Return-Path: <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.9.3/8.9.0.Beta5/980425bjb) with SMTP id LAA03736; Thu, 11 May 2000 11:21:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 11:21:02 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <s91a7a7d.021@epcc.edu> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Andres Muro" <AndresM@epcc.edu> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ESL:4418] English Literacy Civics funds X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.3 Status: O Content-Length: 630 Lines: 5 I don't want to sound like a sore looser, since I applied but was not selected as a finalist. However, I am not very comfortable with the geographic distribution of the funding. The State of New York got four out of twelve awards. Mass. got 2, Philadelphia got 1, Maryland got 1, Illinois got 2, Virginia got 1 and California got 1 award. I am certain that all these applicants are deserving. However, by my calculations, the northeastern part of the country got the bulk of the awards. Some of the poorest immigrant communities in the country, located along the US Mexico border got nothing. What do you all think, Andres
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 16 2001 - 14:44:51 EST