20001
Phone: 202-624-5866 Fax: 202-624-8472
E-mail: warfield@sso.org
Patricia Wilson-Coker
Commissioner
Department of Social Services
State of Connecticut
25 Sigourney Street
Hartford, CT 06002
Phone: 860-424-5008 Fax: 860-424-5129
E-mail: Pat.wilson-coker@po.state.ct.us
308
APPENDIX G Project Staff List
Clarence H. Carter
Director
Office of Community Services
370 L'Enfant Promenade, Aerospace Fifth Floor
Washington, DC 20447
Phone: (202) 401-9333 Fax: (202) 401-5718
E-mail: clcarter@acf.hhs.gov
Martin Brown
Strategic Communications Consultant
Providence Management Group
6706 Iron Gate Drive
Richmond, VA 23234
Phone: (804) 275-1020 Fax: (804) 275-6706
E-mail: mbrown@pmgexcellence.com
Tarryl Clark
Executive Director
Minnesota Community Action Association
100 Empire Drive, Suite 202
St. Paul, MN 55103
Phone: (651) 645-7425 Fax: (651) 645-7399
E-mail: tarrylclark@astound.net
Lisa Cummins
President
Urban Strategies
P.O. Box 41408
Arlington, VA 22204
Phone: (202) 368-3408 Fax: (703) 892-5357
E-mail: LisaCummins@UrbanStrategies.us
Megan Fluharty
Program Assistant
Development Services Group, Inc.
7315 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 800 E
Bethesda, MD 20814
Phone: (301) 951-0056 Fax: (301) 951-3324
E-mail: mfluharty@dsgonline.com
Regina Guyther
Meeting Planner
309
Development Services Group, Inc.
7315 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 800 E
Bethesda, MD 20814
Phone: (301) 951-0056 Fax: (301) 951-3324
E-mail: rguyther@dsgonline.com
Barbara Hulburt
Director
Facilitation and Training
The McCammon Group
1111 East Main Street, Suite 1700
Richmond, VA 23219
Phone: (804) 644-2993 Fax: (804) 343-0923
E-mail: bhulburt@mccammongroup.com
Julie N. Jakopic
Vice President
Community Services Programs
Development Services Group, Inc.
7315 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 800 E
Bethesda, MD 20814
Phone: (301) 951-0056 Fax: (301) 951-3324
E-mail: jjakopic@dsgonline.com
Jeannine La Prad
Vice President
Corporation for a Skilled Workforce
900 Victors Way, Suite 350
Ann Arbor, MI 48108
Phone: (734) 769-2900 Fax: (734) 769-2950
E-mail: jmlaprad@skilledwork.org
James I. Masters
Knowledge Worker
Center for Community Futures
P.O. Box 5309
Berkeley, CA 94705
Phone: (510) 339-3801 Fax: (510) 339-3803
E-mail: jmasters@cencomfut.com
Robert Mott
Deputy Director
Office of Community Services
370 L'Enfant Promenade, Aerospace Fifth Floor
Washington, DC 20447
Phone: (202) 401-5291 Fax: (202) 401-5653
310
E-mail: rmott@acf.hhs.gov
Dennis Parker
CEO
Carieton and Associates
370 L'Enfant Promenade, Aerospace Fifth Floor
Washington, DC 20447
Phone: (804) 690-7421
E-mail: denniscparker@msn.com
Nancy Polend
Project Manager
Office of the Executive Director
21st Century Model to Address Poverty
American Public Human Services Association
810 First Street NE, Suite 500
Washington, DC 20002
Phone: (202) 682-0100 Fax: (202) 289-6555
E-mail: npolend@aphsa.org
Ed Strong
Senior Partner
Corporation for a Skilled Workforce
4595 North Progress Avenue
Harrisburg, PA 17110
Phone: (734) 769-2900 Fax: (734) 769-2950
E-mail: estrong@skilledwork.org
Bonita Turner
President
Topline, Inc.
3829 Nightmuse Way
Glen Allen, VA 23059
Phone: (804) 314-3210 Fax: (804) 262-3154
E-mail: bturner@toplinetech.com
Margaret Washnitzer
Director
Division of State Assistance
Office of Community Services
370 L'Enfant Promenade, Aerospace Fifth Floor
Washington, DC 20447
Phone: (202) 401-2333 Fax: (202) 401-5718
E-mail: mwashnitzer@acf.hhs.gov
311
Office of Community Services
Creating the 21st Century Model to Address Poverty
Community-Based Solutions Working Session
August 25-26, 2004
Aspen Wye River Conference Center
Queenstown, MD
MEETING RECORD
Distributed to participants: November 1, 2004
This document contains the proceedings of the working session and has been compiled
from the small and large group discussions, the associated flipchart records, and from the
presentations given by project staff. Reaching consensus during the session itself was not
attempted.
Therefore, this document merely reflects the viewpoints as they were expressed in the
session and does not imply agreement among participants and/or project staff.
Community-Based Solutions Working Session: Meeting Record 1
PRE-MEETING MATERIALS
Participants received the following materials prior to the working session:
 Preliminary Agenda
 Core Elements: Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles (Appendix A)
 Research Themes: Community-Based Solutions (Appendix B)
ON-SITE PACKET MATERIALS
Participants were provided a meeting packet containing the following materials:
 Final Agenda
 Core Elements: Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles
 Initiative Context presentation: Characteristics of Successful Change (Appendix C)
 Current state presentation: Highlights from the research (Appendix D)
 Research Themes: Community-Based Solutions
 Participant List (Appendix E)
 Project Staff List (Appendix F)
MEETING AGENDA
312
Overarching Goal: The goal of all of the working sessions is to allow people from a
variety of backgrounds and sectors to bring their expertise to bear toward creating a
fundamentally different model for thinking about and addressing poverty.
Session Objectives: This working session has five objectives:
1) Share a compelling case for change and articulate a vision and set of principles upon
which to build strategies to fundamentally change the way we think about and address
poverty as a nation.
2) Review key themes of current community-based efforts to build capacity of low-income
individuals, families, and communities to compare/contrast with the stated vision.
3) Identify some key elements of a desired future state that describe what it would look like
in the ideal for communities to 1) develop local leadership; 2) create community
engagement; and 3) successfully implement ‘whole-community’ strategies for addressing
poverty.
4) Identify some of the areas in which work must be undertaken (i.e. change levers) in order
to close the gap between existing and the ideal states.
5) Brainstorm preliminary strategies for filling the gaps.
Wednesday, August 25, 2004:
3:00 – 4:00 Welcome and Overview by Clarence Carter: The overall case for change and why
we are here; the vision of the 21st Century Model to Address Poverty and the underlying
principles for the development of the model.
4:00 – 4:45 Session Content and Context: Overview of the overall initiative, an exploration of
the current state and key themes regarding community-based solutions to poverty, and large
group discussion of how we arrived at the current state from the participants’ perspectives.
4:45 – 5:00 Facilitative Strategy (Facilitator)
5:00 – 6:00 Break
6:00 – 7:30 Dinner
7:30 – 9:00 Small Group Work: Each small group engages in visioning to describe what it
would look like in the ideal for communities to 1) develop local leadership; 2) create community
engagement; and 3) successfully implement ‘whole community’ strategies for addressing
poverty. The goal of the small group work is to bring focus to a desired future—built upon the
principles—for community-based solutions to poverty.
313
9:00 – 9:45 Small Groups Report: Groups present their work to the large group. Large group
will not discuss presentation content at this time, but will be asked to post questions and
comments on wall for discussion the next day.
9:45 – 10:00 Evening Close Out: Facilitator leads interactive session about the work that’s been
done so far, and what remains for tomorrow.
Thursday, August 26, 2004
8:30 – 10:15 Large Group Discussion: Processing Small Group Work from Wednesday
Using the notes taken by the participants the night before, the group will focus on and discuss
each of the focus areas presented. The focus will be on the identification of the key elements of
the desired future, not on problems with the current state.
10:15 – 10:30 Break
10:30 – 11:45 Identification of Gap Areas and Change Levers: Identification of what needs to
change (i.e. levers for change and related considerations and challenges) that would require work
in order to get ‘there’ from ‘here.’
11:45 – 12:45 Lunch
12:45 – 2:15 Identification of Preliminary Change Strategies: Moving from visioning and
change levers to ideas for closing the gap.
2:15 – 3:00 Session Close Out and Next Steps: Discussion of how the work that’s been done
here will be synthesized to create the pieces of a draft systemic change strategy and about how to
begin the work of change.
Community-Based Solutions Working Session: Meeting Record 3
PROCEEDINGS
August 25, 2004: Afternoon
INTRODUCTIONS (facilitated by Barbara Hulburt)
WELCOME AND OVERVIEW BY CLARENCE CARTER
Clarence provided the overall case for change and why we are here; the vision of the 21st
Century Model to Address Poverty and previewed the underlying principles for the development
of the model. The following is an amalgamation of the opening remarks from all four working
sessions.
314
As America continually strives to form that ‘more perfect union’ envisioned by our
founding fathers, one of the key factors we have always struggled with as a society is how to
care for those in greatest need. For purposes of our work here, we focus on the segment of our
society that exists within the condition we define as poverty.
Every generation or so, our society recalibrates its thinking and approaches for
addressing poverty and it is clearly time for another recalibration. It is time for us to change the
way we think about and address poverty because:

We know that as the number of people living in poverty increases, it becomes more and
more difficult for any society to sustain itself. None of us wants that for our great nation.
As long as many of our citizenry remain under-optimized, our society can never reach its
full potential.

The most recent major recalibration was initiated 40 years ago via the 1964 “War on
Poverty.” President Lyndon Johnson believed that turning the power of the federal
government loose on the issue that we as a society could eliminate poverty.

While there is much progress to celebrate, we clearly have fallen woefully short of the
lofty objective of ameliorating poverty. As a result of the “War on Poverty,” scores of
programs were created, the U.S. Poverty Index was established, unprecedented public
spending was dedicated to the objective, and a massive ‘helping’ industry was created.
Though there have been impressive gains in many important indicators of societal wellbeing, we have not shifted in our approaches as quickly as the conditions have.

The U.S. Poverty Index, developed in the 1960’s and based on an income/food
consumption model, is no longer representative of the conditions of poverty (e.g. cost of
living, basic income needs, economic trends, technological advancements, family
structure and roles, workforce trends, etc.). As the economic, social, technological—
societal conditions change the nature of poverty, we must also change the way our
society thinks about it and addresses it in order to remain economically, socially, and
morally sustainable as a society.

We are still using the income/consumption model and the basic formula as designed in
the 1960’s under vastly different circumstances. Proposed reforms to the Poverty Index
over the last three decades to add other cost elements such as housing and health care and
to add other income sources such as the cash value of benefits have not been successful,
resulting in the continued use of a formula that has outlived its efficacy as a accurate
definition of the conditions of poverty.

We currently spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on assisting those in greatest
need in America without an acceptable return on investment. Unfortunately, since there is
no shared vision guiding and leveraging our investments toward a common objective.
Our spending is ad hoc, in categorical programs—with their own rules, regulations, and
objectives—which often work at cross purposes with other programs and initiatives.
Private initiatives often suffer from not having enough resources to be truly effective. In
315
the aggregate, our fragmented and categorical approach results in the old adage; ‘If you
don’t know where you are going, any road will get you there.’

The issue of poverty is best addressed at the community level. The current construct in
which the ways to address poverty is prescribed at the Federal level fails to fully engage
and empower communities to develop their own vision for the future and the strategies
they need to get there. The uniqueness of America’s communities demands a service
strategy unique to each community’s objectives, resources, and obstacles.

The current construct forces the needs of individuals and families to fit into categorical
programs that cannot possibly anticipate or address the whole and interdependent nature
of what they need to make their lives work for them. Often the goals and objectives of the
various ‘helping programs’ work at cross purposes, making a comprehensive set of
services and support that would be effective problematic at best. This approach is another
example of not leveraging the resources that are currently being expended on the issue
and does not give us a return on our investment.

The existing construct does not maximize the use of technology that would provide for
infinitely more efficient and effective delivery of service and/or to reduce the need for the
services in the first place. The current categorical construct requires separate
technological infrastructures for each of the programs, which means that precious
resources are required to fund the separate infrastructures and resources that could go
directly to the individual or family needing assistance. It means that helpers in the
different program structures have difficulty sharing vital information that would help
serve individuals and families more effectively. Furthermore, technology could be
leveraged to allow many decisions to be placed directly in the hands of the individual or
family, thus obviating the need for intermediaries.

The current helping system is financed principally by government and philanthropy,
despite the widely-used economic construct of market solutions in most other
advancement endeavors. Recognizing that every sector has a role in addressing poverty
and that market solutions are encouraged in most facets of American problem-solving,
we must acknowledge that market-based strategies are significantly underutilized in
America’s helping system.
All of the above leave America with less than the most effective helping system. As the
economic, social, technological—societal conditions change the nature of poverty, we must also
change the way our society thinks about it and addresses it in order to remain economically,
socially, and morally sustainable as a society. We need to create an urgency in society to do the
work of this recalibration, such that our society views eliminating poverty as:
 an exercise in developing self-sustaining conditions at the individual, family, community,
and societal levels,
 a win-win exchange between society and individuals, individuals and institutions, and
 a way to create the harmonious conditions that allow for continued innovation, economic
growth, strong relationships, non-violence, health, etc.
316
As the Director of the Office of Community Services, I draw on the history and intent of my
organization to help communities address issues of poverty—first as the Office of Economic
Opportunity, and in its subsequent evolutions as the Community Services Administration, and
now as the Office of Community Services—to leverage the power of its mandate toward new
constructs for thinking about and addressing poverty.
We have convened this group of the best and brightest thinkers to help begin a social
movement toward developing this new construct. Understanding that it will be a long-term,
complex endeavor, we recognize that we will not, over the course of the next 24 hours of our
initial working session, solve the problem.
Rather, we are simply seeking to start the dialog by putting forward some guiding principles
upon which to build a new construct and by creating the “space” in which to begin building it.
Welcome, thank you for coming, and let’s get to it.
SESSION CONTEXT AND CONTENT
(Nancy Polend, Ed Strong, Tarryl Clark, and Lisa Cummins)
Project staff presented context and content material to ground the work of the session: 1)
Overview of the overall initiative using the characteristics of successful change as a conceptual
framework and a description of the project’s activities as an operational framework; and 2) an
exploration of the current state and key themes from the environmental scan of community-based
solutions . See Appendixes D and E for staff presentations.
The Characteristics of Successful Change presentation suggested that, since the initiative
is at its core the creation of systemic change, it is useful to map its evolving strategies and
activities to a framework that represents components of successful change. The change model
this initiative is using for this purpose is based on the work of John Kotter and John Corlett. The
presentation made connections between the change model and the working session activities in
which participants would be engaging. The presentation also made distinctions between what
could reasonably be accomplished during the working session and what was long-term, evolving
work to be done over the next decade and beyond. Acknowledgment of the uncertain, uncharted
territory of this work was made explicit.
The second component of the Characteristics… presentation included the operational
flow of the project’s short-term activities, showing what had been done to date, where the
working session fit in, and what would come next.
The subject-matter-expert presentation, Community-Based Solutions to Reducing
Poverty, provided an environmental scan of the way community-based solutions have been
thought about, planned for, and implemented up to the present time. The presentation was based
on research into what we know today about community building and some of the major
challenges facing communities as they try to sustain growth initiatives.
317
Two approaches to community building are coming together. There have been traditional
“place-based” strategies emphasizing changing physical structures in a community and “peoplebased” strategies which have emphasized developing human capital. Both appear to be necessary
for sustainable community building.
We have learned that effective community building can only come from within the
community itself; it cannot be imposed from outside. Indigenous community leadership is an
essential element that must be intentionally, systematically, and continuously developed.
Most community building efforts today look at limited aspects of a community such as
housing, crime, education, or job preparation. Few efforts take a holistic view of all aspects of a
community. We do have some good examples of indicators of community health but they too
typically have a specific focus such as the health and safety of children or economic
competitiveness. The body of research on what works and what can be sustained over time is
typically not incorporated into today’s initiatives – they are looked at often as projects with short
durations and limited expectations. The reality is that community building is a long-term,
evolutionary effort that grows as it produces positive results.
Effective communities involve all stakeholders, including commercial enterprises, in
planning for its future. They have developed means of communicating with and involving all
stakeholders in and of the community across sector, age, gender, income, and racial lines to
come together toward a shared vision. Effective communities have established coalitions of
organizations with a common purpose. All members of the community have and understand the
roles they play and a shared ownership of the future.
In effective communities, resources that come into the community have been mapped and
the community’s strengths have been identified as the building blocks for the future (as opposed
to deficit identification). The resources that exist are leveraged so that there is much greater
return on the dollar and service delivery is more integrated and person-focused.
FACILITATIVE STRATEGY
The facilitator set up the evening’s small group visioning activities by restating the idea
that “if you don’t know where you’re going, any road will take you there.” She also announced
the rosters of each of the three small groups and addressed various housekeeping and logistical
items.
Participants took an evening break to check in to their rooms and convened in the dining
room at 6:15 for dinner. They were asked to dine with their small groups so that they could get
acquainted before beginning their work later in the evening.
August 25, 2004: Evening
318
SMALL GROUP WORK: VISIONING THE IDEAL (DETERMINING DESIRED
FUTURE STATE)
After dinner, each of the three small groups convened in their break-out rooms to begin
their task of envisioning the ideal conditions for communities to 1) develop local leadership; 2)
create community engagement; and 3) successfully implement ‘whole-community’ strategies for
addressing poverty. The goal of the small group work was to bring focus to a desired future—
built upon the guiding principles of the 21st Century Model to Address Poverty—for
community-based solutions to poverty.
Visioning the Ideal: Local Leadership and Leadership Development
Participants: Jeannie Chaffin, Sue Christie, Larry Lloyd, Gary Stokes, Debbi Speck, and Tarryl
Clark
Facilitator: Nancy Polend
The group began its visioning task with the following question: What does it look like in
the ideal if we have the leadership we need at the local level to address poverty? The following
lists represent the results of their brainstorming.

Organized neighborhood “clubs”
o Self-managed, convened, bottom-up


Positive influencers (i.e. Education, business, social sciences)
Ability to make systems respond (make things happen)
o Skill set to do this ( skills set to do the above point: emphasis on “respond”)
Change agent (e.g. outcome/solution-based, asset-based, connected, open to new
thinking)
Variety of leaders in everyday person-to-person interactions (poor people too)
o Who stand up and take responsibility
Business community and coming together to help solve problems re: poverty [formal]
Conscious knowledge of “my” responsibility to community in addressing poverty
o All the way throughout community
“Space” for community members to have “voice” -- i.e. leaders/ leaders emerge
Power structures where whole is greater than parts social capital (e.g. voting, assembly)
[formal power structures]
Informal power structure shared for critical issues for the community’s many leadership
“jobs”
Formal power structure opens up the space for the informal power structure
Mechanisms for residents to come together to identify issues
o …and for having formal leadership come to THEM
Future leaders/resilient young folks – generations (multiple generations as leaders) STAY
(avoiding “bright flight”);
o Generational vibrancy/engagement in its own business










319

Traditional power structure actively pursues community engagement in its own
governance…pursues development of a shared community vision
o An understanding that there are a lot of leadership “jobs”
o Leads to sustainability

Traditional power structure is RESPONSIVE to community shared vision -- they are
stewards -- they LISTEN -- not interested in “my” agenda but the community’s
o Leads to sustainability.

Creativity/risk taking by the “small p” and “capital p” folks (referring to both the formal
and informal leadership)
Growing new leaders on purpose
Influence on meaningful things/tasks
Leadership development intentionally and systematically implemented – as a legitimate
strategy like many other things (e.g. land use, economic development)
Tolerance for trial-and-error---reframed to “learning environment”
“Disenfranchised” are recruited and grown for leadership voice to be heard
Listens to ALL VOICES as a matter of course.
Core Issue:
o Willingness of folks with power are persuaded to give some up
o Facilitating dialogue between those who suffer and those who have the power to
change it
o How do you get folks in power:
 To give some power up?
 To find out what poor people are dealing with?
 To have folks shape community?







Large group additions to small group work






Theological and cultural leadership needs recognition
You don’t lose power when you share it Power is infinite
Leadership: Intentionality of grooming leaders through education.
The role of belief in God plays in the restoration of people’s communities faith (Role)
Leadership vs. Power : Empowering all participants
Relationships between power and leadership
Visioning the Ideal: Community Engagement
Participants: Con Hogan, Marc Cherna, Sandra Janoff, Chris Sieber, Bob Woodson, Ona Porter,
and Lisa Cummins
Facilitator: Ed Strong
320
The group took on the task of what the ideal community would look like if it were a fully
engaged community, with all members participating. The following list represents the thoughts
of the group but does not represent a consensus. These are more brainstormed ideas and pictures.
 We need to view communities as places of capacity – not incapacities and make use of
the capabilities identified.
 All communities need vision statements – statements of what they want to be. This is a
universal concept that cuts across all communities not just low income communities.
 Engaged communities display the following characteristics:
o They engage in planning; they have a reason for coming together; they are actionoriented
o They have common aspirations
o They engage in dialogues that surface multiple sides of an issue
o Everybody gets involved
o The planning and dialogue is linked to an effective delivery system – this is an
enabling condition; it must be present for ongoing engagement to be effective.
o The delivery system provide effective services – this also is an enabling condition
necessary for the engagement process to have staying power
o There is reason for the engagement process to continue. It has sustainability as an
enabling condition
 The engagement process uses language that relates to every member of the community
 Reciprocal responsibility is a part of the entire process – everyone has a role to play
 The process has in the room authority; resources; expertise; information; and passion
The discussion moved to a more general framing of what is meant by a community and how
current community planning efforts in some ways reflect the ideal but in others do not. This list
also begins to identify some of the challenges that need to be overcome to have a robust
community building process nationwide:

In today’s world the definition of a community can be very broad. It:
o uses technology to communicate
o is not always centered on meetings
o other venues, particularly electronic means, are employed



Those engaged in the process can see a defined task that’s worth the effort
Character changes but not characteristics
There are places where there are examples of community building focused on selected
components or on limited areas; the challenge is how to take it to scale so that all
communities can be so defined and community building is pervasive and sustained.
Communities build on the successful techniques of entrepreneurs
There was a sense that there is a growing process of engagement; it is evolving based on
new needs and new techniques
A successful engagement process includes flattening the hierarchy
A community must ask the question - what are we trying to impact - do our actions and
structures supports that impact? We have simple tools to use in many different segments
of the community




321
















The boundaries of a community are self defined.
Good community engagement cuts across sectors and uses non-traditional types of
engagement
Measures must be relevant and understandable – can we look ourselves in the mirror and
say these things count
An engaged community would know what’s going on
An engaged community works from inside resources
o Not dependent on outside help
The community has access to communicate its intentions and expectations at appropriate
levels
An engaged community involves cross-generational civic responsibility (at least 3
generations)
There is a sense of participation throughout
An engaged community defines success by the range of people involved not the number
involved
In an engaged community everyone has someone who cares for them
Communities can be defined in many ways. Workplaces can be communities – they are
often expressions of values
We must broaden our concept of community to look beyond geographical/governmental
units, which are often too large.
Community can have many definitions
o People who come together around an issue – have commitment – and can’t do it
alone
o Have fun together
We must know the history of a community and celebrate it
An engaged community is full of volunteers
An engaged community decides how to decide – how to make decisions
Group Additions to Flipchart Information
After presenting to the group as a whole, there were some additions to the small group’s
work including:

In discussing community engagement, we usually focus on engaging the geographic
community. But what about engaging other sub-communities, e.g. the academic
community in terms of providing technical assistance?
Visioning the Ideal: Implementing Whole-Community Strategies
Participants: Jack Burch, Obie Clayton, Scott Miller, Ann Peton, Tony Whitehead, Clarence
Carter, Marvin Weisbord
322
Facilitator: Jeannine La Prad
The group began its visioning task with the following question: What does it look like in
the ideal for communities to successfully implement whole-community strategies? While the
focus was supposed to be future oriented, the discussion began with members of the group each
describing their current experiences with communities before shifting to a more future oriented
focus. The following lists represent the results of their brainstorming.
What Needs to Change Within Communities?



















Identify/engage sub communities within a community
Support structures need to be in place to support a shared vision
Incentives need to be available to engage around a shared vision
o Work together and find energizers/motivators to engage people
All the organizations need to see/shape the urgency around specific issues
Need to deal with the issues more holistically
Be clear about the stakeholders (authority, expertise, knowledge, experience)
Master plans don’t need to be in place
Coordination and control of action can’t be from outside, needs to be more organic
Okay for structures to change and to go away
Can’t have control freaks in charge of the process
Success builds confidence; a group can then move to more formal structure
Moving from conceptualizing to operationalizing a model is a real challenge
Getting politicians to pay attention when the community is at the center
Allow neighborhoods to establish budgets/receive the funding
Corporate sector needs to be involved in the community
Dynamic structures/processes are essential when you unleash the community
o “Messy”/not neat and tight
o “It’s not a program”
Sustainability -- “Train-the-Trainer” approach is important to ensure initiatives thrive
beyond initial resource investment
Get people across socio-economic classes to work together
Get rid of institutional factors that cause poverty
What’s Different in the Ideal Future State?





Resources would flow to ideas or a shared community vision
Talking occurs through a collective voice; leveraging more resources
People/organizations are recognized for their commitments/involvement
Relational energy is kept alive
o Follow the energy
Organic and flexible community
o Problem solving model
323










Free Market ideas are applied to the solutions (i.e., establishing a credit union for lowincome people)
Leadership, community engagement, and implementation are all part of a continuum for
whole community solutions
Organizing the resources around the person or the whole community
Monitoring and evaluation mechanism is in place for determining progress and keeping
an initiative alive
Recognizing and communicating success
Whole system is present:
o Engage the whole group so that all ideas/views are shared
o Focus on the common ground
o Focus on the potential future
o Take personal responsibility
Reconvening people frequently; continuous call to action and renewed commitment
Embracing multiple cultures and language differences
Building confidence within a community to bring resources to the table
Dynamic Model of Community Change
Group additions to Flipchart Information



Need to communicate flexibility in monitoring/evaluating (performance based)
Agenda built around passionate commitments to equal opportunity and to a minimally
decent life
Effective community structures will produce a reaction from established political
hierarchy therefore they must have strategies for resisting or co-opting political actors
SMALL GROUP PRESENTATIONS TO LARGE GROUP
Each small group presented their work to the large group. All of the groups used the
flipcharts they produced (as transcribed in the previous section of this document) as talking
324
points and generally presented the highlights of their small group discussions. By design, the
content of the presentations were not discussed in the large group during this evening session.
Participants were instead instructed to write notes, comments, and questions on pieces of paper
and attach them to the “facilitation wall” to inform the full group discussion to occur in the
morning (see large group additions to flipcharts at bottom of each small group section—above—
for written comments).
Leadership and Leadership Development in the Ideal: Talking Points
 Distinction between formal and informal leadership
o Take responsibility for own community
o Staying engaged in community issues
 Formal
o Ability to have influence/make change/have voice
o Freedom for risk taking/creativity
o Sustainable
o People have a voice
o Many people in the community are doing ‘leadership jobs’
o Real leadership vs. management is present
o Shared community vision
Community Engagement in the Ideal: Talking Points
When the small group reported out its deliberations to the full group, it identified a few
key items from the list above to highlight. These included:









The ideal community engagement is as untidy as this report out
Effective community engagement has a universal quality involving those in authority,
those in need, and those with expertise in the process
The entire process is guided by looking at capabilities not incapacities
The process includes: developing common aspirations; detailed planning; service
strategies; and sustaining activities toward a common vision
There is a focus on reciprocal responsibility where everyone has someone to care for
them and everyone has the opportunity to care for others
The concept incorporates multiple sub-sets of an area such as workplaces and school as
communities within themselves.
The effective community knows what going on; has access to information; and
understands how to use measures of success that relate to the issues and are simple to
follow.
The effective community can communicate its needs and intentions to the appropriate
levels of power and has the power to act.
The effective community has fun together
Whole-Community Strategies in the Ideal: Talking Points
 Deals with issues more holistically
 Relational energy is kept alive – follow the energy
 Organic and flexible community problem solving
325





Recognizes and communicates success
Corporate sector is involved
Sustainable
People across socio-economic classes work together
Monitoring and evaluation mechanism for determining progress is in place
EVENING CLOSE OUT: CLARENCE CARTER
Clarence closed out the evening by thanking everyone for their hard work and sharing
that he was both energized and exhausted.
August 26, 2004: Morning
The morning began with an opportunity for participants to reflect on the work of the day
before and the themes that were common to the “ideals” presented by all of the small groups.
The facilitator spent some time preparing participants for their tasks for the day and revisited the
definition of success for the meeting.
Success is walking away with…
 A set of components that define a fully empowered community
 An understanding of what needs to change
 A start on specific strategies
 Some kindred souls in this effort moving forward who can help make real change.
Tasks for the day:
 Review and discuss in the large group the principles upon which this effort is based.
 Discuss in the large group reactions to the small group presentations on the ideal future
state.
 Identify gaps (what needs to change) and strategies for closing the gaps in small groups.
 Report gaps and strategies to the large group.
THEMES: COMMON ELEMENTS OF IDEAL COMMUNITY-BASED SOLUTIONS
ACROSS ALL PERSPECTIVES





Shared vision
All voices heard; dialog across socioeconomic lines (everybody has a role)
Community/indigenous leadership is broadly distributed
Sustainability (recognizing that change/flexibility is necessary)
Energy vibrancy/fun
REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF THE PRINCIPLES
326
The group was asked to walk around the room to read and internalize the fourteen
principles in preparation for the large group discussion. Participants were asked to think about
whether and how the principles should be enhanced, whether they were clear (and what
clarifications were needed), and about their reactions to them. The discussion is summarized
below.

Shared vision: Considerable discussion ensued about the merits of using the language of
“poverty” with and without its current definition. The following viewpoints were
expressed:
o The vision should be stated as bringing people out of poverty; bringing an end to
poverty.
o “Poverty” is too narrowly defined as an income ‘number’ and that it is arrogant to
place a number on someone and tell them they are poor.
o To not talk about “poverty” is a disconnect; we must talk about the struggle and
suffering associated with poverty if we are to gather momentum.
o An alternative to “poverty” is to use language about “healthy communities.”
o But, communities must define its own health; we don’t want to be nor can we be
prescriptive, since all communities are not the same.
o Healthy communities and poverty are linked, since you can’t have a healthy
community when poverty is present.
o Examples from the UK demonstrate that poverty can be addressed through
working toward “healthy communities.”
o The other principle of “poverty is broader than income” plays into this discussion.
It is true that people do not want to acknowledge poverty and that it does mean
more than income.
 We must break through that denial. Poverty is now denied by the power
structures that decide how to set up our systems and structures.
 Reference to Martin Luther King: “He didn’t stand up and say, ‘we need
to take the edge off of racism.’ We can’t say we need to ‘take the edge off
poverty,’ either.
o It is more about helping every individual meet their potential.
o Perhaps “moving from poverty to prosperity” can be used. However, that brings
us back to “poverty is an income number.”
o We cannot develop a shared vision without involving those that are impoverished.
We must hear what they have to say and not patronize them by suggesting that we
know what’s best.
o However, we who can do something right now already know that little babies
should not have rats chewing on their ears (true story). We know enough about
the conditions to DO SOMETHING!
 While everyone does have a role, the basic structural issues that contribute
to the persistence of poverty ARE the government’s responsibility to fix.
 Leadership must facilitate that dialog.
o Our role is one of servant leadership—we need to be informed by low income
individuals.
327

Reciprocal responsibility:
o The statement needs to acknowledge the creative tension between the system’s
responsibility and the individual and between capacity to uplift and
rights/entitlement.
o The ideal community pays attention to people who are suffering. We need to find
out who else cares and do “with,” not “for.”
o Statement should reflect the notion of “allowing” people to reach their potential
versus doing it for them.
o Biblical reference to “love thy neighbor” and “there should be no poor among
you;” you can’t love thy neighbor and watch them suffer.

Everybody has a role:
o Need a statement about the need for an infrastructure that supports the basics for
achievement in society.
IDENTIFICATION OF WHAT NEEDS TO CHANGE TO GET TO THE IDEAL (GAP
ANALYSIS/DEVELOP STRATEGIES)
Small groups were convened again to identify gaps between the ideals they developed
during yesterday’s work and the current state. Group report outs occurred before and after lunch.
Local Leadership and Leadership Development
Overall Leadership Gaps



There is a critical interdependence between community leadership (informal) and formal
leadership
No one in either “structure” has identified poverty as a priority (holistic vision vs. “BandAid” strategies)
No systematic long-term community investment in leadership development (re:
poverty…it is not on “the agenda”)
Gaps: Formal Leadership
 Lack of data on community issues regarding poverty (formal AND informal leadership)
 Relationships that make data meaningful for action
 Lack of understanding that shared power is more powerful than personal
 Focus on management vs. leadership (i.e. lack of vision)
 Power structure is closed; very few have opportunity to penetrate access
 Goal-setting missing (re: poverty)
Gaps: Community Leadership
 Often ill-equipped to represent community to the formal structure.
Gap: Attitudes/Behaviors
o Mindset that we have a responsibility to DO SOMETHING!
328
 Produce a change strategy
o Long-term view
 Plan ahead for leadership development
o Practical knowledge building in community. (e.g. teach them how voting relates
to getting what they want/need)
August 26, 2004: Afternoon
Community Engagement Gaps and Strategies
Structure: Gaps Impeding Progress Toward Engaged Communities

There was a proposal that the lack of Universal Healthcare was a major impediment to
building communities. This idea was not supported by the group as a whole but was a
powerful issue for one member.

In the absence of basic security: engaging a community becomes paradoxical and
problematic. Those basic issues must be addressed before others can be tackled.

Part of the community building matrix is making choices available to people – allowing
residents to self-select for services is a key element

The community of helpers is hampered by the reality that certification not synonymous
with qualification and there are many who could be good helpers but the rules that govern
who can part of the helping system bar them from participating.
o Drugs/alcohol and offender issues are prime examples; some of the individuals
who have faced these barriers could be most effective community organizers but
they are prohibited from being part of the system
o Those with criminal records can’t even have a voice (the vote) or have access to
services for themselves.

Regulations in general bar employing broad strategies to implement things that work.

Structures for engagement that give incentives for change and support change/new
outcomes need to be expanded
o Example: increase voting percentages through active efforts

It is a developmental/incremental process to build community control
o Example: creating the concept of a family support center by the government but
letting the community decide how it can be shaped and should be organized is a
step toward developing the community’s capacity to self-identify it’s needs as a
next phase.

There was a perception by some of the group that an impediment exists in how some
programs which have strong community building components are actually run. For
329
example: CSBG appears to be open to political control – it needs a strong community
control requirement to make it more effective.

There is a need for resources that are flexible and general and community directed
o Example: allowing a community to pick the technical assistance providers that
come with some projects using vouchers redeemable upon demonstration of
community input to maximize choice.

There is a need for more Federal policies that support community engagement

In developing policy, those in power should look for solutions through community lens
creating incentive systems so that communities benefit from improvements they institute
rather lose funds because of those improvements.

A general rule must be to seek, value, and gather shared information from community
members.

Busy lives restrict participation potential in the form of coming together for meetings
frequently
o We need other means of engagement e.g. using technology

Resistance to change is part of any endeavor to overcome it, we need to achieve
o Need critical mass
o Articulate successes
 e.g. the example was used of a study of accidents by the elderly in grocery
stores that could be attributed to having untied shoes; training baggers to
check and to help by tying shoes proved to reduce the accident rate and
improve communication between the generations

Professional providers need to be on tap NOT on TOP!!!
Whole-Community Solutions Gaps and Strategies







Creative tension exists; move to solution finding
Structural challenges in terms of connecting people to jobs
People in conversations finding common ground based on their frustrations
Need methodologies about building community; convening people to allow principles to
flourish
Leadership methodologies (i.e., transformational leadership)
Technologies need to be usable in rural communities
Build relationships across socioeconomic and class lines; establish dialogue and space for
people to understand each others’ unique life circumstances
o Resources need to be available to do this;
330
















Provide people with a menu of services to pick and choose which services are appropriate
for their families
Need more cross agency dialogue about sharing resources
Support communities that are already building resources through better cross
agency/coordination programs
Integrated information about services availability at the community level (systems
integration)
Fund and work on higher impact projects and strategies--all activities need to support
achieving the mission (stop low impact activities)
Community pride needs to be a way to engage political and economic leadership
Resources need to be available to build the capacity of the community to solve their own
problems
Strategies need to look at building social capital as much as wealth
Need to work with families to address family values/social structures
o Fully engage in creating healthy family structures
Need to put a “face” on poverty; make it a humanistic issue (creating scenarios about the
conditions)
Use multimedia methods to communicate the issue/urgency
Organizing community dialogues – turning energy into action
Let people within communities decide what they need to do; make methods/approaches
available that are appropriate for that community
Funding should be provided only if the community can identify both an urban/rural
partner community to transfer learning
Communities need to develop sustainable funding strategies beyond government
resources
Need to support family formation
Strategies Summary
As each of the small groups reported the strategies they identified to the large group, the
facilitator captured them in one list. The strategies were:
1) Whole community dialogues can lead to concrete outcomes. Encourage, support, and
facilitate these dialogues.
2) Have community define its own needs/goals
3) Divert funding from “programs for conditions” to community capacity building
4) Expose communities to methodologies that work (dialogue, leadership, facilitation) – best
practices
5) Develop and encourage asset-building strategies (i.e. home ownership)
331
6) Bring agencies together for dialogue and sharing resources
7) Create environment in which people can engage in community, not just young people –
across generations
a. (healthy lifestyle, health care, basic survival needs met)
8) Broaden availability of assistance by broadening definition of qualified helpers
9) Provide choices/remove barriers
10) Create incentive opportunities for buy-in/ownership of local service (i.e. family support
center “competition”)
a. Create capacity to make these kinds of decisions
11) Measure outcomes to determine who should get funding as “helpers”
a. (Faith-based, people in recovery, etc.)
12) Look at impact of punitive laws
a. (i.e. on people with drug & alcohol problems)
13) Harness contingency at most basic levels
a. (shoe tying)
14) Listen to community to determine appropriate interventions
a. (not hospital; mind-body-spirit wellness)
15) Transform negative leaders into positive; listens to them to determine what kinds of
interventions are useful
16) Capture and share effective stories of transformation
a. Make it shiny and have them lead to something (give direction)
b. Be aware of Frames of listeners (tell story in a manner in which the listener can
understand)
17) Reduce the amount of prescriptive rules coming out of feds
18) Engage community where the show pinches, not in abstract work on global issues
19) Have resources available to sustain community efforts over time to allow movement from
one issue to the whole community
a. Inter-dependence of haves and have nots
332
20) Look to the wisdom of the whole community, not just the “educated” (or any other single
group)
a. ER data
21) Create incentives for being ‘in the room’
a. Community Shares in benefit
i. Cost savings return to community
22) Make sure dialogues go across socioeconomic lines
a. Make sure business community engages
23) “Experts” should refer to real stories
24) Use volunteers’ expertise more strategically toward issue of poverty (e.g. accounting,
construction, health care, education skills versus ladling soup)
25) Make major investment in communication strategies –
a. Beware of tendency to avoid looking at system change and tendency to avoid
looking at personal responsibility
b. E.g. Groups of leaders doing presentations
c. Recognize that conversation must go beyond ideological structures/confines
26) Create formal community commitments/blueprints to address poverty
27) Be willing to push back against own ideological barriers
28) Choose language that makes sense to audience
a. i.e. develop and disseminate appropriate language for business audience, etc. at
all levels.
29) Start where they area. Understand audience’s issues
30) Consider strategies for intimate/relational dialoguea. Individual successes facilitated at all levels lead to whole community
relationships and recognition of interdependence
31) Prepare formal and informal leaders to enter into productive dialogue
32) Use data in intentional ways to keep ideology from driving/controlling the dialogue;
make sure appropriate data is available.
333
33) Make sure focus is on specifics/ the urgent issues – but within the context of the larger
community goals
34) Provide opportunities and skills for leadership development
a. Define the “body of work” that makes up leadership
35) Create long-term, systematic plan for community development of its own leadership.
36) Give extraordinary level of support to community leaders to allow focus on leadership,
not management.
37) Identify the multitude of leadership roles in community and invite everyone to
participate. Create environment in which its possible for them to perform them (building
capacity of indigenous leaders).
38) Begin capacity building at younger age; broad investments in long-term opportunities.
39) Do community mapping/sociogram of young people to identify potential leaders.
PARKING LOT
A few “parking lot” issues were put up on the board. The group did not have a chance to
discuss them. The issues were:
 With the media faithfully reflecting and choosing not to challenge the boundaries of
debate set by political parties, potential answers to major problems cannot find
expression.
 “Community”—any place that people come together on a regular basis and who share a
common set of values, beliefs, and expectations.
 Is the distribution of income produced by a free market presumptively moral?
SESSION CLOSE OUT AND NEXT STEPS: CLARENCE CARTER
Clarence thanked the group for their engagement during the session and provided
information about next steps. Next steps included:



The project team will be compiling the proceedings of the session and distributing it to
participants for clarifications and enhancements.
o Participants will be given a set amount of time to submit enhancements
Once all of the working sessions are completed and all meeting records were revised
based on the participants’ review, the development of a “blueprint for change” will begin.
There may be some follow up needed with some of the participants as the blueprint
development progresses.
334



Hope to set up a web-enabled space for participants to remain connected to the initiative
and to each other.
Blueprint draft to be completed in early January
“Mega-Session” in which participants from all working sessions will be convened in the
same space to see and discuss the draft blueprint.
Clarence spoke of his desire for this initiative and this group of participants to “write an
important chapter of history” and his belief that we had gotten a great start with the thoughtful
contributions and engagement of the group. He thanked everyone once again and wished them
safe travels.
APPENDIXES
A. Core Elements: Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles
B. Research Themes: Community-Based Solutions.
C. Initiative context presentation: Characteristics of Successful Change
D. Current state presentation: Highlights from the research
E. Participant List
F. Project Staff List
335
APPENDIX A Core Elements: Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles
1
CORE ELEMENTS
Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles
August 2004
Mission
This initiative seeks to change the way this country thinks about and addresses poverty.
Imperatives (Why)




Among other reasons, we engage in this work because:
Despite significant investment in addressing poverty, persistent poverty exists.
We have a moral imperative to take care of one another, as our “brother’s keeper” and as
provided in the founding documents of our nation. No one should have to live an
impoverished life.
We have an economic imperative to ensure that the capacity of individuals, communities,
and the nation for innovation is encouraged and sustainable.
Poverty is costly to taxpayers, wherever they live, via the costs associated with social
services, remedial education, law enforcement, welfare programs, etc.
Vision (Desired Future)









Fewer people will live impoverished lives because:
Poverty is viewed by the mainstream as broader than income.
Society proactively plans for decreasing the number of people living impoverished lives.
Individuals proactively plan for a future for themselves that is not impoverished.
The education sector proactively plans and implements strategies to reduce the number of
people living impoverished lives.
The banking industry proactively plans and implements strategies to reduce the number
of people living impoverished lives.
The health industry. . .
The justice system. . .
The philanthropic sector. . .
The Federal government focuses its programs and policies on the above.
Principles
The desired future will be built upon the following principles:
336

Person-centered service delivery structure: Effectively and efficiently serving individuals
in need means that the service delivery structure must focus on the needs of the
individual or family, not on the needs of the helping system.

Consistency with America’s tenet of free enterprise: As in most facets of the American
experience, the helping system should leverage the philosophy of free enterprise. Doing
so encourages and supports free market solutions to geometrically expand the helping
resources available to serve Americans in need.

Reciprocal Responsibility: Full and equal responsibility for maximizing potential lies
with the individual to society and with society to the individual.

“Poverty” is broader than income: Income is only a part of an individual’s ability to make
life work and to be a productive member of society. Human potential depends on
different types of capital –social, economic, and spiritual.

“Poverty” as we know it is only a starting point: Traditional definitions and mental
models about poverty (e.g. models based exclusively on income determinants, which
suggest poverty as a population) are starting points only.

Shared vision: New ways of thinking about and addressing poverty are aligned with the
assumptions built into the founding documents of the nation.

Hopeful: Our new construct is built on a foundation of a profound belief in the natural
gifts, skills and abilities of every person to achieve when set free.

Fundamental right to individual potential: Every individual has the right to achieve their
potential, regardless of circumstance, strengths, or weaknesses.

Systemic interdependence: All parts of the system (read: nation) must fulfill their
obligations toward maximizing potential in order for all to be successful. No one policy,
program, community, strategy can maximize the nation’s collective human potential
alone.

Leveraging resources: The ability of an individual or system to align and strategically use
the resources they have toward the outcome of success, as they have defined it.

Budget neutral: Spending more Federal and philanthropic money is not the issue. We
should strive first to make wiser application of existing resources.

Everybody has a role: Every sector of society (government, private industry, non-profit,
communities) has a role in creating a nation of reciprocal responsibility and opportunity.
These roles may or may not be consistent with current roles.

Government as convener: The government role is one of convener and catalyst for
enabling innovation.
337

Change is necessary: We cannot create a nation of reciprocal responsibility and
opportunity using these principles without fundamental change occurring in every sector
of society.
338
APPENDIX B Research Themes: Community-Based Solutions
Community Based Solutions – Key Themes and Questions 1
Community Based Solutions
Key Themes
Community Based Solutions Related to Poverty
The United States moved from a moral/compassionate view of the role of government in
addressing poverty (Social Security Act - 1935 – AFDC) to a personal accountability view
(Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act - 1996 – TANF), with major
implications for service providers and recipients.
There have been an array of other federal programs designed to assist people in attaining
self-sufficiency, but they have all been limited in their capacity for success by restrictive
parameters attached to program delivery. Additionally, the programs have been established,
funded, delivered, and measured in silo format, independent from any other effort, which makes
it difficult for communities to build comprehensive approaches that address local conditions.




Success will not come from a new program, but from flexibility in combining the
programs and resources that are already available.
A dichotomy of strategies has been used to fight poverty.
“Place strategists" in the community development field focused on rebuilding
neighborhoods through housing, retail development and attempts at job creation.
“People strategists" in the human services arena focused on helping those living in
poverty to obtain the skills, personal orientation and support needed to achieve selfsufficiency.
There is a growing realization that both strategies must be integrated to be successful.

Change in the system may occur more rapidly if impoverished individuals and families
are seen as customers and if the community applies the principles of customer
relationship management and continuous improvement. Members of all socio-economic
levels must be included in the change process.

Poverty is manifested differently in urban and rural environments, thus requiring different
solutions.

Urban areas are losing a sense of community due to sprawl and multiple hubs of
economic activity. Affordable housing is a major workforce related issue.

Rural areas are small scale/low density and have difficulty connecting to urban centers of
activity. Transportation and lack of markets are major workforce related issues.
339
Increasing diversity requires understanding of how different populations relate to both
poverty and potential solutions. Solutions require flexibility to address multi-cultural differences.
Addressing shared cultural values – family, health, safety, and community - can help frame
solutions.



Successful communities are those that foster positive relationships among residents.
Communities with some level of social capital tend to have lower crime rates and better
relationships. Social capital refers to the norms and networks that enable collective
action. Social capital can take many varied forms, including congregation-based
community organizing; civic environmentalism; participatory school reform; and
numerous others.
Community building is continuous, collective action aimed at problem solving and
enrichment that results in greater equity, strengthened institutions and relationships, and
higher expectations for life in the community.
Sustainable community building happens when the public is engaged, not persuaded.
Community Assessment, Planning, and Development Models








Community building begins by assessing who and what is in the community so those
talents and resources can be leveraged. This is called community asset mapping.
Asset mapping can also raise awareness of community issues and promote citizen interest
in change.
Communities may use a variety of indicators to quantify their assets. Indicators are a
diagnostic tool leading to vision and action. Different frameworks are used by different
organizations. The most common indicators fit into seven categories: wellness and
safety; economic well-being; educational preparedness; community participation;
nurturing, inclusive environment; transportation; and demographics.
While some frameworks use a strong community or smart neighborhoods framing, a new
framework is based on sustainability. Sustainability has as its goal a holistic view of
environmental factors on human, environmental, and business success.
Each community approaches planning in its own way, but there are four basic models:
managerial, legislative, limited community participation, and community empowerment.
Traditional process management models are most likely to fail. Efforts that involve the
community, but assign some level of responsibility to a formal structure to monitor
progress are more likely to succeed.
It is debatable whether community development is about place or people or about process
or outcome. It also makes it difficult to see potential solutions.
Place or People: Place-based development has been the predominant model for 40 years.
The premise is that the “place” must be improved before the people can benefit.
However, significant investments must also be made in people in order to bring about
change.
Process or Product: Certain processes empower people, but sustainability of these
processes must ultimately be driven by results. Community development is actually
dependent on place AND people AND process AND results.
340


Two different approaches to community building are asset-based development, which
starts from strengths found in asset mapping, and deficit-driven development, which
starts from a delineation of problems. The problem with the latter approach is that it
creates a mindset that people in a neighborhood have special needs that can only be met
by outsiders.
The key to community change is having poor neighborhoods define their needs and
assets, have a strong say in their own fate, and work toward making communities not
only viable but sustainable.
Community Building as a Poverty Reduction Strategy

“Community building” is new terminology that describes a comprehensive approach to
addressing interwoven problems such as unemployment, inadequate housing, economic
disinvestment, substance abuse, neighborhood violence and educational failure that have
traditionally been addressed through categorical programs.

Community building efforts share common principles:
o
o
o
o
o
Building on assets;
Emphasizing community-based strategic planning;
Addressing sources of deterioration in a comprehensive way;
Developing partnerships or collaborations among all stakeholders; and
Stressing flexibility of design.

Barriers to successful community building include:
o Lack of agreement on basic terminology;
o Limited consensus on goals and values;
o Complex tensions that characterize working relationships; and
o Chasm between theory and evaluation and actual practice.

Many community building approaches include Community Action Agencies (CAAs),
Comprehensive Community Initiatives (CCIs), and Neighborhood Revitalization
Initiatives.
o CAAs collectively serve 13 million low-income people annually in 96 percent of
the nation’s counties. They serve over a quarter of all Americans living in poverty
and several million more families with incomes only slightly above the poverty
line. Their shared goals include securing and maintaining employment; securing
adequate education; securing adequate housing; providing emergency services;
improving nutrition; creating linkages among anti-poverty programs; and
achieving self-sufficiency.
o CCI goals commonly include encouraging community empowerment through the
development of leadership and organizational capacity, improving the delivery of
human services, expanding beyond housing development, fostering local
economies and job creation and retention, and pursuing comprehensive
community transformation.
341
o Neighborhood Revitalization Initiatives address quality of life issues including
crime and safety and nuisance abatement. Their comprehensive neighborhood
framework utilizes crime prevention strategies including “opportunity blocking,”
targeting of “hot spots” and addressing both supply side and demand side factors
that facilitate criminal activity.
Linking Community, Economic, and Workforce Development Efforts

Workforce development strategies that connect job seekers to employers are not geared to
communities. Rather than being part of a place-based solution, they tend to target
hardest-to-serve residents who are isolated from labor markets.

More effective workforce development efforts have a “dual-customer” perspective,
connecting the needs of employers in the larger regional labor market with the needs of
low-income job and skill seekers, while providing the necessary linkages to poor
communities and community-based institutions.

Economic development efforts are primarily locally funded and governed, while
workforce development efforts are primarily responsive to federal leadership and
dependent on federal funds. Local government can help align economic development and
workforce development for community building.

Economic development policies to alleviate poverty include enterprise zones,
microenterprise programs, and community development financial institutions (CDFIs).
o Enterprise zone programs share the basic concept that the revival of significant
industrial or commercial areas is a promising approach to revitalizing adjacent
residential area. Limited data about outcomes suggest that these zones have not
been effective in their purpose.
o Micro-enterprise programs typically provide business development services to
people who are currently operating or are interested in starting a microenterprise.
A micro-enterprise is defined as a business with five or fewer employees that is
small enough to require initial capital of $35,000 or less. Microenterprise
programs produce businesses with high survival rates.
o CDFIs focus on serving low-income or otherwise disadvantaged persons from
distressed areas by providing lending activities and other services. CDFIs are
effective in targeting their services to people with restricted access to capital, but
are currently too small and offer too limited a range of services to fill the credit
gaps left by mainstream financial institutions.
o Community Development Corporations (CDCs) came out of the Great Society
programs to bring about social, economic, and physical revitalization in their
communities. Many focus on the production and rehabilitation of low-income
housing. Other activities include housing counseling and related services;
commercial real estate development; employment counseling and placement;
rehabilitation of industrial property; and neighborhood planning.
342
o Economic and community development program models can be broken down into
four types: (1) urban education linked to workforce development; (2) programs
and services supporting successful transition to work; (3) successful urban
entrepreneurial strategies and resources; and (4) effective tax incentives and
finance tools to promote inner city development. Characteristics in common
among all four program models are:
 Linked to a market need and strategy;
 Entrepreneurial, opportunity-driven approach;
 Visionary and pragmatic leadership;
 Endorsed by high level corporate, philanthropic, or governmental leaders;
 Focused mission with clear goals and customers; and
 Comprehensive, customer focused program design.

Residency in an extremely disadvantaged neighborhood increases the likelihood of
negative behaviors. The effect is much smaller than family effects, but it is still believed
that peoples’ life chances can be improved by living in better neighborhoods.

Tenant-based housing assistance (i.e. vouchers and certificates) can help diminish the
financial constraints preventing low-income families from relocating to better
neighborhoods. The premise works less well for black families because of persisting
racial issues, although this can be overcome through counseling and employer outreach.

Low income families’ average income, adjusted for inflation, is less then it was 30 years
ago. The major cause of this negative trend is the decline in their rates of pay. The
economic gap between the haves and have-nots currently stands at its highest level in the
post-WW II era.

The living wage movement posits that no one who works for a living should be poor.
Wages paid for full time work to even the lowest wage workers should lift them out of
poverty. Outcome data is small, but suggests that living wage ordinances produce
positive impacts.

Tipping points for bringing about community change include: individual leaders;
responding to opportunity or challenge; rising awareness of community issues; and
shared vision.
Creating, Maintaining, and Sustaining Community-Based Solutions

The methods for improving communities that have been most successful are those where:
o Non-profits, business, local government, and citizens have made a commitment
and an investment to make their particular situation better;
o Residents are invested and encouraged/empowered to affect their own lives;
o Holistic approaches and structures are used;
o Stable community-based organizations and development corporations are in
place;
343
o Diverse coalitions exist that involve the stakeholders in and out of the affected
area;
o Leadership is developed at all levels; and
o Communities address race and ethnicity issues.

Successful initiatives:
o Are “responsive” (outcome) rather than just “comprehensive (process);
o Have a “champion” to mobilize resources and implement the vision;
o Develop partnerships, coalitions, and collaboration; and
o Leverage and bundle resources.

Important elements for leading social change include:
o Visioning;
o Planning;
o Implementation
o Evaluation; and
o Sustainability.

Evaluating the success of community change presents many issues for presenting and
disseminating data. Strategies for maximizing impact include:
o Produce frequent public reports and fact sheets;
o Conduct face-to-face briefings with multiple audiences;
o Release findings to intermediate organizations that can distribute them;
o Make data available to community stakeholders on computer diskettes,
accompanied by training sessions; and
o Use the news media, the Internet, and research papers.

Successful comprehensive community initiatives have learned to use data not only to
validate strategies or raise funds but also to inform positions, strengthen programs, and
build capacity for change among community members and groups.

Sustainable community change initiatives commonly:
o Took advantage of a catalytic event early in their development;
o Tended to expand organically as needs arose and related opportunities were
identified or developed;
o Had a visible signature development or effort;
o Had charismatic leaders with either an entrepreneurial bent or willingness to hire
such individuals;
o Had a solid working-class population base in the community; and
o Had adequate, stable, and flexible financing.
Questions to Consider
344

How well have service providers and recipients adjusted to the personal responsibility
model for alleviating poverty? What change has the personal responsibility model had on
the public’s perception of people receiving public assistance? What changes have come
about in other poverty related programs as a result?

How do we engage people in a healthy discussion of place vs. people strategies in
alleviating poverty? What are the barriers to that kind of discussion? What does it really
“look like” when the strategies are integrated?

How would you recognize a program that sees poor families as customers with whom
customer relationship management techniques must be applied? What would be the
characteristics of such programs? How can those characteristics be incorporated in new
initiatives?

How do we quantify social capital in such a way that we can tell if it is growing or
diminishing? How do we engage both residents and service providers in strategically
enhancing social capital? What other kinds of capital are important, and how do we
quantify those resources?

How should community asset mapping be launched? Who are likely candidates to lead a
successful launch? What should be done if key stakeholders don’t participate? What
templates or examples exist for asset mapping? How do you know when you are “done?”
What does the map look like? How can the effort be sustained over time? What should be
done with the results?

Can you think of examples of community efforts that started from an asset-based
approach and those that started from a deficit-based approach? What was the community
reaction? What do you see as the pros and cons of the approaches?

How can we use what we have learned about successful models to affect the impact of
community action agencies, comprehensive community initiatives, and neighborhood
revitalization initiatives? What are the implications for future grantmaking and grant
solicitation?

In your experience, how do you think workforce development professionals perceive
their role in poverty reduction? How do economic development professionals perceive
their role? How do community builders interact with both this groups?

How can we foster more interaction among workforce, economic, and community
building groups? What is an effective venue?

What has been your experience with enterprise zones, micro-enterprise zones, community
development financial institutions, and community development corporations? What has
been effective or not effective? Why?
345

How do we address some of the tensions surrounding the “living wage” debates? What
has that language come to mean in some quarters?

“Leadership” is a key factor in all successful initiatives. How do we recognize existing
leaders at all levels, including among the impoverished population? How do we cultivate
leadership when none is apparent?
346
APPENDIX C Initiative context presentation: Characteristics of Successful Change
Characteristics of Successful Change (modified from Kotter and Corlett)
347
APPENDIX D Current state presentation: Highlights from the research
Community Based Solutions to Reducing Poverty
Where We Are Today




Dichotomy of “place” strategies and “people” strategies
Impoverished individuals viewed as cases, as “recipients”
One-size-fits-all approaches
Poverty reduction paradigms based on cultural / racial environment of the 60’s
Where We Are Today
 “Data driven decisions” not put into practice
 Limited “Out of the box”, innovative thinking
 Disjointed efforts, missed synergy
 The Great Disconnect
 Funder-driven strategies
 People are not the focus
 “Community-based strategic planning” has limited relevancy
 Disconnect between social theory, practice, and results
Where We Are Today: Community Economic Development





New Roofs aren’t enough
Increasing focus on downtown revitalization
Gentrification of Neighborhoods
Limited effectiveness of Economic Development Efforts
Focus on lower-impact strategies
Characteristics of Highly Effective Communities









Non-profits, business, local government, citizens and other stakeholders have made a
commitment and investment to make their situation better
People are invested and encouraged/empowered to affect their own lives
Charismatic, entrepreneurial leadership is developed at all levels
Catalytic, organic efforts to mobilize people, interests, and passions are seized upon
Communities address race and ethnicity issues
Had visible signature effort or development that reflects work
Holistic approaches and structures are used
Stable community-based organizations and development corporations in place
Diverse coalitions exist that involve the stakeholders in and out of the affected area
Challenges to move into 21st Century Solutions
348





Are all resources being leveraged? Non-traditional service sectors?
How can shared vision for communities be realized (locally, regionally, nationally)?
How does the emergence of class affect strategies?
Does the right leadership exist in communities to affect change?
Are all sectors of the community aware of their issues, opportunities and challenges to
affect change?
349
APPENDIX E Participant List
COMMUNITY-BASED SOLUTIONS WORKING SESSION
PARTICIPANT LIST
Aspen Wye River Conference Center
Queenstown, Maryland
August 25-26, 2004
Jack Burch
Executive Director
Community Action Council for Lexington–Fayette,
Bourbon, Harrison, and Nicholas Counties
P.O. Box 11610
710 West High Street
Lexington, KY 40576
Phone: 859-244-2212 Fax: 859-244-2219
E-mail: jburch@commaction.org
James F. Capraro
Executive Director
Greater Southwest Development Corporation
2601 West 63rd Street
Chicago, IL 60629
Phone: 773-436-1000, ext. 111 Fax: 773-471-8206
E-mail: jimcapraro@aol.com
Jeannie Chaffin
CSBG Program Manager
DSS/FSD/CSBG Unit/State of Missouri
Missouri Department of Social Services
P.O. Box 2320
615 Howerton Court
Jefferson City, MO 65102-2320
Phone: 573-751-6789 Fax: 573-522-9557
E-mail: Jeannie.L.Chaffin@dss.mo.gov
Marc Cherna
Director
Allegheny County Department of Human Services
350
One Smithfield Street, Suite 400
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
Phone: 412-350-5705 Fax: 412-350-4003
E-mail: mcherna@dhs.county.allegheny.pa.us
Susan A. Christie
Deputy Executive Director
Leadership and Practice Development Department
American Public Human Services Association
810 First Street NE, Suite 500
Washington, DC 20002
Phone: 202-682-0100 Fax: 202-408-5947
E-mail: schristie@aphsa.org
Obie Clayton, Ph.D.
Professor and Sociology Chair
Morehouse College
830 Westview Drive SW
Atlanta, GA 30314
Phone: 404-427-6293 Fax: 404-215-3475
E-mail: oclayton@morehouse.edu
Cornelius Hogan
Senior Consultant
Center for the Study of Social Policy
324 Gonyeau Road
Plainfield, VT 05667
Phone: 802-479-2723 Fax: 802-479-2723
E-mail: chogan@conhogan.com
Sandra Janoff, Ph.D.
Co-Director
Future Search Network
9 Arthurs Round Table
Wynnewood, PA 19096
Phone: 610-896-9989 Fax: 610-658-5988
E-mail: sjanoff@futuresearch.net
Larry Lloyd
President
Crichton College
255 North Highland
Memphis, TN 38111
Phone: 901-320-9700 Fax: 901-320-9709
E-mail: llloyd@crichton.edu
351
Scott Miller
Executive Director
Move the Mountain Leadership Center
1211 Burnett Avenue
Ames, IA 50010
Phone: 515-232-9285 Fax: 515-232-0623
E-mail: mtmscott@msn.com
Ann Peton
Director
Community Information Resources Center
Rural Policy Research Institute
University of Missouri
231 Middlebush Hall
Columbia, MO 65109
Phone: 573-884-3147 Fax: 573-884-5310
E-mail: petona@missouri.edu
Ona Porter
Executive Director
New Mexico Association of Community
Action Agencies
2929 Corrs NW, Suite 100 Q
Albuquerque, NM 87120
Phone: 505-344-8811 Fax: 505-343-1919
E-mail: nmacap@aol.com
Chris Sieber
Director of Planning and Program Development
ABCD, Inc.
178 Tremont Street
Boston, MA 02111
Phone: 617-357-6000 Fax: 617-695-2381
E-mail: sieber@bostonabcd.org
Debbi Speck
Arizona Neighborhood Ministries
1929 West Fillmore Street
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Phone: 602-257-4156 Fax: 602-252-3171
E-mail: debbi.speck@nmaz.net
Gary Stokes
CEO
Move the Mountain Leadership Center
14520 Adobe Trail
352
Prescott, AZ 86305
Phone: 928-443-8627 Fax: 928-443-8628
E-mail: gstokes@kachina.net
Marvin Weisbord
Co-Director
A Program of Resources for Human Development
Future Search Network
4700 Wissahickon Avenue, Suite 126
Philadelphia, PA 19144
Phone: 610-896-7035
E-mail: mweisbord@futuresearch.net
Anthony Whitehead, Ph.D.
Professor of Anthropology and Director
The Cultural Systems Analysis Group
University of Maryland
10807 Dayflower Court
Reston, VA 20191
Phone: 703-620-0515 Fax: 703-620-0515
E-mail: tonylwhitehead@comcast.net
John Wilson
Executive Director
Community Action Association of Pennsylvania
222 Pine Street
Harrisburg, PA 17101
Phone: 717-233-1075 Fax: 717-232-1014
E-mail: johnwcap@aol.com
Robert Woodson
Founder
National Center for Neighborhood Enterprise
1424 Sixteenth Street NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: 202-518-6500 Fax: 202-588-0314
E-mail: rwoodson@ncne.com
353
APPENDIX F Project Staff List
CLARENCE CARTER
DIRECTOR
OFFICE OF COMMUNITY SERVICES
370 L'ENFANT PROMENADE
AEROSPACE 5TH FLOOR
WASHINGTON, DC 20447
CLCARTER@ACF.HHS.GOV
PHONE: 202-401-9342
FAX: 202-401-1556
Project Staff
Martin Brown
Office of Community Services
370 L'Enfant Promenade
Aerospace 5th Floor
Washington, DC 20447
mdbrown@acf.hhs.gov
Phone: 202-401-9333
Fax: 202-401-5633
Tarryl Clark
Executive Director
Minnesota Community Action Association
100 Empire Drive, Suite 205
St. Paul, MN 55103
tarrylclark@astound.net
Phone: 651-645-7425
Fax: 320-259-9501
Kelly Cowles
Office of Community Services
370 L'Enfant Promenade
Aerospace 5th Floor
Washington, DC 20447
Kelly.cowles@acf.hhs.gov
Phone: 202-260-2583
Fax: 202-401-4839
Lisa Cummins
President
Urban Strategies
P.O. Box 41408
354
Arlington, VA 22204
LisaCummins@UrbanStrategies.us
Phone: 202-368-3408
Fax: 703-892-5357
Megan Fluharty
Program Assistant
7315 Wisconsin Avenue
Suite 800 E
Bethesda, MD 20814
mfluharty@dsgonline.com
Phone: 301-951-0056
Fax: 301-951-3324
Barbara Hulburt
Director, Training and Consulting
The McCammon Group
1111 East Main Street, Suite 1700
Richmond, VA 23219
bhulburt@mccammongroup.com
Phone: 804-644-2993
Fax: 804-343-0923
Julie Jakopic
Vice-President
7315 Wisconsin Avenue
Suite 800 E
Bethesda, MD 20814
jjakopic@dsgonline.com
Phone: 301-951-0056
Fax: 301-951-3324
Jeannine La Prad
Vice-President
Corporation for a Skilled Workforce
900 Victors Way, Suite 350
Ann Arbor, MI 48108
jmlaprad@skilledwork.org
Phone: 734-769-2900
Fax: 734-769-2950
James I. Masters
Idea Generator
Center for Community Futures
P.O. Box 5309
Berkeley, CA 94705
355
jmasters@cencomfut.com
www.cencomfut.com
Phone: 510-339-3801
Fax: 510-339-3803
Dennis Parker
Office of Community Services
370 L'Enfant Promenade
Aerospace 5th Floor
Washington, DC 20447
deparker@acf.hhs.gov
Phone: 202-401-5463
Fax: 202-401-1556
Nancy Polend
Project Manager
American Public Human Services Association
Office of the Executive Director
21st Century Model to Address Poverty
npolend@aphsa.org
Phone: 202-682-0100
Fax: 202-289-6555
356
Office of Community Services
Creating the 21st Century Model to Address Poverty
Family Economic Security
September 7-8, 2004
Aspen Wye River Conference Center
Queenstown, MD
MEETING RECORD
Distributed to participants: December 8, 2004
This document contains the proceedings of the working session and has been compiled
from the small and large group discussions, the associated flipchart records, and from the
presentations given by project staff. Reaching consensus during the session itself was not
attempted.
Therefore, this document merely reflects the viewpoints as they were expressed in the
session and does not imply agreement among participants and/or project staff.
PRE-MEETING MATERIALS
Participants received the following materials prior to the working session:
 Preliminary Agenda
 Core Elements: Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles (Appendix A)
 Research Themes: Family Economic Security (Appendix B)
ON-SITE PACKET MATERIALS
Participants were provided a meeting packet containing the following materials:
 Final Agenda
 Core Elements: Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles
 Initiative Context presentation: Characteristics of Successful Change (Appendix C)
 Current state presentation: Highlights from the research (Appendix D)
 Research Themes: Family Economic Security
 Participant List (Appendix E)
 Project Staff List (Appendix F)
MEETING AGENDA
357
Overarching Goal: The goal of all of the working sessions is to allow people from a
variety of backgrounds and sectors to bring their expertise to bear toward creating a
fundamentally different model for thinking about and addressing poverty.
Session Objectives: This working session has five objectives:
1) Share a compelling case for change and articulate a vision and set of principles upon
which to build strategies to fundamentally change the way we think about and address
poverty as a nation.
2) Review the current state relative to four key areas that impact family economic
security—basic income (including work supports), acquisition and growth of assets,
mainstream goods and services, and public policy and compare/contrast with the stated
vision.
3) Identify some key elements of a desired future state for each of the four areas (i.e., what it
would look like in the ideal) from the perspectives of the individual and the community.
4) Identify some of the areas in which work must be undertaken (i.e., change levers) to close
the gap between existing and ideal states.
5) Brainstorm preliminary strategies for filling the gaps.
Tuesday, September 7, 2004
2:00 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. Registration
3:00 p.m. – 3:45 p.m. Welcome and Overview by Clarence H. Carter: The overall case for
change and why we are here; the vision of the 21st Century Model to Address Poverty.
Session Context: Conceptual framework for the overall initiative and facilitative strategy for the
session.
3:45 p.m. – 4:15 p.m. Session Content—Starting Points: A guided tour of the current state and
key themes/issues that impact family economic security.
4:15 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. Review of Principles: Exploration of the principles that will guide the
development of a new model for thinking about and addressing poverty.
5:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. Break
6:00 p.m. – 7:30 p.m. Dinner
7:30 p.m. – 9:00 p.m. Small Group Work (Lenses—Basic Income, Acquisition and Growth
of Assets, Mainstream Goods and Services): Each small group engages in visioning to
358
describe what it ‘looks like’ in the ideal in each of the topic areas from two perspectives—the
individual and the community. The goal of the small group work is to bring focus to a desired
future—built upon the principles— relative to their topic.
9:00 p.m. – 9:45 p.m. Small Groups Report: Groups present their work to the large group.
Large group will not discuss presentation content at this time, but will be asked to post questions
and comments on wall for discussion the next day.
9:45 p.m. – 10:00 p.m. Evening Closeout: Facilitator leads interactive session about the work
that’s been done so far, and what remains for tomorrow.
Wednesday, September 8, 2004
7:30 a.m. – 8:30 a.m. Breakfast
8:30 a.m. – 10:15 a.m. Large Group Discussion—Processing Small Group Work from
Wednesday: Using the notes taken by participants the night before, the group will focus on and
discuss each of the focus areas presented. The focus will be on identifying the key elements of
the desired future, rather than problems with the current state.
10:15 a.m. – 10:30 a.m. Break
10:30 a.m. – 11:45 a.m. Identification of Gap Areas and Change Levers: Identification of
levers for change (and related considerations and challenges) that would require work in order to
get ‘there’ from ‘here.’
11:45 a.m. – 12:45 p.m. Lunch
12:45 p.m. – 2:15 p.m. Identification of Preliminary Change Strategies: Moving from
visioning and change levers to ideas for closing the gap.
2:15 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. Session Closeout and Next Steps: Discussion of how the work that’s
been done here will be synthesized to create the pieces of a draft systemic change strategy and
about how to begin the work of change.
PROCEEDINGS
September 7, 2004: Afternoon
INTRODUCTIONS (facilitated by Barbara Hulburt)
WELCOME AND OVERVIEW BY CLARENCE CARTER
359
Clarence Carter provided the overall case for change and why we are here; the vision of
the 21 Century Model to Address Poverty and previewed the underlying principles for the
development of the model. Notes from his overview are provided below and contain an
amalgamation of his opening remarks from all four of the working sessions.
st
As America continually strives to form that ‘more perfect union’ envisioned by our
founding fathers, one of the key factors we have always struggled with as a society is how to
care for those in greatest need. For purposes of our work here, we focus on the segment of our
society that exists within the condition we define as poverty.
Every generation or so, our society recalibrates its thinking and approaches for
addressing poverty and it is clearly time for another recalibration. It is time for us to change the
way we think about and address poverty because:

We know that as the number of people living in poverty increases, it becomes more and
more difficult for any society to sustain itself. None of us wants that for our great nation.
As long as many of our citizenry remain under-optimized, our society can never reach its
full potential.

The most recent major recalibration was initiated 40 years ago via the 1964 “War on
Poverty.” President Lyndon Johnson believed that turning the power of the federal
government loose on the issue that we as a society could eliminate poverty.

While there is much progress to celebrate, we clearly have fallen woefully short of the
lofty objective of ameliorating poverty. As a result of the “War on Poverty,” scores of
programs were created, the U.S. Poverty Index was established, unprecedented public
spending was dedicated to the objective, and a massive ‘helping’ industry was created.
Though there have been impressive gains in many important indicators of societal wellbeing, we have not shifted in our approaches as quickly as the conditions have.

The U.S. Poverty Index, developed in the 1960’s and based on an income/food
consumption model, is no longer representative of the conditions of poverty (e.g. cost of
living, basic income needs, economic trends, technological advancements, family
structure and roles, workforce trends, etc.). As the economic, social, technological—
societal conditions change the nature of poverty, we must also change the way our
society thinks about it and addresses it in order to remain economically, socially, and
morally sustainable as a society.

We are still using the income/consumption model and the basic formula as designed in
the 1960’s under vastly different circumstances. Proposed reforms to the Poverty Index
over the last three decades to add other cost elements such as housing and health care and
to add other income sources such as the cash value of benefits have not been successful,
resulting in the continued use of a formula that has outlived its efficacy as a accurate
definition of the conditions of poverty.
360

We currently spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on assisting those in greatest
need in America without an acceptable return on investment. Unfortunately, since there is
no shared vision guiding and leveraging our investments toward a common objective.
Our spending is ad hoc, in categorical programs—with their own rules, regulations, and
objectives—which often work at cross purposes with other programs and initiatives.
Private initiatives often suffer from not having enough resources to be truly effective. In
the aggregate, our fragmented and categorical approach results in the old adage; ‘If you
don’t know where you are going, any road will get you there.’

The issue of poverty is best addressed at the community level. The current construct in
which the ways to address poverty is prescribed at the Federal level fails to fully engage
and empower communities to develop their own vision for the future and the strategies
they need to get there. The uniqueness of America’s communities demands a service
strategy unique to each community’s objectives, resources, and obstacles.

The current construct forces the needs of individuals and families to fit into categorical
programs that cannot possibly anticipate or address the whole and interdependent nature
of what they need to make their lives work for them. Often the goals and objectives of the
various ‘helping programs’ work at cross purposes, making a comprehensive set of
services and support that would be effective problematic at best. This approach is another
example of not leveraging the resources that are currently being expended on the issue
and does not give us a return on our investment.

The existing construct does not maximize the use of technology that would provide for
infinitely more efficient and effective delivery of service and/or to reduce the need for the
services in the first place. The current categorical construct requires separate
technological infrastructures for each of the programs, which means that precious
resources are required to fund the separate infrastructures and resources that could go
directly to the individual or family needing assistance. It means that helpers in the
different program structures have difficulty sharing vital information that would help
serve individuals and families more effectively. Furthermore, technology could be
leveraged to allow many decisions to be placed directly in the hands of the individual or
family, thus obviating the need for intermediaries.

The current helping system is financed principally by government and philanthropy,
despite the widely-used economic construct of market solutions in most other
advancement endeavors. Recognizing that every sector has a role in addressing poverty
and that market solutions are encouraged in most facets of American problem-solving,
we must acknowledge that market-based strategies are significantly underutilized in
America’s helping system.
All of the above leaves America with less than the most effective helping system. As the
economic, social, technological—societal conditions change the nature of poverty, we must also
change the way our society thinks about it and addresses it in order to remain economically,
socially, and morally sustainable as a society. We need to create an urgency in society to do the
work of this recalibration, such that our society views eliminating poverty as:
361



an exercise in developing self-sustaining conditions at the individual, family, community,
and societal levels,
a win-win exchange between society and individuals, individuals and institutions, and
a way to create the harmonious conditions that allow for continued innovation, economic
growth, strong relationships, non-violence, health, etc.
As the Director of the Office of Community Services, I draw on the history and intent of my
organization to help communities address issues of poverty—first as the Office of Economic
Opportunity, and in its subsequent evolutions as the Community Services Administration, and
now as the Office of Community Services—to leverage the power of its mandate toward new
constructs for thinking about and addressing poverty.
We have convened this group of the best and brightest thinkers to help begin a social
movement toward developing this new construct. Understanding that it will be a long-term,
complex endeavor, we recognize that we will not, over the course of the next 24 hours of our
initial working session, solve the problem.
Rather, we are simply seeking to start the dialog by putting forward some guiding principles
upon which to build a new construct and by creating the “space” in which to begin building it.
Welcome, thank you for coming, and let’s get to it.
SESSION CONTEXT AND CONTENT (Nancy Polend, Ed Strong, Tarryl Clark)
Project staff presented context and content material to ground the work of the session: 1)
Overview of the overall initiative using the characteristics of successful change as a conceptual
framework and a description of the project’s activities as an operational framework; and 2) an
exploration of the current state and key themes from the research regarding definitions and
measures of poverty. See Appendixes C and D for staff presentations.
The Characteristics of Successful Change presentation suggested that, since the initiative
is at its core the creation of systemic change, it is useful to map its evolving strategies and
activities to a framework that represents components of successful change. The change model
this initiative is using for this purpose is based on the work of John Kotter and John Corlett. The
presentation made connections between the change model and the working session activities in
which participants would be engaging. The presentation also made distinctions between what
could reasonably be accomplished during the working session and what was long-term, evolving
work to be done over the next decade and beyond. Acknowledgment of the uncertain, uncharted
territory of this work was made explicit.
The second component of the Characteristics… presentation included the operational
flow of the project’s short-term activities, showing what had been done to date, where the
working session fit in, and what would come next.
The subject-matter-expert presentation provided an environmental scan of the current
state in multiple areas of family economic security. A historical view of the economic support
362
landscape was given and a case for change was made from the perspectives of the resources
currently used to support family economic security, individual family needs, and the service
delivery mechanisms currently being used to support families.
The dynamics of the economy and families themselves have changed over the past
several decades. For much of that time, the major public approach to helping poor families with
children, often headed by individual females, provided a small cash grant together with supports,
such as health care and food stamps. While women entered the workforce in increasing numbers,
parents receiving cash assistance for their families who obtained jobs lost key supports soon after
they began earning income for their families.
During this period, many other low-income families earned wages insufficient to meet
their basic needs, but too high to access supports let alone cash assistance. By the late 1980’s and
into the 1990’s, the public approach shifted to eliminating rules that kept parents from earning
money for their families and helping parents gain access to entry level jobs. Beginning in 1996,
with the enactment of sweeping welfare reform, the expectation for parents who can work is that
they do. For those families, cash assistance is time limited, accompanied by work requirements.
Some level of supports, such as health care, child care assistance, and job search services are
generally available.
The shift from cash assistance programs to assisting people in obtaining entry level jobs
modified service delivery systems and families’ lives. Systems that now assist people in securing
entry level jobs have been strengthened, but there has not been a corresponding emphasis on
strategies for poverty reduction. There are few mechanisms to assist people in planning or
accessing pathways that will lead them out of low-wage jobs.
Most low-wage earners struggle to provide for their families’ basic needs and many find
their rewards do not necessarily match their efforts. Access to jobs with benefits is limited. Like
low-wage workers previously described, they have limited or no access to work supports (e.g.
health care, child care) until they earn enough to meet their family’s basic needs.
A large portion of the population experience a financial crisis during some period in their
lives, but the support mechanisms in the form of family, savings, possessions, and networks
clearly differentiate the general population from low-wage earners who do not have access to
such mechanisms.
Asset building is critical for those seeking economic security for their families –including
home ownership, savings, and human capital investment. However, there are few public
resources devoted to asset building, and low-income families are rarely able to acquire assets.
Low-wage earners do not have full access to their limited resources and have difficulty
accessing mainstream services. The most visible example of this is in the area of financial
services. Payday lending, rent to own, and other predatory lending services flourish, at a
significant cost to low-wage earners in the form of very high interest rates.
363
In combination, these types of financial services coupled with the other conditions
mentioned previously, make obtaining a mortgage or earning interest inaccessible to low-wage
workers.
Focusing on the person is often difficult for systems, organizations, and individuals
within the larger ‘helping system.’ In addition to the public systems, there are many nonprofits,
faith organizations, and other groups which seek to help families in crisis or those seeking to
become self-reliant. Services are generally provided via organizational or funding silos, which
makes it difficult for the person to figure out where and what s/he can access and just as difficult
for the system to have a lasting effect on the ‘whole person’s” capacity to be self-reliant.
The person has the burden of navigating fragmented systems and programs. While
Community Action Agencies, Workforce Centers, public human services agencies, and others
have made an effort to create a “one stop” experience, they still must refer participants to some
other services. Few communities and systems have approaches that focus on assisting the person
overcome her/his barriers and maximize her/his potential.
There is some creative experimentation with new leading edge service delivery options
and the potential for greater focus on the person is substantial.
The creation of a 21st Century approach to family economic security focuses on
generating new opportunities and high-impact strategies in four areas: basic income and work
supports; the acquisition and growth of assets; the ability to access mainstream goods and
services; and public policy related to these three. These are the areas in which we will focus the
small group work, later in the session.
REVIEW OF THE PRINCIPLES AND LARGE GROUP DISCUSSION
At this point, the participants were invited to walk around the room to read, internalize,
and react to the core principles proposed for the 21st Century Model to Address Poverty (see
Appendix A).
A large group discussion of the principles revealed several useful ideas for
enhancements.

Budget neutral: Spending more Federal and philanthropic money is not the issue. We
should strive first to make wiser application of existing resources.
o Discussion and Feedback: There was significant and lively discussion that
demonstrated a collective misgiving with this principle. The group’s discussion
centered on the perception that its wording suggests a preconceived decision that
no new funds need to be expended on the issue, when in fact, to be more
consistent with the other principles, we really don’t know whether it will require
more or less spending. Some participants also pointed out that it could be
construed as political posturing. The group acknowledged that the phrase “budget
neutral” is known as a politically charged phrase, with multiple potential
meanings. Several participants expressed the suggestion to delete it as a principle
364
altogether, and some suggested that the “leveraging resources principle addresses
making better use of existing resources.

Shared vision: New ways of thinking about and addressing poverty are aligned with the
assumptions built into the founding documents of the nation.
o Discussion and Feedback: Some concern was expressed about the well-intended
language in the founding documents that now holds new meaning or that have
been compromised by the nation’s historical application of “equal rights.”

Reciprocal Responsibility: Full and equal responsibility for maximizing potential lies
with the individual to society and with society to the individual.
o Discussion and Feedback: This principle was noted as the most useful in
bringing together some of the known and opposing worldviews of poverty. It was
noted by the group that reciprocal responsibility includes corporate citizens. This
principle was also noted as one of the key ideas that should stand alone (vs. being
combined with any other principle, as suggested below) in conveying the key
foundational components of a new model for addressing poverty.

Everybody has a role: Every sector of society (government, private industry, non-profit,
communities) has a role in creating a nation of reciprocal responsibility and opportunity.
These roles may or may not be consistent with current roles.
o Discussion and Feedback: The suggestion was made to include education in the
list of sectors). Discussion of this point included the possibility of deleting the list,
since the intent of this principle is all-inclusive.

Government as convener: The government role is one of convener and catalyst for
enabling innovation.
o Discussion and Feedback: A brief discussion of the need for government to use
its “bully pulpit” to initiate systemic change. The group discussed the notion that
government’s role as a convener is necessary to find long-term leaders in society.
A suggestion was made to combine some of the principles with similar themes so that
“the message” was more concise. A few of the themes that could accomplish this were pointed
out to project staff. They were:
 Individual potential,
 Reciprocal responsibility, and
 Independence.
The idea that it will be increasingly important as time goes by to hone the message to a few
key ideas was discussed among several participants and the OCS Director. The suggestion of
reducing the existing set of 14 to four or five key principles was well-received. The group
offered other “messaging” considerations, listed below:
 Shift from adequacy to opportunity
 Start with awareness of greater capacity than opportunity
 Investment in people
 Reciprocal responsibility
365







Everybody in it (all sectors)
Shared Vision: poverty as a matter of national, social, and economic security
Rights of individuals should be limited by the harm that is does to others
Need to explicitly recognize that the market cannot address needs most of very lowincome and government has to step up
References to “free enterprise” are as hot as “budget neutral”
A role for government, not the role
If resources are allocated for a purpose, the entity should be free to use them for
inconsistent purposes (Leveraging Resources principle).
The large group discussion continued with some questions about the future of the initiative
and some general observations. A participant asked Clarence what would happen to this initiative
after the election. Clarence responded by saying that this effort is not an attempt to create
“another government program,” it is about a long-term effort to change the way this country
thinks about and addresses poverty. He added that this work will go on, regardless of any
administration and that what happens to the effort is largely dependent on what everyone in the
room does when they get home. He reiterated that everyone has a role and responsibility in the
effort and encouraged participants to think of themselves as a “guiding coalition” to create and
embed the changes necessary.
Another question was about how the principles would be used after the session. The response
was that they will be used to frame the conversation going forward.
One participant offered that building the capacity of individuals requires the “4 C’s:”
Confidence
Competence
Connections
Capital
FACILITATIVE STRATEGY
As the large group discussion wound down, the facilitator walked through the success
factors for the session and led the group in a process of establishing guidelines for participation.
Success is walking away with it…
 A set of components that describe economically secure individuals and communities
 An understanding of what needs to change
 A start on specific strategies.
 Some kindred souls in this effort moving forward who can help make real change.
The facilitator then explained the evening’s small group visioning activities and restated the
idea that “if you don’t know where you’re going, any road will take you there.” She also
announced the rosters of each of the groups and addressed various housekeeping and logistical
items.
366
The small groups were:
1) Basic income (including work supports)
2) Acquisition and growth of assets
3) Mainstream goods and services
Participants took an evening break to check in to their rooms and convened in the dining
room at 6:15 for dinner with their small group colleagues. After dinner, each of the three small
groups convened in their break-out rooms to begin their task of envisioning the ideal future in
each of the three small group topic areas.
September 7, 2004: Evening
SMALL GROUP WORK: VISIONING THE IDEAL (DETERMINING DESIRED
FUTURE STATE)
Each small group was asked to engage in visioning to describe what it ‘looks like’ in the
ideal for their topic area from two perspectives—the individual and the community (e.g. what
does it look like in the ideal in order for an individual (or community) to acquire and grow
assets?). The goal of the small group work is to bring focus to a desired future—built upon the
principles—relative to their topic.
The small groups settled into their break-out rooms to envision a desired future state
relative to their topic area.
Basic Income: The Ideal
While the general group charge was to view the assigned topic from the two aspects of
the individual and the community and in fact the group reported out in that framing, the
workgroup felt that the issues surrounding income were generic to both the individual and the
community and that describing the community conditions that needed to be present would then
lead to allowing individuals to determine their own paths. This approach is reflected in the
summary statements below.
In order to understand the flow of the discussion, the final group conclusion is presented
first. It represents the collective thinking of the group of what would define the ideal state from
an income perspective. In reading this, note that there is no dollar figure stated or implied. The
group felt that the level an individual or family needs varies with the individual and with the
family. What is important to note is the group felt that simple survival was not sufficient – there
has to be adequate income to allow the individual or family to move upward – to pursue the
American Dream (a self-defined term for each individual and family given the combination of
their own abilities, aspirations, and efforts).
Every individual/family/community has enough resources to meet their basic needs, to
thrive, and to pursue the American Dream.
367
Note: The group did not feel that the above statement was perfect but it was as close as
they could come to a common definition. The statement embodies the concepts of beyond
survival to thriving and the ability to move forward. “Pursue the American Dream” was the most
difficult concept One iteration said “achieve their aspirations to the American Dream”. That was
not fully satisfactory to the group but it encompassed the best description of a self-determined
state that differs for each person and family and is related to their talents and how they use them.
A core theme is that the community is supportive of all levels of aspiration and does not
present barriers to achievement.
In order to arrive at this collective statement, the group considered many factors that
would contribute to a sense of adequate income and how it would feel in various venues. The
following are the key elements that the group felt an adequate income should be able to provide
– without defining it as a certain level or even a percentage of any average or the like and the
conditions that the community must create to maximize individual potential.
















The community provides a sense of physical safety for all.
The community ensures adequate education and training to meet individual and societal
needs and provides a level playing field in access to such education and skills training.
Protection for the assets people have accumulated e.g. freedom from usury, excessive
fees, etc.
Fair and reasonable options to access goods and services e.g. food shopping within
reasonable distances and that is priced similarly across all areas.
Infrastructures to sustain its residents in terms of housing and community resources.
The community is purposeful in the kinds of jobs it creates through it economic
development efforts so that there are opportunities at all levels and the ability to move
upward in the local economy.
Ladders up to better jobs: defined pathways with supports that allow workers to increase
their skills and then move to higher paying jobs that take advantage of those new skills
The community support opportunities for those in low wage jobs.
The community makes targeted investments for better jobs through its economic
development and community building efforts. Better jobs are defined in terms of higher
wages and jobs with benefits.
Community systems support flexibility/agility e.g. the ability to adapt to changing
economic conditions so that its citizens are given a wide array of opportunities in an ever
fast paced world
Future generations are better off than the last will be one key measure of success.
The community supports all individuals regardless of circumstances e.g. single people
(no dependants) have the same access to support mechanisms and opportunities as do
others.
Individuals and the community abound with hope.
Systems are integrated and acting on behalf of people
Gaps in income are filled in some way; the way is purposefully not defined – it happens
in the best way for the individual and the family.
Everyone who wants a job has one.
368



Individuals have a predictable income and there is general economic security in the
community overall.
The community has an awareness of self-sufficiency (what it takes to meet basic needs in
that community without institutional or governmental support) and the community uses
that knowledge as tool in making decisions that affect the community’s growth and
economic future.
The community had robust social networks.
While the group’s report was posted on the wall for consideration by the whole group,
individuals from the whole group were offered the opportunity to add their individual thoughts.
These are captured below but it should be noted that these were not necessarily discussed and
represent individual views:









Access to education and other opportunities is necessary but not sufficient
Does the definition of self-sufficiency include government benefits or does selfsufficiency preclude government assistance?
Why is there no mention of “livable wages” or benefits?
Employees don’t control wages, employers do. An employer focused initiative would
have more impact.
Reference was made to the Aspen Institute’s Self-Employment Learning Project and how
micro-enterprises can assist low-income workers and low-income communities
supplement income from other sources.
Silo problems are barriers – examples of differing eligibility criteria for HUD programs
(80% of median area income vs. OCS IDA eligibility criteria of 200% of poverty).
There is a need to reduce asset/employment penalties and to reduce the effective tax rates
on the poor.
Because people change jobs, job-related assets need to be portable.
Assertion – low-wage jobs are central to the low-income problem: what is the private
sector’s role?
Acquisition and Growth of Assets: The Ideal
This group engaged in visioning to describe what it ‘looks like’ in the ideal for
individuals and communities to acquire and grow assets. The initial discussion focused on
describing the range of assets that would be in the ideal state for either individuals or
communities. The following lists start with a general description of assets and then include more
specific ideas from the perspectives of the individual and community.
General Descriptors of Assets
 Financial Capital: home equity; business equity
 Human Capital
 Social Capital
 Physical Capital and Ecological Capital
369







People as economic actors and producers; need to change perception that people are only
consumers
An asset is something of value that appreciates and depreciates
An asset is something to use in the future; something to fall back on
An asset is something you need for ongoing improvement
Assets will go up in value over time (i.e., appreciating assets)
“Asset” may mean different things, for different people, in difference situations
Value depends on where you start (i.e., a lease on an apartment to a family or homeless
person is an asset)
Individual Assets



















Goal is for the individual to be able to successfully acquire, grow and maintain assets
Basic starting points include: housing; health; education; physical security; civic
engagement; economic security
Access to credit, capital, and basic banking services are also essential in terms of
economic security
Affordable, quality housing
Assets are for the next/future generation
Every child will have a “nest egg”
Every family would have a minimum of “invest-able” assets
Low and middle income individuals have incentives for accumulating assets
o (See CFED Report “Hidden in Plain Sight”)
Need to see stable, predictable income or “sufficient income,” but this isn’t a prerequisite
to asset building
In the future we won’t see statistical differences in asset holding by race, gender, income
levels
Asset accumulation strategy is unique for each community
Communities strategies based on differences in income; won’t see this in the future
Seeing low income individuals as economic actors not just consumers; individuals need
the 4 Cs (confidence, competence, connections, and capital)
Seeing business ownership at the individual and community level as an important way to
pass on wealth
Individuals are protected from usurious lenders
Individuals will be financially savvy through financial education
Civic Engagement
o Reciprocal Relationship between individual and community in terms of asset
protection
Community/civic involvement in advocating for a range of housing and economic
development options
More/Increased access to some level of postsecondary education (completion is
increasingly important as well)
o People need to be at a certain level of competence
o “Access is necessary, but not sufficient”
370
Community Assets














Need political, economic, and civic institutions to promote and support individual and
community asset building (also need information)
Seeing asset building at the institutional level in communities (i.e., ownership of credit
unions)
o “Institutional sustainability is key” to maintain the capacity to help individuals
accumulate assets
o Unclear about need for institutions relative to the guiding principle around
“person-centered” services
Identifying and supporting effective intermediaries (i.e., organizations that are focused on
the needs of the individuals)
Engaging volunteers in the work of leading and running these institutions/organizations
Seeing well developed social networks
Information is readily available, organized, and disseminated about individual and
community asset building
o “Communications infrastructure” is in place
Community engagement is important for ensuring the people wanting services are at the
table
Institutions that are “owned” by members of the community (ownership could mean a
number of things)
“Common” assets are essential (i.e., roads, airways, public spaces, etc.)
Employers support asset building and see it as a “Good Business Strategy”
High incidences of indigenous ownership of businesses
Ongoing communication, inspiration, motivation about building and maintaining assets
within communities
Every individual/sector understands how to connect with and support asset building
Frame the message in a way that speaks to asset building
o Content is important as is who is doing the communicating
o Methods for communication must be appropriate to the needs of individuals
Mainstream Goods and Services: The Ideal
This group began by discussing the types of goods and services that could be included in
their visioning task. The types of goods and services they wanted to consider for this task
included financial, educational, health care, job training, and technology goods and services. The
following lists contain the brainstormed components of an ideal environment where there is
access to and use of mainstream goods and services by everyone—particularly those considered
low-income.
The Ideal from the Individual Perspective

Credit Union/Bank presence (non-profit)
o Access to financial institutions that exist to serve people with lower
balances/income
371




















ATM/Debit cards with multiple outlets
Access to competitive financial services
o Located in every community
Financial education required in school system
Financial Planning starts early, is maintained and part of lifestyle
All have access to quality public education/early education (including those children
between the ages of birth to 5.)
o money for schools, good teachers, etc.
All students would achieve …regardless of income
There is no achievement gap
Incentives programs occur to encourage ownership/opportunity (housing)
Saving and investment are valued more than consumption (after basic needs are met)
“e.g. America Saves”
Access to health care and wellness services
Location, location, location
o Bank is there, health care is there…
Mobility issues are addressed
o Relocate to where shills are needed/transportation to jobs
All children age 0-5 have access to quality early education
Individual plan for access to adult presence
Ideas and talent can find capital for entrepreneurial pursuits
Community colleges play an active role in supporting education of low-income
individuals
Matching job opportunities with job training to individuals
o Tax incentives for above statement exist
Community development is family-focused
Soft-skills/life shills are provided on-the-job (every job/real job)
Access to technology
o Computer with internet access (i.e. reduces barriers)
Community Perspective
 Health care is available during all hours/accessible/convenient
 Regulate conditions under which pay day lending establishments operate (e.g. database in
Florida)
 Advance pay checks and employers –vs.- pay day/ending
 Employers flexible on pay day/frequency (i.e. weekly)
 Communities proactively plan to address poverty (with everyone at the table)
 Social networks that allow linking people from all income levels with each other
 Communities engage/involve consumers of payday lender, check-cashing, emergency
room users in developing alternative strategies
SMALL GROUP PRESENTATIONS TO LARGE GROUP
372
Each small group presented their work to the large group. All of the groups used the
flipcharts they produced (as transcribed in the previous section of this document) as talking
points and generally presented the highlights of their small group discussions. By design, the
content of the presentations were not discussed in the large group during this evening session.
Participants were instead instructed to write notes, comments, and questions on pieces of paper
and attach them to the “facilitation wall” to inform the full group discussion to occur in the
morning (see …large group additions to flipcharts at bottom of each small group section—
above—for written comments).
Basic Income: Talking Points
Individual:
 Everyone who wants a job has one
 Stable and predictable income
 Awareness of self-sufficiency
 Access to education and skills development
 Robust social networks
Community:
 Sense of physical safety
 Level the playing field in access to education and skills training
 Conscious of kinds of jobs created
 Targeted investment for better jobs and higher wages
 System that supports flexibility / agility
 Future generations are better off than last
 Supports all individuals
 Integrated systems
 Gaps in income are filled in some way
 Every individual / family / community has enough resources to meet their basic needs to
thrive and to achieve their aspirations of the American Dream.
Acquisition and Growth Assets: Talking Points
 Financial, home equity, business equity, human capital, social capital, people as
economic actors
 Time dimension of assets
 Assets may mean different things to different people in different situations
 Acquiring and maintaining assets
 Need political / economic and civic intuitions to promote and support individuals
 Assets generated for the next generation
 Every child have a nest egg
 Every family has a minimum asset investment
 Look at assets differently by community
Individual and Community:
373






Individuals protected from usurious lenders
Civic engagement is important
Financial savvy individuals
Stable / predictable income
Access to post-secondary education
“Access is necessary, but not sufficient”
Community:









Political / economic / civic intuitions to promote and support individual.
Asset building at institutional level
Identify and support effective intermediaries
Well developed social networks
Information is readily available
Institution is owned by members of community
Employers who support asset building
Need to form the message in a way that speaks to asset building
4 “C’s” – Confidence, Competence, Connections, Capital
Mainstream Goods and Services: Talking Points
Individual:
 Access to competitive financial services
 Financial planning starts early in everyone’s lives
 Financial education in schools
 All have access to quality public education and early education
 Performance of teachers is high
 There is no achievement gap for children (K-12)
 Access to healthcare + wellness services
Community:
 Regulations for payday lending
 Healthcare available during all hours
 Advance paychecks
 Engaged consumers
EVENING CLOSE OUT: CLARENCE CARTER
Clarence thanked everyone for hanging in there late into the evening, previewed the day
ahead, and wished everyone a good night.
374
September 8, 2004: Morning
The facilitator opened the morning by walking the group through the themes found
among all of the groups’ visioning work of the day before and asked the group to identify themes
she may have missed.
THEMES: COMMON ELEMENTS OF THE IDEAL ACROSS PERSPECTIVES
 Stable and predictable income
o Protection of income and assets
 Level playing field in access to :
o Quality education 0-5; K-12
o Skills development
o Health care
o Credit, competitive banking services (located in community), capital (for ideas
and talent)
o Housing
o Incentives
o Financial literacy
o Technology
o Transportation
o Assets/planning for future generations
o Hope
 People as assets and as economic actors/producers

 Communication
o With consumers
o Among organizations
o Within communities
 Robust social networks
Group additions to Flipchart information




Need to communicate flexibility, into monitoring/ evaluating (personnel based)
Agenda built around passionate commitments to equal opportunity and to a minimally
decent life
Effective community structures will produce a reaction from established political
hierarchy -- therefore they must have strategies for resisting or co-opting political actors
Free market solutions appropriate for some but not every issue.
Clarence then led a large group discussion on a few of the key principles that were not
discussed in detail the previous day. During the large group discussion, the following points were
made:
 It is important not to lose context of War on Poverty.
375






Issues of race / equality / justice need to be counted in
We need to remember where we come from and where we are headed. We don’t want to
get ourselves trapped though.
Acknowledge the difference between 20th and 21st century agendas.
 Adequacy vs. Opportunity
 We are talking about investment strategies
 21st Century agenda to talk about opportunity; we should strive for
opportunity not adequacy.
 Opportunity agendas help people rise. Education levels are backwards /
regressive. More random in effect. Subsidies discourage ownership of
homes.
 We have to talk about opportunity.
 We have to figure out how adequacy turns into opportunity.
 Want to aspire for more than adequacy. But if we go get people to
adequacy it would be a major step.
 It should not be either/or. There is a notion of justice across the nation.
There are basic fundamental beliefs. We can’t divorce adequacy from
opportunity.
 Hope that something great comes of this
 Society must be encouraged. This has to capture imagination of society;
we’ve got to craft a communication strategy.
 We need to learn to have a conversation without blame.
 It is imperative that we don’t cast aspersions.
We need to link arms and hearts in an effort to help ‘Ms. Maimie.’
It is safe to say that we do not yet have a society we’re working toward.
Important to wage this effort carefully. I want to understand what’s changed when black
child poverty is worsening. Budget neutral needs to get off the table. We need to think
about all pieces.
o That is wise and accurate. Create environment without casting aspersions.
Whether or not people believe conversation is reflective of leaders. The most
important issue to poverty is bringing people together to talk about it.
IDENTIFICATION OF WHAT NEEDS TO CHANGE TO GET TO THE IDEAL
Each of the small groups reconvened to identify gaps and brainstorm strategies for
closing the gap between the current state and the ideal state that they developed during their first
small group activity.
Basic Income: Gaps and Strategies
The small group re-convened to discuss both gaps and strategies that would help move
individuals and communities toward the ideal state identified in the earlier session. The gaps are
presented first followed by the strategies.
376
Gaps






There simply are not enough good paying jobs to allow everyone to achieve one that suits
him or her.
There is insufficient childcare to meet the needs of those who need to work.
The immigrant population needs are substantial and are not being met in the current
system.
Societal decision making structures impede being able to move forward on many poverty
issues.
Housing concerns exist at several levels – promoting ownership; managing debt; rising
values put many homes out of reach of low-income families; in many areas the wages of
low-income workers combined with high housing costs makes the percent of their income
that they have to spend on housing too large - leaving nothing for other essentials and
definitely nothing for asset building.
This item was perceived as both a gap and a strategy. There is an inconsistent message on
work supports. As a society we have to have conversations about how to reconcile the
messages and come together on the themes.
Strategies











Promote the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC): it is one of the most effective weapons
we have to address poverty for low-wage workers
o Simplify the process so that workers can easily get the credit as part of their
paychecks (exists to some extent but is not easy to implement)
o Revise eligibility to protect workers without children.
Promote Individual Development Account (IDA’s) through such mechanisms as the
expansion of community development financial institutions (CDFIs).
Create robust social networks so that communities can share experiences and find ways
to use local contacts for work supports, jobs, assistance, etc.
Revise Unemployment Insurance rules to expand coverage/eligibility so that UI is a
better part of the social safety net.
Make the concept of life long learning a real part of our society and recognize that it
extends from birth to death.
Develop approaches for supports for those working and those not working.
Invest in creating advocacy avenues so that low-income communities can have a voice in
what happens to them and for them.
Create buy-in/support from consumers/communities.
Re-structure program eligibility determination processes so that there is presumptive
eligibility for a variety of supports thus dramatically simplifying applying for programs.
In measuring TANF success assess whether caseload reductions is actually helping to
meet needs.
Develop a coherent child support policy/advocacy mechanism/strategy as part of an
integrated approach to problem-solving: articulate the goal of creating nurturing
environments to support children.
377






Take-up rates for all supports should be increased through a comprehensive strategy to
get the message about economic security out to all who are eligible.
Create a strategy to take the message of the 21st Model to Address Poverty across
Federal agencies. Healthcare may be a place to start: it cuts across many factors and
impacts many agencies’ interests.
Create a coherent and broad-based strategy around job initiatives including a focus on
career ladders; employer involvement in messaging on work supports to their low-income
workers; addressing the consequences of being uninsured; and recognizing that all levels
of jobs are needed – work toward more career pathways.
Build a strategy on expanding financial literacy initiatives.
Engage in deliberate efforts to build caring communities with reciprocal responsibility as
a core theme. Include in the effort developers; citizens at all levels; and government.
Create more entrepreneurial opportunities using models that have been successful for
low-income workers in childcare and food related enterprises.
Group Additions to Flip Chart Information

Employees don’t control wages, employers do. An employer focused initiative would
create more impact.

Under the individual sector: No mention of “livable wages” or “benefits” Huh?

“Patching” use of small business to supplement income from jobs. Aspen institute self
employment learning project

Every individuals family/community has enough resources to meet basic needs, to thrive
and to pursue the American Dream

Definition of self-sufficiency – Does this include government benefits, or does selfsufficiency preclude government assistance?

Access to education, and other opportunities is necessary, but not sufficient

Because people change jobs, Job-regulated assets need to be portable

Silo problem; HUD eligibility; 80% median area income; OCS-AFI IDA 200% of
poverty

Reduce assets/ employment penalties

Reduce effective tax rates on poor

Asset development and opportunity – more difficult than minimum consumption
378

* Assertion - Low-wage jobs are central to the low-income problem; Question - What is
the role of private sector?
Acquisition and Growth of Assets: Gaps and Strategies
The group re-convened to discuss both gaps and strategies that would help move
individuals and communities toward the ideal state of acquiring and growing assets. The gaps are
presented first followed by the strategies.
Gaps

Structural aspects of our current economic system ensure we’ll always have poor(er)
people (i.e., poverty is more structural as we become a more service-based economy)

United States job market has worsened in terms of job quality, lower wages, less security

Role of government needs to be very different

Increasing economic inequality


o Relative poverty (inequality vs. absolute poverty; focus should be on reducing
absolute poverty)
Need a stronger safety net and we need to pay attention to individuals that are ready and
able to move forward
Help that’s needed that we’re not talking about
o “Deep therapy /change” is needed
o Support for individual change/transformation

Trouble setting priorities; choosing to help some and not others is difficult for many to
swallow

Not talking about “values;” espoused values may not be aligned with action in terms of
investing resources

Need to appreciate the effect of asset poverty and how things can change through an asset
development strategy

Perception of poverty has changed for a number of Americans.

Not dealing with the public perception of the poor; focus on the American public’s
reaction to and understanding of poverty

Perceptions of the homeless and other impoverished people get in the way of solving
problems
379

Still have an ethnic/racial tension underlying individual values/perceptions of poverty

Not enough people in the country have access to asset building strategies/support

Failing on the big picture side in terms of dealing with public perceptions and values
Strategies

Play off the idea of reciprocal responsibility in terms of promoting tax strategies
o Build from Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) philosophy/strategy

Aggressively use EITC to help families accumulate assets (approximately 35% not being
used)
o Leverage what’s being claimed to establish an “Asset Building Movement”

Look at new ways of framing the success with EITC

Create the strategic foundation to create big changes
o Create the environment for incremental strategies/change toward those big
changes
o Create opportunities for change

Focus on high-return investments and strategies

Give people hope that there can be a return from building assets

Be clear about where we have made progress in raising the floor/baseline in terms of
housing

Need to grow and shift resources, not only talk about using limited resources

Need to connects people to appreciable, long-term financial assets (i.e., investments
clubs)

Look at the set of people that have shared economic concerns/issues

Begin talking about assets, reducing poverty from an economic perspective
o Speak more to the private sector to leverage more money to build assets

Need to not lose a focus on adults or a generation of people that haven’t achieved their
full potential
o Frame this as a developmental strategy (i.e., ages 0-5, 5-12, 12+)
380

Need to help people see the possibilities (i.e., “self-talk”)

Be clear about priorities for investments; be okay with decisions to invest at one level and
not others

Short term strategy to ensure adequate safety net; medium term to support families at
lower end of the market; and longer term to support advancement through skills
development/ education

Look at reallocation money for tax expenditures (taxes not collected); quantify and talk
about this as a change lever

IDA needs to move from programs to tax strategy

Focus on our future through our kids; “family an children” are an important part of the
message; helping children by building their family’s assets

Reframing message in a way that brings focus to building a community’s assets as a way
to build a family’s assets
Mainstream Goods and Services: Strategies
The group decided that their previous work in envisioning the ideal also served the
purpose of identifying gaps. They used their existing work to brainstorm strategies, as follows:
Access to Financial Services

Refocus CDFI (Community Development Financial Institution) on a priority of bringing
financial institution into low-income communities. This is a tool the nation already has.

Tap into market forces that are already in place (ATM, EBT) to focus on bringing lowincome into mainstream.

Encourage co-location of financial institutions/ banks/ financial services/credit unions
into facilities that serve—
o
o
o
o
o

Head start
Post offices
CAA
Human Services Agencies
Workforce Centers
Continue and expand the “new markets” tax credit program beyond 2007
o (encourages private sector investment into low-income communities)
 Research into success, expand based on results
381

Continue/ Expand Community Reinvestment Act (CRA)/ fair lending regulations and
enhance enforcement for banks of all sizes
o Lending: as lending relates to entrepreneurship and home ownership

Encourage employers to be flexible on payday frequency and/or payday advances to
provide alternative to pay day loans

Engage broad community stakeholders, including consumers of payday loans, check
cashing, etc. developing alternative strategies, and anti-poverty strategies.

Hold “opportunity fairs” in communities to highlight financial planning, home
ownership, jobs, health…have corporate sponsors

Link financial counseling to other services/programs (e.g. home ownership, IDA)

Regulate conditions under which pay day lending establishments operate to move to more
equitable/ competitive transactions

Tap into community colleges as a site for financial planning/ education for low-income
individuals/families
Access to Financial Education

Give small grants to HS students to invest in financial markets (learn by doing)

Pre-requisite curriculum for financial education (K-12)

Employers reconfigure retirement plans to be “opt-out” vs. “opt-in”

Employers responsible for educating employees on benefit plans financial focus

Take advantage of push in banking industry for financial literacy toward “teachable
moments” for low-income individuals/families
Job Training

Target job training for non-custodial parents

Develop incentives for non-custodial parent to engage in child’s life, especially 0-5
o Tax credits for employers to hire low/moderate income + CAREER LADDER

Consider expanding targeted job credit to include non-custodial parent
382

Reduce the number of “eligibility labels” that constrict the participation in existing
services (e.g. Head Start, etc…)
o …mainstreaming those receiving services
o …seamless delivery

Individual plan for each child -- family centered (education, access to adults)
o Investments in experiments in a few communities where investments in children
have been made

Facilitate universal understanding of what quality early childhood education means –
emphasis on parent involvement

Disseminate data/information on importance of quality early childhood education in
terms of money, innovation, crime, entrepreneurship

Disseminate information on how to get money to pay for quality early childhood
education

Demonstrate benefits/incentives for linking employees with quality childcare/education
Mobility Access

Make housing vouchers truly portable and convertible to equity
o Make “national”
o Change incentives for local housing authorities
The group was able to brainstorm the strategies above in the time they had. The other
“ideals” they had developed previously for which they did not have time to brainstorm strategies
are listed below. These represent areas for future consideration.
More work to do…

Saving and investment are valued more than consumption, once basic needs are met. (e.g.
“America Saves”)

Ideas and talent can find capital for legal entrepreneurial pursuits

Health care and wellness is available/ accessible/ convenient during broad times

Social networks are in place that link people from all income levels with each other
Group additions to flip charts
383

Community colleges are natural allies the “peoples college” only access major for poor

Access or Access + EQUITY?
Strategies Summary
As each of the small groups reported the strategies they identified to the large group, the
facilitator captured them in one list. The strategies were:
1) Create coherent child support mechanism/strategy as part of comprehensive/integrated
approach to problem solving; articulate goal of creating nurturing environment to support
children.
2) Engage people affected as co-creator of strategies.
3) Change messages, language, to engage and energize discussion. (i.e. with people eligible
for certain benefits – focus on finance)
4) Let society know ultimate impacts of fiscal/budgetary considerations (decision makers,
legislations, and others).
5) Reform unemployment insurance system to address inequities.
6) Make sure health insurance is reciprocal responsibility between employees & employers
as people move to “better” jobs.
 Benefits support services not just wages
7) Revise earned income credit to decrease disparity between singles and families.
8) Make informed choice available to EITC/EIC recipients re: advance payment vs. lump
sum.
9) Create entrepreneurial opportunities (Asian markets, day care, IDA, CDFI).
10) As “intervening structures” need to look at how we create nurturing communities and
foster reciprocal responsibility.
11) Look at asset poverty as critical element in system; educate re: importance.
12) Advance affirmative asset building strategies
reduce/eliminate penalties (i.e. for grants).
and
protect
savings/assets
to
13) Take tax incentives re: asset building for “non-poor” and apply to middle class and poor
(i.e. bank / financial institution matches first $500 and gets credit).
384
14) Leverage additional money from corporate sector by looking at it from economic benefit
view.
15) Frame message to audience (tell corporations the benefits it will receive).
16) Connect people to appreciating long-term assets (structured savings –groups- programs).
17) Make sure that financial institutions get and stay engaged in low-income communities.
18) Continue the conversation of how we look, openly and honestly at poverty in order to
change minds and hearts; global change (media, public info).

Public policy; shaping the message
19) Look realistically at priority-setting; don’t get lost in “can’t do everything, so can’t do
anything;” acknowledge what is possible.
20) Address disconnect between stated values and society actions; necessary for priority
setting and goal setting.
21) Refocus CDFI – fund to bring financial institutions into communities.
22) Support market growth in electronic delivery strategies.
23) One-stop for financial and social cervices (bank, child care, post office).
 Link financial counseling to other services
24) Continue and expand New Markets tax credit beyond 2007.
25) Continue and expand CRA enforcement for all sizes/types of financial institutions.
26) Work with employers to reduce dependence on payday lenders.
 Expand to small business lending
27) Support opportunity fairs.
28) Adult financial education through community colleges

Look at opportunities for distance learning in this area and others
29) Support individual/family – centered plan for each child regarding education and adult
interaction.
 Invest in pilots
385
30) Develop universal understanding of what quality early childhood education means and
what value of quality early childhood care is; communicate value to corporate
community.
31) Provide grants to high school students to invest as mechanism for learning/financial
literacy.
32) Enlist employers in making savings plans opt-out instead of-in (e.g. 401(k)); help with
financial education.
33) Make housing vouchers truly portable and convertible to equity ownership (give local
housing authorities incentives to do so).
 Note recent changes
34) Target job-training for non-custodial parents in opportunities with career potential;
engage existing network (courts, etc) to facilitate this; look at tax credits as a way to
encourage employers to hire this population.
35) Co-locate financial services/education in institutions where low-income people already
are being served (schools, CAP’s, grocery stores, etc.)
 Alternate delivery service
36) Make capital more available to low-income population with talent/ideas.
 CDFI new markets
37) Engage social networks more effectively.
38) Think carefully about measurement and monitoring—what data is collected reflects cause
and drives progress.
39) Look at other avenues for asset building and anti-poverty work (faith-based, volunteer
work, other community resources)
40) Work with Chambers of Commerce to educate first, and then use their resources—and
the resources of their members, to make change.
SESSION CLOSE OUT AND NEXT STEPS: CLARENCE CARTER
Clarence thanked the group for their engagement during the session and provided
information about next steps. Next steps included:

The project team will be compiling the proceedings of the session and distributing it to
participants for clarifications and enhancements.
o Participants will be given a set amount of time to submit enhancements
386

Once all of the working sessions are completed and all meeting records were revised
based on the participants’ review, the development of a “blueprint for change” will begin.

There may be some follow up needed with some of the participants as the blueprint
development progresses.

Hope to set up a web-enabled space for participants to remain connected to the initiative
and to each other.

Blueprint draft to be completed in January

“Mega-Session” in which participants from all working sessions will be convened in the
same space to see and discuss the draft blueprint.
Clarence thanked the project staff for making the working session a reality and Barbara
Hulburt for her expert facilitation. He spoke of his desire for this initiative and this group of
participants to “write and important chapter of history” and his belief that we had gotten a great
start with the thoughtful contributions and engagement of the group. He thanked everyone once
again and wished them safe travels.
APPENDIXES
A. Core Elements: Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles
B. Research Themes: Family Economic Security
C. Initiative context presentation: Characteristics of Successful Change
D. Current state presentation: Highlights from the research
E. Participant List
F. Project Staff List
387
APPENDIX A Core Elements: Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles
CORE ELEMENTS
Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles
August 2004
Mission
This initiative seeks to change the way this country thinks about and addresses poverty.
Imperatives (Why)




Among other reasons, we engage in this work because:
Despite significant investment in addressing poverty, persistent poverty exists.
We have a moral imperative to take care of one another, as our “brother’s keeper” and as
provided in the founding documents of our nation. No one should have to live an
impoverished life.
We have an economic imperative to ensure that the capacity of individuals, communities,
and the nation for innovation is encouraged and sustainable.
Poverty is costly to taxpayers, wherever they live, via the costs associated with social
services, remedial education, law enforcement, welfare programs, etc.
Vision (Desired Future)









Fewer people will live impoverished lives because:
Poverty is viewed by the mainstream as broader than income.
Society proactively plans for decreasing the number of people living impoverished lives.
Individuals proactively plan for a future for themselves that is not impoverished.
The education sector proactively plans and implements strategies to reduce the number of
people living impoverished lives.
The banking industry proactively plans and implements strategies to reduce the number
of people living impoverished lives.
The health industry. . .
The justice system. . .
The philanthropic sector. . .
The Federal government focuses its programs and policies on the above.
Principles
The desired future will be built upon the following principles:
388

Person-centered service delivery structure: Effectively and efficiently serving individuals
in need means that the service delivery structure must focus on the needs of the
individual or family, not on the needs of the helping system.

Consistency with America’s tenet of free enterprise: As in most facets of the American
experience, the helping system should leverage the philosophy of free enterprise. Doing
so encourages and supports free market solutions to geometrically expand the helping
resources available to serve Americans in need.

Reciprocal Responsibility: Full and equal responsibility for maximizing potential lies
with the individual to society and with society to the individual.

“Poverty” is broader than income: Income is only a part of an individual’s ability to make
life work and to be a productive member of society. Human potential depends on
different types of capital –social, economic, and spiritual.

“Poverty” as we know it is only a starting point: Traditional definitions and mental
models about poverty (e.g. models based exclusively on income determinants, which
suggest poverty as a population) are starting points only.

Shared vision: New ways of thinking about and addressing poverty are aligned with the
assumptions built into the founding documents of the nation.

Hopeful: Our new construct is built on a foundation of a profound belief in the natural
gifts, skills and abilities of every person to achieve when set free.

Fundamental right to individual potential: Every individual has the right to achieve their
potential, regardless of circumstance, strengths, or weaknesses.

Systemic interdependence: All parts of the system (read: nation) must fulfill their
obligations toward maximizing potential in order for all to be successful. No one policy,
program, community, strategy can maximize the nation’s collective human potential
alone.

Leveraging resources: The ability of an individual or system to align and strategically use
the resources they have toward the outcome of success, as they have defined it.

Budget neutral: Spending more Federal and philanthropic money is not the issue. We
should strive first to make wiser application of existing resources.

Everybody has a role: Every sector of society (government, private industry, non-profit,
communities) has a role in creating a nation of reciprocal responsibility and opportunity.
These roles may or may not be consistent with current roles.

Government as convener: The government role is one of convener and catalyst for
enabling innovation.
389

Change is necessary: We cannot create a nation of reciprocal responsibility and
opportunity using these principles without fundamental change occurring in every sector
of society.
390
APPENDIX B Research Themes: Family Economic Security
Family Economic Security -- Themes and Key Questions 1
Family Economic Security
Key Themes
Compelling Case for Change
The dynamics of our economy and of families have changed dramatically over the past
several decades. Traditional assumptions and approaches are no longer relevant.
For working age individuals breaking out of the poverty cycle means finding a job that
pays self-sufficient earnings and help in getting there.
The skill demands of today’s good paying jobs make it increasingly more difficult for
low-wage earners to break out of the poverty cycle. There is increasing competition for the
diminishing number of good jobs.
Stable, long-term employment is no longer the norm. Flexibility, the ability to learn, and
portfolio development are the currency of job success and thus family economic security.
Low-wage earners and others in poverty do not have full access to the limited resources
they receive, oftentimes due to predatory practices that make them victims of unscrupulous
speculators. They are often disadvantaged by virtue of where they live (and thus have to pay
more for basic goods such as groceries), the need to focus on living day to day, and the lack of
access to service that are taken for granted by middle class individuals, such as banking and
financial services.
Individuals with criminal records have a less than 50% change of being hired in a good
paying job than do those without such records and the numbers of people with records is
increasing dramatically.
Access to benefits in low-income jobs is often limited and without such benefits, the
price of working can be greater than the return. There is a fairly direct correlation between wage
levels and turnover. Low-wage workers typically have much higher rates of turnover than other
groups, causing them to change jobs frequently as other demands require their attention.
Asset accumulation is crucial to long term family stability. Most individuals in poverty or
in low-wage jobs do not have the resources to accrue assets that can help maintain them during
periods of unemployment or prevent them from drifting back into poverty.
391
Government support systems are often disconnected from each other, are cumbersome to
navigate, and do not reflect individual needs. Combining them to address specific needs is not
part of most delivery systems.
Current State
Basic Income (including work supports such as childcare, transportation, etc.)
Sources of income vary by age group. The working age population is expected to obtain
their income from wages earned through employment. Other groups such as the elderly are more
likely to be dependent on Social Security (however Social Security assumes at least a minimal
work history of 10 years). The focus of our deliberations is mainly on the working age
population.
Sources of income for many very low income parents/adults have changed in recent times
due to welfare reform.
While wage earning is the major means of income, it is not the only avenue. Selfemployment is a growing factor in today’s economy at all levels of income.
Skills needed to advance in careers, and thus in pay, are ratcheting up as technology and
global competition put pressure on this country to compete. The increasing skill needs make it
harder for low-wage earners to move out of entry level jobs. They typically cycle through a
variety of low skilled jobs with no benefits, no career ladders, and high turnover built in to the
employer’s economic model.
Work support from government resources typically takes an individual to the entry level.
There are few support mechanisms beyond that level that are widely available.
Acquisition and Growth of Assets
Asset building is a critical part of the equation to help people move themselves out of
poverty but it is not a widely adopted concept and has few resources devoted to it.
While we see a large portion of the population experience a financial crisis during some
period in their lives, the support mechanisms in the form of family, savings, possessions, and
networks clearly differentiate the general population from those in poverty who do not have
access to such mechanisms.
The lack of assets contributes to a spiraling effect that makes it difficult for low-income
individuals to move out of poverty e.g. lack of home ownership leads to no fallback assets when
times are tough or jobs are disappearing and lack of networks makes finding a new job difficult.
Working hard is not equivalent to earning more.
392
Many low-wage earners work multiple jobs doing hard work but the rewards do not
match the input.
Assets are both tangible and intangible. Both kinds are important to moving out of
poverty. The obvious tangible assets are savings, home ownership (a crucial piece of the
equation in stabilizing families), benefits, etc. Intangible assets include education and skill
development, networks and support systems. The most prevalent means of finding a job is by
referral from someone who is already working for the employer. To get a referral to a good
paying job, you need to know people who are so employed. If your network is limited to others
who have no access to good paying jobs, as is the case with most low-income individuals, you
can’t find a way in.
Human capital development is a critical intangible asset. Education is the single biggest
determinative of whether a person will likely move out of poverty. The development of an
individual’s skills is particularly important in today’s economy. Finding the means to acquire
new skills that are valued by employers takes resources not available to most low-income
individuals.
For a variety of reasons, including the impact of immigration and the escalating definition
of a “skilled worker”, low skilled workers are potentially chasing after a smaller number of low
skilled jobs. There are fewer low skilled jobs as technological advances and global competition
reduce the need for lower skilled workers in this country. This will lead to the continuation of
depressed earning power for low skilled, low income workers.
Mainstream Goods and Services
Access to basic banking services are often not available to those in poverty. As such they
are often forced to pay excessive fees to have the minimal money transfer services that are
typically available for free to those who have accounts. The end result is low-income individuals
do not get full advantage of the small earnings or income they receive.
Predatory practices exist in several areas including home ownership, check cashing,
payday loans, tax return loans and other forms of overcharging for services that cause low-wage
earners to have to pay exorbitant prices for goods and services –even inflated prices for food
because no supermarkets exist in their neighborhoods.
Housing is often problematic for low-income individuals. While there are several
programs available to support reduced housing costs and some home purchases, many do not or
cannot access these services. Low income individuals are often the target of predatory lenders
who take advantage of inexperienced home buyers with low credit and little to no down
payments. In many cases home values are artificially inflated and low-income buyers are left
with properties that are not worth the purchase price and with payments they cannot afford.
In the United States, work is valued as the path out of poverty and hard work is the axiom
for getting ahead. But hard work alone does not guarantee success. The reality is that skill
393
attainment, combined with access to jobs, is the real path to success. Many low-income
individuals cannot access skill development services and cannot plan pathways for themselves
that will lead them out of low-wage jobs.
Public Policy
In this country public policy emphasis has for the last few decades been focused on
welfare rolls reduction and not at all focused on poverty reduction.
Government programs are not driven by individual needs and are not well connected
among themselves.
There have been some federally driven efforts to create collaboration among programs
such as the One-Stop Career Centers under the Workforce Investment Act, but these efforts have
had limited impact and do not go far enough to address the full range of needs of low-income
individuals. Locally some community action agencies have led efforts to streamline accessing
assistance.
In many cases, states, foundations, and local governments have experimented with new
leading edge service delivery options. Some of these options involve better access to the existing
tax supports such as the Earned Income Tax Credit, and state tax credits.
At the federal level, policies that support strong families have their base in efforts to
reduce spending more than they do in building family structures.
Questions to Consider
How can existing resources at the federal, state, local, and foundation levels be better
designed to meet the specific needs of individuals so that the individual is the driver of the
resource use rather than a program policy?
What mechanisms are needed to create better system interdependence?
Who are the key drivers of policy that can influence new ways of thinking about resource
allocation?
How can information about existing resources flow to those who qualify for assistance in
ways that are more effective than those in place today?
How can tax policies be structured to help low-income individuals maximize their
potential?
What entities are in the best position to deliver services in a new, individual focused way
and to help people in poverty access mainstream financial and social services?
394
How can low-income individuals be protected from predatory practices?
How can low-income individuals be helped to create networks and gain access to skills
and pathways to careers beyond low-wage, low skilled jobs?
What new policies can help individuals maximize their potential?
How can society be coalesced to provide support to individuals trying to find their way
out of poverty?
395
APPENDIX C Initiative context presentation: Characteristics of Successful Change
1
Characteristics of Successful Change (modified from Kotter and Corlett)
396
APPENDIX D Current state presentation: Highlights from the research
Compelling Case for Change
Federal, state, local and foundation resources can be better designed and integrated to meet the
specific needs of individuals the specific needs of individuals
 Government support systems are often disconnected from other, cumbersome to navigate,
and do not reflect individual needs
 Work support from government resources typically takes an individual to an entry level
job and not beyond
 Entities that are in the best position to deliver services in new, individual focused ways,
can be identified
 Many states, foundations, and local governments have made strides in program
integration
The Case for Change The Case for Change
 Specific needs of individuals vary
o Sources of income vary with age
o Individuals with criminal records have a less than 50% chance of being hired in a
good paying job
o Access to benefits in low income jobs is limited

Mechanisms can be developed to create better resource integration and system
interdependence
o Policy drivers can influence new ways of thinking about resource allocation
o There are few support mechanisms beyond securing entry level jobs
o Information about existing resources can flow more effectively to those qualifying
for assistance
 New Approaches Needed to Help Individuals Maximize Their Potential
Their Potential
o The dynamics of our economy and families have changed dramatically and
traditional assumptions and approaches are no longer relevant
o Stable long term employment is no longer the norm; flexibility, the ability to learn
and portfolio development are the currency of job success and family economic
security
o Asset building is critical but few resources are devoted to it
o Tax policies can be restructured to help low income individuals maximize their
potential
o Policy should focus on collaboration among programs and the needs of
individuals should focus on collaboration among programs
and the needs of individuals
Support to Low Income Individuals

Low income individuals need protection and support
397
o Low wage earners and those in poverty do not have full access to the limited
resources available to them and can become victims of unscrupulous speculators
o Asset accumulation is crucial to long term family stability
 Savings (and access to basic banking services)
 Home Ownership
 Benefits
 Education and skill development
 Networks

Low income individuals need help creating networks and gaining access to skills and
pathways to careers beyond low wage, low skilled jobs.
o Breaking out of the poverty cycle means increasing educational attainment and
finding a job that pays self sufficient earnings
o Skill demands of today’s good paying jobs make it increasingly difficult for low
wage earners to break the cycle of poverty
o Skill attainment and access to jobs is the path out of poverty.
398
APPENDIX E Participant List
FAMILY ECONOMIC SECURITY WORKING SESSION
PARTICIPANT LIST
Aspen Wye River Conference Center
Queenstown, Maryland
September 7-8, 2004
George Brown
Senior Vice President and Director
Washington, DC, Office
The Center for Responsible Lending and Self-Help
910 17th Street NW, Suite 500
Washington, DC 20006
Phone: 202-349-1877 Fax: 202-289-9009
E-mail: George.Brown@self-help.org
Tony Brown
President and CEO
Uptown Consortium, Inc.
51 Goodman Drive, Suite 600
P.O. Box 210186-0186
Cincinnati, OH 45221
Phone: 513-556-2742 Fax: 513-556-2216
E-mail: tony.brown@uc.edu
Lois Carson
Executive Director
Community Action Partnership Riverside County
2038 Iowa Avenue, Suite B-102
Riverside, CA 92507
Phone: 951-955-4900 Fax: 951-955-6506
E-mail: lcarson@riversidedpss.org
Nancy Cauthen, Ph.D.
Director of Research and Policy Analysis
Columbia University
National Center for Children in Poverty
215 West 125th Street, Third Floor
399
New York, NY 10027
Phone: 646-284-9626 Fax: 646-284-9623
E-mail: nkc1@columbia.edu
Roger Clay, Jr.
President
The National Economic Development and Law Center
2201 Broadway, Suite 815
Oakland, CA 94612
Phone: 510-251-2600, ext. 115 Fax: 510-251-0600
E-mail: roger@nedlc.org
Barbara Dorry
Executive Director
KOOTASCA Community Action
1213 SE Second Avenue
Grand Rapids, MN 55744
Phone: 218-327-6701 Fax: 218-327-6733
E-mail: barbd@kootasca.org
Bob Friedman
Chair
Corporation for Enterprise Development
353 Folsom Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Phone: 415-495-2333 Fax: 415-495-7025
E-mail: friedman@cfed.org
Mark Greenberg
Director of Policy
Center for Law and Social Policy
1015 15th Street NW, Suite 400
Washington, DC 20005
Phone: 202-906-8005 Fax: 202-842-2885
E-mail: mgreenberg@clasp.org
Bonnie Howard
Senior Associate
Family Economic Success
Annie E. Casey Foundation
701 St. Paul Street
Baltimore, MD 21202
Phone: 410-223-2898 Fax: 410-223-3716
E-mail: bhoward@aecf.org
Lyman Howell
400
President
Faith to Finance
7667 West 95th Street, Suite 6E
Hickory Hills, IL 60457
Phone: 708-599-3607 Fax: 708-599-3639
E-mail: lymanhowell@faithtofinance.org
Dana Jones
Executive Director
Southern Maryland Tri-County Community
Action Committee, Inc.
P.O. Box 280
Hughesville, MD 20637
Phone: 301-274-4474 Fax: 301-274-0637
E-mail: dana@smtccac.org
Hubert Price, Jr.
President
Synergistics Consulting
583 Pearsall
Pontiac, MI 48341
Phone: 248-334-1800 Fax: 248-334-2146
E-mail: comhprice@tfnmail.com
Clifford Rosenthal
Executive Director
National Federation of Community
Development Credit Unions
120 Wall Street, 10th Floor
New York, NY 10005
Phone: 212-809-1850, x216 Fax: 212-809-3274
E-mail: crosenthal@cdcu.coop
Elaine Ryan
Deputy Executive Director, Policy and Government Affairs
American Public Human Services Association
810 First Street NE, Suite 500
Washington, DC 20002
Phone: 202-682-0100 Fax: 202-289-6555
E-mail: eryan@aphsa.org
Eugene Steuerle, Ph.D.
Senior Fellow
The Urban Institute
2100 M Street NW
Washington, DC 20037
401
Phone: 202-261-5545 Fax: 202-467-5775
E-mail: esteuerl@ui.urban.org
John Taylor
President and CEO
National Community Reinvestment Coalition
733 15th Street NW, Suite 540
Washington, DC 20005
Phone: 202-628-8866 Fax: 202-628-9800
E-mail: jtaylor@ncrc.org
Elaine West
Executive Director
Missouri Association for Community Action
2410 Hyde Park Road, Suite A
Jefferson City, MO 65109
Phone: 573-634-2969 Fax: 573-636-9440
E-mail: ewest@communityaction.org
402
APPENDIX F Project Staff List
Clarence H. Carter
Director
Office of Community Services
370 L'Enfant Promenade SW, Aerospace Fifth Floor
Washington, DC 20447
Phone: (202) 401-9333 Fax: (202) 401-5718
E-mail: clcarter@acf.hhs.gov
Martin Brown
Strategic Communications Consultant
Providence Management Group
6706 Iron Gate Drive
Richmond, VA 23234
Phone: (804) 275-1020 Fax: (804) 275-6706
E-mail: mbrown@pmgexcellence.com
Tarryl Clark
Executive Director
Minnesota Community Action Association
100 Empire Drive, Suite 202
St. Paul, MN 55103
Phone: (651) 645-7425 Fax: (651) 645-7399
E-mail: tarrylclark@astound.net
Megan Fluharty
Program Assistant
Development Services Group, Inc.
7315 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 800 E
Bethesda, MD 20814
Phone: (301) 951-0056 Fax: (301) 951-3324
E-mail: mfluharty@dsgonline.com
James Gatz
Manager
Assets for Independence Program
Office of Community Services
370 L'Enfant Promenade SW, Aerospace Fifth Floor
Washington, DC 20447
Phone: (202) 401-5284 Fax: (202) 401-5718
E-mail: jgatz@acf.hhs.gov
Regina Guyther
Meeting Planner
403
Development Services Group, Inc.
7315 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 800 E
Bethesda, MD 20814
Phone: (301) 951-0056 Fax: (301) 951-3324
E-mail: rguyther@dsgonline.com
Barbara Hulburt
Director, Facilitation and Training
The McCammon Group
1111 East Main Street, Suite 1700
Richmond, VA 23219
Phone: (804) 644-2993 Fax: (804) 343-0923
E-mail: bhulburt@mccammongroup.com
Julie N. Jakopic
Vice President, Community Services Programs
Development Services Group, Inc.
7315 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 800 E
Bethesda, MD 20814
Phone: (301) 951-0056 Fax: (301) 951-3324
E-mail: jjakopic@dsgonline.com
Jeannine La Prad
Vice President
Corporation for a Skilled Workforce
900 Victors Way, Suite 350
Ann Arbor, MI 48108
Phone: (734) 769-2900 Fax: (734) 769-2950
E-mail: jmlaprad@skilledwork.org
Robert Mott
Deputy Director
Office of Community Services
370 L'Enfant Promenade SW, Aerospace Fifth Floor
Washington, DC 20447
Phone: (202) 401-5291 Fax: (202) 401-5653
E-mail: rmott@acf.hhs.gov
Dennis Parker
CEO
Carieton and Associates
370 L'Enfant Promenade SW, Aerospace Fifth Floor
Washington, DC 20447
Phone: (804) 690-7421
E-mail: denniscparker@msn.com
404
Nancy Polend
Project Manager
Office of the Executive Director
21st Century Model to Address Poverty
American Public Human Services Association
810 First Street NE, Suite 500
Washington, DC 20002
Phone: (202) 682-0100 Fax: (202) 289-6555
E-mail: npolend@aphsa.org
Ed Strong
Senior Partner
Corporation for a Skilled Workforce
4595 North Progress Avenue
Harrisburg, PA 17110
Phone: (734) 769-2900 Fax: (734) 769-2950
E-mail: estrong@skilledwork.org
Margaret Washnitzer
Director
Division of State Assistance
Office of Community Services
370 L'Enfant Promenade SW, Aerospace Fifth Floor
Washington, DC 20447
Phone: (202) 401-2333 Fax: (202) 401-5718
E-mail: mwashnitzer@acf.hhs.gov
Carol Watkins
Director
Community Discretionary Programs
Office of Community Services
370 L'Enfant Promenade SW, Aerospace Fifth Floor
Washington, DC 20447
Phone: (202) 401-9357 Fax: (202) 401-4687
E-mail: cwatkins@acf.hhs.gov
405
Office of Community Services
Creating the 21st Century Model to Address Poverty
Maximizing Technology
September 14-15, 2004
Aspen Wye River Conference Center
Queenstown, MD
MEETING RECORD
Distributed to participants: December 3, 2004
This document contains the proceedings of the working session and has been compiled
from the small and large group discussions, the associated flipchart records, and from the
presentations given by project staff. Reaching consensus during the session itself was not
attempted. Therefore, this document merely reflects the viewpoints as they were expressed in the
session and does not imply agreement among participants and/or project staff.
PRE-MEETING MATERIALS
Participants received the following materials prior to the working session:
 Preliminary Agenda
 Core Elements: Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles (Appendix A)
 Research Themes: Redefining Poverty (Appendix B)
ON-SITE PACKET MATERIALS
Participants were provided a meeting packet containing the following materials:
 Final Agenda
 Core Elements: Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles
 Initiative Context presentation: Characteristics of Successful Change (Appendix C)
 Current state presentation: Highlights from the research (Appendix D)
 Research Themes: Redefining Poverty
 Participant List (Appendix E)
 Project Staff List (Appendix F)
MEETING AGENDA
Overarching Goal: The goal of all of the working sessions is to allow people from a
variety of backgrounds and sectors to bring their expertise to bear toward creating a
fundamentally different model for thinking about and addressing poverty.
406
Session Objectives: This working session has five objectives:
1) Share a compelling case for change and articulate a vision and set of principles upon
which to build strategies to fundamentally change the way we think about and address
poverty as a nation.
2) Review key areas of the current technological state relative to its impact on individual
and community impoverishment in areas such as access to technology, use of technology
in providing services to individuals, use of technology for integrating information for
community-based strategies, the use of technology for connecting individuals to
resources, etc. and compare/contrast with the stated vision.
3) Identify some key elements of a desired future state relative to technology (i.e. what it
would look like in the ideal) from the perspectives of the individual, the community, and
service delivery (e.g. access to and availability of technology for individuals in
connecting to resources, improving education, and strategic use of information
technology in communities).
4) Identify some of the areas in which work must be undertaken (i.e. change levers) in order
to close the gap between existing and the ideal states.
5) Brainstorm preliminary strategies for filling the gaps.
Tuesday, September 14, 2004
3:00 – 3:45 Welcome and Overview by Clarence H. Carter: The overall case for change and
why we are here; the vision of the 21st Century Model to Address Poverty.
Session Context: Conceptual framework for the overall initiative and facilitative strategy for the
session.
3:45 – 4:15 Session Content—Starting Points: A guided tour of the current state and key
themes/issues related to the impact and use of technology in addressing issues of poverty.
4:15 – 5:00 Review of Principles: Exploration of the principles that will guide the development
of a new model for thinking about and addressing poverty.
5:00 – 6:00 Break
6:00 – 7:30 Dinner
7:30 – 9:00 Small Group Work: Each small group engages in visioning to describe what the
technological environment would ‘look like’ in the ideal from three perspectives—the individual,
the community, and service delivery. The goal of the small group work is to bring focus to a
desired future—built upon the principles—from each of the three perspectives.
407
9:00 – 9:45 Small Groups Report: Groups present their work to the large group. Large group
will not discuss presentation content at this time, but will be asked to post questions and
comments on wall for discussion the next day.
9:45 – 10:00 Evening Close Out: Facilitator leads interactive session about the work that’s been
done so far, and what remains for tomorrow.
Wednesday, September 15, 2004
8:30 – 10:15 Large Group Discussion: Processing Small Group Work from Tuesday
Using the notes taken by the participants the night before, the group will focus on and
discuss each of the focus areas presented. The focus will be on the identification of the key
elements of the desired future, not on problems with the current state.
10:15 – 10:30 Break
10:30 – 11:45 Identification of Gap Areas and Change Levers: Identification of levers for
change (and related considerations and challenges) that would require work in order to get
‘there’ from ‘here.’’
11:45 – 12:45 Lunch
12:45 – 2:15 Identification of Preliminary Change Strategies: Moving from visioning and
change levers to ideas for closing the gap.
2:15 – 3:00 Session Close Out and Next Steps: Discussion of how the work that’s been done
here will be synthesized to create the pieces of a draft systemic change strategy and about how to
begin the work of change.
PROCEEDINGS
September 14, 2004: Afternoon
INTRODUCTIONS (facilitated by Barbara Hulburt)
WELCOME AND OVERVIEW BY CLARENCE CARTER
Clarence provided the overall case for change and why we are here; the vision of the 21 st
Century Model to Address Poverty and previewed the underlying principles for the development
of the model. The following is an amalgamation of the opening remarks from all four working
sessions.
408
As America continually strives to form that ‘more perfect union’ envisioned by our
founding fathers, one of the key factors we have always struggled with as a society is how to
care for those in greatest need. For purposes of our work here, we focus on the segment of our
society that exists within the condition we define as poverty.
Every generation or so, our society recalibrates its thinking and approaches for
addressing poverty and it is clearly time for another recalibration. It is time for us to change the
way we think about and address poverty because:

We know that as the number of people living in poverty increases, it becomes more and
more difficult for any society to sustain itself. None of us wants that for our great nation.
As long as many of our citizenry remain under-optimized, our society can never reach its
full potential.

The most recent major recalibration was initiated 40 years ago via the 1964 “War on
Poverty.” President Lyndon Johnson believed that turning the power of the federal
government loose on the issue that we as a society could eliminate poverty.

While there is much progress to celebrate, we clearly have fallen woefully short of the
lofty objective of ameliorating poverty. As a result of the “War on Poverty,” scores of
programs were created, the U.S. Poverty Index was established, unprecedented public
spending was dedicated to the objective, and a massive ‘helping’ industry was created.
Though there have been impressive gains in many important indicators of societal wellbeing, we have not shifted in our approaches as quickly as the conditions have.

The U.S. Poverty Index, developed in the 1960’s and based on an income/food
consumption model, is no longer representative of the conditions of poverty (e.g. cost of
living, basic income needs, economic trends, technological advancements, family
structure and roles, workforce trends, etc.). As the economic, social, technological—
societal conditions change the nature of poverty, we must also change the way our
society thinks about it and addresses it in order to remain economically, socially, and
morally sustainable as a society.

We are still using the income/consumption model and the basic formula as designed in
the 1960’s under vastly different circumstances. Proposed reforms to the Poverty Index
over the last three decades to add other cost elements such as housing and health care and
to add other income sources such as the cash value of benefits have not been successful,
resulting in the continued use of a formula that has outlived its efficacy as a accurate
definition of the conditions of poverty.

We currently spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on assisting those in greatest
need in America without an acceptable return on investment. Unfortunately, since there is
no shared vision guiding and leveraging our investments toward a common objective.
Our spending is ad hoc, in categorical programs—with their own rules, regulations, and
objectives—which often work at cross purposes with other programs and initiatives.
Private initiatives often suffer from not having enough resources to be truly effective. In
409
the aggregate, our fragmented and categorical approach results in the old adage; ‘If you
don’t know where you are going, any road will get you there.’

The issue of poverty is best addressed at the community level. The current construct in
which the ways to address poverty is prescribed at the Federal level fails to fully engage
and empower communities to develop their own vision for the future and the strategies
they need to get there. The uniqueness of America’s communities demands a service
strategy unique to each community’s objectives, resources, and obstacles.

The current construct forces the needs of individuals and families to fit into categorical
programs that cannot possibly anticipate or address the whole and interdependent nature
of what they need to make their lives work for them. Often the goals and objectives of the
various ‘helping programs’ work at cross purposes, making a comprehensive set of
services and support that would be effective problematic at best. This approach is another
example of not leveraging the resources that are currently being expended on the issue
and does not give us a return on our investment.

The existing construct does not maximize the use of technology that would provide for
infinitely more efficient and effective delivery of service and/or to reduce the need for the
services in the first place. The current categorical construct requires separate
technological infrastructures for each of the programs, which means that precious
resources are required to fund the separate infrastructures and resources that could go
directly to the individual or family needing assistance. It means that helpers in the
different program structures have difficulty sharing vital information that would help
serve individuals and families more effectively. Furthermore, technology could be
leveraged to allow many decisions to be placed directly in the hands of the individual or
family, thus obviating the need for intermediaries.

The current helping system is financed principally by government and philanthropy,
despite the widely-used economic construct of market solutions in most other
advancement endeavors. Recognizing that every sector has a role in addressing poverty
and that market solutions are encouraged in most facets of American problem-solving,
we must acknowledge that market-based strategies are significantly underutilized in
America’s helping system.
All of the above leave America with less than the most effective helping system. As the
economic, social, technological—societal conditions change the nature of poverty, we must also
change the way our society thinks about it and addresses it in order to remain economically,
socially, and morally sustainable as a society.
We need to create an urgency in society to do the work of this recalibration, such that our
society views eliminating poverty as:

an exercise in developing self-sustaining conditions at the individual, family, community,
and societal levels,
410


a win-win exchange between society and individuals, individuals and institutions, and
a way to create the harmonious conditions that allow for continued innovation, economic
growth, strong relationships, non-violence, health, etc.
As the Director of the Office of Community Services, I draw on the history and intent of my
organization to help communities address issues of poverty—first as the Office of Economic
Opportunity, and in its subsequent evolutions as the Community Services Administration, and
now as the Office of Community Services—to leverage the power of its mandate toward new
constructs for thinking about and addressing poverty.
We have convened this group of the best and brightest thinkers to help begin a social
movement toward developing this new construct. Understanding that it will be a long-term,
complex endeavor, we recognize that we will not, over the course of the next 24 hours of our
initial working session, solve the problem.
Rather, we are simply seeking to start the dialog by putting forward some guiding principles
upon which to build a new construct and by creating the “space” in which to begin building it.
Welcome, thank you for coming, and let’s get to it.
SESSION CONTEXT AND CONTENT (Nancy Polend, Ed Strong, and Bonita Turner)
Project staff presented context and content material to ground the work of the session: 1)
Overview of the overall initiative using the characteristics of successful change as a conceptual
framework and a description of the project’s activities as an operational framework; and 2) an
exploration of the current state and key themes from the environmental scan of community-based
solutions . See Appendixes D and E for staff presentations.
The Characteristics of Successful Change presentation suggested that, since the initiative
is at its core the creation of systemic change, it is useful to map its evolving strategies and
activities to a framework that represents components of successful change. The change model
this initiative is using for this purpose is based on the work of John Kotter and John Corlett. The
presentation made connections between the change model and the working session activities in
which participants would be engaging. The presentation also made distinctions between what
could reasonably be accomplished during the working session and what was long-term, evolving
work to be done over the next decade and beyond. Acknowledgment of the uncertain, uncharted
territory of this work was made explicit.
The second component of the Characteristics… presentation included the operational
flow of the project’s short-term activities, showing what had been done to date, where the
working session fit in, and what would come next.
The subject-matter-expert presentation, “Leveraging Technology to Reduce Poverty”
provided an overview of the changes that have occurred technologically that might be used to
reduce poverty, the state of technology in Human Services, and the state of technology in other
industries.
411
The presentation began with a discussion of emerging technologies that have changed
and will continue to change the world that we live in dramatically. Small chips are now available
which are capable of storing massive amounts of data on miniature devices. E-commerce, webbased applications, and customer relationship management tools have rearranged the landscape
that operates most businesses. The pace at which technological changes are impacting
organizations is exponentially greater now than 10 years ago. It took the radio 38 years to reach a
market of 50 million; it took TV 13 years to get to a market of 50 million; it took the internet just
4 years to reach a market of 50 million. We discussed that 10 years from now when we reflect
back to year 2004, our technology will seem immature compared to the advances that will be
present given the rapid roll-out of technological solutions.
The discussion explored advances in technology - “where technology is today”, “how
technology has evolved”…”what is on the cutting edge of the technology movement”. We
looked at industries outside human services to ascertain how other industries have leveraged
technology to reinvent themselves and to improve business outcomes. For example, we discussed
the fact that the banking industry has dramatically changed its business model over the past 10
years. ATM machines and Internet banking have eliminated the need for customers to go into
brick and mortar establishments to conduct business. Manufacturing operations are now
controlled largely by robots. Everything from inventory management to finished goods tracking
is performed electronically through computers and PDA devices.
In our discussion, we looked at a few examples of inefficient processes and asked the
question: “ What’s wrong with this picture?” For example…
A woman with a sick child calls a welfare office in a county with a large
population, seeking assistance for a Medi-Cal application. She is instructed to come to
the welfare office with her sick child to pick up an application and receive a preapplication screening. She is not informed that she can apply by mail as authorized by
state statute. She is informed that the wait in line in the county welfare office to receive
the application is estimated to be one to three hours. When she asks if she can come at a
time when she will not have to be absent from her 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. job that has no
sick leave or vacation benefits, she is informed that the welfare office hours are weekdays
7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. The woman estimates that it will take her at least two visits to the
county welfare office to successfully complete the application. It’s not known while this
client is in the office that she is in need of information concerning day care facilities that
might enable her to continue working with interruption. She calls next week for
information about the process of finding reasonable day care.
We discussed leveraging technology from three different perspectives – Service Delivery
perspective, Community perspective and Individual perspective.
Services Delivery Infrastructure
412
We discussed the current model of delivering services to individuals in need. We looked
at how the system operates from the perspective of meeting the requirements of funding sources
rather than from the perspective of making the needs of individuals central. We discussed legacy
systems, data silos, complex interfaces and other characteristics inherent in the current services
delivery infrastructure. We talked about how current technology can be used to invert the
existing paradigms such that the customer is the focus. We discussed a few examples of
initiatives underway in States to use the Internet and other current technologies to address the
weaknesses of the current system.
Communities
We discussed tools available to communities for addressing poverty. We discussed the
physical infrastructure as well as the capacity of communities to leverage technology in
providing better services to persons in need. We discussed a few community models that
leverage technology to empower communities and people such as Community Technology
Centers, Computer Training Programs/classes, Resource Based –Educational Systems, Local
Electronic Bulletin Boards, Informational Community Websites, and “Issue-based” Solutions.
Individuals
We discussed individual access to computers and how inverting the service delivery
model such that individuals would have “self-serve” access to information and services to reduce
poverty. We discussed applications and interventions needed in using technology to reduce
poverty. We concluded with some key questions that the group should consider.
Physical access. What can we do to make technology available and physically accessible
to individuals and communities to lessen the incidences of poverty?
Appropriate technology. What can we do to ensure that the available technology is
appropriate to address the needs of individuals and communities? What are the right
technological applications for poverty reduction?
Affordability. What can we do to make technology access and use affordable for
individuals and communities?
Capacity. What can we do to help individuals and communities understand how they can
use technology in their lives, and what can we do to ensure they receive the training they need?
Relevant content. What can we do to ensure that content is developed that is locally
relevant to individuals and communities, especially in terms of language, disabilities and culture?
413
Integration. What can we do to ensure that technology is not just a further burden to the
lives individuals and communities; how can we help them integrate technology into their daily
routines?
Integration – How do we move from the “stove-pipe” and fragmented applications of the
1990’s to integrated systems that leverage the power of technology?
Infrastructure – How do we simplify the human services infrastructure such that
duplicative costly structures are not the central mechanism? How do we address duplicative
processes?
Self-Service Applications – How do we leverage the Internet and Self Service
Applications to deliver services directly to clients? How do we ensure that Applications serve the
clients rather than the infrastructure?
Administrative Challenges – How do we address the administrative challenges inherent
with technological changes?
FACILITATIVE STRATEGY
The facilitator set up the evening’s small group visioning activities by restating the idea
that “if you don’t know where you’re going, any road will take you there.” She also announced
the rosters of each of the three small groups and addressed various housekeeping and logistical
items.
Participants took an evening break to check in to their rooms and convened in the dining
room at 6:15 for dinner. They were asked to dine with their small groups so that they could get
acquainted before beginning their work later in the evening.
September 14, 2004: Evening
SMALL GROUP WORK: VISIONING THE IDEAL (DETERMINING DESIRED
FUTURE STATE)
After dinner, each of the three small groups convened in their break-out rooms to begin
their task of envisioning what the technological environment would ‘look like’ in the ideal from
three perspectives—the individual, the community, and service delivery. The goal of the small
group work was to bring focus to a desired future—built upon the guiding principles of the 21st
Century Model to Address Poverty—for maximizing technology to address poverty.
Group 1
Individual
 Increased access to seamless services
414









Better case coordination through common intake process/tool
Direct access to appropriate technology
Clients are benefiting from service provider capacity to use technology
Increased use of goal planning and outcomes setting – individual or family plans are
developed
Increased access to communication tools/technology through service providers
Greater “IT” literacy and access to “IT” economy jobs
Content is relevant to client’s/resident’s lives (e.g., “Bee-hive”)
Increased comfort level with using the technology
Enhanced basic literacy to move to “IT” literacy
Communities









Technology is used to reach out and engage community members
Communities have access to information about resources that are available through
websites
Multi organization/ regional information is available
Community relationships are cultivated through use of technology
Volunteers and businesses are linked across the community
Different technology is used to communicate and share stories
Community has access to technology in terms of the built environment (i.e.; housing,
natural resources, law enforcement)
Technology is used to engage youth and prevent crime and increase learning and skills
development
Technology is used to support early childhood learning
Service Delivery
 Integrated data collection/ client eligibility systems
 Common set of data collections standards and definitions
 Protocol for the data that is collected so that it can be imported into a clearinghouse
 Broader forum that involves policy makers for connecting data across silos /systems
 Communication between policymakers, funders, practitioners, about data needs/
collection requirements is more open/ up front
 Agreements exist to create some standards for data collection with a consortium
 Common client intake process/ tool; increase case coordination from any location
 Pilot projects are brought to scale
 Agencies are capable of accessing information/ resources through technology on behalf
of the clients
 Staff have the capacity to engage with clients and access information across multiple
organizations
 Policies support training for agencies
 Common assessment process/tool that is tied to the available resources in the community
 Agency culture is geared toward case management, not program management
415










Process is more efficient for clients so staff can spend more time on services
Technology is being used to cross train staff and shift culture
Using technology as a communication tool both internally and externally
Communication tools / technology is better integrated within organizations
Technology/ planning is occurring
Using interactive voice recognition to improve/enhance service delivery; make process
more make process more efficient for clients and allow for human interaction as needed
Seeing a digital response to poverty
Access to IT is integrated throughout programs across agencies/ organizations (e.g.,
Adult Basic Education)
Technology centers/ sites are inviting, engaging, and fun for clients
Staff training is integrated into standard agency operations and resources are invested.
Group 2





AH HAH! – Technology is really only an enabler – what we need are policy options –and
the political will to make changes
The technology solutions are there today
o It is turf and process (political turf and connecting processes) that impede
progress. The diagram below shows the level of importance of each barrier with
technology itself the least of the barriers to overcome.
o
Vouchers have potential to optimize customer choice on services and providers
o We must validate that new ways such as vouchers (using technology) are more
effective – prove it empirically.
o We must have appropriate metrics to show there is a difference!!!
Enterprise view of the customer (looking at the customer as having control of the
resources they need and having the option to choose the best provider for them) will be
the norm
o CRM/PRM (customer relations management and partner relations management)
systems will drive service – the technology exists to serve people better – with the
individual as the focal point
There will be totally revised concepts of learning, schooling, and access to education,
characterized by:
o Accelerated pace
o Early starts
o Multiple “graduations”
416
o
o
o
o
o
Continuing competency development
Schools as community development centers – available more hours
Parenting skills developed to supports learning
Teachers use technology as integral part of learning
Blended learning is option
Many of these concepts apply across sectors.
 Case management – menu driven, custom tailored service mix for each individual o
Supported by a diverse community of support
 Technology links all community services – “211” (United Way model of access to social
services similar to “911” for emergency services)
o Real time access to services and integrated information systems that allow a full
view of availability and impact – current data, supported by an updated content
management strategy
 Training has impact that is measured. Training is valued as an investment – a legitimate
cost of doing business. Research and Development/Continuous Improvement are part of
every organizational culture

There are multi-channel strategies for access to information and services that are relevant
to individual needs/ capabilities
o Examples. WEB, Kiosks, e-mail, paper, phone centers, interactive TV, bricks and mortar






Technology to support and enable life-long learning
o People are constantly upgrading their skills
There is appropriate training on using technology for individuals and for service
providers
We have created case managers who can use the technology available to them
o The technology is easy to navigate
Any door/portal should give an individual access to all levels of information and services
(Federal, state, etc)] – it is a hi-tech and hi-touch world.
Maximize use of individual information – only ask for personal data once and allow the
technology and sharing agreements to move to other systems who need the same data.
We have moved to a place where an informed customer owns his or her personal data –
not an agency
417

The diagram below shows how a free enterprise model can work in social services,
education and other arenas, where an individual, through vouchers, controls the resources
available to him or her and can then use those resources to buy the services that are right
for them, shopping from a wide array of options.
Group 3
The group began its work quickly by deciding to envision the ‘ideal’ within specific
categories that pertained to the individual, the community, and service delivery, as instructed for
this activity. They selected the categories of access and capacity, infrastructure, and appropriate
content. Key points of their discussions were captured on flipchart paper and are transcribed
below.
Access and Capacity
 Linkage in every community at places where people ARE (non-typical places like WalMart, churches)
o Linkage = plug-in; connection
o Free
o Simple (“amazon.com – like”)







Every home has a computer (or IT) and access to simple linkage and “power user”
o Youth
Non-typical resources are used for training (e.g. kids as teachers, since they often
understand technology better than most adults)
For-profit centers are used for access/capacity building (give advertisers opportunity to
underwrite; promotes sustainability)
o E.g. entrepreneurs
Strong individual voices through technology as a tool for organizing themselves for
action
The traditional “helping system” is retooled for working with changing technology
Administration of services is fundamentally changed/reduced (to focus face-to-face work
on the actual service provision vs. administrative tasks)
A national framework or tool kit is used for building community-based applications
418




There is significant private investment from the technology sector, particularly to provide
research and development (R&D) money
There are e-places for everyone to connect with services; would not be just for “the poor”
o “Amazon.com” model for diagnostic application that points to every service
available and where to get them
o database via portal with all services loaded to support the diagnostics
o Would include an “off-line space” to point individuals to forums, support groups,
and other resources.
There is technology awareness and outreach in education
Technology is used as a tool for democracy and literacy
Infrastructure









“Cookie” technology is used to “push” information on services / products/ resources that
are needed to individuals
Ability for the infrastructure to process data holistically to make associations between
individuals and services; to facilitate the process.
o Data would come back to the individual and human services agency
o Providers, resources all in one database behind interface that could sift through
the info to return list of services and related information to the individual.
o The data source for the associations would be based on searches, surveys, and
interactions with human services agencies (broadly defined).
Safe, secure, private (no fear)
Power of technology is used to raise awareness of and to change laws/rules that reinforce
poverty
o Integrating must occur (at all costs) for the benefit of the client
Market incentives exist to bring e-services/access to those underserved by bricks/mortar
businesses.
Micro-enterprises are created in communities with e-commerce capabilities
High-speed access for everyone! (TV, Satellite dish = connected)
Case worker/helper capacity is broader than “one or two” programs (e.g. training,
software) to access same intelligence/ data
o Also have same diagnostic from “amazon.com” tool
New data would point to trends that could be more proactively (e.g. because more data
available -- aggregate to proactively create programs, jobs, services)
o “Cookie technology)
o Ability to be more responsive
o Community decision-making
o i.e. using data to keep people out of poverty vs. only getting them out
–Prevention—
Appropriate Content
 Visually rich interface
 Complex, comprehensive, but simple to use (e.g. Google)
419



Integrated, locally relevant (e.g. what do people in OUR community need)
Locally “owned” and access ‚ better off
Application, approval, delivery, and/or referral via technology
o Access after “working hours”

Robust data system for evaluation and program improvement (social services)
The group’s major concept for the ideal future was labeled “help.com” or “you.com” to
reflect a technologically enabled future where individuals everywhere would be able to access
and use a web-based diagnostic, service, and referral tool to get the person-centered services they
need.
The group discussed the concept in terms of “maimie.com”, “help.com” and concluded that
“you.com” more accurately described what they wanted to create. The “you.com” concept also
included resources for the social services organization in helping individuals with face-to-face
service interactions. The group felt that technology could allow social services organizations to
focus on service activities, rather than on administrative activities.
SMALL GROUP PRESENTATIONS TO THE LARGE GROUP
Each small group presented their work to the large group. All of the groups used the
flipcharts they produced (as transcribed in the previous section of this document) as talking
points and generally presented the highlights of their small group discussions. By design, the
content of the presentations was not discussed in the large group during this evening session.
Participants were instead instructed to write notes, comments, and questions on pieces of paper
and attach them to the “facilitation wall” to inform the full group discussion to occur in the
morning.
Group 2
This group presented first and highlighted the ‘Hierarchy of Challenges’ (below).




Technology Solutions are there, it is the process / turf that impedes progress
Citizen based strategies – give vouchers
Enterprise view of the customer - CRM/PRM systems drive service
Tech links all community “211” – real time access to services and information
420



Revised totally concepts of learning, schooling and access to education
Multi-channel approach
Measures
Group 3

This group presented next and highlighted their “help.com” concept and a few key points.
You.com, as below.






Integration
System used by all
Safe / secure / private
Linkage in every community
Every home needs computer /informed used
Reciprocal process of keeping people out of poverty
Group 1
Group 1 presented last and focused on the ideal in the categories of the task.
•

Service delivery
o Integrated data collection
o Common client intake process /tool – central client intake application
o Common assessment process
o Common set of data collection standards

Individuals
o Increase access to seamless services
o Better case coordination
o Clients benefit from service provider use of technology
o Content is relevant to clients lives
o Common definition + standards

Community
o Technology is used to outreach and engage
421
o Community has access to tell us terms of the built environment
EVENING CLOSE OUT: CLARENCE CARTER
Clarence closed out the evening by thanking everyone for their hard work and sharing
that he was both energized and exhausted.
September 15, 2004: Morning
The facilitator welcomed everyone back and provided a review of the themes that
emerged from the small group presentations and an opportunity for large group discussion.
THEMES OF ‘THE IDEAL’ ACROSS ALL GROUPS
1) Integration
 Enterprise case management
 360 degree view
 Programs, education, housing, transportation, health care (Also prevention of poverty)
 Standard data structure and common assessment tools
2) Two way data sharing
 Self defined needs – referral
 Prevention of poverty (skills training in advance of job loss)
 National consistency; local relevance
3) Life long learning (Also prevention of poverty)
 Life skills – constantly changing/ upgrading
4) Access + Content + Capacity = Literacy, Democracy, and Capacity
 Multi-channel (one-stop shop)
 Bricks and mortar (one-stop shop)
o At home
 “power user”

reverse – generational teaching/assistance
o in the world
 Wal-Mart

Library, post office
 Safe, secure, private
5) System constantly improving (measuring and responding) itself
 Corporate citizens -> future, vision
 Entrepreneurial goals
 E-space
 Free enterprise / for-profit centers
422

Citizen-owned duty
LARGE GROUP DISCUSSION
The large group discussion began with the idea of the ‘smart card’ as a way to put the
individual in charge of their service delivery needs.





We have no overreaching plan in terms of smart card.
We have to imagine new jobs and technology.
Managing who doesn’t get it is key.
It is important to look at what has and has not worked. Interested in end goals and
objectives.
The objective is putting individual at the center. We have to look at the means we want to
employ in terms of that objective.
The group then discussed the broader issues of the challenges and opportunities in using
technology to build the capacity of the individual—with the individual in the center.
 There is a policy disconnect. Policy has not embraced technology as a tool. We need to
join technology policy with human services policy
 Access is not enough. Entrepreneurial growth is important.
 This represents a paradigm shift – changes how one looks at identical problem.
 Risk is coming into play.
 We have done tremendous tinkering with these ideas around the edges. If we were to
restate the question to focus on building the capacity of the individual– what the
challenge becomes is how to frame the question.
 There is an issue of entitlement / competition of who gets what services.
 There is also the issue of immigration / undocumented workers and cultural relevance.
 Language is important. “Citizen is not necessarily a good term. We should think of better
language.
 Term of “resident” or “community member” is better than client or citizen.
IDENTIFICATION OF WHAT NEEDS TO CHANGE TO GET TO THE IDEAL: GAPS
AND STRATEGIES
The small groups were convened again to identify gaps between the ideals they
developed during yesterday’s work and the current state. Group report outs occurred before and
after lunch.
Group 1

Engage individuals through multiple doors/ many modes of technology (i.e., phone,
computers, centers, human interaction)
423




























Use technology to have individuals do some level of self assessment
Look at “BenefitsCheckUp.org” as a model for using technology
Expand home computer access and create other nodes of access throughout communities
Provide more basic computer skills training and literacy training
Challenge traditional concept of “agency”
Provide case managers with access to information about available services throughout
community
Change monitoring and evaluation assumptions/ priorities to focus on what outcomes
matter most
Create a comprehensive statewide web-based interface (clearinghouse) that allows
individuals get to appropriate content (e.g., Benefits Check-Up)
Develop a clearinghouse for individual and corporate volunteers to offer their assistance
(e.g., United Way volunteer systems “Virtual Agency”)
Create community networks and collaboratives to build these virtual systems
Use GIS and other available technology in community assessment of poverty
Level the geographic/ place-based opportunities through technology
Create more innovative transportation nodes/ modes to access childcare (i.e., housing,
education, healthcare options)
Use technology to engage community members and organizations in a needs assessment
process
Conduct community asset mapping to inventory assets and resources; should be an
ongoing and technology-based process
Build community consortia to do more integrated/ comprehensive community assessment
and planning (e.g., “coalition building”)
Work with academic institutions within communities to do community assessment,
planning, and developing training/ education opportunities through technology
Leverage community technology assets; need to accelerate the speed of technology
infrastructure development and access
Market technology savvy individuals and communities to business and industry
(consumers and workers)
Push the technology on behalf of serving individuals and communities
Inventory what technology already exists and is being used; identify what services are
already available/ integrated
Identify gaps in current use of technology
Develop strategies for improving use and creating new solutions
Leverage more resources from public and private sectors to maximize access and use of
technology (more funding needs to be dedicated at all levels of government)
Need better policy guidance in terms of using funding for technology solutions
Need to develop a technology plan for organizations to guide their work/services
Create more meaningful accountability outcomes and measures tied to the use of
technology
Culture shift needs to be encouraged/ facilitated so that silos are busted/ bridged and
resources are leveraged
424
Group 2


The type of barrier encountered (Process, Turf, or Politics) should guide what
strategies to employ.
There needs to be a mechanism to identify which of the 3 categories an issue falls in
– name it to navigate it.


Barrier: No one is in charge of addressing poverty.
Strategy: Frame the issue as “empower the consumer”. Create a place for private sector
delivery models and let the consumer select what services they need and who will deliver
them.

Barrier: There are no cross cutting supports for “individual model” – those models that
look at the individual as the focal point for services rather than from a program
perspective.
Strategy: Use demonstrations to show that the individual centric model works better o
Define outcomes against a control group.

o Connect with foundations – others with like interests and willingness to do things
differently.
o OCS needs to take the first step – “put skin in the game” to demonstrate
credibility.
o Bring in all stockholders as partners up front.
o Focus “small” – look for places where there can be “wins” quickly.
o Examine what’s working now including international models.
o Use technology to follow individuals through self-directed but facilitated service.
o Research entities to benchmark against including other models/disciplines (e.g.
client centered training; medical models; case management models).
o Align politics, process, and technology for demo’s to work: only accept
applications from those with alignment; look at smaller government entities as
starting point/ keep initial number of demo projects small as well.
o Use technology for communications with individuals – reduce face to face, travel.
o Mine the best existing grantees for leading edge places as potential demonstration
sites.
o Build on PRM (Partner Relationship Management) technology to integrate
information from various sources – don’t try to change program databases or
create new integrated ones.
o Must have State buy-in for “integrated”, connected systems at the local level in
order for demonstration project applications to be successful.
o Need a Federal team (cross agencies) to support the demonstrations.
o Potential for TANF Reauthorization to be a mechanism to get past barriers.

Super waiver potential
o Use Congressional Commission to spearhead effort – create compelling event.
o Ensure there is a thorough/ solid evaluation component to the demonstration
projects.
425




Barrier: The knowledge level is low in front line workers. Many are still transactional
workers (working on process and forms) rather than outcome workers (focusing on the
ultimate best for the customer).
Strategy: Develop knowledge management strategy including assessments for customer
service aptitude.
Barrier: Leadership in social services qualitative oriented – not technology oriented.
Strategy: Find few leaders who cross both sectors and use them as models; they are the
translators.
o Build on ROMA mentality that now pushes outcomes
o Continue conversation between technology and program “geeks” (create the space
for them to dialogue and interact)
o Layout from a technology system standpoint what you want; convene
policy/process types to figure out how to put it in place
Group 3
Picking up from the ideal the group had envisioned in previous day’s work session, the
group’s task was to identify strategies that would help achieve it. The group’s ideal concept was
the “you.com” concept and they began by defining and describing the concept in more detail.
What is “you.com”?
 Web based portal that employs “cookie technology” that pulls data from multiple
sources, for the purpose of::
o Enhancing/integrating service delivery
o Calculating benefits
o Determining service eligibility
o Providing benefit itself (if possible)
o Serving as a diagnostic tool for addressing needs
o Self-service for service needed
o Community and human service decision-making and policy-making (e.g. trends,
needs)
o Evaluating for outcomes
The group then began to brainstorm strategies that would make the “you.com” concept a
reality.
Access Strategies you.com

I.D. and create multiple access points
426




Develop strategy for getting computers in every home – Government strikes deal with
tech companies to do this entrepreneurs
Develop content that allows people to reach potential
o Services
o Education/training
o Resources
Incorporate Assistive technology into access plan
“Traditional helpers” and individuals
Infrastructure Strategies

Explore security technology to protect data such as:
o Biometrics
o Authentication
o Security card
Design Strategies







Strategically develop research and development mechanisms/strategies (i.e. medical
research and development/ NIH design and research and develop) (seek work done in
other countries, seek people who have done this work in other countries.
Develop strategies with big tech firms/ providers/ developers with focus on poverty.
Evaluate/ assess existing innovative technology approaches for incorporation into
“you.com”.
Team up/ co-invent between technology, community, and helpers to develop useful
design.
Develop design criteria that makes it easy to use for planning and decision-making (e.g.
“GIS out-of-the-box”)
Initiate design criteria using individual/ community as center
Develop comprehensive vision BEFORE design implementation (see point above)
Connectivity Strategies
 I.D. data sources: Fed, state, community
o Eligibility criteria across all “programs” (traditional human services)
o Assessment tools (not necessarily program linked; not necessarily poor)
o Community resources:

Child care

Job training

Voter registration
 Develop data agreements with community resources named above to get data in a timely
fashion
 Mine new data sources for continued enhancement (e.g. peer-to-peer)
427

Mine community capacities for learning/ sharing information for models for using
technology
Urgency Strategies (to generate interest in exploring this idea)




Highlight publicly data around the need for literacy, technically-savvy workforce
o Identify ‘What’s In it For Me (WIFM’s)’ and align strategies to them (e.g. What
would a literate, technically-savvy workforce create for them?)
Make the economic argument for the need to address poverty (again…WIFM) (e.g. the
cost of poverty)
Develop strategies for creating urgency in low-income families to embrace technology
(WIFM).
Engage in conversations with power brokers, business interest in addressing poverty in
their language.
Implementation/ Testing Strategy


Design and pilot a “You.com” model in a community(ies)
o Bring in technologist, community folk, government, business community,
program
o Co-design
o Tap “market economy”
o Allowing entrepreneurship space (e.g. invite action, invite entrepreneurs into
process does not equal research to death)
FED/ Entrepreneurial Partnership
o Develop mechanism for big technology firms, Federal government, and
community to continue working on this concept.
o Develop mechanism/ funding for regular work on implementing this concept.
September 15, 2004: Afternoon
The small groups reported out on their gaps and strategies by early afternoon and the
remainder of the session focused on capturing the collective work of the groups. The facilitator
offered the observation that technology strategies are key in connecting the individual with
multiple aspects of society (e.g. the helping system, opportunities, citizenship, education) and
that the intersection of these components mark the “niche area” for technological solutions,
represented in the shaded areas in the graphic below.
428
429
TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIES
As the groups shared their strategies with the large group, the facilitator captured them
(see below). In all, 29 strategies were generated:
1) Develop integrated web-based portal that draws from existing and new services; adding
value to existing networks/ services. (Emphasis on USER; Demonstration in
Community).
2) Emphasize role of community data, leadership, and analysis of local needs and service
opportunities.
3) Engage leadership – business, government, technology – to create and sustain changes in
the existing model (Broader, bolder, coalition of thinkers).
4) Neutralize “walls” created by local “owners” of data and services (develop data
agreements; address intellectual property issues).
5) Ensure that there are person-to-person networks to allow for exchange of data ideas,
successful strategies between/among individuals
6) Make sure that systems, expectations, and paradigms do not profile people in (or near)
poverty; this focus needs to be on individual. [“you.com” (Everybody has a role)]
7) Look at where research and development mechanisms/ strategies are (or are not); look at
other disciplines to ensure good ideas don’t die on the vine.
8) Look at successful models around the country and the world; build on them (look at other
disciplines to see where customer services works).
9) Engage co-invention strategies to make sure correct interface exist in communities to
make technology usable and useful; engage community in design.
10) Tie access to capacity and training
11) Make content related to all needs (elderly, disabled, assistive technology
12) Develop ways to secure data.
13) Use technology to build urgency
 People don’t want to be left behind
14) Use economic argument to bring along people who would otherwise not be involved;
tailor to audience
15) Be at the table (no sacred cows), not on the menu.
430

Don’t get left behind as technology innovations move forward.
16) Create virtual agency that serves as clearinghouse (info; benefit calculations; access to
services).
17) Emphasize community role/ integrity of system design.
18) Make content compelling; offer training to make access possible.
19) Create multiple nodes of access/ services; use existing consortia where possible (see #21)
20) Create asset maps for localities; have community links to allow sharing of resources
(person-to-person or person-to-program). Bring data silos together to get detailed
snapshots or what’s actually going on the community.
21) Establish multiple nodes: “No wrong door” – web, phone, live assistance
o Integrated entry to services
22) Identify the nature of the barriers that prevent delivery of appropriate services to
individuals.
23) Enable self-determination in the identification of needs and appropriate services.
24) Create partnerships (public and private) to further the models to: (start small)
 a: allow research
 b: measure outcomes
 c. determine effectiveness
 d. expand successful programs
25) Engage government leaders (congress, political leaders) to look at issue and create sense
of urgency
26) Enhance knowledge level of front-line workers/ point of contact for the individual
seeking services
27) Bring together technical people and programs people to (individual-centric aptitude/
attitude/ IT mentors)
 a. generate enthusiasm
 b. develop common vision
 c. develop common language
 d. identify translators
28) Design system with engagement of people using it -- the individuals being served and the
front-line workers using it to provide service; enable change at lowest possible level.
29) Attend to data issues (internal among agencies and with individual).
431
SESSION CLOSE OUT AND NEXT STEPS: CLARENCE CARTER
Clarence thanked the group for their engagement during the session and provided
information about next steps. Next steps included:






The project team will be compiling the proceedings of the session and distributing it to
participants for clarifications and enhancements.
o Participants will be given a set amount of time to submit enhancements
Once all of the working sessions are completed and all meeting records were revised
based on the participants’ review, the development of a “blueprint for change” will begin.
There may be some follow up needed with some of the participants as the blueprint
development progresses.
Hope to set up a web-enabled space for participants to remain connected to the initiative
and to each other.
Blueprint draft to be completed in January
“Mega-Session” in which participants from all working sessions will be convened in the
same space to see and discuss the draft blueprint.
Clarence spoke of his desire for this initiative and this group of participants to “write and
important chapter of history” and his belief that we had gotten a great start with the thoughtful
contributions and engagement of the group. He thanked everyone once again and wished them
safe travels.
APPENDIXES
A. Core Elements: Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles
B. Research Themes: Redefining Poverty
C. Initiative context presentation: Characteristics of Successful Change
D. Current state presentation: Highlights from the research
E. Participant List
F. Project Staff List
432
APPENDIX A Core Elements: Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles
CORE ELEMENTS
Mission, Imperatives, Vision, and Principles
August 2004
Mission
This initiative seeks to change the way this country thinks about and addresses poverty.
Imperatives (Why)
Among other reasons, we engage in this work because:
 Despite significant investment in addressing poverty, persistent poverty exists.
 We have a moral imperative to take care of one another, as our “brother’s keeper” and as
provided in the founding documents of our nation. No one should have to live an
impoverished life.
 We have an economic imperative to ensure that the capacity of individuals, communities,
and the nation for innovation is encouraged and sustainable.
 Poverty is costly to taxpayers, wherever they live, via the costs associated with social
services, remedial education, law enforcement, welfare programs, etc.
Vision (Desired Future)









Fewer people will live impoverished lives because:
Poverty is viewed by the mainstream as broader than income.
Society proactively plans for decreasing the number of people living impoverished lives.
Individuals proactively plan for a future for themselves that is not impoverished.
The education sector proactively plans and implements strategies to reduce the number of
people living impoverished lives.
The banking industry proactively plans and implements strategies to reduce the number
of people living impoverished lives.
The health industry. . .
The justice system. . .
The philanthropic sector. . .
The Federal government focuses its programs and policies on the above.
Principles
The desired future will be built upon the following principles:
433














Person-centered service delivery structure: Effectively and efficiently serving individuals
in need means that the service delivery structure must focus on the needs of the
individual or family, not on the needs of the helping system.
Consistency with America’s tenet of free enterprise: As in most facets of the American
experience, the helping system should leverage the philosophy of free enterprise. Doing
so encourages and supports free market solutions to geometrically expand the helping
resources available to serve Americans in need.
Reciprocal Responsibility: Full and equal responsibility for maximizing potential lies
with the individual to society and with society to the individual.
“Poverty” is broader than income: Income is only a part of an individual’s ability to make
life work and to be a productive member of society. Human potential depends on
different types of capital –social, economic, and spiritual.
“Poverty” as we know it is only a starting point: Traditional definitions and mental
models about poverty (e.g. models based exclusively on income determinants, which
suggest poverty as a population) are starting points only.
Shared vision: New ways of thinking about and addressing poverty are aligned with the
assumptions built into the founding documents of the nation.
Hopeful: Our new construct is built on a foundation of a profound belief in the natural
gifts, skills and abilities of every person to achieve when set free.
Fundamental right to individual potential: Every individual has the right to achieve their
potential, regardless of circumstance, strengths, or weaknesses.
Systemic interdependence: All parts of the system (read: nation) must fulfill their
obligations toward maximizing potential in order for all to be successful. No one policy,
program, community, strategy can maximize the nation’s collective human potential
alone.
Leveraging resources: The ability of an individual or system to align and strategically use
the resources they have toward the outcome of success, as they have defined it.
Budget neutral: Spending more Federal and philanthropic money is not the issue. We
should strive first to make wiser application of existing resources.
Everybody has a role: Every sector of society (government, private industry, non-profit,
communities) has a role in creating a nation of reciprocal responsibility and opportunity.
These roles may or may not be consistent with current roles.
Government as convener: The government role is one of convener and catalyst for
enabling innovation.
Change is necessary: We cannot create a nation of reciprocal responsibility and
opportunity using these principles without fundamental change occurring in every sector
of society.
434
APPENDIX B Research Themes: Leveraging Technology in Human Services
Leveraging Technology – Key Themes and Questions 1
Leveraging Technology in Human Services
Key Themes
The Changing Face of Technology
Developments in IT have significantly changed how individuals, governments and
societies deal with information. There are new and better ways of presenting, analyzing and
using information. There are improved mobile devices for end users, much-improved
middleware, better-conceptualized standards, wider connectivity, new collaboration tools, and
new and better models for doing business as a result of emerging technologies.
To get to a market of 50 million people, it took the radio 38 years, the television 13 years
and the Internet 4 years. The pace at which technology is changing the world that we live in is
increasing exponentially.
A world where objects can sense, reason, communicate and act, the explosion of smaller,
cheaper sensors, continuously connected through wireless communications has created a sensory
environment where we can see the physical online. Some key concepts that have emerged that
sets 2004 apart from 1994 include:
o E-commerce, Real-time Infrastructure, Open Architecture
o Wireless Applications/PDA’s
o Web-enabled applications, Web Kiosks, Broadband
o Online – real-time transacting “always on world”, Virtual Networks
o Voice Activated Applications
o Customer Relationship Management
o Business Intelligence
o Wi-Fi
o Radio Frequency Identification Devices
Changes in the world’s economy as well as emerging technologies are impacting business
practices and create the need for all industries to continuously reevaluate their use of technology
in achieving goals and objectives. Individuals and communities can benefit from the
empowerment that emerging technologies now afford.
Current State of Technology in Human Services
Service Delivery Infrastructure
435
Organizational silos and independently conceived and operated programs have led to a
complex technological environment in Human Services. Many technology solutions are largescale, complex, based on outdated technology, and designed to support single programs and as a
result reinforce the “stove-piping” of program administration.
Human Services Agencies (HSA’s) have a variety of legacy automation systems. These
systems are generally mainframe systems that have been in existence for more than a few years.
HSAs invested valuable resources to develop mainframe systems that were once on the leading
edge of technology. However, technology continued to move forward at an incredible rate of
speed rendering the functionality of many human services mainframe systems today inadequate,
outdated and antiquated.
The legacy systems of Human Services
 were not built from the perspective of the “client”;
 contain limited functionality to provide holistic case management;
 are expensive to maintain;
 lack of adequate documentation;
 based upon programming styles and standards that are obsolete;
 don’t share data across the enterprise.
Historically, it was not considered necessary for disparate systems in a heterogeneous
environment to inter-communicate, or if it was, expediency came first. Now there is an ever
increasing requirement to ensure that data sources can talk to one another so that a complete
“picture” is available for decision-making across communities and governments. Neither human
services case managers nor individuals in need have the information needed to make rapid
intervention decisions due to the lack of integration in the Human Services delivery
infrastructure. Staff and individuals spend an inordinate amount of time collecting information,
processing paperwork and navigating through inefficient business processes.

Access to existing information technology systems is governed by the “silo” that owns
the system. For the most part, information is limited to the organization or individual
managing the silo.

Many local, state and federal governments are implementing “e-government” initiatives meaning the ability to access government services and get government information
electronically. E-government intends to provide increasing opportunities for citizens to
access information, fill out forms, pay bills, and sign-up for needed services from any
computer, at any hour of the day without human intervention.
Individuals

For the most part, individuals access human services interventions by applying for
assistance through an array of programmatic constructs. This typically involves an
individual physically going to a local service office to apply for and be determined
eligible for a particular service. Services are not necessarily arrayed in a fashion where
resources are mapped or tailored to meet the specific needs of an individual. This results
436

in the fitting of an individual into a “cookie cutter program” rather than designing an
intervention that might have long-term impact. Innovative approaches involving the
leveraging of technology to improve the service delivery system for individuals are
beginning to emerge.
According to a study performed by the U.S. Department of Commerce, the unconnected
(people not leveraging technology) include the following groups:
o People in households with low family incomes — 75% of people who live in
households where income is less than $15,000 annually, and 67% of those in
households with incomes between $15,000 and $35,000 are unconnected.
o Adults with low levels of overall education — 87% of adults (age 25+) with less
than a high school education, and 60% of adults with only a high school degree.
o Hispanics — 68% of all Hispanics, and 86% of Hispanic households where
Spanish is the only language spoken are unconnected.
o Blacks — 60% of Blacks are unconnected.
o Rural households – 47% of rural households are unconnected.
The main reason provided as to why these groups