Milestones of TRIO History, Part I

Reprinted from Milestones of TRIO History, Part 1 is the first in a series of Opportunity Outlook TRIO History Short Papers that will trace the evolution of the The Journal of the TRIO Programs. This fascinating history details the stories and Council for Opportunity struggles that have made TRIO one of the most unique and successful educational opportunity programs in the United in Education States. Part 1 discusses the initial creation of the TRIO January 2003 Programs in 1964 through the regionalization of TRIO Programs on a national level. — by John Groutt

This reprint is one of a series of TRIO History Short Papers commissioned by the National TRIO Clearinghouse 1025 Vermont Avenue, Suite 1020 Washington, DC 20005 Phone: 202-638-2887 Email: [email protected] Milestones of TRIO History, Part I JOHN GROUTT

The history of TRIO is a ilestones of TRIO History, The War on Poverty fascinating story of unique Part I is the first in a contin- In 1961, President Kennedy had uing series of National TRIO appointed Walter Heller, a midwestern Federal Government experiments Clearinghouse TRIO History populist economist to serve as chairman MShort Papers that will trace the develop- to address the problems of of the Council of Economic Advisors. ment of TRIO Programs. The purpose of The President charged the Council to poverty by providing educational the History Short Papers is to provide an study the problem of poverty and make opportunities in higher education. historical framework for the TRIO pro- recommendations for action.4 grams. These Short Papers will be avail- Within a few days of Kennedy’s Paralleling that story is the able as reprints and archived in full text assassination, President Lyndon Johnson history of the professional under Publications at the National TRIO summoned Heller to a meeting at which Clearinghouse website at www.triopro- educators who worked to become Heller described the plans being consid- grams.org/clearinghouse. ered to combat poverty. Heller reported active participants in the design later that Johnson spontaneously replied, and survival of the TRIO A Growing Awareness of Poverty “That’s my kind of program; I’ll find the money for it one way or another.”5 A programs. The Milestones of Until the mid 1960’s the Federal gov- ernment was only minimally involved in month later, in his first State of the Union TRIO History, Part I, will review the education of America’s youth. With the speech, the President declared “an unconditional war on poverty that…we the initial creation of the TRIO notable exceptions of the Morrill Land Grant Act of 1862 and the Serviceman’s cannot afford to lose.” A few weeks later Programs, beginning with Readjustment Act of 1945 (“G.I. Bill”), he appointed Sargent Shriver to head a TRIO Upward Bound in 1964, education was considered the domain of Task Force on Poverty. Barely six weeks state and local governments. However, later, the Task Force had prepared legis- on through the regionalization during this period a new rationale devel- lation, in record time, to begin the attack of TRIO Programs nationally. oped to justify Federal involvement in that the Johnson administration declared education. Widespread, but hidden, would “forever eliminate poverty from poverty was suddenly recognized as a the richest nation on earth.” severe national problem. Michael One of the earliest volleys in that war Harrington’s book, The Other America: was The Economic Opportunity Act of Poverty in the United States,1 and a 1964 that established the Office of lengthy article by Dwight McDonald in the Economic Opportunity (OEO) to coordi- New Yorker entitled “Our Invisible Poor”2 nate and administer the poverty pro- alerted the public to this issue. These grams. Sargent Shriver was appointed works helped form a national consensus National Director. that poverty was a serious problem, afflict- One of the more interesting sections ing at least one-third of the population in a of that unusual law established a country that John Kenneth Galbraith had Demonstration and Research office to described a few years earlier as the “afflu- fund experimental programs. Shriver ent society.”3 It was now no longer possi- was eager to make the agency quickly ble to deny the extent and devastating visible throughout the country. To do so effects of poverty to the nation. he established “national emphasis” quite different.11 James Moore, in OE, was responsible for administering the National Defense Student Loans to col- lege students. Samuel Halperin, Assistant Commissioner for Legislation in OE, and also closely aligned with the Johnson White House, was given the assignment to draft educational legisla- tion. These two men helped develop the bill that would become the Higher Education Act of 1965. As a part of that Act, a large amount of money would soon be appropriated to students in the form of new Educational Opportunity Grants (EOG). This was the first time ever that Federal scholarship monies would be distributed based on low-income status. In the United States, a system of higher education had emerged that pri- marily served the children of the upper- income families. This educational elit- ism had been challenged over the years by several programs that progressively opened the doors of higher education to new populations. The GI Bill, passed in 1945, made it economically possible for President Lyndon B. Johnson signs the Higher Education Act of 1965. World War II and the Korean War veter- ans to attend colleges and universities. programs. A program for high school crusade to eliminate poverty though edu- The National Defense Education Act of students called “Upward Bound” was cation. They shared an acute sense of 195812 opened the door a little wider by one of the first demonstration programs creating something new and exciting, providing loans for higher education to to be developed. Its purpose was to and of challenging the system. One thing financially needy students. However, identify secondary school students from that stands out in discussions with per- with the exception of the Historically low-income backgrounds who were sons involved in Upward Bound during Black Colleges, collegiate education was underachieving, and to motivate and pre- its earliest years: everyone, at all lev- limited almost exclusively to whites.13 pare them to pursue postsecondary edu- els, describes it as the most exciting The staff at the Office of Education (OE) cation. Seventeen pilot projects began period of their professional life.9 reflected the same racial composition. operation in the summer of 1965 serving The first national Upward Bound Moore and Halperin knew that very 2,061 students.6 Program was organized on two levels. A few low-income students participated in Stanley Salett deserves most of the miniscule staff of two persons in the higher education. No one expected them credit for designing Upward Bound.7 A Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO) to. Neither high school nor college per- scholar and activist, he brought together set policy. The actual program adminis- sonnel had experience working with ideas from experimental pre-college pro- tration was done by a private contract diverse populations of youth in higher grams being funded by several colleges, agency that processed applications, education. The two men saw that a large the National Science Foundation, small- monitored the programs and sent fre- pot of money would go largely untouched er foundations and the giant Rockefeller, quent site visitors to check on the pro- due to lack of experience on the part of Ford and Carnegie Foundations.8 The grams that were situated in colleges and the students, high school counselors and Upward Bound projects were filled with universities across the country. This colleges. Yet both knew there were large innovative educational ideas and teach- arrangement lasted four years until numbers of low-income potential college ing. Students, instructors and adminis- Upward Bound was removed from OEO students who needed money if they were trators at both the local and national lev- and transferred to the Office of to enter and remain in college. They els were excited over the imaginative Education (OE) at the insistence of quickly inserted a few lines into the pro- materials and methods being tried. Most Congresswoman Edith Green of Oregon.10 posed bill. Section 408 of the Higher of the adults involved as teachers and The beginnings of Talent Search, the Education Act set up a new program, administrators were firm believers in a second of the “TRIO” programs were Contracts to Encourage the Full tion.15 When the programs were imple- mented, many of the results took the country by surprise. The “maximum fea- sible participation” of the poor, included in Title II of the Economic Opportunity Act, occasioned the greatest conflict. It empowered persons at the grass roots level to effectively oppose the entrenched local political powers, espe- cially the mayors and their long-standing patronage systems. It caused havoc with- in the Democratic Party and between local and federal officials.16

The Higher Education Amendments of 1968 The second “milestone” in TRIO history is the Higher Education Amend- ments of 1968. This Act transferred Upward Bound from Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO) to the Office of Education (OE) in the Department of Health, Education and Welfare where it joined Talent Search and a newly Sargent Shriver, National Director for the Office of Economic Opportunity, left, and Dick Frost, first designed and funded program called National Director of Upward Bound Program. Special Services for Disadvantaged Students (SSDS). The first “TRIO” of Utilization of Educational Talent advantaged. In other schools it was not educational programs to help the disad- (CEFUET, later called Talent Search), as unusual for EOG monies to remain vantaged enter college was in place. a marketing tool and outreach effort to unawarded, because most colleges were In the late 1960s the population of help disseminate information about the simply not accustomed to enrolling and economically poor and high-risk acade- existence of the new money and how to working with low-income students.14 mic students entering the colleges was access it. These two pieces of the legislation, growing rapidly. Further pressures came The Higher Education Act of 1965 the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 from the requirement in the 1965 Higher was the most inclusive and radical piece and the Higher Education Act of 1965, Education Act that schools participating of Federal legislation affecting Higher constitute the first TRIO milestones. in the Educational Opportunity Grants Education ever passed, but it only Many of the ideas and practices they (EOG) program must seek to identify and included a mere 17 lines to describe and encompassed were truly revolutionary. enroll students in financial need. Yet few serve as a guide for the new marketing Lyndon Johnson believed that he had a had programs to help support and reme- program for the Educational Opportunity short window of opportunity to enact leg- diate academic deficiencies.17 Clearly Grants (EOG). These new CEFUET pro- islation, following the assassination of a such programs were needed to fill the grams were to be administered from popular President, to make dramatic gap between inadequately prepared stu- Washington in OE’s Office of Student moves in directions that had been dents and the expectations of college Financial Aid. blocked for years by Southern conserva- outcomes. Outlines for such a program One of the early problems for Upward tives sitting in chairmanships of key con- were designed and written into the 1968 Bound, Talent Search and the new EOG gressional committees. He seized this Amendments. The first 121 Services for funds was convincing many directors of occasion to swiftly draft legislation in Disadvantaged Students (SSDS) pro- these programs that this money was real- areas in which he saw a national need grams were funded to begin in 1970 and ly meant to help poor youngsters prepare and had a strong personal interest. they included a new category of student for or pay for college. Site visitors to pro- Things moved so rapidly on the legisla- to be served, in addition to the economi- grams in those early years frequently tive front that most of the country, cally disadvantaged included in the found that children of faculty, administra- including the President, Congress and other two TRIO programs. A set-aside tors’ and well-to-do professional families persons drafting the new laws, did not provision required that ten percent of were enrolled in the programs and receiv- fully comprehend the ramifications of this new program’s funds be used for ser- ing grants and services meant for the dis- much that was included in the legisla- vices for “physically disabled students.” One Project Director describes what resulted as the “balkanization of TRIO.” It encouraged widely varying subcul- tures to develop in the TRIO programs located in different parts of the country. Each of the ten Commissioners was allowed to define their own priorities and to fund TRIO programs accordingly. A reflection of this was what occurred when program personnel began to form profes- sional associations. In 1972 the south- western states of Texas, Oklahoma, Arizona, New Mexico, Louisiana and Arkansas formed a regional association, the Southwest Association of Student Assistance Programs (SWASAP) and adopted an agenda centered on the shar- ing of information and professional development. On the surface it was a quiet group, threatening no one. It was supported by the regional representative, Vice President Hubert Humphry (far right) meeting with Upward Bound students. Walter Mason and received the tacit blessing of officials in Washington.19 This was the first time this particular Education operated with considerable The midwestern region began to population of students had been recog- confusion and anxiety. evolve differently. Peter Mousolite was nized for special consideration in an the regional Commissioner in Region V, based in Chicago. He frequently likened education law. Regionalization of TRIO The transfer of Upward Bound was himself to his ancestors in ancient When Richard Nixon was elected not a smooth process. The Office of Greece who believed strongly that the President in 1969 it was widely believed Economic Opportunity (OEO) did not citizens should wield real political that he intended to wipe out OEO and its want to relinquish Upward Bound, one of power. With the autonomy allowed him programs. Surprisingly he did not do this its best-known, though maverick and at in regionalization, he could influence and his enduring legacy to the TRIO times controversial, success stories. The programs. The Chicago Region funded programs is one that could never have OEO and contract agency staff reacted to fewer, but larger TRIO projects and been predicted. the transition with a passive-aggressive located them at strong universities and President Nixon believed government approach. Many in the Office of colleges with comparatively generous administration would be improved by Education (OE) did not really want what grants.20 decentralization. His administration they considered a program accustomed Mousolite urged his regional repre- directed that TRIO programs be admin- to too much freedom in OEO, and they sentative, Clark Chipman, to encourage istered from ten regional centers, not were not entirely ready to incorporate the project directors in the six states of from Washington. The Congressional program into their existing management Region V to begin thinking how they appropriations for the programs were structure. Others in OE, more sympa- might organize themselves and work for divided among the regions, based on thetic to Upward Bound, opposed the improving the programs. First state asso- poverty populations in their area. Ten transfer because they feared it would be ciations, then a regional association Regional Commissioners were given far too restricted in its new agency. Also, emerged. Some of these professionals full authority to fund, defund, and key positions went unfilled in the OE for began to consider dealing directly with administer programs in their area. almost a year during the Presidential their elected representatives. Applications for grants were sent annu- transition, with indecision on the part of In November of 1974, three persons ally to the ten regional offices. There the outgoing Johnson administration and from the Midwest traveled to they were read and evaluated by a panel an initial delay of the incoming Nixon Washington, DC on what they called “a of readers appointed by the regional administration in appointing key offi- fact finding mission.” Arnold Mitchem, officials. The regional personnel made cials. Only a few of the persons working recently elected president of the Mid- the final determination for program with Upward Bound in OEO or the con- America Association of Educational funding and the amount, with no appeal tract agency transferred to the new struc- Opportunity Program Personnel to Washington. Regional staff was the ture in the Office of Education.18 Thus (MAEOPP), the Region V association, final judge and jury. the first year of “TRIO” in the Office of Rozell Boyd, Director of Student the cover of the “Regional Advisory Boards” which were encouraged by OE officials in Washington. The emphasis however from Washington was on advis- ing, while the focus of many regional per- sons was turning to the political and the sharing of power. The TRIO programs in region V had been well funded and were very strong, many in large universities that often added institutional financial support. This was not the case in all regions. In the Southeast, centered in Atlanta, fed- eral dollars had been spread thinly over many programs in many poor colleges. The result was numerous small pro- grams, weak from under-funding. The regional Commissioner in the Southeast appears to have had reservations about what his counterpart was doing in Chicago. He too appears to have been influenced by his regional atmosphere, and to have administered his region like a fiefdom where all were beholden to him for funding and continuation. Some Upward Bound literature class at Princeton University. University Archives. Department of Rare Books Project Directors who lead the organizing and Special Collections. Princeton University Library. in the regions administered from Atlanta and Kansas City found their projects Services at the University of Indiana and scene was set for a tumultuous period. defunded and themselves without a James Hamilton, Assistant Provost at The genie was already out of the bot- job.22 There was no appeal, because the Michigan State University made the trip tle by the time officials in Washington got “court of appeals” would have been OE to Washington. They traveled at their wind of what was happening in Region V in Washington. One could hardly expect own expense, and this trip signaled the and tried frantically to stop it. Orders and sympathy from that quarter. beginning of an ongoing dialog and rela- calls went out to discontinue their meet- Clearly, these educational programs tionship between TRIO professionals ings and directors were forbidden to trav- for the poor, designed under Lyndon and Members of Congress and their staff. el to Washington to talk with Members of Johnson, could no longer expect active Two very different visions of how the Congress. OE officials argued that they support from the White House of TRIO programs would interact with the were the designated channels to the Republican Richard Nixon. When pro- Federal government were developing Congress. Direct contact with Members of gram personnel looked for support with- and beginning to conflict. Most of the Congress was contrary to the Hatch Act in the governmental framework, the only higher officials in OE envisioned the that forbad government employees to place that seemed possible to turn was administrative structure to be hierarchi- lobby. Because Peter Mousolite believed to the Congress. Fortunately for the cal, with OE placed at the pinnacle of so strongly in true democracy, he worked programs, many key members of the the organizational chart. Little credence to buffer the threats to persons organizing Democratically controlled Congress, and was given to the ideal of sharing power in his region, including the behind the their staff, welcomed this new contact with the people who actually ran the pro- scenes work of his Regional with persons actually working in the grams. The directors working in the pro- Representative. Chipman continued his programs. In spite of the objections from grams in the field, on the other hand, quiet work and TRIO staff continued to some of the OE bureaucrats, Members were beginning to question what they organize themselves in the midwestern of Congress began to listen attentively considered a patronizing point of view states and region. OE program officers to TRIO personnel from the field. and to search for ways to restructure the working in several other regions were Individual TRIO personnel came with relationship. They believed they too had also lending quiet support to regional their ideas on how the legislation might legitimate insights that needed to be associations which were forming and be changed to make the programs more heard directly, on a level playing field, becoming active in states under their effective. The situation on Capitol Hill without the fear of retaliation.21 The supervision. Often this was done under was most accommodating to what was occurring within the states and regions of funding of three million dollars to serve staff commitment to it he wanted the President’s guidance for further action. Walter Heller, Oral the TRIO community. 30,000 students. History Interview by David McComb, 20 February Another force for change was the This concludes Part I of 1970. AC 83-9, 19-20, LBJ Library. thousands of veterans returning from Milestones of TRIO History. 6 Greenleigh Associates, Inc. “History of Upward Vietnam. There was growing concern Milestones of TRIO History, Part II, Bound,” in Upward Bound 1965-1969: A History and Synthesis of Data on the Program in the Office among legislators for their plight and the will be published in the Spring issue of Economic Opportunity (New York: Greenleigh many readjustment problems they were of Opportunity Outlook. Part II will Associates, Inc., February 1970), 22-62. facing. Education appeared as one possi- follow the TRIO Professional move- 7 Stephen Crawford Brock, “A Comparative Study of Federal Aid to Higher Education: The Higher ble solution. The Second Supplemental ment to a national level, and the Education Act of 1965 and Project Upward Bound” Appropriations Act of 1972 included addition of new TRIO programs. (Ph.D. thesis, Cornell University, 1968), 56 ff. $5.8 million for a one-year “Talent This paper is an outgrowth of a Conversations between the author and Stanley Salett 8/30/00 and 11/14/00. Search/Upward Bound Program” to help session with the same title presented at 8 John Groutt, "The Rockefeller Programs for the returning Vietnam veterans enter college. the Annual Conference of the Council Disadvantaged and Federal Educational Since almost none of the then current for Opportunity in Education by Programs," Research Reports from the Rockefeller Upward Bound regulations were designed John Groutt and David Johnson, Archive Center (Fall 2002) : 4 - 10. 9 This statement is based on the author’s conversa- for adults, and the Veteran’s Upward Chicago, September 2001. tions with numerous persons who were intimately Bound was to last only one year, this pro- involved with Upward Bound and OEO in its first gram was initiated without any regula- four years. The National TRIO Clearinghouse, an 10 John Groutt and Calvin Hill, “Upward Bound: In tions. Thus a new “temporary” TRIO pro- Adjunct ERIC Clearinghouse on the Beginning,” Opportunity Outlook: Journal of gram began as a specialized adjunct to Educational Opportunity affiliated with the Council for Opportunity in Education (April 2001), 26-33. Upward Bound. It still continues, after so the ERIC Higher Education Clearing- many years, to meet the unusual college 11 John Groutt, “Just Who do You Think You Are?: house, collects and disseminates infor- An Historical Primer of the Educational Talent preparatory needs of veterans in imagina- mation, program materials, resources Search Program”: paper presented at the annual tive ways, and adding another program to and research focused on TRIO programs conference of the Mid Eastern Association of 23 Educational Opportunity Associations. (Ocean the TRIO community. and students. Housed in the Pell City, Maryland, May 2001). In that same year the Education Institute for the Study of Opportunity in 12 This Act was passed in reaction to the Soviet Amendments of 1972 24 added a fourth Higher Education, Council for Union’s launch of Sputnik, the first artificial satel- program to the “TRIO” programs, the lite sent into space. This event created a panic in Opportunity in Education, the National the U.S., which feared the use of the satellite’s tech- Educational Opportunity Centers (EOC). TRIO Clearinghouse is funded by a grant nology for use with ballistic missiles capable of car- Jacob Javits, Republican Senator from rying nuclear weapons. One response was this leg- from the U.S. Department of Education islation that included federal loans to college New York, and a member of the Senate Federal TRIO Programs. For additional students. Subcommittee on Education sponsored information, contact Andrea Reeve, 13 In 1954, when Brown versus Board of Education the fourth “TRIO” program. He was Director, Educational Opportunity ended de jure segregation in the public schools it familiar with programs in his home state, did not end a racially exclusive, whites-only system Clearinghouses, 1025 Vermont Avenue, of higher education in the south or the nearly all- located in areas of concentrated low- NW, Suite 1020, Washington, DC 20005, white systems of higher education in the north. income families, designed to recruit and Historically Black Colleges were producing more Phone: 202-638-2887, email: clearing- than 90 percent of all black baccalaureates. help disadvantaged persons enter col- [email protected], website: www.triopro- Testimony of Dr. Henry Ponder, at the Hearing lege.25 This new program appeared to grams.org/clearinghouse. before the Subcommittee on Select Education of the many in the TRIO community to be very Committee on Education and the Workforce, House of Representatives, held in Oklahoma City, 23 similar to an expanded Talent Search Notes April 2001. Program. It differed, in that the EOCs 1 Michael Harrington, The Other America: Poverty in Bowen and Bok extract data for twenty-eight major- were allowed to serve all persons, of any the United States (New York: Macmillan, 1962). ity white academically selective institutions from a age, interested in entering higher educa- 2 Dwight MacDonald, “Our Invisible Poor,” The New study entitled “College and Beyond.” In 1951, the Yorker, 19 January 1963, 38, No. 48, 82-132. range of black students entering the nineteen tion who lived in an identified geograph- “College and Beyond” schools, for which adequate ic area with a concentration of high 3 John Kenneth Galbraith, The Affluent Society records are available, ranged from zero at four (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1958). schools, to a high of three percent at Oberlin (a poverty. Another major difference was 4 Evidently it had been discussed in the last Cabinet school which had worked to attract black students that each of the EOC projects received a meeting just prior to Kennedy’s departure for since 1835). The overall average of entering black much greater level of funding than the Dallas. After that meeting, notes, which had been students for the schools was 0.8 percent. By the scrawled by the President, were gathered up. On mid-1960s the numbers remained small, estimated Talent Search Programs to support their one sheet was the word “poverty” written large and by one scholar to be only one percent of the enroll- work with students. It provided a few circled several times. The President’s brother ment of selective New England colleges. additional services, but like Talent Bobby had the paper framed and it hung in his William G. Bowen and Derek Bok, The Shape of the office until he too died from an assassin’s bullet five River: Long-Term Consequences of Considering Race Search, its principal purpose was to pro- years later. These ideas would provide the opening in College and University Admissions (Princeton, vide help with college selection, finan- for a whole new series of Federal initiatives, part of New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1998), 4-5. which involved education. cial aid, college applications, career In 1963, in connection with a Princeton effort to 5 Heller reports that he had a lengthy discussion with design and offer pre-college preparatory summer counseling, and tutoring. Twelve EOCs President Kennedy on November 19th about a programs for minorities, a dean noted, “in recent began as pilot programs in 1974 with poverty program. Since he had made a significant years increasing numbers of Negroes have been coming to Princeton.” In 1964 he estimated the Washington had to act as moderators. The intense total number of “Negroes” at Princeton at 20 (out of conflict between local government officials and a total undergraduate enrolment of 3,166) and one some other CAP programs never occurred between to three graduates per year (with 755 baccalaure- the Upward Bound Projects and local politicians. ates awarded in 1964). Sar A. Levitan, “Fighting Poverty with a Sheep- LCD (Leland DeVinney) interview notes from a skin” in The Great Society’s Poor Law (Baltimore: meeting with John M. Knapp, Jeremiah Finch and The John’s Hopkins Press, 1969), 163 – 175. Parker Coddington at Princeton University, 11 Conversations between William Garrison and the November 1963, folder 688, box 80, series 200, RG author, 8/14/2000 and 5/18/01. 1.2, Rockefeller Foundation Archives, RAC. 1970-71 Upward Bound Guidelines: An Office of The number of total graduates was provided to the Education Program Administration Manual, author in a personal communication from a (Washington DC: U.S. Department of Health, Princeton University archivist. Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, Neither Tribal Colleges nor predominantly November 1969). John Rison Jones Collection, Box Hispanic Serving Colleges were yet functioning. 8, LBJ Library. Thus African Americans were the only significant 17 Lawrence E.Gladieux and Thomas R. Wolanin, minority group with institutions of higher education Congress and the Colleges: The National Politics of focused to address their particular educational Higher Education (Lexington Books, D.C. Heath and needs. Company: Lexington, Massachusetts, 1976), 19. John Groutt is currently work- 14 This information is based on interviews with David 18 Greenleigh. ing on research for a book on the Johnson, January 10, 2001, first Chief of the 19 Walter Mason, the regional representative in the Branch administering the Talent Search Program, Southwest, was quietly encouraging regional pro- history of the TRIO programs. He with John Rison Jones, May 16, 2000, who worked fessionals to begin to think about methods to influ- served as Director of the Upward in both the contract agency administering Upward ence policy. Other regional representatives were Bound Program at the University of Bound in OEO and later in the Division of Special also quietly stirring the waters of political thought, Student Services in the OE and ED, and on the although no overt political activities were initiated Maryland Eastern Shore for 27 author’s personal knowledge of an Upward Bound in these regions. Program which lost its funding in the late 1960s for years and coordinator of the La Jolla adamantly refusing to certify the income eligibility Conversations between the author and: Jo Conway, Science Project or the Harvey Mudd of many of its participants. 6/28/02; Matthew Taylor, 5/28/02, William Garrison, 6/28/02. Upward Bound Program during the 15 Hearings on the Economic Opportunity Act in the summers 1999-2001. He has writ- House took place over twenty days with seventy- 20 Conversations between the author and Clark nine witnesses; seventy of them were in favor of the Chipman, 9/11/00, 10/19/00, 3/30/01. ten articles and made presentations bill. Republicans complained, but were helpless to 21 This is based on conversations with numerous pro- based on his research which prevent it, due to their status as a minority in both ject directors as well as persons working in the houses. No one in either house or party appears to Office of Education at the time these events were includes locating and identifying have understood the explosive potential contained occurring. TRIO archival materials and an oral in the concept contained in Title II, calling for 22 This is based on interviews by the author with per- history component including taping “maximum feasible participation” of the poor. sons who were project directors in those regions at interviews with key figures in TRIO John C. Donovan, The Politics of Poverty. (New that time. One was a project director at one of the York: Pegasus, Western Publishing Company, Inc., defunded programs, and many others contemporary history. He has received grants-in- 1967), 33 ff. with the events verify her story. aid from the Council in Opportunity 16 Upward Bound was developed based on authoriza- 23 Jon Westby, A History of the Veterans Upward in Education, the Rockefeller tion contained in the Economic Opportunity Act of Bound Program. (Privately printed, January 1988). 1964, Title II-A, which establishes the Community Sally Bendixen and Jon Westby, “A History of the Foundation, the LBJ Presidential Action Program (CAP). Initially Upward Bound was Veterans Upward Bound Program,” NCEOA Library and an individual TRIO to function in close relationship with the local Journal,5 (2) (Fall 1990): 16 – 19. professional to support this Community Action Agencies (CAA), and proposals 24 Gladieux and Wolanin characterize the omnibus research. Dr. Groutt received his were to be developed in coordination with, Education Amendments of 1972 as a “basic char- approved by, and funds channeled through the local ter” for higher education (223 ff.), and “the most Ph.D. from Temple University. CAA. In practice this appears to have functioned significant higher education law since the land- more in a token manner, unlike most other CAP grant college legislation of more than a century programs. However, in deference to the concept of (earlier).” In that it signaled a basic shift in the role “maximum feasible participation of the poor”, all played by the federal government in education, Upward Bound projects were required to have three they argue that it was an historical breakthrough functioning advisory boards: Public Advisory comparable to the Social Security Act, Medicare Committee, Parent Advisory Board, Academic and the civil rights laws of the 1960s (xi). Advisory Group. On occasion these boards at a par- ticular project could not agree, and OEO staff from 25 Ibid., 94.