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
118570488
label
Private Sector Initiatives 1981-1982 (10)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
118570488
contentType
document
title
Private Sector Initiatives 1981-1982 (10)
citationUrl
identifierLocal
137
collections
Records of the White House Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff (Reagan Administration)
Michael Deaver's Subject Files
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
118570488
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1985-12-31
year
1985
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1981-01-01
year
1981
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
27994b4c156db543
ocrText
Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
Digital Library Collections
This is a PDF of a folder from our textual
collections.
Collection: Deaver, Michael
Folder Title: Private Sector Initiatives
1981-1982 (10)
Box: 53
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/
response to Buroodn memo.
Background Paper for
White House Briefing:
Private Sector Initiatives
June 17, 1981
10:00am
REVIEW OF PAST DISCUSSIONS
1. We have suggested a one year program running from June 1981 through
June 1982.
2. The purpose of the program is to determine how the traditional instit-
utions in the private sector--neighborhood groups, churches, voluntary
and ethnic organizations, corporations and labor unions--can help
individuals in need, particularly at a time of cutback in government
services.
3. There are four possible key milestones for the program:
*
A Presidential speech in July or August, 1981
*
Structural involvement of private sector leaders.
*
The State of the Union Message, January 1982
*
A final Report to the President by June 30, 1982
There are at least five tasks that will be begun in June with completion
timed so that the findings are available to meet the requirements
imposed by the milestones listed above.
TASK 1: To determine who is affected by cutbacks in social services.
TASK 2: To identify the specific needs that must be filled.
TASK 3: To determine how these needs can be met by private sector
institutions, and what are specific sources of help.
TASK 4: To develop the best communications strategy for White House
and Federal government.
TASK 5: To identify where government creates barriers or interferes
with private sector helping networks and possible areas
where government policies could provide incentives for the
self-help organizations.
2.
OBJECTIVES OF PROGRAM
1. To answer the public consensus to restore balance between
the public and private sectors in meeting social needs, and to
foster policy approaches that are consistent with traditional
values.
2. To determine how government and the private sector can work
together to address these social needs, particularly in a
time of necessary cutback in government services.
3. To suggest more efficient, more humane, and more effective means
of delivering services in such social areas as employment,
crime, housing, health care, public assistance, the arts and
humanities.
4. To demonstrate awareness of these problems and to show that
a new kind of positive response is underway.
5. To develop a complete strategy for addressing the social area
of American life, one that weaves together a refashioned govern-
ment strategy with renewed private sector initiatives.
3.
POTENTIAL NEW GOVERNMENT/PRIVATE SECTOR RELATIONSHIPS
1. Federal government devolves responsibility and/or funding to state
and local government. At least, this will provide more efficient
use of the public dollar; at best, it will produce more flexibility
and creativity.
EXAMPLE:
--Block grants
2. Government works in conjunction with private sector.
EXAMPLES:
--Job counseling and placement efforts modeled after Delaware
Governor duPont's pilot project.
--Labor Department efforts to work with private employers to generate
jobs for former CETA enrollees.
-Social Security Administration's program to train and employ dis-
abled persons in private sector jobs.
3. Government's role changes from service deliverer to stimulator of
private sector action by:
a) providing leadership
b) disseminating information
c) creating incentives Taxnicenties ete.
d) removing barriers
EXAMPLES:
-Highlighting successful job counseling, training, and placement
programs initiated by private sector parties.
--Identifying examples of how grassroots groups have dealt with pro-
blems of youth gangs, child care and assistance to the elderly and
communicating these examples.
--Market-oriented incentives to encourage more competition in the
health care industry.
--Reducing the adverse effect of government-sponsored meals-on-wheels
programs on privately-run meals programs.
--Easing overly-restrictive occupational licensure requirements.
Self-directed programs are carried out by traditional institutions
in the private sector including grassroots neighborhood groups, families,
churches, voluntary and ethnic organizations, corporations, and
labor unions.
The Appendix at the end of this paper provides some examples of specific
institutions as well as selected activities and programs that illustrate
the potential for success of private organizations.
4.
ELEMENTS OF PHASE-I, DETERMINING NEEDS
1. Analytical study - determine who will be affected by cutbacks and what
other needs exist that cannot at this time (or should not at any time)
be delivered by government.
2. Sounding function - receive information in regular meetings with private
sector groups as to perceived needs and how groups might participate.
3. Process of sensitization and communications - (within government, between
government and private sector, and outside government) convey fact that
attention is being paid to their problems and that work is underway.
5.
ROLE OF GOVERNMENT IN PHASE I
1. Provide data - specific contacts should be appointed and apprised
of data needs of this study. These include:
Associate OMB Director Don Moran
Assistant OMB Director for Budget Review
Assistant HHS Secretary Robert Rubin
Assistant Labor Secretary Angrisani
Assistant HUD Secretary Savas
National Endowment for Humanities
National Endowment for the Arts
OPL/Domestic Council representatives
ACTION Director Tom Paukens
Veterans Administration
Commerce Department - Jim Rosebush
Energy Department
Agriculture Department
2. Sounding function - key officials to gather information in meetings
with private sector groups include:
--members of the White House staff including Presidential aides,
domestic council and office of public liason,
top officials of departments and agencies.
3. Communications/sensitization
a) designated officials to use key language indicating that a program
is underway.
b) White House and agencies provide Baroody study with information
as to meetings, speeches, testimony and other targets of op-
portunity that can be used to disseminate information and create
motivation during the progress of the study.
c) White House and agencies provide Baroody study with information
on events that might affect timetables.
d) education function
6.
ROLE OF BAROODY STUDY IN PHASE I
1) provide detailed analysis of needs in social program area
2) begin gathering data on possible private sector solution models
3) carry on communications and dissemination planning
7.
STEPS IN THE SOUNDING FUNCTION
1) state the problem
a) cutback of government funds
b) many needs were not addressed even before this cutback
c) government programs in this area have generally failed
d) new approach needed
2) indicate basic conceptual approach
to develop approaches that highlight private sector successes,
energize the private sector to work in self-help ways, and re-
stimulate the natural helping networks that undergird society
3) ask questions as to perceived needs
("with regard to those areas that affect you, what are priority needs a)
generated by government cutbacks b) that exist and aren't being met re-
gardless of current government cutbacks.)
4) ask questions as to how private parties could be involved
("what are the perceived solutions)
(a briefing paper might be sent out in advance describing concept and
listing kinds of questions to be addressed so the meetings can be
productive.)
8.
Some guiding principles of this program
1. This is not designed simply to address 1982 budget reductions but
is a larger effort to redress imbalance between the public and pri-
vate sectors in addressing problems in social areas. This effort
will seek out all areas of need that can be addressed this way,
not just those arising in connection with the scaling back of existing
government programs.
2. This program does not attempt to produce a blueprint for the solution
of our social problems. It does seek to provide stimulus and a
framework geared to the natural helping networks in the private
sector.
3. It will minimize the hoopla and avoid overpromising.
4. Not strict volunteerism--the government does play a role.
5. Government has not turned its back on these problem areas, and is
developing a positive approach; but this approach does not feature
a spate of new federal programs.
6. This program rests on the premise that many answers to our problems
lie in moving decision-making away from the federal government;
answers will be sought, and where possible programs derived and
executed, by those who are more directly involved and affected.
Thus, new initiatives will bubble up from the private sector nurtured
by government encouragement, rather than filter down from overly-
rigid government programs.
9.
Next Steps
I would like to begin work on this project immediately.
The timetable displayed on the next page indicates that once we
reach an agreement that this project should go forward, we
would begin work on five tasks siumltaneously. While this
work would proceed through four phases, delineated by such
milestones as a public announcement and the State of the Union
address, we believe that work should begin on a variety of tasks
concurrently.
As a first step in this process I would suggest a meeting
between the key people at OMB with supervisory responsibility
in the areas pertinent to this study and members of my staff.
In particular, I would like Jack Meyer and Rudolph Penner at AEI
to meet with Don Moran, Associate Director for Human Resources,
Veterans and Labor and one or two other senior OMB officials
such as the Assistant Director for Budget Review. This
meeting, which should be held as soon as possible, would lay out
the parameters of the first task (determining who is affected by
new budget policies) and establish some of the data and informa-
tion needs that we anticipate.
Simultaneously, I will seek individual meetings with key
White House and agency people as well as selected leaders in the
private sector.
I met this month with key business leaders for preliminary
soundings. The annual AEI board meeting is June 18.
PHASE I
PHASE II
PHASE III
PHASE IV
ENCHMARKS
Concludes with public
Concludes with struc-
Concludes with State-of
Concludes with final
announcement
tural involvement of
Union message
report - June 30, 1982
private sector leaders.
URATION
4-10 weeks
PECIFIC
Task I - Who is affected?
CTIVITIES
Analytical study to deter-
mine needs
Task II - Determining
Meetings with private
Specific Needs.
sector groups.
1) meetings with in-
terested parties.
Task III - How Can Needs
Determine specific
Develop model for
Be Met?
-Development of Pri-
sources of help
identification of poten-
Gather information on
vate sector models
tial solutions.
private sector solution
-Meetings with busi-
models.
ness, labor, private
sector groups.
Task IV - Communications
Catalog private sec-
Continue communications
Sensitization process beg-
Development of Communi-
tor initiatives for
process, highlighting
ins. Dissemination pro-
cations
release through var-
successes.
cess begins.
Elaboration of dissemina-
ious media.
Release Interim report
Preparation of Presiden-
tion function.
State-of-the-Union
for comments and
tial announcement.
discussion
Task V - Public Policy
Recommend public policy
Stage. Identify barriers
initiatives.
and other ways government
1) reduce barriers
interferes with private
2) create incentives
sector action. Identify
potential incentives.
APPENDIX
POTENTIAL SOURCES OF ASSISTANCE
1. Corporations and Businesses
The corporation has been and will continue to be a contributor to the
solution of specific social problems. Corporate foundations can commit
economic resources to funding social programs. Corporate money histori-
cally has focused on research and development or experimental programming.
Corporations also contribute to specific social activities such as Meals
on Wheels, health care and the arts. Individual corporate leaders can
provide technical assistance to local groups. The key is to give the
corporation: a) reasonable recognition b) relatively limited liabilities
and c) some incentives (e.g., tax).
2. The Church
Many church organizations deliver services such as assistance to
the aged, child care, marriage and personal counseling. The chief
problem confronting churches is the requirement that programs not be
restricted to church members. Sanctions against proselytizing also
have hindered development of such programs. This last element has kept
church programs small. Flexibility in this area could produce a wider
range of church-sponsored social programs.
3. Labor Union Locals
Within limitations, labor union locals can raise funds for specific
projects of interest to their members. In many parts of the country,
union locals are operating social programs funded by state and federal
funds and member contributions.
4. Ethnic and Racial
The Sons of Italy, National Polish Alliance, chapters of the N.A.A.-
C.P., and many other such groups operate community programs with which
ethnic groups can identify and in which they can participate.
5. Social and Voluntary Organizations
Under this category one could find a host of groups ranging from
business organizations such as the Rotary and Kiwanis Clubs, women's
organizations such as the League of Women Voters, Daughters of the
American Revolution and chapters of the National Organization of Women.
Many of these organizations are clearly identified with social services
such as Meals on Wheels.
6. Neighborhood Groups
In neighborhoods all over the country there are grassroots groups
that can mobilize citizens for combating social and economic problems.
A host of successful efforts have been identified wherein families or
groups of individuals organized to address a specific social problem such
as youth gang warfare or urban dislocation. Many then move to deliver
other needed services in their communities.
i
Examples of Successful Institutions and Activities
Many private sector success stories stand in sharp contrast to public
sector failures. Here are some examples of successes that specifically
save government money:
Foster Care
Money spent on foster care in this country provides perverse incen-
tives to keep children in the foster care system, separated from a stable
home environment. A community group in Detroit challenged the adoption
practices of these foster care agencies, with startling results. (Homes
for Black Children in Detroit has revolutionized adoption procedures in
Michigan.)
They started with the belief that if a family cared for the children
of unwed mothers, it would also formally adopt the child. By removing
barriers for adoption, the results are substantial. (Homes for Black
Children placed 137 children. The 13 traditional agencies combined placed
only 96.) Over its ten-year existence, Homes for Black Children has
successfully placed over 700 children in permanent adoptive homes. As
a result, the infant units in the Detroit General Hospital and in two
maternal care homes are closed.
Youth Crime
In the mid-1960s, Philadelphia was plagued with gang violence. It
was known as "the youth gang capital of America." Deaths from gang
violence totaled more than 40 per year. To combat this problem, the
House of Umoja was formed. With unorthodox ideas, no formal training
and virtually no government aid, they turned the gang members toward
positive pursuits and gave them a sense of extended family. As a result,
deaths from gang violence have been reduced to about one a year.
Most federal money for youth crime has been spent on consultants,
on expanding the juvenile justice bureaucracy and on university-based
researchers who have offered few practical solutions to the problem.
Health
Arthritis, the nation's number 1 crippling disease, cost Americans
more than $14 billion a year. It affects more than 31 million Americans,
disabling many of them. But the disease is usually treatable if caught
early.
Burlington Industries, the world's largest textile manufacturer,
joined with the Arthritis Foundation and the University of North
Carolina's School of Medicine to establish the Industrial Rheumatology
Rehabilitation Center in Greensboro, North Carolina.
Most government payments for arthritis are made after the disease
has seriously affected the patient, whereas Burlington's approach is to
ii
invest in preventive treatments. This not only saves the government
money, but can save companies millions in insurance premiums and tax
payments.
Another corporation addressing preventive health care is Chevron,
which spends approximately $1 million a year on Health Fairs. Parti-
cipants are given complete physical examinations and are referred to
their physicians if problems are detected. This saves the participants
up to $100 for the cost of the check-ups, and can save millions in
additional health costs because of early detection of disease.
Education
In 40 public schools in Washington, D.C., 6,264 students failed to
pass their midyear promotion standards. The District, with no money
to hire new teachers to help the failing students, turned to volunteers.
It launched Operation Rescue, through which 1,200 volunteers worked in
the elementary schools to tutor youngsters.
By the end of the school year, the failure rate had been cut by
more than 50 percent, down to 2,454 students. The superintendent of
schools cited the volunteer program as a big factor in the turnaround.
Some 92 percent of the volunteers said they would participate in
the program again.
One example of a non-monetary corporate contribution occurred in
Cincinnati, where Proctor & Gamble Corporation assigned one of its senior
executives to the city's school system for two years to provide technical
assistance.
Examples of Regulatory Barriers to Self-Help.
Care for the Elderly
In Phillipsburg, Kansas, the Borum Gentle Care Home had for 23
years provided shelter, food and care for elderly people too infirm to
care for themselves.
This home was located in their own neighborhood, in easy walking
distance of friends and stores and operated without government aid. The
neighbors often aided it in times of stress. When the monthly charge
was no longer sufficient to cover the rising cost of fuel and food, some
sought public assistance, plus a $4.19-a day housing supplement.
With the housing allowance came a list of state and federal regu-
lations: the administrator must have a bachelor's degree; the residents'
activity must be monitored and recorded daily; intake forms must be
filled out. If the home is forced to close, its residents will have to
go to a more expensive nursing home at greater public expense.
iii
Day Care
Title XX of the Social Security Act provides money for welfare
recipients to organize and operate day care facilities. But some states
prohibit anyone without a college degree in early childhood education to
operate a day care facility. Illinois requires certification of any
informal day care arrangement. So, any person caring for more than five
children in their home must be licensed by the state. The conditions
required for certification require formal training. This precludes the
use of many competent neighborhood mothers.
Related AEI Studies
AEI performs research in economic, regulatory, health, legal, inter-
national, defense, legislative, political, tax, energy and social areas.
Several of our study centers will be called on in this effort to identify
innovative approaches to private sector action.
Not only the program but the processes for conducting the programs
will be examined.
One area of AEI study which has been underway since 1976 is directly
applicable to the program at hand. It is our Project on Mediating
Structures. We define mediating structures as those institutions which
stand between individuals in their private lives and the large-scale
organizations of society, particularly government. These include such
entities as the family, voluntary groups and the church.
When the current project is complete, five books will have been
published on the role of mediating structures in the areas of education,
health, housing, law enforcement and welfare.
We will continue to explore applications of mediating structures,
particularly in this new effort to shift major responsibilities to the
private sector and its imaginative institutions.
iv
fell here
PRIVATE SECTOR INITIATIVES
WORK PROGRAM SUMMARY
ACTION
ACCOMPLISH
1.
Summarize budget cuts and their impact
August 3
on the private non-profit sector.
Assess outlook for funding during the
balance of the Administration.
2. Analyze and summarize private sector
August 10
opinion and reaction to cuts.
3. Draft Presidential statement on
August 20
meeting public needs through private
resources. Incorporate in Labor Day
September 7
speech.
4. Brief the President on the private
August 30
sector initiatives program.
5. President asks cabinet to provide
(within 30 days) :
September 4
A. Examples of agency impediments
to shifting responsibility for
categorical programs to private
sector and action steps to correct.
B. Examples of how agencies can
develop private sector initiatives
through grant programs.
6. President establishes 6-month inter-
September 4
agency task force to help implement
the cabinet report as well as
discovering government-wide action
that can be taken to remove impediments.
7. President meets privately with twelve
September 15
non-profit sector leaders of influence
to solicit their views on how to
encourage private sector initiatives.
8.
Presidential advisors and senior staff
September 1-20
meet with opinion leaders in four non-
profit sector groups: Health and
Social Services, Education, Community
Development, the Arts, to discuss how
to encourage private sector initiatives.
2
ACTION
ACCOMPLISH
9. President speaks to major non-
September 30
profit voluntary group in confer-
ence (Council on Foundations,
Independent Sector, etc.).
10. President announces task force (30
September 30
opinion leaders) on private sector
initiatives; Goal: Discover and
promote ways to move from public sector
dependency to private sector. Also
consider ways to develop creative
private sector responses to public
problems.
11. Mid-Stream Presidential Task
April 1, 1982
Force Report.
12. Final Task Force Report and
September 30, 1982
presentation to Cabinet.
PRIVATE SECTOR INITIATIVES
MILESTONES
1. Brief the President.
August 30
2. President asks Cabinet to
September 4
report on impediments to
privitization and appoints
6-month interagency task force.
3. Labor Day Speech incorporates
September 7
Presidential statements on
private sector initiatives.
4. President speaks to major non-
September 30
profit conference.
5.
Presidential Task Force on
September 30
private sector initiatives
announced.
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
Raching
WASHINGTON
9 July 1981
To:
Mike Deaver
Elizabeth Dole
Bill Baroody
From:
Ed Meese
run
Subj:
Private Sector Voluntary Action
Attached is a proposal for a "President's Task Force on
Community Partnerships" which was prepared by William R.
Bricker, National Director of the Boys Clubs of America.
Bill and I worked together for several years as members
of the National Advisory Committee on Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention (appointed by President Ford). This
paper developed from a meeting Bill and I had some time ago,
in which he volunteered to present some ideas concerning how
private sector community organizations might develop an ef-
fective partnership to meet the need for local social services.
In particular, he had in mind efforts to diffuse potential
unrest during the summer months.
I would appreciate it if you would evaluate the enclosed
ideas and incorporate the suggestions as to actions and
personnel which might be applicable to your plans for the
private sector-volunteerism projects of this Administration.
Further contact with the Boys Clubs of America can be made
through Rick Miller, Director of Government/United Way Re-
lations for the Boys Clubs of America, 6501 Loisdale Court,
Suite 901, Springfield, Virginia 22150, Phone: 703/971-1102.
CC: Craig Fuller
Original to
Working Assumptions
The President's Task Force on Community Partnerships
*
The group will be called "The President's Task Force on
Community Partnerships."
*
The President will extend an invitation to prospective
Task Force participants.
*
The President will greet the Task Force and lay out their
charge.
*
The Task Force will meet in the Roosevelt or Cabinet Room
to ensure appropriate status andvisibility.
*
Task Force participants will be responsible for their own
travel expenses.
*
The White House will commit the staff and resources to provide
the necessary background data for the Task Force and to provide
general support as needed.
*
The meeting will run half day: 1:00 - 5:30 p.m.
*
As requested by Mr. Meese, BCA will offer ongoing leadership
and support to the Task Force.
Date of the Task Force Meeting
Because of the immediacy of the Task Force as outlined by
Mr. Meese, the Task Force must meet on either of the following
days:
May 15, 16, 18, 19, or 20.
President's Task Force on Community Partnerships
Suggested Agenda
I Purpose of the Task Force
II State of Low Income Communities
III Development of an Action Plan
IV Assignment of Responsibilities for Follow Through
V Decisions Regarding the Next Meeting
May 6, 1981
President's Task Force on Community Partnerships
Briefing Paper Outline
Paper A
Topic: The New Philosophy of Social Services and Their Delivery
1. Practices of the past 30 years have produced:
- huge government bureaucracy
- double digit inflation
- slow growth economy and dwindling industrial strength
- decaying urban centers
- high unemployment and uneven distribution of employment
- decline in respect for government and key social institutions
- ineffective delivery of services by the federal government
- attitudes of dependency on government rather than self-reliance
- increases in crime
- a sense that things are out of control
2. Absolutely essential that inflation be brought under control and
the economy be stimulated by:
- reducing the size of government
- cutting taxes
- returning decision making to the people through states and
local government
- reducing costly regulations and control
- restoring a sense of confidence by demonstrating the capacity
to make needed change
- providing a safety net for essential services to the truly
needy
- instilling in people of all ages a feeling of hope
3. Solutions to local problems and provision of services must flow
from the ingenuity of those on the scene and from those who have
the greatest stake in the problems.
Paper B
Topic: State of Low Income Communities Today
1. Deep-seated social conditions, deterioration of neighborhoods and
social conditions combine to create:
- a feeling of disenfranchisement and helplessness
- a sense that no one else cares so why should we
- a sense of urgency to get mine while the getting is good
- a lack of information about what is and is not available, or
what will or will not be available
- a lack of basic community servies, i.e., garbage and refuse
removal generates a lack of caring and a rise in frustration
- a feeling there is no place to go to get help or to express
concerns
- a very high state of mobility within the same community
- a lack of job opportunities that are accessible
- a lack of places to go, or things to do, leaves very large
numbers of people free with nothing to occupy their time
or energy
Briefing Paper Outline
2
2. The results are stress-ridden communities where
- there are huge blocks of undirected leisure time
- there is 20-40% unemployment, particularly among youth
- hostility is on the verge of exploding into anger
- some of the problems are also the "effect," as in the case
of crimes against property, and people victimization is of
particular concern
- large numbers of the population have given up and are governed
by a sense of ennui
- people redirect their frustration by acting out in anti-social
ways
- polarization exists by class, as well as by race
- there is no sense of responsibility for the community or
neighborhood
- distrust of individuals, groups, institutions and society
runs rampant, leaving a deep sense of aloneness and bitterness
- a subculture of negative behavior has become the norm
- the underground, or illegal economy, provides the chief source
of opportunity
3. The potential for violence and serious community disruption can be
triggered by
- overt use of police intervention
- by emergency conditions brought on by natural causes such as
heat waves, water shortages, or power outages
- improper planning for attending to the needs of large
gatherings of people
Paper C
Topic: Public Services That will Be Available
1. What are the existing public services currently in operation that
will:
- provide basic data regarding communities which are especially
volatile
- be available to state and local governments to assist in
emergency planning
- be providing ongoing services during the summer months, i.e.,
youth employment
- provide the safety net of service to the truly needy
Paper D
Topic: Some Potential Solutions
At the National Level
1. There is a need for the White House to generate a sense of hope
that is based on the concept that people will, if given the
opportunity, accept responsibility for generating action at the
local level.
2. There is need for the White House to spearhead a communications/
public relations campaign which will serve as a base of support
for organized local action by the private sector.
3. The influence of the White House will be the key motivating
force for mobilizing the private sector.
4. Existing networks for delivering services and reaching people
through existing facilities and programs must be harnessed.
5. Public officials and community leaders must be sensitized to
involve leaders of social services and recipients of services
in the decision making about the delivery of those services.
6. Once a plan of action has been recommended by a Presidential
Task Force and approved, sub-groups representing nation-wide
community networks can be brought together. Examples of such
groups include National Chamber of Commerce, National Council
of Mayors/League of Cities; National Collaboration for Youth, etc.
7. All groups involved at all levels need to promote information
regarding the services that are available to people.
At the State Level
1. The national leadership model should be replicated by Governors.
2. The state will play a major coordinating role where few, or no,
large urban areas exist.
At the Local Level
1. Mayors convene significant local leadership to develop a community
strategy for this summer and a long term approach to the new
style of operating.
2. In the short term we need to:
- develop plans for providing basic human needs, i.e., food,
water, a place to be, etc.
- provide jobs for youth and adults
- provide access to sporting and entertainment events and other
forms of recreational services
- marshall resources through the private sector so that available
community facilities can expand and/or extend hours of operation,
use existing knowledge and skills of people who know how to
organize community groups and conduct recreational and self-
help programs
- generate contingency plans dealing with emergency situations
of nature, such as electrical failure, heat waves, water
shortages, etc.
- sensitize police to avoid use of undue force and to utilize
a mediation system on a neighborhood basis
- plan carefully wherever large numbers of people are expected
to congregate
- utilize outreach street workers as communicators, as an early
warning system and to bring people into programs.
3. The concept of local campaigns can be built around the theme of
all of us pitching in to do 'OUR PART."
PRESIDENT'S TASK FORCE ON COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS
Suggested Members
William Aramony
Roberto C. Goizueta
President International Bd. Directors
President
United Way of America
The Coca-Cola Company
801 North Fairfax Street
P. O. Drawer 1734
Alexandria, Virginia 22314
Atlanta, Georgia 30301
William R. Bricker
Julius Irving
National Director
Pa. 76'rs Basketball Team
Boys Clubs of America
Veterans Stadium
771 First Avenue
Broad & Pattison Street
New York, New York 10017
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Charles L. Brown
John Johnson
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Publisher
American Telephone & Telegraph Co.
Ebony
195 Broadway
1270 Sixth Avenue
New York, New York 10007
New York, New York
John L. Burns
Ms. Jewel S. Lafontant, Partner
President
Lafontant, Wilkins & Butler
John L. Burns Company
69 W. Washington Street
200 Park Avenue - Suite 2615
Chicago, Illinois
New York, New York 10166
J. Paul Lyet
Solon Cousins
Chairman of the Board & CEO
Y.M.C.A.
Sperry Corporation
291 Broadway
1290 Avenue of Americas
New York, New York 10017
New York, New York 10019
Walter Cronkite
Donald V. Seibert
CBS, Inc.
Chairman, Chief Executive Officer
51 West 52nd Street
J. C. Penney Company, Inc.
New York, New York 10019
1301 Avenue of the Americas
New York, New York 10019
The Honorable Michael Curb
Lieutenant Governor
Martin Bud Seretean
The State of California
Chairman of the Board
State Capitol
Coronet Industries, Inc.
Sacramento, California 95814
P. O. Box 1248
Dalton, Georgia 30720
Clifton C. Garvin, Jr.
Richard Shinn
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Exxon Corporation
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
1251 Avenue of Americas
1 Madison Avenue
New York, New York 10020
New York, New York 10010
Franklin Thomas
President
Ford Foundation
320 East 43rd Street
New York, New York 10017
Robert D. Tuttle,
Vice President
Illinois Tool Works, Inc.
8501 W. Higgins Road
Chicago, Illinois 60631
Roberta van der Voort
National Executive Director
Camp Fire, Inc.
4601 Madison Avenue
Kansas City, Missouri 04112
Walter Williams, Ph.D.
Economist
The Heritage Foundation
601 White Plains Road
Trumbull, Ct. 06611
* Dr. Thomas Bennett
817 6th Street, S.W.
Washington, D. C. 20024
Attention: Media Productions
*Facilitator
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Office of the Associate Deputy Secretary
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Washington, DC 20230
June 12, 1981
fule
MEMORANDUM FOR: Craig Fuller
Deputy Assistant to the Robush Resident
S.
FROM:
James S. Rosebush
Office of Business James Liaison
Director
SUBJECT:
Private Sector Initiatives: Corporate
Employee Volunteerism Programs
Corporate Employee Volunteerism Programs are now considered
legitimate and worthwhile employee and community relations efforts
by the business community. Approximately 450 companies have some
kind of formalized programs and an equal number have unstructured
informal programs. Thirty percent of these companies with
structured programs are FORTUNE 1,000 companies. Two national
voluntary organizations assist and encourage corporate volunteerism
and they should be included in any Administration discussion of
this issue.
The Reagan Administration is committed to promoting a strong
private sector as a means of addressing public needs. It would
be appropriate, as a part of the private sector initiative effort,
to invite representatives of companies with effective volunteerism
programs to the White House to discuss how their programs help
fulfill this Administration's objectives and how these efforts
might be extended to other firms.
If such a group of executives is convened, it should be for
the purpose of sharing ideas with a commitment to a strong private
sector, and encouraging these companies to become active partici-
pants in the Administration goals. The White House should be
viewed as a convener and catalyst rather than imposing its own
agenda on the group. If a consensus among the group is, that a
more formal program to promote volunteerism could be developed,
staffing might be done by one of the two national volunteer
organizations.
Please let me know how I can be of assistance to you in
planning this meeting. The public is giving the Administration
a limited amount of time in which to prove that its strong faith
in the private sector for economic revitalization will bear fruit.
Attached are (a) agenda; (b) list of proposed participants; and,
(c) list of primary issues.
Attachments
AGENDA
9:00
Reception
9:15
Welcome
9:20
Briefing on Administration economic goals
and private sector initiative programs
10:00
Discussion of Administration expectations
of Corporate Volunteerism
10:15
Brief visit by Vice President Bush
10:20
Discussion by participants
12:00
Luncheon and continuing discussion
1:30
Finalize action steps
2:00
Adjournment
COMPANIES AND ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED IN VOLUNTEER PROGRAMS
Mr. Lawrence H. Williford
Mr. Thomas E. Harris
Vice President, Public Relations
Vice President
Allstate Insurance Company
Levi Strauss Foundation
Allstate Plaza North
and Community Affairs Dept.
Northbrook, Ill. 60062
Levi Strauss & Co.
(312) 293-3252
Levi Strauss Plaza
1155 Battery Street
Mr. H. Weston Clarke, Jr.
San Francisco, Calif. 94106
Vice President of Human Resources
(415) 544-6577
American Telephone and Telegraph Co.
295 N. Maple Avenue
Mr. Arthur I. Sternhell
Basking Ridge, N.J. 07920
Vice President
(201) 221-7900
Metropolitan Life Foundation
Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.
Mr. Lodwrick M. Cooke
One Madison Avenue, Area 11-D
Executive Vice President
New York, N. Y. 10010
Atlantic Richfield Co.
(212) 578-3515
515 S. Flower St., Rm. AP 5178
Los Angeles, Calif. 90071
Mr. David F. Rinsky
(213) 486-2533
Vice President
Public Affairs Dept.
Mr. Arthur V. Toupin
Prudential Insurance Company
Vice Chairman
5 Prudential Plaza
Bank of America
Newark, N.J. 07101
P. O. Box 37000
(201) 877-6430 or 7334
San Francisco, Calif. 94137
(415) 622-5131
Mr. Fernando Guzman
Vice President of Urban Affairs
Also copy to:
Wells Fargo Foundation
Wells Fargo Bank
Mr. Edward F. Truschke
770 Wilshire Blvd., 5th floor
Vice President
Los Angeles, Calif. 90017
Bank of America Foundation
(213) 683-7087
P. O. Box 37000
San Francisco, Calif. 94137
Mr. Theodore F. Weber, Jr.
(415) 953-3172
Executive Vice President
McGraw-Hill Inc.
Mr. Stephen Stamas
1221 Avenue of Americas
Vice President of Public Affairs
New York, N.Y. 10020
Exxon Corporation
(212) 997-2266
New York, N.Y. 10020
(212) 398-2440
Mr. Robert M. Schneider
Vice President of Corporate
Mr. Dean P. Phyperf
Affairs
Vice President of Finance
Xerox Corp.
International Business Machines
Long Ridge Road
Old Orchard Road
Stamford, Conn. 06904
Armonk, N.Y. 10504
(203) 329-8700 Ext. 3408
(914) 765-4351
COMPANIES AND ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED IN VOLUNTEER PROGRAMS
Mr. Thomas J. Fay
Mr. D. L. Bowers
Vice President, Communications
Vice Chairman
TRW, Inc.
Standard Oil of California
23555 Euclid Avenue
225 Bush Street
Cleveland, Ohio 44117
San Francisco, Calif. 94104
(216) 383-2240
(415) 894-3502
Dr. Mary J. Hall
Vice President for Corporate
Philanthropy
Weyerhaeuser Company
Tacoma, Wash. 98477
(206) 924-3171
NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
Mr. Kerry Kenn Allen
Mr. Brian O'Connell
Executive Vice President
President
Volunteer: National Center for
Independent Sector
Citizen Involvement
1828 L Street, N.W. Suite 1200
1111 N. 19th Street, Suite 500
Washington, D.C. 20036
Arlington, Va. 22209
(202) 659-4007
(703) 276-0542
CORPORATE EMPLOYEE VOLUNTEERISM PROGRAMS
ISSUES TO NOTE
1.
Possible Questions
Voluntary organizations are concerned that the
Administration is attempting to shift too much
responsibility to the private sector.
Many business people subscribe to the theory that
volunteerism should not be a concern of business
corporations.
There may be a perception that government is trying
to coerce business for its own purpose.
Companies may be reticent to take a lead role for
fear of criticism from shareholders.
2.
Supporting Comments
Corporations have long since decided that programs
like this are legitimate, enhance the corporation's
image and boost employees morale.
Corporations would relish the opportunity to be
leaders in promoting a strong private sector.
The corporation is the perfect setting for promoting
volunteerism on a local level.
File
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
to file
WASHINGTON
June: 1, 1981
VOLUNTARY ACTION - PRIVATE SECTOR PROBLEM SOLVING
Meeting with:
John McClaughry OPD
Jack BUrgess
OPL
Alexander Trowbridge, President, NAM
T. George Harris , media consultant
Richard C. Cornuelle, author
Stan Modic, editor, Industry Week
John McClanahan, INdustry Week
Bill Dietel, Rockefeller Brothers Fund
David Bowes, NAM
Joe Jaworski, Houstonian Foundation
Purpose of the meeting was to discuss ways White House could
stimulate voluntary action and problem solving in the private
sector.
Consensus:
The President has moved effectively to cut back
wasteful and ineffective government programs. And he is known to
strongly favor voluntary action and private sector problem solving
as the alternative to government programs. BUt to date the President
has not taken any action to promote voluntary action.
The Administration has given the impression to the
public that the private sector will step in to meet problems previously
addressed by government programs. But there is grave concern among
the people in the meeting that if the President does not act effectively
to mobilize and inspire the private sector, their response will be
inadequate; the public will get discouraged; and pressure to reinstate
government spending programs will rise again.
There is a limit to how much foundations and charities
can do to respond to new needs. The rising standard deduction has
reduced charitable giving (should be made a credit); lowering capital
gains taxes has reduced gifts of appreciated securities; the 20% limit
on gifts to foundations controlled by the donor should be lifted.
Business and industry must be mobilized to act, particularly in the
area of youth unemployment.
Important for the President to move quickly to inspire
America to work together as citizens to meet national needs. Every day
lost is an opportunity diminished and a danger increased,
cc; BUrgess, Bakshian, Deaver, Anderson
PAUL LAXALT
6/6 Frank draft? - who else
NEVADA
handles volunt earism ?
WASHINGTON OFFICE:
315 RUSSELL OFFICE BUILDING
(202) 224-3542
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
CARSON CITY OFFICE:
committee ON JUDICIARY
United States Senate
705 NORTH PLAZA STREET
(702) 883-1930
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510
LAS VEGAS OFFICE:
300 Las VEGAS BLVD., SOUTH
(702) 385-6547
RENO OFFICE:
300 BOOTH STREET
(702) 784-5568
MEMO TO:
Jim Baker
FROM:
Paul Laxalt
DATE:
June 3, 1981
I've been working with Rob on the private
sector plan and think it has great potential.
It seems to insulate the President adequately.
What's needed now is:
1. Sign off by you
2. Designation of White House person to
handle -- Elizabeth Dole?
3. Designation of outside person to coalesce
private sector (Jus Dart - Kitchen Cabinet)
Know your cup "runneth over" but would
appreciate your early consideration.
Copies to: Howard Baker
Jim Cannon
Rob Mosbacher, Jr.
JAB will see Bill Baroody
To Baroody
6/3 - - 3:00 p.m. W/RR
Callamg,+
applain.
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JAMES A. BAKER, III
FROM:
ROBERT MOSBACHER, JR.
DATE:
May 28, 1981
REGARDING:
STATUS OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR PROPOSAL
After extensive discussion, including some five White House
meetings, a consensus has emerged on the particular elements of
a private sector proposal. The proposal provides for a modest,
realistic private sector program in the area of employment, which
we believe has a high probability of success and a relatively low
risk of exposure or embarrassment to the Administration.
We have considered carefully the danger of raising false
expectations among the public about the private sector's ability
or willingness to deliver an assortment of social services and
sought to avoid it by selecting an initial objective which we
regard as attainable and which will offer us a solid opportunity
to test the concept in action.
We also were quite sensitive to the problem of involving the
President prematurely in the program before its success was assured.
With those considerations in mind, the following recommendations
are made:
(1) Limit the focus of the program, initially, to
employment, with the specific goal of encouraging
the private sector to employ as many of the 325,000
displaced CETA workers as possible. (The NAB is
already working on part of this with the Labor Depart-
ment, and their efforts would be folded in.);
(2) Form a steering committee of approximately 15 to 25
top representatives of small, medium, and large
businesses who will help implement the short-term plan
and formulate a much broader plan for the future
(names are being solicited informally from the organi-
discum Pearer with
6/9
zations involved in our working group);
(3) Bring the steering committee group to the White House
to meet informally and off-the-record with you and/or
Ed Meese at an appropriate date in the very near future.
James A. Baker, III
May 28, 1981
Page 2
(4) At that meeting, discuss an agenda consisting of
the feasibility and implementation of the CETA project
in the short term and the formulation of a broader
list of goals, possibly including summer jobs for youth,
community development, etc.;
(5) Emphasize the President's interest in this effort and
in a broader renewal of local volunteer activities,
and designate a contact point in the White House under
you, Meese, or Deaver, who will keep the President
informed of the steering committee's progress and
coordinate Executive Branch participation in the pro-
gram; and
(6) After at least half of the 325,000 are employed or
scheduled for employment, bring the steering committee
back to the White House, along with a larger group of
major contributors to the program's success for a
gathering at which the President publicly embraces the
program, commends the steering committee, and gives it
a broader mandate or charge.
That, in a nutshell, is what we recommend at the outset. We are
aware of the other Administration/private sector activities under
consideration and believe that those activities can be effectively
folded into a single program. However, we remain convinced that
the primary emphasis should be placed upon the private sector,
particularly in the short run, because it is identifiable, accountable,
and result-oriented. Once the private sector is involved in a mean-
ingful way, then we can encourage the efforts of the multitude of
local foundations, churches, and civic organizations.
Finally, I believe it is important that the steering committee
look as though it were formed at the initiative of the private sector
rather than at the behest of the White House. Therefore, it would be
wise to find a potential chairman to bring the group together as soon
1
as possible. Please let me know if you have any questions about any
of this, and I look forward to the opportunity to discuss it briefly
with you soon.
6/1 - To MKD - per JAB reques
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
(202) 862-5800
1150 Seventeenth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036
Fate
May 22, 1981
MEMORANDUM FOR JAMES BAKER, ED MEESE, MIKE DEAVER
FROM
WILLIAM J. BAROODY, JR.
SUBJECT
PRIVATE SECTOR INITIATIVES
This follows our discussions of last week and earlier this week. It
summarizes the basic approach I put forward and outlines the tasks
that need to be addressed with a suggested ambitious timetable for
initial progress in achieving them.
This should be a one-year program -- June 1, 1981 - June 30, 1982.
Four key milestones are suggested during the year:
(1) A Presidential speech in July or August, 1981
(2) Structured involvement of private sector leaders
(3) The State of the Union Message, January 1982
(4) A final Report to the President by June 30, 1982
Purpose of Program
To determine how the traditional institutions in the private sector --
neighborhood groups, churches, voluntary and ethnic organizations,
corporations and labor unions -- can help individuals in need,
particularly at a time of cutback in government services.
There are at least five tasks that will be begun in June with completion
timed so that the findings are available to meet the requirements
imposed by the milestones listed above.
TASK 1:
Who is affected by cutbacks in social services? Cooperation
needed from OMB and other Departments and agencies.
TASK 2: What are the specific needs that must be filled?
TASK 3:
How can these needs be met by private sector institutions?
What are specific sources of help?
TASK 4: What is best communications strategy for White House and
Federal government?
TASK 5:
Scholars to be assigned to study the problem of where
government creates barriers or interferes with private
sector helping networks and possible areas where government
policies could provide incentives for the self-help
organizations.
-2-
Presidential Speech - July/August, 1981
Lays out basic concept of society in balance (The Reagan Vision)
with public and private institutions fulfilling their proper roles.
The President demonstrates his understanding of basic societal
problems and the fact that he has a complete strategy -- one that
addresses governmental and non-governmental imperatives.
Structured Involvement of Private Sector Leaders
Ultimate success requires the involvement of key leaders from the
private sector. This could be accomplished in various ways, ranging
from a series of consultative meetings with large numbers of private
sector representatives to the formal appointment of a Presidential
Commission composed of perhaps 20 to 25 private sector leaders.
This process could begin as early as the summer speech or as late
as the January State of the Union message.
State of the Union Message - January 1982
A preliminary catalogue of possible sources of help should be
highlighted in State of the Union Message. Message should be followed
up with White House and regional conferences to explain the challenge
to private sector groups and to hear from them.
Final Report - June 30, 1982
Will include recommendations as to how public policy can remove
artificial barriers to self-help efforts and, where appropriate,
provide incentives to such efforts.
Initial steps (needed to demonstrate seriousness of intent)
1.
Brief meeting with President and Baroody before June 1,
if possible.
2.
Baroody contact in the White House should be Baker,
Meese or Deaver.
3.
Formal announcement of this effort could come in July/
August speech or at the end of the summer coincident
with completion of Task 1.
make 3 copies pls-
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 20, 1981
MEMORANDUM FOR MIKE DEAVER
as
FROM:
CRAIG L. FULLER
SUBJECT:
Voluntary Action
I just discovered another major resource which can assist with
the private sector initiative effort.
Tom Pauken, Director, ACTION, visited with Ed Meese and me a
few days ago. One of the subjects discussed was ACTION's
voluntary programs. Tom submitted the attached report which
you will find of interest. I suspect if you are still seeking
an individual to coordinate the related efforts, Tom Pauken
would be delighted to provide you with such an individual.
Attachment
AGENCY
THE
ACTION
FOR
ACTION
HOLUNTEER SERVICE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20525
OFFICE OF
MAY 18 1981
THE DIRECTOR
MEMORANDUM
To:
Craig L. Fuller
Deputy Assistant to the President and
Director of the Office of Cabinet Administration
From:
Thomas W. Pauken, Director Thomase. Panken
Subject: Voluntary Action in the Reagan Administration
From the outset, this Administration has been concerned with
the special role that non-governmental voluntary action can
play in American society. A number of proposals have been
made to create a structure for White House involvement to
encourage individual initiative outside government channels
in aiding the less fortunate. The need for public Admini-
stration support for voluntary action has become acute in
light of the significant restructering of government involve-
ment in the economy that the President has proposed in his
economic program. With resources back in the hands of the
people, new structures can and will develop to respond
privately to the needs of Americans.
Voluntary action, not government coercion, is the solution
to our problems. That is not at issue. How, then, can this
Administration provide a locus for encouragement and support
of the private voluntary sector? I believe that ACTION can
be an effective vehicle for the expression of such concrete
policies as the Administration might wish to pursue, and for
the following reasons:
1. ACTION is in place. There is no need to create a new
agency or new office. ACTION is staffed, has lines of
communication with Congress, and has an administrative
structure. All of this would have to be duplicated if a new
agency or White House office were established to handle the
Administration's voluntary action efforts.
2. ACTION can fulfill its mission. The experience of the
agency has been with voluntarism. It has dealt with the
private voluntary sector and has administered government
programs to encourage voluntarism. ACTION has had success
with its Older American Volunteer Programs, particularly
Foster Grandparents, which the Administration already
strongly supports. The pool of administrative talent to act
in this area is presently at ACTION. Any other government
effort would have to draw on the expertise of ACTION if it
PEACE CORPS
VISTA
UNIVERSITY YEAR FOR ACTION
NATIONAL STUDENT VOLUNTEER PROGRAM
FOSTER GRANDPARENTS
RETIRED SENIOR VOLUNTEERS
-2-
were to operate efficiently; the most efficient operation of
all would be to use ACTION itself, and not to fragment or
duplicate the support of voluntary action.
3. All the administrative skills in the world will not
produce desired results unless the people establishing
policy can be relied upon to keep the interests of the
Administration at the forefront. Competence in an agency is
necessary but not sufficient. The current policy people
whom the Administration has chosen to serve with me are both
loyal to the Administration and committed conservatives. As
their credentials make clear, (see attachment) no one in a
policymaking position at ACTION needs on-the-job training in
the political philosophy that guides this Administration.
Furthermore, I believe that the political appointees at
ACTION can actively seek ways to further goals of this
Administration. For example, one of my top priorities as
Director of ACTION is to encourage the mobilization, at
minimal cost to the taxpayers, of assistance to Vietnam
veterans in need by Vietnam veterans who have persevered and
succeeded. At a time when budget constraints necessitate the
reduction of direct government aid to Vietnam-era veterans,
the Administration, through ACTION, will have a program
whereby Americans, through voluntary efforts, take care of
each other. In the continuing process to "wean" Americans
and American institutions from direct dependence on govern-
ment for financial support, there will certainly be occas-
ions for Administration proposals for specific voluntary
action, as with the plight of the Vietnam veteran. ACTION
can provide the political leadership to head off delicate
problems for an Administration committed to private-sector
revitalization.
4. A vehicle exists whereby ACTION can incorporate the
active assistance of prominent Administration supporters
from the private profit and nonprofit sectors who want to
contribute to voluntary solutions to our Nation's problems.
No significant support need be turned away simply because
an already-operating agency is used to effect the
Administration's commitment to voluntarism. No new legis-
lation is needed. A National Voluntary Service Advisory
Council is provided for in ACTION's organic legislation.
The Council, established in ACTION, is to consist of
25 Presidentially-appointed members. Representatives from
the business community, religious leaders, and persons
from the private voluntary sector could work together to
advise ACTION as to new ways to encourage private voluntary
activity.
In sum, then, ACTION provides the Administration with a
ready means by which it can translate its policies with
respect to encouraging voluntary action into practice. No
-3-
new bureaucracy would have to be created. A career staff
whose training has been in voluntarism is in place in
ACTION. ACTION is led by people who are loyal to the
Administration. These policy people will respond quickly to
initiatives from the Administration, and will actively seek
ways to further the philosophy which guides the Administra-
tion. ACTION will not exclude others from the policymaking
process; indeed, the President already has at his disposal a
means by which supporters of his views on voluntary action
can be given a voice in the government, through the National
Voluntary Service Advisory Council.
May 13, 1981
ACTION POLITICAL APPOINTEES
ANTONIO BENEDI - Staff Assistant, full-time staff member of
Reagan for President campaign; staff assistant to Morton
Blackwell; V.P., Pan Caribbean Export Co.; President, Leisure
Consultant Firm of Washington. References include Morton
Blackwell and Joseph Blatchford.
MARK BLITZ - Associate Director of Policy, Planning, Evalua-
tion; A.B. and Ph.D. (political science), Harvard University,
taught at Harvard University and University of Pennsylvania;
studied with Harvey Mansfield (student of Leo Strauss) ; managed
honors program in Government at Harvard. References include
Irving Kristol, Leslie Lenkowsky, Smith-Richardson Foundation,
and Jeffrey Bergner, L.A. to Senator Richard Lugar.
BETTY BRAKE - Director, Older American Volunteer Program;
Co-chairman, Executive Director of 1976 and 1980 Oklahoma
Reagan for President Committee; assistant to Director of Okla-
homa Political Action Committee; Goldwater for President Com-
mittee, Assistant Campaign Director for Oklahoma. References
include Senator Don Nickles, Congressman Mickey Edwards, Tulsa
Mayor James Inhofe and Rick Shelby.
DANIEL BUCKLEY - Special Assistant, Runaway Youth; Attorney;
founding director of National Review, aide to U.S. Senator
James Buckley; a charter member of the N.Y. State Conservative
Party; Minority Counsel, House Committee on Science and Tech-
nology.
JAMES BURNLEY - Director of VISTA; B.A., Yale University; J.D.,
Harvard Law School; Chairman, 1980 Reagan for President (N.C.
6th Cong. District) ; Chairman, N.C. 6th Cong. District's
Republican Party (1979-80). References include Senator Jesse
Helms, Senator John East, Congressman James Broyhill and Con-
gressman Eugene Johnston.
MARION ELIZABETH CERNANSKY - Special Assistant to Deputy Direc-
tor; management analyst of FDA; management consultant and
senior staff member of health care consulting firm; consultant/
special assistant in Executive Office of Governor Ogilvie.
References include J. Robert Barr, Cooke County GOP Chairman;
Marion B. Oglesby, Congressional Affairs Office of the White
House; and Harold Byron Smith, Illinois National Committee-
man.
- 2 -
THEODORE M. CORMANEY - Assistant to Director for Communications,
veteran of 8 years on Capitol Hill and 14 years in Washing-
ton public relations; Communications Director of Senate
GOP Conference; press secretary to Senator William Roth;
Administrative Assistant to Rep. Toby Roth; created the 900-
station "Operation Airwaves" for the Conference.
LAWRENCE F. DAVENPORT Associate Director for Domestic and
Anti-Poverty Operations, Ed. D., Fairleigh Dickinson; Chief
Academic Officer of San Diego Community College Dist.; appointed
by President Nixon to Chair National Advisory Council on
Vocational Education and the National Advisory Council on
Equality of Education. References include Clarence Pendleton,
Urban League of San Diego; Rev. George Walker Smith; Jackson
Lee, former chairman of N. Carolina Republican Party.
RICHARD ENGLISH - Associate Director for Planning and Evalua-
tion. Attorney; A.A. for Policy in Office of Governor
William Clements (TX); Director of Political Research for
George Bush for President campaign. References include
George Bush, James Baker.
ARTHUR F. FERGENSON General Council; graduated first in class
at Yale Law School; clerked for Chief Justice Burger; co-
counsel to Senator James Buckley (Buckley V. Vales) ; has
contributed to The American Spectator, member, YAF. References
include Robert Tyrrell, Fred Fielding and Gerald Ford.
JACQUELINE HARKER Consultant. Southern California
"Commitment '80" Chairman; 1976 and 1980 delegate to Republi-
can National Conventions; Southern Regional Vice Chairman of
California GOP; V.P. of the National Federation of GOP Women;
appointed by Governor Reagan to State Social Welfare Board and
to Governor's Advisory Committee on Pre-School Programs.
References include Robert Carleson, California Lt. Governor
Mike Curb, Congressman John Rousselot and Holmes Tuttle.
CONSTANCE C. HECKMAN Intergovernmental Affairs; active in
YAF (husband, Bob Heckman, FCM Chairman); 1976, Chairman of
N.Y. Youth for Reagan; 1980, Staff Director of YAF's Detroit
'80 Operation for President Reagan; Assistant Executive Direc-
tor of American Legislative Exchange Counsel. References
include Lyn Nofziger, Frank Donatelli and Donald Totten.
- 3 -
CONSTANCE HORNER - Associate Director for Policy, M.A. in
English, University of Maryland; active in Reagan-Bush campaign;
published in the N.Y. Times Magazine, the Wall Street Journal
and The American Spectator. References include Irving Kristol,
Ed Feulner, Jeane Kirkpatrick and Congressman Jack Kemp.
TERRY LANDOLT Director of Communications. Publisher -
Editor for Fleet Street Corp.; 1976 Press Director for the
President Ford Committee (Ill.) ; speech writer and press
coordinator for Committee Chariman, Governor Richard Ogilvie.
References include Minority Leader Robert Michel.
MARK R. LEVIN - Special Assistant to the Director. Assistant
Counsel, Texas Instruments; intern, Office of A.A. to Chief
Justice Burger; elected to Cheltenham Twp. School Board
(P.A.) ; founder, Committee for Tax Limitation; Chairman,
Reagan for President, Cheltenham Township; member, YAF.
References include Senator Paul Laxalt, Senator Orrin
Hatch, Dr. Mark Cannon, Dr. Lev Dobriansky.
THOMAS L. LIAS - Assistant Director for Volunteer Activities.
B.A. in journalism, University of Iowa; staff member, GOP
Congressional Campaign Committee (1956-71) ; Deputy Special
Assistant to President in Office of Harry Dent (1969-71)
aide to Ambassador Bush at U.N. and RNC (1971-74); Director of
Professionals for Reagan-Bush. References include James Baker,
Bryce Harlow, Senator Robert Dole and H.R. Gross of Iowa.
THOMAS G. MOORE - Director of Recruitment, B.A. in English,
The Citadel; Director of Recruiting, The Citadel; candidate,
U.S. House of Representatives, 1st District, S.C., GOP Primary
(6/80). References include Senator Strom Thurmond, Secretary
of Energy James Edwards, Lee Atwater.
WINNIE PIZZANO - Deputy Director-Designate of ACTION. A
principal with Arthur Young and Co. - Director of Health
Care Practice; Assistant to Governor Richard Ogilvie; L.A. to
Congressman Robert Michel with responsibilities for Labor, HEW
and Appropriations issues; worked in Goldwater campaign;
worked for F. Clifton White and Associates.
- 4 -
SAMUEL A. SCHULHOF - Assistant Director. Director of Office
of Recruitment and Communication. Special Assistant to Secre-
tary of HEW; President and C.O.O. of chain of stores in Pitts-
burgh; a Pirncipal with the Hay Group (largest Human Resources
Consulting Firm). References include James Brady,
Neal Freeman and David Wimer, GOP Chairman of Allegheny Co.
JOHN P. WHEELER, III - Vietnam Vet Program. Honors graduate
Harvard Busness School and Yale Law School; commissioned from
West Point as a Distinguished Cadet; artilleryman and para-
trooper; captain, worked on General Staff of U.S. Army in
Vietnam and in strategic planning sections of the Office of
Secretary of Defense and the Joint Staff; co-founder, Director
Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund.
KAY WILSON - Research Assistant. Appointed by Governor
Reagan to California Youth Advisory Committee to Selective
Service System; appointed by Shasta County Board of Super-
visors to County Welfare Advisory Commission; employed by
Library of Congress. References include Charles Heatherly
and Robert Reilly of the Heritage Foundation, and Rita La
Velle, former aide to Governor Reagan.
W. GREGORY WIMS - Congressional Affairs. Provided research
for Governor Reagan's speech to the National Urban League;
L.A. to Congressman Melvin Evans; staff member to Congress-
man Newton Steers. References include Jay Parker, Chairman
of the Lincoln Institute of Washington, D.C.
AGENCY
THE
ACTION
FOR
ACTION
SERVICE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20525
MAY 11 1981
The ACTION Mission
The ACTION mission, as specified in Reorganization Plan
No. 1 of 1971, the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973,
and Executive Order 12137, has three essential components:
First: ACTION is the central clearinghouse for the
management of the Federal government's relationships with
the vast and diverse private voluntary sector and for the
coordination of volunteer activities within the Federal
government.
Second: ACTION provides small amounts of seed money
to test and develop innovations in voluntary action which
can be replicated in the private sector when the value of
the activities has been demonstrated and accepted. State
Offices of Voluntary Citizen Participation are an example
of this kind of activity.
Third: ACTION administers a limited number of
permanent volunteer programs which, for various reasons,
do not lend themselves either to a block grant mechanism
or to transfer to the private sector.
The Foster Grandparent and Senior Companion programs
fall into this category. Only with Federal sponsorship
activities. could these programs continue as low-cost, sub-minimum wage
Summarizing, ACTION originated, and continues to exist,
because of a need within the Federal establishment for a
coordinating mechanism to respond to the needs of the private
voluntary sector. As functions of government are moved from
Federal to state, local and private responsibility, the need
for this mechanism will continue. As new approaches develop
at the local level in response to local needs no longer
receiving Federal support, the private voluntary sector
will assume an increasingly important position and will have
a greater need for the coordinative and technical assistance
resources which are available through ACTION.
PEACE CORPS
VISTA
UNIVERSITY YEAR FOR ACTION
NATIONAL CENTER FOR SERVICE LEARNING
FOSTER GRANDPARENT PROGRAM
RETIRED SENIOR VOLUNTEER PROGRAM
SENIOR COMPANION PROGRAM