The first five years of Title XX allocations for services for the aged are analyzed from a national and a state perspective. Submitting the data to several measures of equity, the authors conclude that, generally, the aged received a "fair share" of Title XX resources. They recommend that advocates for the aged reevaluate the consequences of "group eligibility" systems and that they concentrate efforts on states with low equity-for-the-aged ratings.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Atchley, R.1972Social Forces in Later Life. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
2.
Bradshaw, J.1972"The concept of social need."New Society30: 640-643.
3.
Brotman, H.1967Characteristics of Old-Age Assistance Recipients: Highlights ofthe Findings of the 1965 Study. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
4.
1979"Title XX planning by area agencies on aging: effects, outcomes, and policy implications."Gerontologist19: 264-274.
5.
Gilbert, N.
, H. Specht, and D. Lindeman1981"Social service planning cycles: ritualism or rationalism'?"Social Service Rev.55: 419-433.
6.
Melemed, B.1976Making Title XX Work: A Guide for Funding Social Services to the Aged. Washington, DC: National Council on Aging.
7.
Nelson, G.1980"Contrasting services to the aged."Social Service Rev.54: 376-389.
8.
Riley, M.
, et al.1972Aging and Society (Vol. 3). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
9.
Schultz, J.1976The Economics of Aging. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
10.
Thayer, R.1973"Measuring need in the social services."Social and Economic Admin.7: 91-105.
11.
U.S. Bureau of the Census1970Census Population, 1970, Vol. 1, Characteristics of the Population. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
12.
U.S. General Accounting Office1977Local Area Agencies Help the Aging but Problems Need Correcting. Report by the Comptroller General of the United States. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
