VBScript
History -    
  Community Action  
   
Formative Years: 1964 - 1967  
   

The federal OEO was created to lead the War on Poverty and to coordinate related programs of all other fe deral agencies. Community Action Agencies (CAAs) were created at the local level to fight the War on Poverty “at home.” Initially, there were no statutory requirements as to their structure, so some CAAs were blue-ribbon panels created by the mayor, others were grass-roots organizations composed entirely of poor people, and others were started by groups of neighbors who met in the local church basement and worked on improving their community.
CAAs varied from grass-roots, community-controlled groups to those with experienced board members and a highly professional staff. Most eventually incorporated as private nonprofit organizations, and a few were created as city agencies. And, especially in the South and in urban areas, many of the staff and board members of CAAs were also leaders in the local civil rights movement. The concepts of civil rights and the people from the civil rights movement were at the core of the thinking and operations of CAAs in the formative years.
The state and local governments were seen as not being very effective in eliminating poverty -- or as being part of the problem. In a rural county in the “ Deep South,” for example, where the population was 50% black and 50% white and almost everybody -- both black and white -- was poor, under the ADC program the local authorities only approved financial assistance for the people they decided were the “deserving poor.” So a typical ADC caseload in 1964 would be 700 white females and 4 black females.
The ratio of the registration of college students in the state university in that same state was even more striking -- thousands of white females and 0 (that’s zero) black females. According to the local customs, the black females did not deserve either benefits from government programs or the opportunity for a higher education at the state university. The EOA supported the social movements that were trying to change this racist reality.
The EOA and the OEO bypassed the state and local governments and directly funded the community groups that were seeking social change. This direct funding was a key element of the community action concept.
Community Action Agencies worked to change public policy from a situation were aid or opportunities were given only to the “deserving poor” to a public policy where aid and opportunities were open to all who were eligible for it and legislatively entitled to it – regardless of race. Using the strategies of direct action, community organization and legal action, the CAAs challenged the structures of segregation head on – and won on virtually every front.
From 1964 into the early 1970’s, under the onslaught of CAAs and other groups the segregationist barriers crumbled into the dust of history.
Another powerful antipoverty strategy used by most CAAs was to help “the dad” get a GED (high school equivalency certificate) and then get a job in a factory. The GED would get him the job, and the job would get him the minimum wage which was enough to lift most families out of poverty. And if it was a union shop the job often provided other benefits as well. The anti-discrimination strategy and the get-a-GED-and-get-a-job strategy were powerful -- they worked (pun!) to get people out of poverty.

The EOA also provided for the creation of economic opportunity offices at the state level to involve governors in the War on Poverty. While governors were not authorized to give prior approval on OEO grants, they did have the authority to veto any grant for any reason. Many, especially those in the South, exercised this statutory authority – usually over Legal Services program grants -- only to be checked by another provision of the EOA which provided for veto overri de by the Director of OEO. Among the thousands of grants each year there were only a handful of gubernatorial vetoes, and Shriver overro de almost all of them.
Federal funds were provi ded through the OEO but the local CAAs determined the use of the funds to meet the problems of low-income people as they defined them. These were called “local initiative funds” and were used for a very variety of purposes, from helping people find work to providing basic education to improving housing to creating local community organizations and to supporting social action.
One provision of the EOA called for the poor to have “maximum feasible participation” in i dentifying problems and in developing solutions -- and in obtaining jobs within the program. Across the nation, CAAs opened neighborhood centers in storefronts, housing projects, and other buildings in low-income areas to i dentify people who nee ded help and to determine eligibility, and to help the community organize to take action on its concerns.
A new group of community lea ders developed out of these neighborhood organizations, voicing the concerns of the poor and insisting on change. The philosophy, the values, the strength, and the personal commitments of community action were formed during this period.
It was also during this phase that the OEO hired 3,000 federal employees to manage and monitor all the new programs. Most of these people came from the CAAs, civil rights groups, universities, church leadership, labor unions, and other activist organizations.
The Community Action Program (CAP) grew rapidly and invested substantial amounts of new federal funds into communities.
A confusing aspect of nomenclature that persists to this day is that CAAs are often called “CAPs” because they were formed under the Community Action Program division of OEO to administer funds for local Community Action Programs -- so the agency itself was also called a community action program. (We hope we are moving to a taxonomy where the agency itself is called a CAA and the programs it administers are called community action programs. There.)

This paper was originally written by Jim Masters of the Center for Community Futures and published by NACAA for the
25th Anniversary of Community Action in 1989. He updates it here for the 40th Anniversary

Questions or comments? Contact him at jmasters@cencomfut.com

See our other sections...
Background
LBJ State of the Union
Creation:1964
• Formative Years: 1964 - 1967
Restructuring Phase: 1967 - 1968
Transition Years: 1969 - 1974
Program Management Years 1974 - 1981
Block Grant years: 1981 - Present
The Results and Outcomes Years: 1993 - and into the future

     

 

 
 
© 2007 New York State Community Action Association
518-690-0491 • 518-690-0498
NYSCAA IT Powered

Untitled Document
Register for the NYSCAA Conference
June 11-13, 2008
 
 
Register for the 10th Annual FDANYS Conference
 
 
NYSCAA's 2008
Poverty Report!
 
 
NYSCAA's March 2008 Newsletter