2 20 31 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/4e7ceff5fa27220ac4de96354a0b9048.pdf 4bf4862e31667d30ce4bd9276b5ef157 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. . j/ , ,·/ / · •.. /- .PLANrrnrG FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PROGRA1,S . Introductioh I I i• · A neighborhood program will or~narily be one part of a larger city'W'i.de comir.unity action program. Thus questions must be asked about the city at large and the whole cor::munity action planning, along with an inquiry into the ·neighborhood. program itself'. Funds are likely to be limited so that in I:10st cases a choice of some neighborhoods must be made, either to start the city's program or to be ' . _.. -~ ' used as a. "demonstration." At the outset, reasons for preferring certain neighbqrhoods over others ( should be explored. In soce cities past social .dis"Gurbances or chronic , trouble may dictate the choice of a neighborhood for concerted social i ) · effort. There is a caveat: A city may prefer to choose neighborhoods with problems that can be dealt ·with rather quickly be.c ause succes~ . .. will be more certain and visible. Unfavo1·abh coinJ?arisons should not be made once programs a.re initiated between the more easily solved neighborhood. · problems and the knottier ones. i· The preference of one kind of neighbor- hood. over another may result from wise and responsible political. decision, ., but the basis for decisions should be understood both by the coc::ru.nity and by the federal agencies. In the attached outline we have asked a series of questions designed ·· to otter some go.tides for those evaluating neighborhood progrf!J=!S. Because these programs are so frankly ex:perimental, no such outline can provide .\ I more than a. general approach. More reliable criteria will emerge from. concrete experience with actual programs, their inevitable failures and . . ' :~_:• •:·-~·.~·~~ "'.'"'-···success~s ~• •••., .,- ·~--:-•••N'.-~~·-:~ ··." .--·-:-··.··•••·~~- •':"'--~' ,•--,.<••~~:..,;:.,-•~:"' '" ,,,-.-··-->---~-·- - ·.-:.'•·- ':, ,, - i- ~ ·· I- ...,:., . •• •• �--'-_ i-, -' 4 -=. · , ,,=-· .••,., · · ~ .. ~--·-~.·..__JI· ~-,-=,-~........ - , ___,_ .. 'c'-· __,....._ c-._.,,W __,_.......,--,..1s.... ·, . . -.............. - -. • .· ,. ·_,. ·~~· .. fe_" w ·· ·~ · . .· I . - -· ~·-· - -~ - - ,,. . ,II • . r -r . 2 A detailed knowledge of the city, the sponsors, and the over-all political context will be necessary for judg::ie_!lt. ~ each case. Still., it may be a useful exercise to try to articulate in advance so:::ie of the factors that shouJ.cl enter into evaluation, even though judgments a.re likely to be intuitive. The discussion that follows is divided into two parts: (1) criteria for defining the appropriate neighborhood; and (2) criteria for judging the substance of programs for a neighborhood. It is not inappropriate to point out that some decisions to accept or reject a proposal for neighborhood programs must be piaa.e on a primarily political basis. The Federal. progra!:l needs Congressional support and it needs the support of all the t r aditional agencies in the Executive branch / with which it must cooperate . I of any city is F1trther, the over-all political situat i on an essential i ngredient in the success or failure of a community action program and of the neighborhood program which is its natural offspri ng . This point is probably understood, if not articulated, by applicant s and evaluators alike . The f orms t o be filled out for the '. ~~pt~ - of _~ou·s·~ - &:_Ur b~ :_DevelolJ.~!1t · 'jr.ay__·· ·· set up standards and expectations., but t hey are not like aptitude t ests . A high score does not imply autooat ic admission to "school. " As long as funds a.re insufficient t o j;lermit ·:every soU!ld progral:1 t o 'be accepted., it should be understood that choices involve a variety of factors, not the least of which .is political. There is another risk. . . ·--·---·--..... The existence of complicated .forms., the pro- mulgation of standards. and the coi::J::lOn knowledge that.. choices . . .. . have to be / /·• I �made, may lead cities to imitate slavishly the type of progr8.l:l.S that have been accepted before. This could lead to rigidity -- ·a calcification which is the enemy o'f innovation and imaginative use of these special local characteristics of a city and neighborhood. Neighborhood / I , The limted experience thus far with community action programs and the longer history of settlement houses ,have led those :working with problems of organization to insist upon a small local ·area as the lowest common denominator for any new social programs. The word . ;'neighborhood" . . is used to mea:i a relatively compact geographical area and also an area which has some sort of functional cohesiveness. Before the concept of neighborhood progra:n becomes a . cliche' easily glossed over, it '!Lay be important to ask sorae questions about what may or may not be ·defined· as "neighborhood" and for what purposes. Reaching out: It is fairly well accepted now that any progra.o of social action tnl.St be broken down into local units so that it can reach out to those people who are unwilling or unable to go very far for service, either because of fear, inexperience or lack of basic skills to make use of available services, on their own. Thus the very first criterion of any_ neighbor- hood program. is that it be sufficiently local to achieve this end. Elasticity: The kind of services ottered, a.ncI ·the characteristics of the people· .- ..... . . ' - . -· .. _. :: ·--... 'I ._ ........ �~·=_--_._. ...~_-_:'"_--_:-__::-_-_...., '- _---_-_cc- ~--:-- -_.. tlo~-~ ~~A~.-- - ____ _: _-~--- .-'" • w · . _ F··· · -· . I served will affect tQe definition of "neighborhood." For example, a i. mother with a sma.ll child has a far greater physical-geographical limitation_than does an adolescent who is used to wandering the city with a gang. Could you serve them both in a neighbor center? The unit for phys- . ica1 hea1th care might be quite different from the unit for mental health care, in part because of the degree of education needed before the patient wants the services offered. A co~text of multiple services, or even ser- vices to a wide age range, indicates both elasticity of the concept of neighborhood and the arbitrariness of any definition. one center may The very fact -that offer a multiplicity of services will ~lso affect the delineation of "neighborhood." Even a single person may define his neigh- borhood very differently for different purposes -- church, school, or . . . socializing, for example. The si"t~ation becomes infinitely mo.re compli- cated when the "target population" encompasses many groups. A neighborhood may exist because of pr eexisting -services or grouping of services, for example, an eff ectively functioning settlement house wi-t h a long tradition, as in t he Nort h End, Boston, or a clinic. The Peckham Health Cent er in England created a very cohesive neighborhood for purposes . many A preex~.s.t i ng sense of community of'ten grows up because of ethnic s imilariti es or racial is olat i on. The sense of coIIII:lunity, however, may be a decept ive f actor on which to rely. An effective :preexisting service may provide a ·coI11I:1unity on which . broader services can be built and should be built. . On the other hand., . the invisible walls which create a ghetto like Harlem., create a "coI:1?:1unity; 1---,- -· ._ _ _ but.one frayed .w.;.th strife and hostility _.which may_have .to 1;,e broken down ' �- I ~ C ' • 5. into very small units to penetrate resistance that the larger cor::::rrunity reini'orces. In other words, a neighborhood has tp be a manageable unit. - If there had been trouble, hostility, delinquency ~r a high crime rate, the negative aspect of a community may argue for the arbitrary creation_ of very s~.all neighborhood units for certain kinds of services, in order that the :population ca.~ rea~ be reached and involved. Use of Personnel Affects Delineation of a Neighborhood The availability and training of the personnel to staff a neighborhood program will affect the parru:ieters of a neighborhood unit. 11,ore is meant here than the ratio of professionals to "cl.:i;ent·. ". It goes ·without saying tha.t one doctor in a clinic will serve a far-smaller population than ten. But personnel can be iI!l_portant in a qualitative sense, . as well • I ·The supporting worker can serve a.s· connective tissue ar.ong professional - -I' services. This is the worker who knows the language of the neighborhood and who is able to direct the people in it to needed services, provide follow-up, and help the person coordinate the various services that may be asser.ibled to neet his particular needs, whether welfare, medical, educational, or employment, or a combination of any or all of these, in any problem or crisis. Such personnel make ·up a psychological transpor- tation and concunication syst~~ An A store-front room may serve a block. exacyle may nake this more concrete: . In it may be neighborhood workers or urban agents who can take in.forr:iation from those on the block and steer them to adult education, eJ::ll)loyment training, work crews, mental health ' clinic, the hospital, a local lawyer, the ·hou.siog authority, etc. ~-~-- - ---~~--- of' -these services·. need -not be represented All ill -the st<;>re-tront room, but - �they must be ~ade accessible by effective workers who can coI:II:1unicate with the people ·the program is designed to serve. The urban agent be- !. coi::.es a path:f~nder for the individual in need, to all the agencies and services required. Thus the concept of "neighborhood" is in part defined by the kind of staff' available, because those who help people find their -; / ' . way through a labyrinth of services ma.1-.e the programs really accessible; I· Actual transportation is of great importance, since the inability to find one's way is so characteristic of the -·poor. Their neighborhood, for purposes, is walking radius. · Here again workers can help make exis- many ting transportation usable and therby make far-flung prog;rams accessible to a neighborhood. We have stated earlier that one varient of the definition of neighborhood is the kind of service th~at is offered. We are assuming that one goa.l i s comprehens·iveness - the offering of a group of interreJA,ted human j. services that will raise the aspirations and the opportunities of the / I 1,/ l people to be served. It is understood, then, that different services will serve different geographical areas. As pointed out, the lowest common denominator may have to be the workers who can link physically · separated services. But this is only one alternative. creation of a new instit ution designed defines the neighbor hood. There are others. For example, the t o have such great impact t hat it Consider the Comi:iu.nity School as it exists i n New Haven, Connecticut, and Flint, Michigan. They draw upon the neighbor- hood. of the families whose children attend t he school. In new Haven, Conte School is made as attractive 'f.l,th a center to~ s~nior citizens, .,..,.,..1.. .. -~ · ·- ·- -:. · ...._:. .."'_ .. _.....,_ ,,_ ',, .., .. ..... .•• -.. .....:•• .__,.._,,..,.:. _ _ __.., .......~ ...- ••:. ..-"."'........ ·· •• __ . , ... _.._ ..•.: - •.- ~· _.,:,_ ••• -- • . ~. - . . : . . . . - - - - · · .-14-• -L "i . II ,O �- . -. 3 .7 - , an auditoriun, bocci courts, a park for young mothers, and so on - that a sense . of community is created by the very fact of the institution. other neighborhood se=:vices, legal, public health, wel:fare, etc., are then brought in to this "neighborhood." the neighborhood by their creation. Other kinds of institutions may define Probabzy this is what the multi- In such cases service center in Boston (Roxbu...-J) is attempting to do. the neighborhood is geographically larger than that served by the block store-front with the "pathfinder" personnel. With a large center, staff may literally walk the streets to ·bring the people to the services con- · I . centrated in one building. - There is no a priori reason t~ prefer one I l I structure of a neighborhood program over the other. I !· i So many neighborhoods are natural neighborhoods, defined by geography; I tradition, or other boundaries that they can be seen quite readily. In ... 'the end, high deference should be given .to the local definition , of a neighborhood. However, the Office of Economic Opportunity can and should insist that the city consider the many variables, including history and I . tradition, which go into the delineation of a neighborhood unit. It should ask for careful consideration of demographic data, for detail about the ethnic background of the people in the neighborhood, the economic and educational level, employment opportunities, housing, recreation and social outlets. A well-thought out proposal is likely to be rich in this kind of.detail. - - - " ' · - - - -- -· - .--- . · ·- - ..-~ · ··~ · " · -- ~ - , . . . . . . . . .. ... • . . . . . . . . . . . .. . , . ·- · - - - ... ~ - - , ..., ,-if' .~ -, .... 1 1· .... • , , ' • •, ' I �.j -=-~ ~-=.tp--=' =:-=-:1=-·=·=·=-·==-c== =--=-=·=~c..cc··=··:.c.._~ -· ~-=r:: r:~~-·-= .--=-::::-;:.;;::_=_=_=-=.·""'t":"'=..=====c.:.._""_==__= .c~'i! "-L "' J: ' 8 THE PROGRAM ·I The substance of the program is no less i.J!;portant than the delination of the neighborhood, and must be adapted to this delineation. I • The first overall re~uirement for a.cy program is the involve:ir.ent of the people to be served in the planning and then the operation of the programs designed to serve theo. l. It is not easy to involve the inarticulate poor, for whom organization is not a familiar phenomenon, but it is possible and it is essential. One · clear goal must be to reduce dependency in all areas, ·not to increase it. . This means that arry "tender plant" of a neighborhood, organization :ir.ust I· be built upon -- a.cy indigenous leadership that is at all constructive must be involved in the planning process. \ A list of needs outlined in the program planning stage, health, education, jobs, etc. should indicate how these needs are felt by the pop~ation. It is difficult to establish criteria from Washington to assure this, but there must be some warning signal of local indifference to neighborhood participation in a program. Furtherz:iore, it is so i~- portant that if there is arry doubt, a field tr~p might be worthwhile. We can anticipate antipathy and resistance to the organization and voice of the poor • . But these are risks that must be.accepted as natural and inevitable and perhaps even welcomed as evidence of involvement. Survey of Existing Services A pr oposal should include a survey of existing socia.J. services and education., including, if possible, cost statistics and th~ ratio of -,1 • • ..:.._ __ ~ • •_ .. . . , / _ . ......... .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . - ~~ - professional and supportive personnel to the neighborhood population. I It �9· would be useful to learn how accessible existing services are which reach the segnents of the nei ghborhood population. build on ;preexisting services , and i f not, Is the new plan going to why not" Often there are good reasons, but as often, a natural center for people, for exSJ:lple, a priest whose church has become a focus for inf'o:rmal social services, may be ignored and a new artif icial center created. Relations wi.th Existing Agencies In some cases there r:iay be value in by-passing existing social service agencies. In ·other cases this may be politically unwise pr unwise because of the strength of an agency. In th,e case of a strop.g well-supported agency, it is entirely possible that a neighborhood program should devel- I rI op from one di scipline or area of Iservice. For example, if the Board of Education were strong and innovative, t he idea of a COI:llllunity 5-C:~Oo_l might be the basis for t he nei ghborhood program and education . would then be t he nucleus . I f there were already a co:mnunity mental health cent er with local support, mental healt h could' be the nucleus of the community action pr ograo. Thus, in the Bronx, New York, a community action pro- gram is emerging from a mental health center out of t he Albert Eins t ein Medical School (Dr. Harris Peck) . In other citi es, t he _Youth Employment, or Opportunity Center has already become a familiar and accepted part of neighborhood and so a comprehensive program erierges with the el:!ployment or job training at its core. The judgment probably should be i:::ade "on the grou.:id." Although comprehensiveness of services riay be the ·goal, it is entirely . --·- ~-· ~--...possible·•"'t hat . ·a s ..a""beg:foni'ng 's 't ra tezy ··ror ·.i,oli ti~al; ..financial,· -or even ' �': xr::·_ ,. . 1: . ~7? · L C :i-----~--~- ---~--~:.. -. ,._. -==-=---=- L .~1 -· , · · 10 I ,1 social reasons, a si::lpler or even segi:1entalized progrru;i shotld be created. In other words, a city might want to start _with health~ education only, and slowly add employoent and perhaps much ,later deal with teenage recreation. Or, there r;,ay be an assault on the problem of teenage delinq~eccy which re~uired an across-the-board approach directed to that age group only, leaving fai:dlies and senior citizens for later. It is possible to choose to work only with the families of very young children or those children themselves, on the theory that the very young a.re the most salvageable part of the population. The reasons behind any of these or ether choices :oay have validit-J, in teros of short e.n~ I:ledill!:l range strategy, but they ,I:lust not become the excw.; e for abandoning the objective of a coqirehensive progra..~. ' \ The planned use of staff, including provision for training _should be examined carefu.1.ly. To ~hat extent does a neighborhood prograo search out indigenous workers, to what extent rely on outsiders? have connecting links to outside services been planned? plan to How A:re they suffi- cient to ma.~e all of the services truly accessible to the population of the neighborhood? Some provision should be made for working out a relationship of cooperation and connection among the traditional agencies and institutions which will either work with, control in part, or i.c:pede a neighborhood program. Friction may be inevitable, but its destructive aspect should be m nimized at the planning stage. A ;,very current exBJ:Iple of this is the creation of neighborhood legal services in liew Haven and in Washington, - - - - · -=--···r- n ~c:--±n- frew Haven, at present, ~liere·-1s ·serious opp~sit .i on °fr9m the �-_-,-_-_. ._-_~--------_-_..._-_-__ -.-.,.-~_-_ :~ . . .-O -,;~.:143.215.248.55-,.~-.. ~~-: .,_ · ,C"" .'.:'._-_-_::::::=::==::----- I,, • ll ,. organized bar which has slowed down the program seriously. In Washington, . the Bar Association and Legal Aid were involved at each step of pla.'llli~ and have thus far given strong support. Including the traditional serrice agencies in the planning process as much as possible and drawing upon their skill a:id experience may substitute cooperation f?r friction. The interrelationship of citywide or even state agencies is a question more directly related to the evaluation of· an entire community action program then for judging the specifics of the neighborhood proposal. Al.so a larger matter is the area of the whole question of information gathering and disse:crinating devices, com.~unication, data .and 9ollection, both formal and informa.J.. There are more ways of assuring effective com- munication than can be listed .here. Citywide newspaper coverage, radio, TV, are the ones first considered.1.- The functional illiteracy of many of the people who z:iost need to be reached means that person-to-:,perl:i_? n '.comI munication, and contact th.rough the places most frequented, whether bar or church, is the basis for an effect ive cor.:i:nunica.tions network that ought to be in every neighborhood picture. ~er a Prog:ram has been Accepted. The styl e of initiat i on of a pr ogram is ·something that should be r egarded with gr eat interes t . In s ome sit uations a quiet launching might be preferable t o one with fanfare. Crisis exploitation, cris i s creation, . and timing must all be con:sidered. We would want to know early what obstacles are anticipated and which obstacles are in fact faced. • ~ · - - · ·· · - - ... - · .,4 . . _ _ _ _ ·Il.1.itaracy, 1:8,ck of social cohesiveness, and · a.pa.thy r:,ay be· prevalent __a.lmost ev.e ry place that a program is co?J,templa.ted. • ••• ~ • • • • • • • • • • • • �' 12 I i ifaat are the plans to deal with them? l How are some of . these obstacles considered in the attempt to involve the neighborhood in Dlanning its own progra:n? f i' It is hard to anticipate whether a program will become rigid or calcified. We have already indicated the possibility that a~pllcation forms, or rumors of hard choices a:nong cities, may cause a proposing co~unity to take a "safe route." If it is made clear from the outset that all of I/ these programs are frankly experimental and that innovation is desired and that _constant feedback and evaluation, as well as program initiative at lower levels, are desirable, rigidity nay be avoided in ~ny places. I . There should be mechanisms for anticipating cris~s or resistance that may ,1- come from the mobilization of a neighborhood. •Progra.o effectiveness o:ften means the assertion or creat~on of a p@litical force which will be ' . fought. There are ways to lay the ground for significant changes, __al- though resistance or even outcry may be inevitable. The situation of the rent strikes in Mobilization for Youth and the political repercussions, raise the question of what kind of preparation might be most effective. Evaluation Plans for evaluating a neighborhood proposal must be built into the proposal from the beginning. This is a subject for another document. The whole area of comounity action is too new for us to be aware in ad- I/ I vance of the many causes of lags in progress or even failure. Feedback mu.st be rapid and constant. We would want to know who is evaluating the neighborhood program and --· . against what criteria • . Is it part of a larger evaluation scheme of a , · '/ �13 .citywide community action progrru:i? and Are there any plans to test theories conclusions against other neighborhood programs in the same and other cities? Long-range goals shouJ.d be broken down into sequenti_al. steps. tnl.St have a planning period beyond the first allocation of funds. Ea.ch But detailed plans should be worked out at shorter intervals _than overall plans and broken down in such a way that parts of a program. can be looked at separately i'rOI:J. other parts of the overall structux~. We would 'Wa!lt to know how often., what kind, and to whom reports are made; how much personal contact is there by the evaluators; how are they trea~ed at progra:;i headquarters., - ignored., exploited or self-supported? Are periodic reviews carried out? 'I Are the goals st.u.""'ficiently formulated in the beginning so that we couJ.d ask later on whether the plans were fulfilled? r -- Whether they were · SJ:1ended? How recent and bow severe and how i're~uent were the amendments? We would want to know whether the evaluation is set up in such a way that side effects could be anticipated or observed, if they occurred. We would be loath to set up any machanical criteria for judging the effectiveness of a comprehensive neighborhood program. course., each with some limited value. There are so~e, of For example, the concept of in- creasing life-long earning power, or, a reduction in _unem:plo~ent, the increase of staying power (retention) of yo\.lllg people in high school drop- I ' ·--··-· I I . outs., in illegitimate births., lowering crime r ate., family break-up, hospital admission., and so on. __ ...... ~-- · mu.st be enployed., ., Probably all of these statistical measures but each· should be.looked at quantitatively to see ' �,· I !I 14 l 1- whether, in fact, it tests the social condition we think it does. -· ample, an increase .. in employment For ex- is a good thing; but if. the -N~gr-oes continue to hold only t'lenial, lower paid jobs, the -eI.1ployment program is no success. If our goal is the tullest development of the resources and capacities of each h\.2::lan being, then we will not be satisfied with· any simple statistical measures. These will be only our mechanical sta.rting .:points. The aspirations of any neighborhood program should escalate with success • ·' ... '- / .. .-. l ...- . . .. . . .. . . . . .,_ .. . _•• • • - .._... . . . . ,. . . . . ·- · , _ , ...... . · - ··- -. . . . . . . . . .. ~ - - .. - - " .. - · ... - - , ... - _... _ ------ . .11 . . . . ... , • .,.. ·- ·- · ·· · •• • � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document ff fd. eee : nda Dass ad Aes: eel ao Nears “~“suecessess ee 2 peer rte ee 4. fin ee ES] vos os PLANNING FOR NEIGHBORHOCD PROGRAMS Introduction - A feichborhood program will ordinarily be one part of a larger eiiys wide community action program. Thus questions must be asked about the city at large and the whole community action planning, along with an inquiry into the neighborhood program itself, Funds are likely to be limited so that in most cases a choice of some neighborhoods must be made, either to start the city's program or to be used as a “demonstration.” 7 At the outset, reasons for preferring certain neighborhoods over others should be explored. In some cities past social disturbences or chronic trouble may dictate the choice of a neighborhood for concerted soetan effort. There is a caveat: A ape may prefer to choose neighborhceds with problems that can be dealt with rather quickly tecause success will be more certain and visible. Unfavorable comparisons should not be made once programs are initiatea between the more easily solved neighborhood: problems and the knottier ones. The preference of one kind of neighbor- hood over another may result from wise and responsible political decision, but the basis for decisions should be indeveeoed both by the community and by the federal agencies. | oe A te In the attached outline we have asked a series of questions designed ‘to offer some guides for those evaluating neighborhood programs. Because these programs are so frankly experimental, no such outline can provide more than a general approach. More reliable criteria will emerge from concrete experience with actual programs, their inevitable failures and = eee re an seine ey names tere tee Respite t= te i eae Wh a apn Hidde ae emg = Darel helene ap paeene ee Ae: ote es ieinesie ieee Yeh ape aetna eee ne a ieee a —alienierneeaiea TE A detailed knowledge of the city, the sponsors, and the over-all political context will be necessary for judguént in each case. Still, it may be a useful exercise to try to articulate in advance some of the . factors that should enter into evaluation, even though judgments are likely to be intuitive. The discussion that follows is aividea into two parts: (1) criteria for defining the appropriate neighborhood; and (2) criteria for judging the substance of programs for a neighborhood, It is not inappropriate to point out that some decisions to accept or reject a proposal for neighborhood programs must be made on & primarily political basis. The Federal program needs Congressional support and it needs the support of all the traditional agencies in the Executive bvench with which it must cooperate, Further, the over-all political situation of any city is an essential ingredient in the success or failure of a community action proErai and of the neighborhood program which is its natural offspring. This point is probably understood, if not articulated, by applicants and evaluators alike. The forms to be filled out for the Dept. of Housing &/ Urban Development may ~ set up standards and expectations, but they are not like aptitude tests. A high score does not imply automatic admission to "school." As long as _ funds are insufficient to permit every sound program to be accepted, it should be understood that choices involve a variety of factors, not the least of which is political. There is another risk. The existence of complicated forms, the pro- ry: mulgation of standards and the common knowledge that choices have to be Nc sy So gabe | steric ahi. = ens a he = ate oi E ance ns x —T SS ——E———EESEEE—EEE — . = : = = made, may lead cities to imitate slavishly the type of programs that have been accepted before. This could lead to rigidity -- a calcification which is the enemy of innovation and imaginative use of these special local characteristics of a city and neighborhood, Neighborhood The limited experience thus far with community action nog and the longer history of settlement houses have led those working with ores blems of organization to insist upon 2 small local area as the lowest Dinolt denominator for any new weet programs, The word "neighborhood" is used to mean a relatively compact geographical area and also an area which has some sort of functional cohesiveness. Before the concept of neighborhood program becomes a cliche’ easily glossed over, it may be important to ask some questions about what may or may not be defined as "neighborhood" and for what purposes. Reaching out: It is fairly well accepted now that any program of social action must . be broken down into local units so that it can reach out to those people sone tee ee ee "who are unwilling or unable to go very far for service, either because of fear, inexperience or lack of basic skills to make use of available services, on their own. Thus the very first criterion of any neighbor- hood program is that it be sufficiently local to achieve this end. Elasticity: The kind of services offered, and the characteristics of the people soe me rahe ements cece tle bie eee Fe awe ie  served will affect the definition of "aeighborhood."” For example, a mother with a small child has a far greater physical-geographical limi- tation than does an adolescent who is used to wandering the city with a gang. Could you serve them both in a neighbor center? The unit for phys= ical health care might be quite different from the unit for mental health care, in part because of the degree of education needed before the patient wants the services offered. A context of multiple services, or even ser- vices to a wide age range, indicates both elasticity of the concept of neighborhood and the arbitrariness of any definition. The very fact that one center may offer a multiplicity of services will also affect the delineation of "neighborhood." Even a single person ay define his neigh- _ borhood very differently for different purposes me church, school, or socializing, for example. The situation becomes infinitely more compli- A neighborhood may exist because of preexisting services or grouping of services, for example, an effectively functioning settlement house with _@ long tradition, as in the North End, Boston, or a clinic, The Peckham Health Center in Imgland created a very cohesive neighborhood for many purposes. A preexisting sense of community often grows up because of \ ethnic similarities or racial isolation. The sense of community, however, may be a deceptive factor on which to rely. An effective preexisting service may provide a community on which ' broader services can be built and should be built. On the other hand, . the invisible walls which create a ghetto like Harlem, create a “community say ey, o.. DUG one frayed with strife and hostility which may have to be broken down ” > ee eee a a z 5 into very small units to penetrate resistance that the dergar community reinforces. In other words, 2 neighborhood has to be a manageable unit. If there had been trouble, hostility, delinquency or a high crime rate, the negative aspect of a community may argue for the arbitrary creation of very small neighborhocd units for certain kinds of services, in order that the population can really be reached and involved. Use of Personnel Affects Delineation of a Neighborhood The availability and training of the personnel to staff a neighbor- hood program will affect the parameters of a neighborhood unit. More is meant here than the ratio of professionals to "client." It goes with- . out saying that one doctor in a clinic will serve a far smaller population than ten. But personnel can be important in a qualitative sense, as well. ‘The supporting worker can gerie aa commective tissue among professional services. This is the worker who knows the language of the neieiborhecd and who is able to direct the people in it to needed mexvices, provide follow-up, and help the person coordinate the various services that may be assenbled to meet his particular needs, whether welfare, medical, educational, or employment, or a combination of any or all of these, in any problem or crisis. Such personnel make up a psychological teanspore tation and communication system. An example may make this more concrete; A store-front room may serve a block. In it may be neighborhood workers or urban agents who can take information from those on the block and steer them to adult education, employment training, work crews, mental health clinic, the hospital, a local lawyer, the housing authority, etc. AlL —- +--+ Of these services need not be represented in the store-front room, but. Boneprescre a = a ge ee ert er me oe they must be made accessible by effective workers who can communicate with the paonie’ tha rproarals is designed to serve. The urban agent be- comes a pathfinder for the individual in need, to all the agencies and services required. Thus the concept of "neighborhood" is in part defined by the kind of staff available, because those who help people find their way through a labyrinth of services make the programs really sdoesetblacn Actual transportation is of great importance, since the inability to find one's way is 25 characteristic of the-poor, Their neighborhood, for many purposes, is walking radius. Here again workers can help make exis- ting transportation usable ena tharty make far-flung programs accessible to a neighborhood. We have stated earlier that Ons varient of the definition of neigh- borhood is the kind of service that is offered. We are assuming that one goal is comprehensiveness - thavePfering of a group of interrelated human services that will raise the aspirations and the opportunities of the people to be served. It is understood, then, that different services will serve different geographical areas. As pointed out, the sunt common denominator may have to be the workers who can link physically . separated services. But this is only one alternative. There are others. For example, the creation of a new institution designed to have such great impact that it defines the neighborhood. Consider the Comin’ ty School as it exists in New Haven, Connecticut, and Flint, Michigan. They draw upon the neighbor- hood of the families whose children attend the school, In New Haven, Conte School is made as attractive with a center for senior citizens, rey aa ye ntemilt pees drmeaag ri renege iets vid Had avo tty Os sie th haieeinge | nto eee citar y tie tiene nent ahipabeis 1 > eee «teylgee yes meee  2 ee ae ap a pe ee a eS ES Se a fs il Ve | ead 2h wwe a a Nae we cl. an auditorium, bocci courts, a park for young mothers, and so on = that @ sense of community is created by the very fact of the institution. Other neighborhood services, legal, public health, welfare, etc., are then brought in to this "neighborhood." Other kinds of institutions may define the neighborhood by their creation, Probably this is what the multi- service center in Boston (Roxbury) is attempting to ne In such cases the neighborhood is geographically larger than that served by the block store-front with the "pathfinder" personnel, With a lerge center, staff may literally walk the streets to bring the people to the services con- centrated in one building.. There is no a priori reason to prepa one structure of a neighborhood program over the other. So many neighborhoods are natural neighborhoods, defined by geography, tradition, or other boundaries that they can be seen quite readily. In the end, high deference should be given to the local definition of a . neighborhood. However, the Office of Economic Opportunity can and should insist that the city consider the many variables, including history and tradition, which go into the delineation of a neighborhood unit. | It should ask for careful consideration of demographic data, for detail about the ethnic background of the people in the neighborhood, the eco- nomic and educational level, employment opportunities, housing, recreation and social outlets. A well-thought out proposal is likely to be rich in this kind of detail.  eM dd SP ee a: THE PROGRAM The substance of the program is no less important than the delination of the neighborhood, and must be adapted to this delineation. The first overall requirement for any progrem is the tnyatponans let the people to be served in the planning and then the operation of the programs designed to serve then. It is not easy to involve the inarticulate poor, for whom organization is not a familiar phenomenon, but it is possible and it is essential. One clear goal must be to reduce dependency in all areas, not to increase it, This means that any "tender plant" of a neigaborhood. organization must be built upon -- any indigenous leadership that is at all éonabrudtave must be involved in the planning process. : A list of needs outlined in the program planning stage, health, educaticn, Sebaccetes should indicate how these needs are felt by tue population, It is difficult to establish criteria from Washington to assure this, but there must be some warning signal of local indifference to neighborhood participation in a program. Furthermore, it is so in- portant that if there is any doubt, a field trip might be worthwhile. We can anticipate antipathy and resistance to the organization and voice of the poor.. But these are risks that must be. accepted as natural and inevitable and perhaps even welcomed as evidence of involvement. Survey of Existing Services A proposal should include a survey of existing social services and education, including, if possible, cost statistics and the ratio of professional and supportive personnel to the neighborhood population. © It “Rx. ay ee a “possible that as a beginning strategy for political, financial, or even y-—,| eee a x al PO Beh i Ji i SRO - ro _ 3 = eae chee = | would be useful to learn how accessible existing services are which reach the segnents of the neighborhood population. Is the new plan going to ‘ build on preexisting services, and if not, why not" Often there are gocd reasons, but as often, a natural center for people, for example, a priest whose church has become a focus for informal social services, may be ignored and a new artificial center created, Relations with Existing Agencies In some cases there may be value in by-passing existing social service agencies. In’ other cases this may be politically unwise or umwise because of the strength of an agency. In the case of a strong well-supported agency, it is entirely possible that a neighborhood program should devel- op from one discipline or area OF Servaces For example, if the Board of Education were strong and innovative, the idea of a community school might be the basis for the neighborhood program and education would then be the nucleus. If there were already. a community mental health. center with local support, mental health could’ be the nucleus of the community — action program. Thus, in the Bronx, New York, a community action pro- gram is emerging from @ mental health center out of the Albert Einstein Medical School (Dr. Harris Peck). Im other cities, the Youth Exployment, or Opportunity Center has already become a familiar and accepted part of neighborhood and so a comprehensive program emerges with the employment or job training at its core. The judgment probably should be made “on the ground." Although comprehensiveness of services may be the goal, it is entirely *  - 10 social reasons, a simpler or even segmentalized program should be created. In other words, a city might want to start with health and education only, and slowly add employment and wavheee much daterideat with teenage recre- ation. Or, there may be an assault on the problem of teenage delinquency which required an across-the-board approach directed to that age group only, leaving families and senior citizens for later. It is possible to choose to work only with the families of very young children or those children themselves, on the theory that the very young are the most sal- vageeble part of the population, The reasons behind any of these or cther choices.may have validity, in terms of short end medium range strategy, but theymust not become the excuse for abandoning the objective of a comprehensive program. The planned use of staff, including provision for training should be examined carefully. To what extent does a neighborhood progran plan to search out indigenous workers, to what extent rely on outsiders? How have connecting links to outside services been planned? Are they suffi- cient to make all of the services truly accessible to the population of “the neighborhood? > eo STE Some provision should be made for working out a relationship of coop= eration and connection among the traditional agencies and institutions which will either work with, control in part, or impede a neighborhood program, Friction may be inevitable, but its destructive aspect should be minimized at the planning stage. Avery current example of this is the creation of neighborhood legal services in New Haven and in Washington, “D6. In New Haven, at present, there is serious opposition from the ~ SSS ee  ae rime ae if — a : : sed : jas os ta . Loa . i iia = ao = srtertee in ely 4. J ed oF ee a Mle ar hn aig ere } far: il organized bar which has slowed down the program seriously. In Washington, the Bar Association and Legal Aid were involved at each step of planning and have thus far given strong support. Including the traditional service agencies in the planning process as much as possible and drawing upon their skill and experience may substitute cooperation for friction. The interrelationship of citywide or even state agencies is a question more directly related to the evaluation of an entire community action pro= gram then for judging the specifics of the neighborhood proposal. Also a larger matter is the area of the whole question of ingormation gathering and disseminating devices, commento: data and collection, both formal and informal. There are more ways of assuring effective con= munication than can be listed here. Citywide newspaper coverage, radio, TV, are the ones first considered., The functional illiteracy of many of ‘the people who most need to be reached means that person-to-person ‘com- munication, and contact through the places most frequented, whether bar or church, is the basis for an effective communications network that ought to be in every neighborhood picture. After a prorat has been Accepted The style of initiation of a program is something that should be re- garded with great interest. In some situations a quiet launching might be preferable to one with fanfare, Crisis exploitation, crisis creation, . and timing must all be considered. | We would want to know early what obstacles are anticipated and which obstacles are in fact faced. Tlliteracy, lack of social cohesiveness, and _apathy may be prevalent almost every place that a program is contemplated.  What are the pias to deal with them? How are some of these obstacles considered in the attempt to involve the Hat etborioed in planning its own program? ; It is hard to anticipate whether a program will become rigid or calci- fied. We have already indicated the possibility that application forms, or rumors of hard choices among cities, may cause a proposing community to teke a "safe route." If it is made clear from the outset that all of these programs are frankly experimental and that innovation is desired and that constant feedback and evaluation, as well as program initiative at lower S ovais fore desirable, rigidity may be avoided in many places. There should be mechanisms for anticipating crisis or resistance that may come from the mobilization of a neighborhood, Program efrectiveness often means the assertion or creation of 2 political force which will be fought. There are ways to lay the ground for significant changes, al- though resistance or even outcry may be inevitable. The situation of the rent strikes in Mobilization for Youth and the political repercussions, raise the question of what kind of preparation might be most effective. Evaluation Plens for evaluating a neighborhocd proposal must be built into the proposal from the beginning, This is a subject for another document. The whole area or community action is too new for us to be aware in ade vance of the many causes of lags in progréss or even failure. Feedback must be rapid and constant. We would want to know who is evaluating the neighborhood program and against what criteria. Is it part of a larger evaluation scheme of a | Se  citywide community action program? Are there any plans to test theories and conclusions against other neighborhood programs in the same and other cities? | | Long-range goals should be broken down into sequential steps. Fach must have a planning period beyond the first allocation of funds. But detailed plans should be worked out at shorter intabvats than overall plans and broken down in such a way that parts of a program can be looked at separately fron other parts of the overall structure. We would want to Know how often, what kind, and to whom reports are made; how much personal contact is there by the evaluators; how are they treated at progran heads quarters, - ignored, exploited or self-supported? Ape periodic reviews carried out? 7 Are the goals sufficiently formulated in the beginning so that we could ask later on whether the plans were fulfilled? Whether they were anended? How recent and how severe and how frequent were the shépdinente’: We would want to know whether the evaluation is set up in such a way that side effects could be anticipated or observed, if they occurred. We would be loath te set up any machanical criteria for judging the _ effectiveness of a comprehensive neighborhood program. There are some, of course, each with some limited value. For example, the concept of in- ereasing life-long earning power, or, @ reduction in unemployment, the increase of staying power (retention) of young people in high school bebe outs, in illegitimate births, lowering crime rate, family break-up, age pital admission, ana so on. Probably all of these statistical measures cation eee must be enployed, but each: should be. looked at quantitatively to see 14 whether, in fact, it tests the social condition we think it does. For ex- emple, an increase in employment is a good thing, but if. the Negroes continue to hold only menial, lower paid jobs, the. employment program is mo success. If our goal is the fullest development of the resources and capacities of each human being, then we will not be satisfied with any simple statis- tical measures, These will be only our mechanical starting points. The aspirations of any neighborhood program should escalate with success. -  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 22, Folder 17, Document 27 Box 22 Box 22 Folder 17 Folder topic: Task Force on Cities | 1966 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/1e6f9665e0ddc7301da751883029394c.pdf 78eb5bf63c1a3a4d01cb639e452bf182 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. ' J . '· - / ::· ;-::'t ·.,. O' P t . . · -" ZS .L,. OUTLINE Neighborhood Programs: A. Some Questions Social Framework l. r E:::iergence of planning ·a. · In general, what conditions J.ed to the emergence of this specific _neighborhood plan? b. Who wi-ote the proposal? c. What is his (their) relation to the neighborhood? I d. Were neighborhood people involved in th~ planning? e. · I,f so, how were they involved? f. To what extent have planning concepts or methods been borroHed from other proposa1sz · g. What attempts have been made to adapt transplanted concepts to the neighborhood? I h. What is the role of tbe outside advisor iri the neighborhood planning? -· . i. 2. What opposition has there been? '·. Social and political environment a. How is the nei ghborhood defined? b. Wnat criteria were used to determine the limits of the neighborhood? -- phys ical geography? -- population to be served? --- service pr oposed? combination of above? / / I I .·· c. Has~ inventory been made? Geographic Historic. • . . . . . .. . . - • ... . • - ~ - _••• • - .. ... , • • 1. , . . . . . .. · -.- · \ �2 Demo~aphic (length of residence; population turnover; cot:II;J.uting patterns for work, play, health; education; etc·. ) Ethnic Health ?l..ental health Economic · (individual fa.mizy income; places of employment: Do dollars circulate in neighborhood or flow out, etc.) Housing · Social (num.oers and tYJ;)es of organizations, churches, neighborhood groups, etc.) F.ducation (education of people, ntl!llber and tsJl)es of schools, etc.) Power structure (fon:al and informal) . Values an.cl morale (e. g. suspicion; what ability does the · neighborhood have ,to cope with its proble:tS?) .. Mobile ability d. _ To what e..~tent is the neiehborhood dependent upon outside resources for jobs; medical care, welfare, education, recreation, inspiration? 3. What social services are now available to the neighborhood? a. What is the per capita ·dollar a.I:lount for social services? b. What is the ratio of social 'service · perso:r:i..."lel to the neighborhood population? ( B. Goal formation .... i- l. Hierarchy of goals a. What are the overriding goals .and how are lesser goals subordinated to them? b. What criteria were used to establish priorities of goals? c. · ·W'aa.t do the neighborhood people thi.Dk · their needs a.re? ., �~(J .. I ·. f· .: --::- - -·- -_,, __--· ..,., I' I I I 3 I- I d. What are the n~~ds for: Health I . F.ducation Work, jobs, inco~e . . "Skills-of-livi~" Social cohesiveness .Advocacy: .I 2. l ., legal and constl!!ler Have the neighborhood people been involved in establishing the . goals? 3. Are the programs intended to ma.~e the people less dependent and more able to cope, or are they merely hand-outs w~ich Will keep the people dependent? ' I- 4. Are long-range goals and purposes for the neighborhood specified? 5. How does this specific proposal fit into the long-rang objectives? .. , 6. Does it meet Federal criteria of desegregation? C. Decision-ma.~ing l. / I I / Institutional network a. Do neighborhood organizations already exist? b. Is there an identifiable central neighborhood authQrity · responsible f or this program? c. What is the relationship between this authority and the existing service agencies -- Federal, state, local, public and privete? d. Should this program be part of an already existing agency? / 2. Precess of decision-making a. What are the attitudes of the traditional agencies to this progra:n? b. ,Are. there ar.y institutional mechanisns for consulting other ___ .. _.... . .. age·n cies- and pressure groups ( traue unions, qhurches, business · organizations , poll ti cal pa.rties) ? What are the me·c hanisms? ·- .- . .. - -. .: ··· ·~--. -_.. -- ·- .. . . - - . - - . ·:. _ . --- -·- - - � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document OQUTLIVE Neighborhood Programs: Some Questions A. Social Framework _ de 2. Emergence of planning ae b. Co de ae f. Be h. i. In general, what conditions led to the emergence of this specific neighborhood plan? Who wrote the proposal? What is his (their) relation to the neighborhood? Were neighborhood people involved in the planning? If so, how were they involved? | \ To what extent have planning concepts or methods been borrowed from other proposals?’ ; What attempts have been made to adapt transplanted concepts to the neighborhood? ‘ What is the role of the outside advisor in the neighborhood planning? i What opposition has there been? Social and political environment Qe be Ceo How is the neighborhood defined? What criteria were used to determine the limits of the neighborhood? ; physical geography? population to be served? service proposed? a e-- combination of above? Has an inventory been made? Geographic oe gtagaete! “UML ahd a ciklad euak UCR eae ee i ly eae B. Demographic (length of residence; population turnover; commuting patterns for work, pley, health, education; etc.) Ethnic Health Mental health Economic: (individual family income; places of employment: | Do dollars circulate in neighborhood or flow out, etc.) Housing Social (nunibers and types of organizations, churches, neighborhood groups, etc.) [ Education (education of people, nuxber and types of schools, etc.) a Power structure (formal and informal) Values and morale (e.g. suspicion; what ability does the - neighborhood have to cope with its problems?) Mobile ability ee, d. To what extent is the neighborhood dependent upon outside re- sources for jobs, medical care, welfare, education, recreation, inspiration? 3. What social services are now available to the neighborhood? a. What is the per capita dollar amount for social services? b. What is the ratio of social service personnel to the neigh- borhood population? Goal formation 1. Hierarchy of goals a. What are the overriding goals and how are lesser goals sub- ordinated to them? + ob. What criteria were used to establish priorities of goals? cc. Waat do the neighborhood people think their needs are?  2. 3. 1. 26 d. What are the needs for: Health Education Work, jobs, tiene "Sd L1s-of-living" Social cohesiveness Advocacy: legal and consumer Have the neighborhood peonis been involved in establishing the | goals? Are the programs intended to make the people less dependent and more able to cope, or are they merely hand-outs which will keep the people dependent? Are long-range goals and purposes for the neighborhood specified? How does this specific ao as Tit into the long-rang SO ee na Does it nee Federal criteria of desegregation? C. Decision-making Institutional network a. Do neighborhood organizations already exist? b. Is there an identifiable central neighborhood saprecapei responsible for this program? ce. What is the relationship between this authority and the existing service agencies -- Federal, state, local, public and private? d. Should this program be part of an already existing agency? Process of decision-making a. What are the attitudes of the traditional agencies to this program? ' b. Are there any institutional mechanisms for consulting other _agenciés and pressure groups (trade unions, churches, business organizations, political parties)? What are the mechanisms?  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 22, Folder 17, Document 28 Box 22 Box 22 Folder 17 Folder topic: Task Force on Cities | 1966 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/2cc451449d549a181665be3764cd6341.pdf c2915e8ef0c4f7d6e973fe8e2163e341 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. } '-·__ ·_- _-_--·~-:::::::::::::::: '":::::: ·-:::: · :::::::~::::4,~ I· ====~-~-=-~ ~~ ._. .,_ ·=· ~~- :=::;::;±:::::: " =·· ·=·"":= ________ ------:---- = c;;... ·- 2Eb=~;;;;;;;;;;;:;~ ~ . ...... - . .. t ~- ,, - - - ~ - - - : . , _ _ _ , .,_,c.:;:-.;,,~------------,-.\..J-· .:_ ~ . ~· 4 6. Does it meet Federal criteria of desegregation? C• . Decision-~aking l. . .. ] Institutional network - a. ... Do neighborhood organizations already exist? . b. Is there an identifiable central neighborhood authority responsible for this program? c. What is the relationship between this authority and the existing service agencies-Federal, state, local, public and private? d. Should this program be ·part of an already existing agency? · 3, / /· . ./· ·/ 2. Process of decision-making . a.. What are the attitudes of · the traditional agencies to this progra=i.? b. A:re there any institutional mechanisms for • I ',1 consulting other agencies and pressure groups (trade unions, churches, business organization~, political parties)? What are the mechanisms? c. .- :. ·,. ·.. 1· . What are the mechanisms used to rec·o gnize and handle frictions among the agencies, groups and this program? ,I I d. What are the differences ·in goals and methods between this program and other agencies and groul)s? e. A:re the people involved to whom the program is addressed? t. Is the factual material on which the plan is based accessible to the public~ g. To what extent is pJ.annixig and decisionmaking public? ·, • ·. · ~ .- ·---· ·- ... - . -.-.,. .. . ·-..., . . ........ ·~ l _ ·.. I. \ . . . . . . . .... ... ~._... .., . . ,. ., ... _- · :·. - ·-,. ~ ·. - . , .,... .... . - - --- _j_ � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 6. Does it meet Federal criteria of desegregation? Gel Decision-making bea 2. Institutional network Be d. Do neighborhood organizations already exist? Is there an identifiable central neighborhood authority responsible for this program? 3 Whet is the relationship between this authority and the existing service agencies== Federal, state, local, public and private? Should this program be! oe of an already existing agency? Process of decision-making . Be b. de Ge f. What are the attitudes of the traditional agencies to this program? Are there any institutional mechanisms for consulting other agencies and pressure groups (trade unions, churches, business organizations, political parties)? What are the mechanisms? What are the mechanisms used to recognize and handle frictions emong the agencies, groups and this program? # What are the differences in goals and methods . between this program and other agencies and ' groups? Are the people involved to whom the program is aiarene est . ‘ Is the factual material on which the muah is based accessible to the public? To what extent is plesning and Secision, making public? ce er i nee one pei onan te pet f  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 22, Folder 17, Document 29 Box 22 Box 22 Folder 17 Folder topic: Task Force on Cities | 1966 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/c5808f13b1b25e0d4a1a469c74582a64.pdf d00a7e1c43977e1910daeb1fe1d4c991 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. ATLANTA, GEORGIA PHONE 522- 4463 7 FORM 25-6 � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document ATLANTA, GEORGIA PHONE 522- 4463 From Mes. yam A Moses FORM 25-6  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 22, Folder 17, Document 3 Box 22 Box 22 Folder 17 Folder topic: Task Force on Cities | 1966 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/b568dbcd5d6057abb4795530ea8e51e6.pdf 014b87cb59d1276adc6b455c4e85d484 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. -- - . ·- - ·- ~'.: ·- - - '!: ..___ : U ~ J :. ,> . ·:·.' ·,~- . . -~-~ ::.__ ) I ' .. · ·.. •: -- c c:.-~r::-t·:~""tr1·:CE Gi·J !IOr5I(,iG FO~ THF; P00I{ EUD n:1d o::o i:m ulcl invite t w.:.n ty of the 1.i.oct kno;.;ledgct1.ble pc.opl_e in the fi eld c,Z hou3in3 the p oor , to .:a. t •.10- day C O'.'l:::°C;'.'~ncc . The c.ceting is for c o:·,t.ul t.o.tio::i. ead the public "1 i ll not be i'cw:l.t:ucl, althou zh oth.:-:r Fcdcrel 1,:g2ncf. es '!:tc purpose of this c01:i.fo:.:-r.cncc i s t o evaluate . tho fccsibi li ty of provici i~~-t~ y c:lr.:; , .::t ~rices tt,lo poor C'.:.n ~ffo:-d . 1-J ~ er-~ secl-d113 from this confcren.(..e (l) eco:10.ni-: .:nd :.-:;ucial tc:i:w ; and (2) identif ication of il lte;..1Et ivc pt·ogr.:1.ms o~ housing o·.r.: il.r,blc f or the 3.3 r.1illion r,,o or · househo l d:3 b 1.<, t i1ould otherw i r;e occU?Y substand~rd or overcrowded u~it ~ cy 1970 . }!-::re specifi cally thcr~ will be c.n idcntifica.tioa oi the obstucies involved cutU:v:d . Tbe c onf f~ rencc will i::,(;! c entered nrott-id f:l.ve issues: '"rd/or cle,n ~nce arc n.,::;cds;:d; the cozl.:.s involved ; capjb ility of occup~~tt:: to r,sy; present locc1t1ons of subct~nd.1rd c:nits; oo-.uposition o:Z occupcnts by l"c.1c ~, avtil ilClbility of lsrd; .nr<:l1it ,i ctural end city planning concerna; th-3 t e -::rmolo.;- ica l problem~ and opportunities of a lar~e-Dcale buildins and ~ebuil<lin3 �. " ()(I ,.:' .. V • · ..... ___. • . , .... .. _. ·) p:C,J2;i•o:n; t t~ d1i1it:i C:S nf C,,i;;ting er prO?OS·~ d inGtitutions (fii.,,.:nc:e, (1) to achtc.J(.! die c r:,nccrr.plrlted voh.n~ in five ye~n:·s , ,m<l (2 ) indus try .nnd conrit::ructicn cost:, ; t ht:i effect on the v.:i lues end c o~·~d il: icn of 8Ci sti~'l.~ houGin3 c.nd n,3i2,hb orhoods; cfficie.ncies thti.t might r esult frc::.1 a iinZtnc ing the; prosr~mn . 4. Th:~ Soc 1;:i 1 Issues . The questions of gh~tl:oizing or de c ent.re lizin3 t he counseling .:ind bnck-up scr.v ic0:; i-cquircci; t he proble1':'\S of inst~ 1.U.n::, .n n,c :-;n:::; to this housing . o f pro gra;.·,s ; the nu·::Dcr of units to be ck:vclopcd :E::o~.i er.ch pro2,r::.:·::1; th.:: To t~kc tl11s .a wor.::;.:h ile cc..-1 £crcnce., so t h!l t ell p.:lrt1 cipc..i.t;5 ,-:. re t •. 11:i.:~c •, 0~o t 1Jo• b.our scosi on r.11 ll oe. dcv·:.:tcd to f'...;';.Ch cf. the fi r s t fou r p:;t"t icipont 1n each :Held \JO'~ll cl out line .nnd chair e zdt s e.::;s ion . each punel ~ill ~a C~'PC~tcd to cubsequontly prepare a suri:;;.iary. c.11-c.c?.rj o.: Tb.:1 i~~o -·1:;:..ato4-· ct � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document i einer: ee ae yoke pol om mest —— AC ws 12837) COREORENCE Ga YOUSING FOR THE POOR MUS end O50 would invite twenty of the most imteaLecgaabte people in tie ! £icid of housing the poor, to = twoeday conference. The meeting is for coucultetion aad the public will not be invited, although other Federal ezencies will scud observers. The purpose of this conference is to evaluate the feasibility of providing éa cstimated 3.35 million additional standard housing units within the next five years, st prices the peor can afford. we are secking from this conference (1) & sumnation of what we do and do not know about how the poor ara housed, in physical, economic and social terma; and (2) identification of alternetiva programs or coupination of programs and hiploscntation strategies, that might make decont housing available for the 3.5 million poor households that would otherwise encusy substandard or overcrowded units by 1970, mora specifically there will be en identification of the obatacles involved with mounting a total housing program for the poor, and advice on hew to overcoma -4 these problems. Ismediate and longeranze vesearch and their priority will be tf] cuilincd. The conference will be centered around five issues: 1. Present housing conditions of the poor. The extent to which rehabilitation end/or clearance are necded; the costs involved; ca pantry of occupants to . r pays; present Locations of subaotandard units; somposition of oncupents by TACa, 2. Technical Issues. The type of housing required, its location and the . availability of land; architactural end city planning concerns; the technolog- ical problema and opportunities of a largeescale building and rebuilding epee SS sehees Aetennsnend SESH “ 4 ve 7 5 progz ain} the abilitics of existing or proposed institutions (finsuce, construction, building, dovelonment, govermuent) to implement the programs. : meq t ~ a £2 3. Reenenic Issues, ‘The effect ta program: (1) to achieve the contemplated volume in five years, and (2) who the progyam begins to phase outs the effect om the total housing a the economy of a multi-billicn dolisr ndustry and construction costs; the effect on the values and condition of existing housing and neighborhoods; efficiencies that might result from 4. veevaluation of the economics of the housing industry; alternative imecas of financing thea progrems. 4. The Social fssues. The questions of ghecttoizing or decentralizing the 4 poor and particularly tne nonewhite poor; the supplemental educational, counseling and backeup scrvices required; the probloms of installing a menns ao bhoe toast and establishing priority eriteria} the attitudes of poor end non-poor to this housing. 4, 5. Program Issues. The types of programs required to meat the cbjfectiv Li expansion or redirection of oxieting programs and the invention of new kir of progranis; the tumber of units to be developad from enca program; the phasing and the mix of progvase over the Fiveeyear period. * 5 ats To make this a worticvhile conference, so that all participants are talking from knowledge of the situation te be deslt with, background papers should b pressred and distributed in edvance on the first four issues. Ung twoehour session will be deveted to each of the first four aresg of conacrn, and a half-day wilt be left fer the Program Issues discussion, Cae porticipant an cach fteld would outline and chair ezch session. The woderator each penel vill be expested to subsequently prepare a summary. ~ &  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 22, Folder 17, Document 30 Box 22 Box 22 Folder 17 Folder topic: Task Force on Cities | 1966 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/cfed54c42e837e78ec959a5c304d50ff.pdf 08da6d9473f9d32c87d86ba9d4121f13 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. Some addition8l inf ormation on t he Ribicoff Hearings From the Desk of ArDee Ames l ,, ·-·· ... - --- - - -·.·· ,_. - - . . . .,.. - - · -··---- .. � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Some additional information on the Ribicoff Hearings From the Desk of ArbDee Ames  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 22, Folder 17, Document 4 Box 22 Box 22 Folder 17 Folder topic: Task Force on Cities | 1966 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/eb0b41b345cb72617331536e5efcf1a2.pdf c500645f383656d5694121c6e4cf78a1 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. From the Desk of ArDee Ames � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document From the Desk of ArDee Ames  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 22, Folder 17, Document 5 Box 22 Box 22 Folder 17 Folder topic: Task Force on Cities | 1966 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/cc2959e20085df3f4f2b516f609cc5f0.pdf 9f2962299be2461b61c2836fdd0e65cf Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. From i::he Desk of ArDee Ames Some additional clippings on the Rib icoff He arings. � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document From the Desk of ArDee Ames Some additional clippings on the Ribicoff Hearings.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 22, Folder 17, Document 6 Box 22 Box 22 Folder 17 Folder topic: Task Force on Cities | 1966 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/ae6402acba4f5129a8c8915c7d9030c3.pdf 102c0e44d0ea09ce5ba6ece44159ef4f Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. From the Desk of Ardee Ames � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document From the Desk of Ardee Ames  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 22, Folder 17, Document 7 Box 22 Box 22 Folder 17 Folder topic: Task Force on Cities | 1966 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/7d8f69023e263845e8f4dab2eba3ebcd.pdf 08a21db084a4407d37a4a4544739bf8a Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. - SENDING CALL LETTERS FJT 11/16/ 66 CHARGE rn UNION BLANK Mayo r I s Office , 20 6 City Hall ' Mr. Ardee Ames The White House Washington, D . C . MAYOR IVAN ALLEN, JR . WILL ATTEND THE TASK FORCE MEETING ON NOVEMBER 19th .AT 9:30 A . M. Mrs. Ann Moses E x ecutive Secretary Send the above messa ge, subiecl lo the terms on back hereof, which are hereby agreed to PL EASE TYPE OR WRITE PLAINLY W tT HIN BORDER-DO NOT FO LD 1269- (R 4-55) �I L:. MESSAGE T KE BY THIS COMPA IV A ES ECT T T .E FOLLO GT MS: CLASSES OF SEP.VICE DOMESTIC SERVICES INTERNAT!ONAL SERVICES f'ULL RAT£ (FR) TCLCGRAM Tb •,. t :. J.Jm tic 1tn·1:-e. Th r I t o, f'na rr< C"·I tu Htoro.w, lcttt- iv r; t & r lowlJlfii: morn1n,. tr, le '.\1 r tie t .,,_ 'P."Ti:t o In c:O..!e, c!phrr. or In :tD)' ltma'UACO es, � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document fj WESTERN UNION _ gfe SENDING BLANK GT eee ele 11/16/66 * Mayor's Office, 206 City Hall Mr. Ardee Ames The White House Washington, D. C. MAYOR IVAN ALLEN, JR. WILL ATTEND THE TASK FORCE MEETING ON NOVEMBER 19th AT 9:30 A.M. Mrs. Ann Moses Executive Secretary Send the above message, subject to the terms on back hereof, which are hereby agreed to PLEASE TYPE OR WRITE PLAINLY WITHIN BORDER—DO NOT FOLD 1269—(R 4-55) - | iraccal ed & = hee rate he acoder 1. The Ti inreace rate beyond the Mowske tate beyoud ell | the es! shed ae aeetieaty iia is or the Edleatfosllon oak: ete mot Rereebelo eake calvary will cnlcave. dollver i or ebarge from the iniltresace on ar a eer i fo cused Seats 1 any even the the Telegraph Com pany ox tulle s: oma Com pany aba! unt be liehle for nalataken or det urine ullers noe SoeUCah es on dela vt ms thoes of [ta servants or olluerw lee, wood un be stated in writ ae tothe Telegra ah Company conermn| me mess: maengens. br acta fer thot purpose as the gest ol sen tee of the ‘Telegraph Company in accepting the memage, the * . ALL MESSAGES TAKEN BY THIS COMPANY ARE SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING TERMS: memance AhOuld ordde tt indicated on its face, ‘sin the trams eppcially MM id the actual fon AD excel nge any met ene of the eeod Bid agrees Lo pay auch nadia charge it tt te not Salsa from the sddrtaver wot the sane are Roopted at ofie of ite enbacott Ung officer; and it bdo Lhe sender, exse me sri deaedkted qawsge and paid encase mt (he transrnls iin of every, OF for noa-delivery. of any mereare received for tra: dntedon or del) pery, or for nonedwbrery, aan any cane for delasa ayiedng from wmavelue Telerraph Cus pany shalt Bek ‘be table for Mamiixes for mithkes fr delays in ie trenemisefon ci F delivers iM in any evdgt the gum of dre thousand lara ne at wie y the sender there of AL the time the rocesage ip back t et offite tot % conalilers at Li, telecta Sota For setae the jou where It tt sgreed between “ rimissinn at the unrepeatede Hf Any muse rcelyed for tran ston at the repeated« ap eae In the Sorkin of ps © DonAtelirery 0 aay ae aan, whether ae nH mh ihe et er ol Morenee ee ie Len ranim)elon. ALL Onians thie te peeadeoaeane whieh much ‘valwaLion ahalt ¢ mmceed tive Lhotand dollars, ani ornpany ‘* olay 2 ilo cover tts delivery wighta ers Dir % Felegra Cenpeny doc Gndereaed that the render nut. pet te collection Ienent to aich office by Th Chiat whe the Te leeraph Con: Yavin a wetseier bo plek Op do Kiera, ee legraph Company senring reayouslblley trom. the, tide of aueh acceptance, 0. The Ti b Cimpany will not he Mabie for damaged or statntnry penalties when the claim le not presented in ie the the Tareq ph Company, fa) wiitln olnaty au the Soe mY peiatia ts spe ae Wn Bias ene eas ws fon in the cage of A message betwen ei within th ited Slates [exce ihn cath of an intrmetate Lath or betwee erie the @ point In Alasks, Canada, Mexico, or Ht. 2 merce a i ae ay Tf ‘the of area Dolor nthe Usited te and) sip ae era Eat tot Re ar iri io (day atoer the Tat ot petit any, shall have ace i Cast of En and 4), meet Pe daya alter the om ia filed ‘wi 10 the ruse af wcmesdage fe Detweed B DIAL tn the Uelted fi Bu a tarelgn or av verte Peete toes than the points pues al on in thi bs uRtareDas oar ower that Ath et mae shall got apply to clalins for datonges or overcharges within the purview of Section 415 of the Coummaenicarlons the hereed tose in rae action by. ‘be ap Telrgrasih Compiny to recover the tolls for any message or mewager (he frompt and correct transmlsdon and delivery thereof shall be ‘prewuived, “wubieer to rebuttal Competent 9. NO employee of the Telegraph Company Is authorized 10 Yard the foregoing. ‘DAY LETTER (DL) CLASSES OF Oh ie er ee terics Sie the coat of messages according to thelr clasers, a2 enumerated below, shall apply to ciczsanes In each of euch respective classes In addition to SE -RVICE INTERNATIONAL SERVICES Such Rare (ee) a egg ed cera Me a of in any language em LETTER TELEGRAM (LT) For athall-rat hargefor22 wordsappllea, . a ‘ SHIP RADIOGRAI "For mensages to and from chips at eee. \T . oe :  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 22, Folder 17, Document 8 Box 22 Box 22 Folder 17 Folder topic: Task Force on Cities | 1966 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/47b36d71b34121af9df036e2b28b880f.pdf edd0453762198ae91b4176298126b520 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. WESTERN 1'5P EST NOY 15 66 1F171· OEA,'4 OE WA069 QOYT FD WUX THE WHITE MOUSE TfASHitGTON OC 1,- Pf'T HON~BLE IVAH ALLEN,. DOMT DVR IUYM ~ - A'ft.ANTA GA ATLA ,/ / I TM£ S.EC<WO rtt£T1~ OF TKC TASK F"ORC£ YIU. BE HEt.O ON NO'tfEMBER 19.19"-IN JlOON "44, UEauTIV£ CFF'_IC£S Wn.Dlflll• 1Tl"J~ &: PENNSYL¥A~IA AYE• 8£Ql'NftINQ AT 91,0 AeKe / MO££ AIits l411f .. -; ~:'al- • -· - · - /. � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 22, Folder 17, Document 9 Box 22 Box 22 Folder 17 Folder topic: Task Force on Cities | 1966