Community Development Block Grants at 40: Time for a Makeover

References

• Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. (1967). Fiscal balance in the American federal system (Vol. 1). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
   Google Scholar
• Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. (1977). Community development: The workings of a federal-local block grant. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
   Google Scholar
• Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. (1978). Summary and concluding observations: The intergovernmental grant system—an assessment and proposed policies. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
   Google Scholar
• Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. (1980). In brief—the federal role in the federal system: The dynamics of growth. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
   Google Scholar
• American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, Public Law 111-5, February 17, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Banfield, E. (1974). The unheavenly city revisited. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.
   Google Scholar
• Berry, B. J. L. (1985). Islands of renewal in seas of decay. In P. E.Peterson (Ed.), The new urban reality (pp. 69–96). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Boyd, E. (2012). Community Development Block Grants: Fundings issues in the 112th congress and recent funding history (R41754). Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.
   Google Scholar
• Boyd, E., Mulock, B. K., Smale, P., Cowan, T., Laney, G. P., & Foote, B. E. (2006). An overview of the Administration's Strengthening America's Communities Initiative (RL32823). Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.
   Google Scholar
• Briggs, X. (2008). Democracy as problem solving: Civic capacity in communities across the globe. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bringing communities into the 21st century: A report on improving the Community Development Block Grant program (January 31, Report 109–365). Subcommittee on Federalism and the Census of the Committee on Government Reform, U.S. House of Representatives, 109th Cong. 2 (2006).
   Google Scholar
• Bunce, H. L. (1976). An evaluation of the Community Development Block Grant formula. Washington, DC: Office of Policy Development and Research, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
   Google Scholar
• Bunce, H. L., & Goldberg, R. L. (1979). City need and community development funding. Washington, DC: Division of Evaluation, Office of Policy Development and Research, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
   Google Scholar
• Bunce, H. L., Neal, S. G., & Gardner, J. L. (1983). Effects of the 1980 census on community development funding. Washington, DC: Community Development and Fair Housing Analysis Division, Office of Policy Development and Research, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
   Google Scholar
• CDBG Coalition. (2013, June 21). CDBG coalition decries cuts to CDBG and HOME [Press statement]. Retrieved from National Community Development Association http://www.ncdaonline.org/documents/cdbg%20coalition%20press%20statement%20613.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Center for Effective Government. (2005). House considers CDBG but avoids attacking PART. Retrieved from http://www.foreffectivegov.org/node/2453.
   Google Scholar
• Cisneros, H., & Engdahl, L. (2009). From despair to hope: HOPE VI and the new promise of public housing in America's cities. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, S. E., & Gaile, G. L. (1998). The work of cities. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Community Development Block Grant entitlement regulations: Hearing before the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Development of the Committee on Banking, Finance, and Urban Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives, 97th Cong. 2 (1982).
   Google Scholar
• Community Development Block Grant Program: Staff Report, Subcommittee on Housing and Community Development of the Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives, 95th Cong. 1 (1977)
   Google Scholar
• Community Development Block Grants: Oversight on the administration of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974: Hearing before the Subcommittee on Housing and Urban Affairs of the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, U.S. Senate, 94th Cong. 2 (1976).
   Google Scholar
• Conlan, T. (1988). New Federalism: Intergovernmental reform from Nixon to Reagan. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Conlan, T. (1998). From New Federalism to devolution: Twenty-five years of intergovernmental reform. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act of 1990, Public Law 101-625, November 28, 1990.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989, Public Law 101-235, December 15, 1989.
   Google Scholar
• Departments of transportation, and housing and urban development, and related agencies appropriations bill, 2014 (July 2, Report 113-136), U.S. House of Representatives, 113th Cong. 1 (2013)
   Google Scholar
• Derthick, M. (1975). Uncontrollable spending for social service grants. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dommel, P. R., Bach, V. E., Liebschutz, S. F., & Rubinowitz, L. S. (1980). Targeting community development. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
   Google Scholar
• Dommel, P. R., Hall, J. S., Bach, V. E., Rubinowitz, L., Haley, L. L., & Jackson, J. S., III. (1982a). Decentralizing urban policy: Case studies in community development. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dommel, P. R., Musselwhite, J. C., & Liebschutz, S. F. (1982b). Implementing community development. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
   Google Scholar
• Dommel, P. R., Nathan, R. P., Liebschutz, S. F., & Wrightson, M. T. (1978). Decentralizing community development. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
   Google Scholar
• Dommel, P. R., & Rich, M. J. (1987). The rich get richer: The attenuation of targeting effects of the Community Development Block Grant Program. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 22, 552–579.
   Google Scholar
• Econometrica & Urban Institute. (2012). Study of HUD's section 108 loan guarantee program. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
   Google Scholar
• Eisinger, P. K. (1988). The rise of the entrepreneurial state: State and local economic development policy in the United States. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ferguson, R. F., & Dickens, W. T. (1999). Urban problems and community development. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Finegold, K., Wherry, L., & Schardin, S. (2004). Block grants: Historical overview and lessons learned (New Federalism Issues and Options for States, Series A, No. A-63). Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Fox, D. M. (1973). The president's proposals for executive reorganization: A critique. Public Administration Review, 33, 401–406.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frieden, B. J., & Kaplan, M. (1975). The politics of neglect: Urban aid from model cities to revenue sharing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fung, A. (2004). Empowered participation: Reinventing urban democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gale, S., Byler, J., & Wachs, P. (1980). Community development strategies evaluation: Social targeting. Washington, DC: Office of Policy Development and Research, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
   Google Scholar
• Galster, G., Walker, C., Hayes, C., Boxall, P., & Johnson, J. (2004). Measuring the impact of Community Development Block Grant spending on urban neighborhoods. Housing Policy Debate, 15, 903–934.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• George H.W.Bush. (1991, January 29). State of the union address. Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Glaeser, E. L., & Gyourko, J. (2008). Rethinking federal housing policy: How to make housing plentiful and affordable. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute Press.
   Google Scholar
• Greenberg, D., Verma, N., Dillman, K., & Chaskin, R. (2010). Creating a platform for sustained neighborhood improvement: Interim findings from Chicago's New Communities program. New York, NY: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Gueorguieva, V., Accius, J., Apaza, C., Bennett, L., Brownley, C., Cronin, S., & Preechyanud, P. (2009). The program assessment rating tool and the government performance and results act: Evaluating conflicts and disconnections. American Review of Public Administration, 39, 225–245.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hays, R. A. (2012). The federal government and urban housing (3d ed.). Albany: State University of New York Press.
   Google Scholar
• Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, Public Law 93-383, August 22, 1974.
   Google Scholar
• Housing and Community Development Act of 1977, Public Law 95-128, October 12, 1977.
   Google Scholar
• Housing and Community Development Act of 1977, Part 1: Hearing before the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Development of the Committee on Banking, Finance, and Urban Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives, 93d Cong. 1 (1977)
   Google Scholar
• Housing and Community Development Authorizations, 1977: Hearing before the Subcommittee on Housing and Urban Affairs of the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, U.S. Senate, 95th Cong. 1 (1977)
   Google Scholar
• Housing and Urban-Rural Recovery Act of 1983, Public Law 98-181, November 30, 1983.
   Google Scholar
• Housing and Community Development Act of 1987, Public Law 100-242, February 5, 1988.
   Google Scholar
• Housing and Community Development Amendments of 1978, Public Law 95-557, October 31, 1978.
   Google Scholar
• Housing and Community Development Amendments of 1981, Public Law 97-35, August 13, 1981.
   Google Scholar
• Housing and Urban Development Legislation: Hearing before the Subcommittee on Housing and Urban Affairs of the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, U.S. Senate, 93d Cong. 1 (1973)
   Google Scholar
• Howard, C., Lipsky, M., & Marshall, D. R. (1994). Citizen participation in urban politics: Rise and routinization. In G. E.Peterson (Ed.), Big-city politics, governance, and fiscal constraints. (pp. 153–199). Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, K. T. (1987). Crabgrass frontier: The surburbanization of the United States. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jargowsky, P. A. (1997). Poverty and place: Ghettos, barrios, and the American city. New York, NY: Russell Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Jennings, E. T., Krane, D., Pattkos, A., & Reed, B. J. (1986). From nation to states: The Small Cities Community Development Block Grant program. Albany: State University of New York Press.
   Google Scholar
• Joice, P., Winter, B. J., & Johnson, H. (2011). Redistribution effect of introducing 2010 census and 2005–2009 ACS data into the CDBG formula. Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Policy Development and Research, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
   Google Scholar
• Kaplan, M., & Cuciti, P. (1987). The great society and its legacy: Twenty years of U.S. social policy. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kubisch, A. C., Auspos, P., Brown, P., & Dewar, T. (2010). Voices from the field III: Lessons and challenges from two decades of community change efforts. Washington, DC: Roundtable on Community Change, Aspen Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Landis, J. D., & McClure, K. (2010). Rethinking federal housing policy. Journal of the American Planning Association, 76, 319–348.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LeGates, R., & Keating, D. (1978). Selected legal cases and complaints involving the Community Development Block Grant program. In P. R.Dommel, R. P.Nathan, S. F.Liebschutz, & M. T.Wrightson (Eds.), Decentralizing community development (Appendix IV, pp. 1–29). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
   Google Scholar
• Misuse of HUD Community Development Block Grant funds: Hearing before the Subcommittee on Employment and Housing of the Committee on Government Operations, U.S. House of Representatives, 102d Cong. 1 and 2 (1993)
   Google Scholar
• Mollenkopf, J. H. (1998). Urban policy at the crossroads. In M.Weir (Ed.), The social divide: Political parties and the future of activist government (pp. 464-505). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Moving the CDBG program forward: A look at the Administration's reform proposal—Where do we go from here? (June 27, 2006, Serial No. 109–222). Subcommittee on Federalism and the Census of the Committee on Government Reform, U.S. House of Representatives, 109th Cong. 2 (2006)
   Google Scholar
• Moynihan, D. P. (1969). Maximum feasible misunderstanding: Community action in the war on poverty. New York, NY: The Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nathan, R. P., Dommel, P. R., Liebschutz, S. F., & Morris, M. D. (1977). Block grants for community development. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
   Google Scholar
• Neary, K., & Richardson, T. (1995). Effect of the 1990 census on CDBG program funding. Washington, DC: Division of Program Evaluation, Office of Policy Development and Research, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
   Google Scholar
• NGA, NCSL introduce block grant proposals. (1991, April 15). Housing and Development Reporter, 1021.
   Google Scholar
• Orlebeke, C. J. (2000). The evolution of low-income housing policy. Housing Policy Debate, 11, 489–520.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plan would increase targeting, add to HUD enforcement capacity. (1989, October 16). Housing and Development Reporter, 401.
   Google Scholar
• Pressman, J. (1975). Federal programs and city politics. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Proposal to increase targeting, role of non-profits stirs debate. (1989, September 18). Housing and Development Reporter, 322–324.
   Google Scholar
• Rich, M. J. (1992). UDAG, economic development, and the death and life of American cities. Economic Development Quarterly, 6, 150–172.
   Google Scholar
• Rich, M. J. (1993). Federal policymaking and the poor: National goals, local choices, and distributional outcomes. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rich, M. J., & Stoker, R. P. (2014). Collaborative governance for urban revitalization. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, T. (2005). CDBG formula targeting to community development need. Washington, DC: Office of Policy Development and Research, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, T., Meehan, R., & Kelly, M. (2003). Redistribution effect of introducing census 2000 data into the CDBG formula. Washington, DC: Office of Policy Development and Research and Office of Community Planning and Development, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
   Google Scholar
• Schwartz, A. F. (2012). Housing policy in the United States (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Seidman, H. (1998). Politics, position and power: The dynamics of federal organization (5th ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sirianni, C. (2009). Investing in democracy: Engaging citizens in collaborative governance. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sirianni, C., & Friedland, L. (2001). Civic innovation in America: Community empowerment, public policy, and the movement for civic renewal. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stein, R. M., & Bickers, K. N. (1995). Perpetuating the pork barrel: Policy subsystems and American democracy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Struyk, R. J., & Khadduri, J. (1980). Saving the housing assistance plan: Improving incentives to local governments. Journal of the American Planning Association, 46, 387–397.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sundquist, J. L. (1969). On fighting poverty: Perspectives from experience. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Sundquist, J. L., & Davis, D. W. (1969). Making federalism work. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Turner, M. A., & Kingsley, G. T. (2008). Federal programs for addressing low-income housing needs: A policy primer. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Turner, M. A., Kingsley, G. T., Franke, M. L., Corvington, P. A., & Cove, E. C. (2002). Planning to meet local housing needs: The role of HUD's consolidated planning requirements in the 1990s. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Commerce. (2005). Strengthening America's Communities Initiative: An overview. Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (1978a). Community Development Block Grants. Federal Register, 43, 8449–8474.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (1978b). Community Development Block Grant program, third annual report. Washington, DC: Office of Community Planning and Development, HUD.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (1980). Fifth annual Community Development Block Grant report. Washington, DC: Office of Community Planning and Development, HUD.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (1981a). Review of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Entitlement Applications ( Notice CPD 91-5, May 15, 1981). Washington, DC: Office of Community Planning and Development.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (1981b). Sixth annual Community Development Block Grant report. Washington, DC: Office of Community Planning and Development, HUD.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (1996). CDBG neighborhood revitalization strategies(Notice CPD-96-01). Washington, DC: Office of Community Planning and Development, HUD.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (2006). HUD offers proposal to reform Community Development Block Grant program. Washington, DC: Office of Public Affairs, News Release, May 25, 2006.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (2007). Basically CDBG. Washington, DC: Office of Block Grant Assistance, Office of Community Planning and Development, HUD.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. General Accounting Office. (1999). Community development: Weak management controls compromise integrity of four HUD grant programs (GAO/RCED-99-98). Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. General Accounting Office. (2004). Performance budgeting: OMB's program assessment rating tool presents opportunities and challenges for budget and performance integration (GAO-04-439T). Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2011). Efficiency and effectiveness of fragmented economic development programs are unclear (GAO-11-477R). Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• von Hoffman, A. (2012). History lessons for today's housing policy: The politics of low-income housing. Housing Policy Debate, 22, 321–376.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, C., Dommel, P., Hatry, H., Bogdon, A., & Boxall, P. (1995). Federal funds, local choices: An evaluation of the Community Development Block Grant Program. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Walker, C., Hayes, C., Galster, G., Boxall, P., & Johnson, J. (2002). The impact of CDBG spending on urban neighborhoods. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Waller, M. (2005). Block grants: Flexibility vs. stability in social services (Policy Brief No. 34). Washington, DC: Center on Children and Families,Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Webman, J. (1981). UDAG: Trageting urban economic development. Political Science Quarterly, 96, 189–207.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weicher, J. C. (2012). Housing policy at a crossroads: The why, how, and who of assistance programs. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute Press.
   Google Scholar
• York, B. (1994, December 25). HUD makes last try to keep itself alive. The Baltimore Sun. p. 1F.
   Google Scholar