Annual/Termination Reports:

[06/30/2004] [07/08/2005] [06/05/2006] [11/20/2006] [01/15/2008] [10/08/2009]

Report Information

Participants

Flora, Cornelia cflora@iastate.edu (NCRCRD);

Ayres, Janet ayres@purdue.edu(Purdue University);

Katherine Fennelly kfennelly@hhh.umn.edu(University of Minnesota);

Gary Green gpgreen@wisc.edu (University of Wisconsin);

Donna Hess Donna.Hess@SDSTATE.EDU(South Dakota State University);

Scott Loverage overid2@msu.edu(Michigan State University);

Virgina Zuikaer vzuiker@che.umn.edu (University of Minnesota);

Mary Emery memery@iastate.edu (NCRCRD);

Julie Stewart jstewart@iastate.edu (NCRCRD)

Brief Summary of Minutes

Brief Summary of Minutes of Annual Meeting:
The NC100 meeting followed the conference presentations, thus the group was able to reflect on the findings of the presenters as they discussed plans for moving forward. The committee organized these reflections into five clusters identifying important areas for future research including: immigration and poverty, secondary data sources, the role of school and education as they relate to poverty in the rural Midwest, understanding the impact of poverty research on policy, and employment practices and poverty.

The committee focused in on the last item as a topic of interest to all. They worked on clarifying objectives and methodologies to address community types, employer practices and impact on poverty reduction. The committee will work together to submit a collective proposal for additional funding. While the committee members feel like they are appropriate participants in this project, they will also identify addition faculty who might want to join the committee

Accomplishments

Completed 2004 milestone: The North Central Regional Center in collaboration with RUPRI convened a conference on cultural perceptions of poverty and implications for rural development in the rural Midwest.(The conference also included the meeting of the NC1100 committee.) Information on the conference is available at: http://www.ncrcrd.iastate.edu/poverty/proceedings.html<br /> Specific accomplishments related to the conference include:<br /> <br /> 1. Brought together eighteen presenters from 10 institutions (8 universities, 1 foundation, and one governmental research unit).<br /> <br /> 2. Papers addressed how place affects poverty and how place can mediate the effect of policy on poverty.<br /> <br /> 3. Researchers identified 5 themes for future research:<br /> <br /> a. Immigration. Work to improve data availability and collection. Study the impact of exclusion on immigrants and their children as well as attitudes toward immigrants on the part of local community members, policy makers, institutions and organizations. Strategize how to bring good research to the attention of policy makers.<br /> <br /> b. Place and culture. Work with researchers who produce secondary data to include more questions on place and culture. <br /> <br /> c. Education, family and poverty. Study the interaction of education on families as well as, the impact of families on schools to increase our understanding of poverty.<br /> <br /> d. Policy impacts. Achieve a better understanding the impact of research in this fields impact on policy<br /> <br /> e. Employment. Research the interaction between low wage work, and well-being of workers in addressing poverty.<br />

Publications

None at this time

Impact Statements

1. Output: " Materials from 16 papers plus the summary published to the web
2. Output: " Convening of regional conference in cooperation with RUPRI on poverty in the rural Midwest
3. Output: " Committee developed a focus and agreed to work on a proposal for funding together

Back to top

Report Information

Participants

Goe, Richard - Kansas State University; Keeney, Roman - Purdue University; Schulman, Michael (michael_schulman@ncsu.edu) - North Caroline State University; Anderson, Cindy (cda@iastate.edu) - Iowa State University; Weng, Chih Yuan - Iowa State University; Lobao, Linda (lobao.1@osu.edu) - Ohio State University; Loveridge, Scott (loverids@msu.edu) - Michigan State University; Fennelly, Katherine (fenne007@umn.edu) - University of Minnesota; Hess, Donna (donna_hess@sdstate.edu) - South Dakota State University; Green, Gary (gpgreen@wisc.edu) - University of Wisconsin; Wendy Wintersteen (agexecdean@iastate.edu) Administrative Advisor - Iowa State University; Flora, Cornelia (cflora@iastate.edu) - Iowa State University; Emery, Mary (memery@iastate.edu) - NCRCRD staff, Iowa State University

Brief Summary of Minutes

The NC100 meeting in Chicago focused on refining the rationale for the study focus, identifying existing databases to support the work, determining the study design, and identifying key variables. The committee also worked on identifying possible funding sources and discussing strategies for a successful NRI proposal. The committee will work on the action plan and proposals for funding using a web-based work space. Initial mapping of the descriptive results will provide initial results in July. This information will be used to identify locations for case studies of communities that are working their way out of poverty successfully and those that are falling into further decline. A subcommittee will work on developing the protocol for the survey and case study.

Accomplishments

Proposed accomplishments from proposal (2005):<p><br /> 1) Research design based on the conference to further specify the cultural perceptions of poverty and its alleviation.<br /> <p>Status: The research design is complete and committee members assigned to various aspects of the research. <br /> <ul>Research objectives:<br /> <li>1. Determine the model of the changes in low wage employment growth in rural areas by looking at the intersection of household, employer, labor force, and labor market. Are these changes indications of significant restructuring or are jobs disappearing?<br /> <li>2. Determine the degree to which rural labor markets in each state deviate from the predictive model.<br /> <li>3. Identify in each state rural labor markets that have been most successful in increasing good jobs (non-low wage work) and those who have been least in increasing good jobs a stratified.<br /> <li>4. Compare the development strategies and practices of employers offering high wage jobs with benefits and those offering low wage jobs with out benefit in each labor market. <br /> <li>5. Determine what actions at the community level are related to the creation of good jobs and the creation of low wage, temporary, and part time work.</ul><br /> <ul>Specific hypotheses to be tested:<br /> <li>a. Proportion of and change in working poor in labor markets is a function agricultural dependency, low educational levels, and distance from urban centers (Beale code).<br /> <li>b. Labor markets with a higher dependence on import sensitive industries are more likely to increase in proportion of working poor. <br /> <li>c. Labor markets with high concentrations of women and immigrants would be more likely to have high proportions of working book.<br /> <li>d. Labor markets with high numbers of immigrants will have higher levels of entrepreneurship, as measured in number of small businesses.<br /> <li>e. Communities clusters that counties that invest in big box stores are have more low wage jobs and higher rates of SSI. <br /> <li>f. Community action can have an impact on improving the situation of the working poor.</ul><br /> <ul>Research Methodologies:<br /> <li>1. Labor market and county level will be compiled in an SPSS file from a variety of data sources will be compiled (Iowa, South Dakota, Ohio, Kansas, Wisconsin).<br /> <li>2. Using multiple regression and hierarchical modeling, a predictive model of % working poor and change in working poor will be developed (Iowa, Kansas, North Carolina, Wisconsin). <br /> <li>3. High low wage work rural communities and low low wage work communities in each North Central state will be identified using the models developed (Iowa, Michigan, Purdue).<br /> <li>4. Semi-structured interviews will be carried out with employers in those communities. That data will be coded using N-Vivo and SPSS (All states. Wisconsin, Purdue, North Carolina and Michigan will take the lead in framing the interview schedule).<br /> <li>5. Community case studies to determine the degree of community agency and its impact on low wage work will be carried out in the identified (All states: Michigan and Minnesota will take the lead in determining the specific data gathering instruments to be used in each community).<br /> </ul><br /> <p>2) Analysis of rural labor markets, rural labor force, and levels of poverty.<br /> <ul><li>1. Analysis of changes in rural labor markets, rural labor force, and presence of working poor. <br /> <ul><li>Status: Existing databases have been combined into to data sets - labor markets and counties and individual characteristics of rural labor markets and the rural labor force have been correlated with the percent working poor. Counties at risk of outsourcing and with high levels of inequality have been identified and zero-order correlations calculated. </ul><br /> <li>2. Conduct employer interviews.<br /> <ul><li>Status: A basic questionnaire has been developed in Wisconsin and will be discussed electronically by the group in the fall.</ul><br /> <li>3. Community case studies to determine the intersection of structure and agency.<br /> <ul><li>Status: The committee is discussing a community capitals approach.</ul><br /> <li>4. A grant-writing team has been formed (Iowa, Michigan).<br /> </ul><br />

Publications

Impact Statements

1. The initial analysis has been presented to a variety of organizations interested in rural development, increasing their interest in issues of the working poor and inequality in program development. These organizations include the Humphrey Institute and the National Association for Rural Mental Health.
2. Outputs include: Presentations at the Humphrey Institute and at The Clock is Ticking for Rural America: A Behavioral Health and Safety Conference. An article for Rural Development News on the potential impact of outsourcing in the region is in press.

Back to top

Report Information

Participants

Richard Goe: Kansas State University (model development, case selection, protocol implementation in Kansas);
Michael Schulman: North Caroline State (protocol development and implementation in North Carolina to contrast with job displacement);
Kathy Fennelly, University of Minnesota (protocol adaptation for migrant populations, analysis of working poor and migration);
Cindy Anderson: Iowa State University (data base management, model development, case selection);
Linda Lobao: Ohio State University (model consultation, protocol consultation, Ohio protocol implementation);
Scott Loveridge: Michigan State University (protocol development, Michigan protocol implementation);
Donna Hess: South Dakota State University (protocol development to adapt to Native American areas, South Dakota protocol implementation);
Gary Green: University of Wisconsin (model consultation, employer protocol, protocol implementation in Wisconsin);
Cornelia Flora, Mary Emery: NCRCRD at Iowa State University (protocol development and protocol implementation in Iowa)

Brief Summary of Minutes

Key Discussions:

1. How to refine the model using secondary data to predict level of working poor in counties in the Midwest, with North Carolina analysis done separately to related displaced workers and the working poor.
   
2. The importance of theoretically and systematically chosen cases  to be done using the structural equations and models developed.
   
3. The difficulties of insuring the comparability of the systematic community studies. In order to ensure the analytic comparability
   
   Similar protocol of the information to gather
   
   1. Similar selection of key informants and focus groups participants
      
   2. Utilizing a social/spatial approach
      
      
      1. Addressing poverty spatial distribution within counties as well as between counties
         
      2. Determine the degree to which actions at which spatial levels reduce the number of working poor to avoid spatial aggregation bias.
      
      
   3. Single research paired with PI in each state to insure comparability of methodology and data.
   
   
4. The analytical methods to use in these nested comparisons, particularly the pluses and minuses in using the Community Capitals Framework to address local area investments that are related to a decline in working poor.
   
5. Integrating the household data compiled by NC-1011  Rural Families Speak when the communities selected for analysis overlap.
   
6. Implications of the new poverty paradigm, based on threaded discussion of our reading of Rank.
   
   
   1. Old paradigm: poverty is a personal responsibility. Liberal intervention="fix" people with job training, etc. Conservative intervention=incentivize people.
      
   2. New Paradigm:
      
      
      1. Poverty results from structural failings. For Rank, this is especially the core unemployment rate, which means that some job seekers will be unemployed even at "full" employment.
         
         
      2. Poverty is a conditional state that individuals move in and out of. He documents this with longitudinal data from the panel study on income dynamics showing that the majority of Americans fit the definition of poverty at some point in their lives, but that most are poor for a few years before recovering.
         
         
      3. Poverty constitutes deprivation. Here he makes the point that poverty creates lack of access to basic things such as health care.
         
         
      4. Poverty as an injustice. He presents a number of arguments that poverty goes against widely held American values of fairness and equality.
         
         
      5. The condition of poverty affects and undermines us all. Here he avoids arguments such as the cost of crime, lost opportunity of talent in the workforce due to restricted educational resources, and instead points out that most of us are at risk of poverty through the life cycle and that almost everyone has a family member or friend who is in poverty.

Rank proposes a variety of programs to address the problem: better income supplements for the working poor, better child care, better health care, and asset building programs like IDAs.

Rank gives very little attention to the role of place except to acknowledge that CDCs can play a role in building community assets. Totally absent is the notion or explanation of persistent poverty in places. Perhaps this is a function of his urban location (Washington U, St. Louis, MO).

Place is perhaps less important in urban areas because persistent poverty may indeed be poor people moving in to the only neighborhood they can afford and then moving out when times are better, to be replaced by a new set of poor people. But in rural areas, places with persistent poverty are probably different, with very little population churn. So place-based strategies may be more important in rural areas than Rank's set of policies would suggest.


We incorporated these insights into our NRI proposal, Structural Trends and Community Agency: Toward an Understanding of the Processes that Exacerbate and Erode Uneven Rates of the Working Poor, submitted February 1, 2006.


In our electronic conversations, we decided to continue developing the protocol for the field work and finding multiple funding sources

Accomplishments

Key strategic change. Because a majority of the NC-1100 participants were unavailable for the meeting planned around the RSS meeting in Louisville August 9-13, the group determined to continue meeting virtually by phone and electronically. We will meet by phone monthly.

Publications

Impact Statements

Back to top

Report Information

Participants

" Richard Goe: Kansas State University
" Michael Schulman: North Caroline State
" Cindy Anderson: Ohio University
" Linda Lobao: Ohio State University
" Scott Loveridge: Michigan State University
" Trevor Brooks for Donna Hess: South Dakota State University
" Gary Green: University of Wisconsin
" Cornelia Flora, Iowa State University
" Joe Colletti, Iowa State University, Administrative Advisor

Brief Summary of Minutes

1. Team members presented a session at the National Regional Science Association which laid out the multiphase research design and the methodology to determine the impacts of structure and local agency. The structural model was presented, which allowed for identification of the outliers. Descriptions and preliminary analysis of the outliers  the places that reduced the proportion of working poor more quickly than expected and those that did so more slowly  were presented for North Carolina (an example of unemployed poor), Ohio, Missouri, Kansas, Michigan, South Dakota and Iowa.
2. The team produced a first draft of a proposal to NSF, and began the formulation of a second proposal.
3. The team will revise the proposal via WebCT/Blackboard. It will be submitted in early January.
4. The next meeting will be with the National Regional Science Association meeting in Savannah, Georgia, November.

Accomplishments

Feb. 1, 2006 we submitted a grant proposal to NRI, which was not funded. Building on the comments from the reviewers, we have broken down the proposal into a series of more focused proposals to a variety of granting agencies including NSF and USDA NRI competitive grants program. <br /> Based on the successful breakout session that the NC1100 group organized at the 53rd Annual North American Meetings of the Regional Science Association, Nov 16-18, 2006 in Toronto, Canada, we are planning to author a special issue of the Journal of the Nation Regional Sciences Association. This links us to a multi-disciplinary group interested in this issue of economic development and rural poor. As a member of the Advisory Committee for the National Symposium on Poverty and Economic Security, we are sharing our results on the working poor and new poor in the planning work. The Northwest Area Foundation is extremely interested in our research design and results. The National Rural Funder Collaborative is particularly interested in the work of the team on Native American communities in the Great Plains for the next phase of their work.<br /> At the Regional Science Association meeting the team developed a session entitled "Factors contributing to decreasing working poor in rural counties: comparative case studies of outliers" Scott Leverage, Mich. State University economist chaired the session and organized it with the assistance of Peter Schaeffer (soc) from West Virginia Univ. Three presentations by Flora, Schulman and Anderson framed the issue, set the context and state of knowledge about working poor and offered a regression (multi-variate, cross-sectional) model of the working poor in the North Central USA. NC1100 participants presented case studies using the model with particular focus on outlier counties for the states of North Carolina, Michigan, Ohio, Kansas, Missouri, South Dakota, and Iowa. Then four discussants ( am ix of sociologists and economists) addressed issues related to the methodology (the model) and the results of the case studies. There were about 25 attendees. The session was very robust and informative. NC1100 then convened a project meeting to work on development of research proposals. <br /> In addition, NC1100 in conjunction with NCRCRD is convening research working groups on:<br /> " New Immigrants and Rural Communities (scholars from Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska, Missouri, California, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Oregon, New York, and North Carolina)<br /> " The Impact of Visioning on rural community change, which is just beginning in collaboration with scholars from Illinois.<br /> " The community conditions under which entrepreneurship contributes to community economic development (Nebraska, Iowa, Illinois, and Wisconsin are the states involved to date, but we are expanding the work on this.<br /> " The intersection of local food systems, access to active recreation, and health, as measured by obesity (Iowa and New York, with new states being added). Two proposals are under development, with a third proposal for a conference in negotiation.<br /> " The impact of ethanol production on community capitals (Wisconsin, Iowa, and Missouri in the initial discussions)<br /> In the next year, we will complete the special issue of the journal, submit two research proposals, and convene each of the emergent research teams to share on-going research and to develop research proposalsShort-term Outcomes: <br /> Three major Foundations have adopted the capitals framework in their programming and evaluation.<br /> Two major Foundations and one Federal agency (USDA/Rural Development/ Rural Utilities are using our regional multi-variate regression model as a basis of determining community readiness for different kinds of rural investments.<br /> We have identified 84 communities in the North Central Region where structural trends do not predict the change in the working poor.<br /> Outputs: <br /> " Development of an econometric model of working poor for the North Central region<br /> " One session presenting our design and results at the National Regional Science Association.<br /> " Identification of the outlier counties for the North Central region.<br /> Activities: <br /> The team refined its multi-state multivariate model through a series of iterations and discussions.<br /> Case studies were carried out with positive and negative outliers in three NCRA states.<br /> All outliers were surveyed in one state.<br /> Two states were studied to compare those communities that followed the trend and compared them to the outliers.<br /> Milestones: <br /> Receive grants for different stages of the research.<br /> Outside investments in rural communities that intend to address the condition of the working poor are made by market, state and civil society based on the degree of readiness identified by the research.<br /> Rural communities and regions invest local resources in more effective ways to reduce working poverty.<br /> Return on investments in rural communities increases.<br /> <br />

Publications

Emery, M., S. Fey, and C.B. Flora, 2006. Using Community Capitals to Build Assets for Positive Community Change. CD Practice 13. http://www.comm-dev.org/ <br /> <br /> Emery, M. and C.B. Flora. 2006. "Spiraling-Up: Mapping Community Transformation with Community Capitals Framework." Community Development: Journal of the Community Development Society 37: 19-35. http://www.ncrcrd.iastate.edu/pubs/flora/spiralingup.htm <br /> <br /> Fey, S., C. Bregendahl, and C.B. Flora, 2006. The Measurement of Community Capitals through <br /> Research: A Study Conducted for the Claude Worthington Benedum Foundation by the North Central Regional Center for Rural Development. Online Journal of Rural Research and Policy 1.Available at http://www.ojrrp.org/issues/2006/01/index.html <br /> <br /> Flora, C.B. and A. Thiboumery. 2005. Community Capitals: Poverty Reduction and Rural Development in Dry Areas. Annals of Arid Zone 45 (3-4): 1-2. (Published in 2006).<br /> <br /> Green, Gary Paul. Forthcoming. Workforce Development in Rural America: Building the High Road. Cheltenham, UK and Northhampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing. <br /> <br /> Green, Gary Paul. 2006. Community-based anti-poverty programs. Forthcoming in Encyclopedia of World Poverty, Mehmet Odekon (ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. <br /> <br /> Submitted: Green, Gary and Paul and Landy Sanchez. "Does Manufacturing Still Matter?" Submitted to Population and Development Review.<br />

Impact Statements

1. The model is widely distributed and understood by foundations, governments and businesses. Investments are made with multiple objectives, including improving the situation of the working poor through good jobs and business opportunities. Communities use their scarce resources to better enhance the conditions of the more vulnerable people who live there. The number and proportion of working poor in the region declines more rapidly than structural trends predict.

Back to top

Report Information

Participants

Goe, Richard, Kansas State University;
Anderson, Cindy, Ohio University;
Lobao, Linda Loba, Ohio State University;
Loveridge, Scott, Michigan State University;
Flora, Cornelia Flora, Iowa State University;

Brief Summary of Minutes

1. Team members presented a session at the National Regional Science Association, presenting our continuing macro-level analysis and model refinement.

2. The team outlined a proposal to submit to the NRI and a second proposal to resubmit to NSF, based on the reviews of our previous proposals to these same agencies.

3. We decided to limit our case studies to the Beale Codes 6-9, which are rural and remote, and to eliminate counties containing college towns.

4. The team decided to include Mary Emery as co-PI to conduct the field research throughout the region and Corry Bregendahl to conduct the N-Vivo analysis of the interviews and focus groups in order to provide quality control.

5. The next meeting will be with the National Regional Science Association meeting in New York City, November 22-23, 2008.

Accomplishments

<br /> Our articles from the session last year are in press in the Journal of Regional Science and in Regional Science. An additional article and book chapter are in press for a 2008 publication date. We submitted a grant proposal to NSF, which was not funded. Using the reviewer comments for both out last NRI submission and the NSF submission, we have outlined two new proposals. Because the NRI <br /> will be integrated, we will build on the Extension linkages of the NCRCRD to make the data gathering more action oriented and to develop modules to be used in on-line and face to face graduate courses on rural development, research methods, and rural poverty. We continued our association with the Regional Science Association International, which continues our link to a multi-disciplinary group interested in this issue. As a member of the Advisory Committee for the National Symposium on Poverty and Economic Security, we are sharing our results on the working poor and new poor in the planning work. In addition, the NCRCRD is convening research working groups on:<br /> " New Immigrants and Rural Communities (scholars from Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska, Missouri, California, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Oregon, New York, and North Carolina). Initial work funded by the Northwest Area Foundation includes Iowa, Nebraska, and Minnesota.<br /> " The Impact of Visioning on rural community change, funded by the Farm Foundation in collaboration with scholars from throughout the region<br /> " The community conditions under which entrepreneurship contributes to community economic development.<br /> " Working with Extension program leaders to develop an integrated NRI project on environmental contributions to childhood obesity and ways to overcome them. <br /> " NC 506 -- Took on the leadership of Team 4 -- the impact of ethanol production on rural communities (Wisconsin, Iowa, Kansas, and Michigan are part of the team, with the NCRCRD working with collaborators in Nebraska, Missouri, South Dakota, Indiana and Illinois for additional case studies)<br /> " Working with 4-H Extension educators throughout the nation to develop a research project on how the structures and processes in 4-H contribute to intergenerational bridging social capital and community development.<br /> <br /> Short-term Outcomes: <br /> Three major Foundations have adopted the capitals framework in their programming and evaluation.<br /> Grant received from the Northwest Area Foundation for examining the impact of ICE raids (Iowa, Nebraska, and Minnesota)<br /> Grant received from the Farm Foundation for a research seminar on visioning and rural development (includes all states in the region).<br /> Sub-contract received from the NC-506 to lead and coordinate team 4 (the social impacts team)<br /> Two major Foundations and one Federal agency (USDA/Rural Development/ Rural Utilities are using our model as a basis of determining community readiness for different kinds of investments.<br /> 4-H has adopted the Community Capitals Framework in designing program evaluation.<br /> We are contact with our Extension colleagues in the extreme rural and remote counties. <br /> <br /> Outputs: <br /> " One session presenting our design and results at the National Regional Science Association.<br /> " Three articles published<br /> " Identification of the outlier counties for the North Central region that are also rural and remote.<br /> <br /> Activities: <br /> The team refined its multi-state multivariate model through a series of iterations and discussions.<br /> <br /> Milestones: <br /> Receive grants for different stages of regional research projects (3 received to date).<br /> Outside investments in rural communities that intend to address the condition of the working poor are made by market, state and civil society based on the degree of readiness identified by the research.<br /> Rural communities and regions invest local resources in more effective ways to reduce working poverty.<br /> Return on investments in rural communities increases.<br />

Publications

Brooks, Trevor; Michael McCurry; and Donna Hess. 2007. "Working Poverty." South Dakota State University Rural Life and Census Data Center Newsletter (1).<br /> http://sdrurallife.sdstate.edu/working%20poverty%20newsletter.pdf.<br /> <br /> Green, Gary Paul. 2007. Workforce Development Networks in Rural Areas: Building the High Road. Cheltenham, UK and Northhampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.<br /> <br /> Green, Gary Paul and Anna Haines. 2007. Asset Building and Community Development, 2nd Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.<br /> <br /> Green, Gary Paul and Landy Sanchez. 2007. Does manufacturing still matter? Population Research and Policy Review 26 (5/6): 529-551.<br />

Impact Statements

1. The model is widely distributed and understood by foundations, governments and businesses.
2. Investments are made with multiple objectives, including improving the situation of the working poor through good jobs and business opportunities.
3. Communities use their scarce resources to better enhance the conditions of the more vulnerable people who live there.
4. The number and proportion of working poor in the region declines more rapidly than structural trends predict.

Back to top

Report Information

Participants

Brief Summary of Minutes

The committee did not meet at the end of July as originally intended due to a change in emphasis of the project. An alternative proposal was submitted to the Directors and approved. The Committee will be submitting a new proposal during this year for approval by the Directors.

Accomplishments

Proposal for continuation submitted to Directors and approved.

Publications

Impact Statements

Back to top