Open end Reimbursement C-10,p.31 when should be used Disadvantages C-10, p.32 ACIR - C-9, p. 12 equalization vs.special needs Academy for Contemporary Problems, Report to the Commission of Federal Paperwork, Impact of Federal Paperwork on State and Local Governments: An Assessment Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, The Intergovernmental Grant System: An Assessment and Proposed Policies (Series) Categorical Grants Chapter 9, "The Views of Local, State and Federal Officials" Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, The Federal Aid Grants Consolidation: A Bill (Draft) Commission on Federal Paperwork, Final Summary Report, October 3, 1977 Hawkins, Robert B., Jr., Self Government by District, Hoover Institution National Association of Counties, County Government and Federal Paperwork Burdens: An Impact Study of Three Programs American County Platform and Resolutions National Governors' Conference, Federal Roadblocks to Efficient State White House Media Liaison Office, Grants-in-Aid Reform, 9/9/77 Missouri State and Local Officials' Problems with the Federal Grants System, Compiled by Lynn Yerges, Senator Jack Danforth, Senate Governmental Affairs Committee PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE NASCO NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SMALLER COMMUNITIES 888 17TH STREET, N. W., WASHINGTON, D. C. 20006 (202) 466-5252 REGARDING THE SMALL COMMUNITIES ACT OF 1978--S. 3277 We wish to thank the Committee for this opportunity to comment on S.3277, the Small Communities Act of 1978, and we welcome this chance to share with the Committee some of the concerns of smaller communities. It is only recently that the nation has begun to realize that smaller communities, though they contain a majority of the population, are consistently frustrated in their attempts to win assistance from the Federal government. The Committee and Senators Danforth and Heinz are to be strongly commended for their efforts to bring about a thorough reorganization of Federal programs which service smaller communities. The Small Communities Act of 1978 can make a genuine difference in the way smaller communities are treated by the Federal government. Approximately 60% of the population of the U.S. lives outside large (over 50,000 population) cities. Yet this majority finds itself unable to participate effectively in many Federal aid programs supposedly intended for the benefit of all deserving communities. The reason, from NASCO's point of view, is quite simple: Federal programs are structured in such a way that complicated application and program performance requirements preclude successful participation by most smaller communities. there are exceptions that prove the rule. Through very hard work, and attainment of a sophisticated level of expertise, some smaller communities have been able to "play the game," and have been awarded an impressive number of grants-in-aid. But many other smaller communities, using very limited local resources, have not been able to devote the time and money necessary for competition Plainly, |