No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
IN THE late 1960s, federal anti-poverty programs often mandated the participation of the poor.' While the new, post-categorical generation of social programs attempts to decentralize power to local elected officials,2 Congress has insisted upon a modified dose of citizen participation. For example, the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act of 1973 (CETA) vests contractual authority for manpower training in units of local government, but requires appropriate arrangements with community-based organizations serving the poverty community, and other special target groups, for their participation in the planning of programs. Local planning councils are expected to include representatives of the client community and of community-based organizations. And federal discretionary funds may be used to support some of the older manpower programs where community organizations have won a share of the turf.3 A similar thrust is visible in the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974.4 Outside of the government, the late Saul Alinsky's Industrial Areas Foundation, Imamu Baraka's Congress of Afrikan People, and the Ford Foundation have launched reformminded citizens' groups in dozens of poor neighborhoods.5 Yet we have surprisingly little knowledge of the impact of community-based organizations on public and private policies. As one political scientist has written,
Loading…
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.