Rural Development and the Land Grant University. An Evaluation of Title V of the Rural Development Act of 1972 (The Executive Summary).

Autor/in	Madden, J. Patrick
Institution	Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park. Dept. of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology.; National Rural Center, Washington, DC.
Titel	Rural Development and the Land Grant University. An Evaluation of Title V of the Rural Development Act of 1972 (The Executive Summary).
Quelle	(1977), (20 Seiten)Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Community Services; Employment; Federal Legislation; Federal Regulation; Federal State Relationship; Financial Support; Income; Land Grant Universities; Natural Resources; Objectives; Pilot Projects; Program Development; Program Evaluation; Rural Development; Rural Economics; Rural Extension; State Programs; Puerto Rico + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Gemeindenahe Versorgung; Dienstverhältnis; Bundesrecht; Bundeskompetenz; Bund-Länder-Beziehung; Finanzielle Förderung; Einkommen; Natural Ressource; Natürliche Ressource; Goal definition; Zielsetzung; Pilot project; Modellversuch; Pilotprojekt; Programmplanung; Programme evaluation; Programmevaluation; Rural environment; Development; Ländliches Milieu; Entwicklung; Regierungsprogramm
Abstract	The land grant universities have, for the most part, performed the organizational and procedural processes stipulated by Title V of the Rural Development Act of 1972 and have succeeded in helping rural people satisfy high priority needs, thereby demonstrating that Title V is a valid approach to rural development. The three-year pilot period, ending with fiscal year 1976, was successful despite an 80% reduction in funding (from $45 million to $9 million). The 50 states and Puerto Rico initiated well over 900 Title V projects, including more than 300 aimed at improving income and employment, nearly 500 focusing on community services and facilities, and more than 100 addressing environmental and natural resource concerns. While the extreme diversity of projects and the high success rate were notable, states varied widely in their attainment of project goals. Factors affecting outcome were in-kind contributions by the university, support from other funding sources, and prior involvement of the university in rural development activities. Amount of funding was not a crucial factor, since states with equal funding produced different results. The data suggest that there is no one best way to carry out rural development programs; rather, the advantage of the Title V structure is the flexibility allowed states to adapt procedures to suit local needs. (JH)
Anmerkungen	National Rural Center, 1828 L Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20036
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC