PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 26, 2015
Community Economic Opportunity Act of 2015
This bill amends the Community Services Block Grant Act to revise the Act and reauthorize it through FY2023.
States must adopt performance requirements and performance benchmarks to be included as part of the performance measurement system under this Act.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
States that receive grants must reserve 2% of the funds for a new Community Action Innovations Program (CAIP) and use not less than 90% of the remainder to make subgrants to eligible entities to enable the entities to implement programs, projects, or services to reduce poverty.
Authority is repealed for specific nationally administered grants for: (1) community food and nutrition programs, (2) national or regional programs designed to provide instructional activities for low-income youth, and (3) demonstration partnership agreements addressing the needs of the poor.
A state may use certain grant funds for training and technical assistance to eligible entities and innovative projects to reduce poverty conditions.
Two or more eligible entities shall receive state assistance to merge if the geographic areas of the state they serve can be more effectively served under a single corporate structure. The same assistance must be given any eligible public organization that determines the area it serves can be more effectively served if it becomes a private public charity.
An incentive is repealed for states to enact a charity tax credit.
The Department of Health and Human Services must conduct, in at least one-third of the states in each fiscal year, evaluations (including investigations) of state compliance with the Community Services Block Grant Program.
People & committees
Rep. Fitzpatrick, Michael G. [R-PA-8] · R–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Mar 23, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1655 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1655 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1655 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1655 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.