[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 96 (Friday, July 17, 1998)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1338-E1339]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    INTRODUCTION OF THE COMMUNITY SERVICES AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1998

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. FRANK RIGGS

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                         Friday, July 17, 1998

  Mr. RIGGS. Mr. Speaker, today I want to join with Chairman Bill 
Goodling and others in the introduction of important legislation, the 
Community Services Authorization Act of 1998. This legislation 
reauthorizes the Community Service Block Grant program, and 
incorporates many positive changes into the program.
  The Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) provides funds to States 
and local communities for activities designed to fight poverty and 
foster self-sufficiency. CSBG provides funds to 1,134 ``eligible 
entities''--mostly local non-profit Community Action Agencies in 96 
percent of all counties. The community action network is doing a very 
effective job at addressing the needs of high-poverty communities 
throughout the nation, but this is not to say that we cannot continue 
to make improvements in these efforts. We can and should expect no less 
than excellence in this and all

[[Page E1339]]

other federal programs. Working together we can make improvements in 
CSBG and related anti-poverty programs that will improve services for 
the poor in each individual local community. I believe that this 
legislation moves us in this direction.
  The activities of local programs under CSBG vary widely depending on 
the needs and circumstances of each local community. Common uses of 
funds include the coordination of programs and services for the poor, 
and the provision of emergency assistance in local communities. CSBG 
funds are also spent on education (including Head Start), employment, 
housing, nutrition, health, income management, and emergency services--
filling gaps in programs that are specifically designed to provide 
these services.
  Over the years I have visited ``CAP'' agencies in my District and I 
know of the important work that they do in helping families break the 
cycle of poverty. At a time when we are having great success in moving 
individuals off of welfare into the workforce--leading to self-
sufficiency, it is vitally important to provide local communities with 
the resources and the flexibility to respond to individual local needs 
to help supplement this effort. Following are some of the highlights in 
our legislation.
  Local Control. First, this legislation builds on the strengths of 
local flexibility, local authority, and especially on the strengths of 
the local tri-partite boards that oversee the CSBG program in each 
local community. The unique structure of these boards--including the 
direct involvement of low-income individuals in the community--is key 
to the success of these local efforts. This legislation maximizes the 
role of the individuals that are to be served in programs assisted 
under CSBG, in the design and delivery of such services.
  Linkages and Leveraging. We will continue to encourage development of 
effective partnerships between governments, local communities, and 
charitable organizations (including faith-based organizations) to meet 
the needs of impoverished individuals. In our legislation, we hope to 
encourage a broadening of the resource base for programs directed to 
eliminate poverty, so as to secure a more active role for private, 
religious, charitable, and neighborhood-based organizations in the 
provision of services. CSBG's more than $4 to $1 leveraging of every 
federal dollar invested is exemplary. We want to build on this positive 
record.
  We also continue to stress the importance of local community action 
programs in filling in gaps and in crisis intervention--providing a 
true safety net in each local community. This is especially important 
in making our welfare reform efforts successful.
  Accountability. While we don't want to tell States and local 
communities what to do, we do need to have a better understanding of 
how federal funds are spent and what types of services are provided. 
Under this bill we have included a requirement that the Department of 
Health and Human Services work with States and local eligible entities 
to facilitate the development of a performance measurement system to be 
used by States and local grantees to measure their performance in 
programs funded through CSBG. This builds on a voluntary performance 
measurement system begun by HHS several years ago called ``ROMA'', and 
would allow local communities to determine their own priorities and 
establish performance objectives accordingly. Each State and local 
eligible entity that receives CSBG funds would be required to 
participate in the performance measurement system by October 1, 2001. 
States would be required to annually prepare and submit a report to the 
Secretary on the performance results of the State and the local 
eligible entities.
  Role Of Faith-Based And Other Neighborhood-Based Provders. The 
legislation recognizes the important role that private, neighborhood-
based organizations, including faith-based organizations, play in the 
comprehensive delivery of services to individuals and families in 
poverty. Under the bill, we clarify that faith-based providers are 
eligible and important providers of services. We also encourage these 
organizations to have significant input into the design and 
implementation of the system.
  Federal-to-State Formula. Because the formula in the Community 
Services Block Grant has been frozen in time since 1981, changes in 
poverty have not been reflected in the distribution of funds to States 
under the block grant program over the past 17 years. To address this 
concern, the bill includes a change in the federal-to-State formula, 
however only for funds that are appropriated in future years that 
exceed levels appropriated for CSBG in fiscal year 1999. In other 
words, if and when funding exceeds the level appropriated for CSBG in 
FY 1999, these additional funds would be distributed to States based on 
the formula that are contained in the original Economic Opportunity Act 
(EOA) based \1/3\ on poverty; \1/3\ on poverty; \1/3\ on unemployment; 
and \1/3\ on welfare.
  New Uses Of Funds. Because CSBG is a very flexible block grant, we do 
not prescribe how funds in each local community must be spent. The bill 
does however include several new initiatives for which States and local 
areas may use CSBG funds. These new initiatives include: fatherhood and 
other community-based initiatives that are designed to strengthen the 
family and encourage parental responsibility; initiatives to strengthen 
and improve the relationship between local communities and law 
enforcement (which may include neighborhood and community policing 
initiatives); literacy initiatives (including family literacy 
initiatives); and youth development programs in high poverty 
communities (including after-school child care). The bill also 
prioritizes programs that are tied to welfare reform and that encourage 
self-sufficiency.
  Finally, the draft bill retains existing discretionary programs 
established under CSBG, including the community economic development 
program that facilitates economic development initiatives in high 
poverty areas.
  Mr. Speaker, the Community Services Authorization Act of 1998 is 
based in good public policy, and makes many positive changes to the 
Community Services Block Grant program. I invite Members of the House 
to join with me in support of this legislation, that will truly make a 
difference for individuals in need.

                          ____________________