The rural area agency on aging does not (and cannot) engage in effective social planning. It is overwhelmed by responsibility for
sub-state decision making. Several characteristics of present
AAA planning are identified, including plan preparation, rationalized decision making, sub-state decision making and needs
meeting. Widespread acceptance of the legitimacy of AAA plan ning goals has generated three alternative approaches which are
termed the "case-management, " "interorganizational" and "community structure" approaches. Effective rural planning for the
aged might combine elements of these approaches in an effective
regional planning strategy.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Administration on Aging.Project application for programs in aging under Title III-B of the Older Americans Act of 1965, as Amended.
2.
Estes, C.L., Armour, P.K., & Noble, M.L.Intent vs. implementation: toward an analytic framework for understanding the Older Americans Act. Paper presented at the meeting of the Gerontological Society, San Francisco, November 1977.
3.
Heumann, L. & Lareau, U.The inadequacy of local needs assessment. Paper presented at annual meeting, Gerontological Society of America, San Diego, November 21-25, 1980.
4.
Lohmann, R.The politics of aging and rural services: An exploratory analysis . In B. Locke & R. Lohmann (Eds.), Proceedings of the third national conference on social work in rural areas. West Virginia University , 1978.
5.
Lohmann, R.Planning for aging services: Implications of the 1978 amendments to the Older Americans Act. 1981 (Mimeo).
6.
Taietz, P., & Milton, S.Rural-urban differences in the structure of services for the elderly in upstate New York counties. Paper presented at the meeting of the Gerontological Society, San Francisco , November 1977.
Binstock, R., Cherington, C., & Woll, P.Federalism and leadership planning: Predictions of variance in state behavior . Gerontologist, 14, 114-121.
9.
Binstock, R., & Levin, M.Political dilemmas of intervention policies. In R. Binstock & E. Shanas (Eds.), Handbook of aging and the social sciences. Chicago: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1976.
10.
Coberly, S., Fleischer, D., Fritz, D., Cohn, J., & Kobata, F.A policy note on the 1978 amendments to the Older Americans Act. Gerontologist, 1980, 20(2), 140-147.
11.
Cohen, E. & Poulshock, W.Societal response to mass dislocation of the elderly: Implications for area aging agencies, Gerontologist, 1977 , 17(3), 262-269.
12.
Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office of Human Development Services.Grants for state and community programs on aging: Final rules. Federal Register, 1980 (45 CRF Parts 1320, 1321, 1324 and 1325, 21126-21166.
13.
Dror, Y.The planning process: A facet design. In F. J. Lyden & E. G. Miller (Eds.), Planning, programming budgeting: A systems approach to management , Chicago: Markham, 1976.
14.
Estes, C.L.Barriers to effective community planning for the elderly. Gerontologist, 1973, 13(2), 178-183.
15.
Estes, C.L. Community planning: A study of goal displacement. Journal of Gerontology , 1974, 29, 684-691.
16.
Estes, C.L.The politics of community planning for the elderly. Policy and Politics, 1976, 4, 51-70.
17.
Estes, C.L.The aging enterprise. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1978.
18.
Gilbert, N., & Specht, H.Title XX planning by area agencies on aging: Efforts, outcomes and policy implications. Gerontologist, 1979, 19(3), 264-274.
19.
Golant, S.M., & McCaslin, R.A functional classification of services for older people. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 1979, 1(3), 187-210.
Hudson, R.Rational planning and organizational imperatives: Prospects for area aging agencies. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 1974, 415, 415-454.
22.
Hudson, R., & Veley, M.Federal funding and state planning: The case of state units on aging . Gerontologist, 1974, 14, 122-128.
23.
Lauffer, A.Social planning at the community level. Englewood Cliffs : Prentice Hall, 1978.
24.
Leinbach, R.M.The aging participants in an area planning effort. Gerontologist , 1977, 17(5), 453-458.
25.
Lubove, R.The professional truist. New York: Atheneum, 1965.
26.
Moore, D.E., Taietz, P., & Young, F.W.Location of institutions in upstate New York, Search , 1974, 4(12), 1-7.
27.
Morris, R., & Binstock, R.Feasible planning for social change. New York: Columbia University Press, 1966.
28.
Nelson, G.Social services to the urban and rural aged: The experience of area agencies on aging. Gerontologist, 1980, 20(2), 200-208.
29.
Norman, A.Promoting planning in an area agency on aging: A social systems model . In G. E. Lasker (Ed.), Applied systems and cybernetics. Elmsford: Pergamon Press, 1981.
30.
Orkin, S.Planning and the balancing of interests in an area agency on aging . Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 1979, 2(2), 147-160.
31.
Rawls, J.A theory of justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1971.
32.
Stirner, F.W.Area agency on aging program monitoring and evaluation: Review of some theoretical considerations and problems after a year of operation. Gerontologist , 1977, 7(2), 114-120.
33.
Taietz, P.Community facilities and social services. In R. Atchley & T. Byerts (Eds.), Rural environments and aging. Washington, D.C.: Gerontological Society, 1975 .
34.
Taietz, P.Structural complexity of New York State communities: Health and welfare . Search, 1973, 2(17), 1-15.
35.
Wylie, M.Nonmetropolitan social planning. In L. Ginsberg (Ed.), Social work in rural areas. New York: Council on Social Work Education , 1976.
