Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
118564696
label
California State Office of Economic Opportunity - Response to Federal Evaluation 04/29/1971, Vol. I (4 of 7)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
118564696
contentType
document
title
California State Office of Economic Opportunity - Response to Federal Evaluation 04/29/1971, Vol. I (4 of 7)
citationUrl
identifierLocal
840
collections
Ronald Reagan's Governor's Papers of the Press Unit
California Rural Legal Assistance (CRLA) Files
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
118564696
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1975-12-31
year
1975
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1967-01-01
year
1967
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
37280aee02687f58
ocrText
Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
Digital Library Collections
This is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections.
Collection: Reagan, Ronald: Gubernatorial Papers,
1966-74: Press Unit
Folder Title: California State Office of Economic Opportunity
- Response to Federal Evaluation 04/29/1971,
Vol. I (4 of 7)
Box: P27
To see more digitized collections visit:
https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library
To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit:
https://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection.
Contact a reference archivist at: [email protected]
Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing
National Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/
volume will decrease and the price of the service will level at
approximately $100.00 per month.
(2) Recommendation:
(a) In view of high cost of the clipping service, it
should be evaluated as to relative cost-effectiveness and, if main-
tained, should be shown as a specific item in the budget.
(b) Clippings should be xeroxed for cross-references,
and copies filed in the duo-decimal file grantee folders.
10. MANPOWER ALLOCATION:
See "Analysis of Management Performance in Allocation of Staff Man-
Power Resources" for an assessment of the performance of the SEOO
in the control and application of staff manpower resources.
11. GENERAL COMMENTS:
Overall internal management of SEOO Office procedures to date has
been good. There have been very apparent recent improvements in the
management of the office, in controls instituted over personnel, in
the provision of checklists for Community Program Analysts and in the
design of forms and the requirements for periodic reports. A uo-decimal
file system has been installed. These improvements have been instituted
during the last few months, and can be expected to show tangible results
in the foreseeable future. However, shortcomings in the qualifications
of professionals, particularly lack of experience and previous exposure
to the problems they are expected to solve or give advice on solving,
have had a deleterious effect on the quality of their work and their
effectiveness in the field. Coupled with what is perceived as a
completely opposite philosophical outlook, this further undermines
whatever remaining confidence grantees may have in the SEOO.
There still is no affirmative action plan in accordance with CAP
Form 11; work goals and priorities are not quantified; there has
been no self-evaluation report. Assurances have been made that
these shortcomings will be eliminated prior to the submission of
the next program year's application.
At least eight CAAS reported they had never received a CAP form 76.
The grant document showed eight CAP 76s; two contained adverse com-
ments. Although they were the subject of discussions in the office,
no rebuttal was attempted. Plans and priorities as well as refunding
requests were, according to Regional and Headquarters personnel, sub-
mitted late last year. This was prior to the appointment of the
present SEOO administration. A new budget for the next program year
is under preparation and assurances have been made that all neces-
sary documents will be submitted to Region IX on time, including a
self-evaluation report.
19
Page 19 -- Paragraph 11 GENERAL COMMENTS (Charge)
However, shortcomings in the qualifications of professionals,
particularly lack of experience and previous exposure to the
problems they are expected to solve or give advice on solving,
have had a deleterious effect on the quality of their work and
their effectiveness in the field. Coupled with what is perceived
as a completely opposite philosophical outlook, this further
undermines whatever remaining confidence grantees may have in
the SEOO.
There still is no affirmative action plan in accordance with
CAP Form 11; work goals and priorities are not quantified;
there has been no self-evaluation report. Assurances have
been made that these shortcomings will be eliminated prior
to the submission of the next program year's application.
At least eight CAAs reported they had never received a CAP
Form 76. The grant document showed eight CAP 76s; two contained
adverse comments.
This was prior to the appointment of
the present SEOO administration. A new budget for the next
program year is under preparation and assurances have been
made that all necessary documents will be submitted to Region
IX on time, including a self-evaluation report.
RESPONSE:
This is a subjective evaluation! At no time did the federal
evaluators ask any questions, whether verbal or written, which
would ascertain the philosophical attitude of any field
representative. Hence, without any specific documentation
or statements to the contrary, federal evaluators have no
way of determining the philosophy of SEOO representatives.
Professional qualifications have been mentioned above, however,
practical experience is utilized toward the solving of problems
of community action agencies by all professionals in SEOO.
This practical experience is the result of extensive experience
in government operations and public agencies.
Page 19
Charge:
"11. General comments:
However, shortcomings in
the qualifications of professionals, particularly lack
of experience and previous exposure to the problems
they are expected to solve or give advice on solving,
have had a deleterious effect on the quality of their
work and their effectiveness in the field. Coupled
with what is perceived as a completely opposite philoso-
phical outlook, this further undermines whatever remaining
confidence grantees may have in the SEOO."
Response:
Again the philosophical bias of the professional
establishment of OEO comes through, for they presume
that, out of arrogance, that only those who have been
born and nurtured in experience of OEO's labor pains
are qualified to solve problems facing the poor. State
OEO happens to disagree violently with this position,
and feels that OEO needs not more sociologically-
oriented minds, but more hard-headed, practically-
oriented individuals. State OEO's philosophical
outlook, in a nut shell can be stated as directing
all OEO monies toward enabling poverty communities to
become self-sustaining so that they are no longer
committed to the paternalistic bureaucracies, such
as OEO. Thus we are looking at all programs with one
objective in mind: Does this program produce indi-
viduals and groups that are capable of standing on their
own two feet and lead a meaningful life? It seems
reasonable to infer then, that if this is an opposite
philosophical outlook, then the philosophical outlook
of our evaluators is one of perpetuating monolithic
bureaucratic structures that increase the costs to
low-incomed individuals in gaining meaningful responses
from bureaucracies to insure a life of independence
and fulfillment. We can only assume that if this is
their outlook, that it is a repressive, exploitive,
and in all probability a racist position, with which
we totally disagree.
Page 19--2.b. Clippings (Charge)
"Clippings should be xeroxed for cross-references, and copies
filed in the duo-decimal file grantee folders."
RESPONSE:
Clippings are filed by date sequence in county order. They
are readily accessible to any individual that would like a
complete picture of what is happening within the fifty counties
with which this office has contact. If clippings were filed in
grantee folders, they would be in nine different folders per
county. Filed in such a manner, it would involve a greater amount
of time to see a general view of the county. After a six-month
period, the clippings may be included in the grantee folders.
They would then be available, if needed, for review of individual
grant packages.
THE SEOO AND THE GOVERNOR
1. FINDINGS:
The SEOO has provided the Governor with information and advice with
respect to the policy and programs of OEO and other anti-poverty
resources. This information and advice is ordinarily channeled
through the Governor's Executive Assistant, Edwin Meese, III.
Lewis Uhler, Director of the California SEOO, stated that "The Gov-
ernor has delegated his Section 242 (EOA of 1964, as amended) re-
sponsibilities to his Executive Assistant, Edwin Meese, III, who has
the power to approve or disapprove funding grants. We have direct
and regular access to Mr. Meese, as well as periodic access to the
Governor himself. For organizational symmetry and logistical sup-
port, our office has been placed in the Department of Human Resources
Development." On especially serious matters, information and advice
have been provided directly to the Governor by the SEOO Director as
in the case of the veto of the California Rural Legal Assistance pro-
gram. Lewis Uhler cited the following occasions during the past
three months when advice was provided directly to the Governor:
"In December, 1971, we briefed the Governor on
information we had received on California Rural
Legal Assistance (CRLA) In January, 1971, we
met with the Governor to discuss the design of
the alternative program to CRLA-- Ajudicare
In February, 1971, we met with the Governor to
discuss the status of legal services generally,
as well as the progress of the private funding
of an Ajudicare alternative, plus discussion
of various community action agencies."
Uhler also cited the following instances when grants and contracts
have been disapproved by the Governor in the recent past. "Grants
disapproved by the Governor since July 1, 1970, California Rural
Legal Assistance; Oakland Economic Development Council, Inc.; Santa
Cruz (which was a conditional veto); and the Mafundi Institute.
(We have approved, or allowed to lapse, approximately 140 programs
since July 1, 1970.)"
A recent example of an effort to develop information on the condi-
tions of poverty within the State took place in Oakland. Uhler re-
ported that "We have run on a contract basis with a well qualified,
independent contractor a motivational research study about the City
of Oakland, with specific reference to OEDCI, to determine its ef-
fectiveness as a deliverer of services and advocate for the poor,
20
as well as to determine its relationship to the community at large.
(The cost was approximately $8,000 - $10,000.)"
There is no question that the SEOO Director has direct input to the
Governor of California and is in almost daily contact with the Gov-
ernor's Executive Assistant. This relationship exists in spite of
the fact that in the formal table of organization the California
SEOO is several structural layers below the Governor's Office. It
is obvious, also, that the Governor holds the staff of the California
SEOO in high esteem and has relied to a substantial degree on the
information and recommendations which the SEOO staff has made in de-
terming whether to veto, to approve, or to allow the time period to
approve or veto a grant to elapse.
Although the SEOO has not heretofore provided an annual written
analysis to the Governor highlighting the principal problems and
causes of poverty in the State and including recommended priorities
and types of programs to meet those problems, the SEOO, in response
to instructions from H. Rodger Betts, Regional Director, Region IX,
is now in the process of preparing such a written analysis. Assur-
ances have been made that an annual report of the type described in
OEO Instruction 7501-1, 6a, will be submitted to the Governor and
to Region IX, OEO, prior to the end of the current program year.
While the Governor reportedly has not exercised his authority to re-
quest the termination of assignments of VISTA Volunteers, under
Section 810 (b) of the EOA of 1964, as amended, the SEOO has in-
formed the Governor of VISTA activities within the State. John
Sawicki, Ubler's Administrative Assistant, reported that "concen-
trated VISTA reviews" had taken place with respect to the following
VISTA programs: Shasta, Oakland, Lawyers Committee, Santa Clara
County, and Berkeley VISTA. The SEOO in a letter to Carl Ehmann,
Region IX, VISTA Chief, dated February 1, 1971, recommended a re-
duction in the number of lawyers to be assigned to the Legal Aid
Society of Santa Clara County (see Attachments).
2. CONCLUSIONS:
The SEOO plays a significant role in advising the Governor, usually
through Edwin Meese, III, the Governor's Executive Assistant, on
matters affecting poverty programs and poverty program grantees
within the State of California. The apparent low-ranking status of
the SEOO when viewed from a table of organization point of view is
counter-balanced by the direct line of communication which exists
from the SEOO Director to the Governor's Executive Assistant.
The quality of advice given to the Governor is a question which is
influenced by what the CAAs and WR/OEO staff believe the SEOO's
philosophy to be. This philosophy, while not articulated in any
specific document or statement is exemplified by the style of
the actions taken by the SEOO with respect to various OEO grantees
21
Page 21 -- THE SEOO AND THE GOVERNOR - Findings (Charge)
Although the SEOO has not heretofore provided an annual
written analysis to the Governor highlighting the principal
problems and causes of poverty in the State and including
recommended priorities and types of programs to meet those
problems, the SEOO, in response to instructions from H. Rodger
Betts, Regional Director, Region IX, is now in the process of
preparing such a written analysis. Assurances have been made
that an annual report of the type described in OEO Instruction
7501-1 6a, will be submitted to the Governor and to Region IX,
OEO, prior to the end of the current program year.
RESPONSE:
Unfortunately, the previous administration of SEOO did not
provide the Governor with an analysis of annual SEOO activities.
Mr. Uhler came on board in August, 1970, and the annual report
to the Governor is not appropriately due until June of this
year, which is the end of the program and fiscal year for our
office. However, despite the fact that this is not due at
this time, an annual report to the Governor has been prepared
and sent to the Regional Office as part of an addendum to
the CAP 7e. An additional annual report will be prepared at
a later date highlighting specific activities of our office.
Page 21--1. FINDINGS (Charge)
"Although the SEOO has not heretofore provided an annual written
analysis to the Governor highlighting the principal problems
and causes of poverty in the State and including recommended
priorities and types of programs to meet those problems, the
SEOO, in response to instructions from H. Rodger Betts, Regional
Director, Region IX, is now in the process of preparing such
a written analysis. Assurances have been made that an annual
report of the type described in OEO Instruction 7501-1, 6a, will
be submitted to the Governor and to Region IX, OEO, prior to the
end of the current program year."
Response:
This comment or this paragraph requires no response, as it
states that a national plan is now in the process of being
prepared.
Page 21 --Conclusions (Charge)
"The quality of advice given to the Governor is a question which is
influenced by what the CAAs and WR/OEO staff believe the SEOO's
philosophy to be. This philosophy, while not articulated in any specific
document or statement is exemplified by the style of the actions taken by
the SEOO with respect to various OEO grantees."
Response
The philosophy of this office is precisely in line with the statutory
and regulatory mandates of OEO.
Section 201 of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, as amended, states,
in part, that the objective of OEO is "to stimulate a better focusing of all
available local, state, private and federal resources upon the goal of en-
abling low-income families and low-income individuals of all ages in rural
and urban areas to attain the skills, knowledge and motivations and secure
the opportunities needed for them to become self sufficient." OEO Instruc-
tion No. 6320-1, "The Mission of the Community Action Agency," issued
November 16, 1970, constitutes the new mission statement for community
action agencies and is one with which this office is in total sympathy. It
places emphasis upon the mobilization of local resources, upon the program
as a positive voice for the poor, upon the delivery of services and upon
developing the kind of relationship within the community that will encourage
the community to assist the CAP in its mission. Frankly, we consider that
conflict and confrontation policies are outmoded and clearly counter-
productive. We have carefully articulated this approach not only to our
staff but the community action agencies around the State.
since July 1, 1970. The section of this report dealing with
the 6500 and the CAAs best illustrates the attitude revealed
by this style, It can be summarily stated, however, that
the conclusion of the evaluation team was that the attitude of the
SEOO was, for the most part, one of antagonism toward the CAAS and the
community action program, and that SEOO personnel assigned to ansist
CAAS acted more investigative than helpful, more as observers than
as active participants assigned the job of aiding the CAAs in peo-
gram development: and providing technical assistance. Presumably,
the attitudes displayed by the SEOO representatives had the approval
of the SEOO Director and those to whom he reported.
22
Page 22--Conclusions (Charge)
"It can be summarily stated, however, that the conclusion of the evaluation
team was that the attitude of the SEOO was, for the most part, one of an-
tagonism toward the CAAs and the community action program, and that SEOO
personnel assigned to assist CAAs acted more investigative than helpful,
more as observers than as active participants assigned the job of aiding
the CAAs in program development and providing technical assistance.
Presumably, the attitudes displayed by the SEOO representatives had the
approval of the SEOO Director and those to whom he reported."
Response
The claim that this office is antagonistic toward the CAA is false. There
is no question but that we have been deeply concerned and, at times,
irritated with the conduct of a few of the CAAs which do not appear to be
following the rules and guidelines. Our community program analysts must
elicit the facts about program operation and performance if they are to
fulfill their job assignments according to the grant conditions. They are
available to be helpful within their capabilities when so requested by the
CAA. The no-nonsense attitude about program performance which we urge
on our community program analysts has the full approval and support of
the SEOO Director. We are ever mindful of the need to use effectively
the precious tax dollars used to fund these programs. We want to make
sure that the poor receive some direct benefit from the expenditure of
these funds.
FEDERAL REPORT, PAGE 22
CHARGE:
"It can be summarily stated, however, that the conclusion
of the evaluation team was that the attitude of the SEOO
was, for the most part, one of antagonism toward the CAAs
and the community action program, and that SEOO personnel
assigned to assist CAAs acted more investigative than
helpful, more as observers than active participants
assigned the job of aiding the CAAs in program develop-
ment and providing technical assistance. Presumably,
the attitudes displayed by the SEOO representatives had
the approval of the SEOO Director and those to whom he
reported."
RESPONSE:
The following letter is on file from Myron H. Schussman,
Assistant Superintendent, San Mateo County Board of Edu-
cation, April 29, 1971, to the attention of the California
State Legislature:
"This office was the applicant agency for a VISTA
volunteer project involving tutoring of county jail
inmates.
"Mrs. Theresa McInnes, VISTA Coordinator for the State
Office of Economic Opportunity, reviewed this project
application during the time when it was being consid-
ered for funding. In the course of this review, she
took the time to visit the proposed project site
personally and conferred with the people who were to
be involved in administering the project.
"I found her to be most cooperative and at no time
did she offer any obstructions to the successful com-
mencement of the project.
"This project is designed to provide assistance to
inmates of the County Jail Honor Farm in learning
basic skills of reading, mathematics, etc. Since a
large population of these inmates come from the lower
social economic levels and minority groups, it is
obvious that the entire purpose of this project is
consistent with the underlying motivation of the pro-
grams of the Office of Economic Opportunity.
"This project is now successfully underway and we are
very pleased to be involved with it." =
THE SEOO AND OTHER STATE AGENCIES
State Egency Directors, or their designees, were interviewed from
ten agencies of the State of California. Staff present to advise
them in regard to their answers were an additional eight persons,
for a total of 18 state officials interviewed outside the SEOO staff
itself.
Representatives of the following agencies were interviewed:
a. Human Resources eloment Department
Department of Social Welfare
C. Department of ommerce
4. Office of Intergovernmental Relations (Lieutenant Governor)
C. State Personnel Board
f. General Services Department
g. Department of Education
h. State Planning Office
i. Department of Public Health
Also interviewed was a member of the staff of the California Legi-
slative Analyst who supplied a copy of the recent budget analysis
of the SEOO which is prepared for the California Legislature.
The officials interviewed were asked to report, to the best of their
knowledge, on the SEOO's performance of the following functions in
connection with other state agencies:
a. Representing the Governor on matters related to the poor.
b. Providing information on matters related to the poor and
poverty.
C. Mobilizing and coordinating state agency resources on behalf
of the poor.
d. Acting as a special advocate for the poor within state govern-
ment.
23
1. PERCEPTIONS:
of the state officials interviewed knew little of what the in SEOO
Most had done. Items mentioned by some of the officials responding
relationship to the functions referred above are as follows:
a. The SEOO sponsored a meeting in December, 1970, to which
were invited many state agency heads and rural CAA Executive Direc-
tors. State agency programs and resources were explained.
b. A written agreement was signed February 3, 1971, by SEOO
Director Lewis K. Uhler and Thomas Duffy, Office of Intergovernmental
Relations (Lieutenant agreein to carry out joint studies
leading to the pilot merging
or
CAAs (e.g., Fresno) with
Model Cities agencies isce Attachments).
C.
In
early
1971,
subject of welfare reform was discussed
between Mr. Uhler and en Welfare Department representatives.
d. The California Air National Guard, State Wildlife and
Fisheries Department, and State Department of Forestry were con-
tacted to see whether volunteer dentists could be flown into iso-
lated Indian communities and be given special hunting and fishing
privileges as an incentive to provide dental care for the Indians.
e. Lewis Uhler, California SEOO Director, described one example
of the efforts of the SEOO to expedite state agency certification
procedures as follows:
"We have had significant coordination with the
Business and Transportation Agency and their
Department of Housing and Community Development,
placing them in contact with Dukor Modular Sys-
tems, Inc., to help expedite the certification
process for this factory-built housing company
that is meeting the low and moderate income
housing needs in the State. The RESULTS were
that within one week a certification came
through which involved a process within the
Department of Housing and Community Development
whereby, once certified, Dukor is seemed to have
met all local building codes or standards. "
2. FINDINGS:
The State Interagency Conference for rural CAAs was seen as excellent
and useful by most participants; however, follow up was apparently
left to two STAP consultants, one of whom left the SEOO soon there-
after. As a result, there was very little follow up. The Farmers
Home Administration apprenticeship ("intern") program discussed
24
Page 24-1. PERCEPTIONS (Charge)
"Most of the state officials interviewed knew little of what
the SEOO had done."
RESPONSE:
Within the complexities of State Government, it is not
uncommon for state officials to not know the complex programmatic
functions of all state agencies. To accomplish this objective
would require a staff of public information specialists as well
as special bulletins and regular meetings. This is not feasible
within the budget for SEOO. Steps are being taken to solve this
problem.
Page 24--2. Findings (Charge)
"The State Interagency Conference for rural CAAs was seen as
excellent and useful by most participants; however, followup
was apparently left to two STAP consultants, one of whom left
the SEOO soon thereafter. As a result, there was very little
followup."
RESPONSE:
The concept of the State Interagency Conference was to
develop for rural CAAs a direct pipeline or a liaison to the
agencies from which they are seeking assistance. This office,
along with the cosponsors, stressed the importance of developing
a one-to-one relationship with the state agencies. Certain
documents were distributed at the conference in December. One
in particular, prepared by the Council on Intergovernmental
Relations, which is similar to the catalog of federal
agencies (well-known to CAAs), was distributed. This catalog
was explained by a staff member from the Council on Intergovernmen-
tal Relations. The catalog contained the purpose, eligibility
information on programs handled and a contact, here again allowing
the CAP the flexibility of developing its own state resources.
The SEOO has, however, responded to any requests to this office
for assistance or referral to other state and federal agencies.
Two resource mobilization conferences were held with parti-
cipation of over 20 state agencies who have relationships that
directly affect the poor. In housing, applications have been
completed for Imperial, Riverside, Lake, Mendocino Counties.
These are examples of followup resulting in housing assistance.
Management technical assistance has been supplied on a con-
centrated basis to San Luis Obispo, Santa Cruz, and Merced
Counties. Employment development supplied to Madera, Contra
Costa, and other CAPs. The definition of the term "very little"
is a subjective one, and, therefore, these are just a few
examples of many. If time and staff were available to do so,
more examples of what has been accomplished in followup to rural
and other CAAs could be given.
Page 24, Paragraph 2 (State interagency conference)
Charge:
"The State Interagency Conference for rural CAAs was seen as
excellent and useful by most participants; however, follow up
was apparently left to two STAP consultants, one of whom left
the SEOO soon thereafter. As a result, there was very little
follow up."
Response:
Report maintains: "Follow-up was apparently left to two STAP
consultants
"
SEOO field representative in Southern
California personally delivered copies of materials distributed
at state interagency conference to rural CAPs, when he discovered
the CAPs were unable to attend the conference. (E. M. Petersen -
Santa Barbara and Ventura CAAS)
Page 24 - 1. PERCEPTIONS:
(Charge)
"Most of the state officials interviewed knew little of what the
SEOO had done."
RESPONSE
Field representatives of State OEO contact many field
representatives of other State agencies. Heads of departments
would not necessarily know of this contact, and, in this case
obviously did not. State OEO representatives feel that it is
mandatory that they work with the various state and federal
agencies in their field operations, not only from a time saving
point of view, but for coordination of effort. SEOO field
representative sits on CAMPS Board in Los Angeles County.
This board consists of many and various state, county and
local officials. See attached list of CAMP Board members.
Cooperative Area Manpower Planning System
Area Manpower Coordinating Committees
Alameda County, Bakersfield, Contra Costa County, Fresno, Los Angeles, Orange County,
Sacramento, San Bernardino/Riverside/Ontario, San Diego/Imperial Counties,
San Francisco, San Joaquin County, San Jose, Vallejo
SALVADOR VELASQUEZ, Chairman
Los Angeles Manpower Coordinating Committee
PETER LADANY, Executive Secretary
1525 So. Broadway, Los Angeles 90015
(213) 744-2757
MINUTES
OF THE
FORTIETH MEETING
MARCH 10, 1971
AT
1525 South Broadway
Los Angeles, California
Page 24
Paragraph /
Area Manpower Coordinating Committees
Alameda County, Bakersfield, Contra Costa County, Fresno, Los Angeles, Orange County,
Sacramento, San Bernardino/Riverside/Ontario San Diego/Imperial Counties,
San Francisco, San Joaquin County, San Jose, Vallejo
SALVADOR VELASQUEZ, Chairman
Los Angeles Manpower Coordinating Committee
PETER LADANY, Executive Secretary
1525 So. Breadway, Los Angeles 90015
(213) 744-2757
MEMBERS PRESENT
AGENCY
John Caldoras
Human Resources Development Department-JTD & PI
Robert Calvo
Calif. Dept. of Education - Bureau of Adult
Education
Eursall Cordell
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture
William Enright
Long Beach Commission on Economic
Opportunities and Community Relations
Johanne Gaudioso
City of Los Angeles - Model Cities Program
Gilbert Gonzalez
U.S. Civil Service Commission
Lowell Jones
Los Angeles Urban League
Wilbur Lorbeer
Calif. Community Colleges - Deans of
Vocational Education
Jerome Miller ( for Rockwell Ames )
City of Los Angeles - Office of the Mayor
Charles Overholt
U.S. Office of Economic Opportunity
Clinton Prentice
Los Angeles County - Dopt. of Public
Social Services
Martin Samaniogo ( for Ernest Sprinkles )
Economic and Youth Opportunities Agency
lip Soto
SER - Jobs for Progross
alvador Velasquez
Rio Hondo Area Action Council, Inc.
Elmer Wirta
Calif. Dept. of Education - Division of
Vocational Education
MEMBERS ABSENT
AGENCY
Richard Amador
L.A. Mexican-American Manpower Association
Raymond Carrasco
Dept. of Housing and Urban Development
Charles Flotcher
Calif. Dept. of Rehabilitation
Ralph Goff
Calif. Dept. of Social Welfare
Harvey Howard
Community Action Agency - Compton-Willowbrook-
Enterprise
Luanno Jamio
U.S. Dept. of Commerce - Economic Development
Administration
Gordon Nesvig
L.A. County Board of Supervisors
William Spencer
Human Resources Development Department -
Farm Labor Service
Philip Wing
Pasadena Commission on Human Need and
Opportunity, Inc.
CONSULTANTS PRESENT
AGENCY
Fred Baugh
NAB - JOBS
Larry Cooper
NAB - JOBS
George Garland
Human Resources Development Institute - AFL-CI
as Pedorson
Calif. Dept. of Youth Authority
Jck Fenn ( for Marshall Lundsberg )
Calif. Dopt. of Corrections
John Vornay
NAB - JOBS
David Wobb
U.S. Dept. of Labor - Job Corps Division
Ellsworth Woltz ( for Robert Reynolds )
U.S. Dopt. of Labor and Manpower Administration
Roy Zhe
NAB - JOBS
Cooperative Area Manpower Planning System
Area Manpower Coordinating Committees
Alameda County, Bakersfield, Contra Costa County, Fresno, Los Angeles, Orange County,
Sacramento, San Bernardino/Riverside/Ontario San Diego/Imperial Counties,
San Francisco, San Joaquin County, San Jose, Vallejo
SALVADOR VELASQUEZ, Chairman
Los Angeles Manpower Coordinating Committee
PETER LADANY, Executive Secretary
1525 So. Broadway, Los Angeles 90015
(213) 744-2757
CONSULTANTS ABSENT
AGENCY
Ralph April
California Association for Privato Education
Patrick Burke
U.S. Dept. of Labor - Bureau of Apprenticoship
OTHERS PRESENT
AGENCY
John Baca
Human Resources Development Dopt. - JTD & PD
Ralph Chadwick
Calif. Community-Collogos ( Cerritos College )
Gono Davis
Calif. Dept. of Education - Division of
Vocational Education
Jerry Fields
Human Resources Development Dopt. - JTD & PD
Joo Goron
Stewards Training and Recreation, Inc.
Jim Hall
Building Trades - AFL - CIO
F-ank Honnessy
Human Resources Development Dopt. - JTD - PD
Huffmon
Stowards Training and Recreation, Inc.
norbert Laffoon
Skills, Training and Employment Program, Inc.
Mauroen O'Brien
Long Beach Commission On Economic
Opportunities and Community Relations
Manuel Palmarin
Rio Hondo Aroa Action Council, Inc.
Arthur Price
Skills, Training and Employment Program, Inc.
John Price
Los Angoles Urban League
Paul Regorz
Human Resources Development Dopt. - JTD & PD
Bon Rodriguez
Computing and Software - Pre-Vocational Center
Frank Seevers
Human Resources Development Dept. - JTD & PD
Ellen Sniadowski
Human Resources Development Dopt. que Research
and Statistics
Irwing Wenger
Human Resources Development Dopt. - JTD & PD
Dick Whitoman
Calif. Community Colleges - ( Cerritos Colloge
Earnestine Woods
Skills, Training and Employment Program, Inc.
Al Zaapata
L.A. Mexican-American Manpower Association
Myrtle Zooper
Skills, Training and Employment Program, Inc.
Peter Ladany
Los Angeles CAMPS Executive Secretary
nica manpower rianning
Area Manpower Coordinating Committees
Alameda County, Bakersfield, Contra Costa County, Fresno, Los Angeles, Orange County,
Sacramento, San Bernardino/Riverside/Ontario San Diego/Imperial Counties,
San Francisco, San Joaquin County, San Jose, Vallejo
SALVADOR VELASQUEZ, Chairman
Los Angeles Manpower Coordinating Committee
PETER LADANY, Executive Secretary
1525 So. Broadway, Los Angeles 90015
(213) 744-2757
MINUTES OF THE MARCH 10, 1971 MEETING
I. Introduction and Approval of the Minutes of the February 17, 1971 Meeting
Chairman Salvador Velasquez opened the meeting at 9:05 a.m. and requested
self-introduction of those present. Following the introductions, the
Chairman welcomed Mr. Gene Davis from Vocational Education and Mr. Joe
Goren from the Stewards Training and Recreation, Inc., who were present
to address the committee.
The Chairman asked for the approval of the minutes of the February 17, 1971,
meeting and on a motion by Mr. Enright, seconded by Mr. Cordell the
minutes were unanimously approved.
II. Chairman's Report
Mr. Velasquez reported on the numerous actions taken by the Executive Sub-
Committee and himself on behalf of the Los Angeles CAMPS Committee. He
stated, that We have accepted a change in the membership status of the
Department of Labor from "voting membership' to 'consultant' status. Then
Mr. Velasquez commented on a number of seminars and conferences on man-
power and manpower related issues in the Los Angeles area, including the
Industrial Relations Conference at U.C.L.A. and the Human Resource
Allocation Symposium to be hold on April 14, 15, 16, 1971, at the Airport
Marina Hotel. The Chairman mentioned, that Mr. Amador and Mr. Ladany
will both be speaking on April 15, 1971.
Mr. Velasquez discussed the continued efforts of our committee to move
into a more meaningful and effective posture on manpower planning and
commented on the favorable responses, letters, etc. which have been reaching
us from other CAMPS Committees in the State and the Region regarding our
manpower planning concepts.
The Chairman called upon Mr. Miller, from the Mayor's Office, who reported
on the approval of the Mayor's Planning Grant by the Los Angeles City Council,
Mr. Miller stated, that they expect to receive their final go-ahead on the
$136,000.00 grant in the next few days and plan to initiate their operation
on or about April 1, 1971. Mr. Miller gave a short outline of their goals
and responsibilities under this grant, re-emphasizing the interest and
commitment of the Mayor for cooperation with the CAMPS Committee. He
indicated, that in Los Angeles the Mayor decided to utilize this grant to
conduct both general and specific studies on Manpower Planning and that they
proposed, that the Los Angeles CAMPS shall be maintained during this twelve
month planning period under the same terms and conditions currently in
operation.
2
Mr. Velasquez thanked the Mayor's representative for his support of the
CAMPS Committee and commented on the number of cooperative meetings that
he and Mr. Ladany had, with both Mr. Ames and Mr. Miller. The Chairman
noted that it is the consensus of the Committee to link and coordinate
our efforts with the Mayor's planning endeavors to the maximum extent
possible and for the optimal common good.
The Chairman then called upon the Executive Secretary for his report.
III. Executive Secretary's Report
Mr. Ladany reported on various correspondence received from State and
other CAMPS Committees and touched briefly on the HRD administered Displaced
Workers Program. He again requested members input into the information-
distribution system of the Secretariat so that there could be D. maximum
sharing of information and manpower related data.
He noted, that Mr. Blacher, Chairman of State CAMPS, requested the
consideration of the Regional Manpower Administration for funding on an
areawide basis, similar to the approach used with the Displaced Workers
Program, penmitting maximum participation of the Committee and the general
community in the allocation of resources ( Mr. Blacher's letter distributed
to all members ).
Mr. Ladany commented on the recently released employment and unemployment
figures and on the continuous and still growing rate of unemployed in Los
Angeles. He suggested, that the committe may wish to take a strong position
on this critical and acute problem to bring the special issues of this
large metropolitan area to the attention of those at the highost level of
government. The Executive Secretary noted, that some labor market analysts
prodict an unemploymont rate reaching oight percont in the coming months
and that it was his view, that unemployment in the Los Angeles CAMPS area
will remain twenty-five to thirty-five percent higher than the national
average.
Mr. Soto commented that CAMPS should take a strong position on this still
growing problem and not 'tip-toe' around sending 'nice letters', but
assume a role of advocacy offering specific suggestions for consideration.
A short but spirited discussion ensued in which various comments were offered
by Miss Gaudioso, Mr. Price, Mr. Rodriguez and Mr. Calvo. Mr. Enright
suggested that the matter should be referred to the Executive Sub-Committee
for specific recommendations, to be brought before the Committee at the
next meeting. "I"o Enright's motion was seconded by Mr. Miller and unanimously
approved.
The Executive Secretary reported on his attendance at. the Department of Labor
planning meeting in San Mateo and discussed the need for input by all man-
power and manpower related agencies into the Abbreviated CAMPS Plan for Fiscal
Year 1972. Mr. Velasquez joined in emphasizing the importance of this effort
which, allegedly, will influence the decisions of the Manpower Administrator
in allocating funds for our community. Mr. Velasquez and Mr. Ladany emphasized
that this process. cannot be considered, in any sense of the word, a 'planning'
effort, but it is the best we can do under the extremely limited staff
capabilities of the committee. Mr. Valesquez asked for and received unanimous
consent to sign off on this CAMPS document.
Mr. Ladany called upon Nr. Goren to make a presentation on his project proposal
for seventy-five disadvantaged residents for maritime occupations.
3
Mr. Goren discussed the history and current status of the Stewards
Training and Recreation, Inc. program for which the request is in the
sum of $110,439.00 ( training program prospectus and budget has been
mailod to all members ).
Mr. Goren's presentation was followed by many questions and comments
regarding the average cost factor, employability and long range results.
Following the comments of Mr. Cooper, Mr. Enright, Mr. Wirta and Mr. Ladany,
it was suggested, that future proposals should be first presented to the
Executive Sub-Committee and complete proposals should reach members before
they are presented at the committee meeting. Mr. Miller asked what would
happen if the CAMPS did not endorse a request for MDTA funding. Mr. Calderas
responded, that HRD would be influenced by any CAMPS action and may not
consider a proposal without such endorsement. Mr. Velasquez, Mr. Miller
and others again brought out the need to have the capability for systematically
reviewing proposals, including their history, accomplishments, etc. and
that this need, currently unmet, further emphasizes the importance of our
efforts to obtain technical staff support. A motion was offerred by Mr. Wirta
to endorse the proposal and to so inform the sponsor and HRD. Motion
seconded by Mr. Cordell and unanimously approved.
Mr. Calvo stated that the mailings, that are received from the Executive
Secretary have proven to be informative and of conserable interst, but
would be improved if a point by point summary could be included, highlighting
the materials for easier reading.
Mr. Ladany thanked Mr. Calvo for his comments and indicated that he would
attempt to tollow his suggestion. In completing his report, he again
thanked those members that have expressed, through letters and telephone
calls, special support and commendations for the work of the Secretariat.
IV. Area Vocational Education Planning Council Report
Mr. Velasquez announced a change in the Agenda and called upon Mr. Davis
for a report on the Area Vocational Education Council.
Mr. Davis discussed the recent history of his council in developing the
Advisory Committee for Area IX ( a copy of the progress report of March,
1971, has been distributed to members ). Mr. Davis stated, that in his
district (i.e. Area IX) the planning will take account of 162 high schools,
49 continuation high schools, 63 adult schools, 20 community colleges, and
up to 600 private post-secondary schools. This area has the largest student
apportionment in the state of California with 1,653,000 for 1969-1970.
The committee meets monthly on the fourth Wednesday and the meetins are
open to all interested parties. So far there have been two meetings,
basically of organizational and priority determination nature. Mr. Davis
noted, that the appointment of community representatives has, at yet, been
unresolved and that there has been some delay in the appointment of full
membership.
Mr. Soto asked to have a. clarification on the purpose of the advisory
condities and inquired whether or not there has been a consideration for
inout from the disadvantaged community. Further questions and comments were
presented by Mr. Calvo, Mr. Enright, and Mr. Wirta and it was suggested,
that the CAMPS Committee should take a definite position in nominating
reprosentatives from the Black and Chicano communities, which according
to Mr. Davis, would have to be approved by the State Committee. On a motion
by Mr. Soto, seconded by Mr. Calvo, it was unanimously approved to nominate
4
such persons and to have the Chairman inform the appropriate officers
of the Vocational Education Planning Program of this action.
Mr. Volasquoz asked for nominations from the floor. Mr. Soto was selected
to represent the Chicano community and Mr. Laffoon to be the Black
Community Representative by acclamation.
The Chairman expressed his appreciation to Mr. Davis for his cooperation
and interest in our committee and requested that he maintain continuous
contact with our committee through the Secretariat office. At the
suggestion of Mr. Davis, the Chairman indicated that a letter of CAMPS
support and nomination will be sent to Directors Sheffield (HRD),
Smith (Vocational Education), Dr. Brossman (Community Colleges), and
State Coordinator Larry Harrington.
V.
HRD Status Report on the Displaced Workers Program
Mr. Baca, Mr. Hennessy, Mr. Regorz and Mr. Seevers reported on the
different phases and implementation status of the HRD administered program.
To date 176 members of Experience Unlimited have been hired as consultants
who assist with job development, application preparation, and resumes.
Over 200 consultants have been employed to conduct job finding workshops
and to develop job opportunities. Most of the contracts have been signed
and approved with the Community agencies participating in this program
and it is expected that the last two (Urban League and SER) will be also
approved within the next fow days.
A contract has been approved with the Community and Human Resources
Development Agency to provide supportive services for 88 disadvantaged OJT
Trainees. Another contract has been signed with the California Society of
Professional Engineers to develop high impact communication relating to
the problems of the professional displaced worker.
Mr. Seevers highlighted some of the institutional training efforts,
including those for bio-medical engineers, electro-medical service engineers,
pollution management engineers and others, totalling 113 training slots.
Through March 10, 1971 the Los Angeles County Program reached over 10,500
persons, of whom 305 were enrolled in job finding workshops, 511 in orientation
sessions, 50 in institutional training, 39 in on-the-job training and 2,500
in job placement, job development activities ( Status Report on Displaced
Worker Program has boen mailed to all members ).
Mr. Calderas and the HRD Representatives again emphasized the appreciation
of that agency for the continuous involvement of members of tho Committee
in the program and restated the commitment of HRD to utilize this
established positive relationship in future endeavors. Mr. Velasquez
expressed the thanks of the Committee to the officials of HRD and called on
Miss Gaudioso, Vice-Chaiman, for the Executive Sub-Committee report.
VI. Executive Sub-Committon Report
Miss Gaudioso informed the Committee that six recommendations would be
presented for the Committee's consideration and requested the approval of
each.
1. The membership of the representatives of the Department of Labor shall
be changed from 'voting membership' to 'consultants'. The representatives
of the Department of Labor will be so informed and a letter shall be
prepared by the Chairman, addressed to the Regional Manpower Administrator
and the National Manpower Administrator, expressing our continuous concern
5
with the unilateral action by the Department of Labor. Miss Gaudioso
made a motion to accept recommendation #1, seconded by Martin Samaniego
and approved unanimously.
2. Engage the TYOA-offerred technical assistance organization ( cost
to be absorbed by EYOA ) to prepare a proposal for funding for a Man-
power Planning Staff to assist in the implementation of the revised
rules and goals of the committee. Miss Gaudioso made a motion to accept
recommendation #2, seconded by Mr. Samaniego and unanimously approved.
3. To have a representative, i.e. - the Chairman or his designee,
participate and attend the State CAMPS Meetings and servo as a liason
between the two committees and provide information on the work of the
State CAMPS directly to our Committee. Miss Gaudioso made a motion to
approve recommendation 13, seconded by Phil Soto and unanimously approved.
4. The Executive Secretary is to explore the availability of any CAMPS
monies for travel reimbursement for the Chairman or CAMPS members for this
Fiscal Year and for the coming 1972 Fiscal Year. Miss Gaudioso made a motion
to approve recommendation Hr, seconded by Gil Gonzalez and unanimously approved.
5. Considered the request of the representative of Vocational Education
to extend membership to the four skill center Directors in the Los Angeles
Area and it was agreed that such voting membership would be & precedent
for potential dilution and controversy in membership and recommended the
tabling of this request.
6, Considered the request of the Southern California Community College
Deans of Vocational Education for voting membership and recommended one
voting membership to the representative of this organization. Miss Gaudioso
made a motion to approve recommendation #6, seconded by Mr. Overholt and
unanimously approved.
Mr. Velasquez, in behalf of the committee welcomed Mr. Lorbeer as a voting
member and stated, that he was looking forward to a profitable and fruitful
participation from the Deans of Vocational Education Committee.
Miss Gaudioso asked the Executive Secretary to report on the development
of the planning proposal. Mr. Ladany discussed various contacts with
Federal agencies regarding funding and the underlying concepts, goals,
objectivos of the Proposal ( copy of Proposal mailed to all members ). He
asked for comments and suggestions to further strengthen our determined
efforts to vitalize our Committee and to provide the technical capabilities
in order to fulfill the very mandate of CAMPS.
VII. Vew Business
Mr. Samaniego stated that EYOA received a communication from Herbert Laffoon,
Director, STEP-YTEP asking for an opportunity to present his proposal for
MDTA Stipends.
Mr. Laffoon briefly discussed the history of his organization and the
funding of MDTA Stipends in the last few years. He noted, that it would
be necessary to obtain approximately 600,000 in onder to continue with
his program and that without such input, the other funded segments of his
project (050, etc.) would be greatly endangered. Mr. Laffoon's remarks
wore followed by an emphatic discussion in which among others, Mr. Miller,
Mr. Prontice, Mr. Calderas and Mr. Samaniego participated. As a result
of this discussion, a motion was offered by Mr. Samaniego, seconded by
Mr. Miller, to urge EYOA-STEP, Inc. and HRD to engage in direct, face-to-face
6
dialogue and have the Executive-Secretary report to the Committee regarding
these negotiations. The motion was passed unanimously.
In the absence of any other new business and due to the lateness of the
hour, Mr. Velasquez adjourned the meeting at approximately 1 P.M. and
announced that the next regular CAMPS Meeting will be held on April 14, 1971.
Memo
April 15, 1971
To Robert Hawkinss
From Herbert T. Brown
Subject : Sos Angeles CAMPS meeting held April 14, 1971.
Meeting called to order at 0910. By my presence
State oeo was represented to CAMPS Committee at 0916 hrs.
Letter was read tomembers that Mr Calvinvillims of Regional
O.E.O. will be replaced by MT Overholt of Regional G.E.O.
The Executive Secretary Mr. Peter Ladany reported that there
are at present 7 counties that have formed Job Banks. They are
XXXX
San Diego
Santa Ana
Bakersfiled
Sacreme nto
San Jose
Los Angles
rresno.
it was also mentioned /that a grant of about $100,000
was awrded to the urban League andthe Mayor's office to find jobs
for the returning viet Nam veterans.
it was reported that job placements for the past six months
beginnning in October lof 1970 totalled 17,000.
The ethnic breakdown was as follows:
4,000 Megroes or blacks
@ 22%
105 indians
@ 05%
3,671 mexican/ Americans
@ 21%
9,225 White
@ 56.95,
Mr. Ladany alos announced that 80 million dollars per
month is the average cost for unemployment at the present time. ne
addded if this cycle prersist at the present rate theuemployment funds
will be depleted wihtin two years.
Discussion ensued as to the continued existence 01 CAMPS.
Reference was made to the body to follow senate Bill1243 and House
bill 6181 to get an indicationof the trends of continued exictonon
Dr. Gaylord Pitts of MRD made the glommy report that since march 1,
through March 31, 1971, that 10,0000 people were ladd off work in
Los Angeles County.
He enumerated the causes for the decline of employment as:
1) The Earthquake of February 1971- whereby
52% of the Business District of San Fernando Valley was
wiped out or temporaryily uninhabitable.
2) The Lockheed/ Rolls Koyce financial crisis.
3) The termination of the SST aerospace contract.
ne stated that the average job placement had a growth of
70,000 per year. Last year thisgrowth was down 50,000. The state of
califronia is no longer faced with a problem of immigration but now
one of.immigration.
L971 with its projected 8p unemployment is ththighest since 1961.
The State avergae is now 7.1 unemployed
Los Angeles is now 7.5
"
Orange County is now 7.5
"
Dr. anthony rascal of Hand Corporation gave a talk on menpower needs.
he divided up the result of his firmss resegrch into three categories
1 Anvestigation of local programs - re duplication
2Labor market works - National Policy;
3 nacial Disparity of incomes. (it was noted by members of
the CAMES committee that the racial disparity report left out the
mexican/ American or spanish surname.
and of memo -
elsewhere in this report was a product of the December conference.
It appears that the Regional Office of OEO was neither notified of
nor invited to the conference.
The dentist project mentioned above reportedly fell through later be-
cause regulations did not permit the Air National Guard to transport
the dentists as planned. (The California Private Pilots' Association
was then contacted in effort to provide transportation for the den-
tists to the reservation.)
The California Legislative Analyst is withholding a recommendation
for an increase in funding to the SEOO pending a review of the "re-
view reports" rendered (by the SEOO) on these diverse local projects
to determine whether the reports are accurate and whether the
projects are effective."
en
sttached Budget Analysis.)
3. CONCLUSION:
The SEOO has done some work with state agencies, more than is
apparently known by CAAs and the OEO Regional office. However,
it has not performed this function to the extent that state agencies
themselves can report or comment on SEOO activities with their
agencies.
4. RECOMMENDATIONS:
The SEOO should place major emphasis on its role with state agencies.
Even minimal accomplishments in this role will do much to gain respect
for its performance.
The Regional Office and other OEO grantees should establish a formal
system for requesting SEOO assistance with other state agencies.
This system should be structured to evaluate follow-up performance.
25
Page 25--CONCLUSION (Charge)
"
However, it has not performed this function to the extent
that state agencies themselves can report or comment on SEOO
activities with their agencies. "
RESPONSE:
SEOO is endeavoring at the present time to develop a contact
liaison person within each state agency or agencies for the
purpose of having a responsible person to communicate programmatic
problems of CAAs; the same person being responsible for the
delivery of technical assistance and information to the CAAs.
We are in the process of establishing a technical assistance
clearinghouse or "order desk" by which to endeavor to serve CAAs
technical assistance needs more effectively and promptly, and
also give us feedback as to the effectiveness of technical assis-
tance delivered by state agencies.
Page 25, Paragraph 3:
Charge:
However, it has not performed this function to the
extent that state agencies themselves can report or comment on
SEOO activities with their agencies.
Response:
SEOO field representatives during the course of their duties
have contacted the following State representatives and agencies:
Assemblyman Leon Ralph's Office, Assemblyman Bill Green's office,
Jay Lane McCune, Manpower Research Specialist, Community and
Human Resources Agency, W. Whitehead, Model Cities, William
Jones, Model Cities, Assemblyman William Ketchum, Assemblyman
Kent Stacey, State Senator Lagomarsino, Assemblyman Ken Mc-
Donald, Assemblyman Don MacGillivray, Dr. Schmidthause, Bureau
of Preschool Educational Programs. The above names show but
a few contacts with State agencies, additional names will be
supplied upon request. (See attachment)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
RONALD REAGAN, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT
OFFICE OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
APITOL MALL
AMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814
Southern California Office of Economic Opportunity
1314 Cravens Avenue
Torrance, California 90501
October 8, 1970
Dr. Schmidthause
Bureau of Preschool Educational Programs
721 Capitol Mall
Sacramento, California 95814
C
Dear Dr. Schmidthause:
It was nice talking to you on the telephone earlier this
week and I appreciate your sending us the evaluation
report for the State Compensatory Preschool Education
O
Program.
As we discussed, evaluating the effectiveness of Head
Start Programs is a sophisticated business and inasmuch
as we are charged with the role of evaluating such
programs we will be gathering all of the material and
P
techniques currently employed by your office in an
attempt to provide a realistic and objective evaluation.
In talking with Mrs. Lois Richard, the Project Director,
for the Pasadena area Head Start program, she indicated
that she had received a "Joint Report for Joint Funding
Y
Programs - State Preschool Educational Programs", put
out in May 1970 for the year 1968-69 by the State
Department of Education and the State Department of
Social Welfare.
This report allegedly places Head Start children in the
90 percentile based on some form of post-testing. I
have not seen this report and if it is available through
your office I would appreciate receiving a copy.
I will look forward to working with you and receiving
any additional information which you feel would be of
value to us.
Most Sincerely,
Richard Thies
Page 25, paragraph 3
Page 25 -- 4 - RECOMMENDATIONS (Charge).
The SEOO should place major emphasis on its role with state
agencies. Even minimal accomplishments in this role will do
much to gain respect for its performance.
RESPONSE:
SEOO is placing major emphasis on its roll with State agencies.
Not only do our resource mobilization conferences point this
out, but Mr. Uhler was recently responsible for speeding up
the process of securing over 50 jobs at the Madera Glass Company
for the Madera CAP by advocating for that CAP with NABs,
Department of Labor and Department of Human Resources Develop-
ment. The same was done for the Fresno CAP as concerns contact-
ing the IRS for job placements in that facility. State resources
have been mobilized and services rendered for Santa Cruz, San
Luis Obispo, Contra Costa (Richmond Southwide Center MDTA
program), and other programs too lengthy to mention at this
time.
Page 25--4. RECOMMENDATIONS (Charge)
"The SEOO should place major emphasis on its role with state
agencies. Even minimal accomplishments in this role will do
much to gain respect for its performance."
RESPONSE:
In the 1971 application, every attempt is being made to
provide an ombudsman type position, as well as an alternate
funding specialist, to both mobilize and locate financial
resources to help poor people. This, unfortunately, takes
the type of staff and funds that are not presently available
to the SEOO. This will be eliminated in the next application.
In the meantime, strong contacts and extensive liaison is
taking place through resource mobilization activities and the
following up or "spin off" that resulted from these conferences.
THE SEOO AND FEDERAL AGENCIES
Federal Agency Regional Directors, or their designees, were inter-
viewed at five federal agencies in addition to the Office of Economic
Opportunity.
The agencies contacted were: Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare; Department of Housing and Urban Development; Small Business
Administration; Economic Development Administration; and Department
of Labor. Primary respondents and their advisors who participated
in completion of the questionnaire totaled 24 federal officials.
Three questions were asked to elicit information on the performance
of the SEOO with respect to:
a. Representation of the Governor with respect to federal
agencies.
b. Development by the SEOO of federal resources to assist CAAs
and other anti-poverty efforts.
C. Helping OEO overcome problems at the state level caused by
federal and state requirements.
Only one of the 14 non-OEO federal officials interviewed felt he had
seen enough of the SEOO to have sufficient knowledge to take a position
on how well the SEOO had represented the Governor to federal agencies.
He felt that the SEOO had done a poor job of representing the Governor
to federal agencies. The others replied "don't know".
With respect to the second question, the respondents at two agencies
said "poor", and at the other three agencies the answer was "don't
know". In all cases, the reason offered was that the SEOO had not
had any contact with them or their agencies in the past year dealing
with resource development or coordination.
With respect to the third question, two agencies said that the SEOO
had not assisted OEO with reference to problems covered by their
regulations, and three answered "don't know".
At the national level the SEOO has used the influence of its office
in the following efforts as described by Lewis K. Uhler, California
SEOO Director:
a. "I have personally coordinated with Dr. Aguirre's
assistant as required to make sure that they have
full confidence that their Department of Labor
26
Page 26 -- THE SEOO AND FEDERAL AGENCIES (Charge)
The agencies contacted were: Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare; Department of Housing and Urban Development; Small
Business Administration; Economic Development Administration;
and Department of Labor. Primary respondents and their
advisors who participated in completion of the questionnaire
totaled 24 federal officials.
Only one of the 14 non-OEO federal officials interviewed felt
he had seen enough of the SEOO to have sufficient knowledge to
take a position on how well the SEOO had represented the
Governor to federal agencies. He felt that the SEOO had done
a poor job of representing the Governor to federal agencies.
The others replied "don't know."
With respect to the second question,
In all cases, the
reason offered was that the SEOO had not had any contact with
them or their agencies in the past year dealing with resource
development or coordination.
With respect to the third question, two agencies said that the
SEOO had not assisted OEO with reference to problems covered
by their regulations, and three answered "don't know.'
RESPONSE:
Unfortunately, in many federal and state departments, it is
not possible for subordinate employees of Mr. Uhler to deal
directly with department heads in many agencies. Thus,
coordinated, cooperative liaison activities and joint ventures
are often carried on at a subordinate level without department
heads being completely informed or aware of the extent of
extensiveness of such activities. This is now the case with
SEOO and is now being changed by having all employees in the
TA Section contact department heads and the number one man
in the organization with whom we work directly. Keep them
up-to-date on our activities.
monies are being spent effectively wherever some
concern has been raised (for example, OEDCI). We
sought for a long time to obtain the right to
audit DOL-funded programs in OEDCI. Our requests
went right to the Secretary of Labor, himself.
Subsequent to the appointment of Dr. Aguirre, this
authority was given to our office so that they
could have and have had on-going assurances that
at least from our viewpoint we will take pains to
assure them that their funds are being well spent.
b. "With the Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare, we have become directly involved in the
cut in Headstart fur ds. We interceded on behalf
of the San Joaquin Readstart program (and through
them all of the others), suggesting that a review
be made and if cuts were absolutely necessary, that
they be made not on the basis of an across-the-
board cut, but on the basis that the less effective
programs could be eliminated entirely, leaving the
good programs to function with sufficient funds.
C. "We became embroiled in the issue of three alleged
migrant health centers in the State, worked with
Robert Coop (Director of HEW) and sent a message
to HEW in Washington in coordination with the State
Department of Public Health and the Migrant Labor
Services that function under DHRD's Farm Labor Ser-
vices. We became concerned that there was not adequate
thought or planning given in the location of the mi-
grant health clinics--that they were not placed in the
area of greatest need for the health of migrant
workers. We were successful in getting HEW to review
the matter. As a result of our involvement, Mr.
Coop indicated that he recognized the need in the
future for the coordination with appropriate migrant
health services in the State and with the communities
where such facilities might be initiated."
CONCLUSION:
The SEOO has done very little with respect to non-OEO federal agencies
insofar as supporting poverty-related programs.
27
Page 27 - CONCLUSION - (Charge)
The SEOO has done very little with respect to non-OEO federal
agencies insofar as supporting poverty-related programs.
RESPONSE:
The federal representatives totally overlooked our roll in
securing jobs at the Madera Glass Company. Our roll in getting
a greater awareness by the IRS for employment of poor in
Fresno, all of the FHA home programs including those in Riverside
Kern, Madera and other counties; the housing intern program
in at least 7 counties statewide; application processing
through HRD, DOL, HEW, HUD and the Department of Education
for many agencies statewide; Forestry proposal for the
Bakersfield area, Strawberry Cooperative for Santa Cruz.
It is hard to believe that all of these programs which are
documented in our files were inadvertently overlooked by the
Federal evaluators in our office.
Page 27:
Charge:
"The SEOO has done very little with respect to non-OEO
federal agencies insofar as supporting poverty-related
programs.
Response:
SEOO staff agrees that federal officials have not seen enough
of SEOO and, as indicated above, this is primarily due to the
fact that there has been inadequate funding and as a conse-
quence, a lack of manpower to cover all of the areas necessary
to present a viable SEOO operation. At present SEOO is
working with DOL and HUD in developing an insurance program for
the disadvantaged in Southern California. It is also developing
a factory site in San Bernardino and Los Angeles under EDA,
a housing facility (Section 23) in coordination with Model
Cities in South Central Los Angeles, a training facility in
South Central Los Angeles with DOL. (See attachment)
Bob Hawkins
March 17, 1971
Herb Brown
Gil Archuletta
I have authorized Herb Brown to sit on the Los Angeles County
CAMPS Board as a representative of SEOO.
In addition, he will be the SEOO representative for Assemblyman
Bill Greene's Los Angeles County Manpower Planning Committee.
GA:js
Page 27
OF SOUTH SAN
OFFICE OF
THE CITY MANAGER
April 1, 1971.
CALIFORNIA
Mr. Lewis K. Uhler, Director,
State of California, Dept. of Human Resources,
Office of Economic Opportunity,
800 Capitol Mall,
Sacramento, California 95814.
Dear Mr. Uhler:
The City of South San Francisco has for the past several years
allocated $5,000 per year towards the South San Francisco Information
Center, an agency of the County E.O.C., to subsidize the Center's
annual budget of approximately $30, 000. The original responsibility
of the Center was the War on Poverty, expecting to service some three
to five thousand persons in such areas of English instruction, jobs,
church groups, sociology and an initial day center for young persons.
The Center has run into apparent difficulties administratively
and also is publically criticized profusely by several local groups.
The efficiency, consistency and value of the Center is questionable in
my mind now, and I hesitate to recommend to City Council to continue
the customary funding with such doubts.
Our Chief of Police, Sal Rosano, has suggested I write you and
request your assistance. Is it possible for you or your representative
to conduct a review of the Information Center operation and so advise
of its capabilities ?
Very truly yours,
Ross,
Assistant City Manager.
LLR/cm