Search results

Do federal, state, and local governments differ in their responsiveness to the needs of the poorest citizens? Are policy outcomes different when federal officials have greater influence regarding the use of federal program funds? To answer such questions, Michael Rich examines to what extent benefits of federal programs actually reach needy people, focusing on the relationship between federal decision-making systems and the distributional impacts of public policies. His extensive analysis of the Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG), the principal federal program for aiding cities

Do federal, state, and local governments differ in their responsiveness to the needs of the poorest citizens? Are policy outcomes different when federal officials have greater influence regarding the use of federal program funds? To answer such questions, Michael Rich examines to what extent benefits of federal programs actually reach needy people, focusing on the relationship between federal decision-making systems and the distributional impacts of public policies. His extensive analysis of the Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG), the principal federal program for aiding citie.

Examines the federal policy response to urban problems in the aftermath of the 1992 riots in Los Angeles, CA. Although the federal government failed to enact a long-term urban aid initiative, a number of locally based comprehensive urban initiatives are under way in several cities across the country. The future of national urban policy, however, will require a reconceptualization of the problems of inner cities, & ultimately will depend on significant restructuring of fiscal federalism relationships among & between federal, state, & local governments. 2 Tables. Adapted from the source document.

Compares six major US urban programs on the ability to allocate assistance to the neediest communities. Programs include Urban Renewal, Model Cities, Community Development Block Grants (SDBG), Urban Development Action Grants (UDAG), Economic Development Administration (EDA) Title I Public Works and Local Public Works.

THIS ARTICLE EXAMINES THE DEGREE TO WHICH FEDERAL COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS TARGET FEDERAL ASSISTANCE TO THE NATION'S NEEDIEST COMMUNITIES. THE ANALYSIS SHOWS THAT WHILE URBAN CONDITIONS IN THE NATION'S MOST DISTRESSED CITIES CONTINUED TO DETERIORATE DURING THE 1980S IN BOTH RELATIVE AND ABSOLUTE TERMS, GRANT ALLOCATIONS UNDER THEIR MAJOR FEDRAL URBAN PROGRAM, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS, HAVE NOT RESPONDED TO THE CHANGING INCIDENCE OF URBAN HARDSHIP.

Understanding the dynamics of policy distribution requires an appreciation of federal grant programs that have achieved a prominent place in nearly all areas of domestic policy. The theoretical literature on distributive politics, however, focuses almost exclusively on a centralized, top-down view of policy distribution. By examining the role of presidents, legislators, and bureaucrats, scholars have ignored participants who have become key actors in the distribution of federal expenditures—the recipient jurisdictions. This analysis of the allocation patterns under six federal programs shows that local governments exert important influences on the distribution of federal grants and that the distributional patterns and their determinants vary over time. The analysis also points out the importance of disaggregation by focusing on programs and recipient jurisdictions, as opposed to total federal expenditures and regions, states, or congressional districts.

Analysis of six federal programs; 1950s - 1970s; United States. Extent to which political influence, community needs, and local demand and administrative capacity affect the distribution of federal grants for community and economic development.