In 1883, author Emma Lazarus pronounced, “Until we are all free, we are none of us free.” Throughout the past century and a half, that phrase has been repeated by activists, theologians, and changemakers alike as we walk toward the path of justice and true civil rights for all Americans. Nearly 140 years later, the statement made by Lazarus still rings true. In fact, it’s more important than ever as the United States once again confronts the roots of systemic racism. 

Within the Community Action movement to end poverty, we’ve been here before—after all, our work was borne of the Civil Rights movement in the 1960s—but recent events throughout our country make it clear we still have a lot to do right here in Missouri. For example, our state ranks the worst in the entire nation for healthcare disparities. Kansas City is infamous for its history of redlining. Approximately one quarter of all Black Missourians live in poverty, nearly double the state average. Sadly, there are countless other examples of racism and inequality across our state. For those of us involved with Community Action, it’s time to re-commit ourselves to the anti-racism work from which our movement originated and ensure that our Promise extends to our Black, Brown, and Indigenous neighbors:

Community Action changes people’s lives, embodies the spirit of hope, improves communities, and makes America a better place to live. We care about the entire community, and we are dedicated to helping people help themselves and each other.

At Missouri Community Action Network (CAN), we have spent time reflecting upon this statement and wonder if we’ve done enough to truly live out this promise. Have we been making good on this promise for some, but not for others? Have we truly cared about the entire community, or just some of the community? What does it look like when we care for the whole community? Does this mean equal treatment for everyone, or equitable access to program services? 

Among all the questions we’ve raised, we know one thing for certain—poverty and racism are inextricably connected, and we can’t talk about poverty without talking about systemic racism. Just a few minutes spent reviewing the 2020 Missouri Poverty Report makes this fact abundantly clear.

Missouri CAN is known for raising awareness of poverty-related issues, advocating for changes in policies and systems that create disparities, and equipping Community Action staff across Missouri with training and tools to serve their communities well. At the same time, we admit we don’t have all the answers. We humbly seek help from those who’ve been doing racial justice work and those who’ve been active in this movement for a very long time. Above all, we realize that it’s time to return to our Community Action roots and to listen, learn, and act. 

With that, Missouri CAN has committed to taking the following actions to address racism in our organization, our Network, and our state:

• Inside Our Organization
  • We will initiate an internal education process to recognize our own implicit biases and privileges as we hold ourselves and each other accountable for becoming or growing as anti-racist allies.
  • We will review all internal policies, processes, and the current MCAN strategic plan, then make necessary modifications or additions to ensure our strategic priorities are reflective of our activity and commitment to anti-racism.

• Throughout Our Community Action Network
  • We will provide opportunities for members of our statewide network to learn about how to incorporate anti-racist practices into organizational systems and program design.
  • We will take the lead on bringing educators, thought leaders, and experts together for hard conversations and new learning opportunities for our network members. 

• Within Our External Initiatives
  • We will ensure that our public education and advocacy initiatives make clear that poverty and racism are inextricably linked, and work toward dismantling both as we envision a just and equitable future in which all Missourians thrive. 

For all of us to be free—including our Black, Brown, and Indigenous neighbors—we must intentionally fight racism as hard as we work to create economic opportunity for all. It is our responsibility. We make that promise when we become a member of the Community Action Network. We owe it to the entire community to serve the entire community, to advocate for the entire community, and to help the entire community live more equitable, just, and prosperous lives.

Dear Members of the Missouri Community Action Network:

The Missouri CAN Annual Conference is an event we look forward to each year for the opportunity it provides to receive professional development, network with others from across the state, and reinvest in our commitment to the Community Action promise. In March of this year, however, the planning efforts were forced to change due to the Coronavirus pandemic. The Missouri CAN team, in conjunction with the Executive Committee of the Board, began exploring possible alternatives to format and event dates, only to find no viable options. Therefore, it is with great disappointment that I share with you today that due to circumstances related to COVID-19, Missouri CAN has been rendered unable to conduct this year’s event. 

While the world we currently live in looks considerably different to what any of us could have imagined just a few short months ago, we want to commend the strength of our Network in responding to this ever-changing situation. Though we are still unable to safely come together in person, the unity of Community Action has been felt as deeply as ever through the hard work and perseverance each one of you shows every day. Missouri CAN remains committed to serving you as we all navigate our current reality, and though the Annual Conference will not take place, we are already looking into ways to provide you with critical and timely training opportunities to enhance your professional development throughout this time. We thank you for your continued support and all you do to serve the low-income residents of Missouri.

2021 marks the 50th year of Missouri CAN as an organization, and plans are already underway to make next year’s event more dynamic than ever! I know the Missouri CAN team looks forward to sharing these plans with you soon, and welcoming you all when the time is right and the Network can meet face-to-face again.

In light of these circumstances, the Charles Braithwait Leadership Award and Outstanding Community Service Awards will not take place this year. If you submitted a nomination for either of these two awards, your information will be maintained on record, and those nominations will be considered in 2021.

It has truly been one of the highlights of my Community Action career to serve as your Board President for the last two years. Although I am disappointed, as many of you are, that we cannot gather together this year, I know that the amazing commitment, dedication and passion you all display in this work will continue to shine. The lives you touch, the communities you serve and the change you drive make a difference everyday. I thank you for your dedication and for your service, and I look forward to the new world Community Action creates in the wake of this pandemic. Together we are strong. Together we are innovative. Together we are Community Action.  

With deepest sincerity,
Your Missouri CAN President,

Angela Hirsch
Missouri CAN Board President
Chief Program Officer, Central Missouri Community Action

North East Community Action Corporation recently received top ratings for administering a federally funded rent assistance program. 

President and Chief Executive Officer Don Patrick said the agency earned a 104% rating from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for its performance in administering the Section 8 Housing Rental Assistance Program in Lewis, Lincoln, Macon, Marion, Monroe, Montgomery, Pike, Ralls, Randolph, Shelby and Warren counties. 

The 11 counties are part of the Lincoln County Public Housing Agency overseen and administered by NECAC, which also administers the program in St. Charles County where it received a 102% rating last year.

This is the ninth time in ten years NECAC received HUD’s superior rating. 

Read more about NECAC’s program and the recent rating in the agency’s newsletter.

It is almost always the case that when disaster strikes, people living in poverty are often affected disproportionately. A lack of resources limit both these families’ ability to prepare for emergencies and their ability to recover. As the novel coronavirus spreads across the country and more Americans are contracting COVID-19, we can expect that low-income Americans will be hit especially hard. 

Here are some of the ways in which low-income people may be disproportionately impacted:

Poor Americans are much more likely to be uninsured, and as a result, much less likely to receive medical care. Without regular medical care, they are more likely to have underlying health conditions that may make them more susceptible to the worst effects of COVID-19, resulting in a higher mortality rate. Even without underlying medical conditions, the inability to afford health care may keep some from receiving treatment, exacerbating symptoms, and perhaps even prolonging the course of the disease. The problems caused by lack of health coverage are especially a problem for states like Missouri that have not expanded Medicaid. 

Those without health insurance may also be less likely to get tested when they exhibit symptoms, and therefore may not know that they have been infected with the coronavirus. Some could unwittingly be passing on the virus, meaning that a lack of insurance coverage is a health threat for everyone. 

With little or no money to spare, low-income people are less able to stock up in anticipation of quarantines or travel restrictions. 

Since low-wage workers are disproportionately employed in industries that are most likely to experience some of the most severe effects of restrictions on travel and measures to encourage social distancing (restaurants and hotels, for example), these individuals are the most likely to experience unemployment resulting from the spread of the virus and measures to control it. 

Necessary measures intended to limit the spread of the virus, such as social distancing, may also harm poor people. If workers are forced to stay away from work temporarily, low-wage jobs are the most likely to involve tasks that cannot be done at home. In fact, these jobs, which often involve caregiving and customer service, are more likely to involve direct human contact than most higher wage jobs. For those low-wage workers who do have jobs that are amenable to working remotely, they still may not be able to do so because they are less likely to have access to broadband Internet connections. Since low-wage jobs rarely include paid leave, these workers are faced with the prospect of long periods of lost income whether or not they actually contract COVID-19.

Given the outsized impact low-income people will endure, Missouri CAN urges both employers and policymakers to consider these burdens and take steps to lessen the impact on low-income Missourians. These steps should include the following:

Extend health coverage so low-income Missourians can receive testing and treatment they need. Tests should be provided for anyone free of charge. Congress should make more Medicaid funding available and grant waivers to states to ensure that Medicaid covers the cost of treatment.

Additional nutrition assistance, through measures like temporary increases in SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) benefits, is needed to address the increased food insecurity that many families will face.

The federal government should provide additional funds for states to extend unemployment insurance benefits, and states should be prepared to extend the period of eligibility these benefits. Work requirements should be relaxed, especially for infected or high-risk individuals.

Employers should provide paid leave for workers unable to work due to illness, quarantine, or temporary closure of workplaces. The federal government should provide funds to assist small employers make this leave available.

In addition, Missouri CAN joins advocacy organizations around the state in asking the U.S. Senate to ensure passage of the House version of the Coronavirus Response Act, though we realize some modifications may be necessary. The FMAP (Federal Medical Assistance Percentages) increase included in the Act are among its most important provisions because FMAP:

Allows states to address immediate public health needs – By providing immediate resources to states as they try to cover large, unexpected COVID-19 related costs, it will prevent states from shortchanging critical public health measures – from hospital readiness to public outreach to quarantine-related costs – because they don’t have enough funds. By covering a larger share of Medicaid costs, the proposal frees up state resources for other immediate health-related needs. 

Makes it possible for states to use Medicaid to cover COVID-19 related needs – Medicaid provides a wide range of flexibilities states can use to help address the crisis, from targeted eligibility expansions to insure people can get tested and treated to  broadening coverage of telehealth to covering certain quarantine-related costs, as Washington state is seeking to do. But exercising these options costs money. A broad increase in federal Medicaid funding is the best way to help state policymakers make the targeted Medicaid changes and adjustments that meet their states’ needs.

Prevents states from cutting Medicaid eligibility or benefits during the public health crisis – Past experience shows that, without federal action, state policymakers (constrained by balanced budget requirements) will restrict access to Medicaid over the coming months, as unexpected costs from COVID-19 mount and if, as seems increasingly likely, an economic downturn reduces state revenues. That would lead more people to become uninsured in the middle of the coronavirus crisis, undermining the public health response and creating immense hardship for families. The proposal prevents this both by providing states with more resources and by requiring states accepting these resources to agree not to cut Medicaid eligibility for the duration of the public health emergency. 

Provides needed support to the economy – With an economic downturn likely as a result of coronavirus, state budget cuts would also damage the economy by further contracting demand. Research on the similar FMAP increase put in place in 2009 found that it provided highly effective economic help. The policy was also effective in preventing state budget cuts when adopted on a bipartisan basis as part of 2003 economic recovery legislation. 

Hillbilly Elegy is a story of family stability and family instability. It’s a story of upward mobility in rural America. And it’s a story of regional values. It’s the story of J.D. Vance growing up in Appalachia.

Vance was raised in Middletown, Ohio with Appalachian values of loyalty and love of country. But contrasting these values was verbal abuse and violence as Vance’s mother suffered from drug addictions and cycled through relationships. Despite the instability, Vance found solace during key times in Breathitt County, Kentucky with his extended family—especially his grandmother: “mamaw.” Mamaw’s tough but loving support helped Vance attend college at Ohio State University and then move on to Yale Law School.

“Now consider the sum of my life after I moved in with Mamaw permanently. At the end of tenth grade, I lived with Mamaw, in her house, with no one else. At the end of eleventh grade, I lived with Mamaw, in her house, with no one else. At the end of twelfth grade, I lived with Mamaw, in her house, with no one else…What I remember most is that I was happy—I no longer feared the school bell at the end of the day, I knew where I’d be living the next month, and no one’s romantic decisions affected my life. And out of that came the opportunities I’ve had for the past twelve years.”

Yet Vance’s book extends beyond his life story. Hillbilly Elegy explores the responsibility of families as well as culture and upward mobility, especially for rural communities. He also questions certain values and shares insight into the flood of outsider politics during the 2016 presidential campaign.

While this book has been met with equal measures of praise and criticism, it is in fact a true account of Vance living in poverty, capturing both his observations and experience all while processing the difficult dynamic of the family situation. The complex topics, albeit tough to wrestle with, are important to understand how poverty can look. To help readers process the themes of the book, HarperCollins Publishers has created a reading guide for the book. We invite you to explore this resource, whether reading with a group or on your own. —Sarah Hackman, Associate Director of Strategic Communications

James David “J.D.” Vance is a venture capitalist and author of Hillbilly Elegy, which was on The New York Times Best Seller list in 2016 and 2017. In April 2017, Ron Howard signed on to direct and produce a film adaptation of Vance’s book, which is slated for release on Netflix in 2020. Glenn Close and Amy Adams have been cast as mamaw and Vance’s mother, respectively.

This summer, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) held a comment period for the public to submit feedback on Consumer Inflation Measures Produced by Statistical Agencies—a proposal that would ultimately change the way poverty is measured in the United States. The proposal set forth by OMB raised concern for Missouri CAN, along with fellow nonprofit and advocacy groups. Here are reasons this proposal is concerning and some key takeaways from our comments submitted to OMB.

What the OMB Poverty Measure Proposal Suggests

For many decades, OMB has used the Consumer Price Index-Urban Inflation measure to update the Official Poverty Measure each year. This current inflation rate underestimates what low-income families need to get by and merits an update. OMB is suggesting several different inflation measures to change how poverty is measured. However, these inflation measures up for consideration would result in an even smaller cost of living adjustment each year, thus creating a lower poverty line. This lower poverty line would result in a less-accurate measure of individuals and families struggling to afford basic needs, and therefore reduce eligibility for assistance programs such as Medicaid and nutrition assistance programs. 

The two inflation rates up for consideration as proposed by OMB are:

– Chained Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (C-CPI-U)
– Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index (PCEPI)

Although we appreciate the desire to update how the poverty measure is calculated to make it more meaningful, the strategies outlined in the OMB proposal are concerning. Neither the Chained Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (C-CPI-U) nor the Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index (PCEPI) would adequately or accurately assess the status and well-being of lower income individuals and families. 

OMB’s call for comment was not asking whether the poverty measure should be calculated differently; there is no doubt the calculation needs to be updated. The comment period was to seek feedback on OMB’s proposal for how to calculate poverty moving forward. 

Why the Poverty Measure Proposal Concerns Us

Low-income households purchase goods that experience more inflation on average when compared to households with incomes above the poverty line. The C-CPI-U (proposed inflation measure to use) shows a lower rate of inflation compared to the CPI-U (inflation measure currently used), and therefore the result is an overall reduction in the poverty threshold. 

This means fewer individuals and families will qualify for critical programs that tie eligibility to the Federal Poverty Line, including:

– TANF
– SNAP
– WIC
– School Meals
– CHIP
– Medicaid
– LIHEAP
– Head Start
-Family Planning
-and many others

And over time, the proposed use of a lower measure of inflation would reduce or eliminate critical services, including programs that address the very indicators of need that help families and communities thrive – economic and family security; education; food and nutrition; health; and housing and energy. 

No information was provided as part of the Request for Comment that shows how the proposed changes would affect the most economically vulnerable Americans who rely on these programs as a pathway out of poverty. And given that the proposed measures would not accurately reflect how inflation impacts people with low incomes, many working individuals and families will essentially be “defined out” of poverty and denied access to programs vital to helping them achieve economic stability. This would create a devastating ripple effect as all levels of government use poverty data when determining allocation of resources, and an incorrect count of those in poverty will likely result in the further reduction of support to economically vulnerable populations. 

OMB Needs to Investigate a Few Things Further

In addition to our concerns with the proposed inflation measures for calculating poverty, we strongly believe that any change to the inflationary measure used to establish the Official Poverty Measure should not be undertaken without in-depth research and analysis. 

The notice in the Federal Register states that OMB is not seeking comments on the impact of the proposed changes. However, before moving forward, it would be prudent for the Administration to conduct additional research and seek further comment on the accuracy of current and proposed measures of poverty and the number of individuals who would potentially lose access to critical services as a result of the change. 

Areas of the proposal we believe merit further investigation include these four key factors: 

1. Do these measures accurately or inaccurately reflect the true extent of poverty in America’s communities?

2. What is the potential for direct negative impact on individuals, children, and families through restricted eligibility on programs that serve those most in need?

3. What other poverty measures need to be considered?

4. How will a false perception of lower poverty rates further reduce funding for programs?

With the current proposal from OMB, individuals and families would essentially be defined out of poverty though their situation remains unchanged. How poverty is measured matters greatly. An accurate poverty measure impacts the resources communities have to help those in need move out of poverty. For more information regarding Missouri CAN’s efforts, contact Missouri CAN’s Director of Public Affairs and Community Engagement Jessica Hoey at jhoey@communityaction.org.